Across the Kraven-verse: How Sony Won the Superhero Cinematic Civil War Thread - Part 59

[KBX]

Captain America : Hulk and the Fam should really be the title lol

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

Is Skaar and that horrible CGI lineup they gave him going to be in this movie too?



The barbers in outer space suck LOL

 

[Lily Adler]

Captain America : Hulk and the Fam should really be the title lol

Wakanda v Namor: Dawn of Thirst is Wakanda Forever's alt. :relax:

 

[Spider-Fan]

Is Skaar and that horrible CGI lineup they gave him going to be in this movie too?

View attachment 63621

The barbers in outer space suck LOL

We can send him to boarding school for the movie

Over under Betty ends up as Red She-Hulk? We did get Captain Carter, Rescue, and Jane Thor already! Can add Betty maybe to this group on my Legends shelf?

 

[Lily Adler]

We can send him to boarding school for the movie

Over under Betty ends up as Red She-Hulk? We did get Captain Carter, Rescue, and Jane Thor already! Can add Betty maybe to this group on my Legends shelf?

Introduce the damn Young Avengers.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Introduce the damn Young Avengers.

I think that is coming. Just not this movie, lol. But I do think maybe we will get our first hints at who the new Avengers team will be come Kang Dynasty in this movie. Not the full roster, but I think we will get some names that will be on it

 

[Iceman]

We can send him to boarding school for the movie

Over under Betty ends up as Red She-Hulk? We did get Captain Carter, Rescue, and Jane Thor already! Can add Betty maybe to this group on my Legends shelf?

I'm happy to just get Liv/Betty at all, but that would be a massive bonus.

 

[Iceman]

I think that is coming. Just not this movie, lol. But I do think maybe we will get our first hints at who the new Avengers team will be come Kang Dynasty in this movie. Not the full roster, but I think we will get some names that will be on it

It's needed at this point. The MCU is waiting for a suggestion of an event film and KD already has a lot on its plate.

 

[Zant]

Looking forward to The incredible Hulk 2. I hear Captain America is in it too...

 

[Sithborg]

Given recent developments in Israel, I am still deathly curious to see how badly they fumble through the minefield of one of their characters.

 

[squeekness]

That begs the question..Will bringing back Tony Stark without RDJ be a big draw to General audiences...The GA dont seem to care who plays Spiderman, Batman or Bond..The characters are draws..We dont know for sure yet if the GA will warm up to new actors playing Indiana Jones, Jack Sparrow, Deadpool, Wolverine, Iron man...Nothing is guaranteed. Can go either way

I would struggle with a recast for RDJ , I'd rather see some other character like Bucky take over the Suit.

 

[Sithborg]

I would struggle with a recast for RDJ , I'd rather see some other character like Bucky take over the Suit.

The first recast is always the toughest. But, people will adjust.

 

[Lily Adler]

The first recast is always the toughest. But, people will adjust.

Evans and his magic bum is going to be the hardest. uppydogeyes::crybaby:

 

[Kev4000]

Secret Invasions drops June 21.
(the first trailer came September last year...)

 

[Batgirl0202]

Looking forward to The incredible Hulk 2. I hear Captain America is in it too...

Yeah it's sounding more and more like a (very) belated sequel to IH but I don't care...

Tim Blake Nelson as Leader? Ford as Thunderbolt Ross? Liv back as Betty?

Sign me up

Which Bruce.....?

Norton back as a variant Bruce, going toe-to-toe with Ruffalo's Banner?

We can only dream

 

[Iceman]

Evans and his magic bum is going to be the hardest. uppydogeyes::crybaby:

Maybe Evans could come back just to be a butt-double.

 

[Lily Adler]

Maybe Evans could come back just to be a butt-double.

It is She-Hulk's wallpaper for a reason.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Is Skaar and that horrible CGI lineup they gave him going to be in this movie too?

View attachment 63621

The barbers in outer space suck LOL

I liked She Hulk a lot. But this was a terrible introduction for Skaar.

Good news on Liv Tyler's return though.

 

[Marvel united]

No one is tired of McDonalds filmmaking. You are trying to twist the data a certain way, but you're blatantly ignoring a lot of factors. You cannot just write off DC's past failures. Yes, Gunn is doing a DC reboot, but the brand damage doesn't go away simply cause of the reboot. Your average movie goer doesn't even pay attention to the backstage politics like we do on here. So they either are unaware this is happening or do not care. Gunn is gonna have to have years of success before it reflects in the BO the way it did the MCU. The MCU was making 300-500 mil per project in Phase 1 pre Avengers (excluding Iron Man 2, which was a sequel), and I don't see WB maintaining that kind of patience while he builds that.

