|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 19, 2023 23:50:53 GMT
Do the people in the MCU blame Starlord for that? No they do not. No one holds it against Thor either.
And Dr Strange, no one in universe blames him for anything he did either.
Thor went through a depressing state because of it. At the very least he held it against himself. Wong was also upset with Strange over the multiverse shenanigans. That's still nothing compared to what happened with Wanda.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 19, 2023 23:52:18 GMT
Duh, of course website writers would have seen WandaVision. And a few redditors who also happened to see it. Minuscule compared to those who simply didn't see WandaVision
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 19, 2023 23:54:04 GMT
It's second weekend has not fared any better, in fact it dropped pretty catastrophically, it may be the first Marvel Studios release to not make it past $100 million domestically, www.slashfilm.com/1450417/marvels-biggest-second-weekend-box-office-drop-mcu/ Sorry formersamhmd , but this doesn't look like it will be seeing any rise in interest like Elemental had this summer. Not with this trajectory. And before you bestow upon us another of your monologues about "The Man" is to blame for its box office for creating a world where progressivism cannot succeed in this day and age, it turns out most of the profit made from this movie actually came from...Men. Most of the female demographic didn't show up for it, see this video that explains why that is probably the case (made by a woman I should add) - Another Grifter video made by someone out to make a quick buck on Hating? I think we have enough of those.
The Marvels suffered from nonexistent marketing and promotions. What little they got was utterly wrongheaded by implying you needed to see Secret Invasion, WandaVision and Ms Marvel to understand the movie. You didn't.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 20, 2023 0:05:11 GMT
It's second weekend has not fared any better, in fact it dropped pretty catastrophically, it may be the first Marvel Studios release to not make it past $100 million domestically, www.slashfilm.com/1450417/marvels-biggest-second-weekend-box-office-drop-mcu/ Sorry formersamhmd , but this doesn't look like it will be seeing any rise in interest like Elemental had this summer. Not with this trajectory. And before you bestow upon us another of your monologues about "The Man" is to blame for its box office for creating a world where progressivism cannot succeed in this day and age, it turns out most of the profit made from this movie actually came from...Men. Most of the female demographic didn't show up for it, see this video that explains why that is probably the case (made by a woman I should add) - Another Grifter video made by someone out to make a quick buck on Hating? I think we have enough of those.
The Marvels suffered from nonexistent marketing and promotions. What little they got was utterly wrongheaded by implying you needed to see Secret Invasion, WandaVision and Ms Marvel to understand the movie. You didn't.
Haha. So, anyone who has something critical to say about the movie and the recent installments of Marvel Studios' offerings is a grifter? How typical of you to say such a thing. By the way, one of your favorite online reviewers Chris Stuckmann made a video recently in agreement with Martin Scorsese on Marvel Studios' output, I suppose he's a grifter now, right? Thanks for the laugh about the film not having enough marketing - I've seen ads literally everywhere on television and web suffering, have seen big posters at the cinema, and trailers attached to major releases.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 20, 2023 1:04:29 GMT
Another Grifter video made by someone out to make a quick buck on Hating? I think we have enough of those.
The Marvels suffered from nonexistent marketing and promotions. What little they got was utterly wrongheaded by implying you needed to see Secret Invasion, WandaVision and Ms Marvel to understand the movie. You didn't.
Haha. So, anyone who has something critical to say about the movie and the recent installments of Marvel Studios' offerings is a grifter? How typical of you to say such a thing. By the way, one of your favorite online reviewers Chris Stuckmann made a video recently in agreement with Martin Scorsese on Marvel Studios' output, I suppose he's a grifter now, right? Thanks for the laugh about the film not having enough marketing - I've seen ads literally everywhere on television and web suffering, have seen big posters at the cinema, and trailers attached to major releases. Yes.
Did you watch the video? Stuckmann barely talks about the Marvels, has nothing really negative to say and is talking more about streaming and how movie theaters are dying because of the massive shift away from physical media and movie events.
He also says he was under the impression you had to see the D+ shows to understand the Marvels and he didn't watch a lot of them because there's too much. But it turned out those things weren't necessary to understand the film anyways.
No interviews with actors, no real promotions about what the movie is about, just a few posters and some ads that came out way too late to build up things.
Compare this to the marketing push Wakanda Forever got, the Marvels got next to nothing.
Of course, when it debuts on Streaming in a few months it will probably be super viewed then.
