All the properties they have any claim TO make a grab for ARE in need of rescue.MovieBob said:
Well, I mean there could be issues, I'm just not sure if they exist outside of Bob editorialising. For example, ASM2 did slightly worse than the first. The budget was already pretty massive and it's been reported that the marketing was almost as costly as the budget. While there is still a large chunk of profit here (and Bob had to walk back prior comments), they could be worried about any other movie in the franchise costing them money in the long run (maybe they should have thought about that before using this one to try and set up five sequels, but still). Costs tend to go up on iterative movies, so they may be looking at the big picture here.shintakie10 said:
Oh... finding the brainless fanboys is easy. Just look for the people calling other people brainless fanboys.Uriel_Hayabusa said:
What differentiates a black person from a white person? What distinguishes a Muslim from a Catholic? Do you really think peoples capacity for irrational hate is that limited? Plus if you play up Magneto as the mutant Osama Bin Laden, you have a perfect in-universe scapegoat to whip up anti-mutant hysteria.Steve the Pocket said:
Actually as an outsider we really don't know how well it did for Sony for they never released how much the movie cost to make and how much they spent on advertising. Last time I checked and it could have changed now, but a movie needs to make twice as much as the production value plus the marketing costs at theaters to generate a profit. If the rumors from multiple websites is the combined cost of ASM2 was around $350 million dollars and if Box Office Mojo is accurate with an international box office of just under $709 million that means Sony might have made money, but was it enough to justify the initial risk?shintakie10 said:
Guys like Thor, Captain America, etc. are seen as individuals. Mutants are seen as a race. And a race with dire evolutionary implications for normal baseline humanity, i.e. eventual extinction. THIS is what makes mutants different. I never understood why many fans have a difficult time grasping this concept. XMFC and DoFP practically hit you over the head with it even though in that universe mutants are the only ones with powers. I'd say mutants being without non-mutant peers to have a contrast with eliminates the bulk of what makes them interesting.esserin said:Yeah but black and white people look different. How do you separate thor and captain america from mutants?
Wolverine? "Oh, I'm not a mutant. I'm actually from asgard."
Mutant problem is solved.
I think the main reason Marvel are doing so well as opposed to the rest is that in their case the studio is the auteur rather than any individual director. That's kind of a necessary thing if one wants to play in the expanded cinematic universe franchise game. Because 1 single director in charge of a film or a sub-franchise isn't enough. And every other studio plays by the rules of not being an auteur but rather hiring/buying the vision of a director for this or that project and such. That works ok for individual films and even trilogies once in a while but that will never work for a cinematic universe. You NEED someone over it all who's really the one with the vision and can direct the directors. Marvel has that in Kevin Feige. Maybe Kevin Tsujihara at WB/DC and Kathleen Kennedy at Lucasfilm can do that for their brands as well, who knows. They remain completely untested in this new arena. Only Feige so far has proved he can do it. Other than those two up and comers I don't see anyone like that at Universal, FOX or Sony.Sanunes said:
The villains in Thor 2 were at least threatening enough that they could kill one pre-existing character and make a credible case that they had killed a second one. I wasn't over-the-moon about the "Dark Elves", but they filled their niche well enough.P-89 Scorpion said:
