|
Post by scabab on Sept 30, 2019 13:04:48 GMT
And finally movies based on the World Wars have never had a strong appeal overseas. That's why even though Captain America made about as much as Thor and Ant-man in US, overseas it made a huge amount less. That even goes back to 1998, when even though Saving Private Ryan was bigger than Armageddon, the latter made a lot more worldwide. This in particular is quite true. I remember the disappointment in Dunkirk's overseas performance because it made the same amount as Interstellar domestically but worldwide it made $150 million less even though it came out three years later and the market had grown. Hackshaw Ridge made more in US than all overseas countries combined except China. World War movies have never done that well overseas. Captain America only did better than the Hulk movie. Again it made the same amount of money as Rise of the Planet of the Apes domestically but then $110 million less worldwide.
|
|
|
Post by Groovy Rachel on Sept 30, 2019 13:23:04 GMT
Ok so those are mostly good things that are to its credit. I’m glad it has familiar characters and WA not having much connection is a negative. Also, does that account for $400-$500 million? Don’t forget that ww had a big hype train and CM was wrongly and insanely attacked. It couldn’t be even a little bit because Captain Marvel was actually a really good film? Well it's not all to it's credit, it's to Endgames credit as well and the market place for being so dry when Captain Marvel came out. This year in particular had a terrible start, it was the worst first two months at the theatres in many years. Did all those things specifically add that much? I don't know but it would have added a huge amount. The two movies made practically the same amount in America, so the difference just comes down to overseas but like I said that's because World War movies don't have the same appeal there. Captain Marvel was never a "really good film" anyway, it was just pretty decent at best but that wouldn't really be the factor because it's not like overseas audiences would have enjoyed it far more in relation to America. It's just a matter of appeal. Wonder Woman didn't have the same worldwide appeal just like Captain America didn't. Because that's not the same thing. Captain Marvel released less than two months before Endgame. People knew that Captain Marvel was going to be in Endgame. So the movie benefited from that because people wanted to know about the character prior to Endgames release. Ant-man though came afterwards and was he not involved with the Avengers movies. Had the first movie come out before Age of Ultron and people knew he was going to be in that movie then of course it would have done better. Likewise if Captain Marvel wasn't in Endgame and had come out next March then it would have done much worse.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Sept 30, 2019 13:29:02 GMT
And finally movies based on the World Wars have never had a strong appeal overseas. That's why even though Captain America made about as much as Thor and Ant-man in US, overseas it made a huge amount less. That even goes back to 1998, when even though Saving Private Ryan was bigger than Armageddon, the latter made a lot more worldwide. This in particular is quite true. I remember the disappointment in Dunkirk's overseas performance because it made the same amount as Interstellar domestically but worldwide it made $150 million less even though it came out three years later and the market had grown. You could also say it was a disappointment in the US as well. It did make nearly 65% of it's money overseas. Comparison to Interstellar is problematic - a star studded Sci Fi follow up to the Dark Knight trilogy vs a non-star cast story about a retreat not many had heard about during a war with no US involvement.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Sept 30, 2019 13:38:49 GMT
Oh it was. I genuinely would like to know what was so "woke" about Captain Marvel The slight irony being that Wonder Woman was the character shoe horned into BvS to boost her own movie. That she was the best thing about BvS I'm sure helped raise interest in her film.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Sept 30, 2019 13:51:03 GMT
Ok so those are mostly good things that are to its credit. I’m glad it has familiar characters and WA not having much connection is a negative. Also, does that account for $400-$500 million? Don’t forget that ww had a big hype train and CM was wrongly and insanely attacked. It couldn’t be even a little bit because Captain Marvel was actually a really good film? Well it's not all to it's credit, it's to Endgames credit as well and the market place for being so dry when Captain Marvel came out. This year in particular had a terrible start, it was the worst first two months at the theatres in many years. Did all those things specifically add that much? I don't know but it would have added a huge amount. The two movies made practically the same amount in America, so the difference just comes down to overseas but like I said that's because World War movies don't have the same appeal there. Captain Marvel was never a "really good film" anyway, it was just pretty decent at best but that wouldn't really be the factor because it's not like overseas audiences would have enjoyed it far more in relation to America. It's just a matter of appeal. Wonder Woman didn't have the same worldwide appeal just like Captain America didn't. Because that's not