Will they ever do anything risky or ambitious?
>>69328321
inhumans might be risky
>>69328321
Talking tree and space racoon weren't ambitious enough for ya?
Isn't making big budget movies out of comics no one has ever heard of risky?
Everyone said GotG and Ant-Man were gonna bomb. Now people are saying Doctor Strange will bomb.
Isn't the whole MCU pretty ambitious? The shit they're doing, the connections between movies and TV shows and everything...
Fingers still crossed for this though. I demand mindfuck scenery porn.
GotG was kinda ambitious. Doctor Strange is their ambitious/risky movie.
>>69328321
Civil War is risky
Dr. Strange is risky
Ant Man was risky
GotG was risky
The Avengers was risky
Why would they, you retard?
>have a working formula to print money
>fuck with it for muh artistic integrity
>>69328336
Didn't Inhumans get recently canned?
>>69328321
dr strange is risky cuz itll star bendydick cuminmyass
>>69328441
They all follow the same quip-filled formula
Ant Man is the worst offender
>>69328416
From what Cucumbersnatch and the director have said, it seems like it is gonna be weird as fuck
>>69328321
Guardians of the Galaxy wasn't risky
wew
>>69328395
I think OP meant inviting more complex themes into the plotlines.
MCU films are pretty much copy paste comic stories with some modernization and minor alterations here and there.
>>69328321
I'd say the tv series have been pretty risky since everyone and their mother was keen with Marvel movies being fun romps.
But as others said the fact that they made an interconnected film universe was pretty risky especially when you realize they took fresh outta jail RDJ to star as fucking Iron Man who's only claim to fame was
>Being a fucking drunk
>Being in a fun 2d beat 'em up in the 90s
>Having a bitching theme song for a shitty cartoon
>>69328448
Cause people are starting to realize its the same thing, and how bland they are. Even some hardcore comic fans friends of mine are getting tired of it
>>69328441
>Civil War is risky
>Dr. Strange is risky
>Ant Man was risky
>GotG was risky
>The Avengers was risky
Kill yourself if you unironically believe that
All of those movies were guaranteed to make money and those who weren't (Antman and GotG) could rely solely on the Marvel™ brand and be fine you know. EXACTLY LIKE THEY DID
Marvel is literally for cowards
MCU fans are holocaust deniers
>>69328321
The cinematic universe concept was risky, so they'll always have that going for them. Otherwise I expect them to keep sticking as close to middle-of-the-road mediocrity as possible, producing enjoyable, if ultimately forgettable films.
Doctor Strange is gonna be their risky film
>>69328480
t. mad DCuck
>>69328566
>MCU fans are holocaust deniers
But anon, everybody knows that red-pilled people prefer Zack Snyder's visionary pop-art magnus opus Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice over any of that silly Marvel stuff.
No, Their drama is fucking comparable to Mudasir and Salman squabble
>>69328538
>Dr. Strange is risky
>Ant Man was risky
>GotG was risky
Go back 10 years.
Who the hell would have watched this.
>>69328321
No. Why fix what isn't broke? They have the formula to make hundreds of millions, there's literally no reason for them not to milk it until it's dry
>>69328639
Well that might be coming sooner than they think.
>>69328566
>holocaust deniers
>cowards
Go fuck yourself
>>69328633
Go back 10 years, who the hell would have watched fucking Iron Man?
>>69328633
People literally said that shit about Iron Man and Captain America
shut the fuck up and kill yourself already
>>69328538
>could rely on the brand that they've established
>marvel is too successful for anything they do to be considered risky.
Wow, it's almost as if they've built up a reputation for putting out entertaining material.
>>69328538
Ok? You just admitted that anything they do that could be considered risky won't be because of brand recognition.
Thus they literally cannot do what the OP asks because of that same brand recognition.
If that's the case then there's literally nothing to talk about.
>>69328481
Perfect.
>>69328665
Precisely.
How the fuck did Iron Man get so popular?
Its why I say a lot of Marvels movies are risky. They are using literal who's.
>>69328321
serious question no trolling.
Has Marvel ever done / adapted a serious comic book movie? Like a movie that makes you think or has deep profound symbolisms. Not like the usual popcorn flick.
>>69328648
its been 8 fucking years already
>>69328650
You are a coward, and a dishonest one at that, but that's /pol/ material, so I'll give you another chance to dazzle us all with your cutting wit and deftly executed verbal riposts without rejoinder.
>>69328729
Spiderman 2
Kickass
Civil War
Now fuck off
>b-but quips-
Fuck off, seriously
>>69328725
>How the fuck did Iron Man get so popular?
Iron Man didn't, RDJ did.
>>69328729
The only one that comes close is maybe Winter Solider and Civil War. The rest have been pretty standard.
>>69328729
Serious question no trolling.
Has there ever been any movie based on a COMIC BOOK that meets those criteria, made by any studio, ever?
>inb4 muh BvS
>inb4 muh capekino
>>69328729
Comic book movies don't do that. They're about comic books.
