As far as I know, it was Iron Man that started it all. Before that, it's my understanding that Marvel never really made that good movies. So how did they end up as the biggest movie producers out there today? Asides from having amazing movies of course. Iron Man came out 7 years ago, and in that time they have made 8 movies that were all incredibly successful. Did they change their entire movie staff or something? Or did they pour more money into the movie department? From what I heard Marvel is pretty stingy. What I really want to know was how long they had planned for the MCU. I mean, they had no idea how successful their movies would be, what if Iron Man fell flat?
How did Marvel pull the MCU out of their ass?
- Thread starter Bob_McMillan
- Start date
They did so by setting up Marvel Studios to make movies, and they financed that (namely the first two movies, Iron Man and Incredible Hulk) by pooling their cut of the Blade, X-men, Spider-Man and Fantastic Four movies. The plans have always been in flux and changing between what the original plan and the result are, however the idea seems to have originated around the time Marvel went bankrupt in the 90s, with the idea being that they could stay afloat by making financially successful movies.
The movies where a massive success, but the plan wasn't for them to be the massive hits they where and for Avengers to gross 1.5 billion, only for the margins they would make to be enough to offset any potential looses in their comic book side. Their ability to make overall good movies (and now series) has been the reason for this success, doing an even better job then any other studio at making movies which where both good and honest adaptations of the source material (and managing to make a roster of only second and third tier characters household names bigger then the former first tier).
As for what would have happened in Iron Man fell flat, the answer is simple: they wouldn't make another Iron Man movie. Remember that in the original plan for the Phase One line-up it was: Iron Man, Incredible Hulk, Ant-Man, Thor, Captain America: The First Avenger, The Avengers. It was only because of the unexpected financial success of Iron Man that Ant-Man was pushed back. The first Iron Man was made on a smaller budget then most blockbusters, so if it bomb they could recoup their looses on merchandise and DVD sales, which would have been fine by them as the goal of the movies was to make money period, even if they had to do so after the movies where in theatres.
The movies where a massive success, but the plan wasn't for them to be the massive hits they where and for Avengers to gross 1.5 billion, only for the margins they would make to be enough to offset any potential looses in their comic book side. Their ability to make overall good movies (and now series) has been the reason for this success, doing an even better job then any other studio at making movies which where both good and honest adaptations of the source material (and managing to make a roster of only second and third tier characters household names bigger then the former first tier).
As for what would have happened in Iron Man fell flat, the answer is simple: they wouldn't make another Iron Man movie. Remember that in the original plan for the Phase One line-up it was: Iron Man, Incredible Hulk, Ant-Man, Thor, Captain America: The First Avenger, The Avengers. It was only because of the unexpected financial success of Iron Man that Ant-Man was pushed back. The first Iron Man was made on a smaller budget then most blockbusters, so if it bomb they could recoup their looses on merchandise and DVD sales, which would have been fine by them as the goal of the movies was to make money period, even if they had to do so after the movies where in theatres.
Until very recently there really haven't been many good superhero movies AT ALL, at least ones which are universally recognized as he recent Marvel films are. A couple of those Superman movies way back when are considered classics, as well as maybe the Michael Keaton Batman films, but they're all a bit campy and not universally acclaimed. The X-Men films were both revered and reviled in certain ways. The Chris Nolan Batman films sort of set the standard, but even then many lamented that only the dark and gritty superhero movies were any good.
Then Marvel comes along, banging out Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Captain America, and more. I can't think of a single thing that DIDN'T help them succeed--they had great writing, great casting, a good idea of how to to make the comic worlds and lore accessible and interesting to outsiders while not insulting insiders, and access to all the special effects technology available to films. That is another key component which has contributed to the success of comic book and fantasy films. Special effect technology has progressed enough that they are no longer bogged down by the campiness of their own special effects.
Then Marvel comes along, banging out Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Captain America, and more. I can't think of a single thing that DIDN'T help them succeed--they had great writing, great casting, a good idea of how to to make the comic worlds and lore accessible and interesting to outsiders while not insulting insiders, and access to all the special effects technology available to films. That is another key component which has contributed to the success of comic book and fantasy films. Special effect technology has progressed enough that they are no longer bogged down by the campiness of their own special effects.
