Switch Theme:

Am i Jaded? I can't seem to enjoy entertainment anymore.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Pragmatic Primus Commanding Cult Forces






Southeastern PA, USA

 Easy E wrote:
Not true at all. A western was a single genre with set conventions. Super-hero flicks now-a-days are using a variety of genre conventions. There success is based partly on the fact that they do NOT use a super-hero genre convention all the time. They lean heavily on Origin story conventions, BUT they implant these into different genres such as Heist flicks, Ensemble Team genres, Buddy Cop, Wuxia, Political Thriller, Espionage, etc.


Well...within Westerns, there are comedies, romantic dramas, family dramas, singing cowboy musicals, martial arts films, team/ensemble cast films, heist plots, revenge plots, empire-building stories, films with supernatural elements, films from the perspective of lawmen, films from the perspectives of outlaws...I can go on. I really think you're drawing lines where almost none exist. Whether it's cowboy hats or multi-colored suits, they're both overlaid onto stories about human beings and their interactions.

My AT Gallery
My World Eaters Showcase
View my Genestealer Cult! Article - Gallery - Blog
Best Appearance - GW Baltimore GT 2008, Colonial GT 2012

DQ:70+S++++G+M++++B++I+Pw40k90#+D++A+++/fWD66R++T(Ot)DM+++

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 SkavenLord wrote:
I’m moreso observing this conversation rather than participating, but is the MCU the only example that can be used for this discussion?

I think we can all agree that the MCU is one of the big franchises today, but would observing this issue through the lens of another perspective (ex. The recent surge of reboots) offer additional factors for consideration?


Prior to Star Wars the only major film franchise I can think of would be James Bond. The success of Star Wars led to the Star Trek TOS film series and likely contributed to Alien, Predator, and Terminator all transforming into series as their initial films were successes. I feel like Indiana Jones was always intended to be a series, but I may be wrong. We also had Batman and Jurassic Park throughout the 90s and then the success of the X-Men and critical success of the Nolan Batman trilogy paved the way for Iron Man which then transformed into the MCU. The Avengers was a cultural event and essentially a proof of concept (the concept being a cinematic universe, not simply a series). I think it's important to point out that this had not been done before. The closest thing would be Alien vs Predator, but those films were critically reviled.

If Star Wars marked the beginning of franchises, then the MCU has marked the beginning of full-blown cinematic universes, but no one else has matched them. The DC Cinematic Universe is trying and coming up short.

I say this all because, love it or hate it, the MCU has changed the game. Franchises have been around for decades, but not to this degree. I don't think you can have a conversation about the current state of blockbusters without acknowledging that Disney/Marvel is dictating the terms of discussion.

The only way we can ever solve anything is to look in the mirror and find no enemy 
   
Made in us
Member of the Ethereal Council




USA

 Blackie wrote:
Or.... Disney have the monopoly and all we can watch is their products?


You'd almost think Disney had a gun to your head. If you don't want to watch their products, don't. I skip the overwhelming majority of them these days cause I'm not interested.

   
Made in us
Dominating Dominatrix






John Wick is a perfectly profitable franchise these days. Original content that just gets another entry as it goes. Good characters. Good story. Great action.

Marvel gets mentioned a bunch because honestly what they have done has never been done before. Nobody has successfully linked 4 films in a cohesive story that has kept the audience gripped and made MORE money as it went along let alone over 20 + TV shows.

I say this fully honestly. There are going to be books written about the MCU. Not fan books showing concept art. Books studying what they actually did to make it all work and succeed. Kevin Feige is going to get a Biography at some point like "Have A Nice Day" for Mic Foley. It's everyones current go to right now because how could it not be?


These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
 
   
Made in us
Battlefield Tourist




MN

 gorgon wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
Not true at all. A western was a single genre with set conventions. Super-hero flicks now-a-days are using a variety of genre conventions. There success is based partly on the fact that they do NOT use a super-hero genre convention all the time. They lean heavily on Origin story conventions, BUT they implant these into different genres such as Heist flicks, Ensemble Team genres, Buddy Cop, Wuxia, Political Thriller, Espionage, etc.


