|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Sept 16, 2018 2:01:14 GMT
Apart from the shows occasionally referencing vague things from the movies, there’s pretty much no connection between them. Kevin Feige has no creative involvement in any of the Netflix shows, and it’s clear that at least for the time being, the movies have no intention of referencing them. None of the Defenders were in Infinity War, nor are any of them set to be in Avengers 4, and even Spider-Man: Homecoming didn’t bother referencing the events of something like Daredevil or Jessica Jones, despite taking place in New York.
Is there really any reason for any of those shows to be considered part of the MCU at this point?
|
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Sept 16, 2018 2:12:14 GMT
Apart from the shows occasionally referencing vague things from the movies, there’s pretty much no connection between them. Kevin Feige has no creative involvement in any of the Netflix shows, and it’s clear that at least for the time being, the movies have no intention of referencing them. None of the Defenders were in Infinity War, nor are any of them set to be in Avengers 4, and even Spider-Man: Homecoming didn’t bother referencing the events of something like Daredevil or Jessica Jones, despite taking place in New York. Is there really any reason for any of those shows to be considered part of the MCU at this point? Why should they? Only the Avengers movies are the big events. So they reference them. The movie side of the MCU is basically paused until Avengers 4. So everything that happens in the Netflix shows happened before Infinity War. Spider-man not talking about something that happens in Daredevil is not a big deal because New York is a big city. They take care of their part of it.
I mean, do you talk about everything the people around you do all the time? What you're saying is like saying that the comics shouldn't be considered a universe because they don't interact or talk about what the other did all the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Sept 16, 2018 2:17:47 GMT
The interconnectedness of all of the shows across all media is a marketing tool designed to get people to consume all MCU/Marvel based productions across all channels and media.
Even the loosest connections are enough to inspire FOMO in the hardcore fan if they decide to skip a show or movie. That said, the real question is, why do people keep asking if there is a legitimate reason for the TV shows and Movies to be connected at all?
It's Marketing and, furthermore, it's working; despite the vocal minority who seem to think it's pointless.
While I can't give high marks to the execution the concept is as cool AF. Plain and simple.
If some bright, young and hyper-organized producer can get in there and create a solid pipeline for substantial tie-ins, references, and crossovers - the idea, as conceived, will be a watershed in the history of media. Right now, there is too much in the way logistically preventing the concept, in it's purest form, from being much more than token gestures.
|
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Sept 16, 2018 2:20:56 GMT
Apart from the shows occasionally referencing vague things from the movies, there’s pretty much no connection between them. Kevin Feige has no creative involvement in any of the Netflix shows, and it’s clear that at least for the time being, the movies have no intention of referencing them. None of the Defenders were in Infinity War, nor are any of them set to be in Avengers 4, and even Spider-Man: Homecoming didn’t bother referencing the events of something like Daredevil or Jessica Jones, despite taking place in New York. Is there really any reason for any of those shows to be considered part of the MCU at this point? Why should they? Only the Avengers movies are the big events. So they reference them. The movie side of the MCU is basically paused until Avengers 4. So everything that happens in the Netflix shows happened before Infinity War. Spider-man not talking about something that happens in Daredevil is not a big deal because New York is a big city. They take care of their part of it.
I mean, do you talk about everything the people around you do all the time? What you're saying is like saying that the comics shouldn't be considered a universe because they don't interact or talk about what the other did all the time.
