BLACK WIDOW: THE MOVIE (TBD) 4 4

[Juno Beach]

Not perfect by any stretch but I enjoyed it. I found it interesting that there was a scene of Widow watching Moonraker. I was thinking earlier in the movie how it reminded me of a Roger Moore era James Bond movie (which I thought were great cheezy fun). 

[@therealsilvermane]

35 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

No.

Releasing a Black Widow or Hawkeye movie earlier was no more risky than releasing an Ant-Man movie, let alone a Guardians of the Galaxy movie, when they did. Less risky, in fact, given the profiles of the respective actors involved.

Yes, Ant-Man and Guardians of the Galaxy were also risks, but with those movies you also had the "Wow!" factor of a guy who could shrink and interact with ants or an intergalactic alien adventure movie. Both had fantastic imagery that could be exploited in marketing. Yes, no one had ever heard of Ant-Man, but the commercials of Paul Rudd riding around on flying ants under a Marvel Studios banner was enough to bring in an audience. Ant-Man and Guardians each filled a kind of genre niche in Phase Two. A Black Widow or Hawkeye movie, IMO, would have just been a niche already successfully filled by Winter Soldier and Civil War both which prominently featured Natasha and Clint Barton already. IMO, a Phase Two or Three Black Widow or Hawkeye movie would have been a waste of time. Marvel did good to focus its resources instead on Ant-Man (which opened up the Quantum Realm), Dr Strange (which opened up the Multiverse), or Black Panther.

Edited July 12, 2021 by @therealsilvermane

[@therealsilvermane]

16 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

For me, Black Widow is the MCU's first real movie about family. As I said, WandaVision's family environment was too much a controlled environment for it to feel "real". And Guardians of the Galaxy was more about the bonds of friendship than family, other than the Gamora-Nebula hatership.

I guess I forgot about the family dynamic of Ant-Man and Ant-Man and the Wasp. I think for me, the main dynamic of the Ant-Man films was the father-daughter relationship of Hank and Hope or Scott and Cassie. With Black Widow, we see the darker side of an entire nuclear "family" and all the dysfunctionality that goes with it that Ant-Man was too light hearted to explore.

[drotto]

1 hour ago, @therealsilvermane said:

I enjoy the Screen Rant Pitch Meetings, but to counter its lead-off, the reason a Black Widow movie wasn't made earlier is the same reason a Hawkeye movie was never made. Natasha and Barton didn't warrant a solo movie. They were non-powered SHIELD Agents and more supporting Avengers members. There was the risk of non-interest in a MCU movie(in the formative years) that would essentially be a spy-political thriller movie of which Captain America Winter Soldier and Civil War already handled well for the MCU. And in those formative years when the MCU was still getting its footing, would people have lined up to see a Black Widow or Hawkeye movie? I doubt it. It would have at the least been a risky business move.

What world do you live on?  The MCU is based on B and C list characters from a comic standpoint.  Disney did not have access to the A listers at the time.

 

I would also argue that Black Widow and Hawkeye would have been the safe move for a movie rather than going with new and virtually unknown properties like Gardians, Ant-man or Captian Marvel. They had already been established in at least 2 films, based on where this movie fits the timeline, and should have been made. Introducing new characters was good for expanding the universe, but it was not the safe move.  Black Widow would have been the safe move.  Furthermore, Scarlet Johansen was (and still is) a much higher profile actress, then anyone involved in those films. She was already big when she was cast in IM2, and massive by Avengers.

Edited July 12, 2021 by drotto

[drotto]

Why are we saying this movie is breaking records.  It is doing fine. It is not breaking records.  It is only breaking records for box office when you exclude everything before 2020.  We do not know what the new movie theater world is.  Saying it is record breaking is only the media and industry trying to put a positive spin on a sector of entertainment devastated by lockdowns. In a pre-Covid world they would be calling this a bomb. 

 

Frankly post Covid, I have no idea what it is.

 

As for streaming, yes 60 million is impressive, but with so little historical data, again, what does it mean.

[theCapraAegagrus]

2 minutes ago, drotto said:

...In a pre-Covid world they would be calling this a bomb. 

 

Frankly post Covid, I have no idea what it is.

Count Dookie

[drotto]

12 minutes ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Count Dookie

Remember, Solo made $84 million opening weekend, people called it a flop, and Disney did some course corrections with Star Wars as a result.

 

So BW makes $80 million and is run away hit?  So either post-Covid the movie landscape is forever changed, and all the previous records have no relevance,  the market is still in recovery, or thi movie did not do well.  It is one of those three.  We just do not know of which one.

Edited July 12, 2021 by drotto

[theCapraAegagrus]

1 minute ago, drotto said:

...post-Covid the movie landscape is forever changed...

This is absolutely true, since movies are now offered direct-at-home. Without the industry forcing you to visit a theater, many people will choose the inferior quality of their 32" 720p TV with built-in speakers.

Why would you go to a restaurant for hot and fresh food when you can have it delivered at room temperature?

[Muno42]

I enjoyed it for the low expectations I had going in. Mainly because Florence Pugh was great and is set up for the Hawkeye series and taking up the Black Widow name later. The main story was weak and the movie felt more like "Gee, we should have given Scarlet a movie before Captain Marvel". Also, I did not need to know how she got a vest and quinjet for Infinity War ham-fisted into the story.

 

[@therealsilvermane]

1 hour ago, drotto said:

What world do you live on?  The MCU is based on B and C list characters from a comic standpoint.  Disney did not have access to the A listers at the time.

 

I would also argue that Black Widow and Hawkeye would have been the safe move for a movie rather than going with new and virtually unknown properties like Gardians, Ant-man or Captian Marvel. They had already been established in at least 2 films, based on where this movie fits the timeline, and should have been made. Introducing new characters was good for expanding the universe, but it was not the safe move.  Black Widow would have been the safe move.  Furthermore, Scarlet Johansen was (and still is) a much higher profile actress, then anyone involved in those films. She was already big when she was cast in IM2, and massive by Avengers.

Yes I know the MCU got its start with B and C listers. And still does that.

But to put $150+ million budget and valuable moviemaking resources towards a Black Widow or Hawkeye movie in Phase Two or early Phase Three would have done nothing to expand the MCU the way Ant-Man, Dr. Strange, The Guardians films, or Black Panther did. I'm not counting Captain Marvel because that came out between Infinity War and Endgame.

Put aside box office potential. To tell the story of the MCU which was ratcheting up towards Infinity War, the world of Black Widow or Hawkeye in a $150+ million movie would have done nothing to bring in the proper elements to get the MCU ready for Thanos. The world of Black Widow and Hawkeye is SHIELD, which was covered in depth in Winter Soldier, which was also in essence a Captain America-Black Widow-Falcon team-up movie. The private world of Hawkeye already featured prominently in Age of Ultron. What in their stories would have added to the MCU to expand it to get us ready for Infinity War? Nothing.

With Ant-Man, we got new characters and the Quantum Realm. With Dr Strange, we got new characters and the Multiverse and another Infinity Stone. With Guardians, we got new characters and expanded the MCU into space where Thanos lives. With Black Panther, we got new characters, Vibranium, and an entire new continent where our heroes can fight.

The valuable limited resources of Marvel Studios(relatively speaking) and the limited theatrical calendar it had to work with at the time were put to better use giving us Ant-Man, Dr. Strange, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 1 &2, and Black Panther.

Edited July 12, 2021 by @therealsilvermane

[drotto]

16 minutes ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

This is absolutely true, since movies are now offered direct-at-home. Without the industry forcing you to visit a theater, many people will choose the inferior quality of their 32" 720p TV with built-in speakers.

Why would you go to a restaurant for hot and fresh food when you can have it delivered at room temperature?

I still like the theater experience.  Nothing else beats a great steak cooked by somebody else from a good restaurant.  I do not like reheated beef, and they cook it better than me.

 

So call me old school.

[Gatsby77]

20 minutes ago, drotto said:

Remember, Solo made $84 million opening weekend, people called it a flop, and Disney did some course corrections with Star Wars as a result.

 

So BW makes $80 million and is run away hit?  So either post-Covid the movie landscape is forever changed, and all the previous records have no relevance,  the market is still in recovery, or thi movie did not do well.  It is one of those three.  We just do not know of which one.

I'd argue The Fast and the Furious franchise is a better barometer for "whether the theatrical landscape's changed" than this single (post-Endgame) Marvel film.