Yes, the DC brand is damaged, but that's why Gunn is wiping the slate clean, It's his attempt to rectify, and address that damage. Zaslav isn't an idiot, he knows that this is going to be a process* of rehabilitation, and that the studio is going to have to gradually rebuild audience trust. Gunn sold him on an 8-10 year plan, buildup comes with the territory.

But rebuilding audience investment is not going to be as difficult as you think. While Superman's popularity has faltered, he's still the most ICONIC superhero in the world. The only thing Gunn has to do, to tap into that icongraphy, is make a *good* Superman movie that resonates with audiences.

Considering Gunn's track record, that's not going to be hard for him. Especially if he focuses on the emotion, and humanity of the character.

As for the state of the MCU and McD filmmaking. Every Hollywood blockbuster that costs 100 mil + is McD filmmaking. They are all trying to reach the 4 quadrant demo. No one is tired of that.

Of course not. What people are tired of, is the MCU's lazy "self-aware, action comedy" formula, which is not specific to four quadrant filmmaking. That's not the only* way to make a blockbuster.

'CREED III' is ALSO a four quadrant film, and the movie, tonally, structurally, and aesthetically, is nothing like an MCU film. The movie is also, well, actually* good, great even, with a tight script, good character development, and a compelling conflict. The movie is superior to most everything Marvel has put out since Phase 4 (besides NWH), and box-office, and reviews are reflecting that.

In hard numbers, it'll make less than QUANTUMANIA, but in budget-to-box-office ratio, it'll actually turn a chunky profit for the studio, unlike Quantumania.

What you are now seeing is the BO has declined on movies people largely disliked. Quantumania, Shazam 2, and Black Adam had poor RT ratings, Cinemascores, and lower audience scores than more well reviewed products.

And whyyyy do you think these movies are poorly reviewed, and disliked by audiences and critics alike? There's a common denominator here, that you're missing.

All 3 of these movies follow the same formula, and all 3 of them would've significantly made more money, if they came out 5-6 years ago. Both Ant-Man and Shazam, saw a 40% to 60% decline from their preceding films in terms of box-office

Audiences are rejecting the MCU's formulaic filmmaking

You can excuse MoM as riding NWH, but fact is MoM got decent reviews and netted 900mil, Thor 4 even on mixed reviews and reception still snagged around 750mil, and WF while seeing large drop relative to the first movie still did over 800 mil in business. These are solid numbers. Both MoM and WF I believe were top 5 grossers last year.

These numbers aren't meaningful when stripped of context, tho. And critical & commercial reception irrevocably paint a picture of decline.

As just one example, the MCU used to rely on China push their movies past 1 bil... Those days, however, are over

China Box Office: ‘Ant-Man 3’ Earns Just $7 Million in Second Weekend – The Hollywood Reporter

With Quantumania's abysmal performance in China (40m), esp in comparison to the last 2 (105m & 121m respectively), as well as Black Adam bombing, I think we can safely say, that China is done with CBMs overall.

And the MCU will suffer for this.

What needs to happen for this thesis to have validity is for a big movie, like say GOTG3 to come along, get great reviews and then underperform or bomb. That would show apathy towards the Marvel product from the general public.

Well, that's the just the thing. This is not about good movies bombing, this is about factory movies flopping.

My argument has never been that audiences are tired of superheroes as a concept, just that they're tired of cookie-cutter, formulaic projects, that all taste the same. There's no variety within the MCU, for the most part.

When we compare CBMs to westerns, we talk about superheroes as if they're a genre in itself, because genres can absolutely fall out of favor with audiences. But superheroes SHOULDN'T be a genre, because comic books, like any other format of storytelling, are extremely diverse in subject matter. That's the problem with the MCU. it has *created* a genre for itself, and boxed itself into a specific corner of telling *all* stories the same way, and that's what audiences can, and are, tiring of.

Gunn's Guardians movies have always had their own distinct style, and flavor to them.

But your entire thesis is flawed considering Top Gun Maverick and Avatar 2 are also both McD movies and did amazing at the BO. Yeah, Avatar 2 had James Cameron and all that, but its still one giant Big Mac.

Top Gun 2 was nostalgia bait (like NWH) and Avatar 2 was a tech demo showcase, but neither look, feel, or sound, anything like an MCU film.

Again, you conflating the MCU's specific filmmaking model, with ALL blockbuster films. All MCU films are blockbusters, but all blockbusters are not MCU. There's a huge difference, between something like 'Way of The Water', and something b QUANTUMANIA.