That wasn’t even remotely what I was arguing. My point was that the movies have no intention of acknowledging the shows in any sort of capacity, whether it’s having any of the Defenders appear in the big team up movies, or giving even a passing reference to some aspect of the shows. I’m not asking for them to constantly be referencing one another. I’m simply saying that with how loose and one sided the connections between the movies and the shows are, there’s not much of a point in even saying that they’re connected. All it really does is potentially limit the kinds of stories the shows are allowed to tell. |
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Sept 16, 2018 2:29:57 GMT
The interconnectedness of all of the shows across all media is a marketing tool designed to get people to consume all MCU/Marvel based productions across all channels and media. Even the loosest connections are enough to inspire FOMO in the hardcore fan if they decide to skip a show or movie. That said, the real question is, why do people keep asking if there is a legitimate reason for the TV shows and Movies to be connected at all? It's Marketing and, furthermore, it's working; despite the vocal minority who seem to think it's pointless. While I can't give high marks to the execution the concept is as cool AF. Plain and simple. If some bright, young and hyper-organized producer can get in there and create a solid pipeline for substantial tie-ins, references, and crossovers - the idea, as conceived, will be a watershed in the history of media. Right now, there is too much in the way logistically preventing the concept, in it's purest form, from being much more than token gestures. It just sort of baffles me that people have given DC trouble for not having the movies be connected to the Arrowverse shows when Marvel has frankly shown that there really is no reason to do that from a creative standpoint. Television and film are two different mediums, and not everyone who watches the films watch the shows. Hell, just look at all the people who were confused about Darth Maul appearing in Solo. The people who kept up with the cartoons would’ve been able to perfectly understand how it is that he was alive, but the problem is that the people who watch the cartoons make up only a small minority of the people who watch the films. That goes to show that trying to have television shows and theatrical movies directly connect to one another usually only ends up confusing people. |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Sept 16, 2018 2:34:50 GMT
Why should they? Only the Avengers movies are the big events. So they reference them. The movie side of the MCU is basically paused until Avengers 4. So everything that happens in the Netflix shows happened before Infinity War. Spider-man not talking about something that happens in Daredevil is not a big deal because New York is a big city. They take care of their part of it.
I mean, do you talk about everything the people around you do all the time? What you're saying is like saying that the comics shouldn't be considered a universe because they don't interact or talk about what the other did all the time.
That wasn’t even remotely what I was arguing. My point was that the movies have no intention of acknowledging the shows in any sort of capacity, whether it’s having any of the Defenders appear in the big team up movies, or giving even a passing reference to some aspect of the shows. I’m not asking for them to constantly be referencing one another. I’m simply saying that with how loose and one sided the connections between the movies and the shows are, there’s not much of a point in even saying that they’re connected. All it really does is potentially limit the kinds of stories the shows are allowed to tell. Why should they? Only the Avengers movies are big events. Spider-man not talking about something that happens in Daredevil is not a big deal because New York is a big city. They take care of their part of it. And even if it is one-sided, there still is that connection. Again, what would be the point of Captain America randomly talking about Luke Cage when it has nothing to do with what is going on? They mentioned Avengers characters because of what happened in Avengers 1. They mention Hammertech because that is a nonStark dirty weapons manufacturer.
The only thing that limits the stories the shows can tell is budget.
|
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Sept 16, 2018 2:41:27 GMT
That wasn’t even remotely what I was arguing. My point was that the movies have no intention of acknowledging the shows in any sort of capacity, whether it’s having any of the Defenders appear in the big team up movies, or giving even a passing reference to some aspect of the shows. I’m not asking for them to constantly be referencing one another. I’m simply saying that with how loose and one sided the connections between the movies and the shows are, there’s not much of a point in even saying that they’re connected. All it really does is potentially limit the kinds of stories the shows are allowed to tell. Why should they? Only the Avengers movies are big events. Spider-man not talking about something that happens in Daredevil is not a big deal because New York is a big city. They take care of their part of it. And even if it is one-sided, there still is that connection. Again, what would be the point of Captain America randomly talking about Luke Cage when it has nothing to do with what is going on? They mentioned Avengers characters because of what happened in Avengers 1. They mention Hammertech because that is a nonStark dirty weapons manufacturer.
The only thing that limits the stories the shows can tell is budget.
