Marvel's Multiverse of Maddening Returns

[IlyaP]

3 minutes ago, sifth said:

For me Dr. Strange 2 suffers from a villain problem. Don't get me wrong, I love Wanda in that film, but the problem is they make her too evil and too irredeemable. Part of me wonders if the film would have been better if evil Strange was the main antagonist, with him slowly corrupting Wanda, with promises of giving Wanda her children back if he helps her. The movie could end, with Wanda realizing the evil Strange's promises are false and standing up to him.

My wife, who had never seen WandaVision, predicted the ending to Dr. Strange 2 within the first 10 to 20 minutes of Wanda's arrival in the movie. 

That Strange doesn't even get any real, meaningful, character growth in his own movie? And the plot is that paint by numbers? Man, I hope Cumberbatch is finding *some* kind of creative validation in the work he's doing, because that movie so bland. Even Doctor Strange 1, despite all the CGI excess, had the nerve to have a *clever* ending with Strange annoying the absolutely shit out of a god enough to let him escape from the predicament in which he found himself. It relied on at least a *bit* of wit, instead of having a pure CGI punch-up.

A punch-up, which, as many have rightly pointed out, really undid the final acts of both Shang-Chi and Black Widow. (Side note with Black Widow: If you're going to have Russian speakers, HIRE RUSSIAN-SPEAKING ACTORS. Absolutely nothing that came out of the main cast's mouth sounded like they had any voice or accent training whatsoever and it was as abysmal as Cate Blanchett's awful excuse for a Russian accent in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull - a movie which actually surrounded her with native Russophones.)

/End Tangential Rant. 

At least with Shang-Chi the movie made up for the godawful CGI-fest of an ending by having a delightful karaoke scene as the final moment in the movie. Absolute chef's kiss of a moment, that, making the movie feel human again - alongside the comical replaying of events in the cocktail bar at the end. Less CGI - more human moments. Please.

[mormont]

2 hours ago, sifth said:

At least they're starting to see the way the tides are shifting and creating rated R movies and possibly tv shows. They're seeing how popular shows like The Boys, Gen V and Invincible are becoming and are starting to realize they can no longer afford to play it safe. I hope they actually commit to making their shows as violent, over the top and funny, like the ones I listed.

As a strategy for Marvel that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Why would they pivot to making films a substantial part of their target audience can't get in to see? 

The problem Marvel (and DC) have had in the comics industry is that they are in a death spiral because they make comics that only appeal to people who already read comics, who are getting older and older. So they try to appeal to more diverse, younger audiences, but then chicken out when this doesn't produce instant success and go back to making 'edgy' comics for the existing audience, dooming themselves to irrelevance. 

Why repeat that for the MCU?

Aping The Boys in the MCU would be as stupid as trying to imitate Image was in the '90s, except that the Image comics outsold Marvel whereas The Boys is much less successful than the MCU, so it makes even less sense. 

[Heartofice]

Have to realise that the MCU is a Disney product. They are never going to be doing R rated content, especially for their main movies. We have already seen a little bit too much disneyfication of the Marvel universe, it certainly isn't going to be turning into The Boys. 

It doesn't even need to, not to be good. It was doing perfectly well treading the PG13 line with content that could target slightly older audiences. Stuff like Winter Soldier and Civil War weren't just dumb zap zap comic book tripe. 

I don't know what the new Blade movie would be like, but it sure won't involve a rave in an abattoir.

[Kalbear]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

Have to realise that the MCU is a Disney product. They are never going to be doing R rated content, especially for their main movies. We have already seen a little bit too much disneyfication of the Marvel universe, it certainly isn't going to be turning into The Boys. 

Disney is already doing r rated content in Deadpool and blade.

They're not going to do it with, like, captain America any time soon but Disney does this every so often.

Also, just throwing it out there - having xmen as their r property for more mature stories would not suck.

 

[sifth]

Just now, Kalbear said:

Disney is already doing r rated content in Deadpool and blade.

They're not going to do it with, like, captain America any time soon but Disney does this every so often.

