Captain Marvel 2: "The Marvels" -- Nov 10, 2023 Theatrical Release

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I am talking in tongue in cheek. It’s just the excuses the Disney comes out with these days as to why something doesn’t do well makes me laugh. Like WDW attendance being ‘soft’ on July 4th and Iger was saying it was because ‘it was hot’

Also, I went and saw all the marvel films leading up to Endgame (except Thor 2) and enjoyed most of them. Like another poster said, where these post endgames films don’t feel like they are building to anything, interest isn’t there like it used to be
Were you aware that Iger wasn’t the only one noting the weather as a cause for soft attendance to amusement parks this year?

If you went to them then you would have seen the demographic expansion with each film.

Go back and watch some of those films. They were not clearly building toward anything either. People are complaining that there is both too much to follow and that they’re not interconnected enough. It can’t be both.
 

Phroobar

Well-Known Member
If there is anything Bob Iger knows, it is the weather.
iu
 

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
On the bright side, with a bad box office performance surely D+ could negotiate down a more realistic streaming rights arrangement with the studios given that and thr tepid viewership reception Ms Marvel received.
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
"When she signed on for The Marvels, DaCosta had released just one feature, an indie made for less than $1 million that was galaxies away from a superhero blockbuster."


Yes, this is how Marvel has been picking a lot of its directors for years and years - folks with one well-regarded film, often an indie. It’s fundamental to the entire MCU method.

The idea that the MCU achieved the box office returns it did without appealing to both men and women from every age group is mad. To a considerable extent, what we’re seeing across popular culture is an audience used to being the only one catered to loudly and even violently rebelling against the idea that companies are starting to aggressively target other, previously marginalized groups.

Marvel has a lot of issues to address, but a big one is that Feige probably needs to tighten control again. The MCU was criticized for being a soulless factory that stifles creators, so Feige let the production process loosen a bit. Coinciding with Covid, this seems to have resulted in mistakes like Eternals and the Blade scripts.
 

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
Since Endgame, we’ve gotten ten MCU films. Six have had white male protagonists. So the “hard swing” to diversity consists of Black Widow (which we’re told is not an issue), Shang-Chi, Eternals, and Black Panther. Those are the films that the culture warriors feel mark too much diversity. Too much too soon! Why, out of 32 films, two have had female leads! And four non-white leads! SLOW DOWN!!!
Phase 4 was 7 films and, and here's the breakdown
*4 films would be considered films with diversity as the lead.
*3 films were "white male leads" but two of those films split lead time with a female. Only one film, spiderman, I would consider a white male lead film.
*MCU TV was 7 series (not counting what if). Of the 7, you had 2 white male leads. Both of which again split lead time with a female. Then you had 3 female lead series and 2 minority lead series.

So of 14 projects, you had 9 that would be completely diversity lead. 4 projects I would say are 50/50. So in my opinion you have 93% of phase 4 with diversity as the focus. And the one film that's not, is a Sony project. So yea, I don't think saying too much too soon is really all that far off. That's a huge turn from the infinity saga.

Again diversity isn't bad. But when phase 4s quality was as spotted as it was in my opinion. It's going to raise concerns that they are doing it wrong. My wife and daughter have seen all of 3 mcu films post infinity saga. Thor, spiderman and guardians. And they gave up on TV after Loki. So the shift hasn't really worked for them.
 

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
"When she signed on for The Marvels, DaCosta had released just one feature, an indie made for less than $1 million that was galaxies away from a superhero blockbuster."


Seems like the recriminations and excuses are beginning early.
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
Phase 4 was 7 films and, and here's the breakdown
*4 films would be considered films with diversity as the lead.
*3 films were "white male leads" but two of those films split lead time with a female. Only one film, spiderman, I would consider a white male lead film.
*MCU TV was 7 series (not counting what if). Of the 7, you had 2 white male leads. Both of which again split lead time with a female. Then you had 3 female lead series and 2 minority lead series.

So of 14 projects, you had 9 that would be completely diversity lead. 4 projects I would say are 50/50. So in my opinion you have 93% of phase 4 with diversity as the focus. And the one film that's not, is a Sony project. So yea, I don't think saying too much too soon is really all that far off. That's a huge turn from the infinity saga.

