WELCOME TO THE MARVEL MULTIVERSE -*RIP STAN LEE & Boseman* - Up Next: Brave New World 02/14/25

[rfx45]

This is honestly the only place I hear so much bad things about Thor 2, I perceive it as very well received outside of NT.

And honestly, I am not a fan of IM2 and IM3 but it did get good reviews plus I do think it was still riding on RDJ, IM1s greatness and Avengers high. Marvel hasn't really had a bad or negative reviewed film yet outside of comic book fans so it's hard to judge the films due to that. Marvel certainly didn't have the Marvel name it has now but IM1 made lot of money and I do believe it is because it is just a great film and I do rank it still as the best Marvel film to date.

I think the same thing happened with DoFP, everyone was already hating on it and then the good reviews poured in and it made bank on the box office.


And yeah people aren't seeing it and then paying for it but a lot of those box office are from repeat watches too and if the film wasn't good, not many would watch it again. Cinemascore and reviews definitely mean plenty, if the film had negative reviews, plenty would have delayed watching it and will not see it multiple times. Again I said if it is all said and done, as in after it is done it's theater rounds that I would guess $25m-$$50m less on the lifetime gross if the movie isn't as good and I don't think that is too far fetch.


I mean by itself, all those things may seems small, the reviews, cinemascore, SDCC announcements, etc... but w/o those I really do not think GotG wouldn't have made $90m+ in it's opening and all those makes a difference in the lifetime of the film too. If GotG were just as bad as Incredible Hulk for example, the movie wouldn't make as much as it could/will.


I'm not saying it can't be done with Riddick but that franchise isn't as big or loved as these Marvel films. It's just like DC with it's bad track record, again I am a fan of the series but we are in the minority here. Marvel attaching it's name will get people more hyped and build confidence but I don't think it'll get Riddick to $90m opening unless it is getting 90% reviews and good word of mouth by the time it releases. It'll make more money than past Riddick films but I don't think it'll be a homerun. It could very well make them being a Marvel property than before but do I see it making $300m-$500m lifetime gross? I really don't and I think at this point, any less would be a disappointment to Marvel unless the budget is in the $10m which I doubt they'd do.


I guess I was looking at it this way as a Disney/Marvel ceo or a Feige with my initial comment. I have BP, Doc Strange, Inhumans, etc.. that has a long Marvel history and I just proved I can make big bucks off of these properties that we already own just like GotG. Riddick is a good option but it has had a bad history in box office, I have to pay and buy the rights and deal with Universal. Plus I already have all these films up til 2028, so why should I go for a Riddick franchise when any Marvel properties is a guarantee cash cow right now? I cna probably make a low budget Black Widow film and still make money on the box office more than I could make with a Riddick film and BW is just there sitting in our talble ready to go.




But hey, I was definitely wrong about GotG when it was announced years ago so I really could very well be wrong with the Riddick franchise so who knows. That's just how I see them.

 

[Master Zik]

Oh I definitely get doing the stuff you already own first and not having it fill a spot but I was kinda taking it to consideration that BP, Strange, and Inhumans were coming regardless. So then I think well Riddick is more space than anything and outside of a possible Nova movie I'm not seeing what else a Riddick movie would be blocking in that realm. Doubt they're doing a solo Quasar flick.

I think there'd be room given how they continue to expand how many movies they do a year.

All the things you mention I think are doable for a Riddick film.

 

[everysingletime]

I happen to like Thor 2, it's not a first tier Marvel movie but middle tier to me. It was one of those movies that actually got better the second viewing.

I remember watching it at home thinking, 'this is better than I remember.' lol

 

[rfx45]

Marvel does have a lot on their rumor plate right now.

BP, Doc Strange, Inhumans are the most sure to come. Then there's BW, Ms Marvel and Hulk (a sequel finally). Add the sequels for Thor, Cap and GotG for those dates plus Avengers 3 (possibly a two parter?) and that occupies a lot of dates.