Well...within Westerns, there are comedies, romantic dramas, family dramas, singing cowboy musicals, martial arts films, team/ensemble cast films, heist plots, revenge plots, empire-building stories, films with supernatural elements, films from the perspective of lawmen, films from the perspectives of outlaws...I can go on. I really think you're drawing lines where almost none exist. Whether it's cowboy hats or multi-colored suits, they're both overlaid onto stories about human beings and their interactions.


A fair point and well made. Perhaps my repertoire of Westerns is too limited.

I would still say that almost all modern movies (big and small) are adaptions of things that have been successful elsewhere. I recently watched an indie film, made in my "former" home town, by a local production company that got distribution from Paramount. Even this film was based on a book that they negotiated the rights for.

It is too much of a risk to make original content that has not proven itself to an audience someplace else.


Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 SkavenLord wrote:
I’m moreso observing this conversation rather than participating, but is the MCU the only example that can be used for this discussion?

I think we can all agree that the MCU is one of the big franchises today, but would observing this issue through the lens of another perspective (ex. The recent surge of reboots) offer additional factors for consideration?


I'm not sure if the reboot thing is really the issue people perceive. I suspect it has more to do with the evolution of entertainment away from genre and towards more unique ways to distinguish a property from the competition. When you talk Westerns, you're talking about something based in a certain amount of fact, where rebooting it doesn't make a lot of sense. It's just easier to take the same trappings of the genre, rename the characters and start up your own thing. Same with medieval fairy tales, or spy thrillers or detective mysteries or what have you. It's only fairly recently that having something unique and iconic has been common enough that there's real value in bringing back those unique and iconic elements in a reboot.
   
Made in us
Member of the Ethereal Council






 Easy E wrote:


It is too much of a risk to make original content that has not proven itself to an audience someplace else.


Why?
Did you know of the book beforehand or before you watched it?
If you never have seen the material before, it's still new.

5000pts 6000pts 3000pts
 
   
Made in us
Battlefield Tourist




MN

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
 Easy E wrote:


It is too much of a risk to make original content that has not proven itself to an audience someplace else.


Why?
Did you know of the book beforehand or before you watched it?
If you never have seen the material before, it's still new.


It is new.... to you.

However, it has brought in an audience before. With a decent distributor it will continue to appeal to that demographic/segment but just broaden the reach to more of the people in that segment.

The material itself has proven it can find and appeal to an audience all ready so the risk is reduced.

Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing 
   
Made in us
Member of the Ethereal Council




USA

 LunarSol wrote:
 SkavenLord wrote:
I’m moreso observing this conversation rather than participating, but is the MCU the only example that can be used for this discussion?

I think we can all agree that the MCU is one of the big franchises today, but would observing this issue through the lens of another perspective (ex. The recent surge of reboots) offer additional factors for consideration?


I'm not sure if the reboot thing is really the issue people perceive. I suspect it has more to do with the evolution of entertainment away from genre and towards more unique ways to distinguish a property from the competition. When you talk Westerns, you're talking about something based in a certain amount of fact, where rebooting it doesn't make a lot of sense. It's just easier to take the same trappings of the genre, rename the characters and start up your own thing. Same with medieval fairy tales, or spy thrillers or detective mysteries or what have you. It's only fairly recently that having something unique and iconic has been common enough that there's real value in bringing back those unique and iconic elements in a reboot.


IP laws and the consolidation of IP rights shouldn't be assumed to have no role.

50 years ago, when a movie hit blockbuster status, there'd be dozens of studios and production houses looking to cash in on that discovered current of interest in the audience. You'd get a dozen efforts looking to both replicate success and carve out their own niche. As IPs have become increasingly consolidated into fewer and fewer hands, the shift has predictably shifted to developing IP for its own distinct qualities and away from a mass market looking to replicate its own iterations of those ideas for their own ends.

There is a strong argument to be made that copyright laws as they currently exist, have become stifling to the creation of new creative property. After all, why try and compete with Marvel and DC when between the two of them they completely command the market and anything you do will look like a cheap knock off in comparison? Why should Disney take a risk on a new IP when it can just acquire one people already like and do it right? In some ways its easy to point at Disney and say 'you're the problem' especially since they're heavily responsible for the current copyright paradigms, but I think simply shouting 'boo Disney how dare they make popular stuff' is pretty goofy. Disney is at this point a symptom of a problem Disney made long ago, but Disney isn't the only party to that system anymore. We all are. Company's don't take risks because as much as people bitch about the endless recycling of content, box office dollars prove time and time again that even mediocre crap from an established IP is more profitably reliable than something new and unless Disney has a gun to anyone's head that's kind of our fault as consumers.

