Marvel Cinematic Universe, Phase Three and BEYOOOOONND

[Christopher R Taylor]

It kind of bothers me that the Marvel Cinematic model is being viewed as some sort of meta film making technique rather than a proper way to bring the source material to life.  In other words, rather than viewing the Avengers as the natural result of these various characters who were introduced being in a group film, people are seeing that as the kewl way to do every movie.

 

We need a film that brings all the Hanna Barberra characters together into a team!  We need a film that takes Die Hard, 48 Hours, Lethal Weapon, and Beverley Hills Cop and has them in the same universe as a super cop team up film!!!!  Transformers plus Smurfs plus He-Man!  Its a sure fire winner, baby!

 

Its not organic then, its not by design, its just crass commercialism: we can cash in on this baby!

 

Why does this matter?  Because if the purpose of your film is not storytelling and entertainment, it usually shows.  If you're making a film to put hot properties together to make a mint, it almost always is going to show in the final product.

[Lord Liaden]

In essence, the MCU films are just following the precedents from the comics. This is how the Marvel Comics universe evolved, when they first started having their various characters cross over into each other's titles. The Universal Studios' "Dark Universe" is also actually precedented, since the studio's classic monsters did co-star with each other back in the day. Likewise Godzilla, King Kong, and the Toho Studios stable of kaiju. It may seem a radical approach to people unfamiliar with it, but conceptually it's not ground-breaking.

 

Marvel Studios' success came from building their universe in a logical, cumulative way, drawing carefully from the deep well of ideas from the comics, reinterpreting and repackaging the characters and stories for a new medium and a new audience. That success has prompted a rash of imitators, who aren't necessarily willing to take the same care and time.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Marvel Studios' success came from building their universe in a logical, cumulative way, drawing carefully from the deep well of ideas from the comics, reinterpreting and repackaging the characters and stories for a new medium and a new audience. That success has prompted a rash of imitators, who aren't necessarily willing to take the same care and time.

 

 

Right, it was more organic rather than 'ooh, lets put the band together' crass cashing in.  There's a big difference between like-genre stuff presumed to be in the same world being joined up and just picking stuff that could conceivably be tied together in some conceptual way or just are all owned by the same people and making a film out of it.  With good writing, directing, and casting it might work, its just much less likely to.

I mean, a Matt Helm/James Bond/Maxwell Smart/Salt crossover film could be good, but it would take real talent to make it work because they are so different in tone, timing, and concept.

 

[Old Man]

Exactly.  I get that the MCU crossovers' success appeals to the suits, but the one thing that is most responsible for that success is not crossover appeal, it's good writing. 

[zslane]

Fan service is when you put something into a show/movie regardless of its storytelling merit, often at the expense of strong storytelling, just to please a particular subset of fans (in the case of anime, it is typically in service to the prurient interests of teenage boys). It may qualify as giving (some) people what they want, but that doesn't change the fact that garbage still stinks.

 

The applicability of the label "cash grab" is governed by the intent (and priorities) behind the production choices/decisions made. It is not governed by whether or not the result was popular (or financially successful). Stan Lee is confused.

[Hugh Neilson]

So pulling a high-tech SuperSuit, a rampaging Mr. Hyde and a mythological Norse God together around a character set in WW II but dragged to the present day so he can join the team makes more sense?

[Matt the Bruins]

Within the context of all the above being comic book superhero characters created by Jack Kirby while working at Marvel, yes. It at least makes more sense than teaming up Mickey Mouse, Luke Skywalker, Indiana Jones, Mowgli, and Kermit the Frog because they're all owned by Disney.

[Pattern Ghost]

Within the context of all the above being comic book superhero characters created by Jack Kirby while working at Marvel, yes. It at least makes more sense than teaming up Mickey Mouse, Luke Skywalker, Indiana Jones, Mowgli, and Kermit the Frog because they're all owned by Disney.

 

"Disney Princesses" was the article that started this derail, not just "any random selection of Disney-owned characters." The Princesses are a bit more conceptually relevant to each other, and they've been a marketing thing for years now. As I said earlier, it's already been done quite well on TV. (Making it unlikely they'd do it as a movie, I think.)

 

The main issue is whether the creators have the chops to pull it off, and whether the backers are motivated by making a quality product or by greed. Hollywood generally works on the basis of "Give me something just like that -- but different!" So, pretty much any project that bears any resemblance to another needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

 

I was doubtful about both Once Upon a Time and Grimm starting at the same time, because I figured one was going to be a ripoff of the other. Turned out both were really fun, and it wasn't a concern. But that copycat tendency always makes me wonder.