As for a galactic/cosmic type of film or just anything outside of Earth, I think the Inhumans will pretty much explore that and it along with GotG are plenty.

Then I have my fingers crossed for a Thanos solo film.

If they do acquire Riddick, that film might be better suited to be placed on a brand new date.

 

[everysingletime]

I just hope they can keep up the quality of what they put out while upping the quantity.

Three movies a yr is still insane to me

 

[rfx45]

I have a feeling Antman will be undewhelming just because Cap2 and GotG were so good and AoU will likely be just amazing.

Antman will make big bucks coming after AoU draw but I have a feeling quality will be down after seeing 3 very, very good films in a row from Marvel.

Even if the movie is good, it'll be criticized if it is less than excellent.

 

[tay1]

This is honestly the only place I hear so much bad things about Thor 2, I perceive it as very well received outside of NT.

And honestly, I am not a fan of IM2 and IM3 but it did get good reviews plus I do think it was still riding on RDJ, IM1s greatness and Avengers high. Marvel hasn't really had a bad or negative reviewed film yet outside of comic book fans so it's hard to judge the films due to that. Marvel certainly didn't have the Marvel name it has now but IM1 made lot of money and I do believe it is because it is just a great film and I do rank it still as the best Marvel film to date.

I think the same thing happened with DoFP, everyone was already hating on it and then the good reviews poured in and it made bank on the box office.


And yeah people aren't seeing it and then paying for it but a lot of those box office are from repeat watches too and if the film wasn't good, not many would watch it again. Cinemascore and reviews definitely mean plenty, if the film had negative reviews, plenty would have delayed watching it and will not see it multiple times. Again I said if it is all said and done, as in after it is done it's theater rounds that I would guess $25m-$$50m less on the lifetime gross if the movie isn't as good and I don't think that is too far fetch.


I mean by itself, all those things may seems small, the reviews, cinemascore, SDCC announcements, etc... but w/o those I really do not think GotG wouldn't have made $90m+ in it's opening and all those makes a difference in the lifetime of the film too. If GotG were just as bad as Incredible Hulk for example, the movie wouldn't make as much as it could/will.


I'm not saying it can't be done with Riddick but that franchise isn't as big or loved as these Marvel films. It's just like DC with it's bad track record, again I am a fan of the series but we are in the minority here. Marvel attaching it's name will get people more hyped and build confidence but I don't think it'll get Riddick to $90m opening unless it is getting 90% reviews and good word of mouth by the time it releases. It'll make more money than past Riddick films but I don't think it'll be a homerun. It could very well make them being a Marvel property than before but do I see it making $300m-$500m lifetime gross? I really don't and I think at this point, any less would be a disappointment to Marvel unless the budget is in the $10m which I doubt they'd do.


I guess I was looking at it this way as a Disney/Marvel ceo or a Feige with my initial comment. I have BP, Doc Strange, Inhumans, etc.. that has a long Marvel history and I just proved I can make big bucks off of these properties that we already own just like GotG. Riddick is a good option but it has had a bad history in box office, I have to pay and buy the rights and deal with Universal. Plus I already have all these films up til 2028, so why should I go for a Riddick franchise when any Marvel properties is a guarantee cash cow right now? I cna probably make a low budget Black Widow film and still make money on the box office more than I could make with a Riddick film and BW is just there sitting in our talble ready to go.




But hey, I was definitely wrong about GotG when it was announced years ago so I really could very well be wrong with the Riddick franchise so who knows. That's just how I see them.

Thor II is far from being well received, but it's nowhere near as bad as folks here making it seem. However, it's not great. I believe some folks view these films as either great or trash, with no inbetween. If you go to the theatre and watch these films, folks are enjoying themselves. I enjoyed IM3 because there were moments that were funny and all that, and people laughed as well. It's a disappointing movie, but I don't think it is as close to being as bad as people make it seem. People make it seem like it's another Green Lantern, when it's far from it. The only dud Marvel truly has in my book is IM2. There were moments in IM3 that I truly liked, I can't say that at all for IM2.

