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.

 LunarSol wrote:
I think obsessing over the box office figures is super weird in general. I've loved so many things that don't sell well that I have little correlation between the two. I know people like having it as evidence to feel like their opinion is justified, but I personally have zero stake in the financial success of things. I definitely don't need get attached to hating something to not see it.

I think people focus on them because its often those numbers which define if the thing you enjoyed (or not) gets any sequel work. A film that does really great might well get a sequel; or if not at least the director/filmteam might get other work on other projects. Meanwhile if it does "so so" or badly then there's a higher chance that any sequel will

a) Never happen
b) Get a drastically reduced budget which can seriously impact its quality and what it can do
c) Enter "development hell" where it bumbles along for utterly years and might never release

Bob hit the nail on the head. At least, that's what happened in my family. I am using that as a small microcosm of the wider audience.

My wife (and child as well) is usually into seeing Marvel movies in the Cinema, liked Ms. Marvel on D+, liked the first film well enough, likes female supers, has Capt Marvel merch, and doesn't hate Brie Larson at all. That said, she has no interest in seeing this film.

The reason? Marvel phase 4 has not been good. She was not impressed by anything since Shang-Chi. She saw all those in the cinema and felt disappointed by them.

Therefore, she would rather go see the Hunger Games Prequel than The Marvels.

Elsewhere I was critical of the marketing trying to get audiences to conflate Captain Marvel with the original Avengers characters (talking just about MCU here, obliviously) and that it was mistake to pretend that Danvers has the same cache at this point so throwing up up a trailer that went "Iron Man > Captain America > Captain Marvel" was probably a mistake. I didn't talk about the actresses or the film just the marketing of it and was told that I am a gross misogynist that should go fornicate elsewhere.

I hope to get time to see The Marvels in the cinema as it looks kinda fun compared to some of the recent offerings.

The thing for me is I like superhero movies, but there's only so many I can watch in a given time period due to cost and time (versus using that money and time on other things). What made me go to every MCU film up until skipping GOTG3 was the connection between the stories through the Avengers/Infinity War plot. For me, launching the next phase without having the next underlying arc ready to build, followed by the chaos about which properties may or may not continue the breadcrumbs they've left is just meh, and I'll pick and choose based on individual characters (eg I would see Blade anyway, whereas Fantastic Four I would only go and see if I'm expecting to see Doom, Surfer or Galactus).

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
The Flash is another oddity, given the bizarre and illegal behaviour of its lead.

I for one have no wish to endorse such behaviour, and so won’t watch it. The same reason I don’t watch films starring Jared Leto, Rebel Wilson, James Corden, Tom Cruise and others.

My daughter is 9 and she's picking up on strange obsessions in cinema. Her impression of celebrities seems to be they are mostly weirdos, I think Jonathan Majors is what clued her in.

Her reason for not wanting to see the Marvels is because it's a cat movie. The leads don't matter to her, just that there's a lot of cats in the film and we have dogs.

I'm happy not to spend the $60+, but missing that sense of wonder and excitement that came with going to the movies. Lead actors are what used to carry that, and I don't see it as much anymore.

The death of the movie star is a good thing. Over paid rich feths wielding far too much power in a collaborative effort.

 Lance845 wrote:
The death of the movie star is a good thing. Over paid rich feths wielding far too much power in a collaborative effort.

Sorry, movie stars aren't going anywhere. Nor are TV & theatre stars.
There will always be someone who draws audiences by turning in better performances (overall or in certain niches)/being funnier/being prettier/or by just having some sort of charisma that draws interest.
And those who invest the $$$ to make these shows? They'll keep right on giving those people top billing & pay, etc - thus making them stars. So long as whatever they have is selling enough product.

It’s also not something the MCU or Star Wars has ever been particularly noted for.

Sure, our original Core Avengers are household names now? But when they were being signed up, they were either faded stars of yesteryear (Downey Jr) “Wasn’t he in?” (Chris Evans, Mark Ruffalo) or outright “sorry, who?” (Chris Hemsworth, Tom Holland, Tom Hiddleston)

Now? Absolutely household names who can increase a box office by having their name on the hoardings.

ccs wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
The death of the movie star is a good thing. Over paid rich feths wielding far too much power in a collaborative effort.

