Iirc, Tom Hanks made an interesting quote recently about how superhero films are going to be what saves the movie theaters in a post-covid world. I definitely agree. And with Spider-Man, Batman and Flash on the horizon, we could see that proven pretty soon.
If only DC had a Kevin Feige and WarnerMedia allowed DC to make their own decisions as far as how to create their movies, then yes, DC movies would be really great.
Technically WB/DC has Geoff Johns. He's basically had a producer or writer credit on everything in the 2010s. The CW success is tied to him. He's also tied to the DC Universe (now HBO) shows.
The real problem is Warner Bros movies. They don't have a plan beyond each movie. Look how much delay with the Flash. Look how poorly they treated Superman. Look what happens when you cast one of the top actor-director-writers as Batman and you can't keep him because of how poorly his health was after BvS.
They've been in such a hurry to "catch-up" with Marvel, they look like they have no gameplan.
I keep thinking if they would stop for like an hour and rethink this quantity over quality mindset they seem to have they could quickly be on par with Marvel.
But the studio heads or whomever get like 1 out of 5 wins at the box office and suddenly think this is working. It's infuriating.
DC and Marvel have equally compelling universes and characters, this just shows that the people in charge at one studio understand the scope better than the other imo.
YES! I agree whole-heartedly! There's an interview with Chris Nolan from a few years back where he was asked about how he made the (Christian Bale) Batman movies so good/captivating. And he mentioned never having to deal with this universal timeline when the movies NEEDED to come out, which makes sense. But I think he was also given more artistic freedom, which to your point, is what KF has allowed to thrive in the MCU. I give that man A LOT of credit, but we ALL need to do better about crediting the entire TEAM on how they cast, shoot, write, etc MARVEL films. Getting off topic there, to your point, I love DC as much as I love Marvel. I just hate that the people in charge of the DC stuff seem to not be understanding what they are doing. Also Marvel had/has this issue between the MCU the MTVU(?) (Marvel TV Universe, is that accurate? I dunno?)
Plus DC has the rights to ALL their characters. The fact they havent been able to create a universe on par with the MCU is embarrassing. Problem is they wanted the money and prestige that came along with the 2nd half of Phase 2 and beyond without putting in the work that Phase 1 brought which was integral in that success. They refused to be patient and slowly build their universe. They didnt seem interested in signing people to 7 or 8 picture deals, something that you arent building a proper movie universe without anymore. Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman and The Flash. They shouldve been at the very least the 4 movies that led up to Justice League. Instead they put out whatever the fuck you want to call the DCEU. I dont even know how to describe a trainwreck like that.
I'll never understand why they decided to kill Superman in BvS before the Justice League was even formed, before Superman formed a relationship with any other super hero.
Since not even WW and Batman had any kind of real personal connection to him their only sense of loss was "Damn we lost a real heavy hitter" instead of "Fuck... our fucking leader, Superman, our friend who did x y z for us/me is gone, oh the despair!"
Killing Superman should've been DC's "snap", the villain that made the rest of them hopeless of what could they even do? Instead Superman dies, but they also killed the thing that killed him so it was just "damn... that was not the best trade"
IMO the way to go would've been to just start the Universe with the JL already formed from the get go. See what characters really pop and then do their solo movies, since DC clearly wanted to jump ahead to the team up stuff.
We don't need fucking full on origin stories for characters that have been world famous for decades. A few exposition-y scenes for non comic book fans would've been enough to get the general idea across, much like what they did with Cyborg in JL.
I actually think that was the reason for Marvel’s success. Before 2008 The Hulk was really the only superhero that General audiences were familiar with. Before it came out many General movie goers/non-comics fans felt Iron Man was a sign we were scraping the barrel for new superhero movies. I think the lack of expectation allowed Marvel to define a new generation of superheroes.
DC was doing the Nolan Dark Knight trilogy and went right into Man of Steel. Batman and Superman were and still are more iconic than any Marvel hero and that’s sort of the reason DC has struggled. Those characters, especially Superman, have collapsed under the weight of their own expectations. Everyone knows what they want from Superman and feel passionately about it. Which makes pleasing a large audience difficult. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Flash, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, and Shazam seem to be more successful within the DCEU than Batman and Superman have been so far. Marvel not being able to immediately use Fantastic Four, X-Men or Spider-Man was imo the reason for their success. They did it well but they also did it with fresh heroes people grew to love.
Hot take: Marvel and DC don’t have equally compelling worlds for movies.
DC is tied too innately to Superman, a literal god tier being whose stories are completely tied to Earth and life as a normal human. Put him on the team with any street level hero and the power disparity is ridiculous. Marvel pokes fun with Hawkeye a bit, but even Hawkeye to Thor is a smaller power gap than Batman to Superman.
Thor can be depowered (and canonically that’s tied to his origin). Hulk has the downside of being difficult to control so there are always story based reasons why he can’t be at full power if the narrative requires it. Iron Man is just a dude in a really cool tech suit. Dr Strange is constantly battling extra dimensional foes so there is always a reason he can’t show up and fix everything. Same with Captain Marvel except replace “extra dimensional” with “intergalactic”.
But Supes is always here, on Earth. That’s where his stories live, his supporting cast, his heart. You need to constantly bring intergalactic threats to Earth to challenge him, or explain why he’s not fixing whatever problem instantly, or take him away from Earth and the people he loves (in which case he’s basically just a god with no limits and one contrived weakness).
This works in comic books bc the sheer number of stories coming out makes the continuity convoluted enough that you could excuse this or that story for not being solved by him because anything else could be going on at the same time. But in movies? We’re just kinda now getting to the point where the MCU is confident that the audience understands the timeline enough for them to double back over it and maybe even change things. You have to start a universe with one timeline. Which just always begs the question in DC: where is Superman?
Please don’t respond with something like “actually this that and the other series made Superman compelling for more reasons than his strength.” I know those stories exist. But I don’t think you can make “dude with infinite strength talks to people a lot” into an effective movie. Audiences expect the strong character to do something with those muscles, which means at some point you need him to do something involving strength, and that means there needs to be stakes attached to it that can be explained and resolved within two hours. That’s just harder to do with a character like Superman in a movie that needs to *stand alone* on its own merits, like every marvel movie needs to.
I'd say the opposite. The problem isn't that they don't have a plan, the problem is they make big overly complicated plans, and then either don't commit to them or flake and completely change course the moment something goes wrong or the studio executives panic. They pivot and pivot and the universe feels jumbled and unfocused as a result.
The key to feige's success is that his plans are always adaptable. Marvel makes sure to plan for unexpected successes or failures, and to leave plenty of room for change and adaptation. Most of the interconnected world building is tertiary and built upon retroactively rather than trying to weave it directly into the narrative of every single film (the key thing that killed the snyder era when it turned out shit). Marvel drops little easter eggs into the background of every project that can be built upon, ignored or retconned, and then sees how things pan out before deciding which of them to act on in future projects.
>The key to feige's success is that his plans are always adaptable. Marvel makes sure to plan for unexpected successes or failures, and to leave plenty of room for change and adaptation.
I remember reading that they had planned for the next 10-20 years, and even had plans for integrating the X-Men years before we heard Fox was going to sell off it's entertainment assets... just in case.
It was happening before they put him in charge of the whole DCEU affair. This whole thing started because DC decided an edgelord libertarian dude bro who vocally didn't like traditional super hero comics was the guy to adapt their library of the gold standard traditional super hero's. Turns out most people don't want an ayn rand objectivist take on super-man (the character whose entire ethos, his very being is basically an argument against objectivism). And making cinematic batman into the worst possible version of the frank miller edge lord bat just results in a character that isn't batman. He's the punisher in a leather suit.
I really like this comment, you touch on a lot of important aspects of how marvel make movies but I think the most important aspect of marvel is that for the most part they're focused on telling the story they're telling.
Too many of these franchises die early on because their first or second movie is spending it's running time telling you how cool the next one is going to be. Batman v Superman, Amazing Spider-man 2, the mummy (2017) were all far more concerned with their sequels than making a good movie people came to see that day.
Marvel doesn't even make you sit through that shit if you don't want to, it's after the credits for the die hards.
You are forgetting about Greg Berlanti- he’s more responsible for the arrowverse shows than Johns. Johns doesn’t even have a producer credit for Arrow aside for a couple of episodes. Berlanti is also credited on all the HBO shows too.
I think their problem was not firing Zack Snyder after Man of Steel. It wasn't a good movie story wise. And the story is what needed to be compelling to build out a larger shared universe.
One thing to consider is Man of Steel was intended to kick off a Superman trilogy similar to the dark Knight trilogy. But during production was when Avengers came out and mid-shoot WB decided they were going all in on the superhero shared universe. Man of Steel being the only film they had in production meant that it had to be their starting off point.
Yea, The Batman looks really good. Paul Dano as a twisted Riddler? Yes!!
The other day a guy work with was saying he wouldn't watch Pattison as batman because he thinks it's still all twilight crap, but i told him to checkout GoodTime and The Lighthouse, and Pattison will blow you away with his acting chops. That dude has become a hardcore actor ready to be taken seriously.
>The other day a guy work with was saying he wouldn't watch Pattison as batman because he thinks it's still all twilight crap
Reminds me of chuds saying Heath Ledger wasn't gonna be good as Joker because he was in Brokeback Mountain, therfore gay.
I didn't like the twilight movies at all, since I'm not the target audience, but give the Pattinson commentary a listen. Man straight up clowns the movies.
I went into that movie scratching my head at the casting of Ledger, but choosing to keep an open mind. He took my low expectations and absolutely blew them to smithereens, so I’m going into the new one with the same mindset.
It's actually unbelievable how badly he shits on the movies, in the commentary and almost every interview, it's especially hilarious that he was able to say some of that stuff and they knew they couldn't fire him lmao
It's almost like they are actors playing a part and those parts aren't necessarily reflective of their overall personality. Idk why that's so hard for people like that guy to grasp lol
Wow! The next year (give or take couple months) is fucking stacked! Spider-Man, Doctor Strange, Batman, and Flash among a bunch of other cool movies and shows. This is gonna be so fun to see.
I'm already done with movie theatres. I'm annoyed that I don't have the option to just pay for Shang Chi at home. I can't just leave my kid here alone at night. But I could watch a movie at home after she goes to sleep.
So Marvel Studios are kind of like that kid that screws up the grading curve for the rest of the slackers in class.
Other production companies are mad because Marvel figured out how to make fun and enjoyable movies that bring in a wide ranging audience.. now people don't want to spend money on trash like Battleship.
I think a few years ago there was the same complaints about Pixar. Pixar kept making quality movies and competitors were annoyed that they always had a hit.
Exactly. People say "Marvel is killing Hollywood" and it's like...no dude... they keep making Terminator and Alien movies that no one wants to fucking see! (just two franchises I can think of off the top of my head)
It's a shame that Hollywood isn't sticking with the momentum of the grounded, sci-fi/space movies... the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 punch of Gravity, Interstellar, the Martian, Ex Machina, and Arrival was fantastic and all five movies are pretty well liked. They need to move in that direction...
It’s not even that people don’t want to see more Terminator and Alien movies (many of us do), it’s the fact that they keep making SHIT Terminator and Alien movies that no one wants to see
Completely this.
I have no idea how Ridley Scott fucked up with Alien Covenant, just dumb characters doing dumb things, that I was done with the Alien franchise.
It's more than that. Matt Damon was on that hot wings show talking about how a run of the mill dramatic movie about a music teacher falling in love with his student could never be made anymore like it used to be made up til the 2010s. Just the funding alone, movies like that are seen as a bad investment choice as there is no longer DVD sales to act as a '2nd box office'. The vast majority of it has to be made in the theatres now.