>>69328321
>risky
Nothing is risky anymore.
>ambitious
The cinematic universe they've made is the most ambitious thing capeshit has ever done. It succeeded too.
>>69328321
The entireity of the MCU has been risky. Just because they're huge successes now doesn't mean it wasn't a pipe dream 10 years ago. They pioneered their own way of doing things and perfected it.
>>69328729
Winter Soldier was more of a political thriller than a comic movie. Fury in the SUV scene was incredible, same with the Cap v Bucky fight.
>>69328781
>Winter Soldier and Civil War
oh fucking please. never was for a second that I was in a deep thinking in those 2 movies. its a generic popcorn flick
>>69328765
I wouldn't call CW deep, not even if I was a manlet.
WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THAT BITCH ACCENT
YEAH I MAD REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>69328538
GotG is very overratedly risky. Like true risky would have been if it was a bum drunk Star Lord who pisses on his ship and has a bunch of shitty allies who hate each other a lot like Watchmen.
What they did was they made the green girl hot, the tree guy cute, the raccoon quippy, put in a TON of widely accepted music from the Boomer generation so older people could connect.
Its like they took a premise that could have been edgy and used easily achievable ways to make it smoothed down for a general audience.
WB made GotG and features Joker torturing for fun and everyone acting "real" with griminess and darkness. So no shit when it only grosses half of what GotG did if that happens.
>>69328729
Mature themes =/= deep or profound symbolism
Lurk more faggot
>>69328321
making billions of fucking dollarydoos is ambitious
>>69328633
I feel that gotg would've been a GOAT 90s movie if it was done back then. Not really relevant to 10 years ago like you said but the 90s housed some weird shit that was marketed to the blockbuster going public so it would've blended right in.
>>69328770
And how did RDJ get so popular?
Dude was a fucking disgrace. What did RDJ have that GL Reynolds and Cavill fid not?
>>69328824
Nigga you asked if they have made any deep films and I said those COME CLOSE. Of fucking course they aren't, but for the MCU they are.
the first Iron Man was pretty risky imo
>>69328824
Plen detected.
Rewatch them when you are 25 you underage
>>69328321
Daredevil was a risk and it paid off.
>>69328870
that's quite sad if those 2 are the closest that MCU has for a deep movie. everything's a fucking cash grab nowadays, like TFA where its a safe movie
>>69328416
Launching connected TV shows when the movies were that big isn't ambitious at all.
The MCU was too big to fail by the time AoS was released, so they're (still) pumping out as many shows as they can before the fever cools.
Still hasn't happened yet, which is a testament to how 'safe' Marvel keeps there movies and the consistency of them.
>>69328841
>Already making excuses for SQUAD
>>69328582
I could see that but I just have the feeling like Dr. Strange will just be Quippy Magicpants Sherlock Holmes (the Robert Downey version), they will make a bunch of jokes at the weird characters to keep it light, throw in some 1960's music and ironic 70's touches and then rip off Inception for the edgy teens.
How is no one mentioning Deadpool, that movie was basically set up for failure.
>>69328870
Holy shit, some honesty. Thank you, bro.
Marvel has always cornered the market on lighter-toned comic flicks whereas DC has always tried to explore mature and profound themes.
>>69328824
>Civil War not deep for MCU
Nigga people have been debating like fucking crazy with it political and ideological themes. They're basic as fuck but to says Civil War isn't got some deep themes for MCU then you're just ignorant
>>69328919
Pretty much.
Same for Iron Man
>>69328903
Well they just want to play it safe.
>>69328529
Yea I can tell by the billion civil war is about to make my retard friend
>>69328441
GOTG was the only risky one. And they took away all risk by making it about quips and nostalgic music,
Everything else there is safe as shit.
>>69328381
Lovable cartoon characters? Yeah, Spongebob and My Little Pony is super risky too.
>>69328919
>Marvel Studios
>Deadpool
>>69328841
>WB made GotG and features Joker torturing for fun and everyone acting "real" with griminess and darkness. So no shit when it only grosses half of what GotG did if that happens.
>Skwad=GotG
No way that's right. The Guardians are only anti-heroes individually, not outright villains. The Marvel equivalent of Suicide Skwad will be Thunderbolts.
>>69328966
>Civil War
>safe
>>69328710
entertainment =/= risk you retard
>>69328765
Civil War wasn't deep, at all. It was a giant toy commercial with quips every 2 seconds
Spider-Man 2 might be the only serious one there, but it wasn't part of the MCU. Kickass is a parody comic not connected to Marvel save semantics
>>69328944
>Comeback flick for well-known actor
>story runs parallel with his life
>comic book movie from Marvel, the studio that brought you the very successful Spider-Man series
>Big budget
It definitely wasn't set up for failure nor was it risky in the least. Quit kidding yourselves.