Sorry, movie stars aren't going anywhere. Nor are TV & theatre stars.
There will always be someone who draws audiences by turning in better performances (overall or in certain niches)/being funnier/being prettier/or by just having some sort of charisma that draws interest.
And those who invest the $$$ to make these shows? They'll keep right on giving those people top billing & pay, etc - thus making them stars. So long as whatever they have is selling enough product.

I'd also add that because moviemaking is a collaborative effort, more talented actors can contribute more to the production than just reading the lines as written. Just keeping it to the MCU, RDJ brought a lot to the table that wasn't in the Iron Man script. In fact, I thought I remember reading that he and Favreau were heavily involved in rewriting IM on the fly.

Part of the Phase 4 problem is just that everyone, including Disney, is expecting what Endgame grew up to over a decade when most of the cast is very much in the Captain America 1 to Iron Man 3 level of star power.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Given audience scores, I don’t agree.

Actors promoting a film might account for 10% of box office.

Again, the lack of Larson, Paris and Vallani out on a red carpet isn't what sank this film.

 LunarSol wrote:
I think obsessing over the box office figures is super weird in general.

I bet if the film was doing really well we wouldn't see comments like this one.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
I think obsessing over the box office figures is super weird in general.

I bet if the film was doing really well we wouldn't see comments like this one.

Well, probably not simply because there'd be little reason to comment on the box office figures if they were better, would there?

That said, I feel the same way about box office records. Like, its super fun when studios congratulate each other for major achievements, but when it becomes an actual competition and people start talking about adjusting for inflation or what have you it veers into the same sort of weirdness that is similarly trying too hard to equate sales and quality in an overly direct manner.

Don't forget a LOT of the consumer market we've built these days (esp if you're in any way tied to the stock market) is built on short term profit. When films are front loaded with massive amounts of debt to start with, those investors and producers want/need to see a very quick return on that investment so that they can plough money into future projects which will take years to complete - as well as gain profits for their big investment.


So even though merchandising and steady sales could yield a very healthy profit over time; the "box office" big launch both sets a tone for those likely future sales. Its super rare that a film flops/flounders at the box office and then becomes a big hit later. Indeed even when it does happen its often within a "niche" that its popular

Sure and that's certainly true, but why should I care? How does it affect my enjoyment of the product? I'm not saying this as a fan; I haven't even seen the film myself, but I've been absolutely bombarded with information telling me how I should feel about it and I just find it really weird. Just finding myself increasingly put off by how the algorithm wants me to think. It seems like its constantly telling me what I should hate or why I should hate something I enjoyed. This film has felt like an extreme example of that and I haven't even seen it. XD

 LunarSol wrote:
Sure and that's certainly true, but why should I care? How does it affect my enjoyment of the product? I'm not saying this as a fan; I haven't even seen the film myself, but I've been absolutely bombarded with information telling me how I should feel about it and I just find it really weird. Just finding myself increasingly put off by how the algorithm wants me to think. It seems like its constantly telling me what I should hate or why I should hate something I enjoyed. This film has felt like an extreme example of that and I haven't even seen it. XD

Because these days influencers and marketing are all about telling you what you should think. Even professional reporters are all about telling you what you should think rather than providing either their own personal views or impartial ones. Plus anything that "trends" online gets repeated like crazy these days as everyone is chasing clicks

 LunarSol wrote:
Sure and that's certainly true, but why should I care? How does it affect my enjoyment of the product? I'm not saying this as a fan; I haven't even seen the film myself, but I've been absolutely bombarded with information telling me how I should feel about it and I just find it really weird. Just finding myself increasingly put off by how the algorithm wants me to think. It seems like its constantly telling me what I should hate or why I should hate something I enjoyed. This film has felt like an extreme example of that and I haven't even seen it. XD

Welcome to the internet? This has been happening for a long time now. It's just the tide has turned the other way now it's irrefutable that The Marvels has done poorly, even mainstream media has to acknowledge it and is jumping on the bandwagon (probably doesn't help Disney isn't doing great financially, so less monies than usual to buy out more shills very likely). I remember when the internet kept yelling about how Ghostbusters 2016 was great and it only failed because of misogynists and nothing to do with the movie being just bad and actively attempting to attack their audience for not bowing before it like it was the second coming of Christ.