[bigdamnhero]

The applicability of the label "cash grab" is governed by the intent (and priorities) behind the production choices/decisions made. It is not governed by whether or not the result was popular (or financially successful). Stan Lee is confused.

I think you're missing his point. Every popular and successful thing Marvel (or DC, or Image, or...) has ever done has been accused of being a cash grab by someone. No matter what Marvel (et. al.) does, some fans will complain. Change a character? "They're Ruining My Childhood!" Don't change a character? "They're just churning out the same stuff over and over!" Too much T&A? "Sexist!" Not enough T&A? "PC Nazis!" Do something original? "They're ignoring canon!" Remain faithful to canon? "There's no originality!" Too much fighting? Not enough fighting? Too much dialogue? Not enough dialogue? No minority representation? Too much minority representation? Kill off a character? Bring a character back from the dead?

 

Fans. Will. Bitch.

 

Part of this, of course, is because "fandom" is not a monolithic group and different people want different things. But a large part is because a lot of comics fans are too often - and I say this with love for my tribe - a uniquely whiny bunch of entitled brats. For Exhibit A, I present: The Internet.

 

Don't get me wrong: I've never been shy about criticizing comics companies for doing things I think are stupid. But I also appreciate the Catch-22 they're in.

 

 

As for Franchise Mania: there's nothing wrong with it per se, and as pointed out it's not even really a new concept. The problem comes when Building A Franchise takes precedence over making good individual movies. Personally I thought the 1st Captain America movie suffered from this a little bit, and Age of Ultron even more so. But those were petty misdemeanor offenses compared to Batman v Superman, Kong Skull Island, or the Mummy. Nothing wrong with teasing the next movie, but not at the expense of the movie we're currently watching. I feel like Marvel got that message after the complaints about Ultron; sadly, the other studios have yet to figure it out.

 

 

Re Disney Princesses Assembled: in general I try not to get too worked up over "Some actor(s) think it would be neat if the studio made another movie for them to star in." But at least there's a common unifying theme there, and it would be building on (mostly) successful existing movies rather than starting with the Big Franchise Crossover! and working back from there.

[zslane]

Okay. Point taken. Stan Lee isn't confused. Whiny fans are.

 

I still categorize "Disney Princesses Assembled" as a cash grab with zero in-universe rationale, for no other reason than the fact that they don't share an established universe. They only share a common IP holder (which in the case of the most classic princesses is true only because Disney has somehow managed to convince the world they own all the fairy tales ever told). A story like that doesn't grow organically from the (established) circumstances of the characters, it grows strictly from the avaricious hearts of Disney shareholders.

[Pattern Ghost]

I still categorize "Disney Princesses Assembled" as a cash grab with zero in-universe rationale

 

You do realize that it was just a stupid question a reporter was asking to voice actresses, who said, "sure, that'd be great!"? So, it really stems from someone's desire to write a click bait headline. It's not an actual idea Disney has floated.

[Bazza]

*sits back, munches popcorn* I think Pattern Ghost is on to me...

[slikmar]

Well, when you compare the "Dark Universe" vs Marvel, the other thing that becomes clear, well to us, not apparently to studios, is that writing a fun movie with people involved that actually pay attention to the source material is a good model.

So far, Dark Universe has apparently abandoned it's first attempt (Dracula Untold) because it was just bad.

I have a friend, and the 2 of us tend to see a lot of movies and neither of us was interested in seeing The Mummy, their 2nd attempt.

I kind of wish they had started with the I, Frankenstein movie. I thought it was a decent portrayal of Frankenstein's Monster.

on the other hand, Marvel has made epic and non epic level movies I will still flip on if they are on tv and I don't have a other things to watch.

An article I read, may have been linked here before but I don't remember, commented that the "Dark Universe" was making a mistake in that they were still trying to bill their movies around the big star, instead of the characters (Tom Cruise and Johnny Depp come to mind).

[Christopher R Taylor]

I like the idea of a crossover universe with Universal's gothic monsters; they work well together.  Attempts in the past have been pretty cheesy or just bad (Van Helsing).  But it could work, if done well.

[Old Man]

I still categorize "Disney Princesses Assembled" as a cash grab with zero in-universe rationale, for no other reason than the fact that they don't share an established universe.