And audiences notice.

No one cares about the name on the superhero project, whether they be auteur or hired gun to the average movie goer. They simply care if they had a good time.

Right, they care about the products they create. James Cameron IS an auteur with a specific vision of a world, that he executed on screen, and audiences loved.

Just because the movie made 2 billion dollars, doesn't mean Cameron isn't one of the most prestigious filmmakers in Hollywood. Auteur-filmmaking doesn't always equal A24.

Robert Eggers is an auteur, but so is Steve Spielberg, and so is Denis Villeneuve, and so is Tim Burton -- all of them have made, and are making, blockbuster films.

So, what Marvel needs in all honesty is to do a better job at reaching those 4 quadrants they were nailing for years. Hopefully slowing down output allows them to give each project more TLC and we see audience enjoyment go up. Cause that's where they need to focus

Simply designing a movie for a four quadrant audience, doesn't make it good. You still need compelling characters, an investive conflict, reasonate themes, and a script that all ties all of these elements together, in a tightly woven narrative.

In other words, you still need the movie to ACTUALLY* be good, in order for those four quadrants to show up to the theater. And guess what? Stuffing 50 characters into a script, and trying to set up 20 other movies, does not a good film, make.

And this is not some baseless conjecture on my part. Others are noticing. Gunn has noticed, box-office analysts are talking about it. Even Feige probably knows, but he's either too stubborn, or unable to act.

That's why Malcolm Spellman is writing New World Order, and not someone like Barry Jenkins. They haven't acted at all.

 

[Iceman]

Yeah it's sounding more and more like a (very) belated sequel to IH but I don't care...

Tim Blake Nelson as Leader? Ford as Thunderbolt Ross? Liv back as Betty?

Sign me up



Norton back as a variant Bruce, going toe-to-toe with Ruffalo's Banner?

We can only dream

Yep, absolutely no complaints here! Ford is just a great bonus. Liv is too good to be true.

I'd love to see those 2 Hulks go at it (Ragnarok/Avengers 1 Hulk in Ruffalo's case - otherwise Professor Hulk is going to get eviscerated).

 

[Iceman]

Is Skaar and that horrible CGI lineup they gave him going to be in this movie too?

View attachment 63621

The barbers in outer space suck LOL

I liked She Hulk a lot. But this was a terrible introduction for Skaar.

Good news on Liv Tyler's return though.

I really want these other Hulk characters like Skaar, but yeah they really didn't put a whole lot of effort in. He better look 20 times better if they put him in a film.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I really want these other Hulk characters like Skaar, but yeah they really didn't put a whole lot of effort in. He better look 20 times better if they put him in a film.

If they wanted to set up WWH. They chose a pretty damn poor way to do it.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Yes, the DC brand is damaged, but that's why Gunn is wiping the slate clean, It's his attempt to rectify, and address that damage. Zaslav isn't an idiot, he knows that this is going to be a process* of rehabilitation, and that the studio is going to have to gradually rebuild audience trust. Gunn sold him on an 8-10 year plan, buildup comes with the territory.

But rebuilding audience investment is not going to be as difficult as you think. While Superman's popularity has faltered, he's still the most ICONIC superhero in the world. The only thing Gunn has to do, to tap into that icongraphy, is make a *good* Superman movie that resonates with audiences.

Considering Gunn's track record, that's not going to be hard for him. Especially if he focuses on the emotion, and humanity of the character.


Of course not. What people are tired of, is the MCU's lazy "self-aware, action comedy" formula, which is not specific to four quadrant filmmaking. That's not the only* way to make a blockbuster.

'CREED III' is ALSO a four quadrant film, and the movie, tonally, structurally, and aesthetically, is nothing like an MCU film. The movie is also, well, actually* good, great even, with a tight script, good character development, and a compelling conflict. The movie is superior to most everything Marvel has put out since Phase 4 (besides NWH), and box-office, and reviews are reflecting that.

In hard numbers, it'll make less than QUANTUMANIA, but in budget-to-box-office ratio, it'll actually turn a chunky profit for the studio, unlike Quantumania.



And whyyyy do you think these movies are poorly reviewed, and disliked by audiences and critics alike? There's a common denominator here, that you're missing.

All 3 of these movies follow the same formula, and all 3 of them would've significantly made more money, if they came out 5-6 years ago. Both Ant-Man and Shazam, saw a 40% to 60% decline from their preceding films in terms of box-office

Audiences are rejecting the MCU's formulaic filmmaking

These numbers aren't meaningful when stripped of context, tho. And critical & commercial reception irrevocably paint a picture of decline.