You’re really missing the point of what I’m saying. What I’m saying is that the films will not acknowledge the shows in any sort of capacity. I’m not even specifically talking about references. I mean that none of the Defenders in their current incarnations are ever going to appear in the movies at all, not even in IW and its sequel, despite the fact that those movies are the grand culmination of everything in the MCU up to that point. For the record, this isn’t even a big deal for me. I don’t care to have the movies acknowledge the existence of the shows. I just don’t really understand (apart from cynical marketing reasons) why they even bother pretending that they’re all connected when there’s a good chance that Kevin Feige doesn’t even watch the shows. All that does is cause the fans to pointlessly speculate on how everything ties together. Again, this is one reason why it baffles me that anyone would give DC trouble for not having their movie and tv universes be connected. |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Sept 16, 2018 2:44:27 GMT
The interconnectedness of all of the shows across all media is a marketing tool designed to get people to consume all MCU/Marvel based productions across all channels and media. Even the loosest connections are enough to inspire FOMO in the hardcore fan if they decide to skip a show or movie. That said, the real question is, why do people keep asking if there is a legitimate reason for the TV shows and Movies to be connected at all? It's Marketing and, furthermore, it's working; despite the vocal minority who seem to think it's pointless. While I can't give high marks to the execution the concept is as cool AF. Plain and simple. If some bright, young and hyper-organized producer can get in there and create a solid pipeline for substantial tie-ins, references, and crossovers - the idea, as conceived, will be a watershed in the history of media. Right now, there is too much in the way logistically preventing the concept, in it's purest form, from being much more than token gestures. It just sort of baffles me that people have given DC trouble for not having the movies be connected to the Arrowverse shows when Marvel has frankly shown that there really is no reason to do that from a creative standpoint. Television and film are two different mediums, and not everyone who watches the films watch the shows. Hell, just look at all the people who were confused about Darth Maul appearing in Solo. The people who kept up with the cartoons would’ve been able to perfectly understand how it is that he was alive, but the problem is that the people who watch the cartoons make up only a small minority of the people who watch the films. That goes to show that trying to have television shows and theatrical movies directly connect to one another usually only ends up confusing people. I think that's more DC's fault really. When Suicide Squad was coming out, they killed them off on Arrow. Why would they do something like that? And by that same token, they cameo the back of Harley Quinn's head and voice. Then they have characters like Huntress and Batwoman and hints of a Batman, but there is no Batman in that universe? Where is the Joker? Oh, he's in the movies and Gotham... maybe. But there is a Harley Quinn. It shouldn't confuse people having 2-3 of the same character because they are in different universes.
I don't understand how Maul being alive in Solo would confuse people when Star Wars is a fantasy world.
|
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Sept 16, 2018 2:53:49 GMT
Probably gets more people to watch it than they otherwise would. I know that I would never have watched any of them had they not been part of the MCU.
I watChed that Cloak and Dagger only for that very reason even though it has next to nothing to do with the MCU.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Sept 16, 2018 2:55:40 GMT
The interconnectedness of all of the shows across all media is a marketing tool designed to get people to consume all MCU/Marvel based productions across all channels and media. Even the loosest connections are enough to inspire FOMO in the hardcore fan if they decide to skip a show or movie. That said, the real question is, why do people keep asking if there is a legitimate reason for the TV shows and Movies to be connected at all? It's Marketing and, furthermore, it's working; despite the vocal minority who seem to think it's pointless. While I can't give high marks to the execution the concept is as cool AF. Plain and simple. If some bright, young and hyper-organized producer can get in there and create a solid pipeline for substantial tie-ins, references, and crossovers - the idea, as conceived, will be a watershed in the history of media. Right now, there is too much in the way logistically preventing the concept, in it's purest form, from being much more than token gestures. It just sort of baffles me that people have given DC trouble for not having the movies be connected to the Arrowverse shows when Marvel has frankly shown that there really is no reason to do that from a creative standpoint. Television and film are two different mediums, and not everyone who watches the films watch the shows. Hell, just look at all the people who were confused about Darth Maul appearing in Solo. The people who kept up with the cartoons would’ve been able to perfectly understand how it is that he was alive, but the problem is that the people who watch the cartoons make up only a small minority of the people who watch the films. That goes to show that trying to have television shows and theatrical movies directly connect to one another usually only ends up confusing people. I can't speak to DC's approach or how their fans are responding to it as I have lost interest in most of their offerings. At a glance, I see multiple iterations of the same character in both the movies and tv. As a consumer