Also, just throwing it out there - having xmen as their r property for more mature stories would not suck.

 

I think Echo will be a good testing ground for what an R rated Disney film will look like. Are we in uncharted waters? Has Disney ever made an R rated film? Naturally I’m not counting the upcoming Deadpool and Blade films. 

[Kalbear]

1 minute ago, sifth said:

I think Echo will be a good testing ground for what an R rated Disney film will look like. Are we in uncharted waters? Has Disney ever made an R rated film? Naturally I’m not counting the upcoming Deadpool and Blade films. 

Disney's brand hasn't, but the company has made a lot - they were under a different branding name though. Touchstone? I think that's right. Nowadays that's what they do with hulu.

https://movieweb.com/disney-movies-rated-r/#down-and-out-in-beverly-hills-1986

[sifth]

1 hour ago, mormont said:

As a strategy for Marvel that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Why would they pivot to making films a substantial part of their target audience can't get in to see? 

The problem Marvel (and DC) have had in the comics industry is that they are in a death spiral because they make comics that only appeal to people who already read comics, who are getting older and older. So they try to appeal to more diverse, younger audiences, but then chicken out when this doesn't produce instant success and go back to making 'edgy' comics for the existing audience, dooming themselves to irrelevance. 

Why repeat that for the MCU?

Aping The Boys in the MCU would be as stupid as trying to imitate Image was in the '90s, except that the Image comics outsold Marvel whereas The Boys is much less successful than the MCU, so it makes even less sense. 

Well a lot of their audience isn’t showing up for the stuff they are creating, so it make’s logical sense to try something new. Both Ant Man 3 and The Marvels bombed this year. They better hope audiences turn up for Deadpool 3, but even that film is riding the nostalgia band wagon, similar to No Way Home.

Don’t get me wrong; GoTG 3 did really well this year and was a great film as well, but James Gunn is no longer part of the MCU and the new blood aren’t bring their A game. 

[Heartofice]

41 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Disney is already doing r rated content in Deadpool and blade.

They're not going to do it with, like, captain America any time soon but Disney does this every so often.

 

Hmm interesting, because thats a pretty recent change of heart. Fiege had made comments before about future movies not really straying from the PG-13 formula:
https://collider.com/new-blade-movie-mcu-cast-actor-filming-news/
 

Quote

“I think we target everything we’re doing for kids and adults, so I think your question is more adult or R-rated. Other than Deadpool, which has already established itself as a certain genre and a certain rating, that we already said we would not mess with when we started working on Deadpool — which we have — other than that, we haven’t encountered a story or a storyline or a character’s journey that a PG-13, or the tone, or the ratings we’ve been using up to this point has prevented us. We haven’t been held back by. If we ever are, then certainly there can be a discussion that can be had now that there’s other outlets like Star. But that just hasn’t been the case. We’ve told all the stories that we wanted to with the tonality and the rating we have now.”

With Blade, there has been such utter chaos around the making of that movie, I am not confident that it ever even gets released, and have no idea whether it will actually be an R rated movie, or whether Disney will shit the bed about have a last minute change of heart.

[Corvinus85]

42 minutes ago, sifth said:

I think Echo will be a good testing ground for what an R rated Disney film will look like. Are we in uncharted waters? Has Disney ever made an R rated film? Naturally I’m not counting the upcoming Deadpool and Blade films. 

Strictly under the Disney umbrella I don't think so, but ever since they acquired 20th Century Fox, they've been starting to lean that way. They put R-rated stuff on Hulu like Prey last year. 

[mormont]

50 minutes ago, sifth said:

Well a lot of their audience isn’t showing up for the stuff they are creating, so it make’s logical sense to try something new. Both Ant Man 3 and The Marvels bombed this year. They better hope audiences turn up for Deadpool 3, but even that film is riding the nostalgia band wagon, similar to No Way Home.

Don’t get me wrong; GoTG 3 did really well this year and was a great film as well, but James Gunn is no longer part of the MCU and the new blood aren’t bring their A game. 

