The Marvels | November 10, 2023 | Abandon All Hope Ye Who Enter

[ChipDerby]

4 minutes ago, SpiderByte said:

Ehh I think the Carol/Monica/Kamala dynamic is much more vital. If that doesn't work then the whole movie doesn't. Like Ronan with the first Guardians, the real important part is the heroes.

 

GOTG1 had a hook. Eternals is one of the only other MCU movies that didn't have a hook, and look how that turned out. (granted I think this movie will be FAR better than that, I'm strictly talking for box office purposes)

[ThomasNicole]

It’s funny that these endless arguments about “the awful TV shows hurted the brand or not” keep being discussed when even Bob Iger already said it did 

 

I don’t think the world is crumbling, i certainly don’t think this will be a colossal failure if it’s well received 

 

But you know, GOTG3 needed absolutely stellar reception to ended up close to Vol 2. It’s obvious there’s a cultural shift in how people relate to these projects, and certainly the excess of things is part of it.

[Valonqar]

3 minutes ago, ZeroHour said:

When a brand is more popular, bad films can still do well. The Marvels doesn't have that luxury. More importantly though is the ceiling. Because the brand is in a wobbly place, even if this is a great film, it probably can't hit $800 million (I don't buy that Captain Marvel is an unpopular character, but I also don't buy that she's as popular as the Guardians or Black Panther, so those movies show the very top of what an MCU movie can do right now outside of the Avengers or Spiderman).

 

Yep. Marvel had tons of not so great movies that got anything between a pass enough to avoid rotten territory to laughable overpraise because the brand was strong and the studio had a great relationship with fans and critics. That changed after Endgame. perhaps many fans felt the series came to a natural end, perhaps oversaturation and D+ devalued the brand and made it not special anymore, perhaps covid changed habits, but fact is that movies that followed weren't really worse yet pass was no more given like candies. I mean, when critics who worshipped Zhao couldn't muster passable reviews for her turkey, which was unheard of in Golden Age of Marvel for shitty movies not by critic's darlings, you know that it isn't just movies themselves but that something changed on a different level. And fans even earlier than critics started to fall out of love. 

[ZeroHour]

The hook is definitely the body swapping and now we have to be a team thing. The MCU has never depended much on strong villains.

[ZattMurdock]

Just now, ChipDerby said:

 

GOTG1 had a hook. Eternals is one of the only other MCU movies that didn't have a hook, and look how that turned out. (granted I think this movie will be FAR better than that, I'm strictly talking for box office purposes)

I think the counter point to your argument is that barely anyone knew who Ronan was either. I think the problem with the villain here is that well, Vol. 1 killed an excellent villain that could play an actual role here, given Captain Marvel’s ending and how she owned Ronan there. 
 

With that said, an interesting thing that can be done is to build up Dar-Benn to become a threat bigger than Ronan. And since that was resolved on Vol. 1 with a dance-off, it could be done. I agree with @SpiderByte that the nega bands swapping gimmick plus having a diverse cast of superheroines is the actual selling point for The Marvels.

[Arlborn]

1 hour ago, ZattMurdock said:

That’s the first time I think that, and it’s clearly not just me that sees it this way. I actually think that the harsh criticism online for films and shows that are actually great or ‘eh it’s fine’ muddles things. What makes this unlike Iron Fist and let’s say some of the Agents of SHIELD mid seasons where Nick Fury shows up but that wasn’t deemed as canon afterwards is that this is very much MCU proper. That’s the real question here, imho. 

 

Best Marvel show ever by the way. There, I said it.

 

 

Edited July 27, 2023 by Arlborn

[ZattMurdock]

4 minutes ago, ThomasNicole said:

It’s funny that these endless arguments about “the awful TV shows hurted the brand or not” keep being discussed when even Bob Iger already said it did 

 

I don’t think the world is crumbling, i certainly don’t think this will be a colossal failure if it’s well received 

 

But you know, GOTG3 needed absolutely stellar reception to ended up close to Vol 2. It’s obvious there’s a cultural shift in how people relate to these projects, and certainly the excess of things is part of it.

