THE UNMARVELOUS WEEKEND THREAD | FEATURING MELTDOWNS, ARMCHAIR ANALYSIS, AND SEXISM

[MuffinMan]

 

[ListenHunnyUrOver]

Put Grace Randolph in charge of Marvel studios and their reign will continue for 40 more years. 

[John Marston]

Love all the positive reviews for The Marvels going “it’s goofy wacky and silly” as if that’s supposed to be a selling point in 

[Eric Prime]

3 hours ago, grim22 said:

With the way the box office results are coming in for The Marvels from around the world, maybe it should have been Zaslav'd.

Really hate how anti-art users here are getting more and more. Baffling people are actually accepting of such scummy, terrible practices.

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

1 hour ago, abracadabra1998 said:

I miss those days  really I miss the days in the 90s (which I wasn’t alive for lol, reminiscing over a time before mine) where the top 10 would be mostly non-IP dramas for grown-ups

The box office was healthier overall, but in any time there are always complaints about movie quality being less than it was in "the good old days", and Hollywood causing moral decay: in the 1920s, in the 2020s.

 

The classics are remembered but a lot of stuff was just so-so, and there were big hits derided as junk by the cinephiles. Today it's comic book movies, 20-30 years ago it was some Jim Carrey or Adam Sandler comedy that was supposedly the degradation of cinema. And some things derided as bad initially get reclaimed and there's nostalgia for movies that weren't well regarded at first. It's interesting to watch it happen.

[CrashBandicoot81]

Hard to image that even in the lowest case scenario that a sequel to a billion dollar movie will be losing to Freddy Fazbear and the gang.

 

These Characters will live on. In the Hearts of Gen z children, these characters will live on. Captain Marvel however won't be living on.

Edited November 11, 2023 by CrashBandicoot81

[Torontofan]

21 minutes ago, TEE said:

The problem is that these TV-series actually have a pretty low viewership, which is one of the reasons why The Marvels has become such an epic flop. So no, the relatively good reception of (some) Marvel-series doesn't mean that the MCU is not in danger.

 

 

TV shows rarely ever get the viewership of movies.

 

I doubt more people seen loki then Thor 2 likely 

[Eric Prime]

2 hours ago, LonePirate said:

Why do these movies need to go anywhere? This sounds like a fan expectation or desire to recreate the magic in a bottle of the MCU between 2008-2019. Perhaps these movies should be allowed to exist on their own without any connection to anything. The MCU doesn’t need some overarching purpose. They are not the cinematic equivalent of a philosophical sojourn.

 

2 hours ago, abracadabra1998 said:

*Insert “THANK YOU” Michael Scott gif*
 

Just stop viewing movies as vehicles for the next big thing and instead make a film that stands and can be appreciated on its own. So disappointing to see how audiences approach modern blockbusters these days

Well here's the thing. If Phase 4/5 wasn't trying to build up to any big epic Avengers movie and everything was stand-alone, it would be fine. It would definitely be weird, considering that Marvel was giving us Thanos teases and every movie built up to the next one for the last few phases. But I would be fine with that...but that's not what we're getting.

 

We're in a weird inbetween where they are trying to build on top of each other, but it's not leading to anything satisfying. Shang-Chi and Captain Marvel were hyped up to meet up and do stuff together, but we're probably never getting that. Eternals promised Harry Styles as Thanos' brother, but we don't know when he's coming back. So we have no clue what the overarching story is.

 

But at the same time, the current batch of movies don't feel standalone or like they are an artists' vision. At best you have Sam Raimi or Ryan Coogler doing their usual flair and schtick, but then are swamped with following story arcs from TV shows or randomly introducing characters that will get their own spin-off years down the line, which I feel damages these movies and still makes them insular. I think the only couple movies that felt like it was made by a person and was allowed to be creative and fun was Shang-Chi (most successful new hero, wow look at that) and....Love and Thunder. Which at least that felt like it was made by a person...a person a shell of his former self, but that's besides the point.

 

So really, nobody is happy here. Marvel fans who like the overarching story aren't getting a satisfying narrative from film to film, and the overabundance of content makes you feel exhausted. Casual fans of the franchise who only see a couple movies get a half-baked movie that feels like endless exposition and a director's vision suppressed from corporate mandates. And the kids who weren't even born when the first Avengers came out? They have no clue what's going on, because they have to watch a million movies to understand who this cool new character is Disney.

 

So everybody is miserable and...well, this is why we're seeing the opening that we are.

