- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Good Read on Marvel's Year
Posted on 12/31/14 at 5:21 pm
Posted on 12/31/14 at 5:21 pm
2014: The Year Marvel Studios Redefined Itself
I won't quote the last line for fear of starting war, but anyways, good stuff here. I'm torn between this and the increasingly apparent blockbuster or bust culture that's buttressed by comic book movies that many people love to hate now.
Are these films empty? Is it part of the Michael Bay syndrome of visuals over story, thereby increasing "dumber" movies that can sell well overseas BECAUSE they rely on visual exposition and narrative over direct character complexity?
I'm a fan so I'm torn. Part of me thinks this is true, but the other part can see SOME complexity where others seem to roll their eyes.
quote:
Captain America: The Winter Soldier is the studio’s refutation of the claim that all the films look the same. Its visual and editing aesthetic isn’t just different from the other movies in the universe, it’s very different from the previous film in the franchise. The Winter Soldier also serves as a proof of concept for the Marvel tone, showing that the sense of fun and adventure that had made the previous films popular could still work in a darker, more morally complex story. The Winter Soldier was Marvel throwing down a gauntlet, saying that their films could be more than simply light escapism (but still maintaining plenty of light escapism).
quote:
By launching Guardians - and launching it profitably - Marvel defined two things about itself. One, it isn’t just the Avengers universe. This is something James Gunn has been saying in a lot of interviews, and people have been taking it to mean that the Guardians and the Avengers will never cross over. They will, but the larger thing he’s trying to convey is that Marvel has started building a new wing on their house. It’s attached to the Phase One foundation, but only through one small door (that door being Thanos, a character who the average moviegoer probably missed in The Avengers, as they were already in the parking lot when his cameo happened). The cosmic side of Marvel can be its own thing, only occasionally butting up against the earthbound side. This is familiar to comic readers but is a new concept to general audiences only now getting into the swing of a shared universe. Marvel Studios is already redefining how that shared universe works.
quote:
More importantly, Guardians defined Marvel as a franchise launcher. Again, the relatively unknown quality of the Guardians is key here - every other franchise Marvel launched had, on some base level, name recognition. This time it was simply the Marvel name that people knew. The Avengers was a big moment for Marvel, a billion dollar movie that cemented them in the big players club. Guardians was the movie that defined them as the biggest player in the big players club.
quote:
That scope is enormous, and I haven’t even touched on television, which isn’t really the same guys as Marvel Studios. But if we will mention television the announcement of the Netflix project - four series that will come together in The Defenders - while a riff on Phase One is as important a tonal distinction as Winter Soldier. Marvel has found success with blockbuster heroes, Marvel has found success with cosmic heroes and now Marvel is going to try and find success with street level heroes. There’s a broad diversity of story types here.
I won't quote the last line for fear of starting war, but anyways, good stuff here. I'm torn between this and the increasingly apparent blockbuster or bust culture that's buttressed by comic book movies that many people love to hate now.
Are these films empty? Is it part of the Michael Bay syndrome of visuals over story, thereby increasing "dumber" movies that can sell well overseas BECAUSE they rely on visual exposition and narrative over direct character complexity?
I'm a fan so I'm torn. Part of me thinks this is true, but the other part can see SOME complexity where others seem to roll their eyes.
Posted on 12/31/14 at 5:26 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
In 2014 Marvel didn’t just redefine themselves, they redefined what the superhero movie can be. Will superhero movies last? Let Warner Bros worry about that - after 2014 Marvel has given itself plenty of options.
Posted on 12/31/14 at 5:29 pm to Freauxzen
I think we are getting dangerously close to over saturating the market with super hero movies.
Don't get me wrong. I have waited for my whole life to see this genre take off...but I remember thinking a couple years ago while watching another Wolverine movie that maybe it was time to take a step back and slow down the release of these things.
(of course it could be because that movie kinda sucked)
Don't get me wrong. I have waited for my whole life to see this genre take off...but I remember thinking a couple years ago while watching another Wolverine movie that maybe it was time to take a step back and slow down the release of these things.
(of course it could be because that movie kinda sucked)
Posted on 12/31/14 at 5:50 pm to asurob1
quote:
I think we are getting dangerously close to over saturating the market with super hero movies.
people keep saying this and I just don't see what it even means.
it's going to take quite a lot for people to get bored or sick of super hero movies IMO
Posted on 12/31/14 at 6:13 pm to LSUSoulja08
How to cut Phase 1 into Chronological order.
