Jump to content

Plain Old Tele

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

Recommended Posts



2 hours ago, RandomJC said:

GOTG2's problem is the MCU ceiling, that's appearing. It may not have that much more room to grow past it's first film's gross.

 

There is a ceiling, but wouldn't it be closer to IM3's $409m?  Theres plenty of room to grow.

 

I could be way off, I still think it'll increase because it's become a unicorn in the MCU where we haven't seen these characters 12 times now across a zillion different movies and that could help since this is the only place to see the Guardians. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rallax said:

 

There is a ceiling, but wouldn't it be closer to IM3's $409m?  Theres plenty of room to grow.

 

I could be way off, I still think it'll increase because it's become a unicorn in the MCU where we haven't seen these characters 12 times now across a zillion different movies and that could help since this is the only place to see the Guardians. 

 

I would think the ceiling for an average MCU movie is 350, with more likely range to be in the mid 200s. Of the highest grossing films, We have the Avengers mega-events, Civil War mega-event, and IM3 high on the Avengers. I'd wager that GOTG is pretty much the ceiling for an average MCU film, while GOTG2 may increase on it, I don't think it's that much, and I don't think an stand alone MCU film will go much past 350.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



 

6 hours ago, Captain Craig said:

And thats's just the Warners&Disney comic movies. Fox's Marvel WW cume is 1.3B more.

So year to date when 5 comic films can pull in $3.8Billion World wide you can bet "fatigue" isn't on the table in any Studio boardroom. 

Dr.Strange will push that tally to 6 films and at least $4.3 Billion. 

 

Great point.   "Super hero fatigue" really isn't happening despite years of people making that claim.   I mean....audiences supported two movies with horrible reviews and another one with bad reviews.   That's pretty incredible....the OPPOSITE of "fatigue".

 

2 hours ago, Arlborn said:

It's like Marvel suddenly noticed they were going up against Justice League and decided to throw everything and the kitchen sink at Thor lol

 

I don't blame them, this exact same strategy worked out well for them this year, so...

:redcapes:

 

I know the Hulk is a big guy, but is he the "kitchen sink" all by himself?

It looks like Marvel is doing what I'd hoped they would do.   Use the characters.   Don't follow any rigid formula where there are "Avengers movies" and "solo movies".    Mix and match I say.   Keeps it fresh.

 

1 hour ago, RandomJC said:

 

I want my SPAWN remake!

 

Hells yes!

 

13 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

 

I would think the ceiling for an average MCU movie is 350, with more likely range to be in the mid 200s. Of the highest grossing films, We have the Avengers mega-events, Civil War mega-event, and IM3 high on the Avengers. I'd wager that GOTG is pretty much the ceiling for an average MCU film, while GOTG2 may increase on it, I don't think it's that much, and I don't think an stand alone MCU film will go much past 350.

 

I'm just going to assume GotG2 will decrease.    That tends to happen with sequels to surprise hits.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

 

I would think the ceiling for an average MCU movie is 350, with more likely range to be in the mid 200s. Of the highest grossing films, We have the Avengers mega-events, Civil War mega-event, and IM3 high on the Avengers. I'd wager that GOTG is pretty much the ceiling for an average MCU film, while GOTG2 may increase on it, I don't think it's that much, and I don't think an stand alone MCU film will go much past 350.

 

The Guardians isn't really a standalone film though, it's a group film but of Guardians not Avengers (without the build up of solos)   It not only had legs but was huge (for it's time) on home video and I think it could open at around $150m and maybe hit $375m+ - especially if it maintains it's more family and kid friendly spin than Civil War

 

The first Guardians wasn't budgeted as a stand alone and I'm sure this one is more expensive with the added cast and upped salaries for the existing cast.

