THE MARVELS starring Brie Larson, Iman Vellani and Teyonna Parris (2023) 9 9

[fantastic_four]

On 11/10/2023 at 4:06 PM, VintageComics said:

In Jan 2020 I made a conscious decision never to have a bad day again after a lifetime of bad days. I made a promise to myself to turn every negative into a positive and that made all the difference in the world for me. I haven't had a bad day since. Really. Bad things happen, the pandemic happened 3 months after, I had a car catch fire, lost many friends and clients over my position on current events, but I can genuinely say every day is a great day and haven't had a bad days since Jan 1 2020.

I didn't believe it was possible when people would tell me about this sort of polyynic stuff, but I'm now living it. 

You're on a similar, parallel path with your Zen journey, aren't you?

Yes, although I don't even think about that word Zen much--probably not for over a year until you just mentioned it.  But it's the state I live in, allowing me to clear my mind at will whenever it starts to fill with irrational negativity.  That's everything I wanted out of it, and I've had it for about 30 years now.

[drotto]

On 11/11/2023 at 11:06 AM, fantastic_four said:

So fire the only guy who's ever done what he's done.  The guy Warner Brothers has been searching for their own version of for almost two decades without success.  I had high hopes that Geoff Johns would be that guy, but I was skeptical from the start--with good reason, it turned out.  Creative types like him usually get frustrated with the business aspect of films after a while when they're relatively young like he was, so I wasn't at all surprised when he stepped down.  They never fully gave him control anyway, so I'm still not sure who to blame that on.

So, fire a one of one dude in Feige and replace him with...who?    Ideally it will be a superfan without writing or art creds like Feige has always been.  There was never any danger that Feige would go back to writing or drawing because he didn't have skill at that to even fall back on it like a Geoff Johns did.  That's Kathleen Kennedy's problem--she's a stellar producer, but she is NOT a content curator, nor does she appear to have much of an instinct for how to curate content and Star Wars has suffered for it.  I'm guessing Kennedy has never known who Figrin D'an is, and that's who they need curating their content--a superfan.  Pablo Hidalgo and Dave Filoni are superfans, but both are also writers so they're not ideal candidates.  They're still both the best candidates to have creative control over that content, but neither has really been given that control to date so who knows how they'd do.  

Yes, Feige has been successful, but you can not ignor the contributions Favreau and even Purllmutter made to the MCU especially during phases 1 and 2.  There was also the story group during the earlier stages. The style of story, writing, and direction has changed dramatically since they were pushed out.  Remember Iron Man was all Favreau, and that was the foundation for the MCU.

 

I think it would be difficult to replace Feige, but it is not impossible. He at least needs to bring the story group back, and get some help.if phases 4 and 5 arw and indication he could just be stretched thin, may have list his touch, or maybe always needed others help.

Edited November 11, 2023 by drotto

[fantastic_four]

On 11/11/2023 at 1:44 AM, jimjum12 said:

On 11/10/2023 at 12:31 PM, fantastic_four said:

I still love going out to the movies.  Why don't you guys?  

Perhaps they don't have the twins to accompany them ?  GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

... You said you skip DC television, but for me, Gotham and Pennyworth were a couple of my favorite shows ever.

My twins haven't been to any Marvel movies at all, and until recently they haven't seen any.  They just turned 8, so they were a bit young for it.  I've been going to Marvel movies with adult friends in the area since they started.

Gotham I watched all the seasons of.  I think it's the only DC show I've seen more than half of since Smallville.

[Bosco685]

On 11/11/2023 at 10:28 AM, media_junkie said:

Yeah, it took a different trajectory than normal.  Most films when the initial reviews come in that is typically the highest it goes (The Marvels landed at like 55% when it first dropped) and then it goes down from there.  This one started at 55 then went to 61 then back down to 59 then back up to 62.  I'm not saying anything nefarious was done (also not saying it wasn't) but that isn't how a typical movie tracks.  Now on the flip side the "Verified Audience" rating is looking a bit gamed to me.  It started at 85% and has stayed at 85%.  Almost like that one Star Wars movie @Bosco685 posts from time to time.  That will be something to watch over the next few days.

