Jump to content

MCU: Phases? What Phases???


Rhom
 Share

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

The issue is that they are just playing much less engaging versions of the same character, far less iconic than the originals, and that’s even acknowledging we are talking about side players who were pretty much a joke in some avengers movies like Hawkeye. 

This is entirely a matter of taste.  I think Steinfeld/Bishop is a much more interesting Hawkeye than Renner/Barton.  I really enjoyed Johannson/Nat (at least after Iron Man 2), but Pugh/Yelena is just as interesting to me.  As for She-Hulk, she appears to be a very distinct character to Ruffalo's Hulk based on that trailer, and again, if I was a movie studio I'd easily bank on Maslany over Ruffalo.

4 minutes ago, RumHam said:

Eternals and maybe the new Thor depending who you ask were the only "duds."

Thor is easily my favorite MCU film since Endgame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly I don’t understand what point people are making by talking about the actors in this franchise. Pretty much every movie in the MCU is jam packed full of acting talent.. that on its own isn’t building a franchise.

The Eternals was an ensemble cast of some incredible talent, but as a movie it was utter cardboard, nobody is crying out for a sequel, there aren’t going to be kids asking for Eternals lunch boxes. Oscar Issacs was brilliant but is Moon Knight front and centre of Secret Wars? Course not.

The issue isn’t with the actors. It’s the characters. RDJ and Chris Hemsworth played 2 of the most iconic Marvel characters going. Steve Rogers as Captain America is hugely recognisable as an archetype, which is one of the issues Mackie is going to have: what is special about his version of Cap? He doesn’t have that goody two shoes thing, he doesn’t have the history, he’s just a guy with a shield.

All the big, iconic characters that Marvel mined at the beginning are running out. The narrative was that they could just keep the factory line going. Phase 4 has shown they don’t , and until they can fall back on F4 and the Xmen there might be an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

The Eternals was an ensemble cast of some incredible talent, but as a movie it was utter cardboard, nobody is crying out for a sequel

They're still doing one one though. They trademarked it the other day with the other ones that got announced and Shang-Chi 2. Something like Celestials: The End of Time. I don't remember exactly a lot of news came out that day.

In other news:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/avengers-the-kang-dynasty-to-be-directed-by-shang-chi-filmmaker-destin-daniel-cretton-exclusive-1235186348/

  

5 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

what is special about his version of Cap? He doesn’t have that goody two shoes thing, he doesn’t have the history, he’s just a guy with a shield.

Did you watch the show where he became captain America? cause they made a point of the fact that he's black and how that makes him conflicted about being captain america. Also he has wings!

 

Edited by RumHam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Honestly I don’t understand what point people are making by talking about the actors in this franchise.

Because the complaint you made I was originally responding to was about these new characters' inability to "carry a franchise."  And that generally entails your interest in the specific actors and characters, both of which I've addressed simultaneously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

Because the complaint you made I was originally responding to was about these new characters' inability to "carry a franchise."  And that generally entails your interest in the specific actors and characters, both of which I've addressed simultaneously.

Ok well we can clarify that this is not about the actors. 

 

16 minutes ago, RumHam said:

Also he has wings!

 

Ok yeah I take it back. He’s now an interesting version of the character 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Why is this argument repeated? We’ve already had phase 4 and it was full of duds. It’s already happened. We already know what is good and what isn’t.  

Who is this we of which you speak?  People keep using we in front of sentences that are exclusionary of me and many I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

 

The issue isn’t with the actors. It’s the characters. RDJ and Chris Hemsworth played 2 of the most iconic Marvel characters going. Steve Rogers as Captain America is hugely recognisable as an archetype, which is one of the issues Mackie is going to have: what is special about his version of Cap? He doesn’t have that goody two shoes thing, he doesn’t have the history, he’s just a guy with a shield.

Iconic to who?  I’ve been a comic fan back to the beginnings of the Bronze Age. Certainly, by my history, Cap and Iron Man are iconic, as is Thor, but those aren’t the versions of the characters they’re choosing to depict. But after that?  My Avengers deviates wildly. Vision and Wanda, certainly but again, not those versions. Hawkeye?  Sure, and honestly, far closer to my Hawkeye.  Nope to Hulk, Ant Man and Black Widow - replace them with Wonder Man, Yellow Jacket and Wasp and toss in Beast for good measure. 
 