the same thing. Captain Marvel released less than two months before Endgame. People knew that Captain Marvel was going to be in Endgame. So the movie benefited from that because people wanted to know about the character prior to Endgames release. Ant-man though came afterwards and was he not involved with the Avengers movies. Had the first movie come out before Age of Ultron and people knew he was going to be in that movie then of course it would have done better. Likewise if Captain Marvel wasn't in Endgame and had come out next March then it would have done much worse. Meh, that is just being dismissive. I could sit here and name all the advantages WW had like being billed as this first for women, remember all the hype about how DC had beat them to it? And this was DC turning the corner and going to have a truly great film. Gal was forced into BVS so that they could hype her up, and you were just saying how you didn’t like Marvel doing that. The point is you’re going to give anything else you can credit no matter how much CM won by. The objective truth is because it’s a damn good film, and yes it’s also because Marvel is the better product as a whole. At least BVS was so bad everybody had to admit it, but WE is one of those people to conceded on. I get it. I’m not really sure what point you’re trying to make aside from that but if you don’t want to be convinced I’ll leave you to it.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Sept 30, 2019 13:53:20 GMT
You think people didn't know Captain Marvel was a Marvel film? They didn't have Marvel Studios all over the advertising? Nick Fury didn't even look like himself in that film, I highly doubt a significant number of people went to see CM simply because Fury was in the trailers. I would not count on masses of people being too aware of it specifically being a Marvel Studios movie that was part of the MCU had Nick Fury not been a part of it. There are plenty of other Marvel movies too and while we and the internet crowd would likely be familiar, average joe on the street in China probably wouldn't. No but they did have all those very obvious posters instead. So they did push it as being part of that whole franchise.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 30, 2019 14:06:12 GMT
You think people didn't know Captain Marvel was a Marvel film? They didn't have Marvel Studios all over the advertising? Nick Fury didn't even look like himself in that film, I highly doubt a significant number of people went to see CM simply because Fury was in the trailers. I would not count on masses of people being too aware of it specifically being a Marvel Studios movie that was part of the MCU had Nick Fury not been a part of it. There are plenty of other Marvel movies too and while we and the internet crowd would likely be familiar, average joe on the street in China probably wouldn't. No but they did have all those very obvious posters instead. So they did push it as being part of that whole franchise. I didn't say Ant-Man wasn't pushed as part of the franchise, I said Falcon's appearance wasn't a box office draw. If it was supposed to be, it worked about as well as I would expect, given Ant-Man's low (by Marvel standards) BO revenue. I disagree with this 100%. Every trailer starts off with a Marvel logo. It's a superhero with the word Marvel in her name for Christ's sake. In fact I'd go a step farther and say the inexplicable box office success of a shit film like Venom is because casual fans in global markets saw the Marvel logo and assumed it was a Marvel film. And as I said earlier, if using the same characters throughout the franchise in order to promote continuity is a gimmick, I'll take that over 5 different Jokers and a universe reboot every time out of the gate.
|
|
|
Post by Groovy Rachel on Sept 30, 2019 14:22:26 GMT
Meh, that is just being dismissive. No it isn't, Captain Marvel did benefit from Endgame. It's box office increased on the weekend and then weekdays just prior to Endgame which obviously never happens ordinarily. That never happened, it wasn't the first for women, it wasn't even one of the first three. Even Googling that only brings up two links and one just says it's the first since 2005. Remember all the hype? There was none over that, even as a woman myself who wanted this for a while...I never heard anything about it being the first never mind to an extent there was any kind of hype for it. If anything I heard a lot more about Captain Marvel being the first in regards to the MCU. Yeah and that was the same mistake there as well. It's not like the issue I have with it is exclusive to Marvel, I don't like it in general. Well you asked me the question, you asked me why it made $300 million more and I gave you the reasons why. That it was released shortly before and was tied to what is now the biggest movie of all time is obviously a major factor, that's just common sense. That it had no competition at all whereas Wonder Woman had a lot of competition right in the middle of summer would again be common sense. That World War movies lack international appeal is a fact that can be seen with other movies, including the other superhero World War movie Captain America. So that's why. It didn't make all that much money more because it was better than Wonder Woman or anything because it's generally regarded as being the inferior movie. Aquaman also made $300 million more than Wonder Woman, it made more than Captain Marvel too but that also is inferior to Wonder Woman.
|
|
Caesium137
Sophomore
I am simply not there
@cobalt
Posts: 654
Likes: 305
|
Post by Caesium137 on Sept 30, 2019 14:37:30 GMT
The slight irony being that Wonder Woman was the character shoe horned into BvS to boost her own movie. That she was the best thing about BvS I'm sure helped raise interest in her film. She was not shoehorned into BvS, they had planned to have the trinity on screen for the movie. There were many things better than her in BvS so it wouldn't have impacted her solo movie. The impact would have been negative if anything.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Sept 30, 2019 14:40:17 GMT
Of course CM benefited from Endgame, but we are talking a $400 million difference. It’s pretty hard to claim the film was significantly worse and chalk it all up to outside factors. So I completely disagree with you doing so
Also there was clearly hype about it being the first female superhero film. Obviously it wasn’t, but it was hyped that way anyway.
And yes I asked for your take on WW but I think everything you said about it is completely backwards and the same for CM, you’re very dismissive of what it accomplished. It’s clearly the better film IMO.
So I’ll leave it to you to pick 1 we can go through WW talking about what you think was so good 2 we can go through CM and I can tell you what was so good
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Sept 30, 2019 14:44:28 GMT
The slight irony being that Wonder Woman was the character shoe horned into BvS to boost her own movie. That she was the best thing about BvS I'm sure helped raise interest in her film. . There were many things better than her in BvS There really was not Not really...her appearance in BvS made me more interested in seeing her solo outing for definite
|
|
|
Post by Groovy Rachel on Sept 30, 2019 14:48:02 GMT
You keep changing your tune, I already said and explained why I thought Wonder Woman was good and why it was better than Captain Marvel. So then you didn't want to know about that convo and asked about the box office. Now I've explained that to you and now you don't want to talk about that convo either and you've shifted back to the quality aspect again.
If you think it's that good then that's your own individual opinion but of course Wonder Woman is generally regarded as the better film. Captain Marvel ain't a bad movie, I said it's pretty decent, it's just not as good as Wonder Woman, it's not a big deal.
If any superhero movie is the most overrated movie of all time then it's clearly Black Panther as it sits at #1 on Rotten Tomatoes and was nominated for Best Picture and that wasn't even the best superhero movie last year.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Sept 30, 2019 14:49:07 GMT
I disagree with this 100%. Every trailer starts off with a Marvel logo. It's a superhero with the word Marvel in her name for Christ's sake. In fact I'd go a step farther and say the inexplicable box office success of a shit film like Venom is because casual fans in global markets saw the Marvel logo and assumed it was a Marvel film. There's a big difference between the average joe knowing that a movie is a Marvel movie and knowing that it's a Marvel Studios movie that's connected to the rest of the MCU. You can go on Google and see that questions like "Is Captain Marvel Part of the MCU" or "Is Venom part of the MCU" are amongst the most searched for.
|
|
Caesium137
Sophomore
I am simply not there
@cobalt
Posts: 654
Likes: 305
|
Post by Caesium137 on Sept 30, 2019 14:53:10 GMT
There were many things better than her in BvS Ben Affleck and Henry Cavill were both better. Gal is stunning looks wise and I'm sure that played a bigger role in the anticipation for her solo movie than a compelling arc of her in BvS.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Sept 30, 2019 14:56:27 GMT
You responded to me unprovoked, I guess to defend WW but you haven’t said anything convincing. And you don’t want to listen to criticism. I changed because it was clear you had not made a single point I agreed with so I moved on. If you want to think it’s a better film, more power to you. Most of it doesn’t make much sense, it’s derivative, and she gives up and cries about failing, but if that’s your thing ok.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Sept 30, 2019 14:59:24 GMT
If any superhero movie is the most overrated movie of all time then it's clearly Black Panther as it sits at #1 on Rotten Tomatoes and was nominated for Best Picture and that wasn't even the best superhero movie last year. Yeah that's probably true. Black Panther was a good movie but it should not be #1 and shouldn't have been the first superhero movie to be nominated for best picture over a other bunch of movies that were better than it. Like Logan in particular. It's not even in the best 5 of the MCU movies, Winter Soldier was better than Black Panther and that was never even considered for any kind of nomination. Looking at the Top 10 though, Thor Ragnarok...that's good too but #6? No way. Shazam at #8? I'll never know how that happened but that's two places higher than The Dark Knight. Winter Soldier is down at #23.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 30, 2019 15:02:38 GMT
I disagree with this 100%. Every trailer starts off with a Marvel logo. It's a superhero with the word Marvel in her name for Christ's sake. In fact I'd go a step farther and say the inexplicable box office success of a shit film like Venom is because casual fans in global markets saw the Marvel logo and assumed it was a Marvel film. There's a big difference between the average joe knowing that a movie is a Marvel movie and knowing that it's a Marvel Studios movie that's connected to the rest of the MCU. You can go on Google and see that questions like "Is Captain Marvel Part of the MCU" or "Is Venom part of the MCU" are amongst the most searched for. I covered this already. Casual fans will assume it's a part of the same universe from the logo alone. Their ignorance benefits films like Venom. If "Is Captain Marvel Part of the MCU" is a common search, then how is it Fury is drawing the audience in? Clearly his presence wasn't enough of a draw if people are having to google it to find out.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Sept 30, 2019 15:04:49 GMT
There were many things better than her in BvS (no I didn't)Ben Affleck and Henry Cavill were both better. Gal is stunning looks wise and I'm sure that played a bigger role in the anticipation for her solo movie than a compelling arc of her in BvS. Well from my point of view...WW's arrival on screen with that theme...it was the only shining light in a shit smog of a movie.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 30, 2019 15:10:44 GMT
If any superhero movie is the most overrated movie of all time then it's clearly Black Panther as it sits at #1 on Rotten Tomatoes and was nominated for Best Picture and that wasn't even the best superhero movie last year. Yeah that's probably true. Black Panther was a good movie but it should not be #1 and shouldn't have been the first superhero movie to be nominated for best picture over a other bunch of movies that were better than it. Like Logan in particular. It's not even in the best 5 of the MCU movies, Winter Soldier was better than Black Panther and that was never even considered for any kind of nomination. Looking at the Top 10 though, Thor Ragnarok...that's good too but #6? No way. Shazam at #8? I'll never know how that happened but that's two places higher than The Dark Knight. Winter Soldier is down at #23. Because you're using Rotten Tomatoes as a barometer. First of all it's a garbage site. Second of all, it's impossible to rank superhero movies because they're completely different films with different intentions. Is Shazam trying to do the same thing The Dark Knight is trying to do? Does Ant-Man have the same theme as The Winter Soldier? Critics aren't comparing Shazam to Black Panther when they rate it, they're rating it on its own merit based on their expectations of what it was trying to accomplish as a film. Therefore, to go back after the fact and 'rank' BP ahead of TDK or Shazam makes no sense.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Sept 30, 2019 15:16:54 GMT
Yeah that's probably true. Black Panther was a good movie but it should not be #1 and shouldn't have been the first superhero movie to be nominated for best picture over a other bunch of movies that were better than it. Like Logan in particular. It's not even in the best 5 of the MCU movies, Winter Soldier was better than Black Panther and that was never even considered for any kind of nomination. Looking at the Top 10 though, Thor Ragnarok...that's good too but #6? No way. Shazam at #8? I'll never know how that happened but that's two places higher than The Dark Knight. Winter Soldier is down at #23. Because you're using Rotten Tomatoes as a barometer. First of all it's a garbage site. Second of all, it's impossible to rank superhero movies because they're completely different films with different intentions. Is Shazam trying to do the same thing The Dark Knight is trying to do? Does Ant-Man have the same theme as The Winter Soldier? Critics aren't comparing Shazam to Black Panther when they rate it, they're rating it on its own merit based on their expectations of what it was trying to accomplish as a film. Therefore, to go back after the fact and 'rank' BP ahead of TDK or Shazam makes no sense. I agree in principle you can’t just take the raw numbers and act like that’s all there is to it and it’s an apples to apples comparison. However it’s not a garbage site. RT is pretty damn accurate to its stated goal. It’s pretty rare that I ever think they’re way off.
|
|