Avengers: Age of Ultron (Pre-release)
- Thread starter goofball107
- Start date
-
- Tags
- the avengers
First, I haven't even talked about Age of Ultron yet. This is the publicity for it. Second, every member of the Avengers including their girlfriends have killed someone. Natasha killing people isn't exactly a trait that makes her stand out.
Well, this fictional universe just happens to be part of of a multi-billion dollar world wide industry that everyone seems to want a slice of. Despite the common knowledge that the MCU and it's characters are all make believe, that doesn't stop anyone from becoming emotionally invested in the characters or the story. Movies, TV shows, books, comics, ect can make any kind of person feel happy, sad, triumphant, depressed or even just content. These are some of the reasons why we become so invested with the entertainment medium because we love these characters and stories. For an industry that can reach so many people and get them invested in their non-existent characters, it's difficult to not see the extremely bias view on what stories they choose to tell. It's like women's stories are ones that are not worth because it's about women. Just look at the reaction to Paul Fieg's announcement that his Ghostbusters movie would feature an all female cast. Everyone was already dismissing the movie solely on the idea that casting an all-female Ghostbusters team was a gimmick and he should only have female Ghostbusters so long as there are male ones. Because tokenism is by no means a gimmick either.
And for a universe like the MCU that has so much potential in areas involving action, science fiction, fantasy and even drama, I see no reason why we only have one female movie coming out. It should be half the movies! And I really don't do this with everything. Check out the Daredevil thread. I've got nothing but good things to say about that series.
Oh, Captain Marvel. She won't be in the movie, but she will be in spirit.
That was mostly a well made and coherent argument that ignores the basic truth.
If a female super hero movie made a billion dollars at the box office tomorrow I guarantee you the studios would immediately run out one a year.
The truth is that they are simply not a big box office draw. Remember that good old Superman you so like?
Well I remember “Supergirl”. Cost $35 million took $14 million and was generally considered anything but.
Then there was “Tankgirl”. Cost $25 million and took $4 million. Guess who lived up to her name then?
Remember “Catwoman”? Cost $100 million, took $82 million. So the Cat got creamed by the critics.
And then theres “Elecktra”? Cost $43 million and took about $56 million. And was considered as flat as a dead battery.
Can you spot a trend yet? Hollywood certainly can. I’m amazed they are actually taking the risk to do a “Wonder woman” and “Captain Marvel.”
Thing is Jeyl, I’ve read this argument of yours dozens of times over and well why , I’ll ask again, keep post it ? Why continually clog up threads with this tiresome tirade that adds NOTHING except disagreement and will change absolutely nobodies opinion here or in an industry thats knows female superhero movies don't bring in the bucks.
Your huge self protest about X men last year stopped nobody here that I know from going to see it or actually enjoying it any less. And it featured very strong female leads who were pretty pivotal to the storyline.
Your inability to recognise that your pedantic preaching on this subject is generating nothing but ire is troubling. Sometimes you have some very clever and pertinent observations to make about the movies you‘ve actually gone to see, but well on this topic you do sound exactly like the Kingpin, self obsessed by his own arguments and blind to his own flawed reasoning ,psychology and understanding of others.
If a female super hero movie made a billion dollars at the box office tomorrow I guarantee you the studios would immediately run out one a year.
The truth is that they are simply not a big box office draw. Remember that good old Superman you so like?
Well I remember “Supergirl”. Cost $35 million took $14 million and was generally considered anything but.
Then there was “Tankgirl”. Cost $25 million and took $4 million. Guess who lived up to her name then?
Remember “Catwoman”? Cost $100 million, took $82 million. So the Cat got creamed by the critics.
And then theres “Elecktra”? Cost $43 million and took about $56 million. And was considered as flat as a dead battery.
Can you spot a trend yet? Hollywood certainly can. I’m amazed they are actually taking the risk to do a “Wonder woman” and “Captain Marvel.”
Thing is Jeyl, I’ve read this argument of yours dozens of times over and well why , I’ll ask again, keep post it ? Why continually clog up threads with this tiresome tirade that adds NOTHING except disagreement and will change absolutely nobodies opinion here or in an industry thats knows female superhero movies don't bring in the bucks.
Your huge self protest about X men last year stopped nobody here that I know from going to see it or actually enjoying it any less. And it featured very strong female leads who were pretty pivotal to the storyline.
Your inability to recognise that your pedantic preaching on this subject is generating nothing but ire is troubling. Sometimes you have some very clever and pertinent observations to make about the movies you‘ve actually gone to see, but well on this topic you do sound exactly like the Kingpin, self obsessed by his own arguments and blind to his own flawed reasoning ,psychology and understanding of others.
CB2001
Master Member
Yes. Hollywood makes terrible movies with female comic book leads and expects to get their money back for releasing nothing but ****-poor quality movies.
Ever heard of the original Captain America movie from 1990? That was a film so notoriously bad that the studio didn't bother releasing it theatrically in the states and has since garnered a reputation as being one of the worst super hero movies of all time. Like all the others you've listed here, Captain America was a poorly written and poorly executed mess that the studios didn't really care about. The film had a 10 million dollar budget and the only source I know where it lists how much money it made was from imdb, listing it as grossing $10,173 in the UK. That's it.
Now compare that to Chris Evans' Captain America films. Not only were those movies both critically and financially successful, but it's sequel, The Winter Soldier, has been cited by some to be the best Marvel Studios movie to date. It's a film that got respect from viewers who weren't into super hero films. Captain America has since become a respected and admired character now that the marketing department for Age of Ultron actually has posters where Steve is front and even though Robert Downey Jr. is billed above the freaking title.
So if Marvel can take a character like Captain America who has only been in one poorly made film that has done worse than all the female starring films you just listed and turn him into a powerhouse name, why can't the same thing happen for any future depiction of those characters? The obstacle is not gender. It's giving a crap. And can you honestly say that the studios who green lit those movies actually cared about the source material? Catwoman is essentially 'in-name only' adaption of the iconic character who predates the Joker, and Jennifer Gardner didn't even want to be in an Elektra movie but her contract demanded it. Plus having the film be a follow up to Daredevil didn't help things either.
You're talking about a country where almost every college teaches kids to be offended over anything they don't like. They're going to have a rude awakening when they get out and the world doesn't stop because they're offended about something.
It was a stupid joke, but I'm not going to go all nuts and say they hate women. It was a joke.
Banner
Well-Known Member
I wonder if things have changed in the last few years as far as female superheroes. Couple years ago Kevin Smith had Paul Dini (one of the creators of Batman: The Animated Series) on his Fatman on Batman podcast. It was Dini's insight that executives don't push female superheroes because girls don't buy toys. I personally think things have changed a little in the last couple years, but if anyone wants to listen to this discussion it starts around 45:00 mark.
http://smodcast.com/episodes/paul-dini-shadow-of-the-shadow-of-the-bat/
Sorry if I'm derailing this thread even more than it already has, but I'm assuming in another week everything will be in the post release thread anyway.
http://smodcast.com/episodes/paul-dini-shadow-of-the-shadow-of-the-bat/
Sorry if I'm derailing this thread even more than it already has, but I'm assuming in another week everything will be in the post release thread anyway.
MooCriket
Master Member
Sad but true. Once I read what happened, I immediately said to myself, I bet Jeyl has something to say about this. Sure enough, once I logged into the RPF, there it was. Oh well. At least he is constant.
I knew they are close to her, and it was said in jest. No different than when a couple of friends and I go out and needle each other during a game of pool.
Paul Andrew
Master Member
The only trend I spot is that Hollywood has a record of making ****ty comic book movies with women as leads. I don't care if the lead is a dude or a chick, if the quality is there they can have my dollars.
asemblyrequired
Well-Known Member
Just got through watching it and love it. Vision was the best for sure
-James
-James
Similar threads
