Civil War Is Captain America: Civil War Too Crowded?

[MbJ]

Nobody thought the first Iron Man was going to be that big of a success either.

True, but thus far Marvel has failed to replicate that lightning in a bottle. They've had a string of very huge hits but they haven't had a solo outgross Iron Man 3 yet and Iron Man still dominates all the other heroes when it comes to licensing and merchandising money.

That doesn't reflect poorly on any of the other heroes. Rocket Raccoon bringing around 800 million and freakin' Ant-Man making 500 million is very impressive and I expect the newbies like Captain Marvel and Black Panther and Doctor Strange to all be big hits too.

Just not big enough that someone at Disney would say "Cool, now we can officially retire Iron Man and never use him again." That's just not gonna happen.

Look at this way. Disney is a business. More successful characters means more money for them, and they love making money. They aren't looking at the MCU in terms of which characters can be retired and replaced because that's cutting off a financial resource, effectively. Even Joss Whedon made a remark when promoting Age of Ultron about how it was really unlikely that Marvel would ever let him kill off an Avenger because he'd have to make a pitch to the bean counters about why he was cutting off a potential revenue stream (which is why the Avenger who died was some newbie who had virtually no merchandise and who is already being used by another studio).

Look at it like this. When looking at these properties, Disney isn't thinking Iron Man or Doctor Strange, Black Widow or Captain Marvel, or Captain America or Black Panther. They're looking at it like

 

[TheVision]

Its not what you do its how you do it. In other hands Iron Man probably wouldve tanked, Ant Man wouldve tanked etc. Marvel just knows how to create entertaining stories and they cast really well.

I think the most important part is the fact Kevin Feige & Co are geeks like us. They make the films they want to see as fans.

 

[MbJ]

And yet, people are expecting a sizable arc for the Vision, is what I'm saying.

Those people are setting themselves up for disappointment. I keep seeing folks talking about Vision struggling with his humanity and starting a romance with Scarlet Witch and as far as I can tell neither one of those have been mentioned by the crew.

People don't grasp that not everything from the comics is going to happen right away.

 

[Illegal Seafood]

True, but thus far Marvel has failed to replicate that lightning in a bottle. They've had a string of very huge hits but they haven't had a solo outgross Iron Man 3 yet and Iron Man still dominates all the other heroes when it comes to licensing and merchandising money.

That doesn't reflect poorly on any of the other heroes. Rocket Raccoon bringing around 800 million and freakin' Ant-Man making 500 million is very impressive and I expect the newbies like Captain Marvel and Black Panther and Doctor Strange to all be big hits too.

Just not big enough that someone at Disney would say "Cool, now we can officially retire Iron Man and never use him again." That's just not gonna happen.

Look at this way. Disney is a business. More successful characters means more money for them, and they love making money. They aren't looking at the MCU in terms of which characters can be retired and replaced because that's cutting off a financial resource, effectively. Even Joss Whedon made a remark when promoting Age of Ultron about how it was really unlikely that Marvel would ever let him kill off an Avenger because he'd have to make a pitch to the bean counters about why he was cutting off a potential revenue stream (which is why the Avenger who died was some newbie who had virtually no merchandise and who is already being used by another studio).

Look at it like this. When looking at these properties, Disney isn't thinking Iron Man or Doctor Strange, Black Widow or Captain Marvel, or Captain America or Black Panther. They're looking at it like

Well I wasn't saying enough to forget about him...I was referring to the fact that I don't think it's impossible to create a similar wave of enthusiam that the first Iron Man did with one of the new Phase 3 characters.

It's not a question of whether or not they can just replace him, because just look at PoTC...Disney will keep pumping those films out because they make money.

I think we were talking about different things because I'm referring to the fact that I don't think it's impossible that BP can generate an Iron Man 1 type vibe if done right.

 

[TalismanRing]

Since the launch of IM, the MCU have launched 4 other solo series and two group series (one of which uses IM/RDJ as the lead).