of both mediums, that's confusing to me and somewhat exploitative. Marvel's approach at least allows for the consumption of different characters across film and television. That said, the idea that there is no creative merit in crossing over the films and TV is far from a foregone conclusion - it is, in fact, entirely debatable. The aspiration to create even a loosely connected world across film and tv is worth pursuing in my opinion. The secret to the successful execution of the concept is to allow users to consume or ignore the interconnected content as they see fit without feeling confused or as if they had missed out on something. So, I don't think anything is written in stone regarding this idea. It can work and it has been done to a lesser extent before. Star Trek the Next Generation and Deep Space 9 did it superbly during their final/starting seasons. When the Starfleet uniforms changed in the TNG movies, they also changed them on DS9. After the Dominion War in DS9, the TNG movies referenced its major engagements and heroes in the subsequent TNG movies. If you didn't know what the Dominion War was or who was involved, you could disregard the information as anecdotal world-building and move on cognitively. The hardcore fans who watched both the films and TV shows were rewarded for their loyalty with extra detail (which is synonymous with extra content). He or she also became a de facto ambassador to the uninitiated who were curious or did not want to experience FOMO. From a business point of view, this is a brand extension. People follow a brand they know and trust wherever it leads them. |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Sept 16, 2018 2:55:57 GMT
Why should they? Only the Avengers movies are big events. Spider-man not talking about something that happens in Daredevil is not a big deal because New York is a big city. They take care of their part of it. And even if it is one-sided, there still is that connection. Again, what would be the point of Captain America randomly talking about Luke Cage when it has nothing to do with what is going on? They mentioned Avengers characters because of what happened in Avengers 1. They mention Hammertech because that is a nonStark dirty weapons manufacturer.
The only thing that limits the stories the shows can tell is budget.
You’re really missing the point of what I’m saying. What I’m saying is that the films will not acknowledge the shows in any sort of capacity. I’m not even specifically talking about references. I mean that none of the Defenders in their current incarnations are ever going to appear in the movies at all, not even in IW and its sequel, despite the fact that those movies are the grand culmination of everything in the MCU up to that point. For the record, this isn’t even a big deal for me. I don’t care to have the movies acknowledge the existence of the shows. I just don’t really understand (apart from cynical marketing reasons) why they even bother pretending that they’re all connected when there’s a good chance that Kevin Feige doesn’t even watch the shows. All that does is cause the fans to pointlessly speculate on how everything ties together. Again, this is one reason why it baffles me that anyone would give DC trouble for not having their movie and tv universes be connected. Why. Should. They? Only the Avengers movies are big events. Meaning: All the other movies a small personal movies. Why would Jessica Jones randomly show up in an Iron Man movie? Iron Man shows up in Spider-man because they have that connection from Civil War (and Iron Man 2 evidently). Like I said twice already, there would be no point unless the movie directly had a point for Danny Rand to show up in a Black Panther movie.
It is like this. The movies have a cinematic universe. The tv series inhabit that universe. All of them. The Runaways and Cloak And Dagger and Agents of SHIELD, also. A cop in Cloak and Dagger mentions Misty Knight and Misty Knight mentions that cop in Luke Cage season 2.
|
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Sept 16, 2018 2:58:11 GMT
Probably gets more people to watch it than they otherwise would. I know that I would never have watched any of them had they not been part of the MCU. I watChed that Cloak and Dagger only for that very reason even though it has next to nothing to do with the MCU. The only connection is O'Reilly mentioning Misty since she is from New York. |
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Sept 16, 2018 3:00:23 GMT
You’re really missing the point of what I’m saying. What I’m saying is that the films will not acknowledge the shows in any sort of capacity. I’m not even specifically talking about references. I mean that none of the Defenders in their current incarnations are ever going to appear in the movies at all, not even in IW and its sequel, despite the fact that those movies are the grand culmination of everything in the MCU up to that point. For the record, this isn’t even a big deal for me. I don’t care to have the movies acknowledge the existence of the shows. I just don’t really understand (apart from cynical marketing reasons) why they even bother pretending that they’re all connected when there’s a good chance that Kevin Feige doesn’t even watch the shows. All that does is cause the fans to pointlessly speculate on how everything ties together. Again, this is one reason why it baffles me that anyone would give DC trouble for not having their movie and tv universes be connected. Why. Should. They? Only the Avengers movies are big events. Meaning: All the other movies a small personal movies. Why would Jessica Jones randomly show up in an Iron Man movie? Iron Man shows up in Spider-man because they have that connection from Civil War (and Iron Man 2 evidently). Like I said twice already, there would be no point unless the movie directly had a point for Danny Rand to show up in a Black Panther movie.
