LouisianaArkansasGeorgia

Is this the biggest star Marvel Studios has (maybe) hired for a leading role since RDJ? I know they have had many stars and Oscar winners/nominees in supporting roles, but Angelina Jolie in a leading role of an MCU movie is a huge deal.

Ok, but what I meant was a superhero film based on an established comic book from DC or Marvel, and with Paulson in a lead superhero or supervillain role.

Speaking of which, Sarah Paulson needs to get her sweet talented ass into a CBM. I would sooo stan whatever superhero films she lands.

I was wondering the same thing.

That would be quite the coup. If this turns out to be accurate, I wonder what exactly it is about this property that made Angelina "succumb" to the Marvel call. I know that one might be cynical and say "the money and the exposure," but Angie's career choices as of late don't seem like they were made by a woman whose main interest is money or exposure. In any case, I suppose she would play Sersi, right? Is there any other major female character in the Eternals mythos that could fit Jolie?

So much sensitivity/tears/resentment/arguments over a CBM box office being called 'meh' or 'just ok' or whatnot.

I hope that too. Many things interest me about Endgame, but knowing how Carol is portrayed there is among the top ones.

I actually would have loved to see that. It is the kind of surface-level-crazy yet intriguing idea that Marvel's What If comic book used to explore all the time.

In a sea of "mediocre" and "it's ok" and even "good," you are the first person I see here calling CM trash. I have a suspicion that CM will be one of those CBMs whose first sequel will significantly increase in quality, like Ragnarok, and Spider-Man 2 (although Spider-Man 1 is already a very good film).

So based on how these #s have trended, what day can we reasonably expect CM to reach a billion dollars globally, and how much fuel in the tank do you guys think it has beyond that figure?

Damn! I just realized that Perry-directed films have grossed over a billion dollars. And with his relatively tiny budgets, the guy must certainly be one of Hollywood's most profitable directors. Good for him.

People keep saying that CM is not a sequel, and it is true. However, nobody can deny that it was indeed marketed/pushed as a very important follow-up to IW and a "connector" if you will between a 2-billion dollar grosser and the sure-to-gross 2 billion, highly anticipated final entry in an insanely successful series of movies that have an overarching narrative thread through all of them. Of course CM making a billion dollars is impressive but let's not act as if it did not have some built-in advantages that say, Iron Man, the first GOTG and Wonder Woman did not have. And considering the fact that CM's reviews were not as glowing as WW's, GOTG's or Iron Man's, it just gives you an added perspective to assess its financial success. That assessment does not have to be a negative critique or a slam against the CM film. It is simply more food for thought/discussion. And I definitely agree. It is not the only reason for CM's success, of course, but it helped.

I am out of likes so...

"Stop it, troll!!!"

See, in this regard, I agree with you: if people are going to say that "it is easier to make a billion now than before" to talk about Aquaman, then they should be allowed to do the same to talk about CM's performance or any other billie-grossing film. Besides, there is no inherent "bashing" of Aquaman or CM in addressing the realities of the market or whetever.

I totally know where you come from, and I think the emotional response that so many people have in regard to CBMs ("How dare you say that Superhero Man is not doing well, you troll? Please, that film is flopping and you are all idiots for not seeing it! What? Nobody likes that film, NOBODY!! Are you blind!?" ) is not necessarily productive and generally leads to assumptions, insults, and fights). However, it is not expected and normal that a film genre that is unquestionably Hollywood's current box office king elicits more discussion at at website called Box Office Theory than any other type of movie?

To be fair and realistic, we are still in the middle of an MCU boom, and sociologically speaking, it is normal for lots of people to cheer for/root for /champion whatever is the trendy/hot/of the moment thing in pop culture, while the FF franchise is widely perceived as "not so hot" (even though the actual numbers say otherwise. Also, to be fair, most people here are quite balanced in their assessment of CM. Even its staunch defenders generally call it "ok" ir "good" (not "great") and most people here who have no horse in this race generally say that its domestic BO run is good (not OMG or extraordinary). There will always be one or two who will scream "troll" at anybody who dares not rave about MCU films and their box office (or any big franchise film) but that is normal for any fandom.

Come on. I love me some Avatar, but it was full of elements that, nowadays, are often mocked and demonized (by certain people) as "SJW crap" and "PC crap." There is nothing wrong with social justice, by the way. My opinion...

I don't understand why so many uber-Cameron fans hate being lumped with the whole "SJW" label. Imagine if Avatar not been directed by Cameron and it had been released in 2019! I bet it would totally face the wrath of certain vocal internet dwellers who would dismiss it for being "too feminist (OMG! the woman, not the male hero, killed the villain!!!), too save-the-environment, too on the nose in its Native American-are-saints-and-white-people-are-evil-colonizers analogy,, too much SJW PC crap" etc...

Absolutely true. CM was/is perfectly positioned as it is, and it is making a killing at the box office. So the MCU is still a winner, no matter how we look at it.

True. The hype for BvS having the two biggest DC comic book icons finally meet onscreen (with the added incentive of the company's third biggest character finally making her long anticipated movie debut) was insane. That opening was proof that audiences were eager to see this event, but that multiplier is evidence that they did not like what they saw. At least not enough people liked what they saw, which impacted the word of mouth and thus the re-watchability and repeat business factors. We can all look for excuses, but there is a reality: there was a palpable reaction all across the board in regard to BvS, and it was not positive. Not even close. Of course it has its fans. Every single movie ever made has some fans,

The Beauty and the Beast remake, Jurassic World, the Transformers franchise, the series of Pirates of the Caribbean films and Jumanji (as well as Captain Marvel itself) all want a word with you.

Bad analogy. People were not meh on BvS. GA audiences flat out hated it. It is a good thing that Superman and Batman are iconic and had so many staunch fans already; had a films starring an unknown character like CM gotten not just so-so reviews, but awful ones like BvS did and an awful audience response, I feel that it probably would have made an even worse multiplier than the Snyder turkey.

Exactly. It's funny how some people seem to act as if they had some sort of supernatural insight into alternate timelines/realities and claim that "it is not up to debate that this WOULD HAVE happened had these circumstances had been such and such"... But to each their own, I guess...