Marvel Films The Marvel Studios News and Discussion Thread

[DyeLorean]

It doesn’t show the wheels coming off of Marvel. It shows the obvious - terrible films do poorly, that’s an obvious statement that is true for every single company especially today.

When a great Marvel film does poorly or even when a good Marvel film does poorly - THAT is when there is fatigue. Since that shows despite the film being good, people are tired of the genre.

True. Although let me just say this. While not as bad as Quantumania and The Marvels, both of those previous outings (Ant-Man and the Wasp and Captain Marvel) were very mid-tier efforts from Marvel and yet they were successful enough (both critically and financially). I was very surprised by the reaction to AATW given how bad it was compared to the first one. That is not happening anymore and why I say the wheels are starting to come off.
That good will they once had is evaporating and the mediocre movies that weren't received as mediocre by then are starting to be perceived as such, finally.
And that is part of the fatigue. There's a certain amount of things you can do within the genre and the generic villain-of-the week from The Marvels is the perfect example of why they can't keep doing that crap anymore. It worked six years ago; we've moved on, keep it fresh, do something different. They need to turn the ship around because the landscape isn't what it was when they were on top.

Excuse my english, it isn't my native language and maybe my opinions are not coming across as I want to.

 

[psylockolussus]

So you're honestly going to actually try to say that having one outlier year in four secutive years that had solid performances 3/4 times is fatigue?

Two films performing poorly whereas five saw gains or remained consistent is fatigue?

It's hyperbole. People have been saying Marvel has reached it's peak since before even the first Iron Man.

Adding: it's chicken little territory.

CNBC 2016: Is superhero movie fatigue a myth?

"Last year, after Twentieth Century Fox’s “Fantastic Four” flopped and Disney’s “Avengers: Age of Ultron" underperformed its predecessor, box office watchers posed an intriguing question: After an impressive run of more than a decade and billions of dollars in revenues, had superhero movie fatigue finally set in?"

In the lexicon "superhero fatigue" has been around for so many years.

Time 2011: Box Office: Green Lantern's Superhero Fatigue

The Wrap 2016: Did ‘Deadpool’ Save the Superhero Genre From Fatigue?

Forbes 2018: Diversity And 'Black Panther' Are The Antidotes To Superhero Fatigue

It feels like as long as there has been superhero movies, people have been shouting that there is "fatigue" and jump at even the slightest disappointment to proclaim it's real and will hit the MCU as noted in the 2016 article quote.

If it was real for the MCU - box office across the board for all of MCU films would be on a constant and noticeable decline. There wouldn't be gains or managing to hold firm (still making more than most MCU films) - most would perform similarly to Ant Man and The Marvels (which both failed for very obvious reasons: too much not like its prior installments, leaning too heavily on material general audiences are unfamiliar with due to streaming).

As said, at the box office it has yet to rear its head. When it does for the MCU, it will look like a meteor (akin to DC's recent non-Batman performance) - increasingly going down with no end in sight - not two bad outlier ducks (AMQ, TM)

I should note: has there been a decrease in quality? Yes. Can this hurt the MCU if that isn’t fixed? Absolutely. However, fatigue hasn’t hit the MCU - simply audiences don’t and won’t turn up if the film is bad (an obvious statement that is true for every film). The Marvels was a terrible film and therefore failed.

There's a fatigue when the most lucrative brand struggled to hit $100 million domestically.

And imo, The Marvels was a subpar film but not terrible. There are plenty of terrible movies that have done wonders at the box office. People aren't just interested to watch The Marvels, and i doubt if it was as good as Endgame, it would have done so much better at the box office.

Marvel Studios and Disney miscalculated the interest for the brand by releasing too much content from 2021 to 2023.

 

[Cap2024]

There's a fatigue when the most lucrative brand struggled to hit $100 million domestically.

And imo, The Marvels was a subpar film but not terrible. There are plenty of terrible movies that have done wonders at the box office. People aren't just interested to watch The Marvels, and i doubt if it was as good as Endgame, it would have done so much better at the box office.

Marvel Studios and Disney miscalculated the interest for the brand by releasing too much content from 2021 to 2023.

You’re very oddly saying each Marvel film is representative of each other.

Almost like trying to make excuses for why The Marvels did so poorly by saying, “it wasn’t a terrible film, it only did poorly because of the brand!!!”

While obviously and blatantly ignoring that every recent Marvel film widely considered to be good by audiences- not surprisingly- did good.

