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

[Eric Burnett]

Moderation

 

@Willowra For about 5 pages now, you have regurgitated the exact same hyperbole of "The Marvels not being called Captain Marvel 2 means Carol Danvers is irrelevant and Marvel doesn't care about her. This movie will bomb and we will never see Carol in another movie ever ever again. Carol is going to be the leader of The Avengers, meaning The Avengers movies will all bomb from now on".

 

It has been nothing but these posts ad nauseum. It has run its course, isn't offering anything constructive to the conversation, and frankly is starting to feel like you are baiting and trolling Captain Marvel/MCU fans. If you can't think of anything else to add that you have already said before, then I don't think it's a good idea to continue posting.

[Willowra]

13 minutes ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

Marvel clearly planned/plans to use Captain Marvel as a major character in the next big crossover. However, this is a point about the single use tax entity's name to predict plot points of future Avengers films not about the scale of Captain Marvel's role going forward. It's just not an easter egg for Avengers 5/6.

 

The problem with this argument (ignoring constant evidence it's an exaggerated point) is that 5 years means Captain Marvel 1 so we're not even going to get Avengers 5 within that time frame. Warbird Productions was created in late 2015. In 2019/2020 Spider-Man 3 was still planned to be a Kraven movie, and in 2017 DS2 was clearly signposted as a "Baron Mordo wants to get rid of magic" storyline. There's absolutely no reason to assume that Kang was planned as the next "big bad" in 2015. If he was, that clearly would have been used in marketing phase IV and we could have gotten some early easter eggs. 

 

 

If Warbird productions was created in 2019/2020, I could at least see the argument they're making an easter egg for a comic book storyline involving CM as "Warbird" but that's just not the case. 

 

 

Similarly, look at how Disney talked up Gunn having control of Cosmic marvel only to fire him less than a year later and never really hyping "cosmic marvel" as the big post Endgame concept after that. There's to my mind no evidence they were looking to make a series of multiverse movies in say 2017.

 

 

Neither you nor I can say anything with certainty about what's going to happen in Avengers movies: who is the lead? Who will lead the Avengers? Whether it would be Captain Marvel, who is leading Avengers in comics currently, Captain America, who is at the forefront of the D+ Marvel banner, or the most popular character, Spider-Man, we can only assume right now. They would have never imagined that the Marvels would do this badly. What if she already has a contract with Marvel Studios as the lead character? If she has a contract and they want to change it, then she'll demand compensation. So until they give clarity about Avengers movies, nothing can be said for certain. We can only assume.

[Willowra]

11 minutes ago, Eric Feels 22 said:

Moderation

 

@Willowra For about 5 pages now, you have regurgitated the exact same hyperbole of "The Marvels not being called Captain Marvel 2 means Carol Danvers is irrelevant and Marvel doesn't care about her. This movie will bomb and we will never see Carol in another movie ever ever again. Carol is going to be the leader of The Avengers, meaning The Avengers movies will all bomb from now on".

 

It has been nothing but these posts ad nauseum. It has run its course, isn't offering anything constructive to the conversation, and frankly is starting to feel like you are baiting and trolling Captain Marvel/MCU fans. If you can't think of anything else to add that you have already said before, then I don't think it's a good idea to continue posting.

Ok if you think that's repetitive I won't post that again lol. I've already said enough about this movie.

[PlatnumRoyce]

30 minutes ago, Willowra said:

Neither you nor I can say anything with certainty about what's going to happen in Avengers movies: who is the lead? Who will lead the Avengers?

I agree! however, we do know that "The Marvels production company name is 'Warbird'" doesn't have any casual relationship to the decision to make Avengers 5 about Kang. That's the only point I was making. It was chosen well before MCU settled on Kang as the new big bad and fits the generic naming conventions of Disney (and other studios) for film single use tax entity corps. 