We'll bitch about it, but we like seeing the same old gak and it's patent denial to pretend otherwise.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/15 22:15:25


   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut



Canada

Who's we?

As far as westerns go, you won't be seeing them or any other period pieces ever again in a theatre. It's a hard sell to a global market, the best you can hope for is turds like The Magnificent Seven(2016) and King Arthur (2004/2017)

The MCU is just bland and safe enough to appeal to a very large demographic without offending anyone. Including that all important Chinese money.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/15 22:41:13


Old World Prediction: The Empire will have Clockwork Paragon Warsuits 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




You may not be included in it, but enough people are implicit in the system for it to continue on with minimal deviation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Goose LeChance wrote:
Who's we?

As far as westerns go, you won't be seeing them or any other period pieces ever again in a theatre. It's a hard sell to a global market, the best you can hope for is turds like The Magnificent Seven(2016) and King Arthur (2004/2017)

The MCU is just bland and safe enough to appeal to a very large demographic without offending anyone. Including that all important Chinese money.



In the last 20 years we have had Gladiator, Master and Commander, The Last Samurai, The Green Knight, The Witch, The Lighthouse, Gangs of New York, There Will Be Blood, The Prestige, Shutter Island, The Illusionist, Emma, etc. Are those not all period pieces to a degree?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/15 22:50:22


The only way we can ever solve anything is to look in the mirror and find no enemy 
   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut



Canada

They are but we're not going to get another Gladiator or Gangs of New York. It's the era of Harry Potter and Spiderman.

Old World Prediction: The Empire will have Clockwork Paragon Warsuits 
   
Made in us
Calculating Commissar




pontiac, michigan; usa

 Easy E wrote:


 gorgon wrote:
If there's a problem with entertainment today, it's in the sheer volume of it. It's overwhelming, but also leads us to think our entertainment needs to be "perfect" and tailored for us just like our news and virtual world has become. I've certainly found myself spending half my evening navigating my streaming services to find *just* the right scratch for my itch. In that instance, I've found it's best to just pick SOMETHING and watch it. Sometimes you'll be disappointed, but sometimes you'll be surprised.


Yes, even our entertainment needs have become "entitled" and "privileged". All media should be made for me, or it is crap; or worse "woke".


I'll only slightly touch on this because i'd rather not have a thread lock. Amazingly we've gotten to like 4 pages with this without serious arguments so good job everybody!

As far as entitled and privileged goes that's sorta true but some may say being rich or being a big middle eastern prince with mounds of oil and personal cruise boats is privileged. I suppose in the West we've mostly been catered to and now that the potential market has extended beyond the West more ways of thinking will have to be considered and they don't always mesh together like Chocolate and Peanut Butter.

As entertainment goes it's been said previously but the global market is getting a bigger look at by the entertainment industry in some ways. Yeah they saw movies like Star Wars before but how well can a movie cater to the "woke" and china at the same time.

For what it's worth i may not be fond of what's "woke" though i find some people who are to still be decent people overall and to actually be people i'd still chat or be friends with (unbelievable in current year as we all know). One of my bigger issues with what's "woke" is in movies, tv and businesses in general and the way they pander and do it horribly. I'm autistic and i can't stand the way movies portray autistic people 90% of the time (they usually highlight the social awkwardness, the autism and give us super-human intelligence). I watched a youtube video where a Trans Woman goes into detail about how a tv show turned gay or trans people into walking stereotypes and she absolutely hated it. Other commenters said the same.

I also hate how corporations have commodified race, sex, gender identity and so on....but only in countries it's profitable to do so as shown by their branches in the middle east or china (and just about all of them do this btw). It feels like it's something like this. "Diversity can be yours for the Low, Low Price of 3 payments of $19.99+shipping and handling!" It's just disgusting to watch. I just wish people would view their inborn characteristics as worth more to them than making a few bucks off of.