Not to mention, I have statistics to back that up. Whereas you only have subjective and extreme supposition not backed up at all by statistics (thinking Endgame even wouldn’t do well today). That is to say I won’t even try to after this post as one can’t get through to that level of exaggeration.

 

[Cap2024]

True. Although let me just say this. While not as bad as Quantumania and The Marvels, both of those previous outings (Ant-Man and the Wasp and Captain Marvel) were very mid-tier efforts from Marvel and yet they were successful enough (both critically and financially). I was very surprised by the reaction to AATW given how bad it was compared to the first one. That is not happening anymore and why I say the wheels are starting to come off.
That good will they once had is evaporating and the mediocre movies that weren't received as mediocre by then are starting to be perceived as such, finally.
And that is part of the fatigue. There's a certain amount of things you can do within the genre and the generic villain-of-the week from The Marvels is the perfect example of why they can't keep doing that crap anymore. It worked six years ago; we've moved on, keep it fresh, do something different. They need to turn the ship around because the landscape isn't what it was when they were on top.

Excuse my english, it isn't my native language and maybe my opinions are not coming across as I want to.

We’re basically on the same page.

Fatigue though is comedies, musicals, and westerns when even a solid film of them comes out - there’s a risk that they just won’t do well at box office at all. Thus why they’re often avoided by companies.

We’re on the same page that films can damage a brand, but we’re not there yet with just two films. If it keeps up like that though, that’s when fatigue can set in. Marvel has to right the course in terms of quality. Otherwise it will get worse than Marvel performing like every other company (good film does good, bad film does bad).

When we enter the stage of good Marvel films doing bad - that’s a sign that audiences are just tired of the genre.

Marvel needs to condense what they make, but not really because of too much content. Rather it’s spreading themselves too thin - to the point that they struggle to keep films at the same level as before.

This is why Bob Iger stressed quality needs to improve.

Basically we’re saying near the same thing. Just I’m saying things aren’t there yet since good Marvel movies are still doing good.

 

[Chris B]

Here's the thing - people are mixing DC and Marvel. There is without a doubt DEFINITELY a DC fatigue. But only two MCU films haven't done well post Covid.

If I was to reckon a guess it's because DC recently is a brand that people know not to trust outside of a couple of rare occassions (Batman films). It's like do you get chicken from McDonalds or Applebees? Both are relatively fast food/chain food, but customers generally know that Applebees is much better quality than McDonalds if that makes sense. James Gunn has his work ahead of him and I trust that he can do it.

I don't see the Sony non-Spider-Man movies ever doing well outside of Venom. They put little to no work into those and that shows on the screen and in the trailers.

Thunderbolts is a wild card. I expect that to potentially just break even or make some profit. I also expect that if it even makes a semi healthy profit people will chant that the sky is falling for Marvel. Problem here is same as with The Marvels - Disney is putting too much faith into thinking people will want to see continuation of TV characters on the silver screen. G.A. will have the same response to Walker as they had to Monica and Kamala, "who?"

[I think 'Mandalorian' here might be an exception since that widely caught on during Covid]

I expect that Captain America without Chris will probably make a healthy profit, but be a noticeable drop off from the box office of Chris' films (akin to BP vs BP2). People will again chant that the sky is falling. While a TV show is connected to it, audiences won't really need to see the series to follow the film - they know the characters. It needs to be said - Chris' first Cap wasn't a lightning rod success either - he caught on after the first Avengers film. I remember being a rarity and odd duck out in favoring Cap over Iron Man.

I think Fantastic Four has a strong chance if it's done right. Audiences tend to want a new take on familiar grounds. A superhero film that takes place in the 60s is that in spades.

My thing is this - saying there's a Marvel fatigue or a sweeping superhero fatigue at this point is a hyperbole. The statistics just don't show that at the box office. It shows a DC fatigue, but not Marvel, if anything. 2021 and 2022 were solid years that saw mostly gains (if Thor premiered worldwide, box office rose domestically), 2023 was the outlier with films that had obvious problems except for one (Guardians). Four solid years (2024) with an outlier isn't "fatigue."

The movie star as a concept isn't really a thing anymore, but I have to wonder if Thunderbolts will get a boost from seeming to be a starring vehicle for Florence Pugh. To state the obvious, she's hot right now and I can her involvement generating interest from the GA.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

You're talking after release? My counter to this is not many movies are anymore in the age of content. Last year it was essentially just Barbie and Oppenheimer. Outside that, everything came and went. This year Dune seems like it may stick around, but nothing else is. Film impact in general has declined due to the changing nature of how media is consumed

There was also Super Mario last year, but the point stands.