Again diversity isn't bad. But when phase 4s quality was as spotted as it was in my opinion. It's going to raise concerns that they are doing it wrong. My wife and daughter have seen all of 3 mcu films post infinity saga. Thor, spiderman and guardians. And they gave up on TV after Loki. So the shift hasn't really worked for them.
You’re contorting yourself in absurd ways to try and prove a point that isn’t viable. Trying to limit it to “phase 4,” which even the most dedicated fans don’t read as a coherent unit thanks to the lack of an Avengers, is a nakedly arbitrary attempt to exclude Guardians, Ant-Man, and Far From Home, which all weaken your point. Saying that Multiverse of Madness and Thor aren’t “white male lead” films is such a stretch as to be dishonest. America Chavez in MoM is a McGuffin who gets almost no characterization and I’m not even sure what you’re thinking with Thor. Both focus on the white male lead more than many typical action-adventure films, which often feature a major romantic angle. Come on.

The D+ shows have had a more diverse group of leads, but it’s telling that those characters have been consigned to the much less prominent streaming shows and that is still somehow offensive. Your count is off here, as well - only She-Hulk, Ms Marvel, and SI were fully non-white lead, while WandaVision, Falcon, Loki, Hawkeye, and Moon Knight had white male co-leads - but these are TV series, and it’s very normal to have two characters, often a man and woman, share lead duties - that only seems to become objectionable when it’s Marvel. In fact, the ease with which you label any product with a non-white secondary lead as something remarkable demonstrates the degree to which Marvel is viewed, erroneously, as the realm of the white male.

If you want to say a lot of the TV output was lackluster, I’m on board. Outside Ms Marvel, Hawkeye, Loki, and WandaVision, the shows weren’t very good. Moon Knight had huge promise but lost its way, Falcon had intriguing concepts but was shredded by the pandemic, She-Hulk had weak writing despite some good ideas, etc. That’s a major issue. None of that has to do with culture war nonsense that requires us to distort the history of the franchise and remove all memories of the film and TV industry to feed artificial grievances that are manifesting in every corner of society. If the minimal move towards diversity Marvel has actually made has turned portions of the audience against it, that’s a disaster for American society, not Marvel.
 

Phicinfan

Well-Known Member
Captain feels like a “swap” because the replaced actor is firmly in his prime…he’s not Michael Keaton.
Not only that…but you’re kinda “losing” parts of the falcon character with it…and that’s a great character.
However it is true to the comic's story line, as the Capt. America mantel has passed to Bucky and Falcon in the past.
I will add, they seem in the MCU to be keeping him with "falcon" capabilities for now. I do believe they will add a new Falcon at some point though.
Wakanda forever tried to swap…but they get an obvious pass there.
Had to swap and I agree they get a pass for this, but like the long term story line of his son taking the mantle
 

Phroobar

Well-Known Member
"When she signed on for The Marvels, DaCosta had released just one feature, an indie made for less than $1 million that was galaxies away from a superhero blockbuster."


How the heck is someone who made one low budget indie movie suppost to understand how to make a huge blockbuster movie? Why does Disney keep giving this kind of responsibility to people with no experience?

Roger Corman used to give movies to people with no experience and let them direct it. However, unlike Disney, the budget was in the hundreds of thousands not hundreds of millions and he would watch over them. People like James Cameron got his start that way. He learned his craft on the cheap. It didn't matter if the film tanked because it was cheap.

Disney goes cheap on the director hoping to find someone they can control. Most of the time, that person folds under the pressure and result is terrible.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
However it is true to the comic's story line, as the Capt. America mantel has passed to Bucky and Falcon in the past.
I will add, they seem in the MCU to be keeping him with "falcon" capabilities for now. I do believe they will add a new Falcon at some point though.

Had to swap and I agree they get a pass for this, but like the long term story line of his son taking the mantle
I don’t really disagree with any of this…

But we have to accept that what has been done in comic books only marginally applies
To big Hollywood money corporations…

It’s two different markets…one is tiny and the other needs to be huge…

That’s what Warner bros and Disney has always meant to do…use the former to “tap in”
To the latter without going too deep.

