Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Marvel Cinematic Multiverse

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Lucifer Netflix has confirmed that filming has officially begun on the fourth season of its supernatural drama series “Lucifer”. FOX cancelled the series less than four months ago, but the streaming giant picked up the series for their service. The new season will feature just ten episodes as opposed to the third’s twenty-four, but it […]


    The Runaways: Season 2 will begin on 21 December

    Comment


      In the weeks since James Gunn was fired from Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, there has been a lot of discussion about the permanence of the situation.


      Disney has apparently reaffirmed that they won't be rehiring James Gunn. No decision on whether his script survives yet but chatter seems to suggest it will.

      If the scripts not heavily altered and they get a decent director (likely as the MCU is pretty consistent as it is) then in terms of the film I can't imagine much will be different in the end. There seems to be concern about cast sticking around too but Gunn mentioned long ago that Vol.3 was always aimed to be the last one with the current line up.

      Comment


        I’m going to the Metrocentre today. There’s a Disney shop there. I’m going to go in and bloody well not buy anything.

        Then I’m going to walk past House of Fraser laughing at the Mags protesting and waving illiterate bedsheets.

        Comment


          That'll show them.

          Comment


            This ties in with a discussion I was having with a friend who refused to watch Bright on Netflix because there have been accusations of sexual harassment from the writer, Max Landis.

            Where do people stand on this, if you think Gunn's treatment has been unfair?

            Will you boycott seeing GotG3, boycott all Marvel films, wait to see it but streamed/pirated or maybe just shrug and carry on as normal?

            Comment


              I'll watch the film and judge it on its own merits rather than around a controversy. If its great then I'll say so. If its sub-par I'll share my opinion on that (I'm hoping its not but I can imagine that a change in director might be greeted with less-committed performances from the main cast as they look to move on now the original director has been jettisoned).

              Comment


                For me it's technically fair given the image of the company involved as an 'in the moment' decision but immediately outside of that the wider context quickly makes it unfair. They already knew and hired him anyway so its poor form to swing the axe when nothing new has occurred and they were clearly fine with it, much more so that they have isolated this as an instance happily hiring and maintaining working partnerships with others who have similar or much worse attention and historical instances making Gunn an example rather than a fair judgement.

                There were a lot of ways to address the issue and they messed it up.

                I'll still watch Vol.3 though - as will I imagine almost everyone complaining and saying they'll boycott Disney and Marvel films from here on out. Honestly, I fully expect the eventual movie to be dogged in criticism because of this but in reality be barely any different than if Gunn had made it.

                Comment


                  It taps into a wider discussion as well given the amount of celebs who have been hung out to dry in the last few years for genuinely awful behaviour. You get a lot of people saying it's wrong to watch anything made by such people but that's... well a long list that outright dismisses the work of a staggering amount of other innocent people too.

                  Are people never going to watch Seven, Baby Driver or Superman Returns again because Kevin Spacey was in them? Kevin Smith fans going to forget Clerks II, Sly fans state there are now only three Rambo movies and parents cover their children's eyes when Paddington comes on because Harvey Weinstein earned money from those films?

                  The list very much goes on and on if you take that position and you can let it get out of control very easily trying to climb a moral hill over it.

                  It's important to separate the different components that make up the situations. Like with Spacey, his downfall is deserved but it doesn't mean he wasn't good in the roles he played or those films no longer hold merit.

                  Not that Gunn is anywhere near that scenario either.

                  Comment


                    The point about there being a lot of people involved is correct. But I would certainly draw a line somewhere. Would you pop on a Gary Glitter album, for example? Did his music change when it became apparent who he is? Feels similar to the acknowledgement that Spacey was good in his roles. Yeah, he certainly was. But at what point does watching him become uncomfortable because either we're just aware of the reality or it feeling like a show of support?

                    What I was really happy with was that House of Cards at least got some sort of final season so it wasn't a case that everyone was punished for his behaviour. Same with that film where he was replaced.

                    Gunn feels like he is nowhere approaching that level though so maybe it isn't even hugely relevant.

                    Comment


                      I wouldn't put on the Glitter album but then I wouldn't have before Had Michael Jackson been convicted that would have been an real stress of where the public lies as his catalogue contains many popular and iconic songs spanning decades.

                      It's a curious one because so often it seems people cherry pick their boycott claims but in this instance it feels a bit too much like people spitting their dummy out. If Warners snaps him up for a DCU movie we'll probably see a few peoples loyalty get strained

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Dogg Thang View Post
                        The point about there being a lot of people involved is correct. But I would certainly draw a line somewhere.
                        Yeah, it isn't always obvious where to draw the line, and I think it has to be case-by-case.

                        Like I simply can't listen to Lostprophets anymore, and I at one point really liked some of their music.

                        Conversely, I still have a Rurouni Kenshin shirt and would still watch the anime, but the creator of that has been implicated in child pornography offences (though nothing to the degree of the prior example).

                        I'm not sure I know what the difference is. Like I don't understand why I can still get along with one and not the other. It might be because you get a sense, with music, that you're part of some kind of dialogue with the singer, but there are more degrees of seperation with a writer. Or maybe it's the nature of the offences themselves.

                        Generally though, I don't pay much heed to this stuff - but perhaps it has to do with the era in which I grew up (I'm aware most people here grew up in that era too). Back in the 90s and 80s, we didn't expect celebrities to be good people. It just wasn't something we considered. In fact, we kinda expected all of them to be "weirdos", because they all had some quality that had led them to being so rich and famous. Like in the 80s, the loadsa-money culture; we saw all those rich people, the Trumps etc, and we just knew they did that because they stepped on other people. They ****ed other people over. Sometimes they ****ed over society at large. But that was the norm.

                        The Twitter era gives off this idea that you can be much closer to a celebrity than was previously the case, even if that's a manufactured fantasy (to some degree), and people now care about this much more.
                        Last edited by Asura; 16-08-2018, 19:37.

                        Comment




                          Partially thanks to her return as Black Widow in the two Avenger movies, Scarlett Johansson is this year the highest paid actress in Hollywood. The full top 10 is:

                          1. Scarlett Johansson $40.5m
                          2. Angelina Jolie $28m
                          3. Jennifer Aniston $19.5m
                          4. Jennifer Lawrence $18m
                          5. Reese Witherspoon $16.5m
                          6. Mila Kunis $16m
                          7. Julia Roberts $13m
                          8. Cate Blanchett $12.5m
                          9. Melissa McCarthy $12m

                          Those figures do include earnings from other revenue than acting roles though. Johansson will reportedly get $25m for making the solo Black Widow movie and an extra $6m if it tops $900m worldwide.

                          Personally, I don't think it will but its impressive bank for a film and is apparently the highest ever paid to an actress for a single movie. Personally, the list generally shows the need for more successful actresses, I hardly rate any of them bar one or two.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Superman Falls View Post
                            Personally, I don't think it will
                            I think it will, but not just because I expect it'll be quite a good movie.

                            This is going to rattle people a bit, so I should state that I do consider Hollywood to be somewhat male-centric and that female production staff and talent can be sidelined in the modern industry. I think this is a problem, and I also think diverse representation is important (I'm sure most people here are aware of my views on that).

                            I strongly suspect that with Black Widow, Disney will, from an early point, draw people's attention to its staff, and they'll make an effort to have as many women on the production team as possible. I think they'll really push that this movie is meant to be a kind of counterculture response to those issues. I like to think they'd be doing this for the right reasons, but with massive companies like that, you never really know.

                            I think this'll work, too. It'll go both ways; some people will be all for it, some people will complain about it, some will call it empowering and others will call it a cynical marketing ploy. Whether it is or isn't won't be clear.

                            What will be clear is the box office receipts, because all of that vitriol spewed in the ongoing "culture war" in the US will make this the most advertised movie in years, much of it not costing Disney a penny.

                            Comment


                              I don't know if that will be the case. Mainly because we'll have Captain Marvel before it and also because Johansson hasn't exactly endeared herself to all the people who would jump on this cause.

                              But given we've had something like 20 Marvel movies and, until Captain Marvel, not one of them has had a woman as the main lead and there has been barely any women in key roles behind the scenes, the dial has a LONG way to swing and the scenario is WELL beyond "somewhat male-centric" I have no problem with a huge push in that direction and making a big deal of it in PR and I would think little of those who will.

                              Comment


                                I dunno, I just don't feel like the popularity for Johannson or the character exists to the required level to reach it, especially when existing big fish series like Guardians can't reach it. I feel like Black Panther immediately opens the door to thinking it could but with BP the extent of its success was a surprise to the company and particular to a series of factors that Widow doesn't apply to or that a sequel to BP might not even be able to fully replicate.

                                I feel like Wonder Woman is a more apt comparison film and even then that's for a generally more popular character who isn't bogged down by villainous traits which Black Widow is (given the film is rumoured to be a prequel to the existing films). I can completely see why Marvel has finally relented and made a film focused on her, but most of the MCU audience will already have an opinion on the role a decent gauge on whether they're interested or not which will colour the likelihood of attendance too.

                                That's not counting that Marvel are already popping that Female-led bubble next Feb/March with the release of Captain Marvel so Widow won't be leading that discussion either.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X