One thing is, after Infinity War Part 2, Marvel needs to have something major up their sleeve to stop the momentum from bombing harder than a brick, I know it's been reported that they have the next 10 years or so planned out, but that needs to be a damn good plan because by all accounts both Downey Jr and Evans will be pulling out after Infinity War Part 2, and certain others like Samuel L Jackson are getting on in age so won't be sticking around for much longer either.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure Marvel must surely have a plan for when the inevitable occurs, but I don't think Evans and particularly not Downey Jr are as easily replaceable as certain other actors. I do think Sebastian Stan will soon be the face of the MCU (which is a freaking cool character arc, I'll give them that), whether audiences warm to him to such an extent that he'll be able to carry the movies post-RDJ/Evans remains to be seen.
We most likely we looking at a good reshuffle of the MCU all right. Sebastian Ztan would be a great leader and we've already seen him three times so it's not like they'd just be shoving a new character\actor in there. Iron man aside, I think most are replaceable. Antman,Dr strange,spider.an should continue into phase 4 as they're quite new, and also guardians. We'll. Apt marvel by then too. So I think the wheels are already turning on replacing the superheroes and should help keep the MCU fresh
DC are only getting started but we should be fine for the next decade with them unless their films bomb completely.
ShotDownInFlame I get your concern about Marvel after Infinity War Part One and Two if RDJ and Chris Evans both do leave as at the moment they are the main face of Marvel but I think they understand that as that's why both are being used in Infinity War and RDJ cameo in Spider-Man in the next 3 years
Marvel know that they need to focus on the other superheroes such as Paul Rudd in Ant Man And The Wasp,Chadwick Boseman in Black Panther and Tom Holland in Spider-Man.Also Marvel plans for Inhumans have been delayed but could this be because they want to focus on the Inhumans after 2020 as basically they could become Marvel version of the X Men
We still have the unknown factor of Chris Helmsworth as Thor,Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow,Elizabeth Olsen as Scarlet Witch,Paul Bettany as Vision and Mark Ruffolo as Hulk.The length of some of these actors/actresses contract is unknown to the public at the moment
I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's easy to be negative about the MCU in 2020 as its 4 years away and we have no idea how popular some of the new characters will be to general cinema public.
I know myself that some of my favourite moments in Civil War involved Ant Man and Spider-Man who are both new to the MCU
The government think superheroes are dangerous and want to control them, some go along with the government and some against, seems the same to me.
That is a very simplistic description, plus also inaccurate.
In X-Men 1, the US Government was trying to pass the "Mutant Registration Act", which would require all mutants to be registered. The heroes and villains both opposed this, in different ways. The MRA wasn't the core of the film though, it was just background, and it did not cause the X-Men to fight each other.
In X-Men 3, a mutant "cure" was discovered, with some mutants being against it and some being for it (but most against). There was no mutant or superhero registration, and the only intra-team conflict IIRC was due to Jean "going bad" as the Phoenix.
In Captain America: Civil War, the United Nations has had enough with the Avengers' lack of oversight and with the collateral damage that occurs when they barge into sovereign nations uninvited. The "Sokovia Accords" are proposed as a solution to this, with the idea being that the Avengers would have to sign up to the Accords and operate under the oversight of a UN panel that would tell them when and where to intervene. Not all of the Avengers agree with this, with some refusing to sign. Certain other plot points occur (spoilers) that then cause the Avengers to break up and fight each other.
In the *comics*, Civil War may sound similar to X-Men due to it featuring a Superhuman Registration Act rather than a Mutant Registration Act, except it's still nothing like it.
On an unrelated note, I'm also tired of how clean, nice and glamorised violence is getting. I'm not saying that every film has to be a blood-splattered, Tarantino squick-fest, but pretending that it doesn't hurt by not showing the aftermath is (over the long-term) more harmful in my view than the immediate reaction of disgust provoked by seeing the violent consequences.
Hollywood has always done this one way or another. Look at the controversy Bonnie and Clyde created - glamourisng violence in one respect, but also showing its brutality.
If anything, I would say the horror genre is getting fleeced, as it has seriously gone downhill. It's utterly shocking what people find creepy or scary these days, its a joke.
Horrors still chuggs along, but it's been quite a while since anything truly stood out and shook things up in that genre-defining way we get with horror.
