Which Marvel Movie franchise has been your favourite?

[Flint Marko]

I was talking about sequel to TIH movie (which under-performed.) Marvel are not making The Incredible Hulk sequel as they are not sure about it's success... same with Daredevil, which could be the reason why Daredevil is getting a Netfilx series.

It goes back to the fact that Marvel makes the movies they want. They were initially hesitant to make a TIH sequel back in 2008 because of it's disappointing return; they had set up the movie for sequels and signed actors for multiple contracts but when that didn't pan out they just threw in the towel.
However it's several years later and a brand new Marvel we are talking about. If they wanted to make a Hulk movie I'm sure they could.
The main reason they don't largely has to do with the fact that the distribution rights are still tied up with universal. Fiege spoke out about how Disney is not interested in sharing the profits of their work with anyone else, so until that gets settled out we probably won't see a Hulk film. I forgot where I exactly read this, but I'll look into finding it when I have the time.
Not to mention that Whedon in an interview just talked about how Hulk being an Avengers-exclusive character really helped the story out and how he approached the film.
Not to mention that the Hulk was widely regarded as one of, if not the, best parts of the Avengers movie, a film which is the third highest grossing of all-time and was seen by hundreds of millions of people, clearly showing Marvel there was an audience for this character.
Once again, they were hesitant to make a Hulk sequel before, but now they could make a movie out of anything and we all know it'd be a success.

They did take some risk with GOTG movie but it was at par with WB taking a risk with Green Lantern or Fox taking a risk with first FF (and first X-men) movie.

Not at all.
X-men, FF, and Green Lantern all have considerably more name recognition than Guardians. Guardians is a property that is obscure even to comic book fans, and it features a talking tree and a raccoon with a gun.
Sorry, that is way more obscure and potentially-alienating to the general audience than anything you just mentioned.

 

[See Cap Run]

They also took away the movie potential of A-listers Daredevil and Hulk.

Actually, The Avengers made Hulk even more popular than he's ever been and I'm sure AOU will make him more popular still.

 

[Flint Marko]

An Incredible Hulk sequel would have indeed been a risk.

If we ever get one, it'll have been at least 12 years after the first. That's more turnaround time than Green Lantern.

Avengers wasn't a huge risk. Iron Man was a huge success and that alone is enough to make the film.

If iron man led straight into the avengers then you'd have a point; however, Marvel had a Norse god and a World War Two veteran to sell to audiences first.
And if avengers was not that risky, then why haven't we seen anything like that in movies before?

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Also with regards to GotG, soft sci-fi space opera has been a hard sell for decades with the exception of Star Wars. That genre has produced many bombs.

 

[See Cap Run]

If iron man led straight into the avengers then you'd have a point; however, Marvel had a Norse god and a World War Two veteran to sell to audiences first.
And if avengers was not that risky, then why haven't we seen anything like that in movies before?

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

* Punisher, Ghost Rider and Blade have been more recognizable names as compared to likes of Black Panther and Dr. Strange (overseas)

wait... your saying MS takes no risk because the develop movies based on less recognizable names

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

One if the hallmarks of a franchise is a consistency of characters.
[...] therefore they are each individual franchise but because they share continuity they become a mega-franchise, a collection of franchises.

9/10 of Marvels movies are Avengers based. The same base characters again and again, not saying that to knock them but it's fact that Iron Man, Cap and Thor who are all the main Avengers comprise almost all of their movies. .

make up your mind

 

[Flint Marko]

wait... your saying MS takes no risk because the develop movies based on less recognizable names

It doesn't make much sense, does it?

make up your mind

 

[psylockolussus]

The X-Men film series!

Nice to see X-Men getting the most votes, though for me the Wolverine films are included in the X-Men film series. Also Elektra is a spin-off of the Daredevil film, so they are in the same franchise.

I don't think "franchise" is the right word for this poll. More like a set of films for a particular character or superhero team.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

Exactly! Marvel Studios took 3 B-listers (Thor, Cap and Iron Man) and a group of C-listers (GOTG) and managed to raise them up to a level of popularity where they can compete with and even defeat the likes of Spider-Man, Batman, Superman and X-Men at the box office! Just take a moment to marvel at that! Those characters are no longer risky, it's true but if you'll take a moment to look ahead to 2019, you'll notice a slew of new B and C-listers about to be made A-listers by Marvel over the next few years: there's nothing risky about that!

The first ones while B-listers weren't huge risks as they were straight white American male led movies and had the same concepts of heroes defeating bad guys with cool settings. They were risky in the sense that the characters weren't as well-known as others but original franchises where the characters aren't known bust the block if the stories and characters are cool and interesting.

Now if they had done a Gay, Black, Islamic superhero movie then that would've been very risky as it puts lots of hurdles to overcome but straight white American males as the leads is the safest possible route to take so they chose those properties rather than Black Panther or Ms Marvel to start with as they were less less risky.

Marvel Studio movies from 2012 onwards are no longer as risky though because of the brand-security they secured with Avengers. That brand-security guarantees an audience so no matter what they do it'll be seen, ergo not risky henceforth. Which is why they have a minority led superhero and a female led one coming. Those would've been very risky before the brand security but now those hurdles are compensated by the brand-security.

 

[Flint Marko]

The first ones while B-listers weren't huge risks as they were straight white make led movies and had the same concepts of heroes defeating bad guys with cool settings. They were risky in the sense that the characters weren't as well-known as others but original franchises where the characters aren't known bust the block if the stories and characters are cool and interesting.

