The Marvels

[Glacier Peak]

I'll watch this on D+. I'm happy with the MCU style of film. Sometimes I just want to turn my brain off and watch colorful explosions on my nice TV screen. Or have a long movie to watch during travel. My expectations are neither exceeded or lowered when I watch this genre of movie. I enjoyed Avengers Infinity War and Endgame because both were quite a cultural phenomenon in my social circle. 

 

I think Iron Man 3 is the worst of three dozen or so MCU movies, but if it was playing in a DMV waiting area, I'd watch it. 

[Without_Pause]

14 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I'll just leave this here.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/2023/11/20/like-it-or-not-the-marvels-has-now-bombed-in-every-way-possible/

The good news is they only have one movie coming out next year, and that feels like the right kind of film to do well. I know DC is rebooting, but I am curious to know if they aren't going to get hit by the superhero fatigue as well. DC hasn't been pulling Marvel numbers anyway.  Blue Beetle nor the new Shazam film even pulled $100 million in domestic tickets, and I thought the first Shazam was great. The Batman didn't do $400 million domestically. 

 

Personally speaking, I think Marvel/DC should build characters and storylines via TV shows and then make a movie when they have something worthy of it. 

[PeregrineFalcon]

7 hours ago, Without_Pause said:

The good news is they only have one movie coming out next year, and that feels like the right kind of film to do well. I know DC is rebooting, but I am curious to know if they aren't going to get hit by the superhero fatigue as well.

There's some debate as to whether or not it's "superhero fatigue" or people just not wanting to watch what they believe will be a garbage movie.

[Without_Pause]

3 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

There's some debate as to whether or not it's "superhero fatigue" or people just not wanting to watch what they believe will be a garbage movie.

I went and watched it today. It isn't garbage. My wife said it was good, and far better than the second Ant-Man film. I genuinely enjoyed it. It was fun. It was a bit ridiculous. I think they did a good job of interweaving the three heroes in the film.  I have very debatable qualms with the film. I'm sure I could easily skip putting it into MCU's bottom 5 which honestly gets it into the solid territory. Even if I agree that it might only be a 3/5, that's still not garbage. FYI, Rotten Tomatoes Audience score is 83%. 

[Excraft]

Scores on Rotten Tomatoes are notoriously suspect, same as any other site where "customer" reviews and product ratings are easily manipulated by bots and sellers paying for good reviews.  The Marvels being good or bad is subjective, but numbers don't lie.  Overall, the 46 million dollar opening weekend followed by a near 80% drop off in the following week is enough to inform you that the movie isn't performing and is a complete box office disaster.

[battlewraith]

2 hours ago, Excraft said:

Scores on Rotten Tomatoes are notoriously suspect, same as any other site where "customer" reviews and product ratings are easily manipulated by bots and sellers paying for good reviews.  The Marvels being good or bad is subjective, but numbers don't lie.  Overall, the 46 million dollar opening weekend followed by a near 80% drop off in the following week is enough to inform you that the movie isn't performing and is a complete box office disaster.

 

The numbers are saying that it failed at the box office. That doesn't tell you why it flopped. John Carpenter's The Thing is, in my opinion, one of the best films ever made and at release it not only bombed but was absolutely despised by critics. Dredd with Karl Urban kicked ass and it didn't even make it's money back. 

[Without_Pause]

6 hours ago, Excraft said:

Scores on Rotten Tomatoes are notoriously suspect, same as any other site where "customer" reviews and product ratings are easily manipulated by bots and sellers paying for good reviews.  The Marvels being good or bad is subjective, but numbers don't lie.  Overall, the 46 million dollar opening weekend followed by a near 80% drop off in the following week is enough to inform you that the movie isn't performing and is a complete box office disaster.

The Audience Score for it still isn't the lowest for an MCU movie. Thor: Dark World has a 75% Audience Score. Iron Man 3 is at 78%.

[Glacier Peak]

3 hours ago, Without_Pause said:

The Audience Score for it still isn't the lowest for an MCU movie. Thor: Dark World has a 75% Audience Score. Iron Man 3 is at 78%.

Ah that was the other one I thought wasn't very story polished!

[Excraft]

12 hours ago, battlewraith said:

The numbers are saying that it failed at the box office. That doesn't tell you why it flopped. John Carpenter's The Thing is, in my opinion, one of the best films ever made and at release it not only bombed but was absolutely despised by critics. Dredd with Karl Urban kicked ass and it didn't even make it's money back. 

 

It failed at the box office because the majority of moviegoers weren't interested in it for whatever reason.  That's great that you liked the Thing (I agree - totally underrated film) and Dredd.  I did say that whether a film is good or bad is subjective, but that's irrelevant.  What you and I may find to be a masterpiece of cinema doesn't magically make it so.  Box office receipts don't lie - the film is a total flop and a complete financial disaster.  I'm happy you enjoyed it though.  

[Excraft]

8 hours ago, Without_Pause said:

The Audience Score for it still isn't the lowest for an MCU movie. Thor: Dark World has a 75% Audience Score. Iron Man 3 is at 78%.

 

Sites like Rottentomatoes are notorious for bots and manipulating reviews.  There's all sorts of reasons why they do it.  For me, I don't believe any of the results on websites like those.

[Without_Pause]

9 hours ago, Excraft said:

 

Sites like Rottentomatoes are notorious for bots and manipulating reviews.  There's all sorts of reasons why they do it.  For me, I don't believe any of the results on websites like those.

You just needlessly repeated yourself. I'm pointing out the ratings from the same site to get a base for how those films did using the same system. Also, the audience ratings for how much I liked a film line up with how I feel about said films. 

[Ghost]

10 hours ago, Excraft said:

 

Sites like Rottentomatoes are notorious for bots and manipulating reviews.  There's all sorts of reasons why they do it.  For me, I don't believe any of the results on websites like those.

You may not, but a lot of people rely on those ratings to decide if they are going to see a movie they are not already invested in.

 

Ill use IMDB for movies I know nothing about -  is it 100% accurate and in line with my tastes? No, but it can still be a good indication if something is trash.

[Excraft]

On 11/23/2023 at 9:47 AM, Without_Pause said:

You just needlessly repeated yourself. I'm pointing out the ratings from the same site to get a base for how those films did using the same system. Also, the audience ratings for how much I liked a film line up with how I feel about said films. 

 

On 11/23/2023 at 10:49 AM, Ghost said:

You may not, but a lot of people rely on those ratings to decide if they are going to see a movie they are not already invested in.

 

Ill use IMDB for movies I know nothing about -  is it 100% accurate and in line with my tastes? No, but it can still be a good indication if something is trash.

 

I'm really glad you both get something out of those sites and they work for you.  I prefer to be skeptical of reviews posted on sites owned by the studios producing the films being reviewed. 

[Without_Pause]

On 11/23/2023 at 10:49 AM, Ghost said:

You may not, but a lot of people rely on those ratings to decide if they are going to see a movie they are not already invested in.

 

Ill use IMDB for movies I know nothing about -  is it 100% accurate and in line with my tastes? No, but it can still be a good indication if something is trash.

Yep. I tend to lean with the critics, but I feel like for the Marvel movies I will lean a bit more with the fan base. I also have no problem having a 'hot take' for even Marvel movies which critics and fans love. I have used at a time Meta Critic as well since it is more score based versus thumbs up or thumbs down. Again, I don't expect 100% agreement with any site, but if two sites are saying the movie is in the 30% range, I'll at best wait for it to hit streaming. 

 

I find it interesting the sheer hype that is put into an ad for Napoleon and yet it is getting a 64% at RT and 61% at Meta Critic. 

 

In The Marvels news, my wife and brother-in-law had a fun time talking about the film on Thanksgiving. 

[PeregrineFalcon]

In its annual SEC report, Disney acknowledges that "we face risks relating to misalignment with public and consumer tastes and preferences for entertainment, travel and consumer products." AND "Further, consumers’ perceptions of our position on matters of public interest, including our efforts to achieve certain of our environmental and social goals, often differ widely and present risks to our reputation and brands."

 

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/4326247-happy-birthday-adam-smith-the-invisible-hand-just-slapped-disney/

 

"Disney has reportedly lost a billion dollars just on four of its recent “woke” movie flops, productions denounced by critics as pushing political agendas or storylines."

[Without_Pause]

The sad/funny thing is I don't know what is 'woke' about them, but I'm convinced people who are anti-woke don't know what woke is. My issues with say the latest Ant-Man had nothing to do with anything 'woke.'

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

4 hours ago, Without_Pause said:

My issues with say the latest Ant-Man had nothing to do with anything 'woke.'

The only woke issues I had with Quantumania was staying awoke through it. Yeesh.

 

It's kind of puzzling how this has warped into a whole win/lose/zero sum thing with the movies, not to mention a lot of other things. Time was, there would be movies that appealed to one kind of audience but maybe not this other one, and that would be okay, both financially, and with the press and politicians not being overly bothered...

 

...unless it was really nasty/juicy/transgressive stuff. I'm not quite old enough to remember when Exorcist, Brazil, VideoDrome or Life Of Brian came out. But I do know those got fun, and for some slightly better reasons. Marvels is not the Messiah, it's a very... slightly half-baked popcorn movie with a bunch of adorable cats in it that needed better editing. And more cats. Nothing more insidious than that.

 

Financially, risking a studio's rep and future on big-swing franchise tentpole movies that you haven't given time to develop properly is getting to be a risk. MGM/Sony killed Bond partly for that reason. But also creatively, that character had run its course and needed a rest and refresh. 

 

If we're looking for a less-PC, more testosteroney* example, Fast X is a franchise movie, a mess (EXPLODING HAMSTERBALLS!), and the lowest-grossing in the series. It's allegedly just scraped into profitability, though what kind of profitable depends on who you ask. I've yelled enough about rolling breaks and other quantum accounting techniques they use in Hollyweird. If you really wanna know, look it up.

 

The death of the Franchise Movie has been long foretold by prophets of Profits Of Doom. It ain't happened yet. Like serial killers (and their franchises), it always seems to rise just when you think it's gone.

 

But making smaller bets on smaller, story-led movies and shows - like Loki - for a range of different audiences? That might be a better time creatively, financially, and give everybody their own theatre to head into at the 'plex.

 

Well, at least until the next Tom Cruise flick comes out.

 

*Testosteroney: the other San Francisco treat.

Edited November 28, 2023 by ThaOGDreamWeaver

[Ghost]

Well, it’s done and buried.

Lowest grossing MCU movie to date.

First MCU film to not cross 100million in N America.

 

Ugly all around.  Hopefully they can figure out how to get back to what made them successful.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/the-marvels-ends-box-office-run-as-lowest-grossing-mcu-movie-in-history/ar-AA1kW0lr?OCID=ansmsnnews11

[battlewraith]

5 hours ago, Ghost said:

Well, it’s done and buried.

Lowest grossing MCU movie to date.

First MCU film to not cross 100million in N America.

 

Ugly all around.  Hopefully they can figure out how to get back to what made them successful.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/the-marvels-ends-box-office-run-as-lowest-grossing-mcu-movie-in-history/ar-AA1kW0lr?OCID=ansmsnnews11

 

There might simply be a glut of too many superhero movies. It looks like The Marvels took in $197 million worldwide and was the lowest grossing MCU film. Blue Beetle took in $128 million and was the lowest grossing DCU film. We'll see how Aquaman does. 

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by battlewraith

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

33 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

Blue Beetle took in $128 million and was the lowest grossing DCU film.

Which seems kinda unfair. Tested well, critics were good with it if not raving, scored well with audiences...

...well, the audiences that got to see it, because pretty much everywhere was booked for Barbenheimer at the time. 

There's been differing reports about whether this and Aquaman are canon to the new DCU, though Gunn certainly liked it and thought Maridueña could come back as Jamie Reyes.

 

And even I think the genre could use a break for a while. Well, not a break exactly. A pause in the rush to exploit the genre.

 

A movie should be entertaining, sure, but it needs to tell a story. A good one.

And there are many, many kinds of stories that you can meld into the superhero world.

Which The Batman managed to do. It's recognisably a Bat-flick, but very much a proper underworld/serial killer flick too.

And there's a whole bunch of other genres that would work and have worked. Horror. Retro pulp. Conspiracy.

I mean, maybe not a Richard Curtis romantic-comedy take on Captain Britain with Colin Firth, but...

...*blink*...

...nah, that'd never work. Well maybe. Could it?

[battlewraith]

3 hours ago, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:

A movie should be entertaining, sure, but it needs to tell a story. A good one.

 

Yes, but I think this is also part of the problem. There's such an impulse to have these films tell epic sagas and be taken seriously as dramas that they start to fall apart as actual comic book movies. I saw The Marvels and it was entertaining when it was the three main superhero characters goofing around together. But then you had to sit through this intrigue about the Kree empire and the skrulls and Carol having not returned to take care of Monica after the blip and blah blah blah. The first Captain Marvel movie was out 4 years ago. I barely remembered all that backstory. And they always seem to think that there needs to be this world ending threat for basically every superhero movie.

[Without_Pause]

15 hours ago, battlewraith said:

 

But then you had to sit through this intrigue about the Kree empire and the skrulls

To be fair, one of the big Avengers movies coming out is Secret Wars. 

[Ghost]

17 hours ago, Without_Pause said:

To be fair, one of the big Avengers movies coming out is Secret Wars. 

Maybe I misunderstand your point, but Secret Wars has nothing to do with Kree/Skulls

[Without_Pause]

4 hours ago, Ghost said:

Maybe I misunderstand your point, but Secret Wars has nothing to do with Kree/Skulls

Bah. Secret Invasion. Still, the Kree/Skulls are a running plotline in the MCU, so it is isn't surprising they touched upon it. I mean, in the list of issues that movie had, that wasn't one for me. 

[BrandX]

On 11/18/2023 at 8:23 PM, Techwright said:

New Mutants, as I recall, got a very, very late start, with numerous delays, even after it was shot, and then was almost pushed out as a "hey, gotta get this old stuff off the shelf" thing.   The flaw with it, did not lie with it, but with the logistics people who were supposed to promote and push it out better.  (Well, that and Covid screwing everything up at the theaters.)

 

New Mutants was released right before quarantine went into full swing, but had sort of started.  Saw it in theaters.  That said, it wasn't bad, but it wasn't great either.