Daredevil is going to great. The Wire is serving as a little inspiration here.
LINK
7 things learned about Daredevil
Daredevil is going to great. The Wire is serving as a little inspiration here.
LINK
7 things learned about Daredevil
This post was edited on 12/31/14 at 6:17 pm
Posted on 12/31/14 at 6:18 pm to Freauxzen
As far as the saturation argument.
I never read comic books, I've picked up maybe 5 in my life. Of course I grew up with the Batman cartoon, JL, and then JLU. Those are where I learned to love the comic universe. X-Men, Spiderman, and Fantastic 4 were nothing to me. Then Iron Man happened, and my interests changed. Without Ironman, Marvel would have never taken off(thanks Favreau).
My point is this, while I am foremost a DC fan, and gobbling up knowledge. Thanks to both this website and wiki. Marvel has my attention within the Avengers universe. These are all sequels, but each one is a completely different story with a character we love. Look at successful fantasy authors of the past 30 or so years. Terry Brooks, Robert Jordan, Hickman and Weis and many, many others. None wanted to leave a world they started. All wrote more than 10 books in their universe. It's the same with these movies, once you create fans of a character, people will watch it regardless. Simply to see what happens to their favorite persona. It isn't even necessarily the actor, well...outside of ironman. Even if it is a different actor, if you do it in the same universe, people will still watch it.
I never read comic books, I've picked up maybe 5 in my life. Of course I grew up with the Batman cartoon, JL, and then JLU. Those are where I learned to love the comic universe. X-Men, Spiderman, and Fantastic 4 were nothing to me. Then Iron Man happened, and my interests changed. Without Ironman, Marvel would have never taken off(thanks Favreau).
My point is this, while I am foremost a DC fan, and gobbling up knowledge. Thanks to both this website and wiki. Marvel has my attention within the Avengers universe. These are all sequels, but each one is a completely different story with a character we love. Look at successful fantasy authors of the past 30 or so years. Terry Brooks, Robert Jordan, Hickman and Weis and many, many others. None wanted to leave a world they started. All wrote more than 10 books in their universe. It's the same with these movies, once you create fans of a character, people will watch it regardless. Simply to see what happens to their favorite persona. It isn't even necessarily the actor, well...outside of ironman. Even if it is a different actor, if you do it in the same universe, people will still watch it.
Posted on 12/31/14 at 7:14 pm to asurob1
quote:
I think we are getting dangerously close to over saturating the market with super hero movies.
Don't get me wrong. I have waited for my whole life to see this genre take off...but I remember thinking a couple years ago while watching another Wolverine movie that maybe it was time to take a step back and slow down the release of these things.
(of course it could be because that movie kinda sucked)
My argument to this, especially with Winter Soldier, is what makes superheroes so much different than the bevy of Cop movies we get every year? Romantic Comedies that follow the same formula? Etc.
Posted on 12/31/14 at 10:35 pm to VaBamaMan
I had the same thought as you. I was a pretty big comic book nerd as a kid and familiar with most of these characters and story lines. Comic book nerds are not enough to create this kind of box office success. Production values, effects, and great casting have brought in a ton of new fans who are super hero movie fans first.
Hard core comic fans are accustomed to changes in characters and drastic altering of old storylines, so they can still be a loyal built-in audience for the films.
Super heros can be recast and their stories retold without being "remakes." I think that's a long term advantage.
So the question is, will the movie-first fans maintain their interest in evolving franchises with occasional cast changes ? All depends on production value and good casting.
But I think they've moved past the "comic book adaptation" label and into some other genre of film franchising.
Hard core comic fans are accustomed to changes in characters and drastic altering of old storylines, so they can still be a loyal built-in audience for the films.
Super heros can be recast and their stories retold without being "remakes." I think that's a long term advantage.
So the question is, will the movie-first fans maintain their interest in evolving franchises with occasional cast changes ? All depends on production value and good casting.
But I think they've moved past the "comic book adaptation" label and into some other genre of film franchising.
Posted on 12/31/14 at 10:44 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
By launching Guardians - and launching it profitably - Marvel defined two things about itself. One, it isn’t just the Avengers universe.
It's the same universe. Thanos made his debut in the Avengers movie and the Guardians are chasing Infinity Stones, just as the Avengers are.
The introduction of Thor was the expansion of the Iron Man universe. Guardians is many great things, but the expansion of the playground was already there.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News