I'm not surprised though, because this is the same kind of wishy-washy doommongering that happened after Age of Ultron in 2015. "Fans" just never learn.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 20, 2023 2:15:43 GMT
Haha. So, anyone who has something critical to say about the movie and the recent installments of Marvel Studios' offerings is a grifter? How typical of you to say such a thing. By the way, one of your favorite online reviewers Chris Stuckmann made a video recently in agreement with Martin Scorsese on Marvel Studios' output, I suppose he's a grifter now, right? Thanks for the laugh about the film not having enough marketing - I've seen ads literally everywhere on television and web suffering, have seen big posters at the cinema, and trailers attached to major releases. Yes.
Did you watch the video? Stuckmann barely talks about the Marvels, has nothing really negative to say and is talking more about streaming and how movie theaters are dying because of the massive shift away from physical media and movie events.
He also says he was under the impression you had to see the D+ shows to understand the Marvels and he didn't watch a lot of them because there's too much. But it turned out those things weren't necessary to understand the film anyways.
No interviews with actors, no real promotions about what the movie is about, just a few posters and some ads that came out way too late to build up things.
Compare this to the marketing push Wakanda Forever got, the Marvels got next to nothing.
Of course, when it debuts on Streaming in a few months it will probably be super viewed then.
I'm not surprised though, because this is the same kind of wishy-washy doommongering that happened after Age of Ultron in 2015. "Fans" just never learn.
My, that is quite the generalization to make. So, suppose you were to make a video complaining about Spider-Man: No Way Home would you therefore qualify as a grifter? It matches your logic since it is a Marvel Studios release. Yes, of course I watched the video, did you? It doesn't sound like you did, because Stuckmann does touch base on what he sees as quality decline regarding Marvel Studios' output. Funny attempt at revising history, but no. The movie had been hyped up since it was announced a few years ago, its first trailer and poster was released seven months ago, there was a lot of hype going for it, the fact of the matter is consumer interest just wasn't there, for a number of reasons. Going by the financial success of both Barbie and Oppenheimer both proved that the strikes shouldn't affect much of anything if the movie was of stronger interest to the general marketplace. Streaming won't save it, sorry. With these numbers, a change is definitely going to come with Marvel Studios' content strategy.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 20, 2023 2:21:26 GMT
Yes.
Did you watch the video? Stuckmann barely talks about the Marvels, has nothing really negative to say and is talking more about streaming and how movie theaters are dying because of the massive shift away from physical media and movie events.
He also says he was under the impression you had to see the D+ shows to understand the Marvels and he didn't watch a lot of them because there's too much. But it turned out those things weren't necessary to understand the film anyways.
No interviews with actors, no real promotions about what the movie is about, just a few posters and some ads that came out way too late to build up things.
Compare this to the marketing push Wakanda Forever got, the Marvels got next to nothing.
Of course, when it debuts on Streaming in a few months it will probably be super viewed then.
I'm not surprised though, because this is the same kind of wishy-washy doommongering that happened after Age of Ultron in 2015. "Fans" just never learn.
My, that is quite the generalization to make. So, suppose you were to make a video complaining about Spider-Man: No Way Home would you therefore qualify as a grifter? It matches your logic since it is a Marvel Studios release. Yes, of course I watched the video, did you? It doesn't sound like you did, because Stuckmann does touch base on what he sees as quality decline regarding Marvel Studios' output. Funny attempt at revising history, but no. The movie had been hyped up since it was announced a few years ago, its first trailer and poster was released seven months ago, there was a lot of hype going for it, the fact of the matter is consumer interest just wasn't there, for a number of reasons. Going by the financial success of both Barbie and Oppenheimer both proved that the strikes shouldn't affect much of anything if the movie was of stronger interest to the general marketplace. Streaming won't save it, sorry. With these numbers, a change is definitely going to come with Marvel Studios' content strategy. Yes, it would. It wouldn't succeed because that film appealed to people who disliked the MCU, but it would still be a Grift.
And none of that was aimed at the Marvels. He said he loved Ms Marvels' actress and the movie just breezed by for him, he didn't have anything negatively specifically about that film he referred to the MCU in general.
No, it never got 1/10 the hype or marketing the other movies got. Some trailers and posters aren't much of anything.
Barbie and Oppenheimer's hype started long before the Strikes derailed anything.
Funny, Indy 5 topped the VOD charts and is a shoe-in for being a huge streaming success. Not going to keep that open mind here? Predictable
|
|
|
Post by pennypacker on Nov 20, 2023 2:40:10 GMT
Yes.
