H2O_Mouse-Ears
Active Member
Wow, so sorry. I did not insert the correct spoiler macro.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney and Universal working on Marvel deal for Florida?
- Thread starter Yellow Strap
- Start date
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Haven't seen the movie, but I would say that the interconnectiveness of the MCU movies makes them more interesting, not less. I think the little easter eggs and the setting up for a larger world is part of what has made the MCU movies so popular (and they are generally well made, certainly). I guess we'll see how the movie does in weeks 2 and 3 due to word of mouth.
H2O_Mouse-Ears
Active Member
Still going to make bank and shatter records. But this does not mean it was flawless. It is no Transformers 2 drop-off level but it is a drop-off nevertheless in all aspects (character interaction, acting, battle scenes, payoff, flow). Still a solid, entertaining movie.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Except that Disney's position is that the plain coffee mug does not work at all.
Easter eggs are great when used correctly. Often though, I see very forced foreshadowing in movies nowadays and its almost disrespectful to the viewers intelligence. Its not an easter egg if its right in your face and spelled out so you understand what it is.
Hidden Mickeys have gone in the same direction. It was fun because they werent supposed to be there and were kinda against the rules. Now, they intentionally add them in and even point them out.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
It's absolutely going to make bank. My point is that the returns in weeks 2/3/4 for AoU will tell us more about how well received the film is among the general public than any debating of opinions on a message board (or critical reviews). If AoU "only" makes something like $450M domestic or $1.3B worldwide, then I think we can say that the word of mouth and repeat viewers are down compared to the previous film.
I dont know which is more sad. The fact that Disney will advertise that their more expensive, high tech, pre-ordered mug will "enhance" your coffee experience, or the fact that some people would buy it and actually think the same coffee taste better in it.
Rodan75
Well-Known Member
I kinda agree here. I think Universal will start hitting the wall on ROI within the next 3-5 attractions and we will see their pace slow a little. I know that goes against the UNI fanboi thought process 'of build till it surpases WDW', but I can't believe the Comcast would push growth of UNI if they stop producing Potter leve returns.
I'm not promoting the Disney brand concept, more I think that UNI Fanbois aren't being realistic. Which isn't to say that UNI won't continue to improve their attendance share, but it won't be worth as much at a certain point soon.
lebeau
Well-Known Member
It's going to have a huge record-breaking opening weekend and then a fast fall. That's not a judgement on it's quality. The first Avengers fell 51% in week two. I expect Age of Ultron will open bigger and fall off more steeply just because of how big it's going to open. I don't think the box office for Age of Ultron will tell us much at all. The question is, how will audiences feel by the end of Phase 3? Will they still be excited about a two-part Infinity War? Or will that feel like too much after years of binging on Marvel movies.
The interconnectedness is a double edge sword. It makes things like Avengers possible. I remember being very excited to see Samuel L Jackson and Robert Downey Jr pop up in other character's movies. I still like Easter eggs although some fans get way too excited over something that doesn't really mean anything.
The downside is that the movies have to serve two masters. You can't just make a good stand-alone Avengers movie. You have to serve all the other franchises. Age of Ultron falls victim to that. The movie is bloated and frankly not a lot happens because a lot of the movie's nearly 2 and a half hour runtime is spent explaining Marvel concepts that are needed for the other phase 3 movies but have nothing to do with the story at hand.
That's not a critical flaw. But the movie could have been tighter on its own if it didn't have to do all the set-up for 5 or 6 other movies.
Rodan75
Well-Known Member
Don't forget that Comics inspire comic book conventions across the country that are highly attended. But I agree with the broad point, the IP itself isn't going to draw more folks in those folks are largely already engaged in the superhero presence in parks like Six Flags and IOA.
Good rides and experiences will do that over the long term, but it is more than IP.
lebeau
Well-Known Member
There's some Easter eggs in Age of Ultron, but that's not what I'm talking about. Those go by and you can either notice them or not. Age of Ultron spends about 20% of its runtime setting up other movies. Which is a problem because the movie is too long. Cut out 20 minutes or so and it runs much more smoothly. You could even make more room for the interpersonal exchanges which work so well. Instead, we've got some kind of clumsy exposition for other movies you may or may not even want to see. But Marvel hopes that since they introduced the concepts here you will want to follow up on them in the other solo movies.
If I can figure out how to do a spoiler tag, I'll add spoilers for those who want to know.
