The Marvels - MCU

flazio

The Marvels and the Young(ish) Avengers IS the follow up for Ms Marvel. But other than that fair point. I fear a second season of Ms Marvel would just have been Kamala battling her heart over the 3 boys in her life with another weak street villain to fill the time.

pjohnson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121400238#Comment_121400238

Yeah I was worried being attached to this bomb this early in a new career would really hurt her, but even the harshest reviews generally are giving Vellani the thumbs up thankfully.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121403652#Comment_121403652

Worst thing that they could do, with Ms Marvel, is return to CW level of love triangle.

She has the potential to be their wholly owned Spiderman type. This is especially true as they have retconned her to be a mutant and not InHuman so she can be the bridge there

silverharp

The director was poorly advised to take on this project with her lack of experience and Marvel set her up to fail, there is a competency issue and poor management with Marvel

Fysh

That feels like a bit of a reach - what about the film says "the director was inexperienced" to you?

I think the main thing the film suffers from is the usual MCU issue of "if you haven't been watching everything else including the Disney+ shows you might not understand the starting point for the story overall", but the film IMO did a good job of establishing what the audience needs to know for the story to work.

Given that the recurring reception to the films since Endgame has been been somewhere between "it's pretty poor" and "it's grand", I think this film has been unfortunate in being the point where a number of people decided that they can't be arsed paying cinema prices for MCU films any more - which is a shame, because as MCU films that can be enjoyed as a relatively standalone viewing it's one of the better recent offerings.

This is in part a result of the insistent Disney productification of it, wanting a film release every X months and a series as well - and particularly of having used swift launches of the films on Disney+ as a lure to build numbers in its early days. But that is probably better suited to the Marvel general thread ;)

jface187

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121410240#Comment_121410240

I don't really get the whole you have to wa0tch everything argument. I saw one espiode of Ms. Marvel and my partner hadn't seen anything and got the character and her family.

Maybe wandavison to doctor strange 2 would be the only clear example.

Penn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121410286#Comment_121410286

I thought they did a pretty good job of introducing Kamala and her family for people who hadn't seen the show. They probably could have explained how Monica got her powers a bit better rather than one throwaway line about walking through a witch's hex to save a mind-controlled town or whatever. That was probably jarring for people who hadn't watched Wandavision where the last time they saw Monica she was just a little kid in Captain Marvel. But her motivations and why she was upset with Carol were explained well, and that's the most important part.

I'd agree the shift in Wanda's character is probably the best example. Even for people who did watch Wandavision, her shift from the end of Wandavision to how she is in Doctor Strange 2 was really badly done.

They just run the risk of alienating large sections of the more casual audience who don't want to try keep up with all the shows just to understand the films. I've felt similar to the Star Wars TV shows recently, where there are so many references to stuff and characters from the animated shows that I haven't watched, and it's leaving me lost with regards some characters histories and motivations and relationships. You have to give audiences enough information that they can still follow along.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121410446#Comment_121410446

As someone who didn't see the show, I would agree. Ms. Marvel and the actress who portrays her are both very easy to like. I'd no idea how Monica got her powers but the whole thing was so lifeless (with the exception of Ms. Marvel) that it ultimately did not matter.

I was always fine with the films being interconnected. That's what made them new but if you've to do homework and pay for another streaming service to fully appreciate what's going on then I'd write that off as bad storytelling. I've started passing on some Marvel fare. I was bored so I saw this and a friend wanted to see the Eternals so I saw that. Otherwise, I find it hard to maintain an interest in stuff that's "new", ie not a sequel to a previous Marvel film.

silverharp

you dont give a director with basically one small film to her name a $250m movie to direct. thats just basic management? you build up your people over time

BruteStock

Dr Strange 2 was one of the best marvel movies for me and I never saw a single minute of anything that went straight to Disney +. It did well at the box office too.

These aren't complicated movies. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what's happening. Scarlett Witch was played by an actor whose good enough to make that character feel otherworldly and belong in the fantasy world the film takes place in. The 3 marvels look like they came out of an episode of The OC.. Nobody wants to watch that and nobody did.

