Shit man, I'm agreeing with you. I actually did forget about that part.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Fans Have Inherited the Film Industry and It's a Problem for the Rest of Us
- Thread starter Nerdkiller
- Start date
Shit man, I'm agreeing with you. I actually did forget about that part.
MugiwaraCole
Member
That Deadpool teaser is literally the beginning of the damn movie for everyone who saw it in theaters. You wanna count post credit shit in otherwise standalone MCU movies? Fine. That counts too, then.
Most MCU movies work just the same as you described Logan to do. If you don't like the movies, don't like the movies. It's fine. But blaming it on "oh God, they're all SO connected" is such bullshit. Beyond a few references and nods, most of the solo movies (which are the bulk of the universe, and always will be) are self-contained within their respective franchises. Quit this false narrative shit.
Especially since The Thing hasn't shown up in any franchise outside of the Fantastic 4. You've never watched an MCU movie, have you? Come clean, man.
I know, I believe you. My tone probably seemed antagonistic there, sorry about that. Just sick of this complaint.
Subpar Spatula
Banned
Deadpool 2 bit was a teaser. It wasn't part of Logan's story.
Maintenance
Member
Good, I'd rather have that than a critic inherited movie industry.
I never really understood this sentiment. Yes, the biggest movies these days tend to be from big franchises. But there are a ton of great movies out that aren't. Is it not enough that they exist but they also have to make $2 billion?
There is so much incredibly good entertainment available these days that I can't really think of a worse time to even attempt this kind of argument. You can see amazing movies at the local multiplex without ever stepping foot into the MCU or any other franchise.
There is so much incredibly good entertainment available these days that I can't really think of a worse time to even attempt this kind of argument. You can see amazing movies at the local multiplex without ever stepping foot into the MCU or any other franchise.
Here are the movies playing at the 2 local multiplexes:
Despicable Me 3
The House
Transformers 17
All Eyez on Me
Rough Night
The Mummy
Pirates of the Caribbean 5
Baby Driver
The Beguiled
Cars 3
Wonder Woman
Guardians of the Galaxy 2
Of those, maybe 3 fall into this category? (Transformers, Pirates, Guardians) There's plenty of original stuff, smaller movies, kid movies, etc. This weird notion that hollywood produces 100% serialized superhero movies is nonsense.
Despicable Me 3
The House
Transformers 17
All Eyez on Me
Rough Night
The Mummy
Pirates of the Caribbean 5
Baby Driver
The Beguiled
Cars 3
Wonder Woman
Guardians of the Galaxy 2
Of those, maybe 3 fall into this category? (Transformers, Pirates, Guardians) There's plenty of original stuff, smaller movies, kid movies, etc. This weird notion that hollywood produces 100% serialized superhero movies is nonsense.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I never felt that the Nolan films actually functioned much like a trilogy, more like an anthology of Batman tales. I love TDK and I don't even like the other two much. I think Nolan is much more concerned with making films that work on their own rather than trading on continuity and connections between his films.
To the degree that his movies are connected: it's still a self-contained trilogy in a universe just for Batman. I don't mind sequels... it's having to fit every new hero into an existing world that already has magic and aliens and a web of existing relationships that bums me out.
It's all good.
ArkkAngel007
Member
I wonder how confused they were when Mission Impossible 3 opened up with 6 minutes from The Dark Knight.
MugiwaraCole
Member
Transformers and Pirates don't because they're only franchises. They're not universes. I need people to understand the difference.
Guardians and Wonder Woman fall under that umbrella, everything else is just regular shit that's been part of the industry for years (and hell, even Despicable Me spawned Minions).
I totally agree with this too. But I can definitely see some people feeling like "well, haven't watched Iron Man 1-3, not going to watch 4.... (which on a side note, I wonder if that's why people are moving away from number sequels....)
Bobby Roberts
Banned
what is this even supposed to mean.
if you've ever left your opinion on a film in public for other people to read you're an amateur film critic, man.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Hey, Fox has the license to The Thing, so he could conceivablely have shown up in Logan.
