Film General : MCU Series Growth

MCU Series Growth

Don't you love how rabid DCEU fans always point to the fact that the first four films in their franchise made more than the first four films in the MCU? Naturally, they're not taking into account that most of the characters in the latter series were mostly unknown to general film-going audiences at the time of their first film's inception. The MCU had to grow basically from the ground up, and got really lucky that all the pieces fell into place perfectly with the original Ironman (2008). Whereas the DCEU brought out the big guns, Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and such from the word go, so yeah, their films made more by proxy of having the most well-known names in the business in their titles. Yet for their initial boost, its been quick to wear off as of the release of Justice League, whereas the MCU just keeps building and building upwards. Let's take a look:

Marvel Film Grosses:


Phase One (2008-2012)
1. Ironman:                                 $585.2 million
2. The Incredible Hulk: $263.4 million
3. Ironman 2: $623.9 million
4. Thor $449.3 million
5. Captain America: The First Avenger: $370.6 million
6. The Avengers: $1,518.8 billion


Phase Two (2013-2015)
7. Ironman 3:                               $1,214.8 billion
8. Thor: The Dark World: $644.6 million
9. Captain America: Winter Soldier: $714.3 million
10. Guardians of the Galaxy: $773.3 million
11. Avengers: Age of Ultron: $1,405.4 billion
12. Ant-Man: $519.3 million


Phase Three (2016-2019)
13. Captain America: Civil War:             $1,153.3 billion
14. Doctor Strange: $677.7 million
15. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2: $863.7 million
16. Spider-Man: Homecoming: $880.2 million
17. Thor: Ragnarok: $850.3 million


Looking down this list you can see that there is definite growth and audiences are becoming very familiar and comfortable with the characters, stories, esthetic, and setting.
The MCU has definitely moved on from the days of Phase One, when only half the films would break past the $500 million barrier.
Starting from 2013-onward, the only film in the entire series to make less than $600 million world wide is Ant-Man. Yep, out of the 11 films that have been made since The Avengers, only one couldn't crack $600 million. 

"BUT WEIRDRAPTOR! AGE OF ULTRON MADE LESS THAN THE FIRST AVENGERS FILM! THAT PROVES THE SERIES HAS PEAKED AND ON ITS WAY OUT!"

Sigh… Alright, DC-Fan, I'll bite. Yes, Age of Ultron made less than The Avengers, but…


Every Non-Avengers Phase 2 Film consistently made more money than every Non-Avengers Phase 1 Film, with the sole exception of Ant-Man, which clocked in with less than the first two Ironman films. But it still made more than Incredible Hulk, Thor, and Cap: TFA.

Ironman 3 is the most successful Ironman film to date.

Thor: The Dark World, despite easily being the worst MCU film, still beat its predecessor.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier beat its predecessor to a bloody pulp and then buried the carcass.

The Guardians of the Galaxy outdid Ironman 2, Phase 1's most financially successful Non-Avengers film by over a hundred million.
And yes, Age of Ultron made less money than the original Avengers, but that's not because the entire franchise is dying. That's because Age of Ultron just isn't the fun romp its predecessor was. It wasn't intended to be. It was heavier, darker, bleaker, more dramatic, and just not as rewatchable for it.

Back on the topic of growth, so far every Non-Avengers Phase 3 Film has continued the trend.


Captain America: Civil War outpaced The Winter Soldier by $400 million. No, it's not an Avengers film. It is a Captain America film. The next Avengers film will be Infinity War.

Doctor Strange, the new weird character on the block performed as well as everyone was expecting him to. Like Thor, Cap: TFA, and Ant-Man before it, it pulled a healthy, but average box office. In fact, it’s the most successful new sub-franchise in the series second only to the first Guardians of the Galaxy. And yes, the other previously new properties (Ironman 1, Hulk, Thor, Cap: TFA, Guardians, and Ant-Man) are the films to compare it to. Just as Black Panther and Captain Marvel will be compared to the other previously new properties when they come out.

And Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 has already beaten its predecessor at the box office, finishing at about $90 million more than Vol. 1. 
Spider-Man: Homecoming, the newest entry-film of the franchise is easily the highest grossing superhero film of 2017.
And at the end of 2017, we have Thor: Ragnarok, which successfully atoned for the sins of The Dark World, joining its brothers in making over $850 million at the box office in 2017.



