Jump to content

Plain Old Tele

Fanboy Wars Thread: Personal Attacks not allowed | With Digital Fur Technology

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

I agree that it’s a business and it’s natural that money is a big driver of what gets made and gets sequels, and etc. and there’s nothing wrong with that. MCU is one of the least money driven big franchises though, at least in the short term, and I think that can lead to better creative quality.

....

what

 

MCU is a perfect example of paint by numbers collaborative movies without heart and soul. Not saying that is a bad thing but you just picked the worst example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



8 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

I agree that it’s a business and it’s natural that money is a big driver of what gets made and gets sequels, and etc. and there’s nothing wrong with that. MCU is one of the least money driven big franchises though, at least in the short term, and I think that can lead to better creative quality.

c8c5738a95e918a8b307d981a5e004d3.gif

 

 

and this is coming from a huge mcu fan (me)lol. 

Edited by cax16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Avatree said:

....

what

 

MCU is a perfect example of paint by numbers collaborative movies without heart and soul. Not saying that is a bad thing but you just picked the worst example.

“Paint by numbers collaborative” is not the same thing as “money driven.” MCU employs a lot of tactics that you might casually associate with being purely about $$$, but in their case I think the primary driver is actually to satisfy fans and build up their continuity, with an eye towards continuing to be a culturally cominant product for as long as possible. That aligns pretty well with making money in the long run, sure, but they’re willing to e.g. make an Ant-Man sequel even though it makes way less money than putting an Iron Man 4 in that slot because they’re interested in setting up characters, settings, plot elements, etc for years down the road,

Edited by Thanos Legion
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



2 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

MCU employs a lot of tactics that you might casually associate with being purely about $$$, but in their case I think the primary driver is actually to satisfy fans and build up their continuity, with an eye towards continuing to be a culturally cominant product for as long as possible. That aligns pretty well with making money in the long run, but they’re willing to e.g. make an Ant-Man sequel even though it makes way less money than an Iron Man 4 because they’re interested in setting up characters, settings, plot elements, etc for years down the road,

Iron Man 4 not happening isn't an MCU decision and what you said does not match at all with the amount of production placement (and let said placement affect the story and photography) they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Barnack said:

Iron Man 4 not happening isn't an MCU decision and what you said does not match at all with the amount of production placement (and let said placement affect the story and photography) they do.

out of curiosity, what product placement is there in recent MCU films? I don't think I ever noticed any recently. Only one I can think of is Iron Man's Audi R8 and that was a little while ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



6 minutes ago, Avatree said:

out of curiosity, what product placement is there in recent MCU films? I don't think I ever noticed any recently. Only one I can think of is Iron Man's Audi R8 and that was a little while ago.

Ant Man wasp had some of the biggest and imo some of the worst (having one quite old character saying he always dreamed to have one of those while talking about a Hyundai car that the movie was heavily promoting), they tend to have unnatural cars moment (what the car do, how clean it is, how new of a model, how it is filmed and how long the camera linger on the logo and so on, more than just you need a car in the movie anyway may as well get some free cross promotion)

Edited by Barnack
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Barnack said:

Ant Man wasp had some of the biggest and imo some of the worst (having one quite old character saying he always dreamed to have one of those while talking about a Hyundai car that the movie was heavily promoting)

oh yeah actually I did notice that one.

 

I just looked up (i should have thought to look for a MCU wiki before!).

 

Didn't realise there was Audis in civil war and it was in Black Panther.

 

 

I have also seen TONS of Captain Marvel advertising for the website company Wix. I have seen far more Wix adverts featuring Captain Marvel, than actual adverts for Captain Marvel. However this wasn't in the film (i dont think)

Link to comment
Share on other sites



12 minutes ago, Barnack said:

Iron Man 4 not happening isn't an MCU decision and what you said does not match at all with the amount of production placement (and let said placement affect the story and photography) they do.

Do you mean that IROM Man 4 was RDJ’s decision? It doesn’t have to be IM4 specifically, the point is that they could have used that slot to get sequels for more financially successful characters out faster and just let AM hang around with only 1 solo movie Hulk style.     

