Movie Forums (http://www.movieforums.com/community/index.php)
-   Business & Box Office Discussion (http://www.movieforums.com/community/forumdisplay.php?f=14)
-   -   The Marvel Cinematic Universe (As of Now) (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=67766)

McConnaughay 03-04-23 10:00 AM

The Marvel Cinematic Universe (As of Now)
 
Recent Sentiment: The Marvel Cinematic Universe is losing momentum. Superhero fatigue has set in and the Marvel regime is starting to show cracks in its armor.

What Data Shows Us: The last phase of the Marvel Cinematic Universe is difficult to breakdown and analyze because all the variables you have to consider in-order to fully represent the data shown.

The Covid-19 outbreak had a lot of negative effect on the box-office that we still haven't recovered from - especially not in foreign marketplaces. For that reason, I don't believe we can use either Shang-Chi, Black Widow, or The Eternals in any proper analysis of the state of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. They were all released at a volatile time where every film released suffered.

That leaves us with:
Spider-Man: No Way Home
Thor: Love and Thunder
Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania
Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness
Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
Spider-Man: No Way Home I consider an outlier, so to speak. The film had Tobey Maguire's Spider-Man and Andrew Garfield's Spider-Man involved, and I would consider it an "event" film. It was catching lightning in a bottle, benefited by so many different variables (the right moment, as well as pent-up demand for a major film release). Although it will be tested with a sequel, I call it an outlier because I don't think they'll be able to do it again. I believe the next Spider-Man will be a major moneymaker and it will continue, but I don't see the next film reaching the dizzying heights that No Way Home did.

Thor: Love and Thunder was a success for Marvel. Every Thor film has improved on itself at the box-office at a domestic level. The Dark World made more than Thor, Ragnarok made more than Dark World, and now, Love and Thunder has made more than Ragnarok. Love and Thunder made nearly 30 million more than Ragnarok in the United States.

The film made nearly 100 million less worldwide than Ragnarok, however.

This is because Thor: Love and Thunder was not released in China, where Ragnarok made 112 million.

Thus, I would consider Thor: Love and Thunder a stalemate between itself and Ragnarok and a stalemate to the hypothesis that Marvel is losing momentum - adjusted for inflation, they made almost exactly the same amount in the United States.

For anyone who's curious, I liked Ragnarok more than Love and Thunder.

Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness is not a stalemate to the hypothesis, but a tally in the win column for Marvel. The film made nearly 300 million more than the original film and was amongst the most successful films the Marvel Cinematic Universe has ever seen for a standalone character film. One can argue that it piggybacked off the success of Spider-Man: No Way Home, but the Marvel Cinematic Universe has always piggybacked off its predecessors (the same way Iron Man 3 was largely carried by the success of the original Avengers film).

For anyone who's curious, I liked Doctor Strange 1 more than Doctor Strange 2.

With that, we are left with Black Panther: Wakanda Forever and Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania.

Black Panther in itself is something of an outlier as well. The same way Spider-Man was destined to reach unseen, unheard of success, Black Panther 2 was always doomed to not live up to its predecessor.

The original film was special. Anybody who stares at box-office data all day like I do can attest to that.

We can chalk it off to whatever we want, but the fact is, Black Panther made more domestically than three of the four Avengers movies.

The sequel made 455 million in the United States and did so without the Black Panther. That isn't a representation of Marvel's declining success, but a sign of how weighty the brand actually is.

At 858 million, Black Panther 2 made nearly 500 million less than the original film. That isn't enough to call it a misfire or to make any outright proclamation, other than - Black Panther 2 sure would've made more money if Chadwick was still alive for it.

The film wasn't released in China either (which accounted for 100 million of the original's total), but most of its decline was on a domestic level (the same level that no other Marvel movies has shown any decreases on), which shows, pointedly, that Black Panther 2 didn't have the momentum the original film had.

Lastly, we have Ant-Man 3.

Thus far, this film's biggest crime is falling victim to the fanboy-effect (i.e. a front-loaded box office outcome).

The issue is that Ant-Man has never been a popular franchise for the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

The first film is nearly at the very bottom of the heap, sitting someplace with the early day Marvel movies, like The Incredible Hulk and the original Thor film. The sequel Ant-Man & the Wasp did a little bit better than that. It crossed the 200 million threshold in the United States.

A decent symmetry can be drawn to the first two Thor movies and Ant-Man movies.