>>69328529
my wife who's a fucking huge normie got tired of MCU. Hell she had a huge crush on Thor and after the disaster of Thor 2 she didn't want to see anymore MCU flicks
>>69328906
I am really just trying to say that Suicide Squad is exactly like what GotG would look like as an edgy movie. Not really making fun of DisMarvel because I really think DisMarvel's way is the way to go for mass appeal and WB is making another big mistake.
>>69328895
Actually this is the most risky, especially doing nothing at all to make Punisher a funny or rootable character but just a complete angel of death. He ended up being so badass we all wanted a show of him anyway. :)
>>69328977
Ech fine you got me there, forgot it was tied up in the X-men bullshit
>>69328932
Exactly. Marvel can go dark but light heartedness is a better fit for them. It makes sense. It would be nice for darker and serious themes
>>69328448
>muh formula
They may have formulaic plot structure, but the individual movies are pretty different. The differences between movies like Thor 2, Ant-Man, GotG, and Winter Soldier are pretty big. I don't know that they're any more formulaic than any other successful action movie or action-comedy.
Is Iron Man as a series more a repeat of the same idea than the Alien franchise is? Are Winter Soldier and Civil War more or less similar than Die Hard and Die hard 2?
The solo movie sequels do a good job of changing enough and the different character series alone are different enough from each other that I don't understand this formula meme. When someone just means macguffin->quip->beat the bad guy is the formula, then that's just talking about most action movies. When someone tries to use the 'Marvel formula' to mean all the movies are exactly the same, that just doesn't match what you see in the MCU.
>>69328984
nigga everything that has RDJ in it is safe
>>69328940
Nope. Doesn't count. Civil War is a kids movie. Ignore the literally hundreds of threads over the last two weeks were people insist one side or the other was obviously right. Didn't happen.
There wasn't even any Jesus imagery.
>>69328855
The fact that he can play Tony Stark as basically his own personality and sell it. RDJ is a phenomenal actor and incredibly charismatic. He had me in his corner 5 minutes into Iron Man.
That being said, he's not Tony Stark. Not really. RDJ essentially made Tony Stark be him and it works based solely on the tremendous likability he has as a celebrity. He's quick, he's witty, and he's flawed, and that makes him infinitely relatable.
He's a better, more seasoned actor than either Cavill or Reynolds, and it shows any time he's on the screen.
>>69328987
>It was a giant toy commercial with quips every 2 seconds
I don't understand why you would bother to write something that completely invalidates any point you might have been trying to make.
>>69328321
Does your mom count?
>>69329034
>there wasn't even jesus imagery
Confirmed didn't see the film
>>69329040
dude RDJ is Tony Stark - the drunk Demon in the Bottle Tony Stark
>>69329040
>he had me in his corner 5 minutes into Iron Man
Oh you mean the only good part of the movie? lmao
>>69328855
Getting nominated for an Oscar for Tropic Thunder.
>>69328781
>winter soldier
>WINTER FUCKING SOLDIER
the quippiest, most mind-numbing action-filled film Marvel has ever produced is 'serious' to you?
>>69328919
It's FOX, not marvel studios. When people talk about "marvel" they are talking about marvel studios who is own by Disney.
>>69328855
>GL
Good writing
>Cavill
Charisma
>>69329084
>the quippiest
0/10 weak af bait
>>69328966
It was a generic space adventure movie that was set in continuity with the most wildly successful blockbuster franchise of it's era. The idea that it was "risky" and offbeat was very much a calculated part of it's marketing campaign. I honestly cannot understand why people treat this movie like it was Eraserhead or something. It was as generic a story as they come. And don't give me the "oh but they weren't super popular characters" bullshit. Believe it or not, there was a time when MOST MOVIES were based on original characters and premises.
>>69329084
>winter soldier
>quippiest
This guy thinks Winter Soldier is quippier than AoU.
The entire concept of the MCU was ambitious and risky. As was Guardians of the Galaxy and Civil War and even Winter Soldier and Iron Man 3 to a degree.
>>69329084
>winter soldier
>quips
Yeah you didn't see it.
>>69328665
Exactly, the MCU has been built upon risks one after another.
>>69329101
It really, really was. So many fucking one-liners and 'camaraderie.' A supremely awful movie, and you're a supremely awful mouthbreather if you honestly believe otherwise
>>69328984
>Superheroes fight each other in a manner akin to a kid banging 2 toys together
>Lots of quips and "fun"
>No status quo changes, everybody dies and is friends at the end
Definition of safe
>>69329137
>>69329084
>>69329125
I did. I saw it in theatres. I still regret it deeply.
>>69328729
No comic has ever done that, so no.
>>69329137
You are just talking out your ass
>>69328984
What was "unsafe" about Civil War. Name me one thing, I fucking dare you.
>>69328855
>What did RDJ have that GL Reynolds and Cavill fid not?
charisma
>>69329060
He's definitely got that going for him, but he never goes for any more of Stark's personality than that, but that's understandable because if you do much more than scratch the surface of Tony Stark, shit gets real dark real fast.
They flirted with it briefly in IM2, but it's been off the table ever since.