So this is not a downward spiral. This is a series of franchises that are consistently performing better and better.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

Marvel certainly found a successful formula, that can't be argued. Has a single of those films been good, however? I haven't actually seen most of them, but I can confidently say, no, they have all sucked. At least with DC you've had a couple decent movies. We're talking Batman here. Why doesn't Marvel make a Batman movie? As you point out, he's a much bigger name than the characters Marvel is currently using. It's just a smart move. Once the growth of the international market levels off, so will the box office returns on these films. Iron-Man and Captain Planet won't look so hot at that point. They are going to need a hotter property.

Re: MCU Series Growth

Every single one of those films have been good. That's why audiences love them. In your opinion, they sucked. Mine says otherwise, and my opinion is just as valid as yours'. So I say in complete confidence they've all been good.

None of the DC films of the last ten years have been good.

Marvel doesn't own Batman.

And the international market for the Marvel characters is just fine. That's why The Avengers made $ billion, and why they've added three more films to the billion dollar club since then.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

Nah, they're not that good. Few of them are alright.

They make money in the same way those fuckin' Minions movies make money, just pandering to the lowest common denominator. It's like sitting at a game of Dungeons and Dragons or some shit and having a festy arse geek bitch pay you to jerk him off under the table, the movies are wank.

And I'm totally unbiased with this shit. Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy 1 were pretty cool, so was Deadpool. That's about it.

Haven't seen Thor: Ragnarok yet, pretty sure it might be up there with the other good ones.

Re: MCU Series Growth

In your opinion, they're not that good. Mine says otherwise and yours' does not supersede mine.

No, they make money because they're good movies, and you have no right to judge people you've never met like that.

No, you are biased. You just proved it by calling MCU fans all morons.

Thor: Ragnarok was awesome.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

Marvel movies make money but they're not good films. They're commercial films. Disney plays it safe. They appeal to children and adults with low IQs. Transformers make money too, but they're not good films. Like, you wouldn't watch Marvel movies in film school and study the complexity of it.

Compare with the Dark Knight movies, which are actually good films made by a good Oscar-Caliber director, with Oscar-nominated acting. You don't see Marvel actors being nominated for Oscars.

Did you see the Jennifer Lawrence "Red Sparrow" trailer? It's apparently based on the origin of Black Widow, with a change of name to avoid copyright. It's a hard-R rating set in a more realistic world with no mention of the heroes. See, Marvel would never make a "Black Widow" movie like that, how it should be. Marvel has potential to go with Black Widow and Black Panther a similar route that Nolan took with Batman or Fox took with Logan - but they won't do that. They make their movies lighthearted, hokey, and for children. Case in point, If Marvel had the rights to X-men instead of Fox, we would've never gotten Logan. Wolverine would be in his yellow spandex suit teaming up with Thor etc.,

The whole "shared universe" concept is a joke. It needs to be more subtle. The fantasy-heroes and heroes from graphic novels a potential for a realistic dark story should be separated. Case in point, Superman's presence would've taken away from The Dark Knight, he doesn't belong in that movie.

Make a hard R-rated Black Widow movie that's more a assassin crime movie than a "superhero" movie where other superheroes aren't mentioned.
Make a hard R-rated deep Black Panther movie that deals with systemic racism and police brutality where other superheroes aren't mentioned.

Then, later on, start crossing them over subtly.

Re: MCU Series Growth

Wow. Literally every word you just said is wrong. And you're a biased piece of shit, too. You are out of line saying that only idiots and children like MCU films.

The Dark Knight films aren't as great as you're making them out to be. Er, actually, a number of MCU actors have been nominated for Oscars. Benedict Cumberbach, Anthony Hopkins, Benicio Del Toro, Ben Kingsley, Bradley Cooper, Brie Larson, Afre Woodard, Cate Blanchett, Don Cheadle, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Edward James Olson, Forest Whitaker, Glenn Close, Edward Norton, Gwyneth Paltrow, Jeff Bridges, Jeff Goldblum, Jeremy Renner, John C. Reilly, Josh Brolin, Jude Law, Lupita Nyong'o, Mahershala Ali, Marisa Tomei, Mark Ruffalo, Michael Douglas, Michael Keaton, Mickey Rourke, Natalie Portman, Rachel McAdams, Robert Downey jr., Red Redford, Ruth Negga, Samuel L. Jackson, Sigourney Weaver, Stanley Tucci, Sylvester Stallone, Tilda Swinton, Tommy Lee Jones, and William Hurt. Just owned your ass.

And the fact you think the Nolan route is the only way comic books movie should go just shows how ignorant you are. And Logan wasn't that special. Neither are R ratings. Most comic book movies have no need to be rated R. Also, you want these films to be "realistic"? How dumb are you? Very.

What worked in The Dark Knight trilogy doesn't work in other comic book movies. No, they should not all be dark and realistic. That's just limiting what they can be about. And these films have touched on just as many "adult" issues as your oh so precious Nolan films and Logan. Not that you'd know since you've obviously not seen any of the MCU films.

Er, The Black Panther movie is taking place IN T'Challa's (AFRICAN) country, where black people ARE the norm. Why in God's name would a film about the king of an African country who also happens to be superhero be about police brutality in the United States?

YEah, your way of crossing them over sucks.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

Just owned your ass.

No, you didn't. I never said they use actors who weren't nominated for other films. I said those films do not deliver Oscar-Caliber acting. No Marvel movie has ever been nominated for acting, TDK has, with Heath Ledger, and he won. MCU acting does not compare to the superb level of Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Heath Ledger, and Tom Hardy in the TDK series. As great as Anthony Hopkins is, he would never be nominated for best supporting actor in Thor.

And the fact you think the Nolan route is the only way comic books movie should go just shows how ignorant you are. And Logan wasn't that special. Neither are R ratings. Most comic book movies have no need to be rated R. Also, you want these films to be "realistic"?

This is eally a matter of opinion. MCU movies are not my thing. The only decent one was the first Iron Man - and even that was too "fantasy" for me. I say superhero films should go the "Nolan" route but not necessarily meaning Nolan's style - but in the style of Nolan, Burton, and Magsgold's Logan - logical, plausible, dark, grounded as possible.

What worked in The Dark Knight trilogy doesn't work in other comic book movies. No, they should not all be dark and realistic. That's just limiting what they can be about.

It does work, look at Terminator. It's a rated-R scifi that's set in a pretty realistic world that manages to deal with androids and time travel. It CAN be done, with the right writing. Limiting what it can be about? Really? So would the Godfather be better if Michael Corleone had super powers? Like, could fly? After all the Godfather is limited in what it can be about if Michael Corleone is a regular human.

Not every movie needs to be rated R, but it doesn't need "not" to be either. There's a difference in making something Rated R on purpose, and holding back violence and depth on purpose to avoid an R rating.

The drama between Alfred, Rachel, and Bruce in TDKR for example. The way Michael Caine delivered his lines when he told Bruce about Rachel's note. You don't see that kind of heart and drama in a Marvel movie. It's all about special effects, fancy suits, explosions, "superhero stuff."

Er, The Black Panther movie is taking place IN T'Challa's (AFRICAN) country, where black people ARE the norm. Why in God's name would a film about the king of an African country who also happens to be superhero be about police brutality in the United States?

I hope you realize many of the Black Panther comics have been very political and have dealt with things like institutional racism, deconstructing colonialism, and apartheid. MCU tends to make their movies for the family, so they would never go this direction with a comic book movie.

YEah, your way of crossing them over sucks.

Really? Because they crossed Jason and Freddy over in the same way. Jason existed in 8 films without a single mention of Freddy - they were finally crossed over in Jason's 11th film and Freddy's 8th I believe

Alien vs. Predator is another crossover that was subtle.

Rumor's are that Tim Burton was working on a "Superman Lives" in the 90s which, if made, would've been crossed over with Michael Keaton's Batman at the time. You get the idea? Subtle. Not forced.

We can't even get ONE Iron Man film where Nick Fury doesn't show up talking about the Avengers. Every single stand-alone Marvel movie has had a reference or cameo to another MCU character. That's not how it should be rushed. Stand-alone movies should be the focus first, including sequels, THEN years later, a decade later after the first movie, start talking about crossovers.

Even Captain America's first film was called "The First Avenger" - Jesus Christ, we can't even get a Captain America film without mentioning the Avengers! Batman's film wasn't called Batman Begins: The First Member of the Justice League. MCU's shared universe is stupid.

Re: MCU Series Growth

No, you didn't. I never said they use actors who weren't nominated for other films. I said those films do not deliver Oscar-Caliber acting. No Marvel movie has ever been nominated for acting, TDK has, with Heath Ledger, and he won. MCU acting does not compare to the superb level of Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Heath Ledger, and Tom Hardy in the TDK series. As great as Anthony Hopkins is, he would never be nominated for best supporting actor in Thor.
Yes, I did. Bolded: in your opinion.
Besides which, the Oscars aren't exactly accurate in awarding the right films or actors. "Shakespeare in Love" winning over "Saving Private Ryan" anyone?
And Ledger only won because he died.

This is eally a matter of opinion. MCU movies are not my thing. The only decent one was the first Iron Man - and even that was too "fantasy" for me. I say superhero films should go the "Nolan" route but not necessarily meaning Nolan's style - but in the style of Nolan, Burton, and Magsgold's Logan - logical, plausible, dark, grounded as possible.
Then you could have just said that from the beginning instead of condemning everyone who enjoys them as stupid. In your opinion, Ironman 1 is the only decent one. My opinion states otherwise.
And I say superhero films shouldn't all go the Nolan route. Keeping them grounded as possible is missing the whole point. What works for Batman does not work for other characters.

I hope you realize many of the Black Panther comics have been very political and have dealt with things like institutional racism, deconstructing colonialism, and apartheid. MCU tends to make their movies for the family, so they would never go this direction with a comic book movie.
I am aware, but a film set in an African nation that will primarily be taking place in Africa really doesn't have time to take a side trip into downtown Detroit to get on a soapbox about American police brutality. Besides, there are a ton of other political topics that are just as relevant they will cover.
Yeah, if you think the MCU isn't politically relevant just because its aimed as everyone instead of just teenage edgelords like you, you seriously need to watch CA: The Winter Soldier.

Really? Because they crossed Jason and Freddy over in the same way. Jason existed in 8 films without a single mention of Freddy - they were finally crossed over in Jason's 11th film and Freddy's 8th I believe
Freddy vs. Jason sucked.

Alien vs. Predator is another crossover that was subtle.
Alien vs. Predator sucked.

Rumor's are that Tim Burton was working on a "Superman Lives" in the 90s which, if made, would've been crossed over with Michael Keaton's Batman at the time. You get the idea? Subtle. Not forced.
That film would have sucked. And the MCU's way of doing things isn't forced. It's natural. And subtle.
To be perfectly honest, every example you've given on how a crossover should supposedly be done is just… God awful. Those are the last places anyone should ever look to take a cue on how to build a shared universe. The MCU did it right. It was intended to be a series of films where the characters crossed over sometimes along the way from the very beginning.
None of the examples you listed were ever intended to cross over, whereas the Marvel characters who always existed in the same universe. In the comics, characters like Captain America and Ironman meet up all the time. This is just Marvel taking what they've done in the comics for decades and applying it to a serialized film series.

We can't even get ONE Iron Man film where Nick Fury doesn't show up talking about the Avengers. Every single stand-alone Marvel movie has had a reference or cameo to another MCU character. That's not how it should be rushed. Stand-alone movies should be the focus first, including sequels, THEN years later, a decade later after the first movie, start talking about crossovers.
Nick Fury didn't show up until half through the end credits in the original Ironman, so we DID get ONE Ironman film where that doesn't happen for the entire main running time. And Fury isn't in Ironman 3 at all. Including cameos and references is not rushing it. This is intended as a serialized series of films. Sorry it's not to your liking, but many world wide love and they are not wrong to love it. Bolded: Again, your way of doing it sucks. And no, we shouldn't have to wait a decade to see The Avengers.

In all, it's hard to take your word for it when I know for a fact these films don't just appeal to the lowest common denominator. There have been many perfectly learned people who enjoy them, including professional film critics. I've met a university professor who enjoys them. Who are you that I should favor what you say over all of these other beautiful people?
What makes you a bigger expert than any of the actual filmmakers who have worked over at Marvel Studios? What makes you a bigger expert than anyone who enjoys the series and appreciates what it's accomplished? What makes you a bigger expert than any of the professional critics who have generally reviewed the series positively?
Nothing. That's what.

And the fact of the matter is, a crew of successfully have successfully pulled off making the MCU work when naysayers like you said they never could.

Even Captain America's first film was called "The First Avenger" - Jesus Christ, we can't even get a Captain America film without mentioning the Avengers! Batman's film wasn't called Batman Begins: The First Member of the Justice League. MCU's shared universe is stupid.
It was given that subtitle so they could release it in other countries more easily, because America doesn't have the best reputation everywhere. They figured they could drop the "Captain America" part in certain countries and just call it "The First Avenger" to make things easier.
And no, the MCU's shared universe isn't stupid. It just isn't to your liking. Your opinions are not fact. And I will never agree with anything you've just said. You may as well give on trying to force your opinion on me.

EDIT: Miss a few points you touched on:

It does work, look at Terminator. It's a rated-R scifi that's set in a pretty realistic world that manages to deal with androids and time travel. It CAN be done, with the right writing. Limiting what