Now if they had done a Gay, Black, Islamic superhero movie then that would've been very risky as it puts lots of hurdles to overcome but straight white American males as the leads is the safest possible route to take so they chose those properties rather than Black Panther or Ms Marvel to start with as they were less less risky.

Marvel Studio movies from 2012 onwards are no longer as risky though because of the brand-security they secured with Avengers. That brand-security guarantees an audience so no matter what they do it'll be seen, ergo not risky henceforth. Which is why they have a minority led superhero and a female led one coming. Those would've been very risky before the brand security but now those hurdles are compensated by the brand-security.

LOL wanna know why they kicked off their Avengers universe with a movie starring a bunch of white guys?
Because the Avengers were created 60 years ago as white guys. Blame Stan Lee for that one. This is such a weak counter-argument.

 

[Micromind]

wait... your saying MS takes no risk because the develop movies based on less recognizable names

I never said that MS was making movies without taking any risk, it's all relative.. rejuvenating failed franchises at this stage would seem like a risk rather than developing new franchises, but at the same time the failed franchises have an inbuilt audience who want to see those movies as compared to unknown heroes.

Which one is more risky ? We can debate that but apparently Marvel finds it better to make new cb movies, as opposed to trying to breathe life into under-performing ones.

 

[First Avenger]

I think this poll is flawed:
-Hulk and TIH are not the same franchise,they are just based on the same character but the continuity is totally different,same for Punisher movies
-Raimi's and Webb's series should be divided
-The MCU is one franchise divided in sub-franchises and not the other way around
-The Wolverine movies should be counted in the X-men franchise IMO

 

[Tg11]

The Punisher is another movie franchise that I feel should be rebooted

 

[Flint Marko]

I think this poll is flawed:
-Hulk and TIH are not the same franchise,they are just based on the same character but the continuity is totally different,same for Punisher movies
-Raimi's and Webb's series should be divided
-The MCU is one franchise divided in sub-franchises and not the other way around
-The Wolverine movies should be counted in the X-men franchise IMO

Agreed, this poll makes no sense.
But if you add up the votes and categorize them in their proper place, the MCU is leading the pack.

 

[ctriis]

The Avengers is my favorite film among the ones listed, and is by definition my favorite franchise (when counting single films as franchises)

However, if I only count franchises with multiple movies I have to go with X-men. The Bryan Singer X-films + First Class are all exceptional. I even really liked The Wolverine (excluding the last 15-20 minutes) if we add the Wolverine films to the franchise.

 

[meanmc]

Tough question, because the MCU is imo by far the best franchise!

I pick the Avengers - till now just one movie, but with AoU around the corner, and for sure a awesome movie, and with IW 1+2 coming, that will always be my favorite franchise...
The Avengers movie was just perfect, and i can not wait to see more of this franchise!

The other franchise i like most is Thor, even if the second movie was just "good". Still enough to love the franchise...

They have done also great work with the Iron Man franchise - but i did not like the third one.

I think, with Thor 3 and Captain America 3 coming, both franchises will have a much better third act than Iron Man and will finally "crush" the RDJ franchise

 

[Penguin022]

I'm gonna vote for X-Men. It's really defined itself as a franchise, and it's first 2 and last 2 are pretty good movies. Not to mention some of the fine actors.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

Glad to see Blade get a vote. While not m favourite it's quite underrated IMO.

I think this poll is flawed:
-Hulk and TIH are not the same franchise,they are just based on the same character but the continuity is totally different,same for Punisher movies
-Raimi's and Webb's series should be divided
-The MCU is one franchise divided in sub-franchises and not the other way around
-The Wolverine movies should be counted in the X-men franchise IMO

- They're the same properties all about the same main characters. I take your point though, they'd all be separate if the poll question was 'which is your favourite continuity'.

- MCU is a mega-franchise, a universe and continuity that is comprised of 5 individual franchises. Guardians didn't feature Iron Man therefore not an Iron Man movie therefore not part of the Iron Man franchise. If someone's favourite is the Thor movies and the poll had Thor + 8 movies that are not about the Thor as one franchise then a person would be voting for 8 franchises that are not their favourite when voting for their favourite.

- Wolverine movies are not about X-Men ergo not X-men movies

 

[Loki882]

PROBABLY the X-Men because it's been more consistently good. The only objectively BAD movie that they've had imo (if were excluding XMOW) was TLS.

While I love Marvel, it's been more inconsistent in it's quality to me, same with the Sony Spider-Man films.

 

[spider-neil]

Spider-Man with X-men second. I really like 3 Spider-Man movies movies where as I only really like 2 X-men movies.
I only really like 2 MCU movies.

 

[Marvel]

Right now Iron Man clearly has delivered the best trilogy the genre has seen but that title will belong to shellhead for only another year. I can't see Captain America not taking the crown for good in 2016... with help from Tony Stark no less.

 

[Daltonio]

Spider-Man for me easily and it's not even a contest.

Especially in regards to The Amazing Spider-Man series so far. Nothing even compares to me.

 

[Rorschach2012]

Spider-Man
X-Men
The Avengers
Captain America
Blade
Guardians of the Galaxy
Iron Man

 

[Emperor_Zerg]

This is actually pretty difficult to me because all the franchises has huge flaws in them. But I guess I would have to say Spider-Man and Avengers.

There are so many individual movies that I love, but other installments make me like the franchise a lot less. Loved X-Men 1, 2 and FC, but can't stand to watch Wolverines and X3. Never liked Cap: FA, Iron Man 3 made me mad, FF was just bad.

I actually enjoyed every Spider Man movie to an extent. Loved Spidey and Gwen/Peter in ASM, but also enjoyed the plots to the originals. They just didn't age as well.