Did you watch the video? Stuckmann barely talks about the Marvels, has nothing really negative to say and is talking more about streaming and how movie theaters are dying because of the massive shift away from physical media and movie events.
He also says he was under the impression you had to see the D+ shows to understand the Marvels and he didn't watch a lot of them because there's too much. But it turned out those things weren't necessary to understand the film anyways.
No interviews with actors, no real promotions about what the movie is about, just a few posters and some ads that came out way too late to build up things.
Compare this to the marketing push Wakanda Forever got, the Marvels got next to nothing.
Of course, when it debuts on Streaming in a few months it will probably be super viewed then.
I'm not surprised though, because this is the same kind of wishy-washy doommongering that happened after Age of Ultron in 2015. "Fans" just never learn.
My, that is quite the generalization to make. So, suppose you were to make a video complaining about Spider-Man: No Way Home would you therefore qualify as a grifter? It matches your logic since it is a Marvel Studios release. Yes, of course I watched the video, did you? It doesn't sound like you did, because Stuckmann does touch base on what he sees as quality decline regarding Marvel Studios' output. Funny attempt at revising history, but no. The movie had been hyped up since it was announced a few years ago, its first trailer and poster was released seven months ago, there was a lot of hype going for it, the fact of the matter is consumer interest just wasn't there, for a number of reasons. Going by the financial success of both Barbie and Oppenheimer both proved that the strikes shouldn't affect much of anything if the movie was of stronger interest to the general marketplace. Streaming won't save it, sorry. With these numbers, a change is definitely going to come with Marvel Studios' content strategy. I mean…strikes didn’t hurt FNAF. And that has a much more niche fan base.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 20, 2023 3:21:29 GMT
My, that is quite the generalization to make. So, suppose you were to make a video complaining about Spider-Man: No Way Home would you therefore qualify as a grifter? It matches your logic since it is a Marvel Studios release. Yes, of course I watched the video, did you? It doesn't sound like you did, because Stuckmann does touch base on what he sees as quality decline regarding Marvel Studios' output. Funny attempt at revising history, but no. The movie had been hyped up since it was announced a few years ago, its first trailer and poster was released seven months ago, there was a lot of hype going for it, the fact of the matter is consumer interest just wasn't there, for a number of reasons. Going by the financial success of both Barbie and Oppenheimer both proved that the strikes shouldn't affect much of anything if the movie was of stronger interest to the general marketplace. Streaming won't save it, sorry. With these numbers, a change is definitely going to come with Marvel Studios' content strategy. Yes, it would. It wouldn't succeed because that film appealed to people who disliked the MCU, but it would still be a Grift.
And none of that was aimed at the Marvels. He said he loved Ms Marvels' actress and the movie just breezed by for him, he didn't have anything negatively specifically about that film he referred to the MCU in general.
No, it never got 1/10 the hype or marketing the other movies got. Some trailers and posters aren't much of anything.
Barbie and Oppenheimer's hype started long before the Strikes derailed anything.
Funny, Indy 5 topped the VOD charts and is a shoe-in for being a huge streaming success. Not going to keep that open mind here? Predictable
Okay, then your idea of what makes a grifter disagrees with reality, but then again you have a record of not agreeing with it. So, as you would say...Typical. Ah, trying to spin things aren't we? Point to where I said Stuckmann said anything bad in particular about the movie. If you are looking for a more direct video, your other favorite media reviewer Jeremy Jahns didn't think very highly of the movie at all, Reality says otherwise, friend. And? The hype started for The Marvels before the strikes as well. Don't try to make reality your enemy, friend. And is Indiana Jones going to get another entry in the franchise soon? The answer to that is...No.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 20, 2023 3:21:56 GMT
My, that is quite the generalization to make. So, suppose you were to make a video complaining about Spider-Man: No Way Home would you therefore qualify as a grifter? It matches your logic since it is a Marvel Studios release. Yes, of course I watched the video, did you? It doesn't sound like you did, because Stuckmann does touch base on what he sees as quality decline regarding Marvel Studios' output. Funny attempt at revising history, but no. The movie had been hyped up since it was announced a few years ago, its first trailer and poster was released seven months ago, there was a lot of hype going for it, the fact of the matter is consumer interest just wasn't there, for a number of reasons. Going by the financial success of both Barbie and Oppenheimer both proved that the strikes shouldn't affect much of anything if the movie was of stronger interest to the general marketplace. Streaming won't save it, sorry. With these numbers, a change is definitely going to come with Marvel Studios' content strategy. I mean…strikes didn’t hurt FNAF. And that has a much more niche fan base. It was even released the same day as streaming.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 20, 2023 13:40:00 GMT
Yes, it would. It wouldn't succeed because that film appealed to people who disliked the MCU, but it would still be a Grift.
And none of that was aimed at the Marvels. He said he loved Ms Marvels' actress and the movie just breezed by for him, he didn't have anything negatively specifically about that film he referred to the MCU in general.
No, it never got 1/10 the hype or marketing the other movies got. Some trailers and posters aren't much of anything.
Barbie and Oppenheimer's hype started long before the Strikes derailed anything.
Funny, Indy 5 topped the VOD charts and is a shoe-in for being a huge streaming success. Not going to keep that open mind here? Predictable
Okay, then your idea of what makes a grifter disagrees with reality, but then again you have a record of not agreeing with it. So, as you would say...Typical. Ah, trying to spin things aren't we? Point to where I said Stuckmann said anything bad in particular about the movie. If you are looking for a more direct video, your other favorite media reviewer Jeremy Jahns didn't think very highly of the movie at all, Reality says otherwise, friend. And? The hype started for The Marvels before the strikes as well. Don't try to make reality your enemy, friend. And is Indiana Jones going to get another entry in the franchise soon? The answer to that is...No. And even Jahns joins in on admitting he liked Iman and the Ms Marvel character, funny how anyone legit all have that.
Reality says this has happened before and will happen again and we've had plenty of decent flicks that didn't do well for reasons beyond their control.
Reality supports me, people were saying they didn't even know the film was out yet till it came out.
There little hype before the Strike started, a few trailers that didn't play much. Compare to the massive hype machine Mario and Barbie got.
Yes, because of Ford himself not wanting to do it and his age.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 20, 2023 13:48:59 GMT
I mean…strikes didn’t hurt FNAF. And that has a much more niche fan base. It was even released the same day as streaming. Peacock isn't available outside the US
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 20, 2023 13:50:23 GMT
My, that is quite the generalization to make. So, suppose you were to make a video complaining about Spider-Man: No Way Home would you therefore qualify as a grifter? It matches your logic since it is a Marvel Studios release. Yes, of course I watched the video, did you? It doesn't sound like you did, because Stuckmann does touch base on what he sees as quality decline regarding Marvel Studios' output. Funny attempt at revising history, but no. The movie had been hyped up since it was announced a few years ago, its first trailer and poster was released seven months ago, there was a lot of hype going for it, the fact of the matter is consumer interest just wasn't there, for a number of reasons. Going by the financial success of both Barbie and Oppenheimer both proved that the strikes shouldn't affect much of anything if the movie was of stronger interest to the general marketplace. Streaming won't save it, sorry. With these numbers, a change is definitely going to come with Marvel Studios' content strategy. I mean…strikes didn’t hurt FNAF. And that has a much more niche fan base. It was also marketed better, no one went for the human actors so promotions wasn't a problem and is huge with the kid crowd.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Nov 21, 2023 1:26:37 GMT
Duh, of course website writers would have seen WandaVision. And a few redditors who also happened to see it. Minuscule compared to those who simply didn't see WandaVision
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 22, 2023 2:19:12 GMT
Okay, then your idea of what makes a grifter disagrees with reality, but then again you have a record of not agreeing with it. So, as you would say...Typical. Ah, trying to spin things aren't we? Point to where I said Stuckmann said anything bad in particular about the movie. If you are looking for a more direct video, your other favorite media reviewer Jeremy Jahns didn't think very highly of the movie at all, Reality says otherwise, friend. And? The hype started for The Marvels before the strikes as well. Don't try to make reality your enemy, friend. And is Indiana Jones going to get another entry in the franchise soon? The answer to that is...No. And even Jahns joins in on admitting he liked Iman and the Ms Marvel character, funny how anyone legit all have that.
Reality says this has happened before and will happen again and we've had plenty of decent flicks that didn't do well for reasons beyond their control.
Reality supports me, people were saying they didn't even know the film was out yet till it came out.
There little hype before the Strike started, a few trailers that didn't play much. Compare to the massive hype machine Mario and Barbie got.
Yes, because of Ford himself not wanting to do it and his age.
And? He still gave the film a negative review and no serious recommendation for viewing it. Most people will name one at least one positive thing about a movie they otherwise do not like. The point of highlighting Jahns' review was a criticism if your logic that if someone makes a video that is critical of a Marvel Studios release they are automatically a grifter, because you spoke highly of him a while ago. Since you are not going to give exception to the rule though, this need not go further. I did not argue box office success or failure measures quality of a motion picture,though. In fact, I have not seen it yet, I am talking about external factors relating to the picture, not of the quality itself. And there were plenty of people who knew of the film before its release that were either not interested or came to support it, but evidently, those people were not a high number. It received as much marketing as every other major studios release this year. So what's your point? Initially, I made the argument that the dismal outlook for The Marvels' box office would likely result in the characters being less utilized in the near future, with the likelihood of no more solo films or even a second season of television for Ms. Marvel leading up to Secret Wars, where after that it's reset time. Your counter argument is the VOD numbers for a movie that won't see a follow-up, for the reasons we individually gave.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 22, 2023 2:20:09 GMT
It was even released the same day as streaming. Peacock isn't available outside the US And it's still doing well. Thanks for supporting the argument against you.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 22, 2023 2:22:42 GMT
I mean…strikes didn’t hurt FNAF. And that has a much more niche fan base. It was also marketed better, no one went for the human actors so promotions wasn't a problem and is huge with the kid crowd. I would say The Marvels had more marketing and build-up to it than that movie did, and as pennypacker pointed out, that franchise (Five Nights at Freddy's) is pretty niche while Captain Marvel and the whole of the Marvel Studios brand are quite mainstream.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 22, 2023 3:32:32 GMT
And even Jahns joins in on admitting he liked Iman and the Ms Marvel character, funny how anyone legit all have that.
Reality says this has happened before and will happen again and we've had plenty of decent flicks that didn't do well for reasons beyond their control.
Reality supports me, people were saying they didn't even know the film was out yet till it came out.
There little hype before the Strike started, a few trailers that didn't play much. Compare to the massive hype machine Mario and Barbie got.
Yes, because of Ford himself not wanting to do it and his age.
And? He still gave the film a negative review and no serious recommendation for viewing it. Most people will name one at least one positive thing about a movie they otherwise do not like. The point of highlighting Jahns' review was a criticism if your logic that if someone makes a video that is critical of a Marvel Studios release they are automatically a grifter, because you spoke highly of him a while ago. Since you are not going to give exception to the rule though, this need not go further. I did not argue box office success or failure measures quality of a motion picture,though. In fact, I have not seen it yet, I am talking about external factors relating to the picture, not of the quality itself. And there were plenty of people who knew of the film before its release that were either not interested or came to support it, but evidently, those people were not a high number. It received as much marketing as every other major studios release this year. So what's your point? Initially, I made the argument that the dismal outlook for The Marvels' box office would likely result in the characters being less utilized in the near future, with the likelihood of no more solo films or even a second season of television for Ms. Marvel leading up to Secret Wars, where after that it's reset time. Your counter argument is the VOD numbers for a movie that won't see a follow-up, for the reasons we individually gave. It shows that practically every negative review keeps complimenting her, as opposed to slagging off the entire film. Which is what the Grifters do.
Did you complain like this when Chinatown's sequel bombed?
Not enough, and plenty of folks were turned off because they were misled to thinking they had to watch D+ to understand it, they didn't. Now they'll just watch it on D+ anyways.
Far, far less.
That Indy bombing doesn't have anything to do with whether or not they do more, because it's because Ford doesn't want to do it and they can't do it without him. As opposed to these characters, who will be seen and used again. And there's still no proof anything is being reset after Secret Wars.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 22, 2023 3:33:12 GMT
Peacock isn't available outside the US And it's still doing well. Thanks for supporting the argument against you. Thanks to the crazy marketing and massive popularity it has with the tween crowd and has for several years. It's FNAFs' first movie after all.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 22, 2023 3:33:49 GMT
It was also marketed better, no one went for the human actors so promotions wasn't a problem and is huge with the kid crowd. I would say The Marvels had more marketing and build-up to it than that movie did, and as pennypacker pointed out, that franchise (Five Nights at Freddy's) is pretty niche while Captain Marvel and the whole of the Marvel Studios brand are quite mainstream. Nope, the Marvels didn't have 1/10 what FNAFs got. It's not niche at all considering the fandom it had and it being the first big FNAF movie.
|
|