Marvel Films The Marvel Studios News and Discussion Thread

[Jack Reacher]

So...are you gonna list them or you gonna continue to dance around this then?

Why should I list them?

We know which MCU films flopped theatrically during Phase 4/5, and which streaming shows had weak viewership (per Nielson).

Audiences have spoken quite clearly with the numbers about what they like, and what they rejected.


The only one in the gray area is She Hulk, which did okay with viewership. Not enough to justify it's hefty pricetag. So much so that the lead actress claims that there won't be an S2 because the first was too expensive.

 

[Venom 1988]

Why should I list them?

We know which MCU films flopped theatrically during Phase 4/5, and which streaming shows had weak viewership (per Nielson).

Audiences have spoken quite clearly with the numbers about what they like, and what they rejected.


The only one in the gray area is She Hulk, which did okay with viewership. Not enough to justify it's hefty pricetag. So much so that the lead actress claims that there won't be an S2 because the first was too expensive.

You're the one making the claim that a majority of the current characters are unappealing. I'm asking you to back it up and all you're saying is look at the numbers, which is not at all a way to determine that. Especially when there's various factors (Covid, streaming, the strikes, marketing, etc..) for some movies or shows performing well. Wandavision, despite be loved by critics and audiences, barely did better than She-Hulk in the ratings.

You're dancing around it. You don't want to list them because you know exactly how you would look.

 

[Jack Reacher]

You're the one making the claim that a majority of the current characters are unappealing. I'm asking you to back it up and all you're saying is look at the numbers, which is not at all a way to determine that. Especially when there's various factors (Covid, streaming, the strikes, marketing, etc..) for some movies or shows performing well.

You're dancing around it. You don't want to list them because you know exactly how you would look.

None of those above excuses really work, even in pandemic times, when a film like Spider-Man NWH could do two billion.

Audiences will watch what they want to see, and won't waste their time or money on what they find unappealing.

Shang-Chi was the last new title superhero introduced theatrically that actually did fairly decent in reception and box office (amidst the height of the pandemic).


Contrast that to now, The Marvels has been the worst financial failure of the MCU (audiences didn't turn out for it at all). It died at 84M domestic. Miss Marvel had poor viewership (audiences weren't interested), and even most recently Echo dropped like a stone off the streaming charts after only one week despite dropping all it's episodes at once. No legs. And even Tatiana Maslany said that She-Hulk didn't do well enough to justify it's costs, so no S2.

Eternals, Ant-Man & Wasp Quantumania...outlets from The Trades (Variety, Hollywood Reporter) are all openly discussing how Marvel Studios has pretty quickly lost it's appeal with the divisive projects put out. Characters that haven't been resonating as well as those during the first ten years.

 

[Venom 1988]

None of those above excuses really work, even in pandemic times, when a film like Spider-Man NWH could do two billion.

Audiences will watch what they want to see, and won't waste their time or money on what they find unappealing.

Shang-Chi was the last new title superhero introduced theatrically that actually did fairly decent in reception and box office (amidst the height of the pandemic).


Contrast that to now, The Marvels has been the worst financial failure of the MCU (audiences didn't turn out for it at all). It died at 84M domestic. Miss Marvel had poor viewership (audiences weren't interested), and even most recently Echo dropped like a stone off the streaming charts after only one week despite dropping all it's episodes at once. No legs. And even Tatiana Maslany said that She-Hulk didn't do well enough to justify it's costs, so no S2.

Eternals, Ant-Man & Wasp Quantumania...outlets from The Trades (Variety, Hollywood Reporter) are all openly discussing how Marvel Studios has pretty quickly lost it's appeal with the divisive projects put out. Characters that haven't been resonating as well as those during the first ten years.