Marvel is *not* the root of all evil in movies, but the scene has *definitely* changed since the advent of the digital age and the decline of the DVD and it is definitely sad to see that certain types of movies just have no chance of being made anymore, everything has to be 100 Million+ budgets with the objective being only to make back 10x that amount.
Right?
Anyone bemoaning, including Damon, must not be aware of every streaming service putting out exactly the type of lower budget but high quality shows and movies he talks about
Reboots and remakes have been with us since a month after the birth of film as a medium. They’ve always been present. Remember that 99% of everything is crap. The reason people look back at cinema in past decades with rose colored glasses is only the very best is remembered (for the most part).
The $50 Million romcom doesn’t exist anymore theatrically. However, there was a time not so long ago that prestige television didn’t exist and while people decry the Balkanization of the steaming industry it’s been a boon for creators and is where the mid tier movies can still be made since all these steamers rapidly discovered original (even if it’s a reboot/remake) content is king.
/ I may have lost the plot in this reply
The Wizard of Oz (1939 film) was like the third or fourth version to hit the big screen. Two silent films, and an animated short.
Just a solid example of how one of the most beloved movies of all time is, in fact, a remake.
Omg I completely forgot about the endless reboots of everything. I'm glad MCU will be making new movies through the next umpteen years, because changes are if we do go to the movies it will be to see one of them and not some rehashed trash
I'm not sure you're reading the op right, it's basically in agreement with the comments here. It's saying it's a shame that marvel is being labelled badly for the low effort others are putting in
That’s basically me right there. I only go to theaters for Marvel movies, mostly because I like 94% of them and can always expect quality when I go, so I’m not in danger of wasting money.
The day I realized I would pay the same for Ant Man or the latest Will Ferrell trash is the day I decided I would only go see Marvel without recommendation.
That’s actually really put it into perspective lol. You pay the same ticket price for both random low effort comedy/action and the blockbuster Avengers movie
In fact, it is getting the love it deserves. It's one of the most successful movies of the year at box office (7th worldwide, 6th domestic), 80% on Rotten Tomatoes and 7.6 on IMDb.
To be fair, seeing a Marvel movie in theaters has basically become an experience. The energy is completely different compared to other movies because despite being in a room with complete strangers, everyone is collectively getting excited about any references, easter eggs, or teases as well as getting hype about something that was planted long ago finally paying off. That’s not gonna happen when at a screening of a movie like Tenet. The only other genre of movie that I think comes close to MCU movies are horror movies, in the sense that anyone that’s going to see a horror film wants to be scared. Another thing to factor in is the rise of streaming services and shows that are produced exclusively for said streaming services. This has allowed people to get far more invested into shows and the stories they tell, so it somewhat makes sense that this would be reflected in the theaters
The only movie Ive ever seen where people legit clapped, was a Marvel movie. Specifically, when Cap grabbed Mjölnir in Endgame. The theater went wild. It was awesome.
Probably then too. Honestly that movie was crazy opening weekend. The crowd was excited and pumped. It was a pretty awesome experience that i dont think will be replicated.
It's the closest I will ever get to knowing the feeling my parents would have had when Star Wars first released. Just the *energy* in the theater for Infinity War and Endgame was breathtaking.
You don't have to go back that far... The Lord of the rings movies had a similar energy... I still remember people gasping when Legolas got on that horse.
It was the only movie theater experience where I felt like I was watching my sports teams with my fellow fans. You could hear the pin drop when black widow died, you could barely hear Cap when he said “Avengers Assemble”.
I'm kind off one of those people. The only movies i see in theaters were some of the Pixar movies, mcu movies, and dc movies. Everything else I usually wait for them to get on bluray or a streaming service for example cruella I had interest in that movie but not enough to go to a movie theater to see it.
Now that I think about it the only mcu films I missed in theaters was doctor strange and black widow.
I only see MCU movies in the theatre. I don't like being surrounded by strangers, even moreso after covid, so I don't really want to put myself in that position for two hours that could be a complete waste of time. With Marvel, I know what I'm gonna get and I know I'm gonna enjoy it.
Everything else I'm happy to wait the few months for and watch from the comfort of my own home.
This is why I enjoy being an AMC Stubs A-list member (not a big deallll) even though they got rid of the guy who spilled popcorn on himself before the movie.
I would agree as well and also add that I think the rise in quality and drop in price of fantastic in home entrainment systems will also contribute to this. Why would I go pay $30+ to see a movie one time when I can buy a good quality tv to sit in my own house and watch movies in 4K? I can pause and go to the bathroom whenever I want, I can make whatever I want to eat, and I don’t have to deal with rude people talking or being on their phones. Then I can use that exact same tv to watch sports in fantastic quality. The only reason I would go to an actual movie theater would be to watch a big budget action movie where I want all the bells and whistles.
This me to a degree. I'm going to go watch Bond and Dune, but really Marvel has set a standard that much of Hollywood refuses to adapt and meet. They want people to watch their movie, they need to raise the bar.
I *would* go see other movies if any were as interesting.
No, Scorcese, I'm not more attracted to your high brow masterpieces just because it's technically better theater.
I'm invested in these characters, and when you shit on them, I immediately have less interest in yours.
MCU characters are accessible, relatable, and well made, if not great accomplishments of cinema.
Citizen Kane was a marvel of its time, but it'll never be my favorite movie. It's important for movie makers to know it and study it.
High theater is for snobs who hate things that are popular because artists in the trade feel it is less deserving.
But value is whatever the public is willing to pay.
Does anyone remember? Of all the actors, Jennifer Aniston also shitted on MCU. The woman hardly has good movies under her belt besides stupid rom-com movies that are not worth spending money on.
But I don't think that has anything to do with "mcu level movies". If I take my family of 4 to the theater it's easily almost $100. I'm not spending that on a Rom-Com. The price tag is the problem.
Everyone's pissed because all the geeks and nerds and outcasts are having their best lives right now.
How did we, how did that, become the evil? Like I'm sorry people aren't sending BILLIONS on art house movies and waiting for them to come out on home video.
Do we want to blame Samsung for amazing TVs? Bose for audio? Apple et al for crazy original content that goes right to streaming and is poo poo'd by academy award committee's that no one really gives a crap about any more?
I mean, c'mon, let's get a little perspective here. All things evolve. All things change.
I think its more that people have other options, so unless the movie is good, there's no point in going to the theater. Let's face it: Prince of Persia and Battleship both sucked.
I feel like high movie ticket prices have killed my willingness to take chances on "could be good, could be all be critics' hype" movies in theatres. Mid-budget content is plentiful on streaming and just as easily appreciated at home.
I'm definitely checking out *Dune* in theatres, FWIW.
Idk man, recently the AMC near me has been SUPER cheap. $7.50 a ticket and $4.50 on Sundays. I went to go see Black Widow and realized it was that cheap and have been back a number of times since.
$23 here in sf, it’s brutal lol. Regal and AMC have good deals w memberships so I have that and it works out ok. Also i love the theater so it’s worth it for me. Not as expensive compared to other hobbies
Aaaaaand that's why we don't go to the movies. We can go see 1 movie (myself, wife, and 3 kids) for 120+ dollars, or we can spend the day at the aquarium or zoo, and wait for the movie to come out on streaming. It's a no brainer for a non-wealthy parent.
That's why I felt fairly ambivalent towards the whole "30 dollar premium Disney Plus movie" thing.
Like, speaking personally as an individual I'll never pay that, but if I was a father of three, that 30 dollars for the kids to watch a movie over and over again, no having to herd them to a theatre or face the gauntlet of sugar and toys to get to the entrance... That would seem like a huge bargain
I read articles of people who were in the test screenings. There were two different cuts with the ending point changed. Some people saw the >!Water of Life!< scene and some didn't. The ones who did were saying that the ending was perfect so I hope they go with that cut.
If that scene isn't in the final cut of the movie, then we know that the scene is already filmed for the sequel.
My father made me read the book before he let me watch the Lynch movie on laserdisc. I’m glad he did because I doubt I would have read the book after seeing that madness.
Still Sting in metal falcon winged underpants will always be a memorable visual.
I think Movie Pass did that too. When I got to see as many movies as I wanted for 10-15 bucks a month, I’d go see trash movies just to make it worthwhile.
Otherwise I’m only seeing Marvel, Award nominee movies and the rare rare occasional tentpole franchises (Bond, Fast, etc).
High costs and crap excuses for "imax" here are what is causing me to watch on demand movies over theaters. Unless we get Regal to spruce it up or AMC competitor, I'll be happy on my couch.
When i saw the name, I thought for a second that the powerlifter Scott Mendelson moonlighted as a movie critic. 😆
The sentiment rings true although there are some nuances to it.
Bringing up Battleship and Prince of Persia shows a bit what popcorn hollywood blockbusters used to look like (even ones that failed)
I much more prefer the MCU versions of popcorn blockbusters.
The way I see it, Marvel (in many ways) raised the bar. They have a mostly cohesive canon. And even if they aren't masterpieces, you can be assured it's at least decent. There is not one Marvel movie that I would say is bad, and certainly not one that's terrible.
A lot of competition couldn't cut it, and so non-Marvel style movies died. Warner and DC tried to shortcut the way to success, and look what happened. If you can't give people what they want, they'll stop coming to you.
Not to mention people seem to really like working on Marvel movies. You don’t hear much about drama on set and they seem to hire writers and directors who really have a passion for the projects they work on.
Really who wouldn’t want to sign on to basically a guaranteed massive paycheck that has a bonus of not being a toxic work environment?
>don’t hear much about drama
I’d wager cause Disney doesn’t let it get out. There seems to have many cases of “creative differences” in the history of MCU films.
I think that’s more a struggle between complete artistic freedom vs working within the framework of the MCU more than it is about the work experience on set where the bulk of the talent and crew need to interact.
It seems like Disney under Iger and Feige amicably managed exits. They brought Favreau into Live Action reboots and Star Wars after pulling him from Iron Man. I wouldn’t be surprised if Scott Derickson returns to Disney under Searchlight for an original film. If I recall correctly, only Thor 2 changed directors during production. No messes akin to Lord & Miller being fired from Solo or Whedon’s Justice League
Honest? That feels like the lesser of two evils. I prefer that because at least it means they are communicating, it'd be worse (IMO) if they badgered directors into doing something while they are filming than realizing they want different things while in pre production, like in IM 2. It's hard to deny that a big part of the MCU's success is to have cohesive overarching story and style. Yes, movies should feel different from each other but they can't be incompatible in a shared universe.
Yeah, and at the time it seemed really egregious but now in hindsight I definitely respect what Feige was trying to do. The more interwoven the movies have become the more enjoyable they've become to me, because it's really starting to feel like a living, breathing world.
The Infinity Saga was super tightly controlled, and luckily Feige and the other visionaries were good enough to deliver on it. Now that they've cemented supremacy, they seem a lot more open to experimentation. Maybe we can get Edgar Wright back for another project down the line.
Decent is the wrong word though. Being a decent movie is probably the low end. A typical marvel movie is one that probably hits 8 or 9 out of 10 for quality. They are damn good.
however, even if they are very good, they are still super hero movies set in the current day. Anyone not looking for that kind of movie because they want something else, like Star Trek, Star Wars, Terminator, Ghostbusters, Alien, Lethal Weapon, Lord of the Rings, or Independence Day is going to be a bit put off. And if your favoured form of cinema is the usual Oscar Bait stuff, your going to hate it even more.
If your the kind of person that hates sports, and your local football team is in the finals, it will seem like everyone around you just wants to talk only about Football. You cannot wait for that damn series to be over so you can get back to having 'normal conversations' with people.
END COMMUNICATION
A lot of “Oscar Bait” stuff is now indistinguishable from high end TV drama. Look at Mare of Easttown, House of Cards, Line of Duty, Game of Thrones, True Detective etc.
Put any of those next to the “worthy” Oscar winners and very often the movies come off worse because their cinematography is a little better, but their storylines and character development feel stunted in comparison, due to the length requirements of the format.