Edited October 12, 2023 by PlatnumRoyce

[SpiderByte]

1 hour ago, Willowra said:

Neither you nor I can say anything with certainty about what's going to happen in Avengers movies: who is the lead? Who will lead the Avengers?

This is surprising considering your repeated insistence that The Marvels will cause Avengers to tank because she must be the main lead 

Edited October 12, 2023 by SpiderByte

[TwoMisfits]

36 minutes ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

I agree! however, we do know that "The Marvels production company name is 'Warbird'" doesn't have any casual relationship to the decision to make Avengers 5 about Kang. That's the only point I was making. It was chosen well before MCU settled on Kang as the new big bad and fits the generic naming conventions of Disney (and other studios) for film single use tax entity corps. 

 

Seeing the Daredevil news...anything in Marvel's unfilmed or even filmed plans can be changed at this point.

 

There may be no Kang Dynasty movie.  Yep, I said it.  After The Marvels releases, if it performs what it now seems is in the realm of the possible, Disney will pivot and pivot hard.  They already kinda are with the Daredevil news.

 

So, nothing can be ruled out for future movies, EVEN if they are completed.  WB set the standard now of flushing and writing off full supers movies if the track they are on is a disaster financially (or quality wise).  

 

But on future stuff, we can't KNOW anything.

 

Right now, all we know is this movie.  And after Day 2 sales, I am now willing to join the sub-$70M club (yeah, I'm dropping my "all year" mental number of $75-$85M OW b/c I underestimated how much base may have been lost for the MCU after the spring - GOTG3 may have been the outlier).  If it was allowed, I think a Flash vs The Marvels DOM OW would be a heckuva club to have,  It will be close if quality doesn't deliver here and save the OW and legs.

[M37]

For some perspective, here are the the lowest grossing first (opening) weeks of the entire 32 MCU releases (all others over $100M, with Ant-Man & Wasp next on the list at $104M)

 

28. Captain America First Avenger (2011) $91.87M

29. Eternals (2021) $91.27M

30. Thor (2011) $84.75M

31. Ant-Man (2015) $81.31M

32. The Incredible Hulk (2008) $74.92M

 

A November MCU release would be expected to make ~78% of its OWeek gross for the OW. So a $100M first week needs a ~$78M OW, $90M needs ~$70M OW, $80M needs ~$62M, and $58M or below OW likely falls short of $75M for the first week. The only two sub-$65M OW are Ant-Man ($57.2M) and Hulk ($55.4M), both of which were summer releases and benefited from summer weekdays

[Bob Train]

Disney will fast-track the X-Men reboot after this comes out (and the strike ends). It's clear from the Deadpool 3 hype that there is still interest in X-Men characters, even if interest in other Marvel characters is waning.

 

So they will fast-track it, and cut down massively on Disney+ shows, They will get over with stuff like Agatha and Echo that no one asked for, and only do stuff people care about like Loki.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if we have only 1 show a year from now on. 

 

[Shawn Robbins]

3 hours ago, Willowra said:

I hope @Shawn gives 30-40m of long-range projection. At least the movie would get some talk online by this lol

It won't be that low, but... you're not terribly far off. =\

[TwoMisfits]

21 minutes ago, Shawn said:

It won't be that low, but... you're not terribly far off. =\

 

So, you're saying it will go down to the wire - Flash OW vs Marvels OW...oh boy...

[ZeroHour]

16 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

Seeing the Daredevil news...anything in Marvel's unfilmed or even filmed plans can be changed at this point.

 

There may be no Kang Dynasty movie.  Yep, I said it.  After The Marvels releases, if it performs what it now seems is in the realm of the possible, Disney will pivot and pivot hard.  They already kinda are with the Daredevil news.

 

So, nothing can be ruled out for future movies, EVEN if they are completed.  WB set the standard now of flushing and writing off full supers movies if the track they are on is a disaster financially (or quality wise).  

 

But on future stuff, we can't KNOW anything.