 

[squeekness]

GOTG3 I think had very much a lot of life and good buzz. The shine was there on that one

I loved it myself.

 

[TheVileOne]

Again all of what you’re pointing to can easily be placed on the content itself not being as good as it used to be. A noticeable decline in quality rather than in box office.

Is there less anticipation? Sometimes depending, because of the above. Has that shown up at the box office in MCU brand fatigue? Not yet; terrible films do bad - as is the case for every company.

Kevin just has to put his eyes back on the ball and make sure the content made is A game material again.

Basically what we’re talking about is quality - not box office quantity. The talks of Marvel films failing at the box office due to fatigue right now is hyperbole that forgets every film that came out before Ant Man and Marvels.

Is his eye on the ball? I've yet to see proof that's the case. I don't think he planned out these phases very well knowing where he wants to go and where he wants to take things.

The Multiverse has been a convoluted mess.

 

[Cap2024]

The movie star as a concept isn't really a thing anymore, but I have to wonder if Thunderbolts will get a boost from seeming to be a starring vehicle for Florence Pugh. To state the obvious, she's hot right now and I can her involvement generating interest from the GA.

I wasn't referring to Wyatt Russel, rather the character John Walker. Many general audience members upon seeing Monica and Kamala asked "who?" since the character was introduced in a TV show. Some of the villains in it, such as Ava Starr are from so long ago that I'd reckon they would similarly be a bit lost on who she is. That's why to me I see 'Thunderbolts' as having the same kind of risk that 'The Marvels' has - it places too much emphasis onto needing to have seen other shows and films to completely follow what's going on in it or will seem to. This definitely hurt 'The Marvels' and I see that as likely here.

 

[Cap2024]

Is his eye on the ball? I've yet to see proof that's the case. I don't think he planned out these phases very well knowing where he wants to go and where he wants to take things.

The Multiverse has been a convoluted mess.

He hasn't. I don't think his eyes are on the ball right now and I hope they will be again soon.

It's Disney Plus that more than likely that did him in. When it was just movies, he was able to keep a close eye on everything and there were less cooks in the kitchen as a result. With Disney Plus spreading the MCU's reach so broadly - not only can Kevin not spend as much as he used to on each project, that would naturally result in each film likely having too many cooks in the kitchen.

It's like continually throwing balls at someone because they're a good juggler - eventually, there will be too many balls and they all fall to the floor which is kind of what's been happening here with Disney having turned everything into a factory more or less.

Thus why to really get back to the quality of before - something needs to change - and that's reduced output. What gives me hope is that Bob Iger in interviews seems to get that: the emphasis has to be quality rather than quantity.

Why there are still so many projects - we don't know at each stage they all were and how far along they all are (secrecy and all that). For instance, United Artists once spent three million dollars on pre-pro for an LOTR film that was never made. It's like trying to stop an assembly line that's already in full swing. That too can cause chaos. Thus, I'd expect the drop off or reduced quantity being more gradual than immediately noticeable.

 

[psylockolussus]

You’re very oddly saying each Marvel film is representative of each other.

Almost like trying to make excuses for why The Marvels did so poorly by saying, “it wasn’t a terrible film, it only did poorly because of the brand!!!”

While obviously and blatantly ignoring that every recent Marvel film widely considered to be good by audiences- not surprisingly- did good.

Not to mention, I have statistics to back that up. Whereas you only have subjective and extreme supposition not backed up at all by statistics (thinking Endgame even wouldn’t do well today). That is to say I won’t even try to after this post as one can’t get through to that level of exaggeration.

I don't know what you are talking about. So I'm gonna it end here by saying that there are worse films than The Marvels within the MCU and those earned more at the box office.

 

[psylockolussus]

https://screenrant.com/mcu-most-disappointing-hero-introductions/

From that link
10. Ironheart
9. Mr. Fantastic
8. Professor X
7. Starfox
6. Quicksilver
5. Skaar
4. Adam Warlock
3. Janet
2. Iron Fist
1. Inhumans

I don't think I have been disappointed by a hero's introduction, yet under the MCU, as I'm mostly a X-Men fan and I have yet to see the X-Men full time in the mcu. I think I have been more disappointed with MCU's take with the big villains from the comics.