 

[tay1]

Marvel does have a lot on their rumor plate right now.

BP, Doc Strange, Inhumans are the most sure to come. Then there's BW, Ms Marvel and Hulk (a sequel finally). Add the sequels for Thor, Cap and GotG for those dates plus Avengers 3 (possibly a two parter?) and that occupies a lot of dates.

As for a galactic/cosmic type of film or just anything outside of Earth, I think the Inhumans will pretty much explore that and it along with GotG are plenty.

Then I have my fingers crossed for a Thanos solo film.

If they do acquire Riddick, that film might be better suited to be placed on a brand new date.

A Thanos solo film would be a gamechanger in a way, but I can't see it. The S6 could possibly open up interest in villain eccentric stories, kinda like what the new animated batman film

 

[rfx45]

I remember the Thor 2 thread having mainly positive reviews. I definitely ranked it higher back then than I do now after several viewings but I thought it was still good, better than Cap1, Thor1 and Incredible Hulk. Definitely better than IM2 and IM3 on my ranking.

I mean don't get it confused with the handful of people from the same 10-15 people posting in these threads that are saying it is terrible, it doesn't count because it seems a lot because they keep posting it. But in the movie thread, I definitely remember maybe around 80%-85% of the people liking it.

 

[tay1]

I remember the Thor 2 thread having mainly positive reviews. I definitely ranked it higher back then than I do now after several viewings but I thought it was still good, better than Cap1, Thor1 and Incredible Hulk. Definitely better than IM2 and IM3 on my ranking.

I mean don't get it confused with the handful of people from the same 10-15 people posting in these threads that are saying it is terrible, it doesn't count because it seems a lot because they keep posting it.

But in the movie thread, I definitely remember maybe around 80%-85% of the people liking it.

I probably wouldn't put it above cap 1 in my ranking, but it's definitely better than Thor 1 imo. It's just so meh. I mean they made Cap out of all people interesting, I don't see why they can't replicate that with Thor. He should be the easiest out of the Avenger roster imo.

 

[bamez]

Cap1 was is turrible.  Norton Hulk was just behind IM as the best movie in phase 1.

 

[tay1]

I guess I'm alone in the fact that Cap 1 was my favorite phase 1 film.

Once Iron Man got out of the desert in the first film, I stopped liking it. Cap 1 has the best origin imo. Only thing wrong is the usage of Red Skull. Had that been any other villain, with Red Skull being in the background, it would've been perfect for me. And maybe a different director. Don't know if dude who directed it was right for the job.

 

[rfx45]

While I don't view Cap1 as a bad film, it is the most boring to me. I almost always fall asleep when watching it's re-runs.


Thor 1 is still entertaining to me to this day, I can completely watch it after not seeing it for 2-4 months, with Cap1 I am not sure I have seen it in it's entirety in the past 2 years. Loki definitely plays a big role in Thor 1 being better than Cap1 though.

 

[SORIANOTRON]

a standalone villan film would be awesome.

 

[tay1]

It's gonna happen eventually. It's just going to take someone to do it right.

 

[MajinZuub]

I watched Cap 1 once and only once. Felt no desire to see it again. Same deal with both Thor movies, though I found both entertaining. I honestly wasn't crazy about Avengers either but it was solid, I think AOU will be a lot better.

I know it was awhile ago but I'm still sad that the Thomas Jane Punisher was so poorly received and never got a proper sequel. I ******* loved that movie.

 

[jumpmanpro97]

While I don't view Cap1 as a bad film, it is the most boring to me. I almost always fall asleep when watching it's re-runs.


Thor 1 is still entertaining to me to this day, I can completely watch it after not seeing it for 2-4 months, with Cap1 I am not sure I have seen it in it's entirety in the past 2 years. Loki definitely plays a big role in Thor 1 being better than Cap1 though.