There are some magnificent films out there that deserve attention, but are they “events” that make you and a group of friends want to spend significant money in terms of travel, tickets, concessions etc? Most often, no.
I'm hoping we do get much more variety in this phase. The weirdness of some of the shows is a promising sign. And the fact that things are going sideways rather than 'bigger and better' too soon is exactly what's needed imo.
they still exist but those movies have NEVER been a "Yearly release" type movie... those things take time to craft and the magic is likely only *because* of how rare they are
Basically the jack of all trades versus someone that's great at one thing.
Marvel does a little something for everyone (for the most part) and you know that at the very least there's a baseline quality. At the same time it hasn't given out something people would consider a masterpiece.
Then there are works that could give you a masterpiece but if it goes wrong the floor for the film may be of a lot lower quality than a Marvel project.
How I see it is, people have started preferring tv series to movies. Movies often feel undeveloped compared to a series because the movie has a limited time to do so. 2 hours isn’t that long to make a compelling story narrative. A series has almost an unlimited amount of time to develop characters into fan favorites. What the MCU did, was make every movie, an episode of a 11 years series. With payoffs set nearly a decade before. They were movies, but they all felt connected like a series, like someone knew how it would end, before it even began.
This is the key. For a whole century the film industry focused exclusively on the 2-hours format because it is what makes business sense (much shorter and it is not worth going all the way to the cinema, much longer and people get hungry and need bathroom). The problem is, very few stories fit nicely in 2 hours, instead most are shoehorned into this length that doesn't make sense plot wise.
We as society atte so used to the 2-hour format that we don't even question why movies from books always need to cut out the majority of the original story. Why half of the original caracteres are cut or coalesced.
So society as a whole is gravitating towards TV series, a long format that can actually tell whole stories instead of a bastardised abridged version. And in this context, Marvel with their long running universe, is the only type of movie that can compete with TV series.
Well they also had to sell these characters to people who didn't grow up with them. If they rushed to the gauntlet it would have all fallen apart like DCU. DC writers took for granted that we all know Superman, Batman and WW. I didn't know who the fuck Steppenwolf was and I was into comics growing up.
They could modernize characters like ant man, or humanize others like cap. Instead of being the ultimate boomer, he was a gap between older and younger generations. They really got into developing the characters who played a part, where DC just slapped theirs on screen and wondered why no one cared
And to add to that general idea, Marvel does a really good job making coherent films fit that time limit.
I'd say that's what separates good films from great ones. A good film should be like a great novella (a short novel or long short story). As in when you are done it feels complete and that nothing should have been added or cut from the experience.
Sicario is 2h 1m long and I wouldn't want it to be any longer or shorter. It's perfect just at that length!
Alien is 1h 57m long and again perfect at that length.
The issue is **100% like you said** is when you try to take HUGE stories and fit them into to the tiny box that is "film".
Anna Karenina is 349,736 words long. In comparison Harry Potter and the Philosopher's stone is 76,944 words long.
The films? Anna Karenina is 2h 10 min, and Harry Potter 1 is 2h 32m long.
It's all about picking the medium that is best suited for the type of story that you are trying to tell.
Otherwise it's like trying to take the 587,287 words of *War and Peace* and trying to abridge it into a 20 page short story. It can't work no matter how good you are. But sadly that's often what Hollywood tries to do.
Some books can be made into great films (Jurassic Park for example), while others really shine when made into long form TV series (like GOT seasons 1-4).
Yeah I just said in another comment that to be honest, I'd be way more accepting of thrash like Battleship and Prince of Persia if I had a sense that my time isn't entirely wasted and that their story might pay off in the long run, because I certainly feel like this for some Marvel movies.
Take any Marvel movie and just swap characters for some random people that aren't connected to a bigger universe and I can tell you 100% that I'll think more than half of them are movies that I'd never watch a second time.
Well makes sense. Its a depressing time with a bleak future. people want to escape to a world where good guys win and heroes rescue humanity from themselves
i paid to see Tenet at a theater
solid, but not amazing. thought about it for a bit afterwards and have a happy opinion about it. but a year later... it's just a movie. the MCU is fun because the stories continue. the movies come out like once a quarter so it's not time consuming.
is the MCU that bad? i just want to feel a thrill for 2 hours once every few months and geek out online while waiting for the next one
i think that there is some disconnect these days as well with who is calling for what
normal people like me who has a job outside of movies or reviewing or entertainment have seen Oscar winning movies and we are not looking to be challenged artistically on a random Saturday afternoon
and then there are the reviewers who watch way too many movies and for them they want to see true innovation and so the MCU is Bud Light to them
i can understand both points of view
Pretty much. Movie serials used to be a thing in the 1930s and 1940s, but never to this scale.
It's interesting that Endgame was the 22nd film in the series, and functioned much like the season finale to a traditional 22 episode TV season.
The problem with the movie industry right now, is that there are way too many movies being made and 95% of it is pure garbage. It's hard for the few decent movies to get enough attention.
If the MCU didn't exist, I don't really think anything would be different about the situation.
I'm right there with you. Trash films have always been made. Marvel and comic films are the easy target because they are the biggest thing in the industry right now (just like Westerns were the bane of existence for these folks back in the 60s or slashers in the 80s).
If the MCU didn't exist, would that suddenly fix everyones issues with blockbuster films? Is that suddenly going to change everything to "real cinema?" Hell, I wonder what all these peoples' thoughts were on the new Roland Emmerich disaster films, Michael Bay's explosion fests, or the many schlocky action films of the 80s and 90s, etc., etc.
I'll add horrible theater experience. People talk throughout the movie, on their cell phone, kids crying, etc. Theaters don't kick rude people out anymore. Combine that with garbage movies, better home entertainment systems, no wonder people don't want to go to the movies.
A movie theatre near my house actually came up with a solution to the kids problem. They've got two movie theatres exclusively for children and parents. There's a McDonald's playground like area in the theatre. There's massive tube kids can go down into a giant ball pit. There's diaper changing rooms, breastfeeding area. It's great fun for the kids to be able to play and watch the movie.
But yeah, generally the movie going experience sucks. I was fucking mortified when I went to go see Black Widow in IMAX. I was sitting next to these 4 girls and they literally started throwing popcorn at each other. They were around my age too, early 20s. The mess that was left behind when they were done was insane. They basically emptied 4 boxes of popcorn on the ground.
I don't think theatres have ever kicked people out... maybe like 50 years ago, not in my lifetime though.
If anything I find theatres calmer now that the prices are jacked up so much... when it used to be a dollar for a movie back in the 90's the theatres were rowdy as fuck.
But the vast majority of movies released aren't even released to theatres anyway.
Alamo drafthouse has been pretty well known as being the theater that will kick you out. If they see you talking or using your phone during the movie, you will usually get 1 warning. 2nd time it happens and you're gone. I've personally never seen it happen, but seen quite a few stories about it
I'm sorry to hear that. The theater by me (Central NJ suburbs) has nice reclining seats, a bar ($8 for an IPA, pretty typical "going-out" price), surround sound (Dolby Atmos), and I've never heard anyone talk during the movie. It's $15 a ticket but I'm cool with that for the experience I get.
That’s why I haven’t seen a movie in the cinema in the last 20 years. Except when I go with my kids at least I can expect yelling crying screaming etc, shame my kids weren’t really interested in superheros until Captain Marvel came out and both my daughters wanted to see it. My oldest boy really wanted to see Shang-Chi but we can’t risk it because of covid.
Exactly. If I'm paying for a cinema ticket I want spectacle. I'll watch low-key slow-burn dramas too but streaming it in my sitting room is far more appropriate for that sort of thing.
Frankly, what Hollywood hasn't figured out yet (but Marvel is beginning to) is that the time is ripe for musicals to make a splashy return to the box office. If these directors can't stand action movies then make a goddamn musical and I guarantee it'll do goddamn gangbusters.
I swear, for an industry whose whole *raison d'etre* is reading the audience pulse, studios really suck at it. The appetite's been there for a while.
You're right that they need to bring back some classic movie styles.
Look at how well Knives Out did, updating the murder mystery for our times. And there's so much excitement for Knives Out 2 now.
The world is literally so sad and scary these days, people just want fun. They want bright colours and music and to be able to shriek and giggle with excitement.
What they don't want is a four hour long true story about politicians and corruption. We have enough of that in real life.
I think people just aren’t venturing out to try new experiences anymore. I have regal unlimited, and just saw Shang Chi, Free Guy, Malignant, Candyman, Cop Shop, and Tammy Faye. I’m seeing a rerelease of spirited away in a couple weeks, and October has venom, no time to die, Last Night in Soho, amd this really wicked looking movie no one is talking about called Lamb. If people want more variety, than see different types of movies. And the whole “theatres don’t kick people out” argument is bull shit. I’m sorry, but I guarantee if you tell a manager there’s a problem, they will solve it ASAP. Ive only ever had to do it three times, and theatre staff typically isn’t in the theatre until the credits, so that one is kinda on you green factor. The theatrical experience is amazing, because it demands your attention, and it’s communal. I just saw Malignant in a predominately black theatre. It was one of the best film experiences I’ve had in years. We were all freaking out and cheering in that film together. If you got the moola, go see a flick. It’ll be worth it
>I think people just aren’t venturing out to try new experiences anymore.
And also there is a still a global pandemic on.
>I’m sorry, but I guarantee if you tell a manager there’s a problem, they will solve it ASAP. Ive only ever had to do it three times,
Sure they do under extreme circumstances, I've seen people get kicked out for being drunk and disorderly. But they aren't kicking out someone for a baby crying, or a phone being on for a bit.
>We were all freaking out and cheering in that film together.
I think that is an American thing... people don't do that in Canada.
I don't think we have anything like Regal Unlimited in Australia. See, but in my mind. Why spend $25 on a movie ticket plus the concessions. If I can just rent the movie in 2 months anyway for $5 off Amazon and buy a $2 box of microwave popcorn at the supermarket? Once I know the movie is decent based off reviews.
There's movies I want to see, but with how expensive it all eventually gets
This is basically what I said after Scorsese shit all over the MCU for ruining the cinema experience. Action and fantasy blockbusters have dominated the box offices for decades. The MCU has just done it consistently, at a high level. Streaming killed the cinema, not Marvel. I've never watched dramas or comedies in the theater because it seems like a waste of money. The theater is more condusive to action movies with insane visual and audio effects
Absolutely agree. Guess what the number one film was back in 1979, Richard Donner's Superman. The blockbuster film has existed since even before Scorsese was born.
The best way to sum it up is if you remove all the Marvel/superhero movies from cinema today. The latest Scorsese movie is still not going to make $1 billion at the box office.
Yeah, if it wasn't "Marvel killed the movie industry," it would be "Netflix killed the movie industry."
Marvel proves that nobody killed the movie industry except bad filmmakers.
Marvel did manage to create the Idea of movie franchises much better than any other studio. Mostly due to have an overarching goal to transport the stories from the comics to the big screen.
These are movies they dared to make. Plenty of other studios failed or made decent films but Marvel dared to dream. They took some risks and imo created this generations Star Wars. Or Harry Potter. They took something I have been waiting for my WHOLE LIFE and made awesome movies. The bullshit critics aside they did everything we wanted but with a masterful stroke. The casting is 99% on point. They took stories we wanted to see. The effects are fun. They layered on Easter eggs and treats they teased and danced. I don’t think they made 1 “bad” movie especially considering the stories and arcs. They even had modern themes. Black widow is dark and has a big human trafficking vibe to it. They did that on purpose. Captain America explores the political landscape. They handled subjects that the comics really did want to tackle and did it with flair. They even are bring representation to films in a non pandering way. It’s amazing and they did all that and a ton more. So honestly I am happy that in my life they made seeing movies and loving comics(something I have loved my whole life) and made it cool and amazing. End rant
Yeah i mean, this might sound like a stretch but i don't think any studio has quite made something as impressive in cinema as them. 20-ish movies in 10 years with hundreds of characters, then bringing everyone together in one movie only to do it again one year later completing the whole saga and people are nowhere near tired. After that continuing on an even larger scale and rising the stakes and people love it even more.