As just one example, the MCU used to rely on China push their movies past 1 bil... Those days, however, are over

China Box Office: ‘Ant-Man 3’ Earns Just $7 Million in Second Weekend – The Hollywood Reporter

With Quantumania's abysmal performance in China (40m), esp in comparison to the last 2 (105m & 121m respectively), as well as Black Adam bombing, I think we can safely say, that China is done with CBMs overall.

And the MCU will suffer for this.


Well, that's the just the thing. This is not about good movies bombing, this is about factory movies flopping.

My argument has never been that audiences are tired of superheroes as a concept, just that they're tired of cookie-cutter, formulaic projects, that all taste the same. There's no variety within the MCU, for the most part.

When we compare CBMs to westerns, we talk about superheroes as if they're a genre in itself, because genres can absolutely fall out of favor with audiences. But superheroes SHOULDN'T be a genre, because comic books, like any other format of storytelling, are extremely diverse in subject matter. That's the problem with the MCU. it has *created* a genre for itself, and boxed itself into a specific corner of telling *all* stories the same way, and that's what audiences can, and are, tiring of.

Gunn's Guardians movies have always had their own distinct style, and flavor to them.


Top Gun 2 was nostalgia bait (like NWH) and Avatar 2 was a tech demo showcase, but neither look, feel, or sound, anything like an MCU film.

Again, you conflating the MCU's specific filmmaking model, with ALL blockbuster films. All MCU films are blockbusters, but all blockbusters are not MCU. There's a huge difference, between something like 'Way of The Water', and something b QUANTUMANIA.

And audiences notice.


Right, they care about the products they create. James Cameron IS an auteur with a specific vision of a world, that he executed on screen, and audiences loved.

Just because the movie made 2 billion dollars, doesn't mean Cameron isn't one of the most prestigious filmmakers in Hollywood. Auteur-filmmaking doesn't always equal A24.

Robert Eggers is an auteur, but so is Steve Spielberg, and so is Denis Villeneuve, and so is Tim Burton -- all of them have made, and are making, blockbuster films.



Simply designing a movie for a four quadrant audience, doesn't make it good. You still need compelling characters, an investive conflict, reasonate themes, and a script that all ties all of these elements together, in a tightly woven narrative.

In other words, you still need the movie to ACTUALLY* be good, in order for those four quadrants to show up to the theater. And guess what? Stuffing 50 characters into a script, and trying to set up 20 other movies, does not a good film, make.

And this is not some baseless conjecture on my part. Others are noticing. Gunn has noticed, box-office analysts are talking about it. Even Feige probably knows, but he's either too stubborn, or unable to act.

That's why Malcolm Spellman is writing New World Order, and not someone like Barry Jenkins. They haven't acted at all.

Sure, some auteurs are very good 4 quadrant filmmakers, but the MCU for many years has had this same formula with few auteur filmmakers and were making hand over fist without it. It's not the Marvel formula anyone is rejecting. This same Marvel formula yielded 2 of the top 5 BO movies of 2023, one that even with mixed reviews still made about 750mil WW, and Spider-Man No Way Home you can write off all you want as nostalgia bait, but it's still the same Marvel formula on display, and what did it get? A+ Cinemascore, 1.5+billion WW, etc. You cannot have an argument both ways. People are still more than willing to take in the Marvel formula when the movie is something they enjoy. The 3rd film of their worst grossing franchise making disappointing numbers after it got the worst MCU reviews and a B+ Cinemascore doesn't change that fact. It just means this wasn't a movie people cared for. So the fix is do an autopsy on the movie about why it didn't work, learn lessons, and apply to future projects. But I whole sale sell your thesis that it's the Marvel formula or the lack of wanting McD blockbuster filmmaking. That's just garbage. The formula works, they just gotta make sure to execute it better

 

[Iceman]

Avengers films should be making over a billion without China. If they start making only a billion with China I think that indicates a significant shift and that they are now not as special (even though many other franchises would kill for those numbers) - which I don't believe is the case yet even with every issue currently facing the MCU.

 

[kguillou]

I realize that this is complete baseless conjecture on my part, but I having a gut feeling that Superman Legacy is going to be....fine. Its not going to be spectacular or shoot for the stars-- it will be a very tame, safe, affable movie with decent action, decent story and a safe resolution with triumphant John Williams-esque music playing over the credits. And honestly that will be by design because Gunn is gonna use the Feige playbook of "make a decent first film with strong, likable characters so the audience gets invested to see them in a better film later on." And maybe honestly thats what DC needs to do, play it safe and by the book for a while.