I've seen all the MCU movies.... at home on my TV. And I usually turn them off in the third act because I know it will just be some blue-faced villain screaming at the heroes before he's inevitably defeated as they make Josh Whedon quips. Ultimately I don't value the MCU that much.... and that's why it bums me out that every Marvel movie gets slotted into it.
Que?
MugiwaraCole
Member
This isn't the route you wanna go down.
That Thing hasn't shown up in an X-Men movie yet is only because Fox fucked up Fant4stic. They planned to join the two universes and couldn't pull it off.
Even so, the threat of Thing joining Logan (but not) doesn't make any sense in your argument against the MCU since it obviously didn't bother your viewing of Logan.
Just say you don't like MCU movies. It's fine, I swear. You won't be crucified, man.
Frozenprince
Banned
The same Hollywood that used to put out 7 sequels to every marginally successful property?
Nah things are just fine the way they are. These movies are all easily accessible for first time viewers. Sure you may miss some references but you can understand the plot and who each character is without needing ti see 20 other movies.
Nah things are just fine the way they are. These movies are all easily accessible for first time viewers. Sure you may miss some references but you can understand the plot and who each character is without needing ti see 20 other movies.
Nerdkiller
Membeur
St. Elsewhere, dude.I'm still catching up on the John Munch Cinematic Universe.
IndoAssassin
Banned
Boohoo I don't want to watch 4 movies a year out of 400, because I didn't watch any before.
The X-Men movies don't have any continuity whatsoever other than 3 characters.
The only time Marvel movies have any continuity is in character development. Plot development doesn't even exist other than infinity stones.
And DC is all over the place. Watching these movies in order wouldn't make you any wiser than going to a single movie both character wise or plot wise.
The X-Men movies don't have any continuity whatsoever other than 3 characters.
The only time Marvel movies have any continuity is in character development. Plot development doesn't even exist other than infinity stones.
And DC is all over the place. Watching these movies in order wouldn't make you any wiser than going to a single movie both character wise or plot wise.
Frozenprince
Banned
There are two "universes" running right now
Two.
We really up in arms over two series of interconnected films?
Two.
We really up in arms over two series of interconnected films?
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
The "thing" is (get it?), I don't think they would have stuffed superhero cameos in Logan even if they had all the character licenses in the world. I sense some integrity of vision there, wanting to make more of a film that works by itself, rather than the usual 2010s live-action cartoon.
And no I don't like the MCU and I said as much in my last post. It's been codified into a rather bland style and I know any movie slotted into it is going to taste exactly the same
I like Marvel characters though. They should adapt them into some one-off movies by directors with their own unique vision and style. I'd like that.
Subpar Spatula
Banned
No one is "up in arms". People are allowed to discuss and criticize.
Version 3.0
Member
What a strange title. "The Fans" vs. "the Rest of Us". So...non-fans? Shouldn't the film industry be making films for its fans?
As to the actual content: there are films of all kinds being made, all the time. I mean, look at this:
http://www.imdb.com/calendar/?ref_=nv_mv_cal_5
There are an average of almost 11 films being released per day in July, according to that IMDB page. That the most commercially successful of them are ones that engage with fans over multiple films, or in other ways, is not a "problem". It's part of the recipe for success for those films. There are plenty of others to choose to watch if that's not your thing.
As to the actual content: there are films of all kinds being made, all the time. I mean, look at this:
http://www.imdb.com/calendar/?ref_=nv_mv_cal_5
There are an average of almost 11 films being released per day in July, according to that IMDB page. That the most commercially successful of them are ones that engage with fans over multiple films, or in other ways, is not a "problem". It's part of the recipe for success for those films. There are plenty of others to choose to watch if that's not your thing.
MugiwaraCole
Member
I mean, technically 4? (Marvel, DC, the two monster joints 5 if you wanna count Harry Potter, and I don't).
Still, these complaints are so dumb. They're a minority of the industry, even if they're making most of the money right now.
I want you to point out the plethora of MCU movies that are stuffed with characters instead of making a movie that works by itself.
Or don't. I respect your opinion about not liking the movies, but this "they're all too connected" narrative is false as hell.