Well most of the early Marvel movies were made by the likes of Fox, who seems to be unable to keep a good franchise afloat to save their lives. I think that comes in part from 20th Century Fox producers being unable to understand, and unwilling to be very faithful to source material. Then with their cut from earlier movies they made Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk, then they got scooped into Disney. Disney believe it or not has a good track record of keeping their paws mostly out of their subsidiary studios business, while bank rolling them a ton... That is so long as the studios in question bring in boat loads of cash. But the big backer combined with Marvel Studios being able to make really good movies where previous studios failed is where we get all of this good content from.
I feel like with Marvel, there is definitely a sort of synchronization with the source material and resulting film. They aren't identical, there are definitely aspects of the comics which would never be touched in the films, but the general spirit is there and the film isn't ashamed of where it came from. Yeah, it's been made slick and simple to be an effective Hollywood blockbuster, but it didn't do that in a way which felt like a betrayal or insult to the source material.KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime said:
Man of Steel felt like it was at odds with itself. It felt like Superman got trapped into a script written for someone else but then they decided to make Superman the hero at the last minute. I have a friend who's a huge comic reader, and he felt the biggest betrayal of Man of Steel was the story itself and the choices Superman was forced to make. He felt the idea that Superman had to choose to make so many sacrifices betrayed the point of Superman. He shouldn't have had to choose between killing Zod or letting the civilians he was attacking die, because Superman is supposed to be able to find a way win in no-win situations. That's the point of Superman--he finds ways of getting out of situations that normal people couldn't attempt.
There was also, of course, all of the destruction of Metropolis. Honestly, going into the movie I had no idea about Superman's thing about not killing his enemies. So when he killed Zod and freaked out, I thought he was reacting to the realization that in spite of killing Zod the whole city was basically leveled. Then when I learned why he reacted that way, it still fell flat on me because given how much destruction occurred and how little he seemed to have been concerned about collateral damage before that moment, it didn't make sense that in THAT situation he was suddenly worried about it. They seemed to be trying to outdo every movie ever on destruction porn, and in the process it really confused the climax and resolution.
Marvel didn't make movies AT ALL before Iron Man.Bob_McMillan said:
Age Of Ultron will be their 11th movie.Bob_McMillan said:
Iron Man was their first movieBob_McMillan said:
Then The Incredible Hulk
Iron Man 2
Thor
Captain America: The First Avenger
The Avengers
Iron Man 3
Agents Of SHIELD
Thor:The Dark World
Captain America: The Winter Soldier
Guardians Of The Galaxy
Agents Of SHIELD season 2
Agent Carter
Daredevil
They literally created Marvel Studios just to make Iron Man, and have been kicking ass ever since.
All the shitty movies using Marvel properties, like Fantastic Four, Days Of Future Past, Spider-Man 3, Origins: Wolverine, Daredevil, etc etc are all by other companies.
Mostly Fox.
Marvel Studios has an almost flawless track record, the likes of which is basically only rivaled by Pixar.
Kevin Feige is the genius mastermind behind the whole thing.
Their casting is brilliant.
Then they got Joss Whedon and gave him the reins for a long while, and suddenly they doubled their genius mastermind powers.
Seeing how a good comicbook got to have a good story, it's no suprised that most of their films are usually good due to good writing (again for most).
Also wasn't X-men or Spider-man were their first good Marvel movies (yes I know there was that old Spider-man movie and those Hulk crossover) so Marvel must of thought now was the time to make their own movies (and the tech are better these days).
Also wasn't X-men or Spider-man were their first good Marvel movies (yes I know there was that old Spider-man movie and those Hulk crossover) so Marvel must of thought now was the time to make their own movies (and the tech are better these days).
I meant those old ass ones, like the Captain America movie, and the bad Spiderman movie. Heh, completely forgot about the Hulk movies actually. Most people I've talked to about it either didn't know about them or didn't like them. Are they really part of the MCU though?Ieyke said:
Days of Future Past is a good movie Marvel or no. If Fox can keep up that level of quality they could be a legit contender in this business. The X-Universe spans far enough without overlapping too much with the Marvel as a whole.
That said as has been stated above Marvel didn't make movies before Ironman. Apparently they've always had the skill it's important to remember things were real rocky for them in the 90's near bankruptcy. They didn't have the option to make their own movies before that and lets face it without quality CGI that wasn't available until around 2005 most Marvel franchises are difficult to do justice too. Even Spiderman 1 looks incredibly cheesy at this point in many places. (Seriously watch the amazing rubber band man jump from rooftop to rooftop. It looked amazing in 2002 but today you're like. . .yeah lets just appreciate it for what it is!)