Yea NWH did well cause it was Spider-Man and it involved the characters iterations from the previous iterations. I saw people who have been missing from this site for years come back solely because of the prospect of seeing Tobey again. So while I love the Holland movies, a bulk of the success for NWH has to do more of the Spider-Man IP as a whole than anything else. Had that not been a multiverse movie, it still would have been succesful but I don't know if it would have hit a billion. Might have done closer to Guardians 3.

Audiences weren't interested in The Marvels because it wasn't marketed well and it came out during the actor's strike, were the actors couldn't do any press for it. The Marvels is mid (but fun) but there are still worse MCU movies that have done better (The Dark World still comes to mind and thats during the first 10 years). It also came out in the tail end of a year where where a lot of superheroes movies didn't do well. Had it and Quantumania dates been flipped, I feel we'd be looking at different numbers.

Echo was a 5 episode bing watch show on an niche character. The majority of the people that were gonna watch it, did so the 1st week. So not surprising it dropped. And She-Hulk hasn't been officially cancelled. The show Tatiana mentioned that on, she said it in a very jokey manner but yea I'll admit there's probably sometruth in her statement, but its not about viewership. She-Hulk had the same budget as Wandavision (both had $25 million an episode) and they both had similar ratings (overall Wandavision did slightly better). So despite having the same budget and similar views, one is getting a sequel/spinoff and the other's future is in question. Budget is the issue here, not viewership.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

I do wonder if the Ally McBeal tone for She-Hulk was ultimately the right approach. Going for a CGI She-Hulk doesn't work for a streaming show because you don't have the same amount of time to work on and find tune the model like you do for a summer blockbuster where you can spend a year working on it and making it look good. The CGI model for Jen just did not look good in most of the episodes she was in, and the money they spent on it looks like it was ultimately wasted.

 

[psylockolussus]

She-Hulk should have been saved for a feature film.

 

[Venom 1988]

I do wonder if the Ally McBeal tone for She-Hulk was ultimately the right approach. Going for a CGI She-Hulk doesn't work for a streaming show because you don't have the same amount of time to work on and find tune the model like you do for a summer blockbuster where you can spend a year working on it and making it look good. The CGI model for Jen just did not look good in most of the episodes she was in, and the money they spent on it looks like it was ultimately wasted.

I think the McBeal tone is the best approach but the problem is balancing the budget for the type of show when your main character is a Hulk. Maybe a better approach would have been to something similar to what they did with pre-Super Solider Steve in The First Avenger. Where film the scenes with both the actor and the She-Hulk stand in and then CGI the actor's face onto the stand in. Malia Arrayah, the stand in they already used in the show for CGI reference, is 6'5" so I think she works size wise. But I'm not a FX expert, so I don't know doing that for a whole season would have been just as expensive and work intensive or not.

 

[Iceman]

 

[Bayne]

Worthy Cap.

 

[JakeStyles]

None of these moments came even close to Daredevil shouting out "I beat you" to Kingpin. Sorry.

 

[psylockolussus]

Avengers Assemble!

 

[Ctfxcwatcher]

Am I tripping or have we not seen Shang chi since his 2021 film?

Maybe my memory is bad but I thought we would've seen him by now especially since his film is one of the ones post Endgame to have great reception.

I still have yet to see The Marvels or the second season of What...If?

 

[Ctfxcwatcher]

Getting rid of Kang does not fill me with any sort of confidence. Other than Multiverse of Madness, Quantumnia and Loki have been the only projects to set up the main conflict for the upcoming Avengers movies and now they're throwing it all in the trash. The fact that they were already thinking of moving away from the character after Quantumania underperformed tells me that they've become just as reactionary as DC. Kang was not the problem with that movie.

I don't know why they just don't recast? They can still do Kang justice IMO if they feel the character is underwhelming. Idk looking back, I think they definitely should've recast Chadwick for BP but Ryan did not want to or he would walk.

 

[psylockolussus]

Am I tripping or have we not seen Shang chi since his 2021 film?

Maybe my memory is bad but I thought we would've seen him by now especially since his film is one of the ones post Endgame to have great reception.