Fast & Furious 6 opened to $97M

Fast & Furious 7 opened to $147M (en route to $1.5 bn. worldwide)

Fast & Furious 8 opened to $99M (en route to $1.2 bn. worldwide)

Fast 9 (last month) opened to just $70M.(~30 percent less)

 

[drotto]

1 minute ago, @therealsilvermane said:

Yes I know the MCU got its start with B and C listers. And still does that.

But to put $150+ million budget and valuable moviemaking resources towards a Black Widow or Hawkeye movie in Phase Two or early Phase Three would have done nothing to expand the MCU the way Ant-Man, Dr. Strange, The Guardians films, or Black Panther would have. I'm not counting Captain Marvel because that came out between Infinity War and Endgame.

Put aside box office potential. To tell the story of the MCU which was ratcheting up towards Infinity War, the world of Black Widow or Hawkeye in a $150+ million movie would have done nothing to bring in the proper elements to get the MCU ready for Thanos. The world of Black Widow and Hawkeye is SHIELD, which was covered in depth in Winter Soldier, which was also in essence a Captain America-Black Widow-Falcon team-up movie. The private world of Hawkeye already featured prominently in Age of Ultron. What in their stories would have added to the MCU to expand it to get us ready for Infinity War? Nothing.

With Ant-Man, we got new characters and the Quantum Realm. With Dr Strange, we got new characters and the Multiverse and another Infinity Stone. With Guardians, we got new characters and expanded the MCU into space where Thanos lives. With Black Panther, we got new characters, Vibranium, and an entire new continent where our heroes can fight.

The valuable limited resources of Marvel Studios9relatively speaking) and the limited theatrical calendar it had to work with at the time were put to better use giving us Ant-Man, Dr. Strange, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 1 &2, and Black Panther.

I am not disputing that expanding the universe was the better move, and more important to telling the bigger story. It does not change the fact that a BW movie would have been a very safe move, and would have made money, likely more money than some of those films.  They could have easily have found room on the calendar, and pushed some of those back a few months. You could also argue Gardians 2,  other than a few plot points which could have been moved to the first movie, could have been moved or from a world standpoint was not needed. This is no knock against Gardians 2.

[piper]

I'm of the opinion, "What does it matter when the movie came out?" .  We're at the point where movies will not always have sequential story telling.  We may even have god forbid retcons.

I may wish that Black Widow got her story told sooner but I still think it was a well plotted story with interesting character development.

I have a very simplistic perspective when it comes to films or tv shows.  If I care about the characters and the story than chances are I will like it.

[NewWorldOrder]

4 hours ago, Gatsby77 said:

Well said.

Esp. not knowing what $60M knows for streaming, and what the "new normal" is for theater sales.

But consider the alternative - the same movie that only appears on streaming - like Amazon's spending (reportedly) ~$155 million on The Tomorrow War.

There are ways to limit availability as well, such as HBO Max's model - For example, I missed the window to watch In the Heights for "free" via HBO Max because it's already left the platform (for now), as Wonder Woman 2 similarly left the platform after a few weeks as well.

Disney could easily announce that Black Widow won't be available for free via Disney+ until 2023.

And whatever you think of Black Widow's opening weekend box office, this is just a trial run for the truly expensive movies coming down the pike - Bond, Dune and Top Gun: Maverick. Those will be the true litmus tests of the theatrical "new normal."

Old and New Normal is never going to be watching a blockbuster movie at home for the 1st time, or at least having the option to go to a theater.

If that is true the movie business is over besides terrible Amazon and Netflix movies like Tomorrow War.

I dont care if you have a 100 inch TV in your movie theater man cave its still trash compared to going to the movies for most people.

Seeing Infinity War and Endgame in IMAX was a big deal, now imagine how lame it would have been if I we all had to stay home and watch them instead.  Boring Alert!

Covid has really proved how stupid most people are when it comes to common sense (not directed at you or anyone in this thread) about the sheep mentality of most people in the world.  

Obviously movie theaters aren't going away and oil demand isnt going away any time soon!  

See everyone at the movies! 

Edited July 12, 2021 by NewWorldOrder

[@therealsilvermane]

While it was nice to be back in a movie theater for Black Widow, the movie actually looked better on Disney+ for me. I saw it theatrically at AMC in 3D and the colors were drab and muted. On Disney+ on my TV, the colors really popped. I kind of preferred seeing it on TV (maybe it was also because it was my 2nd viewing and the intimate family moments were better suited for TV, but that's beside the point).

I think if the movies are back and are going to compete with streaming, they need to up the quality and experience, maybe homogenize all the choices. Right now, you have four choices of screening at the big multiplexes: regular digital, Dolby Atmos Digital/other enhanced, 3D, or IMAX. The movies should just start with Dolby/enhanced and go from there, like add 3D to the Dolby quality. To have to choose between the great color/sound of Dolby Atmos but have to settle for drab color/sound with the 3D screening or fake IMAX is annoying.

Edited July 12, 2021 by @therealsilvermane

[NewWorldOrder]

10 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

While it was nice to be back in a movie theater for Black Widow, the movie actually looked better on Disney+. I saw it at AMC in 3D and the colors were drab and muted. On Disney+ on my TV, the colors really popped. I kind of preferred seeing it on TV (the intimate family moments were better suited for TV also but that's beside the point).

I think if the movies are back and are going to compete with streaming, they need to up the quality and experience, maybe homoginize all the choices. Right now, you have four choices of screening at the big multiplexes: regular digital, Dolby Atmos Digital/other enhanced, 3D, or IMAX. The movies should just start with Dolby/enhanced and go from there, like add 3D to the Dolby quality.

All the movies theaters around me are high quality with drinks and food galore.  Where do you live?

 Human beings are simple and mostly predictable sheep.  I know so many people beginning of 2021 that said they were very hesitant to go back out or go to public places even with the vaccine.  All those dopes I see are out now eating out and being mostly normal again.  The one movie theater chain that closed (Arclight) by me which was a great super kiss your butt kind of theaters will be taken over by another movie theater company which is something most people around here assumed would happen.   Remember when gas prices were low and oil futures of the barrel was a $1? Everyone thought big oil is dead and here comes the electric car's and movie theaters will be replaced by more Whole Foods and Tesla dealerships.  Fast forward to today and I saw Black Widow last night in a nice theater with a couple beers paid for by my Exxon Mobil and Chevon dividends!  FF and X-men is going to be glorious seeing them in Imax in a couple years!

Edited July 12, 2021 by NewWorldOrder

[@therealsilvermane]

3 minutes ago, NewWorldOrder said:

All the movies theaters around me are high quality with drinks and food galore.  Where do you live?

 Human beings are simple and mostly predictable sheep.  I know so many people beginning of 2021 that said they were very hesitant to go back out or go to public places even with the vaccine.  All those dopes I see are out now eating out and being mostly normal again.  The one movie theater chain that closed (Arclight) by me which was super kiss your butt kind theaters will be taken over by another movie company which is something most people around here assumed would happen.   Remember when gas prices were low and oil futures of the barrel was a $1? Everyone thought big oil is dead and here comes the electric car's and movie theaters will be replaced by more Whole Foods and Tesla dealerships.  Fast forward to today and I saw Black Widow last night in a nice theater with a couple beers paid for by my Exxon Mobil and Chevon dividends!  FF and X-men is going to be glorious seeing them in Imax in a couple years!

I'm a fan of 3D and it would just be nice to see a movie in 3D with nice colors and sound over what I saw at the AMC. All the AMC's in my city are all kind of old. Maybe I should try again at the Cinemark. Perhaps the industry is moving away from 3D. I hope not.

[NewWorldOrder]

1 minute ago, @therealsilvermane said:

I'm a fan of 3D and it would just be nice to see a movie in 3D with nice colors and sound over what I saw at the AMC. All the AMC's in my city are all kind of old. Maybe I should try again at the Cinemark. Perhaps the industry is moving away from 3D. I hope not.

Yeah maybe besides the big IMax, but 3D for BW was widely available here. 

[drotto]

7 minutes ago, NewWorldOrder said:

Yeah maybe besides the big IMax, but 3D for BW was widely available here. 

We lost our biggest theater. 24 screens gone, to my knowledge, nobody has bought the building. It was an AMC.  We have lost 1/2 the screens within 20 minutes of my house.