Which current CBM would do well in the 70s or 80s, and which ones would bomb horribly?

[1627523]

Which modern age (2000 onward) CBM would of resonated well with audiences and sensibilities of the 80s or 70s.
My pick would be Sam Raimi Spider-man because it has some of the Donner feel, and Some other ones would be Thor Ragnarok and Aquaman.
Some CBM's that would bomb are probably Black Panther(unfortunately), and Ant-man(too silly).

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Anything R-Rated would probably have been more popular in the 80s. Those movies ruled the cinemas back then. 80s audiences would absolutely LOVE Deadpool and Logan. Snyder's films as a whole would probably be more popular back then too, especially Watchmen. V For Vendetta is another CBM I see being more popular in the 80s. On the lighter side, I think Stardust would have been a better fit alongside other kids films of the period like A Princess Bride and The Neverending Story. Iron Man is probably still popular during the age of greed and materialism.

Captain America is likely very popular during the Reagan Era and very unpopular during Nixon/Vietnam. Especially the first film. Since 2 & 3 have him fighting the government, they would probably be more well-liked if people got by the Captain America name.

The Hulk films are definitely bigger during the time the Bixby show was on.

I think Guardians of the Galaxy suffers the most in either decade. So much of those films are based on nostalgia and it is basically a love letter to the 80s. It wouldn't work if it is actually in the 80s, let alone hasn't happened yet if it came out in the 70s.

 

[Sithborg]

Which modern age (2000 onward) CBM would of resonated well with audiences and sensibilities of the 80s or 70s.
My pick would be Sam Raimi Spider-man because it has some of the Donner feel, and Some other ones would be Thor Ragnarok and Aquaman.
Some CBM's that would bomb are probably Black Panther(unfortunately), and Ant-man(too silly).

I disagree with Black Panther. Would it have been as landmark successful as it was, no. But blaxploitation did decent in the 70s.

 

[DACrowe]

Logan is downbeat and humanistic enough to work well in the '70s. Same goes for The Dark Knight. The Raimi movies would've gone over well in the '80s, because they had that same sense of wonderment that Spielberg inspired all of Hollywood to chase in family entertainment in that decade. (The modern sense of irreverent winking at the silliness was not in vogue in the '80s save for, strangely, fantasy movies that have aged far less well.)

Ignoring special effects impracticalities for Groot and Rocket, the Guardians movies would've worked well in the '70s and '80s given they are greatly inspired by Star Wars already.

(All of this is operating under the assumption we're ignoring the mainstream didn't take comic books seriously in those decades. Richard Donner's Superman and Tim Burton's Batman began changing that, but they were less afraid to be unrealistic. So maybe TDK wouldn't have worked back then?)

 

[Batmannerism]

I think some of the really violent ones - Deadpool and Logan in particular would struggle because general audiences would be a little too shocked for them to gain widespread acceptance - Logan's story and character drama would probably get some kudos but it's violence would be a bit much. Also, Wolverine as an old man works better when he's been around for a while, he was introduced in 1974, so it might be too soon for that.

There are some very violent films from the 70s and 80s ( e.g. First Blood, the Terminator, Die Hard) but I'm not sure that audiences were ready for superhero films to be that violent ( think of the Donner Superman films) and Logan and Deadpool are a level up from that.

When Batman '89 came out it got some flack for being too dark - compared to today's superhero films it's not that dark at all.

I think Guardians of the Galaxy would suffer from being compared to Star Wars ( there were a bunch of crappy Star Wars knock offs) it would have to be released late in the 80s to do well unless they recast Quill with Harrison Ford ( ROTJ was 1983).

I think Avengers, Dark Knight and Black Panther would succeed no matter when they came out.

TBH I think that a Watchmen film shown during the cold war would be too close to home for a lot of audiences.

 

[Batmannerism]

Anything R-Rated would probably have been more popular in the 80s. Those movies ruled the cinemas back then. 80s audiences would absolutely LOVE Deadpool and Logan. Snyder's films as a whole would probably be more popular back then too, especially Watchmen. V For Vendetta is another CBM I see being more popular in the 80s. On the lighter side, I think Stardust would have been a better fit alongside other kids films of the period like A Princess Bride and The Neverending Story. Iron Man is probably still popular during the age of greed and materialism.

Captain America is likely very popular during the Reagan Era and very unpopular during Nixon/Vietnam. Especially the first film. Since 2 & 3 have him fighting the government, they would probably be more well-liked if people got by the Captain America name.

The Hulk films are definitely bigger during the time the Bixby show was on.

I think Guardians of the Galaxy suffers the most in either decade. So much of those films are based on nostalgia and it is basically a love letter to the 80s. It wouldn't work if it is actually in the 80s, let alone hasn't happened yet if it came out in the 70s.

I disagree with you on almost allis of that, except GOTG and Captain America, but I take your point.
The main point we diverge on is whether the most violent cbms would succeed. I still think that they would turn off the GA, but would get a cult following.

Mind you, the 80s gave us Scarface and Deathwish so you might be into something there.

