Welcome to the main discussion thread for the Marvel Cinematic Universe! This pinned post is here to establish some basic guidelines. All of the Media Forum rules
still apply.
- This thread is for talking about the live-action films, TV shows, animated works, and related content that use the Marvel brand, currently owned by Disney.
- While mild digressions are okay, discussion of the comic books should go in this thread
. Extended digressions may be thumped as off-topic.
- Spoilers for new releases should not be discussed without spoiler tagging for at least two weeks. Rather, each title should have a dedicated thread where that sort of conversation is held. We can mention new releases in a general sense, but please be courteous to people who don't want to be spoiled.
If you're posting tagged spoilers, make sure that the film or series is clearly identified outside the spoiler tagging. People need to know what will be spoiled before they choose to read the post.
Edited by Mrph1 on Jul 29th 2024 at 3:09:00 PM
Sight I am disgusted and disappointed. One of the people I subscribed to was slowly joining the Brie Larson hate Anti-SJW bandwagon lately; He had admitted he might be wrong recently and said he might calm down with that so I had hope... but now he just posted a video where he seriously argued that while the movie was a success, it did underperformed by 50 millions domestically, as it apparently did 5% less than predicted. Somehow he argues that it was enough to make Marvel listen to the fans and means they will give less spotlight to Larson as a result (with some comments even suggesting that was the reason she was less present in Endgame).
I am seriously considering unsubscribing to that guy now...
I get that is bad, but reporting on every Brie Larsen hating asshole comes across as drama importation, and it kinda gets repetitive.
Just letting you know.
Watch Symphogear
x5
I'm not aware of any serious predictions indicating it would even enter the billion dollar club until it blew away it's tracking numbers during opening weekend.
It's actually the 3rd most successful solo film in the entire MCU, and the most successful solo film in the MCU to feature a never-before-seen character, as Black Panther holds the #1 spot and Iron Man 3 holds the #2 spot in terms of solo films.
The notion is idiotic if for no other reason than the marketing Disney did. Remember the last spots before Endgame? They heavily featured Carol, so much, they showed pretty much every scene she was involved in from the beginning of the movie. They didn't do that because they thought that the audience didn't like her. They did it, because they wanted to convince new fans Captain Marvel might have picked up that Endgame is a must see. Just like they did with Black Panther.
Plus, those channels have constantly moved the goal post what can be considered a success. The movie could have made more than any other stand-alone MCU movie and they would still claim that it underperformed. Hell, there are people out there claiming that Disney is cheating by leaving the movie in theatres for "so long".
I certainly get the frustration. The upside is that Captain Marvel is a great litmus test for any Marvel related creator out there. If they repeat the Anti-SJW talking point without any reflection, they are not worth listening to.
Actually, the second domestically, only Black Panther made more. Unless you adjust for inflation, then it is behind Civil War (if you even count it as a solo movie) and Ironman 3. Same if you go for worldwide numbers, then it is number eight overall.
Edited by Swanpride on Apr 30th 2019 at 4:12:31 AM
Exactly. Both domestically and globally, it’s one of Marvel’s top-performing solo movies, up there with Civil War and Iron Man 3 (Black Panther is in a league of its own). And it did it with one of the MCU’s smallest production budgets ($150 million; for comparison, even Ant-Man had $130 mil. Iron Man 3 and Civil War had $200 mil and $250 mil respectively).
There’s no reasonable standard by which it “underperformed”.
Edited by Galadriel on Apr 30th 2019 at 7:22:17 AM
![]()
I was going off of the worldwide numbers, which I generally regard as being more relevant in terms of overall success of a film.
Where the North America box office is most relevant is comparing opening weekends, because not every movie has a simultaneous worldwide release.
I also don't consider Civil War to be a solo film because I don't think that's how audiences generally regarded it.
Monica Rambeau was awesome in Captain Marvel as a kid, and she’d be the right age to be a superhero now. I’m hoping she’ll get a movie.
People keep saying Cassie Lang is the right age to be a superhero now too, but she was, what, 8-10 in “Ant-Man and the Wasp”? So she’d be in her early teens now, which still seems young (Scott’s a good dad, and a ‘no superheroing until you’re legal age’ rule would be reasonable). It would be fun to see her get a movie a few years down the road, though.
Edited by Galadriel on Apr 30th 2019 at 8:19:23 AM
So her actress is a year older than the actual character then?
Eh, still pretty good.
One Strip! One Strip!https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/avengers-endgame-review-nostalgia-arrested-adolescents/
Anyone read this yet? Seems like he's making it sound like everyone who enjoys the MCU are feeding into this problem. I mean he might have a point underneath all of these paragraphs I'm trying to dig through.
Just Makima.![]()
It’s hard to find good, young actors and Dawson Casting is very much a thing, so I wouldn’t put too much weight on the actress’ age. Tom Holland was about 20 during Homecoming, and Spidey’s supposed to be 15 or 16 then.

Doesn't that really depend on the terms of the contract he signed with each company?