None of the solo films have come close to IM's adjusted domestic B.O. of $370m and IM3's WW $1.215B is $500m more than the next solo film TWS at $714m. Even the break out GOTG WW made $442m+ less. IM3 is still the 9th (soon the be 10th) biggest film WW. Bigger than any Spider-Man, Batman or Superman movie. Bigger than any Pirates of the Caribbean, LOTR, Hobbit, Transformers, Bond, and all but one Harry Potter movie.

Expecting Black Panther or and of the upcoming new solo movies to reach those heights is expecting too much. Ant-Man is a big success and it did $515m.


http://www.boxofficemojo.com/schedule/?view=bydate&release=theatrical&date=2008-06-13&p=.htm

 

[Chris B]

It's VERY shortsighted to assume that Marvel is not going to recast these parts so as to have viable continuing franchises for the future. Whether they renegotiate these parts in the short term or not, at some point someone else will be Tony Stark/Iron Man, someone else will be Steve Rogers/Capt. America. The actors are great... But they are not bigger than the character. This opinion of Evans and RDJ being bigger than the characters seems obtuse to me. Imagine if the comics had taken this approach in terms of the creators. "Well, obviously no one is ever going to be as good at doing Thor than Walt Simonson... best to just never make another Thor comic. Denny O'neil and Neal Adams' run in Detective Comics is so definitive... There's no reason to publish Batman ever again."

Once again... The last 8 years is not the end all be all of entertainment history.

I think this is an important point, and one in which I agree completely. As much as I love RDJ's portrayal of Iron Man, he doesn't own a monopoly on a character that was around long before he played him on film, and will be around even after he steps down from the role. Likewise for Evans, Hemsworth, and the rest of the current MCU cast. Personally, if it were up to me, I'd give guys like IM and Cap a break for a little bit when RDJ and Evan decide to move on. Let some demand for those characters build up for awhile and then bring them back with new actors.

Besides, I think the Phase III line-up puts to rest the fear that Marvel will focus only on the likes of proven characters at the expense of new ones.

 

[Mike5575]

True, but thus far Marvel has failed to replicate that lightning in a bottle. They've had a string of very huge hits but they haven't had a solo outgross Iron Man 3 yet and Iron Man still dominates all the other heroes when it comes to licensing and merchandising money.

That doesn't reflect poorly on any of the other heroes. Rocket Raccoon bringing around 800 million and freakin' Ant-Man making 500 million is very impressive and I expect the newbies like Captain Marvel and Black Panther and Doctor Strange to all be big hits too.

Just not big enough that someone at Disney would say "Cool, now we can officially retire Iron Man and never use him again." That's just not gonna happen.

Look at this way. Disney is a business. More successful characters means more money for them, and they love making money. They aren't looking at the MCU in terms of which characters can be retired and replaced because that's cutting off a financial resource, effectively. Even Joss Whedon made a remark when promoting Age of Ultron about how it was really unlikely that Marvel would ever let him kill off an Avenger because he'd have to make a pitch to the bean counters about why he was cutting off a potential revenue stream (which is why the Avenger who died was some newbie who had virtually no merchandise and who is already being used by another studio).

Look at it like this. When looking at these properties, Disney isn't thinking Iron Man or Doctor Strange, Black Widow or Captain Marvel, or Captain America or Black Panther. They're looking at it like

You make some good points, and while Marvel can have tons of characters in an Avengers movie, the main focus will be on a certain set of characters. Take AOU, for example. That movie gave us Scarlet Witch and Vision, but barely any time was spent on developing those characters. So, obviously, Marvel will have to make a choice on which Avengers they want to keep around, and which ones they want to retire. I want the main focus in future Avenger films to be on the new heroes. I have no problem with a couple of the Avengers stick around for support roles, but I'd rather not. It may run the risk of making the new heroes looking incompetent by having Cap or IM sticking around. Would Marvel even want to pay RDJ another $100 mil just to have him in a 5-10 minute cameo?