I still have yet to see The Marvels or the second season of What...If?

He hasn't appeared in any new film since Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings.

I would love to know THE original plan of Feige when he decided to release this line up of films we are getting now. Shang-Chi, for its boX office success, should have its sequel out this year. Instead, we are getting the first MCU film for Deadpool, then neXt year, for Thunderbolts, Fantastic 4 and Blade. And there's also a legacy Captain America movie. Eternals 2 (if they still plan to do that) should be filming this year for a 2025 release.

 

[Maestro216]

I don't know why they just don't recast? They can still do Kang justice IMO if they feel the character is underwhelming. Idk looking back, I think they definitely should've recast Chadwick for BP but Ryan did not want to or he would walk.

Kang is damaged goods. Audiences don't care about Kang now so recasting won't get people's interest

 

[JakeStyles]

It was a terrible decision to introduce Kang in a show, then again in Ant-Man movie and on top of that, make him being defeated by ants...

 

[SirStrangefolk]

Kang is damaged goods. Audiences don't care about Kang now so recasting won't get people's interest

Audiences didn't care about Kang before they did anything with him either. I'm pretty sure if they created a movie that uses Kang well and looks interesting it'll be okay. They can't just count on his past appearances to create hype, but they wouldn't have been able to do so if Kang Dynasty was his first appearance either.

 

[SPO2 Dalisay]

Audiences didn't care about Kang before they did anything with him either. I'm pretty sure if they created a movie that uses Kang well and looks interesting it'll be okay. They can't just count on his past appearances to create hype, but they wouldn't have been able to do so if Kang Dynasty was his first appearance either.

Especially with the prior appearance had Jonathan Majors/your Big Bad losing. The vague another Kang will actually be an Avengers level threat was lost. It wasn't Thanos coming into the next movie after Infinity War movie but the Harlem Globetrotters designated loser once again..

 

[AndrewGilkison]

I think Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes did a much better job with Kang than the MCU did.

I also feel the same about their take on Carol Danvers too.

 

[Bayne]

Especially with the prior appearance had Jonathan Majors/your Big Bad losing. The vague another Kang will actually be an Avengers level threat was lost. It wasn't Thanos coming into the next movie after Infinity War movie but the Harlem Globetrotters designated loser once again..

Thanos in Infinity war wasn't Thanos coming into the next movie after Infinity War, either. Yet Infinity War is definitely his more popular appearance over Endgame.

And Kang losing once hardly makes him the Washington Generals.

 

[SPO2 Dalisay]

Thanos in Infinity war wasn't Thanos coming into the next movie after Infinity War, either. Yet Infinity War is definitely his more popular appearance over Endgame.

And Kang losing once hardly makes him the Washington Generals.

Kang was 0-2.

 

[Bayne]

Kang was 0-2.

He really wasn't.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

MODOK really should have been the main villain of Ant-Man 3, with Kang pulling the strings (like Thanos did in The Avengers and the first GOTG).

 

[TheVileOne]

I do wonder if the Ally McBeal tone for She-Hulk was ultimately the right approach. Going for a CGI She-Hulk doesn't work for a streaming show because you don't have the same amount of time to work on and find tune the model like you do for a summer blockbuster where you can spend a year working on it and making it look good. The CGI model for Jen just did not look good in most of the episodes she was in, and the money they spent on it looks like it was ultimately wasted.

I think it would've been fine if it was a bit more balanced and they didn't just throwaway and abandon multiple subplots.

 

[Maestro216]

Thanos in Infinity war wasn't Thanos coming into the next movie after Infinity War, either. Yet Infinity War is definitely his more popular appearance over Endgame.

And Kang losing once hardly makes him the Washington Generals.

Because Thanos won. Imagine Thanos lost in GOTG instead of Ronan but Marvel kept hyping him eventually winning. That's Kang before Majors got fired.