Captain Marvel or How Marvel does everything better than everyone else

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

Dreiko:
I read somewhere that Chinese audiences found Captain Marvel "too ugly to be a superhero" apparently XD.

I wonder if it's those darned alt right Communists at work again!

Is this like where when the new Godzilla came out everyone said the Japanese thought he was too fat

But tracing back it just ended up being one dude on a toy review site

Eacaraxe:
The only way in which Captain Marvel is a "leading" film, is that it's the first (1.) MCU (2.) film to have a (3.) super-powered woman be the (4.) titular character. That's a comic set of disclaimers. Scarlett Johannson as Black Widow was first-billed in Iron Man 2, Zoe Saldana as Gamora was the first-billed woman super-powered character in Guardians 1, Hayley Atwell as Peggy Carter was the first titular woman in an MCU property, and Krysten Ritter was the first superpowered woman titular character in an MCU property. What Captain Marvel was not, was neither the first woman-led superhero movie based on a Marvel property (which was Elektra if I remember right), nor the first woman-led superhero movie at all.

ScarJo as Black Widow in Iron Man 2 was barely a character and was also part of an ensemble. So were Gamora and Peggy Carter, on top of being the love interests. They didn't exactly lead the movies they were in, those were still led by men.

Same crap happened with Wonder Woman (2017). Not only was Wonder Woman not the first DC woman superhero to get a film, it wasn't even the first Wonder Woman movie.

Sure, the '74 Wonder Woman movie was made-for-TV schlock, and likewise were Supergirl, Catwoman, and Elektra big screen garbage. But, straight talk: out of the entire body of work, how many superhero and comic book movies in general prior to the MCU were actually good? Those four movies being garbage, were normal for the genre. Writing those movies off for being low-budget, made-for-TV, not a tentpole release, nor very good, is actually applying a higher standard for women-led comic book movies opposed to men, which is misogynist as hell.

Spider-Man 1, Spider-Man 2, X-Men 1, X-Men 2, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, The Incredibles. Heck I'd count Blade 1 and 2 as well, but even without those movies that's 7 good superhero movies at least prior to the MCU. That's more good movies than the MCU even has. And guess what, all those movies were led by men or experienced primarily from a guy's perspective.

Which, by the by, Supergirl was the first big-budget, Hollywood-level production standards, woman-led and -titled superhero movie. It was produced by Warner Bros, shot at Pinewood, had a Hollywood cast (Faye Dunaway, Peter O'Toole, Mia Farrow for three), scored by Jerry Goldsmith, and had a budget of $35 million. By comparison, Terminator had a budget of $6.4m, Temple of Doom had a budget of $28m, and Ghostbusters had a budget of $30m.

Yeah, and the plot of that movie totally didn't revolve around Supergirl and the female villain catfighting over a man.

The fact that Wonder Woman was the first female led superhero blockbuster to actually be good was a pretty big deal. It meant genuine effort and money was being put into something NOT starring a man. Even if the Supergirl movie had been good, it would've been a rare outlier.

undeadsuitor:

Dreiko:
I read somewhere that Chinese audiences found Captain Marvel "too ugly to be a superhero" apparently XD.

I wonder if it's those darned alt right Communists at work again!

Is this like where when the new Godzilla came out everyone said the Japanese thought he was too fat

But tracing back it just ended up being one dude on a toy review site

I remember seeing various tweets in JP twitter back in the day saying something along the lines of "this godzilla ate too much mcdonalds" lol.

Anyhow, here's the article:

https://boundingintocomics.com/2019/03/20/report-chinese-movie-goers-dont-think-brie-larsons-captain-marvel-is-attractive-enough/

Here Comes Tomorrow:

trunkage:

Here Comes Tomorrow:

If it makes you feel any better the feminist stuff in Captain Marvel is eye rolling at best. It doesn't beat you over the head with it. Most of the problems with it stem from Larson just being a bad fit in the role.

The worst is I'm Just a Girl.