It is like this. The movies have a cinematic universe. The tv series inhabit that universe. All of them. The Runaways and Cloak And Dagger and Agents of SHIELD, also. A cop in Cloak and Dagger mentions Misty Knight and Misty Knight mentions that cop in Luke Cage season 2.
Again, you’re completely missing the point of what I’m saying. I specifically cited IW and its followup (which, in case you hadn’t noticed, are Avengers movies) as examples of movies that could’ve had the Defemders in them, but that don’t. I never suggested that these characters should’ve randomly shown up in BP or DS. I was specifically using the Avengers movies as examples because as you said, those are the big event movies, and we’re never going to see the Defenders in any of them. |
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Sept 16, 2018 3:03:09 GMT
It just sort of baffles me that people have given DC trouble for not having the movies be connected to the Arrowverse shows when Marvel has frankly shown that there really is no reason to do that from a creative standpoint. Television and film are two different mediums, and not everyone who watches the films watch the shows. Hell, just look at all the people who were confused about Darth Maul appearing in Solo. The people who kept up with the cartoons would’ve been able to perfectly understand how it is that he was alive, but the problem is that the people who watch the cartoons make up only a small minority of the people who watch the films. That goes to show that trying to have television shows and theatrical movies directly connect to one another usually only ends up confusing people. I can't speak to DC's approach or how their fans are responding to it as I have lost interest in most of their offerings. At a glance, I see multiple iterations of the same character in both the movies and tv. As a consumer of both mediums, that's confusing to me and somewhat exploitative. Marvel's approach at least allows for the consumption of different characters across film and television. That said, the idea that there is no creative merit in crossing over the films and TV is far from a foregone conclusion - it is, in fact, entirely debatable. The aspiration to create even a loosely connected world across film and tv is worth pursuing in my opinion. The secret to the successful execution of the concept is to allow users to consume or ignore the interconnected content as they see fit without feeling confused or as if they had missed out on something. So, I don't think anything is written in stone regarding this idea. It can work and it has been done to a lesser extent before. Star Trek the Next Generation and Deep Space 9 did it superbly during their final/starting seasons. When the Starfleet uniforms changed in the TNG movies, they also changed them on DS9. After the Dominion War in DS9, the TNG movies referenced its major engagements and heroes in the subsequent TNG movies. If you didn't know what the Dominion War was or who was involved, you could disregard the information as anecdotal world-building and move on cognitively. The hardcore fans who watched both the films and TV shows were rewarded for their loyalty with extra detail (which is synonymous with extra content). He or she also became a de facto ambassador to the uninitiated who were curious or did not want to experience FOMO. From a business point of view, this is a brand extension. People follow a brand they know and trust wherever it leads them. I don’t see how it’s exploitative. Apart from the Flash, most of the characters who headline their own television shows don’t appear in the movies. There is no Green Arrow or Dick Grayson on the film side of things. I actually think that lazily trying to cram the shows into the continuity of the films is far more exploitative. As you said, it’s done for marketing purposes, not because it’s creatively viable to do so. |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Sept 16, 2018 3:05:47 GMT
Why. Should. They? Only the Avengers movies are big events. Meaning: All the other movies a small personal movies. Why would Jessica Jones randomly show up in an Iron Man movie? Iron Man shows up in Spider-man because they have that connection from Civil War (and Iron Man 2 evidently). Like I said twice already, there would be no point unless the movie directly had a point for Danny Rand to show up in a Black Panther movie.