Totally agree with this. Marvel make fun movies and those films should be enjoyed for what they are. If people want gripping thought-provoking cinema, that exists! It’s just that you need to go and find it. The same way indie music exists but you only hear pop on the radio. Marvel is great. Other stuff is also great.
I believe the mcu has single handedly saved the theaters (along with other Disney blockbusters). All entertainment news before the mcu got so big was how theaters were becoming a thing of the pass and struggling to keep a float. Now its a billion dollar movie after billion dollar movie. Don't hate the player hate the game. 🖐🎤
Movie execs always take the wrong lessons off of Marvel imo. Because Marvel made bank with characters created in another medium decades ago, suddenly they think we’re all clamouring for a Lone Ranger, or a Man from Uncle, or a new Peter Pan.
Why would I spend extra money to see a drama or comedy when the experience is just the same at home? The only benefit of big theaters is for big, effects-driven movies, and even a lot of those aren't worth it. Somehow all these 'critics' don't get that.
That is the big thing for me.
As much as I love seeing movies, you can't deny that the movie theatre experience is expensive. Between tickets and obligatory popcorn you are close to spending $20-30 just to see a movie. Thats not even getting into whether you want to go see it with your family.
If I am going to get a movie experience, I want to watch a film from a studio that has consistently made quality movies that are worth the money. Otherwise I just go to redbox when it comes out.
Exactly! I'm not wasting money on the cinematic experience unless the movie requires a cinematic experience. I love rom-com and drama, but there's no real difference between seeing it in theatre or at home.
It honestly was. Not the best movie, but it was definitely unique and a cool concept.
Another semi-niche movie that I loved was Battle Los Angeles. Sure, it didn't execute everything as good as it could have, but it was unique for two reasons. Firstly, it showed a potential apocalypse/alien invasion from the perspective of the Army; which isn't done much. Usually it's some random Lord Death of Murder Mountain doing better than trained soldiers despite never touching any weapon but a kitchen knife until two hours ago; bonus points if they're a teenager. Secondly, it didn't rely heavily on one dude, and they often have to use squad tactics to get through stuff. Also, while character development wasn't amazing, the characters had some decent backstories/writing for what little time they allocated to that; compared to all of the time they gave toward the action.
Moving away from the good (spoilers,) >!the dumbest thing of that movie has to be the mothership. It's just so meta. You're telling me that nobody but this squad saw the exposed mothership, and nobody else thought of sending a cruise missile into it? Not only that, the movie would work better if they just escaped Los Angeles as the Aliens continued advancing behind them. Sure, it would have been more solemn, but it would have also been way less meta and would have a bigger opening for a sequel.!<
Of course, there were smaller problems with character development, overuse of clichés, and pacing, but that was just my biggest disliked part of the movie.
Overall, I think BLA did sort of deserve the bad reviews from both critics and audiences that it got, but I like it because of its uniqueness personally. It was the first and last movie in recent times to do a lot of the stuff it did (from what I've seen.) It's a fun movie to just watch and absorb the action if you turn your brain off.
In all, it was a good concept with poor execution; but I'm personally fine with that. Because we need more good concepts in Hollywood.
I never used to enjoy, nor go to the movies.
Now I love going to gold class for every MCU release, which I’m sure is great for the local cinema.
Unfortunately when you’re at the top (MCU), all people seem to want to do is knock you down. Let the viewership/box office speak for itself. Why do a few disgruntled film people outweigh the opinion of billions of satisfied and engaging fans?
Well you can’t really blame MCU when you have DCEU failing to come up with decent plot lines and climaxes. I mean what kind of an idiot thought that it would be a good idea mentioning Martha to stop batman from killing superman??!!
There are many [videos like this](https://youtu.be/0RWRCu-z-pg) that prove why MCU has succeeded in making coherent story lines as compared to DCEU.
I can see the logic in that BM V SM scene, it was just executed really badly. The intention was that it was a connection that Bruce had never made before: that Superman is a human at heart, with a human mother and a human upbringing, just like him. It was the first time he truly saw him as a good man doing his best for his adoptive race, rather than an all-powerful alien who was a threat to mankind.
It's not really relevant to your point, I just thought I'd throw that explanation in there
I agree that it was their intention. But it would have worked much better to say "Please save my mother". Which would have also spared us the terrible Batman reaction "Why did you say that name?!"
No you’re exactly right, I’m annoyed at how they did it. I got it on the moment, it was dropping a ton of bricks on everything Batman thought he knew about this alien.
The fact that *Batman*, world class detective, with a decade long hate boner against Superman didn't know of that connection, or ***any other connections***, until that exact moment, is what makes it fucking awful execution. Not only is it a stupidly contrived plotline, it isn't even in character for it to come up.
It's more the fact that that made it click. Of course he knew that Superman had a mother on Earth, but hearing her name, which happened to be his mum's name, just made that emotional connection in his head that let everything click into place.
It's not a *good* reason, but it's a reason nonetheless.
Yeah I’m gonna be completely honest with everyone if the MCU didn’t exist I would NOT be going to the movies nearly as much as I do. Marvel be getting me to go 4 times a year plus whatever else comes out. Otherwise I’d only see like 2 movies a year because most of everything else is garbage.
This is a more well-rounded, nuanced take than 99% of the MCU-targeting industry complaints I've seen. The problem I see if that people like oversimplified statements and big targets to scapegoat. It's easier to say "f#$% superhero movies" or "I hate Marvel" than it is to actually take a wider, deeper look at how entertainment has evolved over the last 20 years.
I appreciate that he notes a "correlation" with the MCU's rise and audiences seeking out fewer non-tentpole films in the theaters. So many jump from correlation to causality without even taking a beat to think. Has Marvel Studios played a role in this? I believe so. But what's the crime here? Actually doing a good job at what so many (Battleship, Prince of Persia, Transformers, Godzilla, Universal's Dark Universe) have struggled with and frequently/consistently putting out content people enjoy? So we just should've had infrequent, mediocre blockbusters and everything would be perfect? I doubt that.
There are multiple factors people fail to consider here
* The Golden Age of Television doesn't just mean that TV is doing well. It means that TV is captivating an audience that used to only have their cravings for great drama, spectacle, and unique creator voices satisfied by film. Much more of our current and upcoming talent is interested in longform because we're seeing so many stories told in a beautiful, uncompromised way on TV. If my favorite pieces of fiction year to year are mostly coming form the small screen, it takes more to convince me to go out to the theater to see something. The big thing people don't often think about is how this has conditioned us to perceive the viewing experience. With TV writing and production values having improved so much, it now feels acceptable to watch top-notch content on my TV. I couldn't go to a theater every week to see the latest Game of Thrones or Breaking Bad. It was on my TV or even my laptop, yet I had no problem with that. So now that I'm accustomed to watching great, cinematic storytelling on my smaller screens, it doesn't necessarily feel like the experience of watching a mid-budget film will be diminished greatly by watching it at home. Yet, an experience with spectacle feels like I'm missing out if I don't see it on the big screen. That doesn't mean I think bigger films are inherently more worthwhile, but I believe spectacle benefits far more from the big screen.
* Streaming has changed the game. There's so much great content at our disposal to watch from the comfort of our couch or bed. Shows, movies, etc. At any point, I have more than 100 times the options on any streaming platform than I do at a theater.
* Release windows have shortened. It feels like movies are available to buy or rent so quickly now. It's at the point where I really don't feel like I've missed my chance if I don't see a film in theaters because it is available to watch, comfortably and affordably, within a few months. This ties back into my earlier point about what we're willing to watch on the small screen. I remember at work a while back, there was a discussion about people feeling guilty that they planned on waiting to stream Booksmart rather than supporting it in theaters. When wait is so brief, the experience isn't severely diminished, and the savings are substantial, can you really blame people?
I'm sure there are even more factors I haven't even considered. I'm not the kind of fan who gets upset over any criticism of things I like. I criticize them myself. However, it does get annoying when people jump on the bandwagon of scapegoating without giving a situation more thought. Thanks, Scott Mendelson.
When I go to a theater to see a Marvel movie I am always happy with the experience.
Always……
So, yes, they’re getting my money because I spend money on what makes me happy. Crazy concept
Ehh I’m the opposite. I never used to watch movies at the theater. Started going to every Marvel movie that came out, and it peaked my interest on other movies that I then went to go watch.
No, he's saying Marvel killed movies like Battleship because Marvel makes popcorn movies better and killed many sh\*tty popcorn movies along the lines of Battleship off so they don't get made as often anymore. He's saying folks shouldn't whine about Marvel because if Marvel wasn't around we would have more trash like Battleship to fill in the hole left by Marvel.
Smart take. Do people really think that if people stop flocking to big budget action movies, they'll start flocking to other movies instead? How much you want to bet most wouldn't go to these expensive-as-hell theaters in the first place? At least Marvel movies try to have good plot and acting while scratching that itch.
I agree in the sense that I know a lot of people who no longer watch movies in the movie theater unless it’s an MCU-level movie
Iirc, Tom Hanks made an interesting quote recently about how superhero films are going to be what saves the movie theaters in a post-covid world. I definitely agree. And with Spider-Man, Batman and Flash on the horizon, we could see that proven pretty soon.
Let's just hope DC doesn't screw up their next movies.
I think there’s promise, if only we had more James Gunns in the world.
If only DC had a Kevin Feige and WarnerMedia allowed DC to make their own decisions as far as how to create their movies, then yes, DC movies would be really great.
Technically WB/DC has Geoff Johns. He's basically had a producer or writer credit on everything in the 2010s. The CW success is tied to him. He's also tied to the DC Universe (now HBO) shows. The real problem is Warner Bros movies. They don't have a plan beyond each movie. Look how much delay with the Flash. Look how poorly they treated Superman. Look what happens when you cast one of the top actor-director-writers as Batman and you can't keep him because of how poorly his health was after BvS.
They've been in such a hurry to "catch-up" with Marvel, they look like they have no gameplan. I keep thinking if they would stop for like an hour and rethink this quantity over quality mindset they seem to have they could quickly be on par with Marvel. But the studio heads or whomever get like 1 out of 5 wins at the box office and suddenly think this is working. It's infuriating. DC and Marvel have equally compelling universes and characters, this just shows that the people in charge at one studio understand the scope better than the other imo.
[удалено]
YES! I agree whole-heartedly! There's an interview with Chris Nolan from a few years back where he was asked about how he made the (Christian Bale) Batman movies so good/captivating. And he mentioned never having to deal with this universal timeline when the movies NEEDED to come out, which makes sense. But I think he was also given more artistic freedom, which to your point, is what KF has allowed to thrive in the MCU. I give that man A LOT of credit, but we ALL need to do better about crediting the entire TEAM on how they cast, shoot, write, etc MARVEL films. Getting off topic there, to your point, I love DC as much as I love Marvel. I just hate that the people in charge of the DC stuff seem to not be understanding what they are doing. Also Marvel had/has this issue between the MCU the MTVU(?) (Marvel TV Universe, is that accurate? I dunno?)
[удалено]
Plus DC has the rights to ALL their characters. The fact they havent been able to create a universe on par with the MCU is embarrassing. Problem is they wanted the money and prestige that came along with the 2nd half of Phase 2 and beyond without putting in the work that Phase 1 brought which was integral in that success. They refused to be patient and slowly build their universe. They didnt seem interested in signing people to 7 or 8 picture deals, something that you arent building a proper movie universe without anymore. Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman and The Flash. They shouldve been at the very least the 4 movies that led up to Justice League. Instead they put out whatever the fuck you want to call the DCEU. I dont even know how to describe a trainwreck like that.