 

Right now, all we know is this movie.  And after Day 2 sales, I am now willing to join the sub-$70M club (yeah, I'm dropping my "all year" mental number of $75-$85M OW b/c I underestimated how much base may have been lost for the MCU after the spring - GOTG3 may have been the outlier).  If it was allowed, I think a Flash vs The Marvels DOM OW would be a heckuva club to have,  It will be close if quality doesn't deliver here and save the OW and legs.

Yes, this is all very true. We've never seen Marvel Studios have to deal with meaningful financial failure before, so the MCU has always had the luxury of executing most of their (publicly announced) plans. There is danger though if they start making big kneejerk reactions. Looking over at DC, you can see how constantly flailing about from one person's big vision to another without sticking to anything can be pretty disastrous to maintaining a brand. Rushing an X-Men movie before it's had the proper time to develop could be a pretty huge mistake, for instance.

 

I do think the only thing though that would stop them from doing some version of Kang Dynasty/Secret Wars is if Deadpool 3 underperforms. If Deadpool 3 hits big like people expect then all of the big cameo fest movies (NWH, MoM, and DP3) will have been successful so they'll definitely want to do their big cameo fest Avengers 2-parter. That said, I don't think it's too far fetched to see them decide that Kang is damaged goods and sub in a different villain. A post credits scene where Dr. Doom or whomever slaughters the council of Kangs practically writes itself and would have the fanboys screaming in their seats.

 

On the TV side, the big canary in the coal mine I'd watch to see how drastically things may be changing is Wonder Man. That show has never been officially announced by Marvel and had only just started shooting before being derailed by the strikes. If that gets quietly canceled, we'll know how drastically they're throwing their previous TV plans out the window.

[MovieMan89]

14 hours ago, The GOAT said:

Quite Frankly, I'm not sure any of your opinions, on the title changes, character irrelevancy, bad cameos, lack of screen times, would've matter if they put out some inspirational marketing material. If you watched the trailer, it appears to be a low stakes goofy action comedy. One in which Brie Larson is not the best fit for. In my opinion, it should've been Marvel's take on the original Top Gun and Superman. The name, Captain Marvel, should elude a sense of awe and wonder. 

I’m sorry but I have never met a person anecdotally who really liked the first movie. It was “it’s fine” to “didn’t like it” among everyone I know, and it certainly wasn’t a sexism thing with many of the people I know. It was just a mediocre film and uninspired character that got a massive boost from the peak of MCU and its ties to the peak of MCU films. This sequel is paying a price it always had to pay. It’s just even worse bc the marketing has sucked and the state of the present day MCU. 

[Valonqar]

2 hours ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

The MCU really has fallen hard if needs to stay away from other remotely big films. That's my big take away from your theory. 

 

yes because it's in decline phase. you can't act like you are in peak when you are in decline. Mind you, decline doesn't mean dead or finished, it simply means no more rise and no more peak. there may be an occasional isolated event like NWH but not consistent dominance.

[M37]

21 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

So, you're saying it will go down to the wire - Flash OW vs Marvels OW...oh boy...

Honestly, I think the bar right now somewhere is around Transformers ($61M), but if you wanted to be creative, could make a Marvels vs Narnia: Price Caspian (#235 all-time) OW Club

[MovieMan89]

It’s a shame Black Widow wasn’t properly leveraged as a film sub-franchise header back when it would have made more sense. Same for them blowing Wanda’s massive potential after WV. Female characters have definitely not been handled the best in this franchise. 

[Valencia]

1 hour ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

Seeing the Daredevil news...anything in Marvel's unfilmed or even filmed plans can be changed at this point.

 

There may be no Kang Dynasty movie.  Yep, I said it.  After The Marvels releases, if it performs what it now seems is in the realm of the possible, Disney will pivot and pivot hard.  They already kinda are with the Daredevil news.