Inhumans the tv show, I don't really view as Mcu even if they used the same actor for Multiverse of Madness. But I wish they moved forward with an Inhumans movie back in phase 3, if not after Endgame.

 

[Chris B]

I wasn't referring to Wyatt Russel, rather the character John Walker. Many general audience members upon seeing Monica and Kamala asked "who?" since the character was introduced in a TV show. Some of the villains in it, such as Ava Starr are from so long ago that I'd reckon they would similarly be a bit lost on who she is. That's why to me I see 'Thunderbolts' as having the same kind of risk that 'The Marvels' has - it places too much emphasis onto needing to have seen other shows and films to completely follow what's going on in it or will seem to. This definitely hurt 'The Marvels' and I see that as likely here.

I actually don't think it'll be as reliant on having to watch Disney Plus in the way The Marvels was. With the exception of John Walker, every other character has appeared in a past film and he's not a hard character to get people up to speed on. Plus I don't expect him to have the amount of focus that Yelena or the Sentry will have.

 

[Cap2024]

I don't know what you are talking about. So I'm gonna it end here by saying that there are worse films than The Marvels within the MCU and those earned more at the box office.

Do you understand the difference between subjective and objective? You're giving subjective. Your opinion alone does not hold any clout (nor does anyone's).

'The Marvels' received the lowest MCU cinemascore - tied only with Eternals and Antman 3. All three of which did terribly at the box office.

THE MARVELS' CinemaScore Is Tied With ETERNALS & ANT-MAN 3 As Lowest In MCU History

'The Marvels' alongside Quantummania and Eternals - again - places among the bottom three on Rotten Tomatoes.

RT: All Marvel Movies Ranked

On IMDB, 'The Marvels' has 5.5 out of 124K user reviews. The Eternals has 6.3. Quantummania has 6.1. Even the usually disliked Thor: The Dark World has 6.8. Making it among the lowest scored MCU film on the site.

The Marvels IMDB

While you may like it and view it more favorable than not - that view is statistically in the minority thus objectively doesn't apply to even close to many or all. There's a difference between subjective and objective - and that can be shown in statistics.

Unless by others you were referring to Antman and Eternals - which also did poorly at the box office. As stated, objectively bad films doing bad business.

Adding: I liked Quantummania and Eternals, BUT I can admit that my opinion is against the grain and statistically most people don't. These three are consistently ranked at the very bottom on a statistical level and as a result each rank among the MCU's lowest earning films. Bad films = low to no profit, obviously.

 

[blueharvest]

 

[OrbOfConfusion]

https://screenrant.com/mcu-most-disappointing-hero-introductions/

From that link
10. Ironheart
9. Mr. Fantastic
8. Professor X
7. Starfox
6. Quicksilver
5. Skaar
4. Adam Warlock
3. Janet
2. Iron Fist
1. Inhumans

I don't think I have been disappointed by a hero's introduction, yet under the MCU, as I'm mostly a X-Men fan and I have yet to see the X-Men full time in the mcu. I think I have been more disappointed with MCU's take with the big villains from the comics.

Inhumans the tv show, I don't really view as Mcu even if they used the same actor for Multiverse of Madness. But I wish they moved forward with an Inhumans movie back in phase 3, if not after Endgame.

It's definitely not outside of the MCU the same way that Helstrom was. Bad or good, it's in the MCU since the very idea of Inhumans themselves was introduced in Agents of SHIELD.

 

[psylockolussus]

Deadpool & Wolverine Second Trailer Showcases Hugh Jackman and Ryan Reynolds Fighting - Comic Book Movies and Superhero Movie News - SuperHeroHype

Check out the Deadpool & Wolverine second trailer, featuring fights between Hugh Jackman and Ryan Reynolds in the MCU.

www.superherohype.com

I wonder which sorcerer is doing that teleportation ring in the movie?

 

[Bayne]

The reason for that is the box office dip. It did well, just not in comparison to Black Panther.

Which is also understandable because - the title hero was absent/replaced.

I personally can’t think of another scenario where that happened.

So the box office being impacted by that would always be the case. That said, what’s impressive is how much it held on regardless.