It is like this. The movies have a cinematic universe. The tv series inhabit that universe. All of them. The Runaways and Cloak And Dagger and Agents of SHIELD, also. A cop in Cloak and Dagger mentions Misty Knight and Misty Knight mentions that cop in Luke Cage season 2.
Again, you’re completely missing the point of what I’m saying. I specifically cited IW and it’s followup (which, in case you hadn’t noticed are Avengers movies) as examples of movies that could’ve had the Defemders in them, but that don’t. I never suggested that these characters should’ve randomly shown up in BP or DS. Again, why should they? What reason would the Defenders be in Infinity War? Daredevil is not an open character. Nobody knows that Danny Rand is the Iron Fist outside of Chinatown. Nobody knows that Jessica Jones has powers besides the people close to her and they treat it like she's a normal person. Luke Cage is the only one that is open about his powers and only Harlem trusts him... sometimes. So I ask you: Why? For a cameo appearance that is not needed? You want all the characters to just appear for a few seconds? |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Sept 16, 2018 3:10:43 GMT
I can't speak to DC's approach or how their fans are responding to it as I have lost interest in most of their offerings. At a glance, I see multiple iterations of the same character in both the movies and tv. As a consumer of both mediums, that's confusing to me and somewhat exploitative. Marvel's approach at least allows for the consumption of different characters across film and television. That said, the idea that there is no creative merit in crossing over the films and TV is far from a foregone conclusion - it is, in fact, entirely debatable. The aspiration to create even a loosely connected world across film and tv is worth pursuing in my opinion. The secret to the successful execution of the concept is to allow users to consume or ignore the interconnected content as they see fit without feeling confused or as if they had missed out on something. So, I don't think anything is written in stone regarding this idea. It can work and it has been done to a lesser extent before. Star Trek the Next Generation and Deep Space 9 did it superbly during their final/starting seasons. When the Starfleet uniforms changed in the TNG movies, they also changed them on DS9. After the Dominion War in DS9, the TNG movies referenced its major engagements and heroes in the subsequent TNG movies. If you didn't know what the Dominion War was or who was involved, you could disregard the information as anecdotal world-building and move on cognitively. The hardcore fans who watched both the films and TV shows were rewarded for their loyalty with extra detail (which is synonymous with extra content). He or she also became a de facto ambassador to the uninitiated who were curious or did not want to experience FOMO. From a business point of view, this is a brand extension. People follow a brand they know and trust wherever it leads them. I don’t see how it’s exploitative. Apart from the Flash, most of the characters who headline their own television shows don’t appear in the movies. There is no Green Arrow or Dick Grayson on the film side of things. I actually think that lazily trying to cram the shows into the continuity of the films is far more exploitative. As you said, it’s done for marketing purposes, not because it’s creatively viable to do so. You also have Cyborg. Then you have Deathstroke as a major character in Arrow lately. |
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Sept 16, 2018 3:11:27 GMT
Again, you’re completely missing the point of what I’m saying. I specifically cited IW and it’s followup (which, in case you hadn’t noticed are Avengers movies) as examples of movies that could’ve had the Defemders in them, but that don’t. I never suggested that these characters should’ve randomly shown up in BP or DS. Again, why should they? What reason would the Defenders be in Infinity War? Daredevil is not an open character. Nobody knows that Danny Rand is the Iron Fist outside of Chinatown. Nobody knows that Jessica Jones has powers besides the people close to her and they treat it like she's a normal person. Luke Cage is the only one that is open about his powers and only Harlem trusts him... sometimes. So I ask you: Why? For a cameo appearance that is not needed? You want all the characters to just appear for a few seconds? I’ve already said that I don’t care either way. I’m just saying that if you’re not going to have the films ever acknowledge the shows, why bother pretending that they’re connected? How did you miss that? Just for empahsis, I’ll repeat it again: I’m not saying that I want the movies to acknowledge the shows. It doesn’t matter to me if they do or don’t. Kevin Feige is by no means obligated to watch and acknowledge any of those shows. I just don’t understand why the shows even bother referencing the movies when the movies won’t acknowledge them back. That’s the fault of the people who make the shows, not the people who make the movies. |
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Sept 16, 2018 3:13:33 GMT