MugiwaraCole
Member
Oops, double post
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
The much anticipated Dark Universe is off to the races. That is, unless The Mummy flopped so hard that it took the whole project out.
Also that Godzilla/Kong one.
andythinkpad
Member
The problem is the tentpole business model has completely killed off the mid budget camper/suspense/thriller genre movies. Also animation taking lunch from the comedies.
High budget action movie has always been pretty shit no matter which decade you are looking at.
High budget action movie has always been pretty shit no matter which decade you are looking at.
AWizardDidIt
Member
It's always the people who sound the most insufferably condescending that also fail to provide anything but the laziest criticism. Unrelated to the author, though her views are also weirdly backwards in that she implies a level of connectivity among the movies and disengagement with the larger movie going audience that simply doesn't exist.
There are literally HUNDREDS of movies released in theatres every single year. Out of those movies, there are three Marvel movies. Two DC movies. One or two X-Men movies. One Monster movie. One Dark Universe movie. One HP movie every 2 years. One Star Wars movie. At most you're looking at 11 movies that fit the definition of being connected.
They're making more movies for people that want to see movies. This is not a bad thing. It's keeping the industry from dying like it probably should and will. Meanwhile those films are funding the hundreds of other films. Like Baby Driver? It was probably paid for by one of the films that you hate.
I suggest anyone complaining about the connectivity of this tiny number of films to join those who promise that Comic movie fatigue is just a movie away. You know how you don't hear from those people any more? Exactly.
They're making more movies for people that want to see movies. This is not a bad thing. It's keeping the industry from dying like it probably should and will. Meanwhile those films are funding the hundreds of other films. Like Baby Driver? It was probably paid for by one of the films that you hate.
I suggest anyone complaining about the connectivity of this tiny number of films to join those who promise that Comic movie fatigue is just a movie away. You know how you don't hear from those people any more? Exactly.
MugiwaraCole
Member
I mean, this is a lie, but okay.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Captain America: Civil War isn't a movie about Captain America, it's a status update about the relationships of every MCU character this year.
Spider-man: Homecoming starring Tony Stark should be a movie focused on the main hero Iron Man, but instead it has a Spider-Man cameo that threatens to drag the whole thing down.
You really can't watch these movies without being into the universe and it's ongoing drama in some sense. That's good if you're way into the MCU, kind of a drag if you aren't.
Glass Rebel
Member
christ
MugiwaraCole
Member
You pointed out 2 movies out of 16, and one of them has a single character that pops up for less than 10 minutes and doesn't interfere with the movie telling a self-contained story at all.
Ergo, you're full of shit, guy.
I haven't really felt that with Iron Man (I kinda feel like they never fully committed to his less heroic traits), but yeah I can see an arc with Cap that will make it sadder when he eventually gets got, haha.
Frozenprince
Banned
And yet people do this every single time in of these cones out with no issue. You don't need to have seen any prior film to get why Spider Man and Iron Man exist in the same place. He's simply a more popular, more experienced hero that Peter Parker leans on for guidance.
Man that sure is hard to understand.
You're just letting your dislike of comic books color your perception.
They do do that though; not with all of them, but more than none. Doctor Strange is self-contained, so are Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, and the other phase one intro movies, and they all flirt with different subgenres (techno-espionage, monster movie, war movie, Shakspearean family quarrel, etc.) Guardians of the Galaxy is very self-contained as well as stylistically different from everything else in the MCU. Black Panther looks to be the same.
The references that do exist in these films that tie them into the MCU are on the level of a James Bond prologue action scene, just an allusion to things off-screen to flesh out the world and set the tone.
I will grant that visually and in terms of soundtrack, the MCU is very samey and that is an issue, and there have been good videos made that cover that. In terms of standing on their own story-wise however there are plenty movies that can be appreciated on their own terms.
If Laura grew up and became the new Wolverine in a New Mutants movie and appeared in Deadpool 3 or whatever, would Logan retroactively become lesser in your eyes because future movies reference it?
You're examples are fucking ridiculous, but so what. Let's say I agree with you on the bolded.
So fucking what? Not every movie is for every person. i hear about movies that don't interest me all the time. I just don't see them. It's as simple as that. Not everything is for you, bro.
ArkkAngel007
Member
Not going to quote a ton since I'm on mobile, so here's just the assorted musings and responses:
- The only universes are DC, MCU, Dark Universe (which is 1 film and future may get canned, so hardly counts), and Monsterverse (Godzilla and Kong). Everything else would fall under normal sequels/franchise.
- Majority of films are not sequels or remakes. Also, remakes/reboots are a fresh start that don't need the context of the originals generally , so I don't understand why a number of people are lumping those in as well.
- Original films (or original adaptations) are not intrinsically better than established content. There's a lot of shitty original stuff out there and a lot of great franchise work. The opposite is true as well. May be hard for some to grasp, but good films are just good films.
- There's no difference with entering a sequel than jumping into a show in a later season. You'll likely understand the events within the context of the viewing, but will miss out on the call backs and underlying relations that have evolved and developed. And that's ok, because all of that stuff is available to view if interested.
- One doesn't need to watch the CW shows for the DC films. Same with the Marvel shows on ABC and Netflix for the MCU. The opposite is mostly true. They have very little, and mostly nothing, to do with each other. It's similar to saying one must watch the Tim Burton Batman films before watching BvS.
- If you can't watch a sequel or watch seasons due to an unwillingness to go back or start with the rest of the stuff, that's your problem, not the film/show. Again, the majority of films are one-off content of a sort that you can enjoy without trying to ruin the fun of those who understand what a sequel is and what that means when watching them. TV shows aren't going to just be one season because some poor soul can't cope with the thought of that they may have to catch up otherwise if they come in late.
- Films have had connecting Easter eggs and elements long before cinematic universe was a thing, and people weren't brainwashed to expect them in every film. It's the same case now. No one is expecting Baby Driver to have any references to Get Out. Sequels are going to lead into one another by rule rather than exception, and indiviual studios like Pixar and Dreamworks will have their little easter eggs across their work. And there's nothing wrong with that.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
That's pretty much what I'm saying. I don't like popular thing.
I know they make lots of money so no one should listen to me. But I think there is a subset of the audience that has been left behind in the push to inter-connect all the stories.
The fact that these Cinematic Universes basically make something like Nolan's Batman impossible should give people pause, I think.
I agree with the article. Not so much that every movie is a big interconnected universe film (I live in The Netherlands, so I'm quite lucky since we have a huge indie theatre scene instead of there just being multiplexes), but moreso that we don't really see many good blockbusters anymore that don't rely on interconnectivity as a big part of their narrative. That said, I hope that films like Logan and Wonder Woman being these more autonomous films that are still set in this bigger universe will change Marvel's and DC's general approach, but I'm not expecting it.
The image in the OP is misleading, the writer literally points out Wonder Woman as one of the few 'cinematic universe' films that works for casuals.
The image in the OP is misleading, the writer literally points out Wonder Woman as one of the few 'cinematic universe' films that works for casuals.
MugiwaraCole
Member
Nolan's Batman isn't impossible though.
A trilogy on that same level of quality could exist within one of these universes. That you don't think one does (I do, Cap trilogy) is a matter of opinion, but there's nothing precluding that Batman from existing in a world with other DC heroes.
Oh, you mean the author doesn't know what they're talking about?
And then she bemoans that it "looks and feels a lot like every other comic-book adaptation" which...I mean, Wonder Woman is a superhero? Is it really that weird for a story in the same genre to look and feel like that genre?
Prince of Space
Banned
Can't wait for the inevitable 2-hour "Catch Me Up on the MCU!!" ABC special that'll drop in the lead up to Infinity War.
Other than the fact that all the characters are valuable IP who can't be moved drastically in a single direction without impacting other films in development.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
They pretty much all work for casuals, though.
Casuals are the reason these films are clearing 250-350mil domestic almost every time out.
It ain't "the fans" as most people understand that term.
You don't make the money and the cultural impact these films are making because of "the fans."