Marvel Studios' Echo

Disney Irish

Premium Member
The Disney brand should not include adult entertainment.
The service is not called "Disney Only", its called Disney+, as in "Disney plus other brands". If you don't want your kids watching adult entertainment content then setup a Kids account with only TV-Y turn on and everything else turned off. This is no different than any other service out there.

Their attempt at "evolving" cost them a billion dollars.
The fact that Disney+ has had general adult entertainment content for several years now is not costing them Billions of dollars.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Their attempt at "evolving" cost them a billion dollars this year and alienated their core audiences.
Disney's Star brand within Disney+ in Europe has a lot of R-Rate stuff (most of Hulu's catalog). And Disney+ subs have been increasing nicely in Europe.

Why would Disney ever put R-Rate stuff on Disney+ in the first place? Because polling their D+ customers informed them that that is what D+ subscribers wanted. Sixty percent of D+ subscribers are households without children.

And for households with children, there are parental controls.
 

MarvelCharacterNerd

Well-Known Member
That Echo trailer escalated my concerns about it. I'm not sure they understand that the reason why the Netflix shows were successful was not their brutality, but their terrifying humanity.

aka IT'S ABOUT THE CHARACTERS NOT THE KILLS

With that said, the action and violence on the Netflix shows, while indeed brutal, was also brilliantly choreographed and directed, though more importantly... motivated by more than "let's show more violence for violence's sake". Even The Punisher, a character notorious for violence, was portrayed incredibly sympathetically to his own trauma.

And with that said, since as noted, Deadpool, Wolverine and the Netflix shows are already on Disney+, the adult content genie is long out of that bottle and ain't going back, for better or worse.
 

Phroobar

Well-Known Member
I still can't over the fact that Vincent D'Onofrio played both King Pin and Thor (Dawson) in Adventures in Babysitting.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member

_caleb

Well-Known Member
The "Marvel Spotlight" label is something they've brought over from the comics. It was originally a try-out book that started in the 1970s and was designed to introduce new characters and storylines into what had become a tangled web of interconnected stories and characters that audiences were deeply invested in. There were a couple others (Marvel Feature and Marvel Premiere).

"The advantage of such tryout books was that they allowed the publisher to assess a feature's popularity without the marketing investment required to launch a new series, and without the blow to the publisher's image with readers if the new series immediately failed."

This might be helpful for those who are confused by the interconnected-universe-yet-standalone approach they're taking with Echo.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
Well, then they should expect underperformance if that's what the theory was. It's billed as Marvel Studios Echo. I get it's a new banner, but if no one knows or cares about the character, it's going to struggle. Especially since it's still a marvel product. And since it is part of the MCU, it still suffers from the homework issue. At least if she has shown up in some films, people will recognize her and maybe give it chance. It's then the shows job to hook the viewer. And from the ratings, I don't think 75% is good enough for people who aren't sure to jump in. At least right away.
They're trying to make people know/care about the character in the series. It's like a fresh start– a new character in a new series. If Echo finds an audience (and I imagine they'll know in just a few weeks), they may decide to feature the character in the broader MCU. If nobody watches it, they'll just leave it as a one-off in the Marvel library and move on to try other things.

Cameos and MCU easter eggs are just to tie everything together and to keep fans coming back to experience the new characters and stories.

This is what they did with Ms. Marvel and Photon/Monica Rambeau, Moon Knight, and Kate Bishop. With She-Hulk, I think they're going to try another season before they decide whether to introduce her into the MCU continuity.
 

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
They're trying to make people know/care about the character in the series. It's like a fresh start– a new character in a new series. If Echo finds an audience (and I imagine they'll know in just a few weeks), they may decide to feature the character in the broader MCU
Oh I get that for sure. It's just not the greatest strategy when your studio doesn't have the history of much watch series behind it. Plus it doesn't have the greater mcu to help get casuals to give it a flyer.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
Oh I get that for sure. It's just not the greatest strategy when your studio doesn't have the history of much watch series behind it. Plus it doesn't have the greater mcu to help get casuals to give it a flyer.
So you're thinking the better approach would be the opposite of what they're doing? Introduce new characters in the MCU tentpoles, and develop them there over time, and then maybe give them their own film/series? I can see that. More like what they've done with Sam/Cap, War Machine, Wanda, and Black Widow (which I've seen you mention).

I'm thinking they've tried both.

I think what we're seeing now is a bit of a firewall to protect the bigger MCU from unpopular characters/stories. It seems like your way might be a bit riskier, essentially having undeveloped and unpopular characters weigh down the tentpole films.

If they can get their series budgets WAY down, the standalone introductions seem like a good way to try lots of new things you wouldn't want to try in a main MCU film.
 

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
It seems like your way might be a bit riskier, essentially having undeveloped and unpopular characters weigh down the tentpole films.
I guess it depends what the outcome is that they are looking for. Could it weigh down a feature film? I suppose it could. But the advantage is they can just as easily abandon it and have it a one and done. If you stick to a true secondary character, I don't think you really have much to worry about. I just feel it's a great way to gauge how well a character is liked.
 

MarvelCharacterNerd

Well-Known Member
It was all right. But pretty mid-pack as virtually all the Disney+ Marvel shows seem to be.

Tantoo Cardinal was glorious - just a master class in emotional performance. Graham Greene is always a scene stealer. Though Cody Lightning as Biscuits may have stolen the whole show for me - he was terrific. Marvel slays with their great sidekick characters. 😍

The first few episodes I couldn't buy into any of the other characters or their motivations. I kept wondering why I should care (again beyond the three mentioned above).

The fourth episode began having some emotional resonance, but when the fifth turned into Star Trek V, my interest checked out. Especially when the tag scene made the whole show into just a prequel for Daredevil 2.0.

I absolutely LOVED Vincent D'Onofrio's Kingpin in Daredevil. One of the greatest characterizations ever. But this version - and this show in general - I kept thinking that Echo is an appropriate title because the whole thing felt like an echo of the brilliant Netflix shows it was trying to ride the coattails of. Episode one was just a darker recap of Hawkeye, for goodness sake!

And do NOT get me started on the brutally bad Kingpin Halloween costume they stuffed D'Onofrio into. It's the real monster on the show. Just awful. Although the Hawaiian shirt in Hawkeye was worse, granted. His suits in Daredevil were a work of art unto themselves and a key insight into his character - class, money, hiding the monster within. These were a hot mess and just embarrassing to look at the obvious padding - I see better in park character costumes. Unfortunately after the Netflix shows were canceled, they auctioned off all the props and wardrobe, so here they started from a much cheaper scratch. I am no fashionista, but he looked terrible in those ill-fitted suits, even if they were intentionally going for "cartoon character" as a style.

I read a review that said Alaqua says more in a look than most actors do in a monologue. Agreed. She's a terrific actress even when mostly conveying "annoyed and determined", and apparently did a lot of her own stunts. But I felt the character wasn't well served here. Wasn't Hawkeye already putting her on a semi-redemptive path (I'll rewatch it at some point - meant to for Christmas but didn't get to it.)? Even if not, we start off with a recap of her backstory and interactions in Hawkeye, then move on to her being a power-hungry killer, vaguely motivated by vengeance but mostly seemingly for a lack of anything else to do. Then she's getting random magic visions out of nowhere that they force-remake into her new origin story. She's completely unsympathetic for 3 episodes, interesting in the 4th, and then in the 5th suddenly has all kinds of magic powers (ancestor skillz! sharing the Chosen One's Slayer power! glowy hands that heal trauma!) that suddenly make her a powered super-therapist. Or whatever. It's all just a bunch of things with a few good character moments thrown in.

But it did have a great soundtrack. I enjoyed the music. Though "Dragula" was pretty random. lol
 

Hawkeye_2018

Well-Known Member
I'm fine with more mature content like this on Dis+. I'm guessing this sort of content will still be fairly limited and nothing overly graphic will show up.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom