|
|
Post by Jerk on Feb 20, 2017 20:57:51 GMT
At some point during phase 4 would be my guess. If not any of what is still to come for phase 3. Then again it could be years before they run out of steam.
|
|
|
|
Post by Times Up on Feb 20, 2017 20:57:53 GMT
I don't know. It seems like there are just so many options at this point in their shared universe.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2017 21:29:14 GMT
The "problem" (if you can call it that) with Marvel is that they simply play it safe enough to where it's HARD to "hate" their movies. They follow a four-quadrant formula and hire people who are competent enough to execute their vision. That's why, at worst, their movies are bland instead of bad. They simply don't take enough CREATIVE risks that would cause the general consensus to be "this is a bad movie." The closest they got to that was probably in IM3, when they decided to completely change who The Mandarin actually was. A lot of people didn't like that creative decision (myself included). But it still ended up "working" because the movie featured the charm of RDJ and the standard Marvel "feel-good" tone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2017 23:01:24 GMT
One dud does not a franchise ruin. They recovered nicely from The Incredible Hulk receiving lukewarm reception very early on, but now have plenty of other films and characters to fall back on if one fails them. When their first real flop happens, they will just not pursue that specific avenue anymore. Pretty simple. The bubble will burst if the flops keep coming in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Feb 21, 2017 13:24:17 GMT
Probably when the general audience get bored with comic book films.
|
|
|
|
Post by darthabe on Feb 22, 2017 2:31:48 GMT
The "problem" (if you can call it that) with Marvel is that they simply play it safe enough to where it's HARD to "hate" their movies. They follow a four-quadrant formula and hire people who are competent enough to execute their vision. That's why, at worst, their movies are bland instead of bad. They simply don't take enough CREATIVE risks that would cause the general consensus to be "this is a bad movie." The closest they got to that was probably in IM3, when they decided to completely change who The Mandarin actually was. A lot of people didn't like that creative decision (myself included). But it still ended up "working" because the movie featured the charm of RDJ and the standard Marvel "feel-good" tone. Pretty much. Although it's pretty impressive they've managed to stretch out that formula to this extent. I wish they would take risks and actually kill off at least one major character to raise the stakes. The cop out {spoilers!} by killing quicksilver at the end of AoU wasn't much of a risk because he was only introduced in that one films (not counting the end credits scene from TWS). It would have changed everything to have killed of Hawkeye because of the introduction of his family. But I'm thinking they are saving all that for the Infinity War movies. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2017 3:29:54 GMT
The "problem" (if you can call it that) with Marvel is that they simply play it safe enough to where it's HARD to "hate" their movies. They follow a four-quadrant formula and hire people who are competent enough to execute their vision. That's why, at worst, their movies are bland instead of bad. They simply don't take enough CREATIVE risks that would cause the general consensus to be "this is a bad movie." The closest they got to that was probably in IM3, when they decided to completely change who The Mandarin actually was. A lot of people didn't like that creative decision (myself included). But it still ended up "working" because the movie featured the charm of RDJ and the standard Marvel "feel-good" tone. Pretty much. Although it's pretty impressive they've managed to stretch out that formula to this extent. I wish they would take risks and actually kill off at least one major character to raise the stakes. The cop out {spoilers!} by killing quicksilver at the end of AoU wasn't much of a risk because he was only introduced in that one films (not counting the end credits scene from TWS). It would have changed everything to have killed of Hawkeye because of the introduction of his family. But I'm thinking they are saving all that for the Infinity War movies. Infinity War could be a game-changer. |
|
|
|
Post by DarkManX on Feb 23, 2017 18:51:19 GMT
When the movies become so interconnected that you can't watch and understand one without watching all the others first.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2017 19:02:09 GMT
When the movies become so interconnected that you can't watch and understand one without watching all the others first. The crossover movies are already getting that way. |
|
Courwes
Junior Member
Hello
@courwes
Posts: 500
|
Post by Courwes on Feb 23, 2017 19:04:22 GMT
When the movies become so interconnected that you can't watch and understand one without watching all the others first. This and if/when they start getting too obscure with the characters that casuals will not care for it. |
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Feb 23, 2017 19:32:56 GMT
At some point there will be an MCU movie that the critics hate. How close or far away do you think we are from the first MCU dud? Will Marvel/Superhero fatigue be a factor? One bad movie does not ruin a franchise and you are asking multiple questions. Yes, there is bound to be a movie that critics do not like, but there would have to be many for them to not like for the franchise bubble to be considered burst. Judging by their recent movies continued success, their demise is a ways off. I personally do not like the first Captain America were Age of Ultron. |
|
|
|
Post by DarkManX on Feb 23, 2017 19:49:45 GMT
When the movies become so interconnected that you can't watch and understand one without watching all the others first. The crossover movies are already getting that way. Yeah they kind of are. I've seen the other movies, but if anyone else hasn't Captain America: Civil War would be pretty confusing in places. |
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Feb 23, 2017 22:20:47 GMT
Maybe in the next four to five years? In the 2020s?
|
|
|
|
Post by brownstones on Feb 24, 2017 0:21:28 GMT
idk man, this a bubble people have been expecting to burst for years, I mean these films have gone through far...............far worse than what we have now, granted today a poor film might be more disappointing, but nowhere near the level of a Punisher or Catwoman, and it's still managed to pull through.
|
|
|
|
Post by flasuss on Feb 24, 2017 23:59:00 GMT
Probably never. James Bond is still going fine 55 years on, despite some pretty lame ass movies, and he's just one character. Marvel has a lot more characters to make money off, and if they managed to make money out of Ant-Man, they probably can make anything a hit.
It's entirely possible people will get tired of, say, Star-Lord or Iron Man, but of every Marvel hero? Nah.
Plus, like Dennis Reynolds said, they just don't take risks enough to have a truly mega failure.
As far as the movies becoming too interconnected, that's easy to be solved, just make movies that are less connected to the others or even reboot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2017 20:24:31 GMT
Putting an odd character on Ant-Man on the big screen as the main character begs to differ.
|
|
|
|
Post by flasuss on Feb 25, 2017 21:11:58 GMT
Putting an odd character on Ant-Man on the big screen as the main character begs to differ. Nah, it was advertised, and actually was, a fun family film. It wasn't something outrageous like Batman and Robin. It was a risk, sure, but even if it was a disappointment, it wouldn't hurt Marvel too much. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2017 21:22:13 GMT
You are seriously under-estimating what a hard sell a character like Ant-Man is. It had every reason to fail yet succeeded, whereas a Batman film has every reason to succeed and there is never an excuse for failure outside of complete and utter incompetence behind the scenes.
|
|
|
|
Post by flasuss on Feb 26, 2017 2:06:16 GMT
You are seriously under-estimating what a hard sell a character like Ant-Man is. It had every reason to fail yet succeeded, whereas a Batman film has every reason to succeed and there is never an excuse for failure outside of complete and utter incompetence behind the scenes. But even if it failed, it wouldn't hurt Marvel that much. They still had the Avengers, Captain America, Thor films. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2017 2:16:55 GMT
All of which were also huge risks. Captain America and Thor were so unlike any superhero typically considered acceptable for a film adaptation in 2011 that many were scoffing at them and writing them off. Most of my friends were mocking the idea of a Captain America movie only to insert their feet into their mouths. once they saw the actual film on DVD. I can't tell you how man times I've heard, "Man, I should have gone to see that one in theaters!"
The Avengers was also mocked and written off by many as an experiment doomed to fail. In fact, neither Thor's nor Captain America's first cinematic outings in 2011 were huge hits. Only Ironman was the big breadwinner in the early days of the franchise. It wasn't until Marvel's biggest risk of all, The Avengers, turned into the mega hit of its year did things start to turn around for the series and the Non-Ironman films start making more money.
|
|