Also, when you say bad fit, do you mean similar to the comics?

I mean a bad fit as in none of her one liners really land and she's not got a great deal of charisma. She's at the same level as Natalie Portman in Thor, shes just there to read lines and get a pay check. Like when I watched Guardians Gamora and Nebula feel like they're characters and the actors are invested, Larson makes Captain Marvel feel like a plot device.

Yeah, her charisma is nothing like RDJ. It's got more of a banter feel rather than quips. Personally, bit sick of quips and appreciate trying something new. I thought it worked okay when she was part of a team but not when she was fighting enemies. I don't know if it was the script or her. I'll wait to see what she does in the next one.

She's probably like a Ruffalo and would benefit from being in a team rather than being by herself.

Eacaraxe:

Snip

Yeah, I've noticed that too. It's a far more benign abnormality, but one all the same.

Captain Marvel is the first MCU film with a sole female lead. That's its claim to fame as far as precedents go. It isn't the first female superhero movie, it isn't the first female Marvel superhero movie, and it isn't the first critically acclaimed female superhero movie (see Wonder Woman).

Casual Shinji:
ScarJo as Black Widow in Iron Man 2 was barely a character and was also part of an ensemble. So were Gamora...

Still received top billing which was my point.

...and Peggy Carter...

Hey now, I liked that character. Being she was a founding member of SHIELD and all, it'd have been cool if they did a television show about her and her exploits. It would even be a part of MCU, like Agents of SHIELD, and everything! Hell, they could even name the show after her!

Spider-Man 1, Spider-Man 2, X-Men 1, X-Men 2, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, The Incredibles. Heck I'd count Blade 1 and 2 as well, but even without those movies that's 7 good superhero movies at least prior to the MCU. That's more good movies than the MCU even has.

So, how many bad superhero movies were there before the MCU started? Kind of my entire point, there.

Yeah, and the plot of that movie totally didn't revolve around Supergirl and the female villain catfighting over a man.

So, what about any shortcomings of the movie's plot negates its budget, casting, scoring, and production?

The fact that Wonder Woman was the first female led superhero blockbuster to actually be good was a pretty big deal.

A pretty big deal that was neatly thrown under the bus by the very people who oh-so-vehemently supported and defended it, right up until the point criticisms surfaced about the movie only passing the Bechdel test thanks to its opening scene, the amount of skin the costume showed, the addition of romantic subplot between Diana and Steve, and Diana's...shaved pits. Scarcely a word about the film since. Strange, one would almost take the film's reception as a cautionary tale against groupthink, however good it was.

I thought Wonder Woman was garbage. So the idea that it was the "first good" one is entirely subjective. Captain Marvel was better if only because it held my attention.

Johnny Novgorod:

erttheking:

Johnny Novgorod:

Matters to me. I'm not saying the movies are "wrong" for being unlike how I'd prefer them. But in every villain death there's always an element of a "lucky parry" or split-second self-defense that absolves the good guy from actual murder. And if there isn't then it's like blowing up an obstacle or something like that. That's how I knew Thanos wasn't dead when Thor axed him. No MCU villain would get killed in a direct attack from the good guy.

Mark my words: Thanos is gonna die from a fall, some form of sleight of hand, an attack's gonna bounce back, he's gonna asplode from too much powah or some conveniently clean bullshit. At best he'll "let" himself get killed.

They. Planted. A. Bomb. In. His. Brain. I don?t know how to make this any more clear to you. They flat out said they needed to destroy Ego?s brain and Rocket prepped a bomb with the sole purpose of killing Ego. There is no ?lucky parry? or ?split second self defense.? They went in saying that they needed to kill him.

You?re flat out ignoring what?s in front of your face. And you?re arguing past me.

Yes, the bomb, I saw the movie. I still think there's a cozy moral buffer between bombing a planet and killing a person. And to be fair to Marvel the rule about having to kill the bad guy in self-defense precedes the MCU and Disney. It's just so much more noticeable and annoying when the shtick of every one of your characters is "punches/shoots bad guys for a living".

So in other words it doesn't count because you don't feel like it counts. Ignoring that Quill was actively holding Ego down while the guy was desperate to stop the bomb, I think it's clear that you just made up your mind and no amount of evidence is going to change that. Pepper overloading a reactor in Iron Monger's face, Vision frying Ultron, Tony directing a nuke at a mothership, you don't feel like it counts so it doesn't.

Eacaraxe:

Spider-Man 1, Spider-Man 2, X-Men 1, X-Men 2, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, The Incredibles. Heck I'd count Blade 1 and 2 as well, but even without those movies that's 7 good superhero movies at least prior to the MCU. That's more good movies than the MCU even has.

So, how many bad superhero movies were there before the MCU started? Kind of my entire point, there.

That's an unfair comparison since there've been superhero movies probably since the 40's, and the MCU is about 10 years old. So obviously by comparison the MCU has a better track record. Saying 'oh yeah, those female led superhero movies were garbage, because superhero movies were just garbage back then' is not true.

Yeah, and the plot of that movie totally didn't revolve around Supergirl and the female villain catfighting over a man.

So, what about any shortcomings of the movie's plot negates its budget, casting, scoring, and production?

The fact that the movie was so bad and embarrassing because of this that they didn't bother with another female superhero movie till.. what, Barb Wire? Also, the Supergirl movie was made to ride the coat tale of the Christopher Reeve Superman, that's why it had the budget it had.

The fact that Wonder Woman was the first female led superhero blockbuster to actually be good was a pretty big deal.

A pretty big deal that was neatly thrown under the bus by the very people who oh-so-vehemently supported and defended it, right up until the point criticisms surfaced about the movie only passing the Bechdel test thanks to its opening scene, the amount of skin the costume showed, the addition of romantic subplot between Diana and Steve, and Diana's...shaved pits. Scarcely a word about the film since. Strange, one would almost take the film's reception as a cautionary tale against groupthink, however good it was.

Who? What very people were that? Or is this one of those cases were two or three tweets about it surfaced therefor 'SJWs hate Wonder Woman because she has shaved armpits'? And Christ, we're living in a time where every movie gets shoved down the plothole meatgrinder by a 100+ YouTube videos.

Also, Wonder Woman has been brought up quite a bit since Captain Marvel got released. Heck, it's still being brought up whenever the DCCU is being discussed, and how it was the first of those movies to not be grimdark trash.

Casual Shinji:

and how it was the first of those movies to not be grimdark trash.

Judgement of quality aside, how the heck do MoS and Suicide Squad fit the definition of "grimdark?"

Hawki:

Casual Shinji:

and how it was the first of those movies to not be grimdark trash.

Judgement of quality aside, how the heck do MoS and Suicide Squad fit the definition of "grimdark?"

I honestly keep forgetting about Suicide Squid, I also never saw it so I can't comment on that.

And does Man of Steel fit the definition of 'grimdark'? Well, kinda yeah. It's certainly not the most grimdark piece of fiction out there, but it certainly went out of its way to not make Superman the big blue boyscout who saves the day. This is done by having him brood, working on a dirty crabfishing boat sporting a beard, making the super suit dark, inserting a ton of 9/11 imagery, lots of military action (though that's probably done to placate the Transformers demographic), and lots of angry smashing-through-buildings fights. And generally just Zack Snyder's way of moviemaking that makes it feel very obnoxious.

Casual Shinji:
I honestly keep forgetting about Suicide Squid, I also never saw it so I can't comment on that.

And does Man of Steel fit the definition of 'grimdark'? Well, kinda yeah. It's certainly not the most grimdark piece of fiction out there, but it certainly went out of its way to not make Superman the big blue boyscout who saves the day. This is done by having him brood, working on a dirty crabfishing boat sporting a beard, making the super suit dark, inserting a ton of 9/11 imagery, lots of military action (though that's probably done to placate the Transformers demographic), and lots of angry smashing-through-buildings fights. And generally just Zack Snyder's way of moviemaking that makes it feel very obnoxious.

None of that is grimdark. Gritty perhaps, but not grimdark.

When I think of grimdark, I basically think of a setting that's absolutely bereft of any hope or joy, where there's no "good" side, where there's no long-term victory, just postponing complete collapse and whatnot.

W40K fits that (or at least did until recently). MoS? Well, considering it's got your standard happy ending and reasonably binary sides morally, I'd say it doesn't.

Hawki:

Casual Shinji:
I honestly keep forgetting about Suicide Squid, I also never saw it so I can't comment on that.

And does Man of Steel fit the definition of 'grimdark'? Well, kinda yeah. It's certainly not the most grimdark piece of fiction out there, but it certainly went out of its way to not make Superman the big blue boyscout who saves the day. This is done by having him brood, working on a dirty crabfishing boat sporting a beard, making the super suit dark, inserting a ton of 9/11 imagery, lots of military action (though that's probably done to placate the Transformers demographic), and lots of angry smashing-through-buildings fights. And generally just Zack Snyder's way of moviemaking that makes it feel very obnoxious.

None of that is grimdark. Gritty perhaps, but not grimdark.

When I think of grimdark, I basically think of a setting that's absolutely bereft of any hope or joy, where there's no "good" side, where there's no long-term victory, just postponing complete collapse and whatnot.

W40K fits that (or at least did until recently). MoS? Well, considering it's got your standard happy ending and reasonably binary sides morally, I'd say it doesn't.

What's been happening recently in 40k? Is the new realigning of things changing that much? I thought they were just renaming things to make sure they didn't get sued. But then I'm no longer in any loop for finding how fans react to 40k anymore

trunkage:
What's been happening recently in 40k? Is the new realigning of things changing that much? I thought they were just renaming things to make sure they didn't get sued. But then I'm no longer in any loop for finding how fans react to 40k anymore

Can't say much, just the whole Primaris Marines/return of Guilliman thing. Like, "yeah, we're in the End Times, but we get a bunch of super marines to play with, so...glory for the Emprah!"

Someone put it this way - "if you want to convey your protagonists as being on the backfoot, don't make them more powerful than the antagonists. It's like if in Star Wars, the Resistance was the one with Starkiller Base."

Can't say how accurate it is, but it's the sense I've got from what I've seen/read/heard."

So, movie looks on track for a billion dollar box office haul. Not a bad innings.

Gordon_4:
So, movie looks on track for a billion dollar box office haul. Not a bad innings.

It's only virtue signallers and SJWs that saw it, didn't ya know?

Hawki:

trunkage:
What's been happening recently in 40k? Is the new realigning of things changing that much? I thought they were just renaming things to make sure they didn't get sued. But then I'm no longer in any loop for finding how fans react to 40k anymore

Can't say much, just the whole Primaris Marines/return of Guilliman thing. Like, "yeah, we're in the End Times, but we get a bunch of super marines to play with, so...glory for the Emprah!"

Someone put it this way - "if you want to convey your protagonists as being on the backfoot, don't make them more powerful than the antagonists. It's like if in Star Wars, the Resistance was the one with Starkiller Base."

Can't say how accurate it is, but it's the sense I've got from what I've seen/read/heard."

The Imperium was never the underdog in 40k. It's always had the most guns, the most territory, the most resources and the most bodies but it's so vast and it has so many enemies that its almost impossible to effectivly defend and if anything 40k got MORE grimdark due to the return of Guilliman.

Think about it, Guilliman had the ENTIRE Imperium of man looking to HIM to fix everything and he hates what the Imperium has become. His only option is to fight a losing battle for something that is the antithesis of what he and his brother fought for.

On topic: I passing a billion really a big deal for a superhero movie these days?