Speaking of Warner/DC…I bet they’re installing a Superman coaster in cedar point as we speak 😎
 

TalkingHead

Well-Known Member
Disney goes cheap on the director hoping to find someone they can control. Most of the time, that person folds under the pressure and result is terrible.
Counterpoint: These directors know that ceding control is part of the deal from the start. I don’t think they fold as much as they see a big paycheck, the prestige of having their name attached to a big title, and hope it goes well enough to expand their professional options. (Or more likely it cripples their promising careers. Hello, Chloe Zhao)
 

Phroobar

Well-Known Member
Counterpoint: These directors know that ceding control is part of the deal from the start. I don’t think they fold as much as they see a big paycheck, the prestige of having their name attached to a big title, and hope it goes well enough to expand their professional options. (Or more likely it cripples their promising careers. Hello, Chloe Zhao)
That is why they sign on until they realize they don't have the skill set for something that big.

Ron Howard always talked about his learning experience with making Willow. He was completely unprepared for something like that. He credits George's mentorship during it that turned him into the director he is now and why the movie came out so well. I don't think Disney or KK is mentoring anyone.

It's like if you were just out of college and were put as the head of a department with hundred people at a huge corporation and you rarely saw your boss. End of year reviews come up and upper management finds out you have no clue what you are doing.
 

Indy_UK

Well-Known Member
How the heck is someone who made one low budget indie movie suppost to understand how to make a huge blockbuster movie? Why does Disney keep giving this kind of responsibility to people with no experience?

Disney would say creativity…

But in reality it’s control which is why so many of their releases are flat with viewers.

Disney has all the money to throw at big directors who will make some real magic but they’re cheap and don’t want to.
 

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
One thing that may affect The Marvel’s opening weekend box office is Journey to Bethlehem is opening the same weekend, and is doing one of those “gift a ticket” promotions.
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
Disney would say creativity…

But in reality it’s control which is why so many of their releases are flat with viewers.

Disney has all the money to throw at big directors who will make some real magic but they’re cheap and don’t want to.
They're not avoiding big directors because they're cheap. The MCU is producer driven. It's a profoundly collaboratively creative process. They absolutely don't WANT dominant individual voices. They've been criticized for this, but it was a conscious choice that produced an absolutely unprecedented string of huge hits.
 

ABQ

Well-Known Member
One thing that may affect The Marvel’s opening weekend box office is Journey to Bethlehem is opening the same weekend, and is doing one of those “gift a ticket” promotions.
You don't think the Flerkin feeding hour....aka cat live stream, on the Marvel You Tube channel won't counteract that?

1699025098606.png


I mean, that's some compelling cinematography right there from one of the foremost movie studios in the world!
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
They're not avoiding big directors because they're cheap. The MCU is producer driven. It's a profoundly collaboratively creative process. They absolutely don't WANT dominant individual voices. They've been criticized for this, but it was a conscious choice that produced an absolutely unprecedented string of huge hits.
You’re honestly going to suggest You, Me and Dupree wasn’t the biggest blockbuster of 2006? That Community didn’t have a stable, prime time slot, high ratings and eager renewals?
 

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
You’re contorting yourself in absurd ways to try and prove a point that isn’t viable. Trying to limit it to “phase 4,” which even the most dedicated fans don’t read as a coherent unit thanks to the lack of an Avengers, is a nakedly arbitrary attempt to exclude Guardians, Ant-Man, and Far From Home, which all weaken your point.
I'm really not. Adding in phase 5 doesn't weaken my point at all. Guardians is a fairly diverse cast and antman features Cassie, Janet and hope. Spiderman is again the one that really isn't all that diverse. I can't help that your idea of diversity is to eliminate white men.
Saying that Multiverse of Madness and Thor aren’t “white male lead” films is such a stretch as to be dishonest. America Chavez in MoM is a McGuffin who gets almost no characterization and I’m not even sure what you’re thinking with Thor. Both focus on the white male lead more than many typical action-adventure films, which often feature a major romantic angle. Come on.
I didn't say they weren't white lead. They weren't just focused on the white lead. Isn't that how it should be? Your philosophy on this seems to be to eliminate the white male heroes. And I would ask why? Thor is an extremely popular character, with EVERYONE, not just white males. So why not make that movie and add in some diversity? I don't think it's fair to eliminate that as diversity. Or doctor strange where they made Wanda a major focus of the film. It was very much a continuation of her show.
Your count is off here, as well - only She-Hulk, Ms Marvel, and SI were fully non-white lead, while WandaVision, Falcon, Loki, Hawkeye, and Moon Knight had white male co-leads
First off, I think you need to do a bit of research on Oscar, he's not a white male. To each their own but Wanda was the headliner of that show as Falcon was the headliner of that show in my opinion. But again because theirs a white male in the show it's no longer diverse in your mind? Hawkeye was the lead, like I said, but Kate was a huge part of it.
. If the minimal move towards diversity Marvel has actually made has turned portions of the audience against it, that’s a disaster for American society, not Marvel.
This is where you are missing. Disney HAS made a big move to be more diverse. They've made the traditional "white male" character share time with a much more diverse cast. All while they've made a lot of diverse projects. Like I've said with the star wars discussion and with marvel. It's not the diversity that's the problem, it's the quality. And what happens with the shaky quality? People think you are putting diversity over quality and that's why you get the "pandering" argument. My argument to you is to stop lumping all fans as diversity hating jerks. Are there some? Of course! It's the Internet. I just don't buy your, the fanbase is the problem mantra for all these franchises. As a whole, they aren't. Disney doesn't have a fan problem, they have a quality problem. And that quality problem makes it seem like they are checking boxes rather than making quality entertainment. Just because you have diversity, doesn't make something good, see the eternals. The same holds true for white male projects. There was a lot of people complaining about Hulk, Iron man 2, Thor 2, ultron... So why weren't those fans all considered toxic?
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
I'm really not. Adding in phase 5 doesn't weaken my point at all. Guardians is a fairly diverse cast and antman features Cassie, Janet and hope. Spiderman is again the one that really isn't all that diverse. I can't help that your idea of diversity is to eliminate white men.

