Will Marvel finally do three films a year to compete with DC?

[Uncle Radiation]

Difference between Western and Superhero genres is that Superhero movies can have sub-genre, like WWII, tech, Mythology, and even sorcery and horror. Westerns are just westerns.

What would you call Jonah Hex then-? Or Cowboys & Aliens? Wild Wild West? Wesley Snipes' Gallow Walkers?
Firefly? Outland? Bravestarr? Futureworld? Ravenous? Billy the Kid vs Dracula? Westworld?

 

[Visualiza]

What would you call Jonah Hex then-? Or Cowboys & Aliens? Wild Wild West? Wesley Snipes' Gallow Walkers?
Firefly? Outland? Bravestarr? Futureworld? Ravenous? Billy the Kid vs Dracula? Westworld?

Don't forget Django Unchained.

 

[psylockolussus]

I hope not, i think it would be overexposure, and Marvel has created the game, they need to keep setting trends, not following on others. If these rumors are true, WB may easily fall on their heads, since they don't look near as well prepared to do a Cinematic Unvierse as Marvel in 2007.

Agreed.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Technically Marvel studios have done 9 movies. Warner Brothers have done 17. So Marvel is catching up to WB in the overall output of CBMs

9 since 2008 is a siginificantly stronger pace than 17 since 1978. 8 of those were in the 70s-90s.

 

[SpideyFan866]

Regardless of who's ahead, pace wise AND number wise, I think it would be in Marvel's best interest to start cranking out three (maybe even four films) a year, or every other year, if they want to keep up with WB/DC, who looks intent on cranking out at least three every year starting in 2016.

 

[regnak]

Regardless of who's ahead, pace wise AND number wise, I think it would be in Marvel's best interest to start cranking out three (maybe even four films) a year, or every other year, if they want to keep up with DC, who looks intent on cranking out at least three every year starting in 2016.

Well the list of films WB is planning looks like it may be legit(but then again everything on it except Flash/GL was expected anyway). However the time frame is something else. The time frame is too compressed. The WB would have scheduling issues, burn through the actors contracts in a hurry and be spending huge amounts of money before they know whether or not any of these movies fail.

 

[The.Brotherhood]

Nah, WB will release more film than marvel per year and in truth's perspective those more than the Marvel's releases will be more prone to flop results.

Why more prone to being flops? the gap of time and development is too early / too short with one another (NOT all films are BATMAN unless they overexpose bat-fleck and put him to all films and eat up the lead's).

BUT you can't blame WB / DC, we're all waiting for them to get their heads out of their a**es and start films with their properties.

First and Foremost, this is business. If those films are flops then don't get your opes high for a sequel.


For the people that are saying that Marvel's playing catching up, this is the CINEMATIC UNIVERSE we're talking about, 9 > 1 (All t.v. series connected as well).

 

[Raiden]

What would you call Jonah Hex then-? Or Cowboys & Aliens? Wild Wild West? Wesley Snipes' Gallow Walkers?
Firefly? Outland? Bravestarr? Futureworld? Ravenous? Billy the Kid vs Dracula? Westworld?

I should've been more specific; I was talking about the Westerns that were made during their heydays, back in the 50s and 60s. The examples you cited are mostly from recent years, when Hollywood was trying to bring back the Western genre by giving them some sci-fi or other sub-genre twist, in an attempt to win back moviegoers. Superhero movies are at the peak of their popularity right now, but studios like Marvel are already trying to change things up in anticipation of the so-called fatigue that may set in if the movies become too similar to one another. That's why I think superhero movies will not flame out as quickly as the Westerns in the old days.

 

[Raiden]

Well the list of films WB is planning looks like it may be legit(but then again everything on it except Flash/GL was expected anyway). However the time frame is something else. The time frame is too compressed. The WB would have scheduling issues, burn through the actors contracts in a hurry and be spending huge amounts of money before they know whether or not any of these movies fail.

I'm rather skeptical whether WB can succeed outside their Batman & Superman movies, especially if they are really trying to rush them out 3 movies in one year, when they had been doing one superhero movie in 2-3 years in the past. Furthermore, none of their non-Batman & Superman DC superhero movies have ever been successful, such as Catwoman, Steel, Jonah Hex, and GL. Even Watchmen wasn't really a blockbuster. That's why just looking at WB's history of superhero movie-making makes it hard for me to think that they can suddenly develop this magic elixir and make so many movies in such a short period of time and still guarantee success.

 

[Uncle Radiation]

I should've been more specific; I was talking about the Westerns that were made during their heydays, back in the 50s and 60s. The examples you cited are mostly from recent years, when Hollywood was trying to bring back the Western genre by giving them some sci-fi or other sub-genre twist, in an attempt to win back moviegoers. Superhero movies are at the peak of their popularity right now, but studios like Marvel are already trying to change things up in anticipation of the so-called fatigue that may set in if the movies become too similar to one another. That's why I think superhero movies will not flame out as quickly as the Westerns in the old days.

Fair point about the western genre crossovers being a recent-ish trend. However, I have to disagree with you about about the superhero boom lasting longer than the western one - westerns were not only popular from the 30s (John Wayne) to the early 70s (Clint Eastwood), but there were vastly more western movies (and TV shows) made during that period than there are superhero movies now, largely because they were so cheap and quick to produce.

I believe the best genre model to compare the current superhero trend to is the 30s/40s Universal horror movies boom. Fantastical movies, sold largely on the appeal of pre-existing characters, which required extensive make-up and special effects, and ended up with team-ups between various characters.

 

[Spider-Vader]

I just posted this in the Blade thread, but since Dr Strange is apparently opening up the "Mystic" side of the MCU, I think it'd be cool if those movies get released in October around Halloween. They could be a bit smaller scaled, budgeted so they can fill up the third spot in Marvel's yearly schedule. Blade, Man-Thing, Ghost Rider (he might need a bigger budget than the others), leading into a Midnight Sons movie.

 

[Kaewin]

I think at some point we are going to get more MCU movies they just have to figure out which brands to push. If they are all just Avenger movies people might get a bit bored but if they have 2 or 3 brands it offers a bit of a selection of what stores to run and where to grow. I would love to see 3 or 4 Avengers based movies every year but an idea of Midnight Sons or the like has appeal.


Also it will come down to scripts...what they perceive is good writing.

 

[psylockolussus]

Answer to this thread: yes in 2017!

I'm fine with it, more Marvel movies the merrier.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

Three from Marvel Studios, probably a fourth from WB and ASM3. Looking like five CBMs in 2017.

Wonder what amount it will go up until it gets too many and audiences become fatigued.

 

[psylockolussus]

Did you forget Wolverine 3? Which is probably going to be the 1st Marvel or CB film of 2017.

And Fox already gave Fantastic Four a July 2017 release date.

 

[Eddie]

Three from Marvel Studios, probably a fourth from WB and ASM3. Looking like five CBMs in 2017.

Wonder what amount it will go up until it gets too many and audiences become fatigued.

Dozens of movies based on novels come out every single year. It's been that way for decades. Audiences haven't gotten fatigued yet. We're probably going to be okay.

 

[Comicbookguy339]

IF the rumor about DC's plans is true, IF Fox releases a Wolverine sequel and a Fantastic Four sequel (unlikely, the first one will probably flop) and IF TASM 3 is delayed to 2017 then in 2017 we would get

3 DC films (JL, WW & GL/Flash)
3 Marvel Studios films
Wolverine 3
Fantastic Four 2
Amazing Spider-Man 3

Hoooly shiiiiiiiiiiii

 

[Eddie]

IF the rumor about DC's plans is true, IF Fox releases a Wolverine sequel and a Fantastic Four sequel (unlikely, the first one will probably flop) and IF TASM 3 is delayed to 2017 then in 2017 we would get

3 DC films (JL, WW & GL/Flash)
3 Marvel Studios films
Wolverine 3
Fantastic Four 2
Amazing Spider-Man 3

Hoooly shiiiiiiiiiiii

FF 2 won't happen, but I'm sure we'll see some creator owned comic adaptations and/or stuff from the smaller publishers. Some manga adaptations are also possible.

 

[Comicbookguy339]

FOX could add some X-Men spin-offs.