 

As for a ceiling. So far the MCU ceiling has show itself to be higher than the DCEU's.  One could say quality has a role in that, bringing down the potential DCEU's top grossers, but quality is part of the equation.  If GOTG, Ragnorok, SM are poor or bad that affects their ceiling as it would for WW or JL.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



16 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

The Guardians isn't really a standalone film though, it's a group film but of Guardians not Avengers (without the build up of solos)   It not only had legs but was huge (for it's time) on home video and I think it could open at around $150m and maybe hit $375m+ - especially if it maintains it's more family and kid friendly spin than Civil War

 

The first Guardians wasn't budgeted as a stand alone and I'm sure this one is more expensive with the added cast and upped salaries for the existing cast.

 

As for a ceiling. So far the MCU ceiling has show itself to be higher than the DCEU's.  One could say quality has a role in that, bringing down the potential DCEU's top grossers, but quality is part of the equation.  If GOTG, Ragnorok, SM are poor or bad that affects their ceiling as it would for WW or JL.

 

Guardians is a standalone. It's a team movie, but still a stands alone from the rest of the MCU as a whole. According to Box Office Mojo it was budgeted less than IM3, not that I know how true that is. I doubt Guardians could ever go over 375

 

We don't know DCEU's ceiling yet, it's still too early to judge, or claim that MCU's is higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Harpospoke said:

I'm just going to assume GotG2 will decrease.    That tends to happen with sequels to surprise hits.

 

Not a bad assumption, I pretty much expect it to remain flat, with maybe a small decrease. It'll need something stellar and surprising to make it jump huge.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



TV Shows  - DC by an inch. Flash and Arrow etc. are just ahead of Daredevil because Agents of Shield is trash and Jessica Jones was underwhelming.

Comics - DC by a wide margin.

Animated - DC by a wide margin.

Film - Both have their +'s and -'s

 

 

Edited by Johnny Tran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Johnny Tran said:

TV Shows  - DC by an inch. Flash and Arrow etc. are just ahead of Daredevil because Agents of Shield is trash and Jessica Jones was underwhelming.

Comics - DC by a wide margin.

Animated - DC by a wide margin.

Film - Both have there +'s and -'s

 

 

Jessica Jones was amazing!

Marvel Comics is a mixed bag, I think some individual series are miles above what DC has. And others are miles below. My favs are Marvel, but the more consistent is DC (yay!)

I agree on the animated, nothing holds a candle to DC animated.

Films, as a whole MCU is doing better, but they do have the benefit of having nearly a decade to find their footing. I'll reserve judgement once we get a few more DC films, and they figure themselves out. it's easy to forget how Early Marvel clearly had no clue where they wanted to go with the MCU.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



My issue @RandomJC is that people forget The Dark Knight trilogy very quickly.  Those were WB productions. They literally JUST happened. Even if your stance is that the DCEU is off to a sluggish start or a bad start or an amazing start it's fucking stupid to pretend that they didn't just put out a Batman trilogy less than a decade ago. But with that, it ALSO must be acknowledged that the Green Lantern film was pretty shitty at least to me and that seems to be the popular take on it..

 

Now with Marvel.  I can't count anything that was Sony or FOX so we're talking MCU.  Within the MCU I think Iron Man. Avengers, GOTG, Winter Soldier were all extremely well done. I think movies like Ant-Man and Civil War were fun and enjoyable but below that first tier.  I also think there's a few stinkers in there.  Thor: The Dark World comes to mind.  Iron Man sequels come to mind. Age of Ultron comes to mind.

 

So that's why I have them on equal footing for right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

 

Guardians is a standalone. It's a team movie, but still a stands alone from the rest of the MCU as a whole. According to Box Office Mojo it was budgeted less than IM3, not that I know how true that is. I doubt Guardians could ever go over 375

 

We don't know DCEU's ceiling yet, it's still too early to judge, or claim that MCU's is higher.

 

Yeah, I meant it's not a solo film while is is a standalone(for now).  

 

GOTG cost $220m+ to make and was down to around $196m after tax rebates (UK  film credit docs are public) .   IM3 was third in a successful series where they had justified a higher budget and there were returning salaries not just for RDJ.  Comparatively, the first IM, Thor and Cap movies were reportedly budgeted between $140-50m.  Even the sequels for Thor and Cap were reported in the $170m range, and AM was $130m.    They didn't budget GOTG like a new solo film and I think Gunn also went over budget.