Fandango is the parent company of Rotten Tomatoes. Fandango is a movie theater ticket outlet that does over $80M/annually in sales. One of the larger studios aligned with Fandango is Disney. Paul Yanover (recently former CEO of Fandango) was a long-time Disney executive.

But the rumors of audience score manipulation is probably fantasy. No way a critic aggregation site would allow such things to drive ticket sales.

[paperheart]

Deadline update; third DIS mega-bomb this year

‘The Marvels’ Meltdown: Disney MCU Seeing Lowest B.O. Opening Ever At $47M+

The Marvels which is seeing a Friday in the vicinity of where we expected it at $21.5M and a weekend opening between $47M-$52M,

Edited November 11, 2023 by paperheart

[fantastic_four]

On 11/11/2023 at 11:12 AM, drotto said:

Yes, Feige has been successful, but you can not ignor the contributions Favreau and even Purllmutter made to the MCU especially during phases 1 and 2.  There was also the story group during the earlier stages. The style of story, writing, and direction has changed dramatically since they were pushed out.  Remember Iron Man was all Favreau, and that was the foundation for the MCU.

Favreau did great.  Nolan did great, too.  But not everybody is a Favreau, and even Favreau isn't always as good as Favreau sometimes is.  He's up and down.

The problem with most studio execs is that they have no real talent at writing, and they don't know much about the content.  EVERY exec has been like that with two exceptions--Feige, and Geoff Johns.  Maybe one of the other short-lived DC Films execs too, I forget who has had that job right now.  Avi Arad is the most vivid example of this kind of typical exec--he had no idea what would work, he just hired the best director or screenwriter and hoped they would figure it out.  Arad seemed to have almost no sense for content continuity across directors at all like Feige has had.  Sometimes an Arad, or a Kathleen Kennedy, or whoever hired Nolan will hire the right creatives and it'll be awesome.  Sometimes they won't and we'll get an Elektra.  And sometimes they'll muck up a good thing like Arad did with Sam Raimi and we'll get a Spider-Man 3.

Perlmutter is a much longer discussion, and I think we have another thread for that.  I'd love to return to it though because I LOVED the concept of his Marvel Creative Committee because it seemed like it would solve the exact issue I just described--Perlmutter knew he didn't know how to guide Marvel's films, so he tasked Marvel's best creatives with doing it for him.  I loved that idea from the start, and I'm STILL not sure why it ended up failing.  I'd love to explore it in more depth though because I still think that would be better than anything DC has tried to date, i.e. a creative committee consisting of DC's best creative talent from the comics.

Edited November 11, 2023 by fantastic_four

[drotto]

On 11/11/2023 at 11:21 AM, Bosco685 said:

Fandango is the parent company of Rotten Tomatoes. Fandango is a movie theater ticket outlet that does over $80M/annually in sales. One of the larger studios aligned with Fandango is Disney. Paul Yanover (recently former CEO of Fandango) was a long-time Disney executive.

But the rumors of audience score manipulation is probably fantasy. No way a critic aggregation site would allow such things to drive ticket sales.

To me the most telling is comparing the top critic reviews to the all critic reviews.  There is a massive discrepancy.  It almost like they use those other critics to pad the numbers.

 

Also the verified fan reviews number often get "stuck".  The number also appears surprisingly low (and shifts around) for a wife release tentacle fil..

[drotto]

On 11/11/2023 at 11:28 AM, fantastic_four said:

Favreau did great.  Nolan did great, too.  But not everybody is a Favreau, and even Favreau isn't always as good as Favreau sometimes is.  He's up and down.

The problem with most studio execs is that they have no real talent at writing, and they don't know much about the content.  EVERY exec has been like that with two exceptions--Feige, and Geoff Johns.  Maybe one of the other short-lived DC Films execs too, I forget who has had that job right now.  Avi Arad is the most vivid example of this kind of typical exec--he had no idea what would work, he just hired the best director or screenwriter and hoped they would figure it out.  Arad seemed to have almost no sense for content continuity across directors at all like Feige has had.

