Can Any Universe Top Marvel?

[The47th]

So

 

- Star Trek

 

 

is made of TOS, TNG, VOY, ENT, DS9 and the movie series = 6 series total.

 

- Marvel

 

(for now)

 

got Avengers movie franchise, Guardians Of The Galaxy movie franchise in the works, Agents of SHIELD TV Series (Netflix TV series to come) , Ant-Man and Doctor Strange movies incoming.

 

Avengers movie franchise can be broken down into Iron Man movie franchise (3 movies), Thor movie franchise (2 movies), Captain America movie franchise (2 movies and one in the works), Hulk movie franchise (1 movie). Each of them carries its own lore.

 

That's already 7 series in that universe established and 2 series in the making but they barely scratched the surface.

 

First of all, you are trying to present any Marvel franchise like Iron Man or Thor as an equal to any Trek series. But then you would be comparing a 6hours+ series to a 130+ hours series like Deep Space Nine.

Not only that, you are comparing series that focus around one main character to Trek series that have an ensemble as protagonists, in which each of them have their own personal stories presented and developed. If there hasn't been a spin off about those characters it's because in the wild majority of cases there wasn't anything left to tell.

 

As an example, imagine The Avengers is the only Marvel series out there. But, it is formed by 50+ films. With all that material, don't you think they would have had time to focus some of those films in each of the main characters, and explore their own stories and lore?

 

Well, even doing that, a series like that would just be comparable to only one Trek series.

 

Star Trek's 6 series are more complex at all levels than those 8/9 Marvel series you are referring to. Because you can't compare them just going by the number of series, but by what they are telling (of course, you were too smart not to break each franchise down to their runtime). Damn, Deep Space Nine alone has the same complexity of all those 8/9 series put together.

 

I just think you are massively downplaying the possibilities for narrative depth you can get on a TV show with a considerable length and a clear focus on the stories they're want to tell. And especially, you are talking about all of this without having the minimum idea of the stories told in each of those Trek series.

 

 

They don't even own Spider-Man franchise, X-Men franchise that spawned Wolverine franchise and FF4 franchise. That would have added 4 franchises to the count. Plus Ghost Rider franchise, Blade franchise, Daredevil and Elektra that were made as well so there are 8 series that were made out of their Marvel universe without even owning those cinematic rights. That's even more mind-boggling like a parrallel Marvel movie world co-existing with Disney/Marvel cinematic universe. (You add it all, that makes 15 separate series at least being milked out Marvel Universe for the last 15 years).

 

Now when you know that Marvel comics universe got other team-ups of superheroes series like Thunderbolts, Inhumans, Nightstalkers which can be broken down in individual franchises like The Avengers. You add parallel universes, microcosms, alternate realities, time travels, mystical dimensions, retcons.

 

 

And all of this...why? What does it add to the discussion? The first parragraph doesn't tell anything about the MCU, and the second one is just speculation about things that there aren't even plans to take to film.

[Water Bottle]

Lol you just contradicted yourself there. If you agree that MCU is better, then that is because it has more depth than Trek. As for scope, the MCU is fundamentally based on time and space too. This will be further explored when Doctor Strange comes along and when the Infinity Gems/Stones are analysed in further detail. Possibly in Thor 3 and GotG 2.

 

Not to mention beyond Phase 3, when Inhumans, the Celestials and the Kree and Skrull saga may come into play. At that point, there will be nothing to beat the MCU in its vast depth/scope combination. Sure Trekkers may have more planets and races, but on a whole, the depth is hardly there to a whooping majority of those races as compared to the major ones in the MCU.

 

1) I didn't agree or disagree that MCU is better but to claim it has more depth than the Trek franchise is wrong. Anyways, a universe can have more depth and be smaller and a universe can have more depth and be bigger. We're speaking quantity here, not quality. So even if I buy your argument that the MCU has more depth, it does nothing to prove your point.

2) So far, the MCU has remained Earth-centered with the occasional breach in space. GoTG has started to break that but even so, it might have the scope but so far it'll take a long time before it's able to tell enough stories to get to the point that Star Trek has reached.

3) How does adding Inhumans, Celestials, Kree, and Skulls add so much to the universe that nothing can possible beat it? As far as I can tell, they're mostly just alien races.