That, but also BP2 was never going to match BP1 in any universe, even with Chadwick and even if it was just as good as or better a movie as the first. The franchise was always going to transition to a normal (wildly popular) franchise, which always meant that there weren't going to be schools, neighborhood organizations, etc, buying out entire theaters to take entire schools/neighborhoods worth of kids to see it for free. And the regular people who went to see it - and even loved it - were always going to be way less likely to keep going and seeing it over and over again every week for months.

As a normal franchise - not the cultural phenomenon that the original film was - the only chance it would ever have of surpassing the original numbers would've been in an absolute monster opening. And those ultra monster openings generally only happen for Avengers movies or big event movies (like a celebration of 20 years of Spider-man movies). The 'last' Black Panther movie could've potentially done it, in the world where Boseman got to play the character through to some kind of ending. But the second Black Panther movie was always going to be just another Black Panther movie. Possibly a billion dollar movie, depending on whether the character Black Panther's popularity leveled out at more Captain America levels or leveled out at more Spider-man levels. But definitely not higher than the first.

Deadpool & Wolverine Second Trailer Showcases Hugh Jackman and Ryan Reynolds Fighting - Comic Book Movies and Superhero Movie News - SuperHeroHype

Check out the Deadpool & Wolverine second trailer, featuring fights between Hugh Jackman and Ryan Reynolds in the MCU.

www.superherohype.com

I wonder which sorcerer is doing that teleportation ring in the movie?

I hope it's Magik.

But with the way magic has been showcased in phases 4 and 5, it's probably Wong.

 

[psylockolussus]

I doubt they are going to have Magik (played by Anya Taylor Joy) having the same teleportation rings as Strange/Wong. I'm aware of Magik's connection with Strange in the comics. But I just don't see Magik as one of the early X-Men characters (that isn't a villain) being reintroduced in the MCU.

I'm curious who could be aiding them, and if this how their reality connects to 616 reality/Secret Wars storyline.

Having Wong/Strange in another multiverse related movie, is very similar to No Way Home. So for that i would prefer someone else.

 

[Bayne]

I doubt they are going to have Magik (played by Anya Taylor Joy) having the same teleportation rings as Strange/Wong. I'm aware of Magik's connection with Strange in the comics. But I just don't see Magik as one of the early X-Men characters (that isn't a villain) being reintroduced in the MCU.

I'm curious who could be aiding them, and if this how their reality connects to 616 reality/Secret Wars storyline.

Having Wong/Strange in another multiverse related movie, is very similar to No Way Home. So for that i would prefer someone else.

I agree it's unlikely for Magik to be using sling rings. But it is an all-in multiverse movie, so unlikely isn't impossible.

As for Wong, similar is kind of the point. The last 2 phases have treated Wong as the Nick Fury of the modern MCU, ie, the guy who keeps showing up everywhere as a familiar face. There's no particular reason why they would abandon that idea. And having Wong actually out in the multiverse wouldn't even be repeating anything they've done before, anyway, since we've so far never seen him go to other worlds, unlike Strange.

Plus, if you're grouping those characters together as 'too similar' to No Way Home, then what candidate is even left to consider? Agatha has no reason to be here. Mordo has no reason to be here. Clea by all rights should be together with Strange, whatever they're doing. The X-men don't really have any magical characters that would make any more sense using sling rings than Magik.

The only even remotely plausible other alternative I can come up with is America Chavez, which just doesn't seem like a likely choice for a Deadpool movie.

 

[psylockolussus]

I would pick Clea, if its a socrerer related thing.

I've seen Wong too many times in The Multiverse Saga so far. And Dr. Strange being the Avenger representative/connection is too similar to No Way Home.

 

[psylockolussus]

I would pick Clea, if its a socrerer related thing.

I've seen Wong too many times in The Multiverse Saga so far. And Dr. Strange being the Avenger representative/connection is too similar to No Way Home.

Okay I just rewatched Multiverse of Madness today. Not Clea but America Chavez, she probably knows how to do that socrery portal thingy now. Plus the Multiverse travel is her main thing. So she would be very fitting.

 

[Primal Slayer]

Thank you Chris for validating my feelings in hating your film

 

[Venom 1988]

Thank you Chris for validating my feelings in hating your film

This does seem to lead credence to the possiblity of a Thor 5. It seems like he wants to go out on a high note.

 

[AnakinFlair]

This does seem to lead credence to the possiblity of a Thor 5. It seems like he wants to go out on a high note.

The worst part of Love and Thunder was that it had so many good ideas, good concepts, and a story that should have been epic- and it was turned into a parody.