-----

Anyway i apologize for bringing some politics into this but it seems to be simmering just under the surface right now. Hopefully you understand it's more the way companies and entertainment portray political situations that bugs me. I'll admit i'm wondering if i should delete some of what i'm posting to prevent an early thread lock.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/15 23:05:25


Join skavenblight today!

http://the-under-empire.proboards.com/ (my skaven forum) 
   
Made in mx
Tunneling Trygon




Mexico

The thing about corporations is that while a corporation as a whole only cares about money, corporations are still made of people and they are not a hive mind.
So you have multiple different people from differing backgrounds, interests and views competing withing a corporation. The name of the competition is profit, but the competitors are not necessarily competing for profit.
On one hand you have corporate business(wo)men who may only care about diversity in function of profit, and on the other you also have content creators with a genuine interest in diversity for the sake of diversity (but still need to generate profit for their corporate masters).

And that leads to two different types of diversity in entertainment. There is the token diversity made by corporate committee, which usually manifests as token characters that can be modularly removed to sell on more conservative markets, and there is the rarer but more genuine diverse characters because the creator personally cares about diversity. And you can find both examples even from the same company. I mean, on one hand you have the MCU with a blink and you miss it gay character, and on the other you have the Owl House with a bisexual protagonist (written by a bisexual creator), and both are from Disney.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/16 00:16:03


 
   
Made in us
Dominating Dominatrix






Goose LeChance wrote:
Who's we?

As far as westerns go, you won't be seeing them or any other period pieces ever again in a theatre. It's a hard sell to a global market, the best you can hope for is turds like The Magnificent Seven(2016) and King Arthur (2004/2017)

The MCU is just bland and safe enough to appeal to a very large demographic without offending anyone. Including that all important Chinese money.



Shang Chi apparently pissed china right off. They refuse to play it in theaters.


These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
 
   
Made in us
Member of the Ethereal Council




USA

Reportedly, Simu Liu made negative comments about life in China a few years back and we know how China feels about that.

China's also reportedly pushing new policies meant to prioritize Chinese films and actors in the country, which will diminish or shut out the release of foreign films with foreign stars. Turns out the Chinese state doesn't really care about how much you pander to them when all the profits from your work ultimately go overseas.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/16 01:53:21


   
Made in ca
Stormin' Stompa






They're also generally cracking down on any Western influences in general, so its unsurprising that Western movies aren't being allowed, even if they're made to pander to the Chinese market. It's almost like you shouldn't try investing money in foreign dictatorial powers.
   
Made in us
Member of the Ethereal Council




USA

 Grimskul wrote:
They're also generally cracking down on any Western influences in general, so its unsurprising that Western movies aren't being allowed, even if they're made to pander to the Chinese market. It's almost like you shouldn't try investing money in foreign dictatorial powers.


At least, not those that are unwilling to tolerate anything even approaching short of blinding praise. The best part is that some of these laws even exclude actors from Hong Kong. And after all the shilling Yifei Liu did for Mulan.

   
Made in ca
Stormin' Stompa






 LordofHats wrote:
 Grimskul wrote:
They're also generally cracking down on any Western influences in general, so its unsurprising that Western movies aren't being allowed, even if they're made to pander to the Chinese market. It's almost like you shouldn't try investing money in foreign dictatorial powers.


At least, not those that are unwilling to tolerate anything even approaching short of blinding praise. The best part is that some of these laws even exclude actors from Hong Kong. And after all the shilling Yifei Liu did for Mulan.


Yeah, its hilarious seeing people who sucked up to China so hard get slapped down so quickly and harshly despite all their efforts. Unfortunately, if history has taught me anything, this won't teach them anything and they'll keep trying to chase the money dragon another way.
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

 Polonius wrote:


What you mean to say is that Disney is the only company making good superhero movies in a rich shared universe that combines movies with television. That's not a monopoly, that's simply a competitive advantage.



That's not what I meant, MCU aren't good films in my opinion. I meant they have much more power and resources than other companies, that's how they have the advantage. Exactly like 40k: it isn't the only game around, it isn't probably even the better one but GW is more powerful than other companies.


 
   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut



Canada

 LordofHats wrote:
Reportedly, Simu Liu made negative comments about life in China a few years back and we know how China feels about that.