I didn't say they weren't white lead. They weren't just focused on the white lead. Isn't that how it should be? Your philosophy on this seems to be to eliminate the white male heroes. And I would ask why? Thor is an extremely popular character, with EVERYONE, not just white males. So why not make that movie and add in some diversity? I don't think it's fair to eliminate that as diversity. Or doctor strange where they made Wanda a major focus of the film. It was very much a continuation of her show.

First off, I think you need to do a bit of research on Oscar, he's not a white male. To each their own but Wanda was the headliner of that show as Falcon was the headliner of that show in my opinion. But again because theirs a white male in the show it's no longer diverse in your mind? Hawkeye was the lead, like I said, but Kate was a huge part of it.

This is where you are missing. Disney HAS made a big move to be more diverse. They've made the traditional "white male" character share time with a much more diverse cast. All while they've made a lot of diverse projects. Like I've said with the star wars discussion and with marvel. It's not the diversity that's the problem, it's the quality. And what happens with the shaky quality? People think you are putting diversity over quality and that's why you get the "pandering" argument. My argument to you is to stop lumping all fans as diversity hating jerks. Are there some? Of course! It's the Internet. I just don't buy your, the fanbase is the problem mantra for all these franchises. As a whole, they aren't. Disney doesn't have a fan problem, they have a quality problem. And that quality problem makes it seem like they are checking boxes rather than making quality entertainment. Just because you have diversity, doesn't make something good, see the eternals. The same holds true for white male projects. There was a lot of people complaining about Hulk, Iron man 2, Thor 2, ultron... So why weren't those fans all considered toxic?
Where the HECK do you get the idea that my idea of diversity is eliminating white men? That’s madness. What you’re doing is seeing women or non-white actors in secondary or co-leading roles and labeling the cast ”diverse.” This is absurd on the face of it - you could, by that logic, go back through Hollywood’s output in the 30s and 40s and talk about how “diverse” the casts were. Things that - in, say, 2010 - would have seemed unremarkable, like a sitcom pastiche like WandaVision having one male and one female lead (there co-headliners, it’s in the name) or a villain like Wanda getting screen time in an action-adventure like MoM, are now seen as abnormal and “diverse” because a loud and powerful group of culture warriors are labeling them so.

When people look at a shaky film and blame the diversity of the cast - that’s bigotry. No one looks at the many awful films with white male leads and says, “white men are the problem.” The idea that Disney is “checking boxes” when it casts non-white men - that’s bigotry. It assumes pop culture in general and Marvel in particular is the rightful domain of white men, and when other groups are cast, that’s something extraordinary that has to be explained by unfair corporate mandates.

I’ll agree that some recent Marvel productions, particularly on D+, have been lackluster. That’s very legitimate criticism, just as criticism of Thor 2 or Hulk was legitimate. What ISN’T legitimate is that the culture warriors are trying to link this to the completely separate fact that, for a variety of reasons, the cast and crew of Marvel’s more recent productions has been somewhat more diverse.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom