Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Marvel Cinematic Universe general stuff

Options
1118119121123124139

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,168 ✭✭✭The White Wolf


    I don't think streaming can be underestimated either in the hit cinemas have taken. A lot of people seem to be extremely comfortable now waiting for something to arrive on Disney+ or on Video on Demand

    The "Event" nature of the genre seems to have simply passed. No Way Home was the last one to capture something of the essence of it for me.

    I also feel that Millennials are still the key audience for these films and are the most likely to go to repeat viewings, but as they get older and priorities shift, the need to rush out and see these films is gone to a degree.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators Posts: 23,928 Mod ✭✭✭✭Clareman


    I don't know, I'm a middle aged man who LOVES the cinema, I much prefer watching a movie in the cinema than at home, everything about the cinema is great, BUT, I'm not going to watch any auld shite. I've no connection to this movie outside of the fact that it's a Marvel movie so I'll give it a miss, same as I don't goto every Warner, or MGM, or Disney movie.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    I dont know Youtubers I dont watch but as of now, the most common youtuber I watch is Mr H Reviews for general Hollywood takes cos he puts out nice and short 10 min videos which is about my level of interest, the question is if you see all criticism of hollywoood as "not analysis" then you may miss out on why general audiences dont like particular content or why a particular project is likely to fail before the trailers are even out.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Wtf you talking about "all criticism of Hollywood" I never said that either. Do I need to spell out that I'm talking about the very loud very obnoxious "go woke go broke" crowd who'll be lining up to declare woke Hollywood dead, spend videos sledging Larsen etc. off the back of this films box office. They have no value but man you can't avoid the man babies and negativity.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    The MCU's biggest strength - its very deliberate flavour of vanilla - has basically become its largest hurdle, mixed with as you say the advent of Disney+. The formula didn't change yet the environment most certainly did: a global pandemic and streaming, coupled with visually interchangeable TV series has basically reminded audiences that the MCU is many things - but not big movies to go to the cinema for. Stuff like Top Gun Maverick made people remember that the cinema was meant to be something epic, astonishing and big.

    And that's not a slight against the MCU, it had a direction and stuck to it. But every franchise since year 0 has had to mould itself with the times. Either the MCU becomes something for the cinema, or it goes to streaming. I don't think it can keep being what it still is anymore.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    but are they fundamentally wrong? companies like Disney are woke, they have embraced DEI/ESG and all that corporate nonsense down to having story line rules in their writing rooms. Hollywood cant write good female characters for example, its as obvious as pie watching the comically bad examples in recent years especially if they can be compared to stuff put out from the 90's and 2000's. you will reply that its all nonsense and they just hate women as if these points can be just argued away.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    As you seem to know what I'll say, and if not invent stuff, there's obviously nothing for me to add here as you have it all figured out. Thought my point was pretty clear but if you wanna #notallyoutubers and Yeah But Actually the woke bordeom, we're done.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    grand, once these flops dont have you confused at all.....

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,049 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    What elements 'failed' with Agents of SHIELD? MCU didn't lose people, it got stronger and stronger while AoS was on the air.

    I saw the Marvels and you need zero knowledge of any of the shows to get that movie, background is provided to everything a person would need. It is just people feel they need to know every bit of background to be able to enjoy the movie, which simply isnt the case.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,049 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    To me you can't really compare an intro movie like GotG to sequels - it has been sequels which have really delved into the multiverse.

    I do agree some of the more recent movies have characters shoved in to be seen later but that isn't a new thing. In the early phases just look at Hawkeye or Black Widow. You might say that was more naturally done but I'd argue it is probably more that we've become more aware of them.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I don't even know what you're talking about now and can't imagine anyone else is entertained by your weird insistence to divine meaning from a glib comment about neckbeards. It's like grasping smoke.

    Maybe consider watching a movie or two and stop hanging about threads for movies you obviously have an axe to grind. Seeya around.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,168 ✭✭✭The White Wolf


    On a comical note I've seen elsewhere fans criticising unfair reviews....same fans absolutely shitted on people for saying that about the DCEU.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,049 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Their flavour of vanilla is only a hurdle because the majority of fans don't want different. Every movie that has veered even slightly away from the core approach has received blowback from fans and critics.

    I also don't think you can look at any of the recent live action successes in film because they aren't comparable to what the MCU are doing. Barbie and Oppenheimer are the first movies and then Maverick and Avatar had huge gaps since the originals. For all of those it is much easier to build up an 'event' experience. We'll see how Avatar holds up when they get to the 5th movie, though even then it will be nowhere near the quantity and complexity of the MCU.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    Watching the news about the direction large entertainment companies are taking is sort of interesting as if they keep putting out subpar material they will eventually go bankrupt if they dont change course, predicting certain movies will flop is not having an axe to grind, surely it would only count as an "axe to grind" if they were wildly successful and still had a problem with them?

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,506 ✭✭✭✭Varik


    Agents of Shield gave up on the interconnection by the end going movies to TV, and TV to movies never really happened.

    The only thing that came from agents of shield was the new helicarrier in age of ultron which didn't have any plot you just had Coulson show it at one point and then age of ultron happens and it shows up.

    If you'd never watched AOS you'd not have missed anything for the movies. They may as well have been fan made shows.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I still chuckle at how the end(?) season coincided with Infinity War and the sum total of connection with that that Agents of SHIELD managed was a lackey on an alien vessel noting that "Thanos was attacking earth". That was it! And needless to say the Snap never featured.