Ant-Man made 180 million domestically and 519 worldwide and Thor made 181 domestically and 440 worldwide. Meanwhile, Ant-Man 2 made 216 million domestically and 622 million worldwide and Thor 2 made 206 million domestically and 644 million worldwide.

The third film Quantumania has dropped like a rock at the domestic box-office (69% after its second weekend), however, you can't tell the whole story without acknowledging that it opened to 106 million compared to Ant-Man's 57 million and The Wasp's 75 million.

By the end of its run, Ant-Man 3 will be the most successful Ant-Man film at the domestic box office. By the end of its worldwide run, it will likely end up someplace over what the original Ant-Man grossed and about what the second film did worldwide.

In summation, the box office data does not support the belief that the Marvel Cinematic Universe is losing momentum (yet).

Instead, it shows a lack of Chinese (Black Panther 2 didn't receive one, Spider-Man didn't, Doctor Strange didn't, Thor didn't. Ant-Man did.) markets, and supports the belief that Ant-Man simply isn't that popular of a character.

ShirleySemon 03-23-23 08:09 AM

Re: The Marvel Cinematic Universe (As of Now)
 
Spider-Man: No Way Home
Thor: Love and Thunder
Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania
Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness
Black Panther: Wakanda Forever

They all are my favorite movies...

GulfportDoc 03-23-23 08:23 PM

Marvel's Victoria Alonso was dumped. She'd been the president of physical production, post-production, VFX and animation.

https://comicbook.com/movies/news/ma...y-kevin-feige/

WorldFilmGeek 01-17-24 10:23 AM

Re: The Marvel Cinematic Universe (As of Now)
 
Between the strikes, the failure of The Marvels, and the recent news of Jonathan Majors' firing, the MCU is slowing down...

This year, we're only having the "Echo" series and the first R-rated MCU film coming later this year in Deadpool 3.

Everything has moved back and even "Daredevil: Born Again" is being redone to make it akin to the Netflix series. There is not going to be a season 2 of "She-Hulk". Thunderbolts is supposed to begin production later this year and Steven Yeun dropped out due to schedule conflict.

Captain America: Brave New World will be out on Feb. 14, 2025

Thief 01-17-24 03:10 PM

Re: The Marvel Cinematic Universe (As of Now)
 
I think there are a thousand ways you can look at this and get different readings out of it; and even though I'm not as big into the MCU as some people, I find myself fascinated by the whole of it.

I haven't paid much attention to the box office *per region*, but if you look at the overall money, they are still making money. Phase 4 has been the second most lucrative Phase of the five, after Phase 3 (which included both Infinity War AND Endgame).

On the other hand, even though people are still paying money and watching stuff, I do think there is an overall fatigue. Not only with the MCU but with the whole comic book/superhero thing, and you can see it in the general attitude towards the releases which is more of a groan than a holler. And this can be due to a bunch of reasons: it can be because of them clogging the market (the Infinity Saga had 23 films in 10 years, the Multiverse Saga has had 17 in half the time; and that's not including the TV shows). It can be because the quality of the films hasn't been the same (the only "Rotten" films from the MCU are from Phase 4 and 5; Eternals and Quantumania). It can be because, after 15 years of dominating, it was meant to happen; the bubble burst. Or it can be a mix of all.

I do think they could've/should've taken a break after Endgame, but I also understand (from a business p.o.v.) them wanting to ride that high. I also respect the decision of taking this "peak" to introduce new, more unknown characters (Shang-Chi, the Eternals, etc.) cause it kinda makes sense to take that risk when you're at a high. But they really need to put more care into each film, from script to SFX, cause at this point, they've turned it into a conveyor belt, where the rate and timeline of releases seems more important than the product itself. It is the equivalent of studios churning out westerns back in the 1950s, which was one of the things that led to the downfall of the studio system.


*I still haven't seen anything AFTER No Way Home, so take all the above with a grain of salt.

TONGO 01-17-24 04:34 PM

For me this is quite simple. After Thor: Love & Thunder and Loki season 1 I lost my unshakable faith in MARVEL projects. If a movie makes money is one thing, if a movie is good is another, its not the same thing. There was a continuity, a goal, and resolution to their projects, and then after Endgame, they just felt they could do no wrong. They stopped seeking the best acting talent. They stopped taking their stories seriously (Thor L&T was making fun of itself nonstop). Hollywood turned its back on what characters were succesful in comics, and thought they could do better. They tried fixing a wheel that wasnt broken.