 

Tangled, Frozen, Tarzan, Little Mermaid All Linked

 

And there's really no reason Jasmine, Mulan, Aurora, Snow White, Belle, Merida, and even Moana couldn't share a universe.  Pocahontas and Tiana would be harder to fit for timeline reasons.

[Nolgroth]

You do realize that it was just a stupid question a reporter was asking to voice actresses, who said, "sure, that'd be great!"? So, it really stems from someone's desire to write a click bait headline. It's not an actual idea Disney has floated.

 

Yeah, well internet outrage and lack of fully understanding the context pretty well go hand in hand. It's almost like a tradition these days. I try to participate at least semi-monthly. Good for the soul.

[Bazza]

[DasBroot]

I mentally add a screenshot of the comments section of a political video to the scene right before he says "Oh no" when he first comes into existence.

[Hugh Neilson]

I still categorize "Disney Princesses Assembled" as a cash grab with zero in-universe rationale, for no other reason than the fact that they don't share an established universe. They only share a common IP holder (which in the case of the most classic princesses is true only because Disney has somehow managed to convince the world they own all the fairy tales ever told). A story like that doesn't grow organically from the (established) circumstances of the characters, it grows strictly from the avaricious hearts of Disney shareholders.

Actually, the Fables comic was a gem, bringing all the fairy tales together well before Once Upon a Time did so on TV, and Damsels was a pretty decent read as well.

 

Meanwhile, none of the super heroes shared an established universe before someone looked at the votes for All-Star Comics #3, noted they were all superheroes, and thought "Hey, what if..."

 

The JSA from the '40s and '50s didn't share an established universe with the JLA in the '60s until a writer thought "wouldn't it be cool to put out a Flash story with the golden-age Flash in there too?"

 

Captain America, and other WW II Timely/Atlas characters weren't part of the Marvel Universe until Stan Lee thought "I wonder if we could bring back Sub-Mariner - not a homage like me naming one of my quartet after one of those old characters, but the same guy!" Even then, he ran a phony Cap before he decided to bring back the real one. After that, the Cap of the '50s was written out, until Steve Engelhart thought "hey, what if the '50s Cap was a different guy" and he also became part of the shared universe.

[Lord Liaden]

I guess the mantra here isn't, "Do, or do not." More like, "If you're going to do it, do it well."

[Christopher R Taylor]

Exactly.  You can make just about anything work, its just got to be done well.  Make it entertaining, well-written, well-acted, and delivered with skill, passion, and enjoyment and you can do your "80s cop show universe" crossover with Miami Vice, Spenser for Hire, Matlock, Hill Street Blues, and Cagney & Lacey.  Just don't expect people to take it seriously unless you do.

[BoloOfEarth]

Exactly.  You can make just about anything work, its just got to be done well.  Make it entertaining, well-written, well-acted, and delivered with skill, passion, and enjoyment and you can do your "80s cop show universe" crossover with Miami Vice, Spenser for Hire, Matlock, Hill Street Blues, and Cagney & Lacey.  Just don't expect people to take it seriously unless you do.

 

I always wanted to see a Quantum Leap movie where Sam leaps into Thomas Magnum (of Magnum PI), imagining it as Magnum helping Al solve a murder or other crime at the Quantum Leap facility while Sam works with Rick, TC, and Higgins to solve a crime in Hawaii.  Since both series were created by Donald Bellisario, I thought it would be a natural pairing of shows.

[Hyper-Man]

I always wanted to see a Quantum Leap movie where Sam leaps into Thomas Magnum (of Magnum PI), imagining it as Magnum helping Al solve a murder or other crime at the Quantum Leap facility while Sam works with Rick, TC, and Higgins to solve a crime in Hawaii.  Since both series were created by Donald Bellisario, I thought it would be a natural pairing of shows.

 

That would have been pretty awesome but very unlikely since they were on different networks (NBC vs CBS).  I know multi-network crossovers have happened more recently with shows like Flash and Supergirl but CBS owns a chunk of CW.  NBC and CBS had little imagination or incentive to work together on such a neat idea back in the day.

 

HM

[Christopher R Taylor]

Rockford Files had kind of a Magnum crossover a couple times

[Old Man]

That would have been pretty awesome but very unlikely since they were on different networks (NBC vs CBS).  I know multi-network crossovers have happened more recently with shows like Flash and Supergirl but CBS owns a chunk of CW.  NBC and CBS had little imagination or incentive to work together on such a neat idea back in the day.

 

HM

 

Ha, I was just watching this last night.  It was pretty good.  Most Flash episodes are not exactly triumphs of cinematic vision, but the kids are really into it.