Fysh

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121410566#Comment_121410566

What were the problems with the film's directiom that would have been avoided by giving it to someone else?

If anything I would say Marvel's insistence on a pipeline where massive amounts of the work are done by previs and visfx teams separate to the director and cinematographer is the problem, because visually Dacosta's previous film Candyman (2021) was much more striking on a $25M budget than The Marvels was on significantly more. (Although there were a few memorable exceptions, like the first body-hopping fight sequence which was very well choreographed, and the second planet was quite neat as well).

But you only need to look at the credits to see where that additional money went, and it's well established that those choices aren't made by the director.

Personally I'd take Dacosta over pedestrian TV-on-a-cinema-screen direction from the likes of the Russos every single time.

johnny_ultimate

There's a definite problem in Hollywood of young, inexperienced directors being handed massive tentpoles instead of being able to develop their style and craft.

DaCosta being hired on the back of two films - one a small indie, the other a high-profile horror reboot - isn't even the worst case of that, though. Look at Colin Trevorrow going straight from Safety Not Guaranteed to Jurassic World.

The broader problem with Marvel, though (along with a handful of other mega-blockbusters), is that it's clear the director's role is limited compared to most other films being put there. They have a role for sure, but there's also a robust production machine that kicks in to handle a lot of stuff that would typically be in a director's full control. And there's obviously things they're not allowed do or have told to them. I thought Doctor Strange 2 was a little bit of a cut above the usual MCU fare, but it's also clear it was much less of a personal expression of Sam Raimi's vision than his take on Spider-Man (at least 1 and 2).

If anything, DaCosta's candid discussions about her experiences working on this film have given us a better idea of how the 'Marvel machine' works. As she said: https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2023/09/nia-dacosta-on-navigating-the-blockbuster-machine

“It is a Kevin Feige production, it’s his movie. So I think you live in that reality, but I tried to go in with the knowledge that some of you is going to take a back seat.”

flazio

I think I saw Marvel try to highlight that this was the highest grossing movie by, I think the demographic was black female director. And honestly I don't know how to react to a statistic like that.

pixelburp

Also worth pointing out as an aside, that DeCosta admitted on the oft-mentioned Blank Check podcast that she took the two high profile gigs (Candyman and The Marvels) so she could pay off her $100,000 student loan - and both those jobs still weren't enough to kill off the loan.

And if that's true, it also gives you some idea of how valued directors are in the MCU at the dollar level. The MCU clearly views directors like Hollywood viewed writers back in the 30s and 40s - objects and tools to be used as cheaply as possible.

Ain't no way in hell a James Cameron, Ridley Scott or David Fincher could forge a career in today's Hollywood; they'd be drummed out of the major "studios" for being too much hassle. Heck, Fincher nearly gave up directing straight outta the gate after Alien 3, and that was only the eraly 1990s.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121410883#Comment_121410883

They are glorified TV show directors

Varik

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121410286#Comment_121410286

If someone is fully ignorant to the plus shows then they don't know that they're missing something on heading into the cinema. I don't think even if you had you're really missing out too much. Strange 2 even if you did see wandavision was a bit abrupt on wanda's 180.

The majority of box office isn't coming from people who've watched everything or who've even read any news or reviews, they've seen posters, trailers, and heard it's good.

If this had just been captain marvel 2, then I don't think it'd have done any better.

For the massive hits, I know a lot of people who went to Top Gun who'd not seen the original or went to Endgame/infinity war without seeing much of the rest of the MCU.

speedboatchase

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121411067#Comment_121411067

That's it. And thus far less likely to baulk at the story demands of Feige or his house style.

pixelburp

Hope this isn't considered a gloat 'cos we know those sorts float around here, but I had wondered if perhaps the long, Thanksgiving weekend might have given this a bump into respectability: not even close, languishing in 6th only managing a paltry $9 million. It's still on wide release in the States too so not like it isn't still on enough screens. I wonder if we'll hear the Disney+ / digital announcement sooner than later at this stage.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121410286#Comment_121410286

Yeah, the negative impact of not knowing the characters is mostly all in the head of people.

