Articulated Thoughts General Movie News & Discussion

TheSameIdiot said:
Yep. None of the Kang/Multiverse stuff landed with audiences.
Click to expand...
I really think the value of Kang would've been in the totality of it all.

Imagine going into a Kang Dynasty after we've had:

He Who Remains and Victor Timely in Loki
Immortus in Quantumania (BIG fumble by making that Kang himself)
Rama Tut in Fantastic Four (and a reveal that Reed is an ancestor of Kang)
Iron Lad in Young Avengers
Scarlet Centurion (Carol's son Marcus!) in Captain Marvel 2

There's been no other opportunity for distinct movies in a franchise to be connected by such a throughline of variants leading up to the one that all the variants are afraid of. Such a unique hook thrown away because it didn't have an immediate payoff.

Imagine if Thanos were tossed aside because audiences didn't know why he appeared in the mid-credit scene of Age of Ultron.
 
TheSameIdiot said:
I've always said unconnected superhero stories are the way to go. Think Nolan's Batman or The Batman. There's no reason we can't get an upbeat Batman & Robin in theaters one year and a dark noir Batman the next. I'd rather distinct visions with complete beginning, middles, and ends than franchise purgatory.
Click to expand...
I'll go one further. I think that's the way to go for both movies AND comics. Get a talented writer and artist to tell their X-Men story. Let them do their thing. Give it a beginning, middle and end. Then find another talented writer and artist to tell their X-Men story and don't worry about whether or not it's "in continuity" with the previous X-men story, or the current Captain America story. Don't force them to create around whatever "event" is planned for this year. Let the creators create then find another creator.
 
Gonna switch it up a bit here and say I just saw character posters for next year's Street Fighter movie. Unfortunately, like just about everything on the internet, I'm not 100% sure if what I saw was real or AI.......but I THINK it was official? If so, the characters look pretty good. I recently watched the 90's SF movie for the very first time, kind of enjoyed it. I'm in the mood for this movie to happen. Hope it turns out well.
 
TheSameIdiot said:
I've always said unconnected superhero stories are the way to go. Think Nolan's Batman or The Batman. There's no reason we can't get an upbeat Batman & Robin in theaters one year and a dark noir Batman the next. I'd rather distinct visions with complete beginning, middles, and ends than franchise purgatory.
Click to expand...
I've said it before, but I think audiences are worn out on there never being an ENDING. Every movie ties into the next movie, which introduces a character for a different movie, which will tie into three other movies.

I'm excited about long-form content, but I think they need to establish a story and a vision, and see it through rather than try to make it a perpetual money machine. I could absolutely get on board if Disney said 'we want to tell a live action X-Men story, it's going to take 5 years and 7 films to get it right, but it will be a complete story with a beginning and an end.' I'm fine with multiple movies all tying together. But I need to see an end in sight. I don't want to feel like there's a good chance I'll die of old age before these characters have some kind of conclusion to their story.

Then when they're done, they can recast everyone and tell a totally different X-Men story with 4 movies over 3 years, or 10 movies over 6 years. Or 1 movie. They can do whatever they want, so I don't understand why what they want is the thing that's clearly not resonating anymore.
 
in-bruges-idk.gif
 
Damien said:
I've said it before, but I think audiences are worn out on there never being an ENDING. Every movie ties into the next movie, which introduces a character for a different movie, which will tie into three other movies.
Click to expand...
I think this is why a third of the audience jumped off after Endgame. They were smart enough to realize that Disney was never bringing the money train back to the station.
 
Damien said:
I've said it before, but I think audiences are worn out on there never being an ENDING. Every movie ties into the next movie, which introduces a character for a different movie, which will tie into three other movies.

I'm excited about long-form content, but I think they need to establish a story and a vision, and see it through rather than try to make it a perpetual money machine. I could absolutely get on board if Disney said 'we want to tell a live action X-Men story, it's going to take 5 years and 7 films to get it right, but it will be a complete story with a beginning and an end.' I'm fine with multiple movies all tying together. But I need to see an end in sight. I don't want to feel like there's a good chance I'll die of old age before these characters have some kind of conclusion to their story.

Then when they're done, they can recast everyone and tell a totally different X-Men story with 4 movies over 3 years, or 10 movies over 6 years. Or 1 movie. They can do whatever they want, so I don't understand why what they want is the thing that's clearly not resonating anymore.
Click to expand...
So... television.

:)

I don't disagree with you, BTW.
 
Schizm said:
So... television.

:)

I don't disagree with you, BTW.
Click to expand...
Oh don't get me started on whether there's even a distinction anymore. Like, I recognize that they want to 'make movies' and have 'theatre experiences' and all that. But I literally do not care. The last film I saw in a theatre was Endgame, because that felt appropriate. It felt like a 'moment in cinema history never to come again.' But by and large, I don't think there's any significant distinction anymore between what's made for the theatre and what's made for television. Many ongoing shows could be a movie trilogy (or a single movie) and many movies could just be ongoing shows or limited series'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top