@therealsilvermane

Of course, the obvious little flaw in that logic is that box office means everything when it comes to the quality of a movie. Even though The Force Awakens and Last Jedi are the highest grossing Star Wars movies, it doesn't mean they're the best. And even though The Mandalorian is just a TV series, it's arguably better than 75% of the Star Wars theatrical releases which have all made tons of money. Box office means very little when judging the quality of a movie's story. James Cameron's Lightstorm is a pioneer of VFX, but he isn't exactly the greatest storyteller ever. And he isn't above taking things from other movies, as I see it. I'm sure Mr Cameron knew jack about early 20th century America when he made Titanic. After a first viewing of that movie, I think he watched Martin Scorsese's Age of Innocence and lifted story ideas and camera movements and inserted them into his movie, only with Cameron's dumb dialogue, they came off like Saturday morning cartoon heroes and villains. School girls loved that and saw it umpteen times at the movies. Same with Avatar aka Dances With N'Avi. Some pretty melodramatic storytelling, but international audiences loved it. Cameron knows VFX, knows his audiences, and knows how to press buttons. It's helped put him at the top of the box office again, but it doesn't make him the greatest storyteller ever and it doesn't make him above taking things and ideas from movies that tell a better human story.

The Razzies have been around a long time and get fairly big recognition every year, so maybe not. But this Golden Tomato thing is just a recognition that Ms Marvel received outstanding reviews from critics across the globe. And it WAS an outstanding series. From a pure humanity story aspect, it’s among the best things Marvel Studios has produced. If James Cameron wants to talk family dynamics in film, he needs look no further than Ms.Marvel.

Marvel Studios may have overestimated the intelligence of a portion of those masses.

Not really. James Cameron put the statement out there which has been covered ad nauseum by the press. And it was a big statement, that comic book superhero movies don't properly portray family life, that the heroes all act like college kids, meaning those films are inferior and that Avatar Way of Water will show us how it's done. Fair enough. Show me. I saw the movie. And in my opinion, Avatar Way of Water is a fairly weak portrayal of family life. As I stated above, yes, Sully had kids, but other than the sweet bowfishing scene at the beginning, when do we see any real relationship building between Sully and his kids, other than him saving them from Sky People or scolding them for screwing up when he wasn't around. Even when they strike out on their own to the N'avi sea village, the kids do their own thing and we hardly see Sully except when he's hanging out with King or saving the kids from Sky People or yelling at them. My conclusion is that Mr Cameron is simply not a good enough writer to properly convey meaningful family dynamics in a movie. His family might as well be a bunch of college kids.

If that’s the case, then my answer to Mr Scorsese Coppola etc is…it’s called capitalism. The market says general moviegoers prefer movies about fast cars, superheroes, and dinosaurs over movies about the struggles of Jesuit priests in 16th century Japan. However, Mr Cameron is like the personification of capitalism in movies. The guy knows how to get people in theaters. IMO his recent jabs at superhero comic book movies are that he just simply thinks his movies are more mature than them. And IMO, Titanic, Avatar, Alita, and Avatar Way of Water are not more mature films than the best MCU or DC movies of the past 15 years.

Why would Kevin Feige and Disney basically wipe out 10-20 years of successful world building just to start Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, T’Challa, and Thanos all over again? Because they’re not going to. If Marvel Studios wants to bring back Iron Man, it will be a different person and actor inside that suit, maybe a relative of Stark. Wakanda Forever already established T’Challa has a son and heir with the exact same name. If you want Thanos back, it’s just as easy to bring in a Thanos from the multiverse if you want to team him with Adam Warlock for a Magus storyline. Marvel Studiios will never reboot the MCU. It’s much easier (and a better business plan) to keep growing the universe and treat OG MCU heroes as legacy mantles to be passed on to new heroes/actors.

I’m not doubting George Lucas took ideas ideas from comic books, but I believe the bigger idea source was other movies, mainly Akira Kurosawa samurai films, John Ford westerns, and a war movie or two. Particularly, Kurosawa’s Hidden Fortress is about a warrior named General Rokurota who must escort the Princess Yuki and royal gold across enemy territory. Along the way, they enlist the aid of two greedy peasants who we first meet as they’re arguing while traversing through the desert. The movie includes a mind trick the General uses on enemy sentries, a sword battle with Rokoruta’s old nemesis General Tadokoro, a scarred Tadokoro aiding the heroes at the end and a reward ceremony. Look up “The Dambusters” and you’ll see where the trench battle on the Death Star came from, almost word for word and shot for shot minus the Luke stuff.

My post directly referred to James Cameron's statement about how he seems to say that as children and family are a part of real life, comic book movies don't really portray that part of life, or at least its heroes aren't affected by it. IMO, Cameron's movies with central children characters, like young John Conner or Newt or Jake Sully's children, are actually stories where the children have to make do a lot without their parents around. John Conner's mom is institutionalized for much of his childhood. Newt's parents are dead. For much of Avatar Way of Water, the children spend their time getting in trouble in the absence of the parents. It seems to me that while James Cameron talks about family dynamics in his movies, I don't exactly see those examples of strong family dynamics that somehow make his films more mature than the best superhero comic book movies. Yes, Cameron's movies have a strong group comraderie dynamic, like the Space Marines of Aliens, John and the Terminator in Terminator Judgement Day, or the N'avi children in Avatar Way of Water, but I'm not sure there's any real parenting in his movies. When Sully does interact with his kids, it's mostly treating them like soldiers or berating them for screwing up (when the parents weren't around). On the other hand, in MCU films where there are parent-child relationships, like Ant-Man, Black Panther, or Avengers Endgame, there's actual parenting happening. T'Challa and Killmonger meet their fathers on the ancestral plain. Tony spends quality time with Morgan before the Avengers time heist mission. 90% of the parent-child interactions in Avatar Way of Water involve Sully and Neytiri either saving their kids from Sky People or scolding them about something. I don't see that as more mature storytelling. IMO, James Cameron’s self-ballyhooed family dynamics in his blockbuster movies are about as skin deep as the T-100.

**spoilers** So if James Cameron thinks super-hero movie heroes act like "college kids", Avatar Way of Water's heroes and villains act like Saturday morning cartoon characters, even if the main characters have kids now. And when WoW's heroes or villains do attempt to act in a more three dimensional way, it sometimes doesn't make sense or seems cheap. Why would Spider suddenly start helping out the Sky People he knows are bad? Why do the children of the Sea King basically attempt to murder Sully's youngest son? Cameron does give tiny sparks for such character turns, but betrayal and murder seem a little drastic. Cameron never really gives us any relationship development between Quaritch and Spider to justify them caring if the other lives or dies. And what was the motivation for the Sky People this time around? Was it unobtanium? Was it amrita? Was it vengeance? It was a little confusing. In the first movie, the Sky People's motivation was clear: corporate interest in unobtanium. The plot of the first Avatar movie was pretty simple: Dances With Wolves in space. Way of Water was a lot messier narratively. I guess it was a little like Avatar meets Finding Nemo meets Titanic meets Swiss Family Robinson but not as good as any of those movies? The movie was full of logic problems (to me), plot holes, weird character turns, and redundant plot points. How many times were those poor kids going to be held at gunpoint by Quaritch? By the third time, I was like, "what's the point? They're just gonna get caught again." For a movie about family, Sully and Neytiri always seem absent from their kids lives until it's too late. Even during the big fight, I was like "is somebody gonna untie those poor kids already?" And Neteyam, the oldest son, leaves his sisters alone so they can go get Spider which ends up having horrible consequences for everybody? Such cruel justice for these kids trying to do good. On the plus side, it all looked great (except for the weird 48p projection which made it look like video) and I did like Sully's kids when they weren't moping.

During the press tour leading up to Avatar Way of Water, James Cameron said: “When I look at these big, spectacular films — I’m looking at you, Marvel and DC — it doesn’t matter how old the characters are, they all act like they’re in college. They have relationships, but they really don’t. They never hang up their spurs because of their kids. The things that really ground us and give us power, love, and a purpose? Those characters don’t experience it, and I think that’s not the way to make movies.” First, super-heroes like Superman, Spider-Man, or Captain America don't hang up their spurs in a super-hero world because of that great power great responsibility thing. Do U.S. military soldiers, sailors, and airmen retire just because they have kids? No. Neither do super-heroes. Second, particularly in the MCU, some super-heroes totally base their actions on their children or dependents. Tony Stark in Endgame refused to help the ragtag Avengers initially because of his new family life, though the great power great responsibility thing won out in the end. If Cameron's point is that Avatar Way of Water is a more mature approach to blockbuster moviemaking, I'm not sure this movie is a prime example. IMO, Way of Water might be one of his most infantile movies to date, not because the story is like 65% kids, but because of the storytelling.

In a civil suit, Anton Yelchin's accident was judged a wrongful death on Chrysler's part because that year's Jeep apparently had a confusing gear shift selector, and Jeeps rolling away had happened to many owners of that model. I wonder if, in the semi-frantic situation of helping out a stranded person, Renner simply forgot to put his snowplow in park?

Apparently, on average, a movie makes about 5% of its budget back off airline deals. In-flight movies is definitely one way to watch a flick. I watched Top Gun Maverick my first and only time(so far) on a flight to New York. It was actually pretty cool watching a movie about jets, on a jet. It was a bit of a meta experience. Unfortunately, the movie was longer than the flight so I still don't know what happened in the final 15 minutes. Good thing I have Paramount+.

Take it from a card carrying MCU fanatic, folks like me were grateful to have new MCU content on Disney+ or at the theater on an almost constant basis, especially during the pandemic when our entertainment options were limited. Other than a bloated director's cut of Justice League, Warner Bros and Sony certainly weren't giving us decent comic book movies/shows during that time, if you wanna talk "near complete artistic and commercial failure." As for Phase Four's "near complete artistic and commercial failure," I mean, I know there's a strong implicit bias against the current MCU Phase, but come on. Out of 15 MCU Disney+ series/holiday specials and theatrical films, only two received a final rotten critics rating, Eternals and Love & Thunder. Every MCU Disney+ series had very high viewership numbers except for Ms. Marvel. On the other hand, that series had the highest critics ratings of any MCU D+ show. The only MCU films you could say were subpar at the box office were the three pandemic releases, BW, ShangChi, and Eternals, but at the same time, every movie had subpar box office during that period. At 960m, 760m, and 830m, the global box office for DSMoM, TL&T, and BPWF were fine, not failures. Spider-Man No Way Home alone is one of the highest grossing movies of all time. Phase Four wasn't the runaway success of Phase Three, which featured two critical Avengers movies, but Phase Four was by no means a failure.

Are Martin Scorsese and Francis Ford Coppola happy now that "real cinema" like Avatar Way of Water and Top Gun Maverick are taking over movie theaters?

Yes, you're right. Still, he's another writer who kind of counters drotto's "example of writers that are great at their primary form, but have failed to adapt to other writing forms."

About the sequel's name being THE MARVELS (as opposed to Captain Marvel 2: The Manifestation of the Marvels or something), and as it pertains to both the title and the apparent story... After ending and beginning the year rediscovering Alan Moore's 1982 MIRACLEMAN (an old favorite of mine, one of the greatest comics stories ever written, and maybe the beginning of serious adult themed comics), I realized that for the MCU Carol Danvers' ongoing story, Marvel Studios is leaning into the character's original Fawcett Captain Marvel and Miracleman roots. In the credits scene of the Ms. Marvel series finale, we see Kamala suddenly switch places with Captain Marvel. This could, at least, be seen as a reference to the Billy Batson/Captain Marvel and Mickey Moran/Marvelman dynamic. Mar-Vell and Rick Jones also had this existence dynamic for a short while in the early days, too. The "Marvels" concept and title can also be seen as the MCU's version of Fawcett's The Marvel Family and the UK Marvelman Family. But rather than call Carol's team "the Captain Marvel family", it's being called "The Marvels".

To keep this kind of pointless debate going, there are also "countless" examples of comic book writers who did just fine transitioning from comic books to film and television. Daniel Clowes co-wrote the adapted screenplays of his Ghost World and Artist Confidential comics. Comics legend Gerry Conway is partially responsible for the success of TV's Law and Order. Allen Heinberg, who co-created and wrote Young Avengers, wrote the Wonder Woman screenplay. J. Michael Straczinski created and produced Babylon 5. Again, Zeb Wells is just a co-writer of a group of four writers of The Marvels. Every MCU film has multiple screenwriters credited. Iron Man had eight writers. That's how they work. Multiple writers contribute to an organic and narratively flexible movie whose story can and usually does change during production, all under the unifying vision of a good director. In this case, Nia DaCosta.

Elissa Karasik, writer and story editor on Loki, is also a credited writer on The Marvels.

That would be Kevin Feige, who oversees all of it, especially The Marvels, a very important film for Marvels Studios.

Zeb Wells is not the only writer credited on The Marvels. The other writers are Meghan McDonnell who wrote some episodes of WAndaVision, and Nia DaCosta the director. Also, Marvel Studios has a long history of employing writers and directors with limited experience in movies or TV or both.

Possibly Korvac, Marvel’s biggest intergalactic troll, who also has Kree origins and was rumored way back to be a villain in the Captain Marvel sequel.

Zen Wells has won Emmies for his work on Robot Chicken. He is the current writer of The Amazing Spider-Man comic. He co-wrote one episode of She-Hulk, Episode 7 “The Retreat” which featured Emil Blonsky and was one of the better episodes.

Well, the American entertainment industry thinks that way. Domestic vs international box office behavior and expectations is a big driver for what gets produced and how. A lot of that is due to the language or cultural difference. Wordy English speaking dramas don’t do as well overseas because of the language barrier so they aren’t marketed as much overseas. However, American movies with less talking, such as sci-fi action movies, get produced with a global audience in mind. Same with American movies that deal with US history. Depending on the particular historical subject, international audiences are perceived to not give a rat’s butt about those kinds of movies, so they aren’t marketed as much overseas. The box office numbers alone show that there is generally more interest domestically for the Black Panther movies because of America’s large black demographic, as opposed to anywhere else outside Africa. In turn, a movie like The Marvels will probably do better internationally than Wakanda Forever.

What was lazy writing IMO was everybody's dream being a different James Bond scene in Inception.