Also, what you just said about not watching it but feeling defensive about it makes me think of this skit:

Definitely nothing new; I've just been taken aback by how concentrated its been for this film. It's also just something I've been trying to step away from. Spend more time enjoying things for myself than being fed hot takes of how I'm supposed to feel.

All fiction is imaginary. Marvel is the intellectual property of a multinational corporation who is free to do what they want with their property and can re-imagine it however they like. Are their decisions good for profitability or brand identity? Only time will tell. The only thing true is that fiction has no rules it must adhere to since it's all made up stories that were created to generate revenue.

The concept of "fandom" is a relatively new occurrence in history (maybe 50ish years). Previously anything with a "fandom" had a niche market that kept it afloat, so the fans ended up feeling like they were part of the thing. Over time corporations saw that content with fandoms yielded not just potential for immediate profit, but potentially perpetual profit as well. Broaden the fandom, potentially broaden the source of revenue generation. This is where the problem lies.

With a niche fandom content will more likely be driven by people with a passion for the content and who have had to establish themselves previously as someone who could make good content outside that niche in order to justify people willing to invest in the creator's vision for making content with limited appeal.

Alternatively, with a niche fandom there is more likely to be forgiveness within the fandom for subpar content since they're just happy to have something. ANYTHING!

We're at a point now where the MCU went from a niche fandom to wide appeal. There is a firehose of content that is not being driven by people passionate about the content. The original niche fans are irritated because they felt like none of this would have existed without their decades of caring, and what is coming out now is not good content and is not loyal to the fandom that got them to this point.

the more recent fans see all this content that has not been very good for a few years now and just will say, "Meh." They don't have decades of invested passion. They just something that used to be great and now is a shadow of it's former self. Not a big loss to them. They'll just stay home.

 Grimskul wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
Sure and that's certainly true, but why should I care? How does it affect my enjoyment of the product? I'm not saying this as a fan; I haven't even seen the film myself, but I've been absolutely bombarded with information telling me how I should feel about it and I just find it really weird. Just finding myself increasingly put off by how the algorithm wants me to think. It seems like its constantly telling me what I should hate or why I should hate something I enjoyed. This film has felt like an extreme example of that and I haven't even seen it. XD

Welcome to the internet? This has been happening for a long time now. It's just the tide has turned the other way now it's irrefutable that The Marvels has done poorly, even mainstream media has to acknowledge it and is jumping on the bandwagon (probably doesn't help Disney isn't doing great financially, so less monies than usual to buy out more shills very likely). I remember when the internet kept yelling about how Ghostbusters 2016 was great and it only failed because of misogynists and nothing to do with the movie being just bad and actively attempting to attack their audience for not bowing before it like it was the second coming of Christ.

Also, what you just said about not watching it but feeling defensive about it makes me think of this skit:

Sole pertinent question.


Have You been to see The Marvels?

Maybe this cut of the film would have been better...

Same question to yourself.

Have you been to see the film?

This whole situation has reminded me of two things:

1) That to often the internet sees things in terms of 1 or 10. Giving a work (game, book, film) a 7 is seen as an insult or treated as a mark of failure. If you say a movie is fine, and not amazing, then it somehow becomes "a garbage fire that will be the end of marvel!?!".

2)The whole, weird cottage industry that has grown around the MCU on places like YouTube. Mot referring to critics but specifically only talk about the MCU. Usually things like "The X-Men are coming soon!" every week for the last eight years or gloom and doom prognostications as easy rage bait.

 LunarSol wrote:
Definitely nothing new; I've just been taken aback by how concentrated its been for this film. It's also just something I've been trying to step away from. Spend more time enjoying things for myself than being fed hot takes of how I'm supposed to feel.