Having said that I feel now they are recognizing their recent shortcomings, and may go back to the old ways that made them. Kang is out and Doctor Doom is in. Yknow Doom, the guy Darth Vader was based off of? Fantastic Four is being cast brilliantly for the first time ever. Secret Wars could surpass the Thanos story arc if they bring in the right writing talent. The X-Men is returning too, getting a new coat of paint.

Not all Bond movies were good, and not all westerns. No genre is without its lows. All hope is not lost. As long as there are fanboys there is an audience willing to give them a fair chance, but not blindly anymore.

xSookieStackhouse 01-18-24 08:56 AM

Re: The Marvel Cinematic Universe (As of Now)
 
i hate when all the haters are men hating on female and female characters like seriously they based on the marvel comics , its sooo upsetting

John McClane 01-18-24 09:24 PM

i’d eat a pair of shoes to finally get a good Fantastic Four movie. i liked the 2015 release, but it was DOA. i have bottom tier expectations for it cause Marvel has sucked so bad of late. but if anyone could **** it up it’d be a rat with beefy hands

also, i love the Ant-Man movies. the third one has grown on me even if it was shit

doubledenim 01-19-24 06:58 AM

Superhero fatigue seems to be too big of a blanket. DC can make a Batman movie every three years until the end of time.

McConnaughay 01-20-24 02:09 AM

Originally Posted by Thief (Post 2433931)
I haven't paid much attention to the box office *per region*, but if you look at the overall money, they are still making money.
Not exactly.

Ant-Man 3 made 476 million off a production budget of 200 million and did not break-even and thus, did not make money.

Also, for a proper understanding of the box-office, you don't have the option to look at overall money and ignore the *per region* aspect, unfortunately.

The regions matter because the cuts in each market differ. For example, in China, the second biggest market in the world, movie studios receive a much smaller fraction of the ticket sales (i.e. a film that makes 400 million in China would only receive about 100 million of that). In the United States, the studio generally receives the lion's share of the profit.

A lot of people like to simplify it by saying 60-70%, etc., but it is complicated. A bigger studio is in a position to ask for a larger share than an independent studio and the split sometimes changes week-to-week (i.e. a film studio may get a larger cut in the opening weekend, but a smaller cut in its fifth weekend, eighth weekend, etc).

Then, if you look at The Marvels - it made 206 million off a net production budget of 219 million, meaning it likely ended up costing the studio as much as 200 million in damages.

There are other variables, like the home video market - streaming services, DVD and Blu-Ray sales, and toys and other merchandising, but, most movie companies aren't willing to expend substantial budgets in hopes it will pay out in the back end.

Although it isn't Marvel, per se, we'd be remiss if we didn't also mention that every single DC movie this year either bombed dramatically or failed to recoup its budget at the box office. Even though it isn't Marvel footing the bill on those productions, I would imagine there is an overlap that over saturates the genre and damages the appeal of superheroes in cinema.

Likewise, the Sony movies, such as the upcoming Madam Webb, which is currently tracking to be a large misfire, directly hurts the Marvel brand.

I don't think the genre itself is dying, per se, but I think what someone else in this thread said is appropriate: "We can keep making Batman moves every three years." Likewise, Spider-Man: No Way Home nearly doubled the box-office record for any Spider-Man movie. The Spider-Verse movies are killing it. The Spider-Man games are killing it. Spider-Man is bigger than ever. Likewise, if they dropped an Iron Man 4 tomorrow, it'd make a billion. Some things will be evergreen, and other things will have to sink or swim.

McConnaughay 01-20-24 02:20 AM

Originally Posted by xSookieStackhouse (Post 2434041)
i hate when all the haters are men hating on female and female characters like seriously they based on the marvel comics , its sooo upsetting
I say this purely from an analytic standpoint, in the film industry (specifically, in the United States), there are two demographics that are repeatedly under served and will always show up and surprise you when they feel a film is worth their time - our female moviegoers and the black demographic.

It does not appear women believed The Marvels was worth their time. This same year, however, they did believe the Barbie movie was worth their time and they showed up in droves. Black Panther was an example of a film that was deeply embraced by black audiences. In one swoop, they made a superhero icon (whose lead actor tragically passed, leaving the character and its sub-franchise in something of a limbo).

I think both markets (especially female audiences - as they make up about half the population) are both largely untapped in the current marketplace and if studios can find a way to align the stars, so to speak, it could be a game-changer for the industry.

It'd also just make the industry a lot more unique and more enjoyable.


All times are GMT -3. The time now is 07:36 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright, ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Movie Forums