Edited by TalismanRing
Link to comment
Share on other sites



3 minutes ago, Johnny Tran said:

My issue @RandomJC is that people forget The Dark Knight trilogy very quickly.  Those were WB productions. They literally JUST happened. Even if your stance is that the DCEU is off to a sluggish start or a bad start or an amazing start it's fucking stupid to pretend that they didn't just put out a Batman trilogy less than a decade ago. But with that, it ALSO must be acknowledged that the Green Lantern film was pretty shitty at least to me and that seems to be the popular take on it..

 

Now with Marvel.  I can't count anything that was Sony or FOX so we're talking MCU.  Within the MCU I think Iron Man. Avengers, GOTG, Winter Soldier were all extremely well done. I think movies like Ant-Man and Civil War were fun and enjoyable but below that first tier.  I also think there's a few stinkers in there.  Thor: The Dark World comes to mind.  Iron Man sequels come to mind. Age of Ultron comes to mind.

 

So that's why I have them on equal footing for right now.

 

No real need for that kind of language.

 

It's also easy to forget how much a hand Marvel did have in X-Men and Spider-Man. After all, Avi Arad was producer. Marvel Entertainment had a hand in those movies before they made an in house studio. So It's perfectly fair to include X-Men, Spider-Man, FF, and their sequels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Johnny Tran said:

TV Shows  - DC by an inch. Flash and Arrow etc. are just ahead of Daredevil because Agents of Shield is trash and Jessica Jones was underwhelming.

Comics - DC by a wide margin.

Animated - DC by a wide margin.

Film - Both have their +'s and -'s

 

 

 

Wasn't Arrow so bad last season that the fans changed their whole website to a Daredevil fan website? There were various petitions as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



12 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

Yeah, I meant it's not a solo film while is is a standalone(for now).  

 

GOTG cost $220m+ to make and was down to around $196m after tax rebates (UK  film credit docs are public) .   IM3 was third in a successful series where they had justified a higher budget and there were returning salaries not just for RDJ.  Comparatively, the first IM, Thor and Cap movies were reportedly budgeted between $140-50m.  Even the sequels for Thor and Cap were reported in the $170m range, and AM was $130m.    They didn't budget GOTG like a new solo film and I think Gunn also went over budget.

 

you have a source on GOTG's budget? I just pulled IM3 because it was right next to it on Box office Mojo.

 

My point was for stand alone movies though, not solo films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



36 minutes ago, Johnny Tran said:

TV Shows  - DC by an inch. Flash and Arrow etc. are just ahead of Daredevil because Agents of Shield is trash and Jessica Jones was underwhelming.

Comics - DC by a wide margin.

Animated - DC by a wide margin.

Film - Both have their +'s and -'s

 

 

 

I only like the Flash from DC and that one has a lot of those Smallville cheesy moments.  (Yes I watched every episode of Smallville)   I love the Flash as a character or I probably wouldn't like it.

With Marvel I only dislike AoS (Because of one VERY annoying character they insist on making the main focus) and season 2 of Agent Carter.  Loved season 1 Agent Carter, Daredevil, and Jessica Jones a little less.

 

Frankly both companies lost me with the comics gimmicks they pull.

 

Don't get what is supposed to be special about the animated movies.   I guess if I was 8 they would be cool.   But as a Pixar fan I watch those movies and it's pretty bad for both companies.   I was able to enjoy Flashpoint, but it still had a lot of things I had to overlook.   Any Superman/Batman encounter turns my stomach frankly.   Very tired of Superman being portrayed as an idiot to make Batman look cool.

 

Enjoy Marvel films a LOT more in general.   They vary in tone from character to character while the DCU films so far are in love with "dark" and are being bogged down with bad writing.