Iger also said that the actors demands are unrealistic. I don’t know why we should put more weight to whatever Iger thinks about Disney’s current slate than what he thinks about the actors and writers want. 

[toutvabien]

19 minutes ago, ZattMurdock said:

That’s one of the main issues I have with the online discourse of the MCU. Vol. 3 is an excellent MCU film, but it’s also a sequel to a film that is not really tied to the MCU as a whole mega event, like No Way Home and Multiverse of Madness are. It’s performing like you’d expect from a Guardians sequel, but yet the expectations is that it should have opened higher than it did.

 

And my question is why? I love Vol. 3, but why it should have opened bigger than it did? It’s a brilliant MCU film, sure, but what was the hook here that would mean it should have opened bigger? What is the hook? Because I sincerely don’t see it. Vol. 3’s sin isn’t that the MCU is in decline. It’s that a brilliant sequel for a film that it took a bit longer than it should.

 

 

It opened 20% less than its direct predecessor, which is a record for a MCU follow up. Even if Vol.2  hit a domestic ceiling for the Guardians as a team, that's still a notable drop, even more so when taking into account inflation since 2017.

[ZattMurdock]

2 minutes ago, Arlborn said:

 

Best Marvel show ever by the way. There, I said it.

 

 

I dropped out after the first season, but it was just to illustrate how the whole MCU shows are affecting the films narrative, which doesn’t make sense when we look how busy Marvel TV was during the 10s as well. I don’t have anything against AoS.

[ChipDerby]

8 minutes ago, ZeroHour said:

The hook is definitely the body swapping and now we have to be a team thing. The MCU has never depended much on strong villains.

 

MCU does have weak villains, yes! But they've almost entirely countered that with having a star in the villain role. Typically. Or at least make the villain menacing in the trailers.

[SpiderByte]

1 minute ago, ChipDerby said:

 

MCU does have weak villains, yes! But they've almost entirely countered that with having a star in the villain role. Typically. Or at least make the villain menacing in the trailers.

I dont think villains are nearly as important as the heroes in cases like this. When you have a big team of heroes it's fine for the villain to be less complex. Kamala dealing with meeting her lifelong hero for the first time is much more important to the story than the bad guy 

[Arlborn]

10 minutes ago, ZeroHour said:

The hook is definitely the body swapping and now we have to be a team thing. The MCU has never depended much on strong villains.

The body swapping hook is such a fun hook though! If it's done well it can have so much fun potential! Please please I hope they really go crazy with that, that is literally what makes this movie a must-see for me! Such a fun concept.

 

Well that and Ms. Marvel, I absolutely adore her.

[ZattMurdock]

1 minute ago, toutvabien said:

It opened 20% less than its direct predecessor, which is a record for a MCU follow up. Even if Vol.2  hit a domestic ceiling for the Guardians as a team, that's still a notable drop, even more so when taking into account inflation since 2017.

I think the issue here is that the film came too late. And I blame the pandemic and Horn’s decision to fire Gunn on that. Not really on a Marvel Studios decline. 
 

Let’s say that The Marvels performs well, Deadpool 3, then Captain America: Brave New World and Thunderbolts blow up. What will be the narrative, that the ‘Marvel Studios are back’? Because it doesn’t make sense to me. I see real hooks with The Marvels (team up of superheroines), Deadpool 3 (team up with Wolverine) and Captain America: Brave New World (an Afro-American Captain America has more potential than I think people are realizing right now). I love Vol. 3. I think it’s one of the best trilogies ever made in the superhero genre. But I never saw the actual hook that would result in opening bigger than Vol. 2. If it had a bigger connection to the MCU as a whole and starred Kang, then I could see it as a decline. But High Evolutionary was a break out villain, it’s the opposite situation of Quantumania imho.