China's also reportedly pushing new policies meant to prioritize Chinese films and actors in the country, which will diminish or shut out the release of foreign films with foreign stars. Turns out the Chinese state doesn't really care about how much you pander to them when all the profits from your work ultimately go overseas.


If that happens it's not all bad, more Countries should ban Hollywood's junk. They'd be better off without it, and maybe we could get some real movies/variety again when there are no worldwide box office profits to chase.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/16 08:33:46


Old World Prediction: The Empire will have Clockwork Paragon Warsuits 
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

 Elemental wrote:


"No, you don't REALLY like the stuff I don't like, you just don't know any better, you barbarian."

Thanks for perfectly illustrating my point.


Yes and no. I mean when something like MCU is so dominant (like 40k in wargaming) lots of other stuff don't get the same attention a people may lose them, regardless of how good these alternatives are. On the other hand not many producers are investing time and money in such aforementioned alternatives considering how strong the Disney brand is. So in part it is ignorance, but in part there's also the fact that not many companies invest in blockbusters as much as Disney, and something like the MCU doesn't really have strong alternatives. It doesn't mean is actually good and people loves it.


 
   
Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User




 Blackie wrote:
 Elemental wrote:


"No, you don't REALLY like the stuff I don't like, you just don't know any better, you barbarian."

Thanks for perfectly illustrating my point.


Yes and no. I mean when something like MCU is so dominant (like 40k in wargaming) lots of other stuff don't get the same attention a people may lose them, regardless of how good these alternatives are. On the other hand not many producers are investing time and money in such aforementioned alternatives considering how strong the Disney brand is. So in part it is ignorance, but in part there's also the fact that not many companies invest in blockbusters as much as Disney, and something like the MCU doesn't really have strong alternatives. It doesn't mean is actually good and people loves it.


I don't think you could say that the MCU is so dominant that its stopping anything else from being made, your talking 3-4 films a year in a time were box office is much more front loaded and films only need 2-3 weeks to make a big return.

Marvel itself like Pixar I actually think is actually one of the more creative bright spots in Hollywood in recent decades, its films maybe based on comics but really the vast majority of them arent widely known, only Spiderman and the Hulk had previously had blockbusters made with them and something like Guardians of the Galaxy was a near total unknown to most of the public. DIsney's path to dominance really was that you had these new studios on the rise taking more risks than the existing establishment was and they were able to buy them out to piggyback on that, such monopolistic behavior really isnt unique to the film business though.

Really I think the main problem with Hollywood is that its obsessed with mega blockbusters, the idea of mid budget cinema that takes some creative risks really has gone into steep decline outside of a few well know directors. Cinema now to be actually feels a lot like the music business in the 80's were you had your massive stadium artists and then you had an almost totally seperate culture of alt/indie music. The arthouse scene today is I think quite similar to that, very much seperate from big hollywood and it means you have a situation were films seem to either have $2 million or $200 million budgets, were directors like Zhao, Waititi, Gunn, etc move from one extreme to the other.

I'd say theres good and bad to that personally, I think its actually easier to get a budget for genuinely left field cinema these days than it has been since at leats the 60's BUT it is mostly limited to relatively small budgets and it doesnt tend to make the same cultural inroads as in the past, something like say Taxi Driver became a cultural lexicon in a way something like Under The Skin hasnt.
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

moreorless wrote:


I don't think you could say that the MCU is so dominant that its stopping anything else from being made, your talking 3-4 films a year in a time were box office is much more front loaded and films only need 2-3 weeks to make a big return.


Well it's actually 3-4 MCU blockbusters plus other Disney stuff. Note that also Star Wars and Pixar are Disney stuff, among other things. And there's a lot of people who really don't go to theatres to watch mainstream movies more than once per month, at most. It might be personal and biased but I go to theatres basically twice per month and me and my films' group are considered by most of my other friends and relatives like someone that always go to the cinema . We actually watch 20-25 movies per year at the theatre, including indie stuff.

It doesn't matter if comics are known. Who knew about Shang Chi for example???? Or even Black Panther. But with the MCU label they become the main attraction of the month. MCU is about quantity over quality and serializing the movies in order to convince people to watch their movies to avoid missing parts and references. Same with SW: a lot of people watch the new movies even if they hated the previous episodes since the franchise is super strong and even if the last good movie was released almost 40 years ago they still want to have knowledge of that universe. That's Disney's superpower.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/16 08:28:00



 
   
Made in gb
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






I strongly disagree that the MCU is lacking on quality.