Cap 1 was boring I always felt that out of all the avengers captain america wasn't bad ***. cap 2 changed my outlook on him

 

[jaypesoz]

I guess I'm alone in the fact that Cap 1 was my favorite phase 1 film.|I

Once Iron Man got out of the desert in the first film, I stopped liking it. Cap 1 has the best origin imo. Only thing wrong is the usage of Red Skull. Had that been any other villain, with Red Skull being in the background, it would've been perfect for me. And maybe a different director. Don't know if dude who directed it was right for the job.

Don't worry, Thor is actually my personal favorite Phase I movie and I know I'm alone on that

But anyway, I thought Cap 1 was great as it's own movie. It perfectly captures what I think of when I think of Cap but it's also why I have no desire to see Red Skull ever again. Plenty of other, more interesting villains they can use in the future but I disagree and think Joe Johnston was the perfect director for that particular film. My only wish would've for that montage scene to be stretched out a little longer.

 

[shogun]

I vote Infinity Box Office lmao

Can't wait for the Infinity Box parody.

 

[lamekilla]

Right now you just seem like the guy going against the grain, starting to hate because ppl didn't like ASM2 and thought Cap2 and GotG were better.

I can say it now, Inhumans and Ant Man could be IM2&3/Thor1/Cap1 quality and Marvel won't skip a beat as they move on to phase 4. The next movies would just come out and be better even if you complained about everyone.

Only decline will occur is if they pick the wrong person to run **** if Feige ever leaves.

Like right now you have no justification in trying to hate on Inhumans other than you not liking them. This was in the cards and hinted at earlier than now. Get used to it.

Why do you keep mentioning ASM2 though? I get it, not too many people like the film and I liked it. I loved Cap2 but thought it had its shortcomings. If you liked that film over ASM2 that understandable and actually the majority consensus. Guardians eh, I've stated how I felt about the film enough. Some have agreed with me so it's not me going against the grain necessarily though I do realize I have a penchant for having the more controversial opinion regardless I can legitimately say my personal dislike for the inhumans is from their comic so I'm not expecting much from the silver screen appearance. It just Marvel is doing too much. IM3 as well as guardians showed marvel that they can slap anything on screen with a marvel logo and people will eat it up. I'll reserve final judgement till the film comes but marvel needs to max out the stories with their top tier characters before we start seeing movies for the second and third tier marvel characters

 

[sb]

 

[sunshineblotters]

Why do you keep mentioning ASM2 though? I get it, not too many people like the film and I liked it. I loved Cap2 but thought it had its shortcomings. If you liked that film over ASM2 that understandable and actually the majority consensus. Guardians eh, I've stated how I felt about the film enough. Some have agreed with me so it's not me going against the grain necessarily though I do realize I have a penchant for having the more controversial opinion regardless I can legitimately say my personal dislike for the inhumans is from their comic so I'm not expecting much from the silver screen appearance. It just Marvel is doing too much. IM3 as well as guardians showed marvel that they can slap anything on screen with a marvel logo and people will eat it up. I'll reserve final judgement till the film comes but marvel needs to max out the stories with their top tier characters before we start seeing movies for the second and third tier marvel characters

Too much? Please Marvel, stop hitting us with quality after quality films. It's "too much" for lamekilla . Give us another ****** IM film.

 

[everysingletime]

'Some has agreed with me so I'm not going against the grain'

Like one or two people in the GotG thread max. LOL

 

[rell826]

How can Iron Man 2 be a dud when its superior to IM3 in every shape and form. That's even with the script being written on the fly due to the writers strike. Good reviews mean absolutely nothing. Richard Roeper, one of the top movie critics, had said IM3 was the best Marvel movie.

 

[MajinZuub]

IM2 and 3 both sucked ***, IM2 just sucked a little less.