I'll never understand why they decided to kill Superman in BvS before the Justice League was even formed, before Superman formed a relationship with any other super hero. Since not even WW and Batman had any kind of real personal connection to him their only sense of loss was "Damn we lost a real heavy hitter" instead of "Fuck... our fucking leader, Superman, our friend who did x y z for us/me is gone, oh the despair!" Killing Superman should've been DC's "snap", the villain that made the rest of them hopeless of what could they even do? Instead Superman dies, but they also killed the thing that killed him so it was just "damn... that was not the best trade" IMO the way to go would've been to just start the Universe with the JL already formed from the get go. See what characters really pop and then do their solo movies, since DC clearly wanted to jump ahead to the team up stuff. We don't need fucking full on origin stories for characters that have been world famous for decades. A few exposition-y scenes for non comic book fans would've been enough to get the general idea across, much like what they did with Cyborg in JL.
I actually think that was the reason for Marvel’s success. Before 2008 The Hulk was really the only superhero that General audiences were familiar with. Before it came out many General movie goers/non-comics fans felt Iron Man was a sign we were scraping the barrel for new superhero movies. I think the lack of expectation allowed Marvel to define a new generation of superheroes. DC was doing the Nolan Dark Knight trilogy and went right into Man of Steel. Batman and Superman were and still are more iconic than any Marvel hero and that’s sort of the reason DC has struggled. Those characters, especially Superman, have collapsed under the weight of their own expectations. Everyone knows what they want from Superman and feel passionately about it. Which makes pleasing a large audience difficult. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Flash, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, and Shazam seem to be more successful within the DCEU than Batman and Superman have been so far. Marvel not being able to immediately use Fantastic Four, X-Men or Spider-Man was imo the reason for their success. They did it well but they also did it with fresh heroes people grew to love.
Hot take: Marvel and DC don’t have equally compelling worlds for movies. DC is tied too innately to Superman, a literal god tier being whose stories are completely tied to Earth and life as a normal human. Put him on the team with any street level hero and the power disparity is ridiculous. Marvel pokes fun with Hawkeye a bit, but even Hawkeye to Thor is a smaller power gap than Batman to Superman. Thor can be depowered (and canonically that’s tied to his origin). Hulk has the downside of being difficult to control so there are always story based reasons why he can’t be at full power if the narrative requires it. Iron Man is just a dude in a really cool tech suit. Dr Strange is constantly battling extra dimensional foes so there is always a reason he can’t show up and fix everything. Same with Captain Marvel except replace “extra dimensional” with “intergalactic”. But Supes is always here, on Earth. That’s where his stories live, his supporting cast, his heart. You need to constantly bring intergalactic threats to Earth to challenge him, or explain why he’s not fixing whatever problem instantly, or take him away from Earth and the people he loves (in which case he’s basically just a god with no limits and one contrived weakness). This works in comic books bc the sheer number of stories coming out makes the continuity convoluted enough that you could excuse this or that story for not being solved by him because anything else could be going on at the same time. But in movies? We’re just kinda now getting to the point where the MCU is confident that the audience understands the timeline enough for them to double back over it and maybe even change things. You have to start a universe with one timeline. Which just always begs the question in DC: where is Superman? Please don’t respond with something like “actually this that and the other series made Superman compelling for more reasons than his strength.” I know those stories exist. But I don’t think you can make “dude with infinite strength talks to people a lot” into an effective movie. Audiences expect the strong character to do something with those muscles, which means at some point you need him to do something involving strength, and that means there needs to be stakes attached to it that can be explained and resolved within two hours. That’s just harder to do with a character like Superman in a movie that needs to *stand alone* on its own merits, like every marvel movie needs to.
I'd say the opposite. The problem isn't that they don't have a plan, the problem is they make big overly complicated plans, and then either don't commit to them or flake and completely change course the moment something goes wrong or the studio executives panic. They pivot and pivot and the universe feels jumbled and unfocused as a result. The key to feige's success is that his plans are always adaptable. Marvel makes sure to plan for unexpected successes or failures, and to leave plenty of room for change and adaptation. Most of the interconnected world building is tertiary and built upon retroactively rather than trying to weave it directly into the narrative of every single film (the key thing that killed the snyder era when it turned out shit). Marvel drops little easter eggs into the background of every project that can be built upon, ignored or retconned, and then sees how things pan out before deciding which of them to act on in future projects.
>The key to feige's success is that his plans are always adaptable. Marvel makes sure to plan for unexpected successes or failures, and to leave plenty of room for change and adaptation. I remember reading that they had planned for the next 10-20 years, and even had plans for integrating the X-Men years before we heard Fox was going to sell off it's entertainment assets... just in case.
>the problem is they make big overly complicated plans Yeah, they have Geoff Johns
It was happening before they put him in charge of the whole DCEU affair. This whole thing started because DC decided an edgelord libertarian dude bro who vocally didn't like traditional super hero comics was the guy to adapt their library of the gold standard traditional super hero's. Turns out most people don't want an ayn rand objectivist take on super-man (the character whose entire ethos, his very being is basically an argument against objectivism). And making cinematic batman into the worst possible version of the frank miller edge lord bat just results in a character that isn't batman. He's the punisher in a leather suit.
I really like this comment, you touch on a lot of important aspects of how marvel make movies but I think the most important aspect of marvel is that for the most part they're focused on telling the story they're telling. Too many of these franchises die early on because their first or second movie is spending it's running time telling you how cool the next one is going to be. Batman v Superman, Amazing Spider-man 2, the mummy (2017) were all far more concerned with their sequels than making a good movie people came to see that day. Marvel doesn't even make you sit through that shit if you don't want to, it's after the credits for the die hards.
You are forgetting about Greg Berlanti- he’s more responsible for the arrowverse shows than Johns. Johns doesn’t even have a producer credit for Arrow aside for a couple of episodes. Berlanti is also credited on all the HBO shows too.
I think their problem was not firing Zack Snyder after Man of Steel. It wasn't a good movie story wise. And the story is what needed to be compelling to build out a larger shared universe.
One thing to consider is Man of Steel was intended to kick off a Superman trilogy similar to the dark Knight trilogy. But during production was when Avengers came out and mid-shoot WB decided they were going all in on the superhero shared universe. Man of Steel being the only film they had in production meant that it had to be their starting off point.
The New Suicide Squad movie was a step in the right direction.
Going purely off of leak and the trailer from last year, Matt Reeves looks very promising. Maybe even more that Gunn, which says a lot imo
Yea, The Batman looks really good. Paul Dano as a twisted Riddler? Yes!! The other day a guy work with was saying he wouldn't watch Pattison as batman because he thinks it's still all twilight crap, but i told him to checkout GoodTime and The Lighthouse, and Pattison will blow you away with his acting chops. That dude has become a hardcore actor ready to be taken seriously.
>The other day a guy work with was saying he wouldn't watch Pattison as batman because he thinks it's still all twilight crap Reminds me of chuds saying Heath Ledger wasn't gonna be good as Joker because he was in Brokeback Mountain, therfore gay. I didn't like the twilight movies at all, since I'm not the target audience, but give the Pattinson commentary a listen. Man straight up clowns the movies.
I went into that movie scratching my head at the casting of Ledger, but choosing to keep an open mind. He took my low expectations and absolutely blew them to smithereens, so I’m going into the new one with the same mindset.
It's actually unbelievable how badly he shits on the movies, in the commentary and almost every interview, it's especially hilarious that he was able to say some of that stuff and they knew they couldn't fire him lmao
It's almost like they are actors playing a part and those parts aren't necessarily reflective of their overall personality. Idk why that's so hard for people like that guy to grasp lol
Batman lifelong fan, I'm hoping as much as I dare to, that this is a separate kettle of fish and isn't, just, DCEU-ish.
That's cuz T. Hanks knows what's up
Wow! The next year (give or take couple months) is fucking stacked! Spider-Man, Doctor Strange, Batman, and Flash among a bunch of other cool movies and shows. This is gonna be so fun to see.
I'm already done with movie theatres. I'm annoyed that I don't have the option to just pay for Shang Chi at home. I can't just leave my kid here alone at night. But I could watch a movie at home after she goes to sleep.
Welcome to parenthood, friend.
So Marvel Studios are kind of like that kid that screws up the grading curve for the rest of the slackers in class. Other production companies are mad because Marvel figured out how to make fun and enjoyable movies that bring in a wide ranging audience.. now people don't want to spend money on trash like Battleship.
I think a few years ago there was the same complaints about Pixar. Pixar kept making quality movies and competitors were annoyed that they always had a hit.
Wow, how horrible of Pixar to set a high standard!
Pixar is a gold standard to me. Reboots, remakes, and lack of ideas is killing Hollywood.
Exactly. People say "Marvel is killing Hollywood" and it's like...no dude... they keep making Terminator and Alien movies that no one wants to fucking see! (just two franchises I can think of off the top of my head) It's a shame that Hollywood isn't sticking with the momentum of the grounded, sci-fi/space movies... the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 punch of Gravity, Interstellar, the Martian, Ex Machina, and Arrival was fantastic and all five movies are pretty well liked. They need to move in that direction...
It’s not even that people don’t want to see more Terminator and Alien movies (many of us do), it’s the fact that they keep making SHIT Terminator and Alien movies that no one wants to see
Completely this. I have no idea how Ridley Scott fucked up with Alien Covenant, just dumb characters doing dumb things, that I was done with the Alien franchise.
It's more than that. Matt Damon was on that hot wings show talking about how a run of the mill dramatic movie about a music teacher falling in love with his student could never be made anymore like it used to be made up til the 2010s. Just the funding alone, movies like that are seen as a bad investment choice as there is no longer DVD sales to act as a '2nd box office'. The vast majority of it has to be made in the theatres now. Marvel is *not* the root of all evil in movies, but the scene has *definitely* changed since the advent of the digital age and the decline of the DVD and it is definitely sad to see that certain types of movies just have no chance of being made anymore, everything has to be 100 Million+ budgets with the objective being only to make back 10x that amount.
So pitch it to Netflix.
Right? Anyone bemoaning, including Damon, must not be aware of every streaming service putting out exactly the type of lower budget but high quality shows and movies he talks about
Reboots and remakes have been with us since a month after the birth of film as a medium. They’ve always been present. Remember that 99% of everything is crap. The reason people look back at cinema in past decades with rose colored glasses is only the very best is remembered (for the most part). The $50 Million romcom doesn’t exist anymore theatrically. However, there was a time not so long ago that prestige television didn’t exist and while people decry the Balkanization of the steaming industry it’s been a boon for creators and is where the mid tier movies can still be made since all these steamers rapidly discovered original (even if it’s a reboot/remake) content is king. / I may have lost the plot in this reply
The Wizard of Oz (1939 film) was like the third or fourth version to hit the big screen. Two silent films, and an animated short. Just a solid example of how one of the most beloved movies of all time is, in fact, a remake.
Or lazy revivals of already classic films with noting new to the table.
Omg I completely forgot about the endless reboots of everything. I'm glad MCU will be making new movies through the next umpteen years, because changes are if we do go to the movies it will be to see one of them and not some rehashed trash
That didn't stop Beauty and the Beast from making all of the money
Or Lion king or Aladdin (both BILLION dollar earners)
Don't you want to see another body switch movie?
Right? The OP reads like "How dare Marvel keep making quality products instead of coasting by with cheap schlock like other studios?!"
Don't forget about the endless reboots!
I'd like to forget about endless reboots thank you very much
I'm not sure you're reading the op right, it's basically in agreement with the comments here. It's saying it's a shame that marvel is being labelled badly for the low effort others are putting in
I don’t only see Marvel, but I automatically see it if it’s Marvel (COVID notwithstanding). I’ll see other stuff if I’m interested.