 

You seem to be reacting to this debate not based on quantity (which is what it's about) but on quality-as if me claiming that another universe is bigger is somehow speaking ill of another universe.

[Spidey Freak]

1) I didn't agree or disagree that MCU is better but to claim it has more depth than the Trek franchise is wrong. Anyways, a universe can have more depth and be smaller and a universe can have more depth and be bigger. We're speaking quantity here, not quality. So even if I buy your argument that the MCU has more depth, it does nothing to prove your point.

2) So far, the MCU has remained Earth-centered with the occasional breach in space. GoTG has started to break that but even so, it might have the scope but so far it'll take a long time before it's able to tell enough stories to get to the point that Star Trek has reached.

3) How does adding Inhumans, Celestials, Kree, and Skulls add so much to the universe that nothing can possible beat it? As far as I can tell, they're mostly just alien races.

 

You seem to be reacting to this debate not based on quantity (which is what it's about) but on quality-as if me claiming that another universe is bigger is somehow speaking ill of another universe.

 

Is the thread comparing ONLY quantity though? I actually think it is a quantity : quality ratio. But even if we stick to only "quantity", then even if MCU starts its space exploration with Guardians-- actually scratch that, we've already visited some of the Nine Realms of the Milky Way other than Earth through the Thor movies and I'm sure we will visit the others, especially Hel, in Thor 3 and beyond. 

 

 

And again, that's just the Milky Way. Thanos and his quest to acquire the Infinity Stones will be the first storyline to involve locations outside of this galaxy. So you see, Marvel just doesn't singularly expand its universe like Trek. It is building a fully fleshed nucleus in Earth, and around that the Nine Realms like the inner orbit of protons, and around that the rest of the universe like the outer orbit of the protons. And each of these layers will be given depth. 

 

And again, each of the major alien races we will encounter: Inhumans, Celestials, Kree and Skrull, Asgardians etc. all have their nuanced cultures and complicated structures of hierarchy. The Inhumans, Kree and Skrull all have monarchies and constantly war with each other (Kree and Skrull) by expanding their respective forces by conquering worlds and forcing them to bend their knee to their command (Think of it as Lannisters or Targaryeans conquering different Westeros regions and forcing the ruling lords of those regions to be their bannermen during times of war) and also try to make alliances through marriage to other ruling families or leaders of alien races to ensure universal peace and influence (Inhumans). Yeah, so it IS Game of Thrones on a universal level, if you think about it. Not to mention races like the Inhumans and Asgardians get/will get their own movies, set in their own worlds, about their royal families and unique cultures, customs and physiological nature. And then we have the alien scalawags like the Guardians. The protagonists in Star Trek stories of any nature are 99% of the time members of an Enterprise crew.  

 

The Celestials on the other hand are almost God-like (in the comics, they were the ones responsible for Earth mutants through their experimentation on human being millenia ago) and very spiritually advanced, giving the MCU yet another layer. 

 

And then there's Earth, of course. On the global scale, you've got The Avengers. On a national scale, you've got the Earth-based solo films barring the international adventuring/spy caper that may be a potential Black Widow movie. And on a micro scale, stuff like the four Netflix shows (Luke Cage, Daredevil, Iron Fist and Jessica Jones) all set in different parts of Hell's Kitchen. And then there's the oddball Doctor Strange, which is technically an Earth story for the most part, but whose scope travels well beyond the physical limits of the planet. The title pushes the boundaries of consciousness and dimensions of space and time. Kind of like a spiritual/magical Doctor Who.

 

So you see, that is quantity too. Quantity in length, breadth and depth. Quantity in tone and diversity. And all of this can and will be covered in ten years or less. 

Edited July 28, 2014 by Spidey Freak

[dashrendar44]

First of all, you are trying to present any Marvel franchise like Iron Man or Thor as an equal to any Trek series. But then you would be comparing a 6hours+ series to a 130+ hours series like Deep Space Nine.

Not only that, you are comparing series that focus around one main character to Trek series that have an ensemble as protagonists, in which each of them have their own personal stories presented and developed. If there hasn't been a spin off about those characters it's because in the wild majority of cases there wasn't anything left to tell.