 

17 minutes ago, Johnny Tran said:

My issue @RandomJC is that people forget The Dark Knight trilogy very quickly.  Those were WB productions. They literally JUST happened. Even if your stance is that the DCEU is off to a sluggish start or a bad start or an amazing start it's fucking stupid to pretend that they didn't just put out a Batman trilogy less than a decade ago. But with that, it ALSO must be acknowledged that the Green Lantern film was pretty shitty at least to me and that seems to be the popular take on it..

 

Now with Marvel.  I can't count anything that was Sony or FOX so we're talking MCU.  Within the MCU I think Iron Man. Avengers, GOTG, Winter Soldier were all extremely well done. I think movies like Ant-Man and Civil War were fun and enjoyable but below that first tier.  I also think there's a few stinkers in there.  Thor: The Dark World comes to mind.  Iron Man sequels come to mind. Age of Ultron comes to mind.

 

So that's why I have them on equal footing for right now.

 

I don't see how you can count non DCU films but not count non MCU films.    If TDK counts, then so does Spider-Man 1&2 and X2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



4 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

It's also easy to forget how much a hand Marvel did have in X-Men and Spider-Man. After all, Avi Arad was producer. Marvel Entertainment had a hand in those movies before they made an in house studio. So It's perfectly fair to include X-Men, Spider-Man, FF, and their sequels.

 

That's true but it would not really change the "standings" for me as I enjoyed Spider-Man/X2  but felt FF and Daredevil were horrendous.

 

@Daxtreme I haven't finished the latest season of Arrow so that could be true I don't know

Link to comment
Share on other sites



4 minutes ago, Harpospoke said:

I don't see how you can count non DCU films but not count non MCU films.    If TDK counts, then so does Spider-Man 1&2 and X2.

 

But then so does Fantastic Four and Daredevil. :sadben:

I didn't count them because there are a bunch of cooks in the kitchen. There were reports that Marvel Entertainment had a lot of influence but there were reports they had very little influence.

 

With The Dark Knight trilogy.  That is WB. These films are ALL WB.

Edited by Johnny Tran
Link to comment
Share on other sites



2 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

 

you have a source on GOTG's budget? I just pulled IM3 because it was right next to it on Box office Mojo.

 

My point was for stand alone movies though, not solo films.

 

 

$232.3m before tax credits  (all hail the public records from the UK)


 

Quote

 

Media giant Walt Disney has revealed that the production cost of last summer’s blockbuster comic book movie Guardians of the Galaxy came to $232.3 million which was “slightly over the agreed budget.”


 

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/csylt/2015/01/27/disney-reveals-guardians-of-the-galaxy-was-over-budget-at-232-million

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



37 minutes ago, Johnny Tran said:

TV Shows  - DC by an inch. Flash and Arrow etc. are just ahead of Daredevil because Agents of Shield is trash and Jessica Jones was underwhelming.

Comics - DC by a wide margin.

Animated - DC by a wide margin.

Film - Both have their +'s and -'s

 

 

I agree in some regards but Marvel clearly wins in the film medium in terms of conversation and success. Its my opinion but I think it's fair to say a lot of people think that I'm sorry to say.

 

Animation obviously goes to DC because Marvel doesn't really do it.

 

The comics argument is pointless. DC is doing well now with rebirth but Marvel could do something in the future, it's so hard to judge with constant reboots. It could be debated for hours. 

 

I really love the Flash. I love Daredevil and Jessica Jones. Again TV is down to personal taste. Maybe Marvel has the edge in terms of quality and writing but the DC shows are fun and people enjoy them too. 

 

Its all down to personal taste at the end of the day. I'm only comparing film in terms of success and what people say.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



9 minutes ago, Johnny Tran said:

 

With The Dark Knight trilogy.  That is Nolan.

 

Even if you love DC, and love those films, Nolan had final say, not DC. If you're going to discount Fox and Sony, then you can't turn a blind eye to that Dark Knight was Nolan's baby, not DC or WBs.

Edited by RandomJC
  • Like 2
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.