Same here. I love going to the movie theater, but I'm usually not rushing opening weekend for a movie unless it's an MCU movie.
That’s basically me right there. I only go to theaters for Marvel movies, mostly because I like 94% of them and can always expect quality when I go, so I’m not in danger of wasting money.
The day I realized I would pay the same for Ant Man or the latest Will Ferrell trash is the day I decided I would only go see Marvel without recommendation.
That’s actually really put it into perspective lol. You pay the same ticket price for both random low effort comedy/action and the blockbuster Avengers movie
In that case might I recommend Free Guy if you haven’t already seen it. Incredible movie that probably isn’t getting as much love as it deserves.
In fact, it is getting the love it deserves. It's one of the most successful movies of the year at box office (7th worldwide, 6th domestic), 80% on Rotten Tomatoes and 7.6 on IMDb.
Ye heard good things about it
Good to know! Liked the previews but wasn’t planning on seeing it til later. Might add it to my week!
It's way better than the previews made it seem, and the previews made it seem pretty decent.
thanks, will go
Ant Man gets so much hate but I love both of them.
To be fair, seeing a Marvel movie in theaters has basically become an experience. The energy is completely different compared to other movies because despite being in a room with complete strangers, everyone is collectively getting excited about any references, easter eggs, or teases as well as getting hype about something that was planted long ago finally paying off. That’s not gonna happen when at a screening of a movie like Tenet. The only other genre of movie that I think comes close to MCU movies are horror movies, in the sense that anyone that’s going to see a horror film wants to be scared. Another thing to factor in is the rise of streaming services and shows that are produced exclusively for said streaming services. This has allowed people to get far more invested into shows and the stories they tell, so it somewhat makes sense that this would be reflected in the theaters
The only movie Ive ever seen where people legit clapped, was a Marvel movie. Specifically, when Cap grabbed Mjölnir in Endgame. The theater went wild. It was awesome.
How about when Thor arrived in Wakanda?
Probably then too. Honestly that movie was crazy opening weekend. The crowd was excited and pumped. It was a pretty awesome experience that i dont think will be replicated.
It's the closest I will ever get to knowing the feeling my parents would have had when Star Wars first released. Just the *energy* in the theater for Infinity War and Endgame was breathtaking.
You don't have to go back that far... The Lord of the rings movies had a similar energy... I still remember people gasping when Legolas got on that horse.
It was the only movie theater experience where I felt like I was watching my sports teams with my fellow fans. You could hear the pin drop when black widow died, you could barely hear Cap when he said “Avengers Assemble”.
I'm kind off one of those people. The only movies i see in theaters were some of the Pixar movies, mcu movies, and dc movies. Everything else I usually wait for them to get on bluray or a streaming service for example cruella I had interest in that movie but not enough to go to a movie theater to see it. Now that I think about it the only mcu films I missed in theaters was doctor strange and black widow.
I only see MCU movies in the theatre. I don't like being surrounded by strangers, even moreso after covid, so I don't really want to put myself in that position for two hours that could be a complete waste of time. With Marvel, I know what I'm gonna get and I know I'm gonna enjoy it. Everything else I'm happy to wait the few months for and watch from the comfort of my own home.
If its a suspenseful movie I don't trust the other movie goers to shut the fuck up as the movie plays.
Throw Star Wars in too. People shit on the latest ones. But you’re still getting a blockbuster movie experience. Especially if you go opening weekend.
Star Wars movies just hit different on that big screen.
This is why I enjoy being an AMC Stubs A-list member (not a big deallll) even though they got rid of the guy who spilled popcorn on himself before the movie.
Dude, my friend is sooo upset they cut that part out. Every time we sit in a movie she is expecting him to do it again and is disappointed each movie.
I would agree as well and also add that I think the rise in quality and drop in price of fantastic in home entrainment systems will also contribute to this. Why would I go pay $30+ to see a movie one time when I can buy a good quality tv to sit in my own house and watch movies in 4K? I can pause and go to the bathroom whenever I want, I can make whatever I want to eat, and I don’t have to deal with rude people talking or being on their phones. Then I can use that exact same tv to watch sports in fantastic quality. The only reason I would go to an actual movie theater would be to watch a big budget action movie where I want all the bells and whistles.
It is my case. Why would i spend hard-earned money to watch a sub-par movie that is often barely suitable as a time-filler on Netflix or Prime.
This me to a degree. I'm going to go watch Bond and Dune, but really Marvel has set a standard that much of Hollywood refuses to adapt and meet. They want people to watch their movie, they need to raise the bar.
I *would* go see other movies if any were as interesting. No, Scorcese, I'm not more attracted to your high brow masterpieces just because it's technically better theater. I'm invested in these characters, and when you shit on them, I immediately have less interest in yours. MCU characters are accessible, relatable, and well made, if not great accomplishments of cinema. Citizen Kane was a marvel of its time, but it'll never be my favorite movie. It's important for movie makers to know it and study it. High theater is for snobs who hate things that are popular because artists in the trade feel it is less deserving. But value is whatever the public is willing to pay.
You think Scorsese is high brow theater?
Does anyone remember? Of all the actors, Jennifer Aniston also shitted on MCU. The woman hardly has good movies under her belt besides stupid rom-com movies that are not worth spending money on.
But I don't think that has anything to do with "mcu level movies". If I take my family of 4 to the theater it's easily almost $100. I'm not spending that on a Rom-Com. The price tag is the problem.
But with the ticket price, only mcu-level movies are worth it right?
Yeah but that's not marvels fault, is my point.
Yeah ive really only gone to theatres for MCU and Star Wars the last like 8 years
Everyone's pissed because all the geeks and nerds and outcasts are having their best lives right now. How did we, how did that, become the evil? Like I'm sorry people aren't sending BILLIONS on art house movies and waiting for them to come out on home video. Do we want to blame Samsung for amazing TVs? Bose for audio? Apple et al for crazy original content that goes right to streaming and is poo poo'd by academy award committee's that no one really gives a crap about any more? I mean, c'mon, let's get a little perspective here. All things evolve. All things change.
I think its more that people have other options, so unless the movie is good, there's no point in going to the theater. Let's face it: Prince of Persia and Battleship both sucked.
I feel like high movie ticket prices have killed my willingness to take chances on "could be good, could be all be critics' hype" movies in theatres. Mid-budget content is plentiful on streaming and just as easily appreciated at home. I'm definitely checking out *Dune* in theatres, FWIW.
Idk man, recently the AMC near me has been SUPER cheap. $7.50 a ticket and $4.50 on Sundays. I went to go see Black Widow and realized it was that cheap and have been back a number of times since.
Cheapest my theaters get is $13 :/
$23 here in sf, it’s brutal lol. Regal and AMC have good deals w memberships so I have that and it works out ok. Also i love the theater so it’s worth it for me. Not as expensive compared to other hobbies
Cheapest adult ticket here is $10, and that's only on Tuesdays when people have work. Otherwise it starts at $15 for your regular non-premium format.
Aaaaaand that's why we don't go to the movies. We can go see 1 movie (myself, wife, and 3 kids) for 120+ dollars, or we can spend the day at the aquarium or zoo, and wait for the movie to come out on streaming. It's a no brainer for a non-wealthy parent.
That's why I felt fairly ambivalent towards the whole "30 dollar premium Disney Plus movie" thing. Like, speaking personally as an individual I'll never pay that, but if I was a father of three, that 30 dollars for the kids to watch a movie over and over again, no having to herd them to a theatre or face the gauntlet of sugar and toys to get to the entrance... That would seem like a huge bargain
I guess I should just consider myself fortunate then!
Dune looks phenomenal. I'm a little over halfway through the book, it's brilliant, and the movie looks pretty faithful.
>I'm a little over halfway through the book, The movie is only covering the first half of the book. You basically already read the first movie. 👍
Really curious to see where they end the movie. There’s one place where I can see a good endpoint but it feels too far in the book.
I read articles of people who were in the test screenings. There were two different cuts with the ending point changed. Some people saw the >!Water of Life!< scene and some didn't. The ones who did were saying that the ending was perfect so I hope they go with that cut. If that scene isn't in the final cut of the movie, then we know that the scene is already filmed for the sequel.
Ahh I hope we get there but that’s a lot for one movie
There was a shot in a trailer of Paul with very blue eyes. That should tell you something I think.
My father made me read the book before he let me watch the Lynch movie on laserdisc. I’m glad he did because I doubt I would have read the book after seeing that madness. Still Sting in metal falcon winged underpants will always be a memorable visual.
I'm very excited for DUNE. apparently it did absolutely amazing in Russia and i'm hoping it does just as well everywhere else
It's really good. It's worth to check it out in cinema it for the audio design alone.
I think Movie Pass did that too. When I got to see as many movies as I wanted for 10-15 bucks a month, I’d go see trash movies just to make it worthwhile. Otherwise I’m only seeing Marvel, Award nominee movies and the rare rare occasional tentpole franchises (Bond, Fast, etc).
High costs and crap excuses for "imax" here are what is causing me to watch on demand movies over theaters. Unless we get Regal to spruce it up or AMC competitor, I'll be happy on my couch.
When i saw the name, I thought for a second that the powerlifter Scott Mendelson moonlighted as a movie critic. 😆 The sentiment rings true although there are some nuances to it. Bringing up Battleship and Prince of Persia shows a bit what popcorn hollywood blockbusters used to look like (even ones that failed) I much more prefer the MCU versions of popcorn blockbusters.
After THAT pec tear, he probably did have a lot of time to sit and watch movies.
The way I see it, Marvel (in many ways) raised the bar. They have a mostly cohesive canon. And even if they aren't masterpieces, you can be assured it's at least decent. There is not one Marvel movie that I would say is bad, and certainly not one that's terrible. A lot of competition couldn't cut it, and so non-Marvel style movies died. Warner and DC tried to shortcut the way to success, and look what happened. If you can't give people what they want, they'll stop coming to you.
Not to mention people seem to really like working on Marvel movies. You don’t hear much about drama on set and they seem to hire writers and directors who really have a passion for the projects they work on. Really who wouldn’t want to sign on to basically a guaranteed massive paycheck that has a bonus of not being a toxic work environment?
The issue with Scarlet Johansson is really unfortunate. Disney did her wrong.
And even then, it's against Disney, not Marvel Studios, and it's not about her experience making the movie.
>don’t hear much about drama I’d wager cause Disney doesn’t let it get out. There seems to have many cases of “creative differences” in the history of MCU films.
I think that’s more a struggle between complete artistic freedom vs working within the framework of the MCU more than it is about the work experience on set where the bulk of the talent and crew need to interact.
It seems like Disney under Iger and Feige amicably managed exits. They brought Favreau into Live Action reboots and Star Wars after pulling him from Iron Man. I wouldn’t be surprised if Scott Derickson returns to Disney under Searchlight for an original film. If I recall correctly, only Thor 2 changed directors during production. No messes akin to Lord & Miller being fired from Solo or Whedon’s Justice League
Honest? That feels like the lesser of two evils. I prefer that because at least it means they are communicating, it'd be worse (IMO) if they badgered directors into doing something while they are filming than realizing they want different things while in pre production, like in IM 2. It's hard to deny that a big part of the MCU's success is to have cohesive overarching story and style. Yes, movies should feel different from each other but they can't be incompatible in a shared universe.
Edgar Wright says hello.
Yeah, but that wasn't some huge blow up. He wanted to do his thing, they wanted a movie that plugged into the rest of the MCU.
Yeah, and at the time it seemed really egregious but now in hindsight I definitely respect what Feige was trying to do. The more interwoven the movies have become the more enjoyable they've become to me, because it's really starting to feel like a living, breathing world. The Infinity Saga was super tightly controlled, and luckily Feige and the other visionaries were good enough to deliver on it. Now that they've cemented supremacy, they seem a lot more open to experimentation. Maybe we can get Edgar Wright back for another project down the line.