You're never 'fed' hot takes. You have to actively go watch them. Unless you have a serious virus on your computer, screaming idiot videos aren't going to autoplay when you sit down at it.

Saw the movie. It's got cute girls, action, humor, and kittens. I had a really good time watching it, which is rare since Infinity War. If Strange 2 didn't have a touch of Raimi, I'd have no trouble deciding if The Marvels is my favorite movie out of this phase.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Anyway, I think this is kind of a bigger Solo effect, a movie that would have struggled to attract a huge audience to begin with following up on one or more punishing duds. The audience might like the film, but they won’t take the risk after the last couple times their hands were burned.

Add in the terrible economy, and you have a situation where people are saving their dollars for the few movie experiences that really stand out.

Sounds very reasonable. And if true, just like Solo it's sad and undeserved.

How did the Kree civil war result in their star dying?

And if their star is dying, how does zapping it with marvel juice restart it?

And if she can survive flying into a star (along with her outfit!) how are there any stakes for Captain 'I caused a genocide but don't think about that - there's cats' Marvel going forward?

 Lord Damocles wrote:
How did the Kree civil war result in their star dying?

I didn't catch that. Somebody couldn't resist pushing the big, red button? Civil Wars tend to be an emotional affair.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
And if their star is dying, how does zapping it with marvel juice restart it?

The nucular reaction in the sun was said to have slowed. I assume the idea is that the energy she adds stimulates a big enough fusion reaction so the sun can sustain the process once more.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
And if she can survive flying into a star (along with her outfit!) how are there any stakes for Captain 'I caused a genocide but don't think about that - there's cats' Marvel going forward?

That's nothing new. She's been like that since the finale of Captain Marvel. Which leads me to believe that she'll wear glasses and start a career in journalism, and her stakes revolve around her integrity as a journalist and romancing the newspaper's hotshot reporter.

 Ghaz wrote:
Maybe this cut of the film would have been better...

Spoiler:

Did those guys do the Expanse as well...

Saw it.

They recast the actors who portrayed Goose, the OG Flerkken from Captain Marvel. Replaced unceremoniously and they think we, the audience, are too stupid to not notice. I was literally shaking the entire movie.

0/10.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
How did the Kree civil war result in their star dying?

I think of all these problems as the result of losing the supreme intelligence. The Kree are a civilization that has given up basically all of their autonomy and knowledge and handed it over to an AI overlord. Yeah, THAT Kree guy might understand plasma reactions or whatever as part of their individual tasks in the Kree Empire, but they have no idea what the bigger picture is or how their work contributes to any larger ongoing things.

When the Supreme Intelligence was destroyed it didn't just cause a civil war. For the first time in thousands of years Kree society had nobody paying attention to any of the bigger pictures or understanding how all the cogs in the machine fit together to keep things running. When war broke out over who would be in charge imbalances set in. Production and Industry are no longer being balanced against sustaining systems and air pollution kicks in. The Kree very well may have been maintaining their star all this time. And then, suddenly, as focus shifted elsewhere because of the civil war and other problems... they weren't. This is the result of a series of cascading problems that have been spiraling out of control since the 90s when Carol tore the Supreme Intelligence apart. It's the result of 30 years of probably not just neglect, but actively damaging everything around them as they utilized technologies for short term effects without any understanding of what mitigating techs they needed to stop it from ruining themselves. The Supreme Intelligence was the only thing spinning all the plates before and now nobody even knows how many plates need to spin.

And if their star is dying, how does zapping it with marvel juice restart it?

It was slowed. Comic book cosmic radiation + Infinity stone based powers etc... She basically relight the pilot light on the fusion reactor.

And if she can survive flying into a star (along with her outfit!) how are there any stakes for Captain 'I caused a genocide but don't think about that - there's cats' Marvel going forward?

I mean, You could ask the same question about Thor couldn't you? He took a concentrated beam of the full force of a star straight to the face and was running about with narry a sun tan 10 minutes later.

Honestly we just need a bunch of robots made of of superhero costumes. They would be invincible.