The Superhero Cinematic Civil War: Quoth the Kraven, "Nevermore." - Part 61

[The Batman]

In fact i think we're reaching the end of seeing studios chase the "cinematic universe" model on a whole.

I certainly hope so.

 

[kguillou]

They were also able to do it because they were basically the pioneers of doing that successfully in modern Hollywood. It was a gamble that paid off since basically everything from that presentation in 2014 came to fruition with the exception of Inhumans being nixed and Spider-Man: Homecoming and Ant-Man and the Wasp being added.

I think the days of planning out these movies more than 2-3 years in advance are behind us regardless.

And i think thats the way to go. Forcus on whats in front of you. I dont need to know whats coming in 2027. Get me hyped about whats coming in 2025 and then lets take it from there.

 

[Drizzle]

And i think thats the way to go. Forcus on whats in front of you. I dont need to know whats coming in 2027. Get me hyped about whats coming in 2025 and then lets take it from there.

Yup, let everything come naturally. By all means, let the movies stay connected in the same universe but don't plan out your next ten movies before you've filmed the first one. The only real exceptions to these right now are Marvel announcing details of the next two Avengers movies a few years in advance since we all know we're getting them and they're completely safe without a threat of cancellation but even Avengers 5 has gone through some significant changes in the two years since it was announced.

 

[Venom 1988]

I think the days of planning out these movies more than 2-3 years in advance are behind us regardless.

They probably need to go back to what they did for Phase 2. At SDCC 2012 they only talked about movies coming out in the next 2 years. Well sorta, they talked about Ant-Man but didn't give a release date for it. But they didn't even touch on Age of Ultron yet despite the success of the first Avengers. So it seems back then they still tried to keep things close to the chest even though we all knew the next Avengers was inevitable. I think doing this is better at keeping expectations in check.

Comic-Con: Marvel Studios Official Logos, Announcements Recap

COMIC-CON: A recap of the Marvel Studios news today, plus all of the film logos.

thereelbits.com

 

[Drizzle]

They probably need to go back to what they did for Phase 2. At SDCC 2012 they only talked about movies coming out in the next 2 years. Well sorta, they talked about Ant-Man but didn't give a release date for it. But they didn't even touch on Age of Ultron yet despite the success of the first Avengers. So it seems back then they still tried to keep things close to the chest even though we all knew the next Avengers was inevitable. I think doing this is better at keeping expectations in place.

Comic-Con: Marvel Studios Official Logos, Announcements Recap

COMIC-CON: A recap of the Marvel Studios news today, plus all of the film logos.

thereelbits.com

That was a great one. The main focus was Iron Man 3, which made complete sense since that was the next one in their slate but I think the biggest surprise was the Guardians of the Galaxy announcement and concept art reveal. I remember people being floored that Marvel was taking on something like that at the time.

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

I loved cinematic universes before there was an emphasis of stressing that studios were making a cinematic universe.

Tarantino's was organic and still the best.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I think Superman is going to do well critically and financially but I just dont see Gunn realizing his overall DCU slate successfully. In fact i think we're reaching the end of seeing studios chase the "cinematic universe" model on a whole. The whole announcing 10 movies thing is kind of like jinxing yourself like we've seen over and over again. Marvel was able to do it in 2014 because they proved that they could be successful and they had a very clear linear plan. But now not even Marvel can replicate that strategy successfully again.

I think going forward its more prudent to focus on whats in front of you and then take it from there.

I think you can internally have thay kind of slate, but maybe don't make a giant Comic-Con presentation until they're ready to be showcased and beyond the idea phase.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

I loved cinematic universes before there was an emphasis of stressing that studios were making a cinematic universe.

Tarantino's was organic and still the best.

I’m partial to Kevin Smith’s early stuff, but yeah Tarantino’s ability to give interconnecting tissue with his projects has always been great

Like a cool alternate history with stuff like Inglorious Basterds and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

 

[Venom 1988]

That was a great one. The main focus was Iron Man 3, which made complete sense since that was the next one in their slate but I think the biggest surprise was the Guardians of the Galaxy announcement and concept art reveal. I remember people being floored that Marvel was taking on something like that at the time.

View attachment 99925

Yeah I was really surprised by that as well. I also happened to be reading the DnA Guardians run so the announcement couldn't have happened at a better time for me lol.

 

[Iceman]

I think Superman is going to do well critically and financially but I just dont see Gunn realizing his overall DCU slate successfully. In fact i think we're reaching the end of seeing studios chase the "cinematic universe" model on a whole. The whole announcing 10 movies thing is kind of like jinxing yourself like we've seen over and over again. Marvel was able to do it in 2014 because they proved that they could be successful and they had a very clear linear plan. But now not even Marvel can replicate that strategy successfully again.

I think going forward its more prudent to focus on whats in front of you and then take it from there.