>>69329137
didn't find it quippy but the generic transformer tier destruction got really really boring after several iterations of MCU movies. oh wow a huge ship blew up are we supposed to care after seeing other MCUs blew the fuck up cities and stuff?
>>69329164
>WINTER FUCKING SOLDIER
>more quips than Iron Man 3, Both Avengers, GotG, and Ant-Man
You are a fucking idiot.
>>69328321
The Avengers was pretty fucking ambitious.
>>69329166
>300
>Watchmen
>Man of Steel
>BvS
check and mate
Anybody remember the time that Captain America hid a flash drive filled with world altering state secrets inside a hospital vending machine? Shit was so cash.
>>69328336
cancelled lol
>>69328504
>complex themes into the plotlines
>>69329214
Ham-fisted direct references to actual art does not elevate actual garbage, even if it's shot well.
>>69329214
I said comic, not movies.
Not like any of those flicks are deep anyway.
>>69328940
No it doesn't. It touches on the issues just to immediately forget about them, it takes the cowards way out, marvel always has and it works. Those issues are always just the spring board for their films plots, never the actually topic of the main plot.
BvS on the other hand did tackle some of those issues (collateral damage, accountability, how society views superheroes) and due to it tackling the issues so honestly is exactly why is so polarizing, because many people don't want to see superman painted in a bad light.
Marvel does what they do well, but don't pretend it's anything more than light hearted fun/schlocky action.
>>69329234
kek
>>69328321
>risky
Love it or hate it, this was GotG. But the sad thing is it would just have been a regular movie in the 80s to early 2000s.
>>69329209
It really wasn't. Crossover films happen all the time. Stop lying to yourself.
>>69329181
People seem to be getting hung up on the 'quippy' aspect I mentioned, and while it may not have been as quippy as other Marvel movies (I still think it was) it was still brainrotting, mind-numbing action garbage.
>>69329282
Name 5 that cost as much
>>69329260
I never said they did a whole film to talke them. They merely dipped their toes in it. BvS wasn't polarized on its themes and issues but on technical issues.
>>69329282
>Crossover films happen all the time.
Really? When? What film? Was is another comic movie?
>>69328984
>almost every character so far in the film FIGHTING EACH OTHER WHOOO
>no one dies
>everyone is friends at the end
>zero lasting consequences
There's is absolutely nothing risky about that film
>>69328984
the film financed itself from presales and licensing deals and made money before the fucking camera rolled on the first day
that's the safest thing there is, bro
>>69329260
>and due to it tackling the issues so honestly is exactly why is so polarizing, because many people don't want to see superman painted in a bad light.
Or MAYBE it's just a bad movie and the sooner you admit it the sooner you can move on.
>>69328984
Both within and without, CW is the veritable definition of safe.
It was actually kind of sad watching Cap be one of the least interesting, least compelling things going on in his own movie. They even stole his best lines and let Carter feed them to him in what was one of the more blatant uses of beating the audience over the head with a character's motivations that I've seen in recent memory.
Why should they?
>>69329282
I'd like to know which crossovers happened.
>>69329316
Freddy vs Jason and Alien vs Predator are the only crossovers I can think of off the top of my head.
>>69329260
To be fair, I agree that BvS was incredibly ambitious, at least compared to the MCU, and I respect the effort, but it was a very poorly directed and edited film. Moments that should have been powerful were inadvertently funny, the acting was flat at points, sometimes scenes just felt inexplicably placed. I'd still rather see an ambitious failure than 13 generic cash-grabs, but BvS is an undeniably flawed film.
>>69328321
As long as the movie-going demographic remains
-teens
-parents taking kids to see action movies
-average intelligence '20 somethings on dates
-fat, stupid manchildren
-family members going to see a movie "they all can relate to"
-people that just wanna turn their brain off and eat candy and popcorn
-people that just wanna see "splosions"
then Marvel can do no wrong.
>>69328841
>WB made GotG and features Joker torturing for fun
Don't forget that he's also Robin.
>>69329209
in what way?
>>69329374
>BVS was ambitious
Ah. So you're a DC fan. Enjoy your Jesus imagery.
>>69329347
But that's only 2 characters per movie. Did it try to juggle 6 main characters in one movie?
>>69329374
the biggest mistake BvS is making Lex a hippie millenial. really was out of place in the movie. should have casted Mark Strong and have him go HAM on it
>>69329382
so as long as there are people, they'll stay in business.
>>69329413
>Disliked BVS
>Must be a DC fan.
Keep spergin', senpai.
>>69329420
Not that I know of.
>DR STRANGE IS SOOOO WEIRD GUYS
The trailer was literally just Inception and fucking Avatar the Last Airbender.
>>69329420
>Did it try to juggle 6 main characters in one movie?
oh, gosh, nobody ever fucking did that, ever!
>>69328321
>Gaurdians of the Galaxy is too different! it'll tank!
>makes shit loads of money and gets critical and fan acclaim
>Ant-Man is too different! it'll tank!
>makes shit loads of money and gets critical and fan acclaim
>Doctor Strange is too... ok switch tactics!
>Will they ever do anything risky or ambitious?
>>69329413
He very clearly didn't like Batman v Superman - this is the definition of quoting out of context
>>69328765
Kick Ass is one of the least deep comics ever.
>>69329455
Because that trailer is what the assumption is based on, absolutely.
>>69329312
Cost is irrelevant when the fanbase has already been established over 4 movies. Before Avengers they could have jumped ship even with Iron Man 2 but they didn't because Iron Man was popular, Thor had a cult classic villain and Captain America is a crowd pleaser.
>"risky"
>>69329316
>>69329330
Learn to google, bitches.
>>69328765
>Spiderman 2
Not deep at all. Good semi serious superhero films but not deep at all.
>Kickass
You're kidding...
>Civil War
.....
>>69329461
>Gaurdians of the Galaxy is too different! it'll tank!
Lucky for them it was exactly the same as every other goddamn marvel movie.
>Ant-Man is too different! it'll tank!
Lucky for them it was the same as every other goddamn Marvel movie
>Will they ever do anything risky or ambitious?
Nah, probably not.
>>69329508
Kick Ass is a deep meditation on class warfare.
>>69329533
The scope comparable to the Avengers before hand? No.
Marvel doesn't even bother with developing its villains, people watch it because they want to see superheroes winning. The villain is pretty much a tomato can meant to reinforce the simplistic notion of an objectively evil force in the marvel universe.
>>69329547
and cunts.
>>69329544
>Lucky for them it was exactly the same as every other goddamn marvel movie.
I don't remember there being another space opera sci-fi in the MCU
>>69329438
You're a sharp one.
>>69328985
yup, completely missed the point of my post. Went right over your head, big guy.
But go ahead, keep fighting the good fight.
>>69329572
>Zemo
>an objectively evil force
What's wrong with you?
>>69329572
fucking this. since nobody important dies in MCU you know that:
1. explosions utter desruction of a city
2. heroes fighting and winning nobody important dies and please quicksilver isn't important
3. happily ever after
10/10 BILLIONS EARNED
>>69329588
Yeah but it's the same because he said so.
>>69329413
>Enjoy your Jesus imagery.
Thank you I will.
>>69328481
It had better be. Scenes like this would instantly set it apart from other MCU movies.
>>69329570
>large scope
Your feels don't count as a large scope.
Even if Avengers failed they would have made bank off of toys and cartoons.
>"risky"
This is fun. Keep throwing your misinformed opinions my way.
>>69329170
watch out, we've got an internet tough guy here. He's fucking daring people, everybody stand back.
>>69329588
He's grasping at straws m8
>>69329613
>he thinks that death=depth.
>>69329527
I can't see MCU doing anything like this 2bh pham. Some references at best.
>>69329639
your feels don't count, period, and thats what you're basing your entire argument on.
>>69329658
>can't kill RDJ main cash cow
>can't kill Thor - main hunk
>can't kill Cap - moral compass
>can't kill Hulk - no hulk smash
>can't even fucking kill Black Widow and Hawkeye - no normies
see my point
>>69329659
They did the quantum realm already, so why not?
>>69329709
James Bond is never going to be killed off either, what's your point?
>>69329709
They are waiting for Infinity War to kill them off. Cap is gonna die. Window and Hawkeye will die. Iron Man might.
>>69328321
All of the MCU Risks:
IM1:
>RDJ was the biggest liability in acting history at the time. The movie practically had no script, even during filming, much of it was ad-libbed. Most of the material was presumed to be unfriendly for younger audiences that might not understand the implications of weapons manufacturing and the conceit of double-dealing.
Incredible Hulk:
>First film to attempt crossing over in the same world as previous film while making a more realistic depiction of a character who had (at the time) previously been far less realistic in world setting.
IM2:
>Sacrificed it's existence to lay the bigger groundwork for establishing Shield and introducing Black Widow and War Machine in full (testing the bounds for acceptable limits character/hero introductions) while further fleshing out the stable setting of the MCU at large.
Thor:
>Tested grounds for off-world settings and more fantastical conceits and fully Legitimized Shield's active MCU presence.
CA:TFA:
>Tested extreme limits for stretches of idealized fantasy. (Historical)
Avengers:
>First historically-attempted mega-crossover event of all established previously implied to be connected film franchises combined.
IM3/Thor2/Cap2:
>MCU Worldbuilding and setups for future events.
GotG/Avengers:AoU/Ant-Man/Civil War:
>Forced Re-arrangement and introduction of new characters to cycle out older ones with many characters audiences would find unfamiliar.
This entire franchise is Risk incarnate, and no, you can't have it both ways. Either you keep wondering which one is going to be the one that will kill the MCU or you're just implying that Risk is supposed to be a deliberate mix of terrible decisions that will result in a film being regarded as worse than Movie 43 , Bucky Larson or Catwoman.
What you're tired of isn't a lack of Risk, it's the streak itself that you find tiresome as you are too familiar with the rules that govern the MCU at large.