 

As an example, imagine The Avengers is the only Marvel series out there. But, it is formed by 50+ films. With all that material, don't you think they would have had time to focus some of those films in each of the main characters, and explore their own stories and lore?

 

Well, even doing that, a series like that would just be comparable to only one Trek series.

 

Star Trek's 6 series are more complex at all levels than those 8/9 Marvel series you are referring to. Because you can't compare them just going by the number of series, but by what they are telling (of course, you were too smart not to break each franchise down to their runtime). Damn, Deep Space Nine alone has the same complexity of all those 8/9 series put together.

 

Nice try at changing the terms of the thread. Nowhere people mention the complexity of the content and what they are telling as a criteria to the superior size of one universe compared to one another. Is Dr Who more complex than Star Trek? Because Water Bottle admitted Dr Who universe is bigger than Star Trek only on the sheer factor that Dr Who features more episodes than Star Trek's total series. Star Trek loses that dick contest.

 

No, the main criteria is the number of ramifications and series being milked out of it cinematic wise.

[The47th]

Is the thread comparing ONLY quantity though? I actually think it is a quantity : quality ratio. But even if we stick to only "quantity", then even if MCU starts its space exploration with Guardians-- actually scratch that, we've already visited some of the Nine Realms of the Milky Way other than Earth through the Thor movies and I'm sure we will visit the others, especially Hel, in Thor 3 and beyond. 

 

 

And again, that's just the Milky Way. Thanos and his quest to acquire the Infinity Stones will be the first storyline to involve locations outside of this galaxy. So you see, Marvel just doesn't singularly expand its universe like Trek. It is building a fully fleshed nucleus in Earth, and around that the Nine Realms like the inner orbit of protons, and around that the rest of the universe like the outer orbit of the protons. And each of these layers will be given depth. 

 

And again, each of the major alien races we will encounter: Inhumans, Celestials, Kree and Skrull, Asgardians etc. all have their nuanced cultures and complicated structures of hierarchy. The Inhumans, Kree and Skrull all have monarchies and constantly war with each other (Kree and Skrull) by expanding their respective forces by conquering worlds and forcing them to bend their knee to their command (Think of it as Lannisters or Targaryeans conquering different Westeros regions and forcing the ruling lords of those regions to be their bannermen during times of war) and also try to make alliances through marriage to other ruling families or leaders of alien races to ensure universal peace and influence (Inhumans). Yeah, so it IS Game of Thrones on a universal level, if you think about it. Not to mention races like the Inhumans and Asgardians get/will get their own movies, set in their own worlds, about their royal families and unique cultures, customs and physiological nature. And then we have the alien scalawags like the Guardians. The protagonists in Star Trek stories of any nature are 99% of the time members of an Enterprise crew.  

 

The Celestials on the other hand are almost God-like (in the comics, they were the ones responsible for Earth mutants through their experimentation on human being millenia ago) and very spiritually advanced, giving the MCU yet another layer. 

 

And then there's Earth, of course. On the global scale, you've got The Avengers. On a national scale, you've got the Earth-based solo films barring the international adventuring/spy caper that may be a potential Black Widow movie. And on a micro scale, stuff like the four Netflix shows (Luke Cage, Daredevil, Iron Fist and Jessica Jones) all set in different parts of Hell's Kitchen. And then there's the oddball Doctor Strange, which is technically an Earth story for the most part, but whose scope travels well beyond the physical limits of the planet. The title pushes the boundaries of consciousness and dimensions of space and time. Kind of like a spiritual/magical Doctor Who.

 

So you see, that is quantity too. Quantity in length, breadth and depth. Quantity in tone and diversity. And all of this can and will be covered in ten years or less. 

 

First of all, every sentence you wrote there is filled with "should'ves, would'ves, could'ves." You are continuously making statements based on the potential of the universe and not the reality of it. Second of all, I applaud your passion and knowledge about that universe, but I'm telling you, even if they dedicate their time to portray all of that on screen, it would still be less than 20% of what it's been already seen on Star Trek. All of those civilizations and relationships that you are describing don't take more than one Trek incarnation to describe and explore.

 

I'm repeating myself, but I really recommend you watching Deep Space Nine, because it has all what you are talking about. It employes a great portion of time to explore past and new civilizations, and the war storyline implies that we get to see how all of them deal with each other.