Perlmutter is a much longer discussion, and I think we have another thread for that.  I'd love to return to it though because I LOVED the concept of his Marvel Creative Committee because it seemed like it would solve the exact issue I just described--Perlmutter knew he didn't know how to guide Marvel's films, so he tasked Marvel's best creatives with doing it for him.  I loved that idea from the start, and I'm STILL not sure why it ended up failing.  I'd love to explore it in more depth though because I still think that would be better than anything DC has tried to date, i.e. a creative committee consisting of DC's best creative talent from the comics.

But has Feige lost his touch.  That is worth discussion.  He has been the almost sole driving force behind thr current film.  Remember, the Marvels director said this was his film, not hers. Also, many directors have suggested this lately.  Similar issues where reported with the Eternals where the director could not direct action, so they hired help.

 

The Russo brother were very influential and know how to direct.  They were the last directors to have major impact and control over their MCU project.

[fantastic_four]

On 11/11/2023 at 11:39 AM, drotto said:

But has Feige lost his touch.  That is worth discussion.  He has been the almost sole driving force behind thr current film.  Remember, the Marvels director said this was his film, not hers. Also, many directors have suggested this lately.  Similar issues where reported with the Eternals where the director could not direct action, so they hired help.

 

The Russo brother were very influential and know how to direct.  They were the last directors to have major impact and control over their MCU project.

MOST directors would have never wanted to work for Feige for the exact reasons Nia DaCosta expressed because they're believers in the auteur theory of film, and she's not the first director Feige has lost because they prefer it.  I'm a believer in auteur theory as well, but I understand its limitation--it doesn't work for continuity across multiple works.  When you're tasked with creating a cohesive universe of fiction that spans a hypothetically infinite number of films you just can't leave creative control in the hands of the director alone.  Does DaCosta understand that?  I can't tell that she does, but what I can say is that if she didn't know Feige was going to have some control over her work she wasn't paying much attention when she took the job.

I get that fans think Feige has lost his touch.  I've outlined why I think he hasn't.  We'll see in Phase 6 and 7.

[VintageComics]

On 11/11/2023 at 6:33 AM, jimjum12 said:

On 11/11/2023 at 5:46 AM, Bosco685 said:

Is that the dissatisfier with this movie - powerful women in the lead?

That must be it. Men are so silly.

It's either that, or this place is a Mecca for people who are unable to like anything. GOD BLESS...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

Openly calling people out for disliking females in lead roles is intentionally offensive and abrasive when in fact, many of us have already clearly suggested MANY movies we've loved, where powerful females were the leads. 

It's not that anyone dislikes a female lead, it's that by forcing people into roles the very people they are trying to elevate are being patronized and demeaned. By forcing observers to accept them. And to be more specific, I don't even think that's the case in this movie (I can't comment for sure because I haven't seen it), although it is pretty weird that every movie, show or television commercial now has to have an unnatural, cookie cutter, spread of minorities in every scene. It doesn't even happen like that in real life.  

Forcing minorities into roles JUST SO EVERYONE CAN BE REPRESENTED is like forcing people to like something. It'll have the opposite effect and they will start to hate it. It's parenting 101.

By trying to stop the discussion, you escalate a lack of understanding and in turn escalate tension.  The best way to integrate culture and underrepresented minorities is to openly discuss the topic and bring awareness around it. This is unequivocally proven through scientific and psychological literature. If anyone wants to see it, I can provide it. 

You want to make a show or a movie that appeals to women? Do it. Make it ALL about women. I thought the movie "What women want" with Mel Gibson and Helen Hunt was a funny and good flick, because it had great insights into how women think but it did it without being offensive. It got the point across elegantly.

But forcing views is not only counterproductive, it's dangerous. 

Edited November 11, 2023 by VintageComics

[VintageComics]

On 11/11/2023 at 8:45 AM, Nick Furious said:

it's that the Patriarchy is real.

I have yet to see the movie but plan to. What do you mean by this?

[fantastic_four]

On 11/11/2023 at 11:53 AM, VintageComics said:

misogynists

There's a trend of mis-using that word over the past decade or so.  What 80% of people mean when they say "misogyny" is actually chauvinism.  Actual misogynists are pretty rare, but people who have an obvious bias towards their own gender are plentiful.

[VintageComics]

On 11/11/2023 at 9:34 AM, Buzzetta said:

My point was not irrelevant.  It was irrelevant to YOU because it does not fit your narrative.   To be honest, I will probably not be seeing The Marvels in the theater.  It does not look like a strong movie worth the price of admission and time spent in the theater the same way I did not see Transformers in the theater.  Now, will I watch it when it hits Disney+ in a few months?  I will definitely check it out after I watch the series, Ms. Marvel.  In no way will I stay away from a movie because of some fear of being "emasculated."

You come here running your mouth spouting off the dangers of emasculation because a comic book character was gifted by the powers that be to have a stronger power set than a male.  You know that these are imaginary powers?  Oh no, the powered being has to rescue the male character and the roles switched places between the traditional damsel in distress who played a bumbling oaf and now a male plays that role.   All of a sudden you feel your "little paqart" is small.   Don't worry, a quite a few people across all areas and backgrounds revealed in the last thread and the last time you ran your mouth that they think you are a "big paqart".

The problem is that your beliefs are your brand.  I have gone through some of your writings, your missives, your comments here and elsewhere.  You have to support and build that brand dontchya?  See this is what some would call, your gimmick, and you have successfully blurred the lines between performing your little gimmick and living it.   Now, how the brand started is up for debate.  I am sure it was born into some form of your actual belief system, but again I will go back to what I said earlier, "She said, 'No", it's probably been many years since.  It's time to move on."

Now, @VintageComics I saw earlier you said you were disappointed in how I speak to this guy.  I am sorry if I have made you uncomfortable, as that was not my intent.  I think there is a part of you though, that knows I am curbing my comments and I would have a much stronger voice to him in person, if he was ever worth my limited personal free time. 

 

@jsilverjanet  See what you started  ? 

Your entire post is derogatory, personal, insulting and you are bringing in views that nobody has expressed WHILE insulting him. It's not OK and a post like this shouldn't be allowed. 

I've heard you talk about your "Long Island, Italian", mobster form of justice and it's THAT that I disapprove of. 

I've disagreed with you before on it and I will always disagree with you on it. 

You actually deserve a strike for this taunting post. It's not OK and I've lost a lot of respect for you because of it. 

[VintageComics]

On 11/11/2023 at 11:55 AM, fantastic_four said:

On 11/11/2023 at 11:53 AM, VintageComics said:

misogynists

There's a trend of mis-using that word over the past decade or so.  What 80% of people mean when they say "misogyny" is actually chauvinism.  Actual misogynists are pretty rare, but people who have an obvious bias towards their own gender are plentiful.

I agree 100%, but I believe I used it correctly in my post. 

[fantastic_four]

On 11/11/2023 at 11:58 AM, VintageComics said:

I agree 100%, but I believe I used it correctly in my post. 

Maybe you did--you were referring to others anyway, but I wasn't sure who.  Who called who a misogynist?

[VintageComics]

On 11/11/2023 at 12:00 PM, fantastic_four said:

Maybe you did--you were referring to others anyway, but I wasn't sure who.  Who called who a misogynist?

I think the general tone is that people are being called misogynists in this thread for not liking a female lead, when in fact they're not misogynists. But anyway, I don't want to go down that road with this discussion. I was simply trying to point out that nobody dislikes female leads in this thread from what I can see. 

[fantastic_four]

Accurately identifying a misogynist is pretty hard online unless they're being extremely obvious about it.  Most of us are chauvinists to varying degrees.  Most little boy are chauvinists--they love boy superheroes, hate the girl ones because they're girls.  My son and all but one of his friends are chauvinists too.  Gen Z seems to want to call that misogyny, but that's not what it is.  Little boys with a deep hatred for women are rare, as is that trait in most adult men.

Edited November 11, 2023 by fantastic_four

[VintageComics]

On 11/11/2023 at 11:48 AM, fantastic_four said:

MOST directors would have never wanted to work for Feige for the exact reasons Nia DaCosta expressed because they're believers in the auteur theory of film, and she's not the first director Feige has lost because they prefer it. 

Ironically, Fiege seems to operate like DC did in the Silver Age.

The editor charts the course, the writer writes the story, the artist draws the story, the letterer puts in the words. 

The Auteur theory is more like the Stan Lee / Marvel way, where Stan sets a course but the creative director or the artist follows just a loose outline while conveying MOST of the message in much the same way the Russo Brothers do in their own flavor. Very interested and I never thought about it that way.

[VintageComics]

On 11/11/2023 at 11:06 AM, fantastic_four said:

On 11/10/2023 at 10:59 AM, paperheart said:

#fireFeige

So fire the only guy who's ever done what he's done.  The guy Warner Brothers has been searching for their own version of for almost two decades without success.  I had high hopes that Geoff Johns would be that guy, but I was skeptical from the start--with good reason, it turned out.  Creative types like him usually get frustrated with the business aspect of films after a while when they're relatively young like he was, so I wasn't at all surprised when he stepped down.  They never fully gave him control anyway, so I'm still not sure who to blame that on.

So, fire a one of one dude in Feige and replace him with...who?    Ideally it will be a superfan without writing or art creds like Feige has always been.  There was never any danger that Feige would go back to writing or drawing because he didn't have skill at that to even fall back on it like a Geoff Johns did.  That's Kathleen Kennedy's problem--she's a stellar producer, but she is NOT a content curator, nor does she appear to have much of an instinct for how to curate content and Star Wars has suffered for it.  I'm guessing Kennedy has never known who Figrin D'an is, and that's who they need curating their content--a superfan.  Pablo Hidalgo and Dave Filoni are superfans, but both are also writers so they're not ideal candidates.  They're still both the best candidates to have creative control over that content, but neither has really been given that control to date so who knows how they'd do.  

Some people are quick to eat their own.

I agree with you. Feige, at this point is irreplaceable. 

If he was replaceable all the other MULTI BILLION DOLLAR CORPORATIONS WOULD HAVE HIRED HIS REPLACEMENT and would be rivalling Marvel. They haven't. Ockam's razor. 

Let me ask you: In a simple answer, what exactly do you think is the reason Feige is faltering so much after so much success?

On 11/11/2023 at 11:11 AM, fantastic_four said:

Yes, although I don't even think about that word Zen much--probably not for over a year until you just mentioned it.  But it's the state I live in, allowing me to clear my mind at will whenever it starts to fill with irrational negativity.  That's everything I wanted out of it, and I've had it for about 30 years now.

 I grew up with a lot of pressure from too many sides, that I wasn't able to care for myself for a long time. From a rough upbringing through my parents, to getting married young (21) and having 4 children by the time I was 30. Then I had 20 years of being the sole provider, so it wasn't until I hit 50 that I decided to focus on myself and undo a lot of the things I didn't like about myself. Thankfully, I'm in a great place. It's similar to Zen for people who may understand that term better, but it's more about me realizing that every obstacle is just a lesson now.

Edited November 11, 2023 by VintageComics

[VintageComics]

On 11/11/2023 at 12:04 PM, fantastic_four said:

Accurately identifying a misogynist is pretty hard online unless they're being extremely obvious about it.  Most of us are chauvinists to varying degrees.  Most little boy are chauvinists--they love boy superheroes, hate the girl ones because they're girls.  My son and all but one of his friends are chauvinists too.  Gen Z seems to want to call that misogyny, but that's not what it is.  Little boys with a deep hatred for women are rare, as is that trait in most adult men.

I removed the word misogyny. 

Figured it was better for everyone involved. Sorry about that.