    Great show though and still salty that the MCU brain trust never gave any cameos or nods to Melinda May, Daisy or those who could stand toe to toe. They deserved more than being forgotten. Also salty the budget got slashed such that the last two seasons took place entirely in the same, constantly redressed box set.



  • Registered Users Posts: 33,330 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    If anything though, and as we've seen with some of the Disney shows, being freed of having to connect to the films allowed AoS to do some really funky sh*t. They really took the chance to do some huge stories, have a lot of fun, and develop and evolve their own characters without having to really worry about a new MCU film announced which might not be out for another 3 years.

    Would have loved to see Daisy come through to the main MCU given her powers & history. May and Mac were two of my favourite characters, but they'd get lost in the MCU, and I was fully sure they were going to claim Mac was actually Nick Fury's son but they didn't.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,268 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    The fact Marvel are trying to bury any and all references to to the Inhumans experiment really killed off any hope of any of the characters ever appearing again.

    Damn shame.

    Mac, Robbie, Daisy and Fitz were awesome.

    J August Richards Deathlok was brilliant in his too infrequent small cameo's.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,268 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    For sure and I agree but given Fury hasn't really gone away it's a damn shame his various side hustles couldn't have involved SHIELD in some capacity; feels like Secret Invasion might have been the best lay up to do just that given the plot, and clearly Marvel have been trying to bring random edge cases back into the fold (like Anson Mount in Dr. Strange 2). SHIELD remains the best MCU TV show so far, by some distance with seasons 3 and 4 the pinnacle, yet it's a great pity the show has been effectively nuked from canon.

    It's a good idea, Season 1 was sloppy as fúck til the HYDRA reveal and as I said 3 and 4, the fourth especially, were legitimately great bits of telly.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 33,330 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Season 3 is also responsible for one of my favourite lines of dialogue in any Marvel project

    "Why do you think this Lash can defeat Hive? And who in tarnation names these things?!"



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,268 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    Coulson and Mac are insanely quotable.

    and I think in S2 Coulson tells Trip and Daisy to "prepare for a big file transfer" and Daisy asks "how big" literally seconds before an entire filing cabinet crashes down infront of them from the top of the building and Coulson looking down from the smashed window.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    The show found the right balance with the MCU's Whedon originating snark, among its many strengths. Though being a. long form TV show it probably has more emotional runway for snark & drama than the movies.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,887 ✭✭✭✭flazio


    Basically, once Joss Whedon left the Marvel top table, Jed and Marissa, AOS show runners lost contact with where the movies were going and therefore lost the ability to keep the party connection. Truth be told I kind of preferred Skye the hacktivist to Daisy/Quake the not mutant Inhuman.



  • Registered Users Posts: 33,330 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    I'm sure Jed and Marissa would have had other connections to the producers without Joss. They would have had to get approval for use of characters, stories etc from Marvel comics and the film producers like Feige for everything they did. I always saw it more as a case that because the Inhumans show failed, and because AoS had so much time to fill between movies, constantly having to tie back to the movies became more of a burden than anything else. Particularly with how network TV and movies are made at such a different pace. Splitting from the movies just allowed them to run their own stories at their own pace with stuff the movies weren't using (though the Darkhold appeared in AoS long before it showed up again in Wandavision).



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,049 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Wasn't there also a big internal politics battle between Feige and Perlmutter? Think there were a bunch of rumours that it drove a split between TV and movies.

    Think it ended up for the best in the end, they had some interesting impact early but were then able to go their own way.

    Presume at this stage it is retconned into being another universe.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,931 ✭✭✭Brief_Lives


    *i am moving this comment from the Marvels thread..


    I think the X-Men scenario will be huge.. I was 28 when Iron Man came out, and a total comic nerd. I can't wait to see what happens with the MCU in control.

    the first x-men movie and days of future past, were brilliant. but i am definitely looking forward to this.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    What I will say about MCU X-Men is that the one thing the MCU hasn't been great at, is world building. It's often really surface level if remembered at all and I've never got a sense anything really changed in this world ... which is something I believe you can't do with X-Men. The Fox movies were great cos they really ran with the prejudicial angle to its fullest. In a world of The Snap, talking trees and literal gods living in Norway, so what if Mutants start appearing? I've always felt the comics are just a little too full and inconsistent - Spider-Man is a hero but the X-Men to be suspected? - and the film's keeping a separation would be a good idea imo.



  • Registered Users Posts: 60,386 ✭✭✭✭Agent Coulson


    I think the main issue with the MCU X-Men will come to recasting them now instead of going with the 20 year old cast from the first X-Men movies just to placate the fans of the first movies.

    They can easily recast the Fantastic 4 as none of those movies were really any good

    The cast of the original X-Men were well cast and well received by fans and they did a good job with the material they were given however they are all to old to lead a decade or more MCU Phase now.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,049 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Yeah, they're really in a strange spot with it.

    I felt they were always best to start fresh with it within the MCU rather than using the multiverse. They could have easily built a story where the snaps cause mutants to start appearing at a much higher rate than the past - meaning there were always mutants but they kept below the radar.

    Having the old actors in seems like a short term decision that will hurt the MCU in the long term, unless they can find a way to wipe everything clean. Even then, I think the public is open to new actors when they are clear, like Holland, but when you start intro the old ones it'll be tough to go back to new ones (especially as the younger versions are already done).



Advertisement