 

So, nothing can be ruled out for future movies, EVEN if they are completed.  WB set the standard now of flushing and writing off full supers movies if the track they are on is a disaster financially (or quality wise).  

 

But on future stuff, we can't KNOW anything.

 

Right now, all we know is this movie.  And after Day 2 sales, I am now willing to join the sub-$70M club (yeah, I'm dropping my "all year" mental number of $75-$85M OW b/c I underestimated how much base may have been lost for the MCU after the spring - GOTG3 may have been the outlier).  If it was allowed, I think a Flash vs The Marvels DOM OW would be a heckuva club to have,  It will be close if quality doesn't deliver here and save the OW and legs.

They should definitely scrap the whole Kang thing imo.

 

Between Majors controversies and his big screen debut being a dud there’s no reason to stay on that course. Nobody is excited about the character.

 

He already lost all credibility being beaten by Ant-Man. Just have the rest of them get killed off in Loki and replace him with Doom/Magneto or something.

Edited October 12, 2023 by Valencia

[YM!]

Tbh if they wanted to build Kang up. Why not end Phase 4 with an Avengers movie facing him? Have him get his ass handed maybe he teams up with an impromptu Masters of Evil, the new faces of the MCU are shown but we are given something the MCU hasn’t had aside from Loki and Thanos - a reoccurring villain. The appeal of Kang is that he literally has time to win. He fucks up due to one thing, he comes back next time with a bigger weapon or better plot. So when he gets his big win, he earns the title of Kang the Conqueror.

[BadOlCatSylvester]

1 hour ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

Seeing the Daredevil news...anything in Marvel's unfilmed or even filmed plans can be changed at this point.

 

There may be no Kang Dynasty movie.  Yep, I said it.  After The Marvels releases, if it performs what it now seems is in the realm of the possible, Disney will pivot and pivot hard.  They already kinda are with the Daredevil news.

 

So, nothing can be ruled out for future movies, EVEN if they are completed.  WB set the standard now of flushing and writing off full supers movies if the track they are on is a disaster financially (or quality wise).  

 

But on future stuff, we can't KNOW anything.

 

Right now, all we know is this movie.  And after Day 2 sales, I am now willing to join the sub-$70M club (yeah, I'm dropping my "all year" mental number of $75-$85M OW b/c I underestimated how much base may have been lost for the MCU after the spring - GOTG3 may have been the outlier).  If it was allowed, I think a Flash vs The Marvels DOM OW would be a heckuva club to have,  It will be close if quality doesn't deliver here and save the OW and legs.

I don't think they'll go that far. If anything, I feel like Secret Wars will be the one that bites it if/when shit hits the fan. They'll likely radically rework Kang Dynasty to scale it down to the level of Civil War, and use it to end the Kang storyline for good and clear the stage for the X-Men and Fantastic Four.

[SpiderByte]

I think people are overestimating drastic changes that they think will occur as a result of this movie. They didn't radically flip the table over when Eternals underperformed so I don't see why they would for this. The only difference is the assumption that Carol is meant to be a main lead in Avengers, which has never reported to be the case. The odds of her being in it are about the same as everyone else being in it. Hell Majors might not be in it. The only characters with probable certainty of being in it is Sam Wilson and Shang-Chi, and even then who knows who's actually the main lead. It's too early to figure out.

 

People are gonna pin the likely inevitable strike delays on this but I don't think, say, suddenly Thunderbolts gets scrapped. Theyll brush off the dust and focus on the next movie. The changes will mostly be internal, probably marketing.

 

Something people forget: Marvel is not as reactionary as say DC is. When Quantumania was poorly received they didn't instantly announce that Kang Dynasty was cancelled, they just moved in to Guardians 3.

[Deathlife]

3 hours ago, Shawn said:

It won't be that low, but... you're not terribly far off. =\

 

God damn, that's an oooooofff.

 

For a sequel to a billion dollar grosser, that's pretty horrible.