 

[Illegal Seafood]

Since the launch of IM, the MCU have launched 4 other solo series and two group series (one of which uses IM/RDJ as the lead).

None of the solo films have come close to IM's adjusted domestic B.O. of $370m and IM3's WW $1.215B is $500m more than the next solo film TWS at $714m. Even the break out GOTG WW made $442m+ less. IM3 is still the 9th (soon the be 10th) biggest film WW. Bigger than any Spider-Man, Batman or Superman movie. Bigger than any Pirates of the Caribbean, LOTR, Hobbit, Transformers, Bond, and all but one Harry Potter movie.

Expecting Black Panther or and of the upcoming new solo movies to reach those heights is expecting too much. Ant-Man is a big success and it did $515m.

Adjusted for domestic inflation, Batman, Spider-Man , Superman, and so on have done better than Iron Man's domestic of roughly $370 Million.

I think IM3 was very much a product of being released after the Avengers and it also being a 3rd film in the franchise.

I'm not expecting anything to trump IM, I'm just saying I wouldn't be surprised if it did.

 

[4thWallBreaker]

No. If anything it's not enough characters to be a super awesome civil war. Doesn't have to be comics. It can't. But yea, even if all the licenses were aligned to Disney, I wouldn't want comic book Civil War, imo. But this film could definitely use more stars coming out of the woodwork other than just Black Panther and Spider-Man.

How about Mockingbird, Wonder Man, Tigra or U.S. Agent would be perfect for this movie. Solid on Mockingbird and U.S. Agent, though I do realize Tigra being what she would contrast with Black Panther, as well as Wonder Man with The Vision. Would like to see some more. I'm just naming some.

 

[Dark Raven]

Why would Mockingbird get involved in this of all the people on Agents of SHIELD? She's just a small cog in the machine. If she were there, then you'd have to have Hunter, Agent May, Coulson and then especially the likes of Daisy.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Why would Mockingbird get involved in this of all the people on Agents of SHIELD? She's just a small cog in the machine. If she were there, then you'd have to have Hunter, Agent May, Coulson and then especially the likes of Daisy.

Cause Hawkeye is involved.

 

[MbJ]

As far as we know, Mockingbird and Hawkeye have absolutely no connection whatsoever in the MCU. Clint is happily married with children and the only ex-husband we know of for Mockingbird is Lance Hunter. Even barring that, she's probably off limits for the same reason the rest of the Agents of SHIELD aren't likely to show up.

As for the other characters mentioned, this would be the exact wrong place to debut them. They're already pushing things by debuting two brand new heroes in this amid all the other stuff going on. I can't imagine they'd be able to do a satisfactory job of introducing Tigra, Wonder Man, and U.S. Agent and explain who the hell they are.

 

[Dark Raven]

Cause Hawkeye is involved.

If Hawkeye is involved, then Agent Fitz or Agent May can be involved too, because they have just as much connection to Hawkeye as Bobbi Morse does in the MCU.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

As far as we know, Mockingbird and Hawkeye have absolutely no connection whatsoever in the MCU. Clint is happily married with children and the only ex-husband we know of for Mockingbird is Lance Hunter. Even barring that, she's probably off limits for the same reason the rest of the Agents of SHIELD aren't likely to show up.

And I really like Clint as the family man.

If Hawkeye is involved, then Agent Fitz or Agent May can be involved too, because they have just as much connection to Hawkeye as Bobbi Morse does in the MCU.

They married him and worked on his side as leader to the West Coast Avengers?

 

[Lantern Venom]

It's VERY shortsighted to assume that Marvel is not going to recast these parts so as to have viable continuing franchises for the future. Whether they renegotiate these parts in the short term or not, at some point someone else will be Tony Stark/Iron Man, someone else will be Steve Rogers/Capt. America. The actors are great... But they are not bigger than the character. This opinion of Evans and RDJ being bigger than the characters seems obtuse to me.