I don’t see how it’s exploitative. Apart from the Flash, most of the characters who headline their own television shows don’t appear in the movies. There is no Green Arrow or Dick Grayson on the film side of things. I actually think that lazily trying to cram the shows into the continuity of the films is far more exploitative. As you said, it’s done for marketing purposes, not because it’s creatively viable to do so. You also have Cyborg. Then you have Deathstroke as a major character in Arrow lately. Deathstroke was a major character in Arrow since the first season. That was years before Ben Affleck decided that he wanted him to be the villain of the Batman solo movie that he was originally supposed to direct. Death stroke actually was written out of the show for a while in order to make way for his movie appearance, but now that there don’t seem to be any plans for him in the movies, the show is free to use him again. |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 16, 2018 3:23:46 GMT
Apart from the shows occasionally referencing vague things from the movies, there’s pretty much no connection between them. Kevin Feige has no creative involvement in any of the Netflix shows, and it’s clear that at least for the time being, the movies have no intention of referencing them. None of the Defenders were in Infinity War, nor are any of them set to be in Avengers 4, and even Spider-Man: Homecoming didn’t bother referencing the events of something like Daredevil or Jessica Jones, despite taking place in New York. Is there really any reason for any of those shows to be considered part of the MCU at this point? Because so far the only successful franchise so far that includes movies AND TV shows is Star Trek. MCU wanted to copy Start Trek, but their connectivity between the TV shows and movies are awful and nowhere as successful as Star Trek. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Sept 16, 2018 3:38:57 GMT
I can't speak to DC's approach or how their fans are responding to it as I have lost interest in most of their offerings. At a glance, I see multiple iterations of the same character in both the movies and tv. As a consumer of both mediums, that's confusing to me and somewhat exploitative. Marvel's approach at least allows for the consumption of different characters across film and television. That said, the idea that there is no creative merit in crossing over the films and TV is far from a foregone conclusion - it is, in fact, entirely debatable. The aspiration to create even a loosely connected world across film and tv is worth pursuing in my opinion. The secret to the successful execution of the concept is to allow users to consume or ignore the interconnected content as they see fit without feeling confused or as if they had missed out on something. So, I don't think anything is written in stone regarding this idea. It can work and it has been done to a lesser extent before. Star Trek the Next Generation and Deep Space 9 did it superbly during their final/starting seasons. When the Starfleet uniforms changed in the TNG movies, they also changed them on DS9. After the Dominion War in DS9, the TNG movies referenced its major engagements and heroes in the subsequent TNG movies. If you didn't know what the Dominion War was or who was involved, you could disregard the information as anecdotal world-building and move on cognitively. The hardcore fans who watched both the films and TV shows were rewarded for their loyalty with extra detail (which is synonymous with extra content). He or she also became a de facto ambassador to the uninitiated who were curious or did not want to experience FOMO. From a business point of view, this is a brand extension. People follow a brand they know and trust wherever it leads them. I don’t see how it’s exploitative. Apart from the Flash, most of the characters who headline their own television shows don’t appear in the movies. There is no Green Arrow or Dick Grayson on the film side of things. I actually think that lazily trying to cram the shows into the continuity of the films is far more exploitative. As you said, it’s done for marketing purposes, not because it’s creatively viable to do so. We're going to have to agree to disagree and, furthermore, I think even the most casual MCU fan would also disagree. There is nothing inherently wrong with trying to create a shared universe across media channels either for creative or business reasons (or both). In my opinion, the DC approach is far more "lazy" as it requires little coordination, collaboration or accountability to hardcore fans and casual consumers. Frankly, as a devoted fan of Marvel media and publishing, I find the notion that the shared universe aspects of the MCU television shows and films should be dismantled, offensive. Why is there all this emphasis on tearing down an initiative that does not intrude on the joy of the uncommitted but, adds values for those who are? The narrative seems malicious and meanspirited in its arbitrariness. If you are a fan of the way DC/WB handles their televisions and film properties, more power to you. I enjoy the references across channels to a single universe because it is the guiding principle on which comic books are based. |
|