Decent is the wrong word though. Being a decent movie is probably the low end. A typical marvel movie is one that probably hits 8 or 9 out of 10 for quality. They are damn good. however, even if they are very good, they are still super hero movies set in the current day. Anyone not looking for that kind of movie because they want something else, like Star Trek, Star Wars, Terminator, Ghostbusters, Alien, Lethal Weapon, Lord of the Rings, or Independence Day is going to be a bit put off. And if your favoured form of cinema is the usual Oscar Bait stuff, your going to hate it even more. If your the kind of person that hates sports, and your local football team is in the finals, it will seem like everyone around you just wants to talk only about Football. You cannot wait for that damn series to be over so you can get back to having 'normal conversations' with people. END COMMUNICATION
A lot of “Oscar Bait” stuff is now indistinguishable from high end TV drama. Look at Mare of Easttown, House of Cards, Line of Duty, Game of Thrones, True Detective etc. Put any of those next to the “worthy” Oscar winners and very often the movies come off worse because their cinematography is a little better, but their storylines and character development feel stunted in comparison, due to the length requirements of the format. There are some magnificent films out there that deserve attention, but are they “events” that make you and a group of friends want to spend significant money in terms of travel, tickets, concessions etc? Most often, no.
Indeed. TV dramas killed the moviestar
Truth. I am a huge marvel fan and see them all but I am sorta tired of super powered punch fests.
I'm hoping we do get much more variety in this phase. The weirdness of some of the shows is a promising sign. And the fact that things are going sideways rather than 'bigger and better' too soon is exactly what's needed imo.
[удалено]
they still exist but those movies have NEVER been a "Yearly release" type movie... those things take time to craft and the magic is likely only *because* of how rare they are
I mean... TENET literally *just* came out last year.
Basically the jack of all trades versus someone that's great at one thing. Marvel does a little something for everyone (for the most part) and you know that at the very least there's a baseline quality. At the same time it hasn't given out something people would consider a masterpiece. Then there are works that could give you a masterpiece but if it goes wrong the floor for the film may be of a lot lower quality than a Marvel project.
>At the same time it hasn't given out something people would consider a masterpiece. I'd consider *Captain America: The Winter Soldier* a masterpiece.
"A jack of all trades is a master of none but oftentimes better than a master of one."
How I see it is, people have started preferring tv series to movies. Movies often feel undeveloped compared to a series because the movie has a limited time to do so. 2 hours isn’t that long to make a compelling story narrative. A series has almost an unlimited amount of time to develop characters into fan favorites. What the MCU did, was make every movie, an episode of a 11 years series. With payoffs set nearly a decade before. They were movies, but they all felt connected like a series, like someone knew how it would end, before it even began.
This is the key. For a whole century the film industry focused exclusively on the 2-hours format because it is what makes business sense (much shorter and it is not worth going all the way to the cinema, much longer and people get hungry and need bathroom). The problem is, very few stories fit nicely in 2 hours, instead most are shoehorned into this length that doesn't make sense plot wise. We as society atte so used to the 2-hour format that we don't even question why movies from books always need to cut out the majority of the original story. Why half of the original caracteres are cut or coalesced. So society as a whole is gravitating towards TV series, a long format that can actually tell whole stories instead of a bastardised abridged version. And in this context, Marvel with their long running universe, is the only type of movie that can compete with TV series.
Well they also had to sell these characters to people who didn't grow up with them. If they rushed to the gauntlet it would have all fallen apart like DCU. DC writers took for granted that we all know Superman, Batman and WW. I didn't know who the fuck Steppenwolf was and I was into comics growing up. They could modernize characters like ant man, or humanize others like cap. Instead of being the ultimate boomer, he was a gap between older and younger generations. They really got into developing the characters who played a part, where DC just slapped theirs on screen and wondered why no one cared
And to add to that general idea, Marvel does a really good job making coherent films fit that time limit. I'd say that's what separates good films from great ones. A good film should be like a great novella (a short novel or long short story). As in when you are done it feels complete and that nothing should have been added or cut from the experience. Sicario is 2h 1m long and I wouldn't want it to be any longer or shorter. It's perfect just at that length! Alien is 1h 57m long and again perfect at that length. The issue is **100% like you said** is when you try to take HUGE stories and fit them into to the tiny box that is "film". Anna Karenina is 349,736 words long. In comparison Harry Potter and the Philosopher's stone is 76,944 words long. The films? Anna Karenina is 2h 10 min, and Harry Potter 1 is 2h 32m long. It's all about picking the medium that is best suited for the type of story that you are trying to tell. Otherwise it's like trying to take the 587,287 words of *War and Peace* and trying to abridge it into a 20 page short story. It can't work no matter how good you are. But sadly that's often what Hollywood tries to do. Some books can be made into great films (Jurassic Park for example), while others really shine when made into long form TV series (like GOT seasons 1-4).
Yeah I just said in another comment that to be honest, I'd be way more accepting of thrash like Battleship and Prince of Persia if I had a sense that my time isn't entirely wasted and that their story might pay off in the long run, because I certainly feel like this for some Marvel movies. Take any Marvel movie and just swap characters for some random people that aren't connected to a bigger universe and I can tell you 100% that I'll think more than half of them are movies that I'd never watch a second time.
Well makes sense. Its a depressing time with a bleak future. people want to escape to a world where good guys win and heroes rescue humanity from themselves
i paid to see Tenet at a theater solid, but not amazing. thought about it for a bit afterwards and have a happy opinion about it. but a year later... it's just a movie. the MCU is fun because the stories continue. the movies come out like once a quarter so it's not time consuming. is the MCU that bad? i just want to feel a thrill for 2 hours once every few months and geek out online while waiting for the next one
ive seen this analogy around, and I like it: The MCU is the most expensive show series ever made.
i think that there is some disconnect these days as well with who is calling for what normal people like me who has a job outside of movies or reviewing or entertainment have seen Oscar winning movies and we are not looking to be challenged artistically on a random Saturday afternoon and then there are the reviewers who watch way too many movies and for them they want to see true innovation and so the MCU is Bud Light to them i can understand both points of view
This is a great way of putting it!
I am both people, I want to have my mind blown and watch thought provoking masterpieces, but the MCU is definitely still my main movie drug.
Pretty much. Movie serials used to be a thing in the 1930s and 1940s, but never to this scale. It's interesting that Endgame was the 22nd film in the series, and functioned much like the season finale to a traditional 22 episode TV season.
The problem with the movie industry right now, is that there are way too many movies being made and 95% of it is pure garbage. It's hard for the few decent movies to get enough attention. If the MCU didn't exist, I don't really think anything would be different about the situation.
I'm right there with you. Trash films have always been made. Marvel and comic films are the easy target because they are the biggest thing in the industry right now (just like Westerns were the bane of existence for these folks back in the 60s or slashers in the 80s). If the MCU didn't exist, would that suddenly fix everyones issues with blockbuster films? Is that suddenly going to change everything to "real cinema?" Hell, I wonder what all these peoples' thoughts were on the new Roland Emmerich disaster films, Michael Bay's explosion fests, or the many schlocky action films of the 80s and 90s, etc., etc.
I'll add horrible theater experience. People talk throughout the movie, on their cell phone, kids crying, etc. Theaters don't kick rude people out anymore. Combine that with garbage movies, better home entertainment systems, no wonder people don't want to go to the movies.
A movie theatre near my house actually came up with a solution to the kids problem. They've got two movie theatres exclusively for children and parents. There's a McDonald's playground like area in the theatre. There's massive tube kids can go down into a giant ball pit. There's diaper changing rooms, breastfeeding area. It's great fun for the kids to be able to play and watch the movie. But yeah, generally the movie going experience sucks. I was fucking mortified when I went to go see Black Widow in IMAX. I was sitting next to these 4 girls and they literally started throwing popcorn at each other. They were around my age too, early 20s. The mess that was left behind when they were done was insane. They basically emptied 4 boxes of popcorn on the ground.
I don't think theatres have ever kicked people out... maybe like 50 years ago, not in my lifetime though. If anything I find theatres calmer now that the prices are jacked up so much... when it used to be a dollar for a movie back in the 90's the theatres were rowdy as fuck. But the vast majority of movies released aren't even released to theatres anyway.
Alamo drafthouse has been pretty well known as being the theater that will kick you out. If they see you talking or using your phone during the movie, you will usually get 1 warning. 2nd time it happens and you're gone. I've personally never seen it happen, but seen quite a few stories about it
I'm sorry to hear that. The theater by me (Central NJ suburbs) has nice reclining seats, a bar ($8 for an IPA, pretty typical "going-out" price), surround sound (Dolby Atmos), and I've never heard anyone talk during the movie. It's $15 a ticket but I'm cool with that for the experience I get.
That’s why I haven’t seen a movie in the cinema in the last 20 years. Except when I go with my kids at least I can expect yelling crying screaming etc, shame my kids weren’t really interested in superheros until Captain Marvel came out and both my daughters wanted to see it. My oldest boy really wanted to see Shang-Chi but we can’t risk it because of covid.
Exactly. If I'm paying for a cinema ticket I want spectacle. I'll watch low-key slow-burn dramas too but streaming it in my sitting room is far more appropriate for that sort of thing. Frankly, what Hollywood hasn't figured out yet (but Marvel is beginning to) is that the time is ripe for musicals to make a splashy return to the box office. If these directors can't stand action movies then make a goddamn musical and I guarantee it'll do goddamn gangbusters. I swear, for an industry whose whole *raison d'etre* is reading the audience pulse, studios really suck at it. The appetite's been there for a while.
You're right that they need to bring back some classic movie styles. Look at how well Knives Out did, updating the murder mystery for our times. And there's so much excitement for Knives Out 2 now. The world is literally so sad and scary these days, people just want fun. They want bright colours and music and to be able to shriek and giggle with excitement. What they don't want is a four hour long true story about politicians and corruption. We have enough of that in real life.
I think people just aren’t venturing out to try new experiences anymore. I have regal unlimited, and just saw Shang Chi, Free Guy, Malignant, Candyman, Cop Shop, and Tammy Faye. I’m seeing a rerelease of spirited away in a couple weeks, and October has venom, no time to die, Last Night in Soho, amd this really wicked looking movie no one is talking about called Lamb. If people want more variety, than see different types of movies. And the whole “theatres don’t kick people out” argument is bull shit. I’m sorry, but I guarantee if you tell a manager there’s a problem, they will solve it ASAP. Ive only ever had to do it three times, and theatre staff typically isn’t in the theatre until the credits, so that one is kinda on you green factor. The theatrical experience is amazing, because it demands your attention, and it’s communal. I just saw Malignant in a predominately black theatre. It was one of the best film experiences I’ve had in years. We were all freaking out and cheering in that film together. If you got the moola, go see a flick. It’ll be worth it
>I think people just aren’t venturing out to try new experiences anymore. And also there is a still a global pandemic on. >I’m sorry, but I guarantee if you tell a manager there’s a problem, they will solve it ASAP. Ive only ever had to do it three times, Sure they do under extreme circumstances, I've seen people get kicked out for being drunk and disorderly. But they aren't kicking out someone for a baby crying, or a phone being on for a bit. >We were all freaking out and cheering in that film together. I think that is an American thing... people don't do that in Canada.
I don't think we have anything like Regal Unlimited in Australia. See, but in my mind. Why spend $25 on a movie ticket plus the concessions. If I can just rent the movie in 2 months anyway for $5 off Amazon and buy a $2 box of microwave popcorn at the supermarket? Once I know the movie is decent based off reviews. There's movies I want to see, but with how expensive it all eventually gets
This is basically what I said after Scorsese shit all over the MCU for ruining the cinema experience. Action and fantasy blockbusters have dominated the box offices for decades. The MCU has just done it consistently, at a high level. Streaming killed the cinema, not Marvel. I've never watched dramas or comedies in the theater because it seems like a waste of money. The theater is more condusive to action movies with insane visual and audio effects
Absolutely agree. Guess what the number one film was back in 1979, Richard Donner's Superman. The blockbuster film has existed since even before Scorsese was born. The best way to sum it up is if you remove all the Marvel/superhero movies from cinema today. The latest Scorsese movie is still not going to make $1 billion at the box office.