[CrashBandicoot81]

16 minutes ago, Eric Danvers said:

Really hate how anti-art users here are getting more and more. Baffling people are actually accepting of such scummy, terrible practices.

You never seen the people who unironically want writers to be replaced with AI.

[DC Rich]

I just stopped by to see all the new updated MCU ranking lists.

 

 

 

[MysteryMovieMogul]

What is it with the double standard of flops? MI7 wasn't a flop because of *insert long list of ancillary profits*, but if you bring up a film people don't like, those ancillary profits can't even be brought up.

 

[fmpro]

45 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

Not a chance MI7 breaks even.
 

It was Variety or THR who reported the $100m+ loss.

 

MI7, Indiana Jones, The Marvels and The Flash are the biggest financial bombs of the year. So far. 

MI7 did double budget. Without doing hollywood math that means you will be fine down the road. Especially when its a very well recieved Cruise movie. Theaters covers most of budget and TV,VOD and streaming covers residuals, P&A ect

 

I don`t think its fair to compare this to the 3 others BO wise. Not even if Variety or THR said so. It will break even. Give or take 20 mill.

The other 3 will loose 100-200 mill

[MovieMan89]

I’m just hoping Hollywood is paying attention lately because there are some really good things that can come of these franchise implosions.
 

Up until the past few years, certain franchises were basically “too big to fail.” Hollywood knew the could keep milking tons of cash cows and even in the rare instance something really disappointed and maybe even lost a little money, it was never disastrous if you were a part of a heavy hitting franchise.

 

Now franchises like Star Wars, DC, Indy and Marvel have all experienced some of the biggest losses ever because audiences are rejecting unwanted movies in huge franchises, and execs aren’t paying attention when they make these.

 

When The Marvels was greenlit, everyone should have had enough of a finger on the pulse to know audience reception to the first was middling at best and there were tons of external momentum factors that boosted it at the box office.

 

Under that notion, the utmost of quality control should have been applied to making the sequel, ensuring that it was a marked improvement crowd pleaser this time that could spur WOM. That’s how you get a huge audience who saw the last film but was lukewarm on it to mostly return. You make a follow up only the Internet trolls can objectively describe as “trash”, or if the ideas and creative team simply aren’t cutting it… don’t make the movie (gasp)!
 

Budget control also should have been way more paid attention to given the reception of the first, as well as a very smart marketing campaign lined up. None of those things happened. And audiences have decided no franchise is too big anymore to completely reject.
 

Which again, can be a huge positive since we will inevitably stop getting lazy sequel after sequel to milk the cash cow if these kinds of bombs keep happening. Audiences are asking for better from their blockbuster these days, and it’s kind of about time too. 

[Maggie]

MI 7 is a flop.

 

My magic worked!

 

[fmpro]

MI7 recieved 71 mill from insurance company due to COVID

 

https://www.cbr.com/mission-impossible-7-insurance-payout-profitability/

 

So net budget is closer to 220 mill on a 570 mill theater gross. 
 

IT WILL MAKE MONEY

[MovieMan89]

I am also wildly curious to know what The Marvels was making in that week after Barbenheimer original slot? No way it wasn’t an even bigger massacre considering how all engulfing Barben was that month as it was. I will guess it probably opened to Blue Beetle numbers there, except with a 2x multi instead of the 3 of that movie. 

[MovieMan89]

MI7 is too close of a call for us to know for sure if it was profitable or a loss, but the point is it’s not even on the same continent of box office bombs as The Marvels if it did lose some money. No idea where this bizarre comp is coming from. 

[Boxofficerules]

[Krissykins]

20 minutes ago, fmpro said:

MI7 did double budget. Without doing hollywood math that means you will be fine down the road. Especially when its a very well recieved Cruise movie. Theaters covers most of budget and TV,VOD and streaming covers residuals, P&A ect

 

I don`t think its fair to compare this to the 3 others BO wise. Not even if Variety or THR said so. It will break even. Give or take 20 mill.

The other 3 will loose 100-200 mill

I disagree. It didn’t quite make it to double in the end. And the participations will be huge. P&A easily $150m+. 

[MysteryMovieMogul]

10 minutes ago, fmpro said:

MI7 recieved 71 mill from insurance company due to COVID

 

https://www.cbr.com/mission-impossible-7-insurance-payout-profitability/

 

So net budget is closer to 220 mill on a 570 mill theater gross. 
 

IT WILL MAKE MONEY

Or it won't make money. Who really knows for sure?

 

But it's funny how many folks here really need to to not be a flop.