>>69329746
Even if they die they'll come back because everything Thanos does is going to get undone, just like in the comics.
>>69329570
Here's the thing you really need to learn, calling these movies "risky" is literally part of the marketing strategy. Every movie prior to Avengers built up hype and anticipation specifically because the studio played up the idea that "hurr durr, how can a movie like this EVAR SUCCEDDD?" It's hype. Avengers is a pretty average movie, but it occupies this special place in the popular zeitgeist because it was the "first" of it's kind. But what about the narrative of that movie was honestly all that innovative? Those stories have existed on television and in comics for years. Action team-up films in and of themselves aren't even terribly original. It was a gimmick plain and simple. How do people honestly believe that this movie somehow "defied the odds" in its success? What about it seemed destined to fail? They made four movies general audiences generally liked, built up a massive amount of hype and made a fairly straightforward action movie. The fuck is so crazy about that?
>>69329461
>>69329746
>Window
>>69329658
Not him but even though the characters are put in extremely dangerous events, there is pretty much no sense of danger or tension in any of the conflicts. When you have normal people like Hawkeye and Black Widow fighting along side gods, it just serves to undermine any sort of threat they face. They don't even acknowledge this issue, and usually put these characters in to beat up some enemies that are zerging them, making the threat of these enemies practically non existent.
>>69329769
And Superman came back to life at the end of BvS.
These characters are meant to have stories told about them, not to satisfy some neckbeard who doesn't really give a shit about them in the first place.
>>69329588
Generic action film filled with family friendly humor made to appeal to the broadest possible demographic. It was the same generic Marvel formula with a different coat of paint. Come to me when they make something like Only God Forgives starring the hulk or fucking Spider-man does Salo, then we'll talk about how fucking daring they are.
>>69329819
B-but muh Walking Dead and Game of Thrones have people dying all the time so they're mature and dark!
>>69329458
Yeah.
Name one movie that did that.
Aside from the Xmen. And the Dragon lives again. And the League if Extraordibary Gentlemen
>>69329697
>4 films of pre-emptive material with a final 5th encompassing characters from the previous movies is "risky"
>all of which made over a 100% profit
>BUT IT COST A LOT OF MONEY
You're lazy AND stupid. Learn to research and lurk more.
>>69329769
I doubt it. Chris Evans contract is gonna be up by IW 2 and he's been wanting to do directing for awhile, plus Winter Soldier dude contract is for 9 films so he'll be Cap most likely. Widow and Hawkeye are expendable. RDJ is also gonna be up but unless Disney feels like givin another 200m to him, he is gon a leave too. These actors want to do other shit and with all this money they have made, they will be fine if they leave
>>69329851
X-Men and the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen all dealt with characters who were established in the same movie. They weren't crossovers, even if the cast of League was based off of public domain characters.
I don't know what that third one is.
They had the perfect chance to take a risk with Civil War by having Cap mack on Bucky instead of Generic Love Interest #47 but here we are.
>>69329883
>Chris Evans wants to do directing
You mean he's going to become the Ben Affleck of Marvel?
>>69328504
Sure, but only if they start adapting comics with complex themes.
Shoehorning themes into comic stories that don't have or even want them is disastrous, especially when the people in charge are incapable of the task. See Batman v Superman.
>>69329870
Assuming a general audience is up to speed on like 5 previous movies is the definition of risk.
Making a profit under those conditions is pretty much unheard of, since profits usually decline the more sequels there are.
Your resentment of their success says more about you than the movies they make.
Why is Jessica Jones the best thing the MCU's ever produced?
>>69328321
>mfw Marvel will never ever dare to do something risky like BvS
but this is probably Marvel drone's argument
>Muh talking Racoon in GoTG
>Muh talking tree in GoTG
>Muh Purple pumpkin final boss
>>69329835
>family humor
Bruh....
>>69329916
So where my Saga of the Swamp Thing or Sandman?
>>69329908
Maybe
>>69329922
It's not, Maddox.
>>69329761
>RDJ was the biggest liability in acting history at the time. The movie practically had no script, even during filming, much of it was ad-libbed. Most of the material was presumed to be unfriendly for younger audiences that might not understand the implications of weapons manufacturing and the conceit of double-dealing.
And based largely off of RDJ's appeal, it sets the tone for practically everything that follows. The only film series that deviated overmuch in terms of tone from the others was TFA and its sequels, which ultimately devolved into "let's throw everybody into it so that it's essentially Avengers 2.5."
For God's sake, they even took Thor, the only character more stoic and noble than Cap and reduced him to something of a joke.
>>69329761
Cont'dIt's still impressive that RDJ hasn't relapsed into a coke-fueled spaz-out or that a good 5th of the existing avengers haven't let celebrity and ego get to their head at this point. When one considers that they've had problems with undisciplined/egotistical talents like Edward Norton, Terrance Howard and Edgar Wright who simply aren't team players, it's astonishing that the MCU lasted even as far as the First Avengers Film.
So serious, you see this shit? Knock it right the fuck off.
This "Not taking risks" is the most tired and shitty meme I've ever seen anywhere online and honestly reeks of a lesser education not possible from people who've graduated out of second grade.
If you're smart enough to make a coherent sentence, you shouldn't be stupid enough to spam shitty bait threads like these that might confuse people into believing that this kind of shitposting is supposed to be the standard.
It's bullshit like this which is why more than 70% of the topics on /tv/ is absolute trash instead of the quality than most of the other boards on 4chan have.
>>69328841
>made the green girl hot
Just came in here to tell you have abysmally wrong you are. She looked like a sheboon nigger painted green.
Gamora is fucking *hot* in the comics. Literally the worst casting in the entire film.
>>69329835
Bruh you're trying too hard. For MCU it was different and doesn't even feel like a superhero film. Plus OGF with Hulk and Spider-Man sounds fucking horrible. Please never pursue film.
>>69329929
OH NO don't even fucking think of touching Sandman
>>69329920
I don't resent their success. I loved Avengers and most Marvel films.
I resent lunacy. This was not a risky move and anyone with any idea of how financial risk works or has is versed at all in trend analysis knows this. Hell, anyone who has ever presented an idea to an investor ever knows this.
Just stop
>everyone here saying different = good
Different/Risky =/= Good all the time
>>69329991
But they already are. And it's going to be terrible.
>>69329908
>You mean he's going to become the Ben Affleck of Marvel?
Except he'll actually be successful
>>69330021
Affleck's directing has been mighty fine though.
>>69329761
Based anon
Heres a pic of All Star Captain America in approval
>>69329458
This perfectly illustrates the problem with talking about these movies online. You literally have an entire generation of late teens/early 20 somethings that are very vocal and have literally been raised in a world where Marvel movies were the norm. They can honestly make statements like that because from the time they were actually children, this mode of cinema in which every major blockbuster is a remake of a remake of a sequel of a remake of a toy line has been the industry standard. They honestly believe that Guardians of the Galaxy was a "risky" film because they have never lived in a world where MOST movies weren't based on anything.
>>69330015
nothing is sacred anymore fuck this shit
>>69330058
Something was sacred at some point? Do you come from the negaverse or some shit?
>>69329980
>doesn't even feel like a superhero film.
It most certainly does. It's simply a superhero film that happens to take place in space.
>>69329934
>actually complex and flawed characters
>confronts social issues without being too preachy
>an interesting villain with a developed backstory and motivations (compare to: Loki, which everyone likes just because Tom Hiddleston is handsome af no homo)
>incredible action sequences, unlike the Avengers which is just explosions and half hearted punches, and Daredevil, which is just throwing sticks at ninjas
>excellently written dialogue without any cheesy bullshit about WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE A HERO
If it's not the only good thing to come out of the cash machine that's the MCU, then what is hothead?
>>69329888
That was part of my point. The Avengers was doing something new.
Also
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dragon_Lives_Again?wprov=sfla1
>>69330120
>The Avengers was doing something new
But that's what my point was too.
>Marvel is creating an epic cinematic universe, spanning many films, over the course of several years
>"will Marvel ever do anything risky or ambitious?"
>>69329925
No you're right. GoT was SUPER EDGY! Still can't believe they got away with those footloose jokes.
>>69330120
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dragon_Lives_Again?wprov=sfla1
I am legit upset I didn't know this existed.
>>69330136
b-but it was successful! it couldn't have been a risk!
>>69330138
It had some pretty dirty jokes for a marvel film dude. AoU is family humor.
>>69330136
The concept is ambitious. The execution is anything but. They've ripped the heart right out of their source material and served it up to the masses on a plate of fool's gold.
>>69330138
When they made that black light joke on the spaceship, I was afraid my mom was going to make me leave. She's a cool parent, though.
>>69330198
>They've ripped the heart right out of their source material
No, that was BvS
>>69330198
And it was worth it
>>69330227
B-b-but edgy murderbat is totally what Batman is meant to be!
>>69330227
Nope. I know the source material.
>>69329920
Also:
>implying the audience from the previous movies wouldn't see The Avengers after its predecessors were enjoyed
>kids films therefore the audience grows with the material and guarantees seats; what is HarryfuckingPotter
>new movie formula is successful therefore risky somehow?
Great argument, drone. Consider this mercy.
>>69330232
I'm honestly glad you think so. I wish I did.
Maybe Marvel should take a risk andhire Zack Snyder to direct one of their movies
>>69330303
Blown the fuck out, m8
>>69330303
kek. dc-cuck here and that made me laugh
>>69330303
Why are MCucks so afraid to defend their "brand" without comparisons?
>>69328841
>its not a risk unless you purposely sabotage your movie
>doing your best to adapt an obscure comic to the big screen and get the fickle general audience to enjoy it isn't risky
>>69330291
Well.
I have enjoyed all of the MCU, since Iron Man 1. It felt a longing of seeing a big superhero teamup that the comics and the 90s Marvel animated series did.