The framework for Marvel has always been there as well and fairly well maintained. The hard part of the Avengers wasn't really finding an origin story for them. It was getting people who'd never picked up a comic in their lives to know who Captain America, Thor, Hawkeye (who they barely bothered with) and Black Widow were that you should give a shit. Ironman and Hulk are still fairly well known. This is the opposite of DC where Batman's B-Listers are better known than much of their supposed A-List. Lets be honest regardless of how it played out it would have been a solid bet to assume Nightwing would get a show/movie before Green Arrow or Flash. Wonder Woman keeps trying her damnest and then Martian Manhunter? Right. . .pull the other one gents.
So the bottom line is they didn't so much pull this out of their ass as they had the money to see if they could do it on their own and they can. And damn well.
That said as has been stated above Marvel didn't make movies before Ironman. Apparently they've always had the skill it's important to remember things were real rocky for them in the 90's near bankruptcy. They didn't have the option to make their own movies before that and lets face it without quality CGI that wasn't available until around 2005 most Marvel franchises are difficult to do justice too. Even Spiderman 1 looks incredibly cheesy at this point in many places. (Seriously watch the amazing rubber band man jump from rooftop to rooftop. It looked amazing in 2002 but today you're like. . .yeah lets just appreciate it for what it is!)
The framework for Marvel has always been there as well and fairly well maintained. The hard part of the Avengers wasn't really finding an origin story for them. It was getting people who'd never picked up a comic in their lives to know who Captain America, Thor, Hawkeye (who they barely bothered with) and Black Widow were that you should give a shit. Ironman and Hulk are still fairly well known. This is the opposite of DC where Batman's B-Listers are better known than much of their supposed A-List. Lets be honest regardless of how it played out it would have been a solid bet to assume Nightwing would get a show/movie before Green Arrow or Flash. Wonder Woman keeps trying her damnest and then Martian Manhunter? Right. . .pull the other one gents.
So the bottom line is they didn't so much pull this out of their ass as they had the money to see if they could do it on their own and they can. And damn well.
Honestly, this is pretty close to how I felt about the whole of Man of Steel. I feel like the writer doesn't really understand Superman. I feel like this was written by one of those "Batman is better" guys and came at from the point of view... "Superman is perfect and so we need to make him less perfect to be interesting." Which always struck me as missing the point. Superman is powerful, sure. But he isn't perfect and a lot of his conflicts come from the world and people around him and knowing that he has to let people live their lives and make their own mistakes despite what he has the power to impose on them, heck especially because of what he has the power to impose on them.Lilani said:
Supes doesn't need to be edgey or dark, he needs to be the guy that through his power and intelligence accomplishes what others can't and never compromises his ideals for the sake of convenience. So in short people need to want to be Superman, but not just because of the powers but because of what he does with them and what he says about humanity and our better nature.
Marvel succeeded by not actively sabotaging their own product. The upcoming Fantastic Four movie wouldn't be half as shit as it's going to be if they were even trying to do a good job of transferring the characters to the big screen, and got rid of whatever moron decided they had a better idea for Doom, a better idea for Johnny Storm, and a better idea for their origin story.
The answer. They didn't pull it out of their asses. I think it was actually the Incredible Hulk that kicked it off. FOllowed by Iron Man. But even before the movies came out Marvel had the plan for Avengers already set down. Rather than let the poor performance of one film derail the whole project they were commited enough to see each film as a component of the project as opposed to the project being a combination of the films.. Subtle perspective shift.
DC seems to have taken the other route. Basically willing to derail the project if one of the fimlms doesn't work out. As well as not having the patience to build up to their universe over 10 years.
DC seems to have taken the other route. Basically willing to derail the project if one of the fimlms doesn't work out. As well as not having the patience to build up to their universe over 10 years.
They managed to have a company they had no relations with make them successful for 6 movies? I think you have the order of things wrong, Disney didn't buy them until after The Avengers due to how successful they managed to be on their own.Pluvia said:
EDIT: Alright, I was off on the date for when Disney bought Marvel out. I get that.