 

Nice try at changing the terms of the thread. Nowhere people mention the complexity of the content and what they are telling as a criteria to the superior size of one universe compared to one another. Is Dr Who more complex than Star Trek? Because Water Bottle admitted Dr Who universe is bigger than Star Trek only on the sheer factor that Dr Who features more episodes than Star Trek's total series. Star Trek loses that dick contest.

 

No, the main criteria is the number of ramifications and series being milked out of it cinematic wise.

 

You have clearly not paying a lot of attention in your reading. It has never been stated that the topic was specifically the number of brands that could derive from one property, not matter how short-lived they are. It's all been kept abstract, so that everyone could present their vision.

 

Spidey Freak was the one who started talking about the complexity of the universes, saying that Game of Thrones happens in only one world. That derived on the idea that yes, the MCU contains more worlds, but Star Trek multiplies that by 100, anyway.

 

And I was telling you that you can't present the different MCU properties like Iron Man or The Incredible Hulk as equals to Star Trek Voyager or Deep Space Nine, because the latter ones are so insanely bigger.

 

By the way, why do you assume that saying that Dr Who has more episodes is going to piss me off? This is not a contest, I'm just stating why is not true that the MCU is superior to any other fictional universe, and just using the Star Trek one as an example because it's one that I happen to know very well.

 

 

The protagonists in Star Trek stories of any nature are 99% of the time members of an Enterprise crew.

 

 

And that just proves my suspicion that you have absolutely no idea of how Star Trek works.

[dashrendar44]

You have clearly not paying a lot of attention in your reading. It has never been stated that the topic was specifically the number of brands that could derive from one property, not matter how short-lived they are. It's all been kept abstract, so that everyone could present their vision.

 

Spidey Freak was the one who started talking about the complexity of the universes, saying that Game of Thrones happens in only one world. That derived on the idea that yes, the MCU contains more worlds, but Star Trek multiplies that by 100, anyway.

 

 

 

Isn't most things Star Trek centered around the Federation and the Starfleet crews of the different Enterprise ships throughout the years? Everything is seen through their prism and POV. In Marvel, the POV on the universe is demultiplied into a plethora of individual character series. Those individual character series form team-up series, those team-up series meet other team-up series to create bigger crossovers.

 

 

 

And I was telling you that you can't present the different MCU properties like Iron Man or The Incredible Hulk as equals to Star Trek Voyager or Deep Space Nine, because the latter ones are so insanely bigger.

 

They barely scratched the surface, there is like 50 years of comics history and background to sustain their adventures. That's enough to  to Star Trek episodes.

Edited July 28, 2014 by dashrendar44

[The47th]

Isn't most things Star Trek centered around the Federation and the Starfleet crews of the different Enterprise ships throughout the years? Everything is seen through their prism and POV. In Marvel, the POV on the universe is demultiplied into a plethora of individual character series. Those individual character series form team-up series, those team-up series meet other team-up series to create bigger crossovers.

 

It may seem like that to you, because you are not totally familiar with the shows, but you have to consider that the Federation is an alliance of civilizations, so you have characters from different species, and they all develop their personal storylines in which we get to know more about their culture and take their POV. So a character can belong to the Federation, but if he's a Klingon, it's going to be used to develop Klingon-centric storylines. The same with Borg, Vulcans, Ferengis, etc.

 

The fact that the starting point of a show is a Federation crew makes you certain that you are going to get diversity in the kind of storylines and points of view.

 

On the other hand, Deep Space Nine is just as much a Bajoran-centric show as one focused on the Federation. And just so you know, only TOS, TNG and ENT are based around an Enterprise crew.

 

Consider the development of stories in Star Trek the opposite of Marvel: here you have ensemble properties that then develop their individual stories through individual episodes and story arcs. 

 

They barely scratched the surface, there is like 50 years of comics history and background to sustain their adventures. That's enough to  to Star Trek episodes.

 

 

Again, we are talking about cinematic universes. Anything beyond that is irrelevant. Just like if someone came and said that Star Wars would be gigantic because of all the possibilities brought by the expanded universe.

[Water Bottle]

They barely scratched the surface, there is like 50 years of comics history and background to sustain their adventures. That's enough to  to Star Trek episodes.

Of course the comics are bigger. There's literally thousands of Marvel comics out there-and multiple incarnations of many characters. Sadly, dash, these comics aren't part of the MCU. They are the inspiration for it but they're not a part of the MCU cannon.

 

Is the thread comparing ONLY quantity though? I actually think it is a quantity : quality ratio. But even if we stick to only "quantity", then even if MCU starts its space exploration with Guardians-- actually scratch that, we've already visited some of the Nine Realms of the Milky Way other than Earth through the Thor movies and I'm sure we will visit the others, especially Hel, in Thor 3 and beyond. 

 

 

And again, that's just the Milky Way. Thanos and his quest to acquire the Infinity Stones will be the first storyline to involve locations outside of this galaxy. So you see, Marvel just doesn't singularly expand its universe like Trek. It is building a fully fleshed nucleus in Earth, and around that the Nine Realms like the inner orbit of protons, and around that the rest of the universe like the outer orbit of the protons. And each of these layers will be given depth. 

 

And again, each of the major alien races we will encounter: Inhumans, Celestials, Kree and Skrull, Asgardians etc. all have their nuanced cultures and complicated structures of hierarchy. The Inhumans, Kree and Skrull all have monarchies and constantly war with each other (Kree and Skrull) by expanding their respective forces by conquering worlds and forcing them to bend their knee to their command (Think of it as Lannisters or Targaryeans conquering different Westeros regions and forcing the ruling lords of those regions to be their bannermen during times of war) and also try to make alliances through marriage to other ruling families or leaders of alien races to ensure universal peace and influence (Inhumans). Yeah, so it IS Game of Thrones on a universal level, if you think about it. Not to mention races like the Inhumans and Asgardians get/will get their own movies, set in their own worlds, about their royal families and unique cultures, customs and physiological nature. And then we have the alien scalawags like the Guardians. The protagonists in Star Trek stories of any nature are 99% of the time members of an Enterprise crew.  

 

The Celestials on the other hand are almost God-like (in the comics, they were the ones responsible for Earth mutants through their experimentation on human being millenia ago) and very spiritually advanced, giving the MCU yet another layer. 

 

And then there's Earth, of course. On the global scale, you've got The Avengers. On a national scale, you've got the Earth-based solo films barring the international adventuring/spy caper that may be a potential Black Widow movie. And on a micro scale, stuff like the four Netflix shows (Luke Cage, Daredevil, Iron Fist and Jessica Jones) all set in different parts of Hell's Kitchen. And then there's the oddball Doctor Strange, which is technically an Earth story for the most part, but whose scope travels well beyond the physical limits of the planet. The title pushes the boundaries of consciousness and dimensions of space and time. Kind of like a spiritual/magical Doctor Who.

 

So you see, that is quantity too. Quantity in length, breadth and depth. Quantity in tone and diversity. And all of this can and will be covered in ten years or less. 

 

And you think Star Trek doesn't have any depth? Over 30 years of mythology building and you think it has so little depth that it'll take Marvel less than a decade to overcome it?

 

You know dash said that it takes a Trekkie to really understand everything and yet you claim Marvel has so much more depth? I mean, make up your minds. Star Trek's universe is either extremely shallow or it's so complex that only the real fans can understand it. You can't have it both ways.

 

There is really no point in me continuing the conversation because it's pretty clear that you guys want to have the biggest universe-clearly trying to compensate for something-even if it means disrespecting the work other franchises have done to build up entire universes.

[dashrendar44]

First I'm not Spidey Freak's döppelganger as I don't speak on his behalf nor I share all of his opinions for which he is entitled to but don't express what I'm thinking on this topic so it is needless to lump us together as one entity thinking alike.Because if we go there I could say that you and the47th are not clear on the cinematic universe we're talking about if I go by your comment when I brought up Dr Who's bigger universe about you not being aware of notable Dr Who cinematic experience to be considered relevant and worthy of being mentioned in the thread discussed:

 

Yes. Only reason I haven't brought it up is a lack of a cinematic experience that I'm aware off.

 

So Dr Who is a bigger universe than Star Trek's but the fact that there is no "cinematic experience you were aware off" deemed it irrelevant to be mentioned.

 

That means TV series are irrelevant to the debate then since Dr Who is a TV series despite being the only argument you both brought up to claim ST's superiority over MCU is the fact there are 6 Star Trek TV series. You Trekkies better both agree what is the frame of a cinematic universe before arguing its bigger size.So if we speak strictly about "cinematic experience" as movies only what Marvel is doing at its pace is exponentially bigger in the 6 years time frame since 2008 than Star Trek. How many Star Trek movies were produced in that same 6 years frame starting from ST:TMP back in 1979? 3 movies to date from 1979 to 1985. Marvel has already produced and released 9 movies in 6 years. It took 19 years for ST to spawn 9 movies!

Edited July 28, 2014 by dashrendar44

[Kalel009Shel]

Eh... I'm sure Marvel makes ten times the revenue (if not more) of what the Star Trek property brings in. 

Dude the TV shows alone made billions .. There were like 4 -5 successful shows... So Marvels got a long way to go.. LOL.

STrek has been making money since the 60s LOL.. Do your homework. Marvel went bankrupt and had to sell or rent off it characters.. 

[Kalel009Shel]

First I'm not Spidey's Freak and I don't speak on his behalf nor I share all of his opinions which he is entitled to but don't express what I'm thinking on this topic so it is needless to lump us together as one entity thinking alike.Because if we go there I could say that you and the47th are not clear on the cinematic universe we're talking about if I go by your comment when I brought up Dr Who's bigger universe about you not being aware of notable Dr Who cinematic experience to be considered relevant to the thread discussed. That means TV series are irrelevant to the debate then despite being the only argument you both brought up to claim ST's superiority over MCU. You Trekkies better both agree what is the frame of a cinematic universe before arguing.So if we speak strictly about cinematic as movies only what Marvel is doing at its pace is exponentially bigger in the 6 years time frame since 2008 than Star Trek. How many Star Trek movies were produced in that same 6 years frame starting from ST:TMP back in 1979? 3 movies to date from 1979 to 1985. Marvel has already produced and released 9 movies in 6 years. It took 19 years for ST to spawn 9 movies!

Tell em Dash and lets not forget the successful shows. Star Trek Generations billions up billions of dollars in TV and merchandising,  And that wasnt the only hit TV Show..

TV is where all the mega money of the future is going to be made . I wonder if these folks really know what they saying Dash. And how quick they forget that before Disney came into the picture Marvel was bankrupt. LOL

 

When youve been making money since the late 60s to current,  Disneys new Marvel will take a long time to catch up..

[dashrendar44]

Tell em Dash and lets not forget the successful shows. Star Trek Generations billions up billions of dollars in TV and merchandising,  And that wasnt the only hit TV Show..

TV is where all the mega money of the future is going to be made . I wonder if these folks really know what they saying Dash. And how quick they forget that before Disney came into the picture Marvel was bankrupt. LOL

 

When youve been making money since the late 60s to current,  Disneys new Marvel will take a long time to catch up..

 

 

Uh, Kal I'm not a trekkie...Sure Star Trek's universe is big. Marvel's too.

[Accursed Arachnid!™]

Star Wars is the only series with a chance. So yeah.

 

It's a...

 

Edited July 29, 2014 by Accursed Arachnid!™

[Spidey Freak]

Of course the comics are bigger. There's literally thousands of Marvel comics out there-and multiple incarnations of many characters. Sadly, dash, these comics aren't part of the MCU. They are the inspiration for it but they're not a part of the MCU cannon.And you think Star Trek doesn't have any depth? Over 30 years of mythology building and you think it has so little depth that it'll take Marvel less than a decade to overcome it?You know dash said that it takes a Trekkie to really understand everything and yet you claim Marvel has so much more depth? I mean, make up your minds. Star Trek's universe is either extremely shallow or it's so complex that only the real fans can understand it. You can't have it both ways.There is really no point in me continuing the conversation because it's pretty clear that you guys want to have the biggest universe-clearly trying to compensate for something-even if it means disrespecting the work other franchises have done to build up entire universes.

Ok, what dash said about us not being a hive mind. Also, read my previous post again and see where I am coming from when I talk about depth. Though okay, depth may not be the most appropriate term as I don't know how many individual Trek characters and their respective worlds/backstories/POVs are as fleshed out as the Marvel heroes. But what about tonal diversity and the different macro and micro levels of storytelling in the MCU? Surely that has to account for something? Especially genre versatility. You did scoff at the notion of the MCU being bigger than the Trek-verse so I don't think my feelings are any stronger either. I'm sorry if it was demeaning towards ST. I do believe it is a worthy opponent for the title of biggest universe. I still think you are writing MCU off too easily especially when the universe building as just begun and they are trying something entirely novel in terms of budget and challenging the concept of mass appeal.

[cheesypoofs]

I had this idea, what if Sony and Marvel could make a deal that Spider-Man can be included in the MCU. Marvel has to make the films but Sony can still distribute the Spidey solo films. Kinda like how Paramount distributed Phase 1

[Spidey Freak]

I had this idea, what if Sony and Marvel could make a deal that Spider-Man can be included in the MCU. Marvel has to make the films but Sony can still distribute the Spidey solo films. Kinda like how Paramount distributed Phase 1

They should but Avi Arad has some weird terms like Spidey being the protagonist of any Avenger movie he appears in. Feige and co. will have none of that. Maybe it's for the better as Spidey is marginalised as the wisecracking goofball youngster rookie whenever he joins Earth's Mightiest.

[Spidey Freak]

Dude the TV shows alone made billions .. There were like 4 -5 successful shows... So Marvels got a long way to go.. LOL.STrek has been making money since the 60s LOL.. Do your homework. Marvel went bankrupt and had to sell or rent off it characters..

I'm sure Marvel has made much more seeing how they have their OWN blockbuster movie studio. They've consistently had books, animated shows, toys and other merchandising since the 60's too.Also, they didn't get bankrupt because of lack of popularity. It was due to egomaniac top management trying to destroy DC and other competition by making the assinine decision to buy entire retail chains selling comics and making them Marvel exclusive stores. After that plan backfired, the douches were let off and Marvel managed to bounce back successfully. It's all in the past now. There may have been a point where ST revenues were greater than Marvel's but that time has gone. Edited July 29, 2014 by Spidey Freak

[The47th]

 But what about tonal diversity and the different macro and micro levels of storytelling in the MCU? Surely that has to account for something? Especially genre versatility.

 

What levels? What diversity? Has that happened already? You are talking about the potential considering the comic, but the MCU is decades from getting to the point when it has a clear superiority over other brands.

 

The same with genre diversity. Are we any closer to get a heart-felt drama entirely based on Pepper Potts' family reunion? All properties are built around the action and adventure genres. They do have variations for some properties, and kudos for them for trying to make each brand different from the others, but those variations are also limited by the scope of what people expect/want from a super-hero blockbuster.

[James]

Well, BO wise Potter is ahead ($7.7B with 8 movies vs $6.3B with 9), though with Disney soon having 3 MCU movies a year that'll probably change (even with Fantastic Beast trilogy coming). 

If we're talking world building, Star Trek and Stargate are well ahead of MCU. Their universes are incredible. I've only completely watched Stargate and with several movies and 17 seasons (plus an animated series), all connected, it's much more complex than the Marvel universe, even with it's Tv series.

[Spidey Freak]

What levels? What diversity? Has that happened already? You are talking about the potential considering the comic, but the MCU is decades from getting to the point when it has a clear superiority over other brands.The same with genre diversity. Are we any closer to get a heart-felt drama entirely based on Pepper Potts' family reunion? All properties are built around the action and adventure genres. They do have variations for some properties, and kudos for them for trying to make each brand different from the others, but those variations are also limited by the scope of what people expect/want from a super-hero blockbuster.

Decades no. One decade at the most. Coz this is Marvel. Expect the unexpected.And while there was no Pepper family reunion episode, there were two movies that heavily focused on the drama of the Asgardian Royal Family. As for expectations from a blockbuster superhero movie, GotG and Doctor Strange will shatter it. And no, Marvel is no longer "limited" to the big screen. There is AoS, and soon Agent Carter, Jessica Jones, Daredevil, Luke Cage and Iron Fist on their way. I'm sure these shows will feature episodes you were talking about that focus only on drama and not action/adventure.So yeah, multiple movies AND multiple shows per year. That's the simplest reason why Marvel will expand its universe at a much faster rate than Trek.