The Xmen came close, which is why I am stoked for Apocalypse. But the MCU was mych larger in scope.
Its why it is worth it to me. Cap and Tony are my heroes.
>>69330385
are you 12?
>>6933039530
I grew up on the Spiderman, Xmen and Iron Man animated series
>>69329950
On the most basic levels, your views change absolutely nothing and you're shifting goalposts.
The current MCU is an "adaptation" of the comics characters and not a direct 1:1 translation of any specific arcs or stories until they made more valid efforts with Winter Soldier, Ultron and Civil War.
If you're not going to bitch or whine about RDJ as Stark in IM 1, then you best not be pissing and moaning about anything else that followed that decision as far as tone is concerned as all of the lead and titled Avengers actors up until that point repeatedly cite him for guidance/reverence for a focal point in order to better understand how to "act", as starting with IM 1, the Studio only had him as a leg to stand on to get by.
Hell, it wasn't until Cap 2 that the leads (Evans/Scarjo) started learning to really show their own acting muscle.
>>69330364
Because most criticisms come from butthurt DCucks who are just jealous that Marvel has been able to do a better job of adapting their comic books to the big screen
>>69330385
>Cap and Tony are my heroes.
I can respect that. For what it's worth, I still think that they're the two most faithfully adapted members of the ensemble.
Goofy Thor just really gets under my skin.
>>69330474
just swallow your goofy thor and be thankful its not a woman thor
>>69330474
As a huge fan of Thor, not going to lie: he is one of the harder characters to adapt. And make likeable.
>>69330463
The only thing I'm "bitching and whining" about is the fact that they gave them all the same streak of flippancy. It's great when it's applied to Tony. It sucks when they start slathering the entire cast in it, and it gets old.
I'm glad you think my views change nothing. Would it shock you at all to learn that yours don't either?
>>69330533
I'm hoping for Ragnarok to finally to able to shape Thor's character. As you said, he is very hard to adapt.
>>69328996
>the comeback film for a washed up druggy
>that's the main reason he got the role
>marvel the brand brought us spidey, marvel studios brought us fuck all up until then
>big budget but literally no script at the start of filming forcing improvisation the entire production cycle
You're delusional if you think that it wasn't a risky move. Whether it was then or now in hindsight, it was still a highly risky film
>>69330468
What if I'm a pissed off MCUck that's tired of seeing so many great characters made generic and interchangeable?
>>69330496
Amen to that.
The whole MCU was a risky and ambitious venture. Before that, nobody ever even imagined that a shared movie universe featuring different characters - all distinct but interlinked, would be possible.
Imagine if Marvel suddenly made a misstep somewhere. I'd say The Avengers was probably the point of no return, where everything they'd do afterwards was gonna ba a success. But everything else before that HAD to succeed, because Marvel hadn't built its brand yet.
We take it for granted today, but creating the MCU was a great risk for them. Iron Man 1 was a great risk. Captain America, Thor - everything before they became a juggernaut.
>>69328625
This is the greatest civil war picture I've ever seen
OP isn't asking for something risky, OP is asking for Marvel to crash and burn their franchise like DC are doing by not respecting any source material or the core personalities of the characters they portray, that isn't risky, that's retarded
>Ant-Man
>GotG
>tying in like six movies to lead up to an expensive movie combining all the major characters from previous films
>planning those movies as a trilogy 12+ years in advance
>casting someone unpopular in Hollywood and a known troublemaker as the lead in your first and most important movie
Just because it REALLY paid off doesn't mean all this shit wasn't a risk
Ant-kino was more of a heist comedy than a cape movie.
The MCU is the biggest thing to happen to cinema in this century.
>>69330609
Sounds like comic book characters alright
>>69329100
>GL had no good weiting
>iron man did
One of the most well known quirks of iron man's production was that he script was never completed and they had to improvise alot of the scenes; granted it all worked out fine since rdj is so good at that
>>69330702
To be fair, RDJ's default on-screen persona is a ton closer to Tony Stark's than Reynold's was to Hal Jordan. That was a terrible casting choice, and also pretty blatantly trying to cash in on the same light humor that RDJ pulled off so well, at least in my opinion.
>>69328976
Moot point imo. It was an overall weird enough movie by a weird enough director with a large enough budgetto be considered "risky" by hollywood standards.
>>69329908
Maybe.
I had my doubts when he was cast as Captain America since all I'd seen him do before was Fantastic Four (terrible) and Sunshine (minor role). I saw Puncture before I saw the first Cap movie, he can definitely act.
Whether that means he's improved his craft enough from F4 and understands what went wrong with that (and to an extent, the first Cap movie) and has the ability to direct, I dunno. Pretty sure he's said he wants to do indie/lower-level things any way. At least at first, learn the ropes, get some cred, etc.
>>69329835
We'll let DC try that out and then we'll laugh at the complete cluster fuck of these movies that don't even count as risks but intentional sabotage. Just ask josh trank how well your style of 'risks' turn out