Hawki:

trunkage:
What's been happening recently in 40k? Is the new realigning of things changing that much? I thought they were just renaming things to make sure they didn't get sued. But then I'm no longer in any loop for finding how fans react to 40k anymore

Can't say much, just the whole Primaris Marines/return of Guilliman thing. Like, "yeah, we're in the End Times, but we get a bunch of super marines to play with, so...glory for the Emprah!"

Someone put it this way - "if you want to convey your protagonists as being on the backfoot, don't make them more powerful than the antagonists. It's like if in Star Wars, the Resistance was the one with Starkiller Base."

Can't say how accurate it is, but it's the sense I've got from what I've seen/read/heard."

The Imperium was never the underdog in 40k. It's always had the most guns, the most territory, the most resources and the most bodies but it's so vast and it has so many enemies that its almost impossible to effectivly defend and if anything 40k got MORE grimdark due to the return of Guilliman.

Think about it, Guilliman had the ENTIRE Imperium of man looking to HIM to fix everything and he hates what the Imperium has become. His only option is to fight a losing battle for something that is the antithesis of what he and his brothers fought for. From a narrative perspective Guilliman was the most depressing primarch they could have brought back as he is the one who would feel the most responsibility towards the Imperium and the least likely to tell them to go fuck themselves.

On topic: I passing a billion really a big deal for a superhero movie these days?

Here Comes Tomorrow:

Hawki:

trunkage:
What's been happening recently in 40k? Is the new realigning of things changing that much? I thought they were just renaming things to make sure they didn't get sued. But then I'm no longer in any loop for finding how fans react to 40k anymore

Can't say much, just the whole Primaris Marines/return of Guilliman thing. Like, "yeah, we're in the End Times, but we get a bunch of super marines to play with, so...glory for the Emprah!"

Someone put it this way - "if you want to convey your protagonists as being on the backfoot, don't make them more powerful than the antagonists. It's like if in Star Wars, the Resistance was the one with Starkiller Base."

Can't say how accurate it is, but it's the sense I've got from what I've seen/read/heard."

The Imperium was never the underdog in 40k. It's always had the most guns, the most territory, the most resources and the most bodies but it's so vast and it has so many enemies that its almost impossible to effectivly defend and if anything 40k got MORE grimdark due to the return of Guilliman.

Think about it, Guilliman had the ENTIRE Imperium of man looking to HIM to fix everything and he hates what the Imperium has become. His only option is to fight a losing battle for something that is the antithesis of what he and his brothers fought for. From a narrative perspective Guilliman was the most depressing primarch they could have brought back as he is the one who would feel the most responsibility towards the Imperium and the least likely to tell them to go fuck themselves.

On topic: I passing a billion really a big deal for a superhero movie these days?

As a rule of thumb, no it isn't terribly rare. What makes it notable in Captain Marvel's case is the sheer amount of shit flinging about that it would fail because.........I don't know. I mean it exceeded my expectations in box office because I was thnking it would pull around $800mil at the most.

Gordon_4:
the sheer amount of shit flinging about that it would fail because.........I don?t know.

A combination of Brie Larson daring to "shriek" (calmly state when interviewed) that "white people and men don't deserve opinions" (a more diverse group of film critics is a good thing) and morons truly believing "get woke, go broke."

Gordon_4:
As a rule of thumb, no it isn?t terribly rare. What makes it notable in Captain Marvel?s case is the sheer amount of shit flinging about that it would fail because.........I don?t know. I mean it exceeded my expectations in box office because I was thnking it would pull around $800mil at the most.

It cracked over $900 mil this weekend. The next highest grossing movie is Civil War. An ensemble movie.

Yeah, I was a bit surprised too. I thought it might do Thor Ragnarok money, but its smashing that out of the park

Here Comes Tomorrow:

Hawki:

trunkage:
What's been happening recently in 40k? Is the new realigning of things changing that much? I thought they were just renaming things to make sure they didn't get sued. But then I'm no longer in any loop for finding how fans react to 40k anymore

Can't say much, just the whole Primaris Marines/return of Guilliman thing. Like, "yeah, we're in the End Times, but we get a bunch of super marines to play with, so...glory for the Emprah!"