Well said. Evans and RDJ have made large contributions to their respective characters, but both IM and Cap will endure long after they retire. We've seen some of the biggest characters in comics recast and rebooted. Cap and Stark will be no different if Marvel's plans outlive Evans' and Downey's interest.

 

[Dark Raven]

And I really like Clint as the family man.

They married him and worked on his side as leader to the West Coast Avengers?

And Bobbi Morse did this when exactly in the MCU?

There are no West Coast Avengers, unless they were formed a long time ago before Clint was married with a family, and before Bobbi was married to Hunter, and before the Avengers assembled for the battle of New York.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

No. If anything it's not enough characters to be a super awesome civil war. Doesn't have to be comics. It can't. But yea, even if all the licenses were aligned to Disney, I wouldn't want comic book Civil War, imo. But this film could definitely use more stars coming out of the woodwork other than just Black Panther and Spider-Man.

How about Mockingbird, Wonder Man, Tigra or U.S. Agent would be perfect for this movie. Solid on Mockingbird and U.S. Agent, though I do realize Tigra being what she would contrast with Black Panther, as well as Wonder Man with The Vision. Would like to see some more. I'm just naming some.

then it shouldn't be a solo captain america film but an ensemble film.

 

[samsnee]

Is this movie too crowded?

No.

 

[All-Father]

Even with so many characters, the movie doesn't feel crowded at all. That's what good writing and directing can do for a film.

 

[TheVileOne]

No. Russos do a great job of balancing characters and much better than Whedon.

 

[kahelle]

No. Russos do a great job of balancing characters and much better than Whedon.

Very true.

 

[Jaxon]

No. Russos do a great job of balancing characters and much better than Whedon.

I don't think there's too many my issue is with who they chose to introduce in AoU. Personally Vision and Wanda are making the MCU feel too cartoony. I'd have preferred more grounded characters. If it was original Avengers, with a few dead like Rhodey and Hawkeye/Widow, plus BP and SM then that would be right.

I guess AoU p***** me off so much because it was just so poorly written, it was not the way that story should be written and the compensation was to put these new characters in there that just didn't work for me. I don't see why Whedon and Feige thought that expanded the roster was needed in that movie. Actually I do know, because MCU rules are about heroes not villains.

 

[Saitou Hajime]

No. Russos do a great job of balancing characters and much better than Whedon.

Don't forget Markus and McFreely. Whedon shouldn't have taken on the creative responsibilities for AoU on his own.

 

[All-Father]

i don't think there's too many my issue is with who they chose to introduce in aou. personally vision and wanda are making the mcu feel too cartoony. I'd have preferred more grounded characters. If it was original avengers, with a few dead like rhodey and hawkeye/widow, plus bp and sm then that would be right.

I guess aou p***** me off so much because it was just so poorly written, it was not the way that story should be written and the compensation was to put these new characters in there that just didn't work for me. I don't see why whedon and feige thought that expanded the roster was needed in that movie. Actually i do know, because mcu rules are about heroes not villains.

Lol!!

 

[Webfoot Hero]

I don't think there's too many my issue is with who they chose to introduce in AoU. Personally Vision and Wanda are making the MCU feel too cartoony. I'd have preferred more grounded characters. If it was original Avengers, with a few dead like Rhodey and Hawkeye/Widow, plus BP and SM then that would be right.

I guess AoU p***** me off so much because it was just so poorly written, it was not the way that story should be written and the compensation was to put these new characters in there that just didn't work for me. I don't see why Whedon and Feige thought that expanded the roster was needed in that movie. Actually I do know, because MCU rules are about heroes not villains.

All you ever do now is whine and complain in the Civil War forum. We get it already; you didn't like the film that much. Maybe it's time for you to move on already.