Skrulls are people too.
Some are good, some are bad.
With what we've seen it looks like maybe there are different factions.
I feel like we haven't seen enough Skrull stuff to be at the Secret Invasion point. But maybe the MCU put a bunch of story strands out there and this is just one they want to tie up.
I feel a bit out of the loop. Are Skrulls bad or not?
You know, they ask the same thing about humans.
I actually thought the current Phase was going to be Skrull based knowing that Secret Invasion was coming. Instead they went in on the multiverse and a whole bunch of other random stuff.
They sort of seem to be throwing a bunch of plot threads up against the wall and seeing what sticks. Honestly the Secret Invasion stuff was more intriguing to me than the multiverse stuff, so it wouldn't hurt my feelings if they pivoted back to that to buy some time to find another big bad besides Kang.
I'm also frankly not waiting with bated breath for them to get mutants / the X-Men into the MCU like so many folks seem to be either. I like the X-Men, but there are a LOT of Fox X-Men movies that I can go back to whenever I want, some of which even hold up.
Never mind, thought I was at the newest post and wasn’t. 
Something just occurred to me today.
Disney/Marvel have been conspicuously silent about whether they're going forward with Jonathan Majors as Kang given the allegations against him, or recasting, or pivoting to a different character as the next big bad, or what. A certain amount of caution before announcing a decision makes sense, but we've sort of reached a point where no new news has come out in a while and it doesn't seem likely that it will before they have to make SOME decision. And the longer they go without saying anything, the louder their silence becomes.
Then it hit me: I bet you anything they are waiting on the box office returns for the opening weekend of the Flash movie before making a decision. Because if DC can get away with backing Ezra Miller, who is certifiably insane, then surely Marvel can get away with backing someone who's "only" a garden-variety domestic abuser. ("Allegedly.")
f*cking gross if true.
Sounds like something a corporation would do.
Maybe but considering the lack luster reception the 6th, or whatever phase we are in, phase of marvel movies I think they are rethinking a lot of their plans not just him as Kang.
Maybe but considering the lack luster reception the 6th, or whatever phase we are in, phase of marvel movies I think they are rethinking a lot of their plans not just him as Kang.
Yeah, and if that's the case, there's probably only so much they can do as far as making specific plans while the writer's strike is going on.
Still a bad look for them to let too much time go by without addressing the Majors situation.
I am a bit surprised there hasn't been an announcement that Majors is going to do some therapy/rehab. Seems like a no brainer that for damage control he should be going into something.
Maybe but considering the lack luster reception the 6th, or whatever phase we are in, phase of marvel movies I think they are rethinking a lot of their plans not just him as Kang.
I suspect that they are looking at the relative success of the TV shows they are putting on Disney+ compared to where we are with the films and thinking, Hmmmmm. Same for Star Wars, although they've been a lot more forward about that. Probably "easier" to pivot to something else than Kang there rather than in a film franchise.
farley3k wrote:Maybe but considering the lack luster reception the 6th, or whatever phase we are in, phase of marvel movies I think they are rethinking a lot of their plans not just him as Kang.
I suspect that they are looking at the relative success of the TV shows they are putting on Disney+ compared to where we are with the films and thinking, Hmmmmm. Same for Star Wars, although they've been a lot more forward about that. Probably "easier" to pivot to something else than Kang there rather than in a film franchise.
I don't think many of the TV shows have been much of a success lately. What I read was they're reducing the number to "focus on quality". She-Hulk, Hawkeye, and especially Ms. Marvel were I believe disappointing in viewership numbers. Moon Knight was only a bit better, and overall D+ subscriptions have started to drop. Part of that I read was losing rights to broadcast a sports league (cricket?), but that doesn't account for it all.
I think the movies make a lot more money, and they're trying to put more effort into righting the ship over there while scaling back streaming. While they've not necessarily had the critical success of earlier films, I haven't seen where any have actually lost money. At least that's what I've read.
I think they lost 4 million out of 165 million so like 2.4%. That % seems like a smaller number then people that sub to other streaming services periodically to watch stuff. I would not really blame it on any marvel stuff.
I think they lost 4 million out of 165 million so like 2.4%. That % seems like a smaller number then people that sub to other streaming services periodically to watch stuff. I would not really blame it on any marvel stuff.
But your producing content that doesn't have a specific ticket sale associated with it. Spending a lot of money on the streaming side is solely about attracting subscribers. Movies have direct revenue tied to them. And so far, while some have under performed, I don't think any have lost money. So for bottom line income growth, do you continue to put efforts into film, or continue to produce expensive streaming shows to a platform that is at a minimum flat lining in growth?
And no, it's not just Marvel shows. It's Lucasfilm stuff like Willow, it's Star Wars shows that aren't putting up the numbers expected, and other non-genre content.
It's more of a result of the fundamental change in the business plans of streaming platforms, not about any singular show's performance metrics. Up until very recently sucess for a streaming show wasn't even measured in profitability, but in how many new accounts they attracted. So it wouldn't be a fair comparison to say that shows that weren't meant to make a profit did worse than movies that did. You'd have to compare audience growth compared to the previous movie in the franchise, like if more people bought tickets to Quantumania than they did for Ant-Man & the Wasp. Also, the performance expectations for more recent streaming shows were unrealistically high because they were set assuming that continued customer growth was even possible when they actually hit their saturation point a while ago and are only just now realizing it. It's not just Disney doing this either, all the streaming platforms are cutting back on producing new expensive content because they're changing their focus from customer growth to operation costs and profitability.
Maybe but considering the lack luster reception the 6th, or whatever phase we are in, phase of marvel movies I think they are rethinking a lot of their plans not just him as Kang.
Sure, they're changing their plans based on Majors, but lack luster reception? You have proof of that? Because there's some big titles that people are very excited about.
farley3k wrote:Maybe but considering the lack luster reception the 6th, or whatever phase we are in, phase of marvel movies I think they are rethinking a lot of their plans not just him as Kang.
Sure, they're changing their plans based on Majors, but lack luster reception? You have proof of that? Because there's some big titles that people are very excited about.
It's super hero fatigue. I mean Guardians 3 only made 2/3 of $1billion instead of a full billion.
ranalin wrote:farley3k wrote:Maybe but considering the lack luster reception the 6th, or whatever phase we are in, phase of marvel movies I think they are rethinking a lot of their plans not just him as Kang.
Sure, they're changing their plans based on Majors, but lack luster reception? You have proof of that? Because there's some big titles that people are very excited about.
It's super hero fatigue. I mean Guardians 3 only made 2/3 of $1billion instead of a full billion.
Yea the entire industry is down, not just superhero movies... Plus, none of the GotG made a billion although the latest has more of a chance than the other 2
Across the Spider-Verse is great like the first. Go see it.
This is the one that would make me go back to the theaters, but they only have the subtitled version in a few places and on the night sessions. Everything else is dubbed. Bah...
If you go to YouTube directly to watch (using the link in the bottom left of the graphic) it helps me out a bit more.
My spoiler free review of Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse.
If you go to YouTube directly to watch (using the link in the bottom left of the graphic) it helps me out a bit more.
Great review! You got a new subscriber.
Pages