Will you continue to support films being split into Part 1/2/3s?

[Deep Wang]

Other than Avengers Infinity Wars 1 & 2, probably not.

 

My reasons

 

• Infinity Wars is likely to feature:

1. Iron Man
2. Thor
3. Loki (possibly)
4. Captain America
5. Winter Soldier (possibly)
6. Hulk
7. Black Widow
8. War Machine
9. Falcon
10. Nick Fury
11. Star Lord
12. Rocket
13. Groot
14. Drax
15. Gamora
16. Quicksliver
17. Scarlet Witch
18. Ant-Man
19. Wasp
20. Doctor Strange
21. Black Panther
22. Captain Marvel
23. Inhumans
24. Daredevil
25. Thanos

Not to mention Marvel could secretly be working out a deal to include (not likely, but not impossible... especially with Spider-Man given Sony's troubles over the last few years):

1. Spider-Man
2. X-Men
3. Fantastic Four

I'd say 2 films spread over 4-5 hrs is warranted for something of that magnitude.

 

Yeah, I agree with you, but there is already a public perception of Part 1 films not being so great(how many more will we get between now and then that could make it even worse?) and I think they shouldn't specifically call them Part 1 and Part 2.

[Dementeleus]

They should simply make two sequels, each one a single, conclusive story (that can be connected to each other). It's not that complicated.

[RobinHood26]

Depends, Avengers scares me. I don't like the idea of a FILM being spilt (MJ) I don't want to feel like I didn't watch a complete movie. The phrase part 1 and part 2 is the part to be iffy on. It makes me feel they won't actually complete a narrative in each movie

 

 

 

Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi are Part 1 and Part 2 100%. Which is why this part thing bothers me, why not just make 2 different films that actually tell the same larger story?

[TServo2049]

It's funny, we're worrying about Avengers 3 Part 1 suffering from the Part 1 stigma, when the problem with past (pre-Harry Potter) back-to-back sequels was that the SECOND film suffered. Back to the Future Part III, The Matrix Revolutions, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (ESPECIALLY Matrix Revolutions).

If they do change the titles so they're not Part 1 and Part 2, I wonder which scenario will apply...

Edited December 30, 2014 by TServo2049

[lilmac]

I am against it. I voted no but technically I will continue supporting it by buying movie-tickets.

[mahnamahna]

Yeah, I agree with you, but there is already a public perception of Part 1 films not being so great(how many more will we get between now and then that could make it even worse?) and I think they shouldn't specifically call them Part 1 and Part 2.

I don't think Infinity Wars will be hurt at all, quality wise

 

Part 1 will handle most of the character development (think the first 100 minutes of Avengers 1) between all of the heroes. 

 

Part 2 will have the best set-pieces and an epic conclusion to the first cycle of the MCU (assuming each cycle is 3 phases). 

 

I could see Part 1 getting a 70-75% on RT, but Part 2 getting a 90-95%. 

[RobinHood26]

I don't think Infinity Wars will be hurt at all, quality wise

 

Part 1 will handle most of the character development (think the first 100 minutes of Avengers 1) between all of the heroes. 

 

Part 2 will have the best set-pieces and an epic conclusion to the first cycle of the MCU (assuming each cycle is 3 phases). 

 

I could see Part 1 getting a 70-75% on RT, but Part 2 getting a 90-95%. 

 

You just listed what Im scared of. Part 1 should not mean just the first act of a much larger story

Edited December 31, 2014 by Jay Hollywood

[Fancyarcher]

I'm not a big fan of splitting up books or stories into two parts, but I don't mind. As long as I enjoy both parts I'm fine.

[Wormow]

Loved the Mockingjay split, liked the Deathly Hallows split, eh on the Hobbit split and did not like the Breaking Dawn split.

I will continue to support them if they're good movies - don't even care if they're split. If I come out of the theatre loving it, then who the hell cares? I'm not going to dismiss a film because it's a 'Part 1' (or Part 3, in The Hobbit's case).

The Avengers though... is a different story. Unlike other splits, it's not really adapted from anything. There's creative freedom as they're essentially making movie 3 and 4, rather than making movie 3 part 1 and movie 3 part 2. There's no 'source material' for it to follow.

[TServo2049]

Yeah, that's why I wondered if TA3 could possibly be more like Back to the Future 2/3, Matrix Reloaded/Revolutions, or Pirates 2/3. The problems with those is that the last entry dropped for all three of them...or is that no longer a plausible scenario in this post-Potter "finale bump" era?

Edited January 1, 2015 by TServo2049

[Olive]

hell no, won't see any Part one movie of YA in a theater.

[pepsa]

hell no, won't see any Part one movie of YA in a theater.

 

I bet you will see avengers part 1

Edited January 1, 2015 by pepsa

[The Panda]

Yeah, that's why I wondered if TA3 could possibly be more like Back to the Future 2/3, Matrix Reloaded/Revolutions, or Pirates 2/3. The problems with those is that the last entry dropped for all three of them...or is that no longer a plausible scenario in this post-Potter "finale bump" era?

I believe those suffered from having disappointing sequels. Revolutions and Worlds end are the only comparable movies there and both of them came off movies that kind of really sucked compared to the first movie.

Unless infinity war part 1 is really terrible we shouldn't have that happen. (Like reloaded or dead mans chest bad). Then infinity war part 2 would need to be even worse than that (worlds end and revolutions bad)

Edited January 1, 2015 by The Panda

[baumer]

These films that are being split in two, the revenue they make from these films is too good to pass up.  Even if you spend 300 million on a first part and it makes 700 million WW, you still have all the other revenue that comes from it.  DVD, BR, TV, Netflix and so on.  Why would they not do this?  It's just a license to print money.

[Ethan Hunt]

I'll support splits as long as the quality of the movies remains high. Big fan of the Mockingjay split, kinda iffy on the Deathly Hallows split.

[4815162342]

It depends on the source material for adaptations. Mockingjay doesn't support a two-part split because all you get is a lot of setup for Part 1 with no closure to any plot or character arcs. Deathly Hallows on the other hand does since the first 60% of the book ties up a few major character arcs and delivers a solid three-act mini-plot within the larger narrative.

 

 

As for movies forging their own way like Infinity War, as long as Part 1 and 2 both tell their own full plot and Part 1 isn't just a long first act-and-a-half, they can work.

[Spidey Freak]

Really, it is down to the source material. Something like Avatar: The Last Airbender ends up being a soulless exposition fest when you force fit an entire 20-episode season of nuanced themes, plotlines and characters into one humorless movie. Would've been better to split the first season into two parts as there is more than enough material to support two full movies of 120-140 hours each. Oh, and not involving Shyamalan will help as well.

 

Deathly Hallows does support two movies. It's just that DH2 lacked imagination and charm unlike DH1. 

 

Mockingjay.. eh.

 

Breaking Dawn, Hobbit and Allergent?