With Phase 3 it worked amazingly, creating years of nonstop hype. After the Endgame high and losing some of the biggest characters/actors and having to reimagine stuff during a pandemic, it was always going to be a tough period, and obviously others have never managed to launch a universe successfully. Outside of TV where Feige and co have mucked it up, I think it’s a method that can snowball success really well when it’s backed up by quality in a way that can’t be achieved with quality alone.

Years of hype and speculation that extend to large parts of the GA compound meaning that when things do hit they hit to the tune of a billion, 1.5B, 2B almost 3B etc. It’s the years of speculation built on top of each other with a continuous pipeline that means the universe never drops out of the news cycle and is continuously relevant, gradually getting firmly established with some of the GA in a way not dissimilar to source material fans.

When the material doesn’t meet audience expectations it’s going to eventually flop either way, and in the past these dips in quality were insulated partially by this method - as it made everything feel continuous like a TV show progressing through its planned out episodes - and where a bad episode here and there is not a reason to drop the show.

The MCU has just been through its lowest point so they’ll hold fire for now but as soon as they string say 3 big hits together again they’ll go straight back to that model which can amplify success way beyond where it would otherwise get to.

 

[Iceman]

I agree. This is an issue for me too. What's the benefit of shooting on such a tight schedule when you have those two films to compete with in the same month? If Superman is great, it will still have plenty in the tank when FF drops. If Marvel really wants to do justice to these characters, finally, then why not give the film some breathing room and increase its chances of success?

Yep, especially when relaunching something that has some failures behind it (applies to F4 and Supes), don’t take unnecessary risks! And even more so when the MCU is on shaky ground and DC are also trying to launch a universe around Supes after the last one failed.

 

[Sithborg]

IMO, it's a reminder that while the Fox/Singer approach to X-Men was successful (at times), it also kept the franchise from reaching its full BO potential.

Are we sure about that? what about the X-men was assured to be a Spider-man level hit? Applying what you think the genre should do now or even a decade ago (dear lord, the sands of time) does not apply to 2000. I just hate the use of box office as a dick measuring contest. Oh, what I like isn't as popular as something else, who gives a ****. As long as you liked it, shouldn't that all that matter. Generally, I only care about the box office being promising enough for a sequel.

Also, keep in mind what "maximizing box office potential" means now to the studio heads. It means "no politics". It was already glaring in one movie I enjoyed, and it will gut what makes the X-men the X-men.

 

[Iceman]

Yup, let everything come naturally. By all means, let the movies stay connected in the same universe but don't plan out your next ten movies before you've filmed the first one. The only real exceptions to these right now are Marvel announcing details of the next two Avengers movies a few years in advance since we all know we're getting them and they're completely safe without a threat of cancellation but even Avengers 5 has gone through some significant changes in the two years since it was announced.

The main lessons there are vet your people taking high profile roles when you could have found out about their dodgy history beforehand and don’t make your super-villains lose to Ant-Men in films releasing to ….mixed reception. You have to execute well regardless of marketing method, and for now they can’t get away with doing a Phase 3 type slate as excitement is nowhere near where it was. If Doomsday gives the GA a sinister Doom and also what they’ve come to expect from Avengers films and works with all the new characters finally meeting 45 years later (!, csad: ), then maybe they will go back to it for announcing the post Doomsday slate.

 

[Kane52630]

New thread, new meme.

 

[Pennywise]

 

[Chip Chipperson]

If it surpasses the infamous car door scene, I’ll be pleasantly surprised (and probably disgusted)

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

Speaking of head condoms, the internet is really making this happen:



If the kids call him the best Gambit ever 10 years from now, I’m blaming Kane.

 

[Kane52630]

I would quote what else he said in that movie but I don't wanna get banned. lol

 

[Drizzle]

All things considered, he's still a step up from Taylor Kitsch. Even with the Minion accent.

But this is still the best Gambit put to screen:

 

[kguillou]

Gotta love D’Onforio man. From day one you could tell he’s just happy to be playing this role. He’s always been a big hypeman for this new series and even his other Kingpin appearances.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I liked Tatum as Gambit. He was hysterical.

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

I liked Tatum as Gambit. He was hysterical.

Agreed.

And that's exactly why we can't have him be Gambit in a serious movie.

 

[Drizzle]

Agreed.

And that's exactly why we can't have him be Gambit in a serious movie.

Also he's too brolic for Gambit.

 

[Iceman]

“Much further” hmmm. When we first heard Disney would get Daredevil the assumption was that things would be muted/Disneyfied. D&W shows that that’s not necessarily going to be the case, and I expected them to go safer on the big screen than on a show with a pre-existing tone. I don’t need further in that direction than Netflix Daredevil (like Punisher), but it’s at least a sign that the show isn’t going to have to pull punches to be kid-friendly.

 

[Iceman]

Also he's too brolic for Gambit.

He looked hilarious in the face. He’s got way too bro (wide) a jaw/cheekbones to look like Gambit and the personality of the character is also nothing like what you expect from Tatum. It’s kind of surprising that he was so up for playing this role when he would be a natural fit for the typical superhero look/build.