As I noted above, what you're advising is exactly what's killing DC and Marvel in the comics business - a panicky overreaction leading to a pivot towards an inherently unsustainable customer base. It's not a strategy, it's short-termism. At least in the comics, this can be explained by the comfortable familiarity of the target audience. Here, it's basically you saying 'they should make only the stuff I like, that's a great strategy for success'. 

I do think there's a sensible place for R-rated stuff in a wider MCU offering. I'm fairly sure I'm going to like Echo as much as I liked The Marvels. But pivoting to 'edgy' as the main approach is just not a sensible strategy.

[Heartofice]

Anyway, I did watch The Marvels (not in a cinema which might influence my opinion)

And actually it's not a bad movie. It's absolutely fine. It's pretty much held together by Iman Vellani and it works when it's an extension of the Ms Marvel show, family and all. If you view it as a Ms Marvel big screen feature then I'm sure people could like it. In fact they should have just cut Captain Marvel out of it completely. 

There is a lot of badly thought out, weak characterisation throughout. The villain is down there with the worst MCU villains of all time. The plot is not good on any level, and there quite a few ropey scenes, and things don't fit together very well.

But it wasn't bad. It was just kind of sub par, forgettable fluff.

It was just a bit better than Quantumania, which is now my go to reference for a super weak MCU movie, but only because of the Khan family. I'm sure there is room in the MCU for this sort of movie, which is kind of Spy Kids level of fun. Take your children, they will enjoy it, don't pay attention to the story, stay for the fun bits and don't watch during the rest. 

But really we should be expecting more from the MCU than this right? If the bar is so low that a movie which is basically The Blue Beetle level is the best Marvel can offer then no wonder they are in trouble. If this was just one of many movies the MCU were releasing and the rest were all bangers then you'd barely notice this was so meh. The problem is, I think this is pretty much the level the Marvel is at right now. 

[Kalbear]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

But really we should be expecting more from the MCU than this right? If the bar is so low that a movie which is basically The Blue Beetle level is the best Marvel can offer then no wonder they are in trouble. If this was just one of many movies the MCU were releasing and the rest were all bangers then you'd barely notice this was so meh. The problem is, I think this is pretty much the level the Marvel is at right now. 

I think this is the real problem - we do kind of expect that (and have the budget to match) but we should really want to have some big wins and then...some 'fine' wins, with similar budgets. There should be room for fun movies that may find a different audience that can be just a good time as well as the big productions. But having every movie have the standard 3-act Marvel Superhero garbage with big blockbusters and whatnot is going to make everything very generic, very much the same, and ultimately not give people a whole lot of reason to go and watch that new thing when they could just rewatch Civil War or Infinity War. 

[sifth]

2 hours ago, mormont said:

 

I do think there's a sensible place for R-rated stuff in a wider MCU offering. I'm fairly sure I'm going to like Echo as much as I liked The Marvels. But pivoting to 'edgy' as the main approach is just not a sensible strategy.

Honestly curious, is their anything the MCU has created that your view as bad? As stated in the past, I often wonder if you work for Disney, since you blindly seem to love every and everything they seem to create or at least enjoy enough to defend.

Edited November 16, 2023 by sifth

[sifth]

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

But really we should be expecting more from the MCU than this right? If the bar is so low that a movie which is basically The Blue Beetle level is the best Marvel can offer then no wonder they are in trouble. If this was just one of many movies the MCU were releasing and the rest were all bangers then you'd barely notice this was so meh. The problem is, I think this is pretty much the level the Marvel is at right now. 

To be fair, the MCU did have a few wins this year, with GotG vol 3 and Loki season 2. So good content still exists in the MCU. For all we know Echo and Deadpool 3 might be good as well, from what little we've seen, but I suppose that's conjecture at best.

[Rhom]

Erik Kain's reviews are generally a little hit or miss for me (I do think he hits more than he misses though).  His new review for Loki is spot on I think though.

