MyMovieCanBeatUpYourMovie

The reviewer superhero fatigue is definitely still real. Having GOTG3 and Across the Spider-Verse back to back isn't enough to break that. Spider-Verse is seemingly immune, but I think every super live action thing is going to lose about 10 to 15 percentage points off the top from what they might have garnered two or three years ago. Reviewers just aren't giving the ones that they marginally enjoy the same pass that they used to.

When people say OK to some long opinion/rant, I generally think this is the vibe they're going for:

Huge mistake, IMO. They should have done a "regular" Avengers movie (i.e., not universe-ending stakes) in between Endgame and Kang Dynasty. Part of what made the MCU the MCU was seeing all the disparate characters coming together. If they had put out an Avengers film this year, bringing whoever is left from Phase 1 along with all the new characters, would given a huge boost to all of them. As for best trilogy, it's probably going to be GOTG (assuming 3 as good as advertised), but give me Homecoming, Far From Home, and No Way Home over Cap or any other three films.

I agree that I don't know that GOTG3 says much about how the rest of Phase 5 will go reception-wise. Feige clearly has a lot of trust in Gunn (wasn't Gunn set to basically head up the "cosmic" MCU for a while before the whole mess?), so he no doubt gave him almost complete freedom for Vol 3. But I also don't think it's some sort of tragedy that Marvel is losing Gunn. He gave a decade of his life to them, and now he gets to see if he can be DC's Kevin Feige and build something great there. No losers here. Maybe pulling back on the projects will allow Feige to not be stretched so thin and he can lend more personal oversight to each one. Or maybe Feige is just burnt out, doesn't have the fire anymore, and should have moved on after Endgame. Who knows. I think the only unfortunate thing for Marvel with Gunn off at DC is that, to me, GOTG3 (though I haven't seen it yet) does really feel like a good ending point for the MCU, maybe even more so than Endgame. Almost everyone introduced in the Phases 1-3 has now come to a natural end point in their stories with this film coming out, and it remains to be seen if general audiences will care as much about all the new characters and their journeys.

GOTG3 paying for the sins of Phase 4. What the MCU needs much more than a massive box office hit that audiences are kind of meh on is to release some great films. Much more important that audiences love this -- and hopefully the start of a string of films that connect with audiences -- whenever and however they end up seeing it.

Perusing one review, and the reviewer was so concerned about moviegoers who are sensitive to animal cruelty that they devote the first paragraph to warning about it: "A public service announcement for sensitive Marvel fans. Many moviegoers will be shocked to discover that Vol. 3 is the darkest, grisliest, and most disturbing Marvel movie yet, to the extent that you might find yourself scratching your head at how it got that PG-13 rating. Most fans of the franchise will be fine, but if you’re the type of viewer who instantly turns against a movie the moment an innocent creature gets harmed—perhaps you’re a regular visitor to doesthedogdie.com?—you might want to sit this one out or, at the very least, know what you’re getting into." In one sense, this could definitely turn off a lot of viewers, but, in another, I could see it giving the film a different kind of buzz. Also getting the idea that those who like it *really* like it: Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 is the best film of the MCU to date."

For my money, Peacemaker was the best superhero series ever made. Gunn only seems to be growing as a writer and director. Not only that. This was Gunn's first time ever writing for TV and he cracked the pacing of an 8-episode season much better than pretty much any streaming series I've seen. Never dragged.

I do sort of wonder if "superhero fatigue" is not only hitting audiences, but reviewers as well, and there's just a certain number of reviewers who would have given some of the more recent superhero films a pass (a positive on RT), but just won't anymore. So, something that would have scored high to mid 80s 5 years ago, ends up in the high 60s or low 70s now. Like, I didn't really like either of these films, but I don't think there's really *that* much of a quality difference between Ant-Man 2 and 3 (87% vs. 47%, a whopping 40-point difference in positive reviews), and I think 3 would have gotten much better reviews 5 years ago, and 2 would have done much better if it had been released now.

Assuming Feige and Marvel realize they need to start really delivering some crowd-pleasers, I wonder if this means there might be some major reshoots for this depending on how the movie is playing right now. I also wonder if they're going to start canceling some TV shows they've already announced. Would they go so far as to not release a TV show they've already filmed if it's not up to stuff?

Assuming they hold off on X-Men (or at least mostly hold off) until after Secret Wars, that's basically their get-out-of-jail-free card. You can weave an entire phase or two around those guys and gals, and anticipation and hype will be big for those characters.

That's really interesting. And you can basically see Feige admitting there: We recognize we have a problem, but you're not going to see the difference until probably mid to late Phase 5 because we're too far into so many projects at this point. I would guess that you're not going to be seeing stuff like Echo or Agatha spinoffs going forward (not that those might not be great, but that they're clearly spinoffs meant to help boost the amount of content they're putting out).

I think Feige might want to take a page out of Gunn's apparent philosophy for the new DCU: Don't start filming projects until you have a rock-solid script locked in. My guess is the unevenness of Phase 4 had a lot to do with the determination to roll cameras and hit release dates and hope you could work out any script issues as you go. But with Feige being stretched over so many projects now, there's a lot more variability in the end result. I wonder if Marvel will move toward hiring more experienced writers, instead of so many up-and-comers.

Currently at 100% on Rotten Tomatoes! ... (with one review) Offers too much sensational spectacle, melodrama, and high-stakes sci-fi adventure ever to bore its audience, but its echoes of exhausted blockbuster tropes ring hollow. February 14, 2023 | Rating: 2.5/4 Wonder if it can eke out a decent percentage (like above 60) with a very low rating with a lot of reviews like this.

If this film is "aggressively OK," as stated earlier in the thread, that wouldn't really surprise me. That's pretty much how I would describe the first two Ant-Man movies myself. To be honest, I never quite got why Feige brought Peyton Reed back after the first one. I mean, look at all the other directors Feige brought back for sequels, Favreau, Whedon, Gunn, Russo brothers, Watts, Waititi, Coogler. They all made MCU films that were critical darlings and connected in a major way with audiences. I don't think Ant-Man really met either of those criteria. (Maybe Reed was just rewarded for salvaging the film after Wright left?) No doubt GOTG3 is going to bring it, since Gunn only seems to be getting better as a filmmaker (I think Peacemaker was the best thing he's ever done), so that is certainly going to give the MCU a boost come May. But I suspect the overall MCU narrative ("audience fatigue!" or "back in the groove") we will see argued about over the next year will be determined by The Marvels' reception.

I believe Feige has been quoted as saying it was his idea? I think they were contemplating just teasing connecting to the Sony Spidey films in the post-credit scenes, and Feige was like: "Well, what if we just make that movie right now?"

Phase 5 should clearly be built around Yelena, because every line out of her mouth is gold! I think the "Marvel fatigue" has a lot of combination of factors. The sheer saturation of MCU stuff in the last 18 months is probably the biggest. But it's also the longest the MCU is going to go without an "event" film since Avengers. They built up the expectation that every 3 years or so (really even more often if you include Civil War in that calculus) a bunch of characters would get together in a culmination of the previous phase, kicking off the next one. But now, what, the MCU is going to go 5 or 6 years before the next big event film? Even with like 5 times as many characters roaming around? It does feel like asking a lot of audiences (and critics) to watch that much content and wait so long for a big cathartic payoff.

From those who have perused the reviews, would you recommend against taking a 6-year-old to see this? I rented a theater for this, and one of my friends was going to bring his daughter, who has seen a bunch of MCU stuff. But it sounds like this might be too much for someone that young?

This is holding up really well critically. Good chance to finish top 5 in MCU RT% when all the reviews are in. I really thought the premise was something Sony foisted on Feige and this would end up a fun mess at best. Very surprised how it seems to have turned out (even though, personally, I adored both Homecoming and Far From Home -- so maybe I should have expected it from the same team).

Hey, now. Let's not set the expectations *that* high!

I'm so happy this looks like it's going to get great reviews. I rented 2 theaters for this for this coming Saturday and Christmas! I was hoping all those folks weren't going to be disappointed.

STOP THE COUNT!

Some people are definitely bookmarking some of these posts for later use! I will say, the rather hyperbolic "This is the end of the MCU" posts are no doubt bringing down the buzz for those who are just trying to get the most joy out of the MCU's first critical failure. Think how hard the past decade has been for them and let them have this! (Personally, I think a slate of films over the next year that consists of sequels to films that collectively earned over $3 billion means the MCU is... probably going to do OK.)

I'm paying for a theater rental for this tomorrow for friends and family. (AMC had it at a very reasonable price for 20 people.) I have thus informed them no one is allowed to complain if they don't like it! 😅

It's definitely trending to end up rotten. I'm guessing mid-50s is where it will end up. The discourse on this will be... interesting. ("Will Marvel stop taking chances?" "Will Feige give less leeway to talented directors?" Tune in and find out!) Eager to see if Feige figures they can work out the kinks and deliver more of a crowd-pleaser with Zhao in a sequel, or if they agree they gave it their best effort and move on to other things. At the very least, you have to figure another Eternals film is not going to be on any fast track (especially if the legs collapse after OW). Maybe they're featured in other films (or even an Avengers film) that is well-liked and then you give it another go.

With Eternals specifically and the MCU, I see it as the equivalent of people dunking on the Patriots when they ruined their perfect season by losing in the Super Bowl to end up 18-1. Got to do it while you can! (Because you know... more Super Bowls are coming.)