WittyUsername

Spider-Man was revitalized by being allowed to interact with other Marvel characters. Interacting with other DC characters is what hurt Batman in the first place.

Batman needs to heal. I’m not even convinced that giving us a new Batman so soon after Affleck’s Batman crashed and burned is a good idea, but I guess WB just can’t let go of the past.

It doesn’t really sound like he was dissing Thor. He seemed to be suggesting that if Thor can be in a modern superhero movie, then there’s no excuse for Superman to just be collecting dust in that regard.

It seems like we’re going to need to wait and see what happens between Marvel and Sony before concluding that there will be no MCU Spider-Man film in 2021. Negotiations are apparently still ongoing.

I guess it might’ve been a mistake for this movie to end on a cliffhanger...

Sure, but stuff like this is nothing new for big corporations. Frankly, if it weren’t for the fact that Disney always tries so very hard to convince people that they’re this innocent and family friendly company, the average person probably wouldn’t care much for this story.

Not in the same way as Groot. Groot is popular because people find the character’s innocence and overall demeanor to be endearing. King Shark is a man-eating psychopath that looks like this.

Call me crazy, but I can’t imagine that King Shark would sell very many Happy Meals.

I should point out that the complaints alleged here have nothing to do with box office numbers.

King Shark isn’t marketable in the way that Groot is. There’s nothing cute or friendly about the character.

A 70% really isn’t that low. That means that much more than half the critics liked the movie. I’m not subscribing to the “Disney buys critics” conspiracy, but Solo is not an example of a poorly received Disney movie.

How was Solo “panned”?

Well, it’s been rumored that the only reason he was “sacked” to begin with was because Disney wanted him to lay low so that the Fox merger could go through without a hitch. The fact that he was rehired shortly before the deal was finalized adds credence to that rumor.

The question is how well will the finale factor work if there’s was only one movie before this one?

If I had to take a guess, it could be because this film might not have the 80s nostalgia/Stranger Things factor going for it.

From what I understand, American politics are basically a laughing stock to other parts of the world, so maybe other countries would be able to enjoy this film in an ironic way.

I don’t mean it was a terrible decision for him. Of course selling 20th Century Fox was great for Murdoch. He got exactly what he wanted by doing that. Im saying that it was a terrible decision for the film industry as a whole.

Wait, Disney is seriously concerned that a Fox Searchlight movie is too edgy? I don’t know why I’m surprised, but that only serves to reinforce a major reason I dislike Disney. They are obsessed with trying to maintain their image as this wonderfully magical family friendly company. It’s actually kind of creepy. Still, considering that this is the same corporation that used to own Miramax, part of me assumed that they would’ve been okay with Fox Searchlight releasing edgy films, so long as the Disney name wasn’t explicitly attached to them. I’ve said this before, but Rupert Murdoch selling 20th Century Fox was a terrible decision, especially selling it to a studio like Disney, who try their hardest to be as non-controversial as possible. If Murdoch felt that he didn’t want to compete in the entertainment industry anymore, he could’ve just retired. The man’s almost 90 and already had a ridiculous amount of money anyway.

If they’re doing a sequel, I’d have to assume that Jafar would factor into the plot in some way. With that said, it would take a special kind of laziness to just remake The Return of Jafar, seeing as how that was a ridiculously cheap direct to video movie that was conceived as a backdoor pilot for a low budget TV series. Then again, outside of Iago’s redemption and the character of Abis Mal, Jafar coming back was basically all there was to The Return of Jafar anyway, so if Jafar does come back in the next movie, they might as well give it that same title.

I wasn’t saying she should’ve been held accountable for what happened in CW. I was saying that it was weird how no one ever brought up her actions in AoU once she became such a hot button topic. Sure, you could say that Steve would never rat her out, but Tony? What reason did he have for keeping his mouth shut about her? At the very least, even if he wasn’t going to tell Ross about it, the film could’ve at least had some acknowledgement of her actions among the Avengers, but it seemed like the Russos preferred to pretend that her brainwashing the Hulk never happened.

I could picture this movie having one or two elements that are reminiscent of a horror movie, like the hospital scene in Spider-Man 2 or the boardroom scene in Shazam! It’s definitely not going to be a horror movie overall, though.

It’ll be interesting if this movie receives the finale boost that movies like DH2 and Endgame received. It only had one prior film, so I’m not sure how effective the whole “witness the end” angle will work out, but we’ll see.

Whatever the next highest grossing movie of all time will be, there’s a 99.99999999% chance that it’s going to be distributed by Disney.

To be clear, a Hollywood film that pokes fun at liberal elites, despite how ironic that might seem, isn’t actually unprecedented. That’s exactly what Get Out did.

I seriously doubt that the majority of people complaining about this movie would’ve even thought about that. From what I can tell, they just saw that these “deplorable” are being killed, and automatically assumed that we’re supposed to be rooting for them to die.