Someone put it this way - "if you want to convey your protagonists as being on the backfoot, don't make them more powerful than the antagonists. It's like if in Star Wars, the Resistance was the one with Starkiller Base."

Can't say how accurate it is, but it's the sense I've got from what I've seen/read/heard."

The Imperium was never the underdog in 40k. It's always had the most guns, the most territory, the most resources and the most bodies but it's so vast and it has so many enemies that its almost impossible to effectivly defend and if anything 40k got MORE grimdark due to the return of Guilliman.

Think about it, Guilliman had the ENTIRE Imperium of man looking to HIM to fix everything and he hates what the Imperium has become. His only option is to fight a losing battle for something that is the antithesis of what he and his brothers fought for. From a narrative perspective Guilliman was the most depressing primarch they could have brought back as he is the one who would feel the most responsibility towards the Imperium and the least likely to tell them to go fuck themselves.

Also, I thought they were doing Demon Primarchs/ Primaris Marine as well. I thought that was just power creep.

On topic: I passing a billion really a big deal for a superhero movie these days?

Well, only when talking to get woke, go broke guys. Non-ensemble billion dollar super hero movies include Black Panther and Dark Knight. Ensemble movies are aiming for 2 billion now.

These guys keep pretending that SJW-ness equals absolute terrible and against every fibre of their being. There could be two 'SJW' movies passing a billion. But I doubt that would actually make much of a difference to the get woke, go broke guys. So, yeah, pointless.

Here Comes Tomorrow:

On topic: I passing a billion really a big deal for a superhero movie these days?

The only movies who have passed 1 billion are team movies so far

And black panther

So basically a movie about a woman and a black guy can easily take in the same money an entire team of white people make.

Get woke

Get unbroke

undeadsuitor:

Here Comes Tomorrow:

On topic: I passing a billion really a big deal for a superhero movie these days?

The only movies who have passed 1 billion are team movies so far

And black panther

So basically a movie about a woman and a black guy can easily take in the same money an entire team of white people make.

Get woke

Get unbroke

Who knew that marketing to MORE PEOPLE might be MORE PROFITABLE?

undeadsuitor:

Here Comes Tomorrow:

On topic: I passing a billion really a big deal for a superhero movie these days?

The only movies who have passed 1 billion are team movies so far

And black panther

So basically a movie about a woman and a black guy can easily take in the same money an entire team of white people make.

Get woke

Get unbroke

To play devil's advocate, couldn't this also not be a case of every subsequent movie in the MCU generally making more money than the last one? There's also the motivation of this movie being the one to introduce the character that'll play an important part in the next Avengers. And then there's the fact that the movie literally has 'Marvel' in the title.

Obviously it's a good sign that the majority of people don't hate women to a degree that the movie would flop, ditto with Black Panther, but would a movie like this be as succesful if it didn't have the Marvel brand? Would a female led John Wick type movie make as much money as the male equivalent?

Saelune:

undeadsuitor:

Here Comes Tomorrow:

On topic: I passing a billion really a big deal for a superhero movie these days?

The only movies who have passed 1 billion are team movies so far

And black panther

So basically a movie about a woman and a black guy can easily take in the same money an entire team of white people make.

Get woke

Get unbroke

Who knew that marketing to MORE PEOPLE might be MORE PROFITABLE?

How was anyone supposed to know black people and women had money?

Next thing you'll tell me is gay people have money too??

Casual Shinji:
So, how many bad superhero movies were there before the MCU started? Kind of my entire point, there.