This isn’t some weird fashion thing. Not after this long.

The MCU has taken pains to ensure that, barring Infinity War and Endgame, people can drop in and drop out as they wish, with no need to see every single entry.

Like Pratchett’s Discworld, there is a benefit to starting at the beginning and watching/reading in release order - but it’s not completely necessary.

For instance, Sam Vimes and Tony Stark both develop over their starring roles. Yet one can pick up any Discworld book about The Watch, or any given Iron Man film and not have gaps in that entry’s narrative. Yes you do gain a better appreciation following their adventures chronologically, but each does a good enough job to not only satisfy on its own, but encourage further reading/viewing.

The most remarkable thing about the MCU isn’t so much it’s success (which absolutely is remarkable), but that nobody else has really come close to replicating the formula.

I think part of that may be down to Studios not hitting MCU money straight off the bat.

Let’s consider the Universal “Dark Universe”. I was up for that. I loved and still love the first two Brendan Fraser Mummy films. The third is a bit shonky but still not completely disastrous. And I’m a sucker for their first monster movies.

Then came the first entry. 2017’s The Mummy. Now, it wasn’t a great film, and was justifiably panned upon release. But when we compare it’s budget and box office take to Iron Man?

The Mummy. Budget estimated to be $125m-$195m. Box office $410m. Not a massive hit, but not a loss either (once we factor in the marketing costs)

Iron Man. Budget estimated to be $140m. Box office? $585m. That was the followed by The Incredible Hulk. $137m budget, $264m box office.

Imagine if the MCU called it a day after Incredible Hulk? I mean, it’s not a great film, and it didn’t do all that well at the Box Office. But the plug wasn’t pulled on the wider project as a result - and now we end up where we are.

It feels as if a nascent franchise isn’t making a Billion with its first movie, the Studios just walk away.

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?

Pfizer vaccine administered 13:40pm 18 Feb 21. Still no second head. Second jab 13:35pm 6 May 2021. At the Masonic Hall. 
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


Then came the first entry. 2017’s The Mummy. Now, it wasn’t a great film, and was justifiably panned upon release. But when we compare it’s budget and box office take to Iron Man?

The Mummy. Budget estimated to be $125m-$195m. Box office $410m. Not a massive hit, but not a loss either (once we factor in the marketing costs)

Iron Man. Budget estimated to be $140m. Box office? $585m. That was the followed by The Incredible Hulk. $137m budget, $264m box office.



I don't think The Mummy (2017) is a masterpiece, really not at all, but I liked it much more than most of the MCU episodes. And was definitely way better than anything SW related that came after Return of the Jedi. The Mummy is considered an awful movie, 15% fresh on RottenTomatoes and with a ton of Razzie Awards nominations but I can't really see it as much worse than the average MCU episode, which on the other hand are never considered this level of bad from the critics, not even remotely.

The Mummy and Iron Man could have similar numbers, but the latter is not just a movie, it's a long term investment. It's part of an infinite amount of episodes, all related to the same universe and not all the producers can afford this strategy or are willing to try it. If a MCU episode doesn't gross enough it's no big deal, the franchise is still strong and the next episode won't suffer from it. Same with SW. Marvel invested in the franchise, not in the movies. That's how they dominated the scene and will dominate for long.

I'm not saying MCU movies are bad. I watch them all as I think they're entertaining enough to get my money. But I don't believe they're so popular because they're very good. I compared MCU (Disney products in general to be fair) to 40k as I think they are popular, successful and dominate their field for the very same reasons.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/16 11:47:28



 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

moreorless wrote:
 Blackie wrote:
 Elemental wrote:


"No, you don't REALLY like the stuff I don't like, you just don't know any better, you barbarian."

Thanks for perfectly illustrating my point.


Yes and no. I mean when something like MCU is so dominant (like 40k in wargaming) lots of other stuff don't get the same attention a people may lose them, regardless of how good these alternatives are. On the other hand not many producers are investing time and money in such aforementioned alternatives considering how strong the Disney brand is. So in part it is ignorance, but in part there's also the fact that not many companies invest in blockbusters as much as Disney, and something like the MCU doesn't really have strong alternatives. It doesn't mean is actually good and people loves it.