[Arlborn]

4 minutes ago, ZattMurdock said:

I dropped out after the first season, but it was just to illustrate how the whole MCU shows are affecting the films narrative, which doesn’t make sense when we look how busy Marvel TV was during the 10s as well. I don’t have anything against AoS.

Season 1?! Dude. Duuuuuuuuude. You watch so much average superhero stuff and yet you missed out on the incredible AOS seasons from season 3 onward???? Duuuuuuuuuuuuude, pqp hein! Best spy thriller plot in all of MCU, best time travel plot in all of MCU, best alternative reality plot in all of MCU, best AI plot in all of MCU and you missed it all?! Oh my oh my.

 

[ZattMurdock]

1 minute ago, Arlborn said:

Season 1?! Dude. Duuuuuuuuude. You watch so much average superhero stuff and yet you missed out on the incredible AOS seasons from season 3 onward???? Duuuuuuuuuuuuude, pqp hein! Best spy thriller plot in all of MCU, best time travel plot in all of MCU, best alternative reality plot in all of MCU, best AI plot in all of MCU and you missed it all?! Oh my oh my.

 

I will eventually get around that then lol

[SpiderByte]

Probably the worst thing after The Dark Knight is the insistence from some that the villain has to outshine the hero in terms of performance etc when that's absolutely not true. I'd much rather see the actual hero get development than build up a huge villain and the hero gets sidelined, like in Quantumania.

[ZattMurdock]

Just now, SpiderByte said:

Probably the worst thing after The Dark Knight is the insistence from some that the villain has to outshine the hero in terms of performance etc when that's absolutely not true. I'd much rather see the actual hero get development than build up a huge villain and the hero gets sidelined, like in Quantumania.

I agree with this, if anything the MCU proved that you really need stronger fleshed out main characters than villains, unless you are leading to a threat like Thanos. 

[AMC Theaters Enjoyer]

I don’t expect this movie to do as poorly as some people think unless it gets a Quantumania-level reception. If it gets at least a decent response, Worst case scenario I see is 575-600M.

 

I do however think that November in general is risking to be too packed and it can risk becoming another June where everything is tripping over each other since audiences are more picky. That goes for every movie in November, from Hunger Games (which I actually think will do well) to Napoleon. Dune was smart to be the first one out of the gate (as of now, knock on wood). 
 

I also think Marvel did a poor job capitalizing on the initial hype Captain Marvel had from her first movie. That’s not exactly this movie’s fault, that’s more on how she was underutilized in Endgame and disappeared after save for the occasional cameo.

[SpiderByte]

5 minutes ago, ZattMurdock said:

I agree with this, if anything the MCU proved that you really need stronger fleshed out main characters than villains, unless you are leading to a threat like Thanos. 

Even with Thanos it's true, because Thanos is the "hero" of Infinity War. He goes on the quest, makes the sacrifices, etc, and as a result the Avengers (especially Caps team) don't have a ton in the way of development or focus, at least compared to Thanos.

[ZattMurdock]

2 minutes ago, AMC Theaters Enjoyer said:

I don’t expect this movie to do as poorly as some people think unless it gets a Quantumania-level reception. If it gets at least a decent response, Worst case scenario I see is 575-600M.

 

I do however think that November in general is risking to be too packed and it can risk becoming another June where everything is tripping over each other since audiences are more picky. That goes for every movie in November, from Hunger Games (which I actually think will do well) to Napoleon. Dune was smart to be the first one out of the gate (as of now, knock on wood). 
 

I also think Marvel did a poor job capitalizing on the initial hype Captain Marvel had from her first movie. That’s not exactly this movie’s fault, that’s more on how she was underutilized in Endgame and disappeared after save for the occasional cameo.

Excellent points.
 

I do think that either The Marvels or Dune 2 are moving, if not both of them. The strike makes a perfect excuse for them to avoid what happened last June. The market isn’t ready for too many films fighting for their attention, just like this Summer has proved. Using Barbie and Oppenheimer as an excuse to say ‘everything is fine’ or ‘that’s the marketing’s fault’ doesn’t cut it.