That's an unfair comparison since there've been superhero movies probably since the 40's, and the MCU is about 10 years old. So obviously by comparison the MCU has a better track record. Saying 'oh yeah, those female led superhero movies were garbage, because superhero movies were just garbage back then' is not true.[/quote]

You think comparing pre-MCU superhero/comic movies to post-MCU movies, to gauge overall quality of the genre and see if woman-led films compare, is an unfair comparison because a minority of big-budget pre-MCU films turned out good? You're proving my point, which is good superhero/comic book movies pre-MCU were outliers, and therefore the woman-led films should follow the same trend.

Which they did.

The fact that the movie was so bad and embarrassing because of this that they didn't bother with another female superhero movie till.. what, Barb Wire? Also, the Supergirl movie was made to ride the coat tale of the Christopher Reeve Superman, that's why it had the budget it had.

Tank Girl, actually. Supergirl had the budget because it was privately financed by the Salkinds, the same people who financed all the Superman movies. They were vested in the IP, not individual characters. None of which disproves my point, because your counter-point is premised by it.

Who? What very people were that? Or is this one of those cases were two or three tweets about it surfaced therefor 'SJWs hate Wonder Woman because she has shaved armpits'?

Mainstream media, actually. A simple Google search for "wonder woman armpits" reveals articles from Maxim, Forbes, HuffPo, Telegraph, Slate, and Independent. Hardly "two or three tweets". That's not the politics beat (for the feminism aspect), entertainment beat (for films in general), or genre beat (for geeky shit) -- that's mainstream coverage.

This was a much bigger deal than you're pretending it was. For some reason.

Who knew that marketing to MORE PEOPLE might be MORE PROFITABLE?

Last metrics I saw, 55% of Captain Marvel viewers were men, and 74% of the demo split by age were 25+.

https://variety.com/2019/film/news/captain-marvel-box-office-opening-weekend-record-1203160002/

Aquaman's audience was 56% women, and 71% of its demo split by age were 25+. Its biggest quadrant were women, 25+.

https://deadline.com/2018/12/aquaman-jason-momoa-marketing-won-women-over-1202525963/

#OopsiePoopsie

Eacaraxe:
You think comparing pre-MCU superhero/comic movies to post-MCU movies, to gauge overall quality of the genre and see if woman-led films compare, is an unfair comparison because a minority of big-budget pre-MCU films turned out good? You're proving my point, which is good superhero/comic book movies pre-MCU were outliers, and therefore the woman-led films should follow the same trend.

Which they did.

Which they didn't, since no good female superhero movie exists pre-MCU among the 10+ male ones that do. Superhero movies were already making a turn for the good at the start of the 2000's, yet the only female led movies we got were embarrassing turds like Catwoman and Elektra. As it stands Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel (judging from the overall reception) are the only competent-to-good female superhero movies. Even if that was pre-MCU that amount would've still been ridiculous.

Tank Girl, actually. Supergirl had the budget because it was privately financed by the Salkinds, the same people who financed all the Superman movies. They were vested in the IP, not individual characters. None of which disproves my point, because your counter-point is premised by it.

Then what was your point in bringing up Supergirl? To show an example of a female superhero movie that treats both its hero and its villain as silly girls who's motivation is fighting eachother over a guy? But that it's okay because it had a budget due to a popular IP that is synonomous with a male character?

Who? What very people were that? Or is this one of those cases were two or three tweets about it surfaced therefor 'SJWs hate Wonder Woman because she has shaved armpits'?

Mainstream media, actually. A simple Google search for "wonder woman armpits" reveals articles from Maxim, Forbes, HuffPo, Telegraph, Slate, and Independent. Hardly "two or three tweets". That's not the politics beat (for the feminism aspect), entertainment beat (for films in general), or genre beat (for geeky shit) -- that's mainstream coverage.

This was a much bigger deal than you're pretending it was. For some reason.

Which is why when people think of the Wonder Woman movie now they think of the shaved armpits controversy. Except, no they don't.

Eacaraxe:

Who knew that marketing to MORE PEOPLE might be MORE PROFITABLE?