Rodan75
Well-Known Member
I think this goes back to even @ParentsOf4 past points, is that how much more can WDW improve attendance before adding significantly more infrastructure and increasing the overall sunk costs and operating expenses. Why buy the rights back or fight for them with UNI if you aren't going to be able to do things that will significantly increase your revenue AND your margins. Most of the current work is being done to protect revenue and margins but not add any new infrastructure requirements.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
It's probably more accurate to say that Disney's position is that they can sell the Mickey mug for twice the price as the plain mug and it only costs them 1% more to produce. And they're right.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
The reconciling item is new hotels. Infrastructure that also generates revenue and increases capacity.
lebeau
Well-Known Member
So, just to be clear, I am not saying any of this ruins Age of Ultron. Just that they could have made a more satisfying Avengers movie if they didn't have to spend 20 minutes or so setting things up for other franchises.
There is a supblot to set up Black Panther in which the team has to go to Wakanda. There's an explanation of vibranium: what it is, why it's important. Andy Serkis appears as Ulysses Klaue. In this movie, he's basically a henchmen. But in comics, he is the badguy known as Klaw who opposes Black Panther. This sequence sets up his origin story as Klaw.
There's another subplot around Thor and his vision of the Infinity gems. They spend quite a bit of time talking about the gems and their importance. We discover that Loki's staff was powered by one of the gems. All of this stuff sets up Thor: Ragnorak and the Infinity War. Oddly enough, these scenes feel very incomplete. Whedon had to cut over an hour of the movie to get it down to its current runtime and I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that much of this explanation wound up on the cutting room floor.
Those are the two big ones that take a decent amount of time. There's some stuff setting up Cap 3, but it's pretty mild. The way the Hulk's story ends is clearly leading somewhere but I won't venture a guess is to where that will pay off. The movie makes room for appearances by Facon, War Machine, Agent Carter, etc which are cool cameos and then the ending introduces the new team line-up. Not complaining about any of that. But taken with all the other set-up and exposition going on, the movie can feel a lot like a teaser for Phase 3 instead of its own entity.
[/spoilers]
There's another subplot around Thor and his vision of the Infinity gems. They spend quite a bit of time talking about the gems and their importance. We discover that Loki's staff was powered by one of the gems. All of this stuff sets up Thor: Ragnorak and the Infinity War. Oddly enough, these scenes feel very incomplete. Whedon had to cut over an hour of the movie to get it down to its current runtime and I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that much of this explanation wound up on the cutting room floor.
Those are the two big ones that take a decent amount of time. There's some stuff setting up Cap 3, but it's pretty mild. The way the Hulk's story ends is clearly leading somewhere but I won't venture a guess is to where that will pay off. The movie makes room for appearances by Facon, War Machine, Agent Carter, etc which are cool cameos and then the ending introduces the new team line-up. Not complaining about any of that. But taken with all the other set-up and exposition going on, the movie can feel a lot like a teaser for Phase 3 instead of its own entity.
[/spoilers]
lebeau
Well-Known Member
I get what your saying. But Some people consider the "setting up other movies" as an actual easter egg though. Not saying they actually call it an "easter egg", but they consider it as something similar. I just take it as the studio forced the director to slam in a few nods for upcoming movies. It takes away from the story and IMO makes the newly introduced character seem like the unpopular kid at the lunch table who got lucky and gets to hang out with the cool kids.
lebeau
Well-Known Member
Agreed.
And just to be clear, I'm not against setting up other movies in Avengers. It's a matter of degrees. It's a little overdone here. If the rest of the movie had been perfect, I wouldn't even mention the time spent setting up future movies. But since one of the problems is that the movie drags on too long and another is that it has too large of a cast and has to introduce too many new characters, taking time to set up other movies exacerbates those problems.
The biggest problem Age of Ultron has is that it is VERY similar to the first movie. The last act is almost identical except you have robots in the place of aliens. But the first movie was new and exciting. While it is thrilling to see the Avengers all working together on the screen, you don't get that same excitement you got the first time it happened. The end result is a movie that, while still highly entertaining, falls short of the first movie in every conceivable way.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
Counter-point: Any work that Age of Ultron had to do to set up Phase 3 was offset by exposition it didn't have to do for its own plot because those points were covered in previous films. If it was a standalone film, you could have cut the things in your spoilers tag, but then you would have had to include exposition of what Asgard is and why one if its citizens is on Earth, who this guy with the eye patch is, why Tony calls Cap "old man," where these flying suits came from, how this team came to be in the first place, and on and on. The exposition done in past films more than covers what Age of Ultron had to set up for future films.
And again, I don't think the trip to Wakanda felt like an unnecessary setup for Black Panther at all. It felt like a perfectly legitimate plot point within the movie that Ultron would want to upgrade himself.
Another thought is that this whole debate feels like a transition that's been happening in television for a few years. Case-of-the-week and standalone episodes of both comedies and dramas has been the status quo for decades. You can watch any episode of Big Bang Theory or Law and Order without knowing how it fits in that show's continuity. The studios love it because those kinds of shows are easy to sell for syndication. But episodic storytelling like we see on cable shows like Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad is becoming the new model. That's the model that the MCU is mirroring on the big screen.