It is a totally normal cinematic experience to not have every background detail about each character.

Seems like a type of FOMO these people experience when they believe they aren't in the know on something and tends to be especially prevalent with people who at one stage watched everything MCU so now cant deal with being in the position of the average consumer has always been with the MCU.

This movie can definitely be watched and easily understood by someone who hasn't seen the other movies.

~Rebel~

Finally got out to see this - I dunno, I quite enjoyed anyway. It did exactly what I was expecting of it, fast paced, light, fun time adventures with likable characters (each to their own on that front, but I found the dynamic worked well).

It's a movie where really we're there for the moment-to-moment fun stuff and the character dynamics, but there were definitely some issues with the broader narrative alright that wouldn't have needed much to fix - I appreciated the shorter run-time, but actually thought it could've done with 10 more minutes. Needed a little tie up to better explain how their civil war caused the sun to fade (can understand the issues of air and water as a result of terrestrial fallout, but getting a sun involved tens of millions of miles away in some way that doesn't utterly destroy themselves felt like it needed to be touched upon). Also needed to put a little more time into making it a bigger deal to reignite, as it came across as a piece of piss when Danvers went off to do it - it should've nearly killed her. The final confrontation with the baddie needed a little more room to breath too, it gets wrapped up too quickly with her self-destruction.

Think they also leaned a little hard on how overwrought Rambeau and Danvers' emotions were around Danvers not coming back (from both perspectives), could've been dialed back a smidge and achieved the same narrative goal. Otherwise enjoyed the push and pull and interplay between the three of them though, with Iman Vellani just brilliant in every scene and every moment. Played it perfectly.

Spon Farmer

Saw this last week. Loved it. Great chemistry between the three leads and great that they brought the family along.

I was just googling to find out something about a character and I saw Bob Iger was being a dick about the poor box office. What does it mean that there was “executives” on the set than usual? Do Disney have suits on the MCU shoots watching what is going on?

Does Feige not have absolute control?

How can the MCU or STAR WARS keep going if there isn’t sequels?

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121451569#Comment_121451569

If I was to guess it is probably the amount of editing and reshoots required to get it where it ended up.

Don't see there being issues with sequels, they just need to be sequels that will draw an audience.

Agent Coulson

Well it finished it's box office run yesterday and has a worldwide box office of $197m the lowest of any MCU.

So I wonder will it be dropped for Christmas Day on Disney+ now.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121453505#Comment_121453505

Seems like a solid bet: the box office failure has given the film a bit of a bad rep. - possibly unearned by the actual reviews that have come in - and might serve some purpose in getting eyes to Disney+

Varik

So if you take the 2.5x budge for breakeven to account for promotion and revenue split, this lost 350m.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121453559#Comment_121453559

This lost huge money, no matter how anyone looks at it.

Having said that, it is always weird when people take into account expenses like promotion on whether movies made money but dont take into account all the other revenue streams for movies, when they have them.

flazio

It's a shame. Of all the recent releases, this didn’t deserve to be the flop.

jface187

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121453630#Comment_121453630

This us it. Throw in tax breaks and merchandise deals it's really hard to figure total loss figures

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121453992#Comment_121453992

Even the likes of theme parks. There is enormous extra revenues available for certain types of movies that dont exist for others. When you're marketing a movie like this it also goes to support those other revenue streams so impossible for us on the outside to understand it.

Penn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121454142#Comment_121454142

In fairness though, box office vs budget is always the metric films are judged on, even internally within studios. Even if the film made 500m in outside revenue, it still comes down to "We were banking on this film making Budget+Profit at the cinema, and instead it made Budget-Loss. Therefore it failed."

I agree with an above post that this film isn't the one that deserved to be Marvel's first big loss, and if anything the poor performance of those films probably increased the losses for this one. But it is what it is. In terms of box office, this film is sadly a failure.