Loki Season 2 is a Blueprint For How to Save the MCU

This from the closing paragraph really stuck with me:

Quote

This is the way forward for the MCU. What truly matters is telling great stories with characters we care deeply about. These can be TVA analysts like Mobius, or roguish demigods like Loki, or even sympathetic villains like Renslayer. Fundamentally, we need to care about them and their relationships with one another more than we care about The Fate Of The Universe.

Really this is what we've been talking about here today.  Shang Chi is about a father and a son and their conflict over the loss of their wife/mother.  Black Widow is about a search for family.  Make the MCU "small" again. 

I said this many times in the past:  Ironman was about industrial espionage!  Hulk has always been The Fugitive... but green.  The MCU took off because it was telling grounded stories that people could believe.  It was much more influenced by Batman Begins than by X-Men (at first).

[Kalbear]

1 hour ago, Rhom said:

I said this many times in the past:  Ironman was about industrial espionage!  Hulk has always been The Fugitive... but green.  The MCU took off because it was telling grounded stories that people could believe.  It was much more influenced by Batman Begins than by X-Men (at first).

Yep. And the worst parts of the best stories were the 'big' unnecessary fights that we didn't care about (like the end of Winter Soldier with the big ships, or Black Panther. When the big end fight matters - Cap vs. Bucky or Cap vs Iron Man, Black Panther vs Killmonger - as long as it's an interesting fight then it's great. But you don't need a giant Return of the Jedi three-part setpiece every single time. You can...just not. You can have Loki sacrificing his friendships for his friends, you can have Thor blowing up Asgard to stop Hela (Ragnarok, IMO, is a good example of an end setpiece that works within the story well), you can have Ant Man fighting on Thomas. 

I don't know that you need to have grounded stories exactly, but the best stories are when the fight is the culmination of the relationship and flows from that, not the stakes. Because, ultimately, we know that the stakes are going to be averted and not a big deal, but the relationship - that is what may change and what we feel. 

[williamjm]

1 hour ago, Rhom said:

I said this many times in the past:  Ironman was about industrial espionage!  Hulk has always been The Fugitive... but green.  The MCU took off because it was telling grounded stories that people could believe.

Even the first Thor film is literally about him being grounded.

[Derfel Cadarn]

7 hours ago, sifth said:

Well a lot of their audience isn’t showing up for the stuff they are creating, so it make’s logical sense to try something new. Both Ant Man 3 and The Marvels bombed this year. They better hope audiences turn up for Deadpool 3, but even that film is riding the nostalgia band wagon, similar to No Way Home.

Don’t get me wrong; GoTG 3 did really well this year and was a great film as well, but James Gunn is no longer part of the MCU and the new blood aren’t bring their A game. 

The quality isn’t really worse than phase 1 and 2 MCU. The issue is that the days of people going out to the cinema with their families once or twice a month are gone.

Covid changed habits. And it’s still around/increasing, so why soend a few hours in a room with dozens of people.

Money. Inflation means people have less disposable income.

Rapid transfer to streaming/DVD. Why spend £40 taking family to the cinema when they can wait a few months and watch it in D+?
 

Ultimately, people are mostly going to the cinema now to see big tentpole stuff. And Avengers/Spiderman movies aside, MCU movies are not that. People are not going en masse to see Antman. They can watch it on D+ a few months later in their own home.

Issue isnt the fans, toxic tho they are. Its the loss of the casual audience who turned up with kids.

[Heartofice]

19 minutes ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

The quality isn’t really worse than phase 1 and 2 MCU.

Well I’d say in general the quality IS worse in the latest phase, but otherwise I agree with your post, people aren’t going to watch the smaller, non event movies in cinemas. 
 

It’s a big worry for the movie industry in general, and one of the big problems is that comic book movies were almost the entire industry on their own. If audiences aren’t even going to watch those then there is big trouble.

[sifth]

32 minutes ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Issue isnt the fans, toxic tho they are. Its the loss of the casual audience who turned up with kids.

I agree with your logic. The question then becomes how to get them back or if that is even possible.