 

[DACrowe]

I think some of the really violent ones - Deadpool and Logan in particular would struggle because general audiences would be a little too shocked for them to gain widespread acceptance - Logan's story and character drama would probably get some kudos but it's violence would be a bit much. Also, Wolverine as an old man works better when he's been around for a while, he was introduced in 1974, so it might be too soon for that.

There are some very violent films from the 70s and 80s ( e.g. First Blood, the Terminator, Die Hard) but I'm not sure that audiences were ready for superhero films to be that violent ( think of the Donner Superman films) and Logan and Deadpool are a level up from that.

When Batman '89 came out it got some flack for being too dark - compared to today's superhero films it's not that dark at all.

I think Guardians of the Galaxy would suffer from being compared to Star Wars ( there were a bunch of crappy Star Wars knock offs) it would have to be released late in the 80s to do well unless they recast Quill with Harrison Ford ( ROTJ was 1983).

I think Avengers, Dark Knight and Black Panther would succeed no matter when they came out.

TBH I think that a Watchmen film shown during the cold war would be too close to home for a lot of audiences.

I think Avengers might be... too nerdy for that era, particularly the '70s, which was much more geared toward adult and sophisticated entertainment. Yes, Jaws and Star Wars came out of the '70s and then the '80s was a time of great kids' entertainment, but I think audiences at the time would've struggled with the idea of a Norse God and someone from WWII who was frozen in a block of ice, and a guy in a robot suit were all running around fighting aliens and Norse gods. I know all of those elements were in '80s movies... but mixing them like that might've been a tough sell. Marvel had to build audiences up toward the idea in the 2000s.

I'll also say Harrison Ford as Quill? The thing about Ford is even when he was in his 20s he was a world-weary man. Think by Raiders of the line "It's not the years but the mileage." We've kind of lost that in our current generations, and the thing about Quill is he's an immature guy trying to be Harrison Ford. In an interesting way, I don't know if his man-childness would've gone over as well in that era, unless they played him more like Ferris Bueller or something... now there's an idea.

 

[2kt09]

I think Avengers might be... too nerdy for that era, particularly the '70s, which was much more geared toward adult and sophisticated entertainment. Yes, Jaws and Star Wars came out of the '70s and then the '80s was a time of great kids' entertainment, but I think audiences at the time would've struggled with the idea of a Norse God and someone from WWII who was frozen in a block of ice, and a guy in a robot suit were all running around fighting aliens and Norse gods. I know all of those elements were in '80s movies... but mixing them like that might've been a tough sell.

Terry Gilliam's or Mel Brooks's The Avengers

I think Guardians of the Galaxy would suffer from being compared to Star Wars ( there were a bunch of crappy Star Wars knock offs) it would have to be released late in the 80s to do well unless they recast Quill with Harrison Ford

Kurt Russell

 

[DACrowe]

Terry Gilliam's or Mel Brooks's The Avengers

Gilliam's would've flopped but I'd have loved to see how weird it'd be. Brooks' would be a hit, but comic fans would be furious to this day like B&R.

Kurt Russell

True, but again not a man-child. You'd have to change the character from how Gunn/Pratt did it for that era. But yes, he'd be good in a different type of Guardians film.

 

[Batmannerism]

Kurt Russell

Why didn't I see that? It was so obvious !

 

[2kt09]

Gilliam's would've flopped but I'd have loved to see how weird it'd be. Brooks' would be a hit, but comic fans would be furious to this day like B&R.

or like Howard the Duck or that Super Mario Bros movie.
I don't see either of those being the case with Mel Brooks.

True, but again not a man-child. You'd have to change the character from how Gunn/Pratt did it for that era. But yes, he'd be good in a different type of Guardians film.

It's a very 90s sort of thing.

 

[Batmannerism]

Terry Gilliam's or Mel Brooks's The Avengers

Hmmmm.....maybe Gilliam's Watchmen, but I see Mel Brooks more doing a parody of Fantastic Four.

As for Avengers... I need to think about which 70s-80s directors would be that ambitious. Spielberg ? Lucas ? Not really their genre. I'm thinking either James Cameron or Ridley Scott.

 

[Mandon Knight]

Ridley Scott would have done an awesome GL film in his heyday.

 

[hawkflame]

I wonder ( no pun intended) how Wonder Woman would have done in the 70s/80s. On one hand it very much follows in the sensibilities of Donner’s Superman. On the other hand, it would have been contrasted to the then recent TV series and I think that could have just confused people.

Reimi Spider-Man would have done well in any era.

I think that characters that weren’t Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Spider-Man, and maybe Hulk or Captain America would have been a tougher sell. Comics were still largely considered kids stuff at the time, and I don’t know if the studios would have taken a chance on less well known characters at the time.

 

[The Batman]

If 70's/80's Special effects could make you believe that a man can websling, then Raimi's Spider-Man would definitely have been a hit in either decade.

I feel like Whedon's Avengers and Deadpool could've only succeeded in this time period.

Wonder Woman would've been successful, and if they had a RDJ-tier lead actor in the 70's/80's, Iron Man would've been successful as well.

 

[psylockolussus]

Kingsman movies.