But outside of middle aged comic fans?  In 2008, Cap had likely appeared only in the 90s Spider-Man cartoon and the terrible 70s TV movies when it comes to mainstream exposure. Iron Man would jump from the 90s Spider-Man and ForceWorks, with John Walkers USAgent all the way back to the 60s animated series. 
 

I think it’s important to remember that the properties that were considered to have mainstream appeal are the ones Stan whored out to anyone waving a check. Did it work?  Absolutely, but not because of the iconic stature of the characters.  Also, if you’re arguing in favor of the comic fans, these characters are iconic to fans a generation or so younger than me. Ms Marvel has been much adored (I get the representation aspect but the power set turns me off), same with Soule’s She-Hulk, Gaiman’s Eternals, Fraction’s Hawkeye, Bendis :thumbsdown:New Avengers (Echo). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno man. There's just an unidentifiable something about the white male versions of the Marvel characters that makes them so much more iconic than the diverse group of characters in Phase 4. I can't put my finger on it. Somehow, their successes are more successy. Their goodness is moar good. Everything about them is just superior in every way. I can't quite articulate the reason. But it's unarguable. Why are we even arguing it? Just agree that the current wave of extremely successful media that audiences, including us, thought we really enjoyed were rubbish and we didn't actually enjoy them, we just thought we did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, hauberk said:

Iconic to who?  I’ve been a comic fan back to the beginnings of the Bronze Age. Certainly, by my history, Cap and Iron Man are iconic, as is Thor, but those aren’t the versions of the characters they’re choosing to depict. But after that?  My Avengers deviates wildly. Vision and Wanda, certainly but again, not those versions. Hawkeye?  Sure, and honestly, far closer to my Hawkeye.  Nope to Hulk, Ant Man and Black Widow - replace them with Wonder Man, Yellow Jacket and Wasp and toss in Beast for good measure. 
 

But outside of middle aged comic fans?  In 2008, Cap had likely appeared only in the 90s Spider-Man cartoon and the terrible 70s TV movies when it comes to mainstream exposure. Iron Man would jump from the 90s Spider-Man and ForceWorks, with John Walkers USAgent all the way back to the 60s animated series. 
 

I think it’s important to remember that the properties that were considered to have mainstream appeal are the ones Stan whored out to anyone waving a check. Did it work?  Absolutely, but not because of the iconic stature of the characters.  Also, if you’re arguing in favor of the comic fans, these characters are iconic to fans a generation or so younger than me. Ms Marvel has been much adored (I get the representation aspect but the power set turns me off), same with Soule’s She-Hulk, Gaiman’s Eternals, Fraction’s Hawkeye, Bendis :thumbsdown:New Avengers (Echo). 

This points gets made a lot, but it’s undeniable that iron man, Thor and captain America and hulk have been mainstays of the comic book world for decades , and while they were clearly not Spider-Man or Batman, they were still recognisable to a lot of people. 
 

You mentioned a bunch of terrible adaptations for those characters in the past, but that’s almost the point, they kept trying to do those adaptations because those were some of the more recognisable characters that they hoped would get traction.

But sure, there is still the possibility that you bring in relatively unknown characters and they take off in pppularity and become a phenomenon. It happened with GotG.

The problem there is that, it hasn’t really happened. We’ve already had the Eternals movie and it didn’t do well, it wasn’t very good.  You might say Ms Marvel is beloved, but it was one of the least watched MCU shows. None of the new characters brought in phase 4 have caused a sensation, there has been an overwhelming sense of ‘meh’ about the whole thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mormont said:

I dunno man. There's just an unidentifiable something about the white male versions of the Marvel characters that makes them so much more iconic than the diverse group of characters in Phase 4. I can't put my finger on it. Somehow, their successes are more successy. Their goodness is moar good. Everything about them is just superior in every way. I can't quite articulate the reason. But it's unarguable. Why are we even arguing it? Just agree that the current wave of extremely successful media that audiences, including us, thought we really enjoyed were rubbish and we didn't actually enjoy them, we just thought we did.

Honestly stop this crap. I’m embarrassed for you. 

Edited by Heartofice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Why is this argument repeated? We’ve already had phase 4 and it was full of duds. It’s already happened. We already know what is good and what isn’t.  

Opinons gonna opinion.

35 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

This points gets made a lot, but it’s undeniable that iron man, Thor and captain America and hulk have been mainstays of the comic book world for decades , and while they were clearly not Spider-Man or Batman, they were still recognisable to a lot of people. 
 

 

But sure, there is still the possibility that you bring in relatively unknown characters and they take off in pppularity and become a phenomenon. It happened with GotG.