Much was made of It Follows, for instance. But while often very startling when just being horror, it suffered from what a friend of mine described as 'a nasty attack of the arts'. A missed opportunity for a better film perhaps (and thus better art). Still, horror always attracts fresh blood from the low-budget/indie sector, not least because it's always been a genre that breeds some genuinely interesting/innovative technique, so I wouldn't write it off just yet.
You're completely right; I was mainly talking about the stunts themselves (my fault for not making that clearer). Over 80% of the effects, stunts etc. were practically created, and a lot was used to remove the stunt rigging.
There's a great photo set out there showing how much it's used in backgrounds and to add cars in that I never would've realised was CGI unless it was pointed out (so I guess that proves your point ): http://goo.gl/Qrhlhm
On an unrelated note, I'm also tired of how clean, nice and glamorised violence is getting. I'm not saying that every film has to be a blood-splattered, Tarantino squick-fest, but pretending that it doesn't hurt by not showing the aftermath is (over the long-term) more harmful in my view than the immediate reaction of disgust provoked by seeing the violent consequences.
Doctor Who script-writer Eric Saward makes a great point about it, after many complained in the 1980's that the show was getting too violent:
I admit that's a fair point. It is a point I agree with despite getting carried away with a good action film myself.
I wouldn't put it past Kevin Feige to broker a deal with Fox to utilise the X-Men in some form or other. After all, we never thought Spiderman would turn up in the MCU.
Back on topic, I for one, am not yet sick of Superhero movies. In fact, I am more excited about the next few years than I was when the first Avengers was announced. I even didn't mind Batman V Superman, despite it being a bit doom and gloom. After Civil War, I cannot wait for Spiderman: Homecoming.
I think Marvel will have the Fantastic Four back by that point and Galactus will be next phase's Thanos.
Yeah I reckon you're bang on there.
Unless Fox decide to push through with Fant4stic 2 which I think is supposed to be due out next year, but I don't think even they are that stubborn surely.
Didn't Fox already remove Fantastic Four 2 from their next year film schedule?
It's a difficult one for Fox at the moment but I don't know how long it is until the rights would revert back to Marvel as Fox only made the reboot last year so it might have to be 5 years or more before the rights of Fantastic Four automatically revert back to Marvel
If that's right then it would be unlikely that they would be part of Phase 4 unless Marvel do a deal with Fox for the Fantastic Four like they did with Sony for Spider-Man very soon!
Didn't Fox already remove Fantastic Four 2 from their next year film schedule?
It's a difficult one for Fox at the moment but I don't know how long it is until the rights would revert back to Marvel as Fox only made the reboot last year so it might have to be 5 years or more before the rights of Fantastic Four automatically revert back to Marvel
If that's right then it would be unlikely that they would be part of Phase 4 unless Marvel do a deal with Fox for the Fantastic Four like they did with Sony for Spider-Man very soon!
The original release date Fox had for FF2 was six days after Star Wars 8 was due, it was never actually going to come out then. I doubt there will be a sequel to the last mess, but at the same time Fox won't want to give up the rights.
Didn't Fox already remove Fantastic Four 2 from their next year film schedule?
It's a difficult one for Fox at the moment but I don't know how long it is until the rights would revert back to Marvel as Fox only made the reboot last year so it might have to be 5 years or more before the rights of Fantastic Four automatically revert back to Marvel
If that's right then it would be unlikely that they would be part of Phase 4 unless Marvel do a deal with Fox for the Fantastic Four like they did with Sony for Spider-Man very soon!
Plus, relations between Fox and Marvel/Disney are so bad I can see the former company doing a "dog in the manger" and doing everything they can to stop Marvel using the the FF. They might even do want Warren Beatty did with "Dick Tracy" and make a TV special solely to hold onto the rights to the characters.
Plus, relations between Fox and Marvel/Disney are so bad I can see the former company doing a "dog in the manger" and doing everything they can to stop Marvel using the the FF. They might even do want Warren Beatty did with "Dick Tracy" and make a TV special solely to hold onto the rights to the characters.
That's no-go. They had to get permission from Marvel to make X-Men TV shows (they have two planned). So it's pretty obvious that Marvel hold the TV rights. How do you think their cartoons are able to use X characters?
Plus, relations between Fox and Marvel/Disney are so bad I can see the former company doing a "dog in the manger" and doing everything they can to stop Marvel using the the FF. They might even do want Warren Beatty did with "Dick Tracy" and make a TV special solely to hold onto the rights to the characters.
Why don't Fox do what Sony did with Spider-Man? They obviously can't make FF work themselves, so why not let Marvel have a go and take a slice of the profits? Half of something is a lot better than all of nothing.
I can't bare to listen people talk about them never mind watch them. Surely I cant be the only one. These films are what I call conveyor belt films. Churn one after the other and forgotten in a year. None of them will be classics. So much rubbish made these days.
Agree with this OP. Although I do admire the MCU, each film feels so pointless as it is just there to set up the next film. Can't really go into anything standalone. And of course people hype up each one as if they are going to be the best movie yet, but are mostly just the same.
X-Men is probably the only superhero franchise that has more standalone type films. I am tired of other film companies now jumping on the "cinematic universe" bandwagon and trying to scramble about to make the next MCU and failing every time.
Well X Men have already had spin off films before in the Wolverine films and Fox have other spin off films in future in New Mutants and also Gambit if that ever happens!
Also I'm not sure if you count Deadpool in the X Men universe as well because that included a character from the X Men in Colossus.There have been rumours of Cable featuring in Deadpool 2 as Fox have plans for an X-Force film which could be counted as another X Men spin off film in the same universe!
Soon it could be that you have more X Men spin off films than X Men films unless you don't count any of these films as X Men spin off films!
That's no-go. They had to get permission from Marvel to make X-Men TV shows (they have two planned). So it's pretty obvious that Marvel hold the TV rights. How do you think their cartoons are able to use X characters?
Why don't Fox do what Sony did with Spider-Man? They obviously can't make FF work themselves, so why not let Marvel have a go and take a slice of the profits? Half of something is a lot better than all of nothing.
As I said, relations between the two companies are very bad (Marvel cancelled the print "Fantastic Four" comic last year partly to deprive the Fox film of publicity, even though it's one of Marvel's flagship titles).
Comments
Except it isn't...
What have you heard to make you think that?
The government think superheroes are dangerous and want to control them, some go along with the government and some against, seems the same to me.
X men uses superheros as an analogy for racism and homophobia.
Civil war is about superheros being responsible for there actions vs their freedom to act as they see fit.
Not the same at all...
Not to mention Civil War was great and X-Men 3 wasn't...
Or X-Men 3 was at least entertaining & Civil War was overlong & dull
We most likely we looking at a good reshuffle of the MCU all right. Sebastian Ztan would be a great leader and we've already seen him three times so it's not like they'd just be shoving a new character\actor in there. Iron man aside, I think most are replaceable. Antman,Dr strange,spider.an should continue into phase 4 as they're quite new, and also guardians. We'll. Apt marvel by then too. So I think the wheels are already turning on replacing the superheroes and should help keep the MCU fresh
DC are only getting started but we should be fine for the next decade with them unless their films bomb completely.
Marvel know that they need to focus on the other superheroes such as Paul Rudd in Ant Man And The Wasp,Chadwick Boseman in Black Panther and Tom Holland in Spider-Man.Also Marvel plans for Inhumans have been delayed but could this be because they want to focus on the Inhumans after 2020 as basically they could become Marvel version of the X Men
We still have the unknown factor of Chris Helmsworth as Thor,Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow,Elizabeth Olsen as Scarlet Witch,Paul Bettany as Vision and Mark Ruffolo as Hulk.The length of some of these actors/actresses contract is unknown to the public at the moment
I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's easy to be negative about the MCU in 2020 as its 4 years away and we have no idea how popular some of the new characters will be to general cinema public.
I know myself that some of my favourite moments in Civil War involved Ant Man and Spider-Man who are both new to the MCU
So don't give up hope about the MCU!
That is a very simplistic description, plus also inaccurate.
In X-Men 1, the US Government was trying to pass the "Mutant Registration Act", which would require all mutants to be registered. The heroes and villains both opposed this, in different ways. The MRA wasn't the core of the film though, it was just background, and it did not cause the X-Men to fight each other.
In X-Men 3, a mutant "cure" was discovered, with some mutants being against it and some being for it (but most against). There was no mutant or superhero registration, and the only intra-team conflict IIRC was due to Jean "going bad" as the Phoenix.
In Captain America: Civil War, the United Nations has had enough with the Avengers' lack of oversight and with the collateral damage that occurs when they barge into sovereign nations uninvited. The "Sokovia Accords" are proposed as a solution to this, with the idea being that the Avengers would have to sign up to the Accords and operate under the oversight of a UN panel that would tell them when and where to intervene. Not all of the Avengers agree with this, with some refusing to sign. Certain other plot points occur (spoilers) that then cause the Avengers to break up and fight each other.
In the *comics*, Civil War may sound similar to X-Men due to it featuring a Superhuman Registration Act rather than a Mutant Registration Act, except it's still nothing like it.
Horrors still chuggs along, but it's been quite a while since anything truly stood out and shook things up in that genre-defining way we get with horror.
Much was made of It Follows, for instance. But while often very startling when just being horror, it suffered from what a friend of mine described as 'a nasty attack of the arts'. A missed opportunity for a better film perhaps (and thus better art). Still, horror always attracts fresh blood from the low-budget/indie sector, not least because it's always been a genre that breeds some genuinely interesting/innovative technique, so I wouldn't write it off just yet.
I admit that's a fair point. It is a point I agree with despite getting carried away with a good action film myself.
Back on topic, I for one, am not yet sick of Superhero movies. In fact, I am more excited about the next few years than I was when the first Avengers was announced. I even didn't mind Batman V Superman, despite it being a bit doom and gloom. After Civil War, I cannot wait for Spiderman: Homecoming.
Yeah I reckon you're bang on there.
Unless Fox decide to push through with Fant4stic 2 which I think is supposed to be due out next year, but I don't think even they are that stubborn surely.
It's a difficult one for Fox at the moment but I don't know how long it is until the rights would revert back to Marvel as Fox only made the reboot last year so it might have to be 5 years or more before the rights of Fantastic Four automatically revert back to Marvel
If that's right then it would be unlikely that they would be part of Phase 4 unless Marvel do a deal with Fox for the Fantastic Four like they did with Sony for Spider-Man very soon!
The original release date Fox had for FF2 was six days after Star Wars 8 was due, it was never actually going to come out then. I doubt there will be a sequel to the last mess, but at the same time Fox won't want to give up the rights.
I'm looking forward to the Killing Joke, but only to see how nihilistic DC is prepared to go- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnTSqgJPVl8
Plus, relations between Fox and Marvel/Disney are so bad I can see the former company doing a "dog in the manger" and doing everything they can to stop Marvel using the the FF. They might even do want Warren Beatty did with "Dick Tracy" and make a TV special solely to hold onto the rights to the characters.
That's no-go. They had to get permission from Marvel to make X-Men TV shows (they have two planned). So it's pretty obvious that Marvel hold the TV rights. How do you think their cartoons are able to use X characters?
Why don't Fox do what Sony did with Spider-Man? They obviously can't make FF work themselves, so why not let Marvel have a go and take a slice of the profits? Half of something is a lot better than all of nothing.
Agree with this OP. Although I do admire the MCU, each film feels so pointless as it is just there to set up the next film. Can't really go into anything standalone. And of course people hype up each one as if they are going to be the best movie yet, but are mostly just the same.
X-Men is probably the only superhero franchise that has more standalone type films. I am tired of other film companies now jumping on the "cinematic universe" bandwagon and trying to scramble about to make the next MCU and failing every time.
Also I'm not sure if you count Deadpool in the X Men universe as well because that included a character from the X Men in Colossus.There have been rumours of Cable featuring in Deadpool 2 as Fox have plans for an X-Force film which could be counted as another X Men spin off film in the same universe!
Soon it could be that you have more X Men spin off films than X Men films unless you don't count any of these films as X Men spin off films!
The universe can be reset with a much younger cast
I wasn't aware of that-thanks.
As I said, relations between the two companies are very bad (Marvel cancelled the print "Fantastic Four" comic last year partly to deprive the Fox film of publicity, even though it's one of Marvel's flagship titles).
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/10/05/confirmed-fantastic-four-to-be-cancelled-in-2015-with-a-triple-sized-issue-645-as-january-kicks-off-fantastic-fourever/
It would make sense for Marvel & Fox make up and share the characters, but any such rapprochement will have to wait a few years at least.