Last metrics I saw, 55% of Captain Marvel viewers were men, and 74% of the demo split by age were 25+.

https://variety.com/2019/film/news/captain-marvel-box-office-opening-weekend-record-1203160002/

Aquaman's audience was 56% women, and 71% of its demo split by age were 25+. Its biggest quadrant were women, 25+.

https://deadline.com/2018/12/aquaman-jason-momoa-marketing-won-women-over-1202525963/

#OopsiePoopsie

Stop trying to derail the narrative. We all know the men who saw Captain Marvel only did so to complain about it on the internet.

Casual Shinji:
To play devil's advocate, couldn't this also not be a case of every subsequent movie in the MCU generally making more money than the last one? There's also the motivation of this movie being the one to introduce the character that'll play an important part in the next Avengers. And then there's the fact that the movie literally has 'Marvel' in the title.

Eh, in regards to your first point, you get outliers. Things like both the Ant-Man films or Doctor Strange where they're testing out a new guy tend to take a dip in between fairly successful repeat outings. Could have been very possible that Captain Marvel, who'd never popped up in any film before (unlike Black Panther, who had a previous appearance before his own film) would have been seen as a filler/expository episode the same as them

Here Comes Tomorrow:

The Imperium was never the underdog in 40k. It's always had the most guns, the most territory, the most resources and the most bodies but it's so vast and it has so many enemies that its almost impossible to effectivly defend

That's true to a point, but what's hammered over and over is that life in the Imperium sucks. There is only war. It's a militant, xenophobic, regressive, ignorant body that governs the swathes of mankind with an iron fist, forcing their worship and killing billions of its own people if it comes down to it...and it's arguably one of the most morally upstanding factions in the setting despite that.

Even if the Imperium's the big boy, he's being picked on by everyone else and being bruised in the process.

and if anything 40k got MORE grimdark due to the return of Guilliman.

Think about it, Guilliman had the ENTIRE Imperium of man looking to HIM to fix everything and he hates what the Imperium has become. His only option is to fight a losing battle for something that is the antithesis of what he and his brother fought for.

That might suck for Guilliman, but it's a boon for the Imperium itself.

Also, the art style seems to have undergone a shift recently - far more use of gold and blue for instance. There's a kind of resplendance in the Imperium now that wasnt' really there previously.

I find it funny there was more feminism in the marketing than the actual film, which, if I'm honest, is a little dishonest advertising if you ask me.

I do like Marvel movies so I'll probably see this one, I'm just hoping they're giving cap an actual character flaw to overcome, a sacrifice to make and a slice of humble pie for dessert like every other major Marvel frontliner.

It sounds super tropey, but I actually like this trope.

Combustion Kevin:

I do like Marvel movies so I'll probably see this one, I'm just hoping they're giving cap an actual character flaw to overcome, a sacrifice to make and a slice of humble pie for dessert like every other major Marvel frontliner.

I'm almost tempted to say you've seen it and are being sarcastic.

Here Comes Tomorrow:

Eacaraxe:

Who knew that marketing to MORE PEOPLE might be MORE PROFITABLE?

Last metrics I saw, 55% of Captain Marvel viewers were men, and 74% of the demo split by age were 25+.

https://variety.com/2019/film/news/captain-marvel-box-office-opening-weekend-record-1203160002/

Aquaman's audience was 56% women, and 71% of its demo split by age were 25+. Its biggest quadrant were women, 25+.

https://deadline.com/2018/12/aquaman-jason-momoa-marketing-won-women-over-1202525963/

#OopsiePoopsie

Stop trying to derail the narrative. We all know the men who saw Captain Marvel only did so to complain about it on the internet.

You might want to put that thing back in the corn field before the farmer finds out you stole it...

Here Comes Tomorrow:

Combustion Kevin:

I do like Marvel movies so I'll probably see this one, I'm just hoping they're giving cap an actual character flaw to overcome, a sacrifice to make and a slice of humble pie for dessert like every other major Marvel frontliner.

I'm almost tempted to say you've seen it and are being sarcastic.

I have not, but I find your response rather ominous.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here