 

There's a reason why Marvel still had the rights to Thor, Iron Man, and Captain America to make their movies...because, despite the fact that they're famous, they're not the ones Hollywood thought could make money, so no one was buying when Marvel had their little rights sale...

As to GoTG, personally, I think they're among the worst of the first three phases.  Those aren't the GoTG.  But they put something together and they got the right director, and they made it work and people responded.  (Chris Pratt is the least likable of all the Chrises...including Pine, and he isn't even in the Marvel movies...)

 

Right now, you're just trying to argue that your opinion is the correct one.  Think it's been shown time and again by the others that the opinion you share is not as universal as you seem to think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I'm out after GotG vol 3. I might be interested in Blade if it's given an R rating, but if the MCU tries to make Blade a fun for the family character, I don't think my heart can take it. I love Blade, but like Deadpool and the Punisher, I feel he needs an R rating to work right. I'll watch She Hulk as well because I love Jen. I'll need more info on the Fantastic Four, before I can say if I'm interested in it or not, I love Doctor Doom and Ben in the comics, so there is that at least.

Aside from No Way Home, I sort of hated all of the Phase 4 movies. Many of them I basically waited to see for free, because I found them very uninteresting.

Edited by sifth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got exhausted reading about all the MCU movies coming out. For someone who hasnt been to a theater in a while (I think it must be nearing 3 years now), its a bit of a slog too waiting for them to drop on Disney+, by which time its lost its cultural potency and the world has moved on.

Individually, disregarding this phase nonsense, I think I'd like She-Hulk (because I've never read or watched anything about her), Black Panther 2 (dont think they can mess this up too much) and maybe Ant Man 3 (I like Paul Rudd and some of the comic stylings of the first two movies).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

This points gets made a lot, but it’s undeniable that iron man, Thor and captain America and hulk have been mainstays of the comic book world for decades , and while they were clearly not Spider-Man or Batman, they were still recognisable to a lot of people. 
 

You mentioned a bunch of terrible adaptations for those characters in the past, but that’s almost the point, they kept trying to do those adaptations because those were some of the more recognisable characters that they hoped would get traction.

But sure, there is still the possibility that you bring in relatively unknown characters and they take off in pppularity and become a phenomenon. It happened with GotG.

The problem there is that, it hasn’t really happened. We’ve already had the Eternals movie and it didn’t do well, it wasn’t very good.  You might say Ms Marvel is beloved, but it was one of the least watched MCU shows. None of the new characters brought in phase 4 have caused a sensation, there has been an overwhelming sense of ‘meh’ about the whole thing. 

So, you’ve brought up GotG a few time - definitely non-iconic. More importantly, not even the comic nerd version of iconic. Yondu is the only member of the actual guardians team to appear in the first movie and, while the balance were cameos in the second. 
 

As far as viewership, you don’t suppose that after 15 years and 20+ movies there might not be a bit of fatigue?  My “we” may not like everything that they’re doing but we’re completely grateful it’s not another bad interpretation of Superman fighting real estate schemes, a Batman origin or the freaking Joker yet again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hauberk said:

So, you’ve brought up GotG a few time - definitely non-iconic. More importantly, not even the comic nerd version of iconic. Yondu is the only member of the actual guardians team to appear in the first movie and, while the balance were cameos in the second. 
 

Actually, they are based on the version of the team that appeared in the 2000's in the Annihilation event, and was a cult hit, though not one that sold well.

Ironically, the movie didn't include Adam Warlock, who was by far the biggest name in the team at the time of the release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Honestly stop this crap. I’m embarrassed for you. 

I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but you really thought Black Panther was "shit?" What MCU movie did you like? 

I remember you once saying the quiet part loud about your dislike of women as superheroes. You also can't understand how the new captain america being black is interesting. 

You're entitled to your opinions but they are bad and you should feel bad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as the Guardians go, I barely even knew who they were when the first movie came out and it remains one of my favorite Marvel movies.  Even my parents liked it and they're in their 70s and lame. 

Getting James Gunn to direct was huge because he's great at telling ridiculous stories about asshole characters who become likable and relatable.  See also: Peacemaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Heartofice said:

You mentioned a bunch of terrible adaptations for those characters in the past, but that’s almost the point, they kept trying to do those adaptations because those were some of the more recognisable characters that they hoped would get traction.