 

Product placement is is a bit of a non-sequitor, doesn’t hurt continuity or fan satisfaction. 8km not trying to say that they don’t value money highly, that would be silly. My point is merely that given a choice between something which they think will make big bucks soon or something less immediately profitable that strengthens the brand in the long run I think they gravitate towards the latter, so $$$ is more of like the 2nd most important thing.

Edited by Thanos Legion
Link to comment
Share on other sites



9 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

Product placement is is a bit of a non-sequitor, doesn’t hurt continuity or fan satisfaction.

I am not sure what distinction you are trying to make between fan satisfaction and making money, having fans in mind is exactly what having money in mind is, no ?

 

And yes Iron Man 4 I had the impression that like Spider Man 4 never happening was not purely a studio decision.

Edited by Barnack
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Just now, Barnack said:

I am not sure what distinction you are trying to make between fan satisfaction and making money, having fans in mind is exactly what having money in mind is, no ?

I would say they can overlap a lot, but not quite the same thing. I’ll grant that it’s hard to draw a distinction since increasing size and intensity of fanbase both tend to lead to more money, but I think if Kevin was offered a deal from a genie where each McU film in the next decade made 10% less money than it otherwise would but was seen and liked by 10% more people (non-theatrical viewing, cheaper tickets, whatever) he would take it in a heartbeat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

Do you mean that IROM Man 4 was RDJ’s decision? It doesn’t have to be IM4 specifically, the point is that they could have used that slot to get sequels for more financially successful characters out faster and just let AM hang around with only 1 solo movie Hulk style.     

Hulk only gets one solo movie because of TiH and they have to deal with Universal.

19 minutes ago, Avatree said:

Didn't realise there was Audis in civil war and it was in Black Panther.

BP had one of the most blatant car & tie-in song ads in a single scene.  

Edited by 2kt09
Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 minute ago, 2kt09 said:

Hulk only gets one solo movie because of TiH and they have to deal with Universal.

BP had one of the most blatant car & pop song ads in a single scene.  

Well BP was also completely unmemorable so that's probably why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





21 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

I would say they can overlap a lot, but not quite the same thing. I’ll grant that it’s hard to draw a distinction since increasing size and intensity of fanbase both tend to lead to more money, but I think if Kevin was offered a deal from a genie where each McU film in the next decade made 10% less money than it otherwise would but was seen and liked by 10% more people (non-theatrical viewing, cheaper tickets, whatever) he would take it in a heartbeat. 

I do not know about him and how much power he has, but hurting the movies quality for product placement is indicating the exact opposite of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



26 minutes ago, Barnack said:

I do not know about him and how much power he has, but hurting the movies quality for product placement is indicating the exact opposite of that.

I think their perception is that the vast majority fans/GA simply don't care about product placement (and I think that's correct). If they conducted an investigation that concluded it was turning a lot of people off/away I bet there'd suddenly be a lot less of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



45 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

I think their perception is that the vast majority fans/GA simply don't care about product placement (and I think that's correct). If they conducted an investigation that concluded it was turning a lot of people off/away I bet there'd suddenly be a lot less of it.

People do not necessarily know the DP/production/script had product placement command and restriction, this is a completely different point if it optimizing your movie quality vs revenues. I am not sure what could be a clearer example, for some movies an argument could easily be made that the product placement gave X resource and worth the trade off, those are not low margin/risky affair that need them.

Edited by Barnack
Link to comment
Share on other sites



3 hours ago, Darth Lehnsherr said:

I think they might have done a Hulk sequel if they could have but regardless of the entanglements with Universal it wasn't a huge priority for Marvel. 

Hulk is clearly a priority character. It is why he is so heavily crossed in Avengers films and Thor 3.

If not for the Universal distribution rights issue I'm quite positive we would've seen a Hulk solo sequel and it would've taken off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



On 3/13/2019 at 7:28 PM, dudalb said:

Whedon also actually wrote some comics for Marvel;he did a X Men series back in the early 2000s.

Yes. Whedon wrote an Astonishing X-Men series back in 2004-2008 (Eisner Award included) and a Runaways series back in 2007-2008. And Sugarshock (Eisner Award again).

 

Also he wrote and/or excecutive produced his own comics: Fray (set in the Buffyverse but in the future), Buffy seasons 8-12 ( Eisner Award again), Angel, Firefly/Serenity...

Edited by Vox02
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.