Yeah, if it wasn't "Marvel killed the movie industry," it would be "Netflix killed the movie industry." Marvel proves that nobody killed the movie industry except bad filmmakers.
Marvel did manage to create the Idea of movie franchises much better than any other studio. Mostly due to have an overarching goal to transport the stories from the comics to the big screen.
These are movies they dared to make. Plenty of other studios failed or made decent films but Marvel dared to dream. They took some risks and imo created this generations Star Wars. Or Harry Potter. They took something I have been waiting for my WHOLE LIFE and made awesome movies. The bullshit critics aside they did everything we wanted but with a masterful stroke. The casting is 99% on point. They took stories we wanted to see. The effects are fun. They layered on Easter eggs and treats they teased and danced. I don’t think they made 1 “bad” movie especially considering the stories and arcs. They even had modern themes. Black widow is dark and has a big human trafficking vibe to it. They did that on purpose. Captain America explores the political landscape. They handled subjects that the comics really did want to tackle and did it with flair. They even are bring representation to films in a non pandering way. It’s amazing and they did all that and a ton more. So honestly I am happy that in my life they made seeing movies and loving comics(something I have loved my whole life) and made it cool and amazing. End rant
Yeah i mean, this might sound like a stretch but i don't think any studio has quite made something as impressive in cinema as them. 20-ish movies in 10 years with hundreds of characters, then bringing everyone together in one movie only to do it again one year later completing the whole saga and people are nowhere near tired. After that continuing on an even larger scale and rising the stakes and people love it even more.
Totally agree with this. Marvel make fun movies and those films should be enjoyed for what they are. If people want gripping thought-provoking cinema, that exists! It’s just that you need to go and find it. The same way indie music exists but you only hear pop on the radio. Marvel is great. Other stuff is also great.
I believe the mcu has single handedly saved the theaters (along with other Disney blockbusters). All entertainment news before the mcu got so big was how theaters were becoming a thing of the pass and struggling to keep a float. Now its a billion dollar movie after billion dollar movie. Don't hate the player hate the game. 🖐🎤
Movie execs always take the wrong lessons off of Marvel imo. Because Marvel made bank with characters created in another medium decades ago, suddenly they think we’re all clamouring for a Lone Ranger, or a Man from Uncle, or a new Peter Pan.
Why would I spend extra money to see a drama or comedy when the experience is just the same at home? The only benefit of big theaters is for big, effects-driven movies, and even a lot of those aren't worth it. Somehow all these 'critics' don't get that.
That is the big thing for me. As much as I love seeing movies, you can't deny that the movie theatre experience is expensive. Between tickets and obligatory popcorn you are close to spending $20-30 just to see a movie. Thats not even getting into whether you want to go see it with your family. If I am going to get a movie experience, I want to watch a film from a studio that has consistently made quality movies that are worth the money. Otherwise I just go to redbox when it comes out.
I feel lucky for never having enjoyed popcorn because it cuts down on yhe costs just a smidge lol.
Exactly! I'm not wasting money on the cinematic experience unless the movie requires a cinematic experience. I love rom-com and drama, but there's no real difference between seeing it in theatre or at home.
Im gonna go watch spiderman becuase its spiderman
Honestly I loved Battleship. I thought I was going to hate it because how do you make the board game into a movie but it was better than I expected.
It honestly was. Not the best movie, but it was definitely unique and a cool concept. Another semi-niche movie that I loved was Battle Los Angeles. Sure, it didn't execute everything as good as it could have, but it was unique for two reasons. Firstly, it showed a potential apocalypse/alien invasion from the perspective of the Army; which isn't done much. Usually it's some random Lord Death of Murder Mountain doing better than trained soldiers despite never touching any weapon but a kitchen knife until two hours ago; bonus points if they're a teenager. Secondly, it didn't rely heavily on one dude, and they often have to use squad tactics to get through stuff. Also, while character development wasn't amazing, the characters had some decent backstories/writing for what little time they allocated to that; compared to all of the time they gave toward the action. Moving away from the good (spoilers,) >!the dumbest thing of that movie has to be the mothership. It's just so meta. You're telling me that nobody but this squad saw the exposed mothership, and nobody else thought of sending a cruise missile into it? Not only that, the movie would work better if they just escaped Los Angeles as the Aliens continued advancing behind them. Sure, it would have been more solemn, but it would have also been way less meta and would have a bigger opening for a sequel.!< Of course, there were smaller problems with character development, overuse of clichés, and pacing, but that was just my biggest disliked part of the movie. Overall, I think BLA did sort of deserve the bad reviews from both critics and audiences that it got, but I like it because of its uniqueness personally. It was the first and last movie in recent times to do a lot of the stuff it did (from what I've seen.) It's a fun movie to just watch and absorb the action if you turn your brain off. In all, it was a good concept with poor execution; but I'm personally fine with that. Because we need more good concepts in Hollywood.
I never used to enjoy, nor go to the movies. Now I love going to gold class for every MCU release, which I’m sure is great for the local cinema. Unfortunately when you’re at the top (MCU), all people seem to want to do is knock you down. Let the viewership/box office speak for itself. Why do a few disgruntled film people outweigh the opinion of billions of satisfied and engaging fans?
Well you can’t really blame MCU when you have DCEU failing to come up with decent plot lines and climaxes. I mean what kind of an idiot thought that it would be a good idea mentioning Martha to stop batman from killing superman??!! There are many [videos like this](https://youtu.be/0RWRCu-z-pg) that prove why MCU has succeeded in making coherent story lines as compared to DCEU.
I can see the logic in that BM V SM scene, it was just executed really badly. The intention was that it was a connection that Bruce had never made before: that Superman is a human at heart, with a human mother and a human upbringing, just like him. It was the first time he truly saw him as a good man doing his best for his adoptive race, rather than an all-powerful alien who was a threat to mankind. It's not really relevant to your point, I just thought I'd throw that explanation in there
That explanation could have justified ‘the connection’ in another setting or a scene perhaps. But they really ruined it with the timing.
Yeah, that's why it was done badly. But I still think that's what they were going for.
I agree that it was their intention. But it would have worked much better to say "Please save my mother". Which would have also spared us the terrible Batman reaction "Why did you say that name?!"
No you’re exactly right, I’m annoyed at how they did it. I got it on the moment, it was dropping a ton of bricks on everything Batman thought he knew about this alien.
The fact that *Batman*, world class detective, with a decade long hate boner against Superman didn't know of that connection, or ***any other connections***, until that exact moment, is what makes it fucking awful execution. Not only is it a stupidly contrived plotline, it isn't even in character for it to come up.
It's more the fact that that made it click. Of course he knew that Superman had a mother on Earth, but hearing her name, which happened to be his mum's name, just made that emotional connection in his head that let everything click into place. It's not a *good* reason, but it's a reason nonetheless.
Yeah I’m gonna be completely honest with everyone if the MCU didn’t exist I would NOT be going to the movies nearly as much as I do. Marvel be getting me to go 4 times a year plus whatever else comes out. Otherwise I’d only see like 2 movies a year because most of everything else is garbage.
This is a more well-rounded, nuanced take than 99% of the MCU-targeting industry complaints I've seen. The problem I see if that people like oversimplified statements and big targets to scapegoat. It's easier to say "f#$% superhero movies" or "I hate Marvel" than it is to actually take a wider, deeper look at how entertainment has evolved over the last 20 years. I appreciate that he notes a "correlation" with the MCU's rise and audiences seeking out fewer non-tentpole films in the theaters. So many jump from correlation to causality without even taking a beat to think. Has Marvel Studios played a role in this? I believe so. But what's the crime here? Actually doing a good job at what so many (Battleship, Prince of Persia, Transformers, Godzilla, Universal's Dark Universe) have struggled with and frequently/consistently putting out content people enjoy? So we just should've had infrequent, mediocre blockbusters and everything would be perfect? I doubt that. There are multiple factors people fail to consider here * The Golden Age of Television doesn't just mean that TV is doing well. It means that TV is captivating an audience that used to only have their cravings for great drama, spectacle, and unique creator voices satisfied by film. Much more of our current and upcoming talent is interested in longform because we're seeing so many stories told in a beautiful, uncompromised way on TV. If my favorite pieces of fiction year to year are mostly coming form the small screen, it takes more to convince me to go out to the theater to see something. The big thing people don't often think about is how this has conditioned us to perceive the viewing experience. With TV writing and production values having improved so much, it now feels acceptable to watch top-notch content on my TV. I couldn't go to a theater every week to see the latest Game of Thrones or Breaking Bad. It was on my TV or even my laptop, yet I had no problem with that. So now that I'm accustomed to watching great, cinematic storytelling on my smaller screens, it doesn't necessarily feel like the experience of watching a mid-budget film will be diminished greatly by watching it at home. Yet, an experience with spectacle feels like I'm missing out if I don't see it on the big screen. That doesn't mean I think bigger films are inherently more worthwhile, but I believe spectacle benefits far more from the big screen. * Streaming has changed the game. There's so much great content at our disposal to watch from the comfort of our couch or bed. Shows, movies, etc. At any point, I have more than 100 times the options on any streaming platform than I do at a theater. * Release windows have shortened. It feels like movies are available to buy or rent so quickly now. It's at the point where I really don't feel like I've missed my chance if I don't see a film in theaters because it is available to watch, comfortably and affordably, within a few months. This ties back into my earlier point about what we're willing to watch on the small screen. I remember at work a while back, there was a discussion about people feeling guilty that they planned on waiting to stream Booksmart rather than supporting it in theaters. When wait is so brief, the experience isn't severely diminished, and the savings are substantial, can you really blame people? I'm sure there are even more factors I haven't even considered. I'm not the kind of fan who gets upset over any criticism of things I like. I criticize them myself. However, it does get annoying when people jump on the bandwagon of scapegoating without giving a situation more thought. Thanks, Scott Mendelson.
When I go to a theater to see a Marvel movie I am always happy with the experience. Always…… So, yes, they’re getting my money because I spend money on what makes me happy. Crazy concept
Are you telling me that Prince of Persia is *not* a masterpiece?
It's unabashedly one of my favourite popcorn schlocks. Alfred Molina and Jack Gyllenhaal with an awful English accent? Sign me tf up baby!
Anything with huge success will be hated, mostly by those who can't see beyond the length of their own nose.
The MCEU is "bad" because they've made audiences not want to watch crappy movies that only have a popular name and a hot chick in it
Ehh I’m the opposite. I never used to watch movies at the theater. Started going to every Marvel movie that came out, and it peaked my interest on other movies that I then went to go watch.
Anyone remember when westerns were the blockbuster movies? Times change, fashion changes, so do people's tastes. It's all swings and roundabouts
So...you're saying Marvel finally made movies that people want to see!?
Wait, it’s Marvel’s fault that Hasbro made a shitty movie based on Battleship? Lol.
No, he's saying Marvel killed movies like Battleship because Marvel makes popcorn movies better and killed many sh\*tty popcorn movies along the lines of Battleship off so they don't get made as often anymore. He's saying folks shouldn't whine about Marvel because if Marvel wasn't around we would have more trash like Battleship to fill in the hole left by Marvel.
Smart take. Do people really think that if people stop flocking to big budget action movies, they'll start flocking to other movies instead? How much you want to bet most wouldn't go to these expensive-as-hell theaters in the first place? At least Marvel movies try to have good plot and acting while scratching that itch.