I mean, this is definitely just my random experience, but for me the iconic Marvel characters were Spiderman and Xmen.  That's informed by the nineties cartoons - I never read comics - but that's kinda the point.  I watched most of them, but I remember when Iron Man came out I was like "who gives a shit about this lame-ass character?"  Thor, too, I viewed as pretty silly with the whole Norse god thing, even though my dad always said he was his favorite comic book character growing up.  

Hulk, yes, I viewed up there, but mainly due to the residual popularity of the 70s TV show.  I agree Cap was on a similar level, but I viewed him as a more cheesy and less powerful Superman (who I also thought was lame).  Frankly I was still skeptical about him working in the MCU when First Avenger came out - as were many others.  Similar concerns with Thor fitting into the more realistic MCU they were building after Iron Man.

Guess my point is you could level these type of worries at virtually any Marvel character outside of Spiderman.  What made the MCU such a juggernaut for over a decade wasn't the iconography of the characters, it was the synergy and quality of the output.  Do I think "Phase 4" - which apparently is already almost over already - has not been on par with that buildup thus far?  Yes, absolutely!  But that's definitely not because the characters don't have the potential to yield just as much success as before.  Hell, was barely familiar with the Black Panther character before it came out, and that was easily the most successful solo effort (again, outside of Spiderman), whatever your personal feelings about the film.

Moreover, the other obvious concern is "fatigue," and in that case, what is your alternative?  Continue milking Downey, Evans, Hemsworth and Ruffalo until they keel over?  That sounds like an obviously horrible idea - and the only reason Thor is still kicking (at least in terms of his own films) is because Waititi breathed new life into the franchise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DMC said:

I mean, this is definitely just my random experience, but for me the iconic Marvel characters were Spiderman and Xmen.  That's informed by the nineties cartoons - I never read comics - but that's kinda the point.  I watched most of them, but I remember when Iron Man came out I was like "who gives a shit about this lame-ass character?"  Thor, too, I viewed as pretty silly with the whole Norse god thing, even though my dad always said he was his favorite comic book character growing up.  

Hulk, yes, I viewed up there, but mainly due to the residual popularity of the 70s TV show.  I agree Cap was on a similar level, but I viewed him as a more cheesy and less powerful Superman (who I also thought was lame).  Frankly I was still skeptical about him working in the MCU when First Avenger came out - as were many others.  Similar concerns with Thor fitting into the more realistic MCU they were building after Iron Man.

Guess my point is you could level these type of worries at virtually any Marvel character outside of Spiderman.  What made the MCU such a juggernaut for over a decade wasn't the iconography of the characters, it was the synergy and quality of the output.  Do I think "Phase 4" - which apparently is already almost over already - has not been on par with that buildup thus far?  Yes, absolutely!  But that's definitely not because the characters don't have the potential to yield just as much success as before.  Hell, was barely familiar with the Black Panther character before it came out, and that was easily the most successful solo effort (again, outside of Spiderman), whatever your personal feelings about the film.

Moreover, the other obvious concern is "fatigue," and in that case, what is your alternative?  Continue milking Downey, Evans, Hemsworth and Ruffalo until they keel over?  That sounds like an obviously horrible idea - and the only reason Thor is still kicking (at least in terms of his own films) is because Waititi breathed new life into the franchise.

I understand the argument that there was no guarantee that something like Iron Man would be popular with cinema audiences, and that we are still talking about tier 2 heroes in terms of public knowledge.
However I think it does a disservice to those characters to not recognise that there might be something fundamentally more interesting in their characters than others, or that we can ignore decades worth of comic stories that writers have kept going back to for a reason. Marvel found a way to take those stories seriously and treat them with respect and not surprisingly audiences responded well to it

And as I said, that doesn’t mean there isn’t the possibility that the MCU can produce gems from some more unknown properties, which is why I bring up GotG as an example where they have done that in the past.

But then, my point is, if Phase 4 was the time to do that, to take risks and get the audience excited for new characters.. then clearly they have dropped the ball. Which new characters are going to excite audiences? They took a risk by using relatively unknown characters ( though actually if you look at it, it’s only Shang Chi and Eternals that were new) , but then made a series of forgettable mediocre at best movies.
 

They haven’t achieved that goal. If they haven’t done it by phase 4, what in phase 5 is going to turn it around? There isn’t very much in there to get excited about , and much of it is still mining the same old characters.

Basically Marvel have dropped the ball, they haven’t managed to refresh the universe and keep the quality as it was before, that’s partly because they’ve been forced to use some simply less interesting characters, but also just a general lower quality of product.  

Edited by Heartofice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...