I don't think you could say that the MCU is so dominant that its stopping anything else from being made, your talking 3-4 films a year in a time were box office is much more front loaded and films only need 2-3 weeks to make a big return.

Marvel itself like Pixar I actually think is actually one of the more creative bright spots in Hollywood in recent decades, its films maybe based on comics but really the vast majority of them arent widely known, only Spiderman and the Hulk had previously had blockbusters made with them and something like Guardians of the Galaxy was a near total unknown to most of the public. DIsney's path to dominance really was that you had these new studios on the rise taking more risks than the existing establishment was and they were able to buy them out to piggyback on that, such monopolistic behavior really isnt unique to the film business though.

Really I think the main problem with Hollywood is that its obsessed with mega blockbusters, the idea of mid budget cinema that takes some creative risks really has gone into steep decline outside of a few well know directors. Cinema now to be actually feels a lot like the music business in the 80's were you had your massive stadium artists and then you had an almost totally seperate culture of alt/indie music. The arthouse scene today is I think quite similar to that, very much seperate from big hollywood and it means you have a situation were films seem to either have $2 million or $200 million budgets, were directors like Zhao, Waititi, Gunn, etc move from one extreme to the other.

I'd say theres good and bad to that personally, I think its actually easier to get a budget for genuinely left field cinema these days than it has been since at leats the 60's BUT it is mostly limited to relatively small budgets and it doesnt tend to make the same cultural inroads as in the past, something like say Taxi Driver became a cultural lexicon in a way something like Under The Skin hasnt.


Excellent points. It will be interesting to see if or how the ongoing pandemic changes things. Not certain if tentpoles do as well on the small screen.

On the positive, watched The Courier last night. Didn't realize that was based on real people. It threw me.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/16 12:23:33


-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

The most remarkable thing about the MCU isn’t so much it’s success (which absolutely is remarkable), but that nobody else has really come close to replicating the formula.


The biggest mistake almost everyone makes is focusing on continuity over the film itself. You have these drawn out scenes of pointless exposition and teases for films that probably won't even happen and they drag down the film to the point where its a chore to watch. The MCU almost exclusively leaves this stuff to the post credit scenes and building off background Easter eggs. The few times it hasn't have been some of the low points in the franchise (Iron Man 2, Thor's sidequest in Ultron, etc). Most attempts to replicate the MCU turn out to be Iron Man 2's or Thor 2's and the like. They focus on the shared universe rather than making great films that just happen to belong together.
   
Made in us
Pragmatic Primus Commanding Cult Forces






Southeastern PA, USA

Cronch wrote:
 gorgon wrote:

I always thought this stuff would resolve itself as people got more sophisticated and learned what was happening to them. Similar to what happened with banner ads after internet newbies grew up and stopped clicking on all of them to see where they led, lol. I have grown more skeptical of that, however.

It would naturally, but...
Spoiler:


I think it's much more wide-ranging than 'big, bad corporations'. I feel like like their interests are very focused and less intentionally sinister, to be honest with you. There are governments and political dark money groups, etc very involved. And there are individual agents of chaos who are real wild cards. Those are more troubling actors, IMO.

I'm not sure how we pull things back to some sense of shared reality when people's itches are getting scratched more by their pocket realities. It's like the Matrix (or Matrices) are here, but in more of an augmented reality form that most didn't see coming.

Think this is getting off-topic though.

My AT Gallery
My World Eaters Showcase
View my Genestealer Cult! Article - Gallery - Blog
Best Appearance - GW Baltimore GT 2008, Colonial GT 2012

DQ:70+S++++G+M++++B++I+Pw40k90#+D++A+++/fWD66R++T(Ot)DM+++

 
   
Made in mx
Tunneling Trygon




Mexico

 Blackie wrote:

That's not what I meant, MCU aren't good films in my opinion. I meant they have much more power and resources than other companies, that's how they have the advantage. Exactly like 40k: it isn't the only game around, it isn't probably even the better one but GW is more powerful than other companies.


Disney isn't even the largest entertainment company, Comcast almost doubles its revenue.
Disney is big, but it exist in a very big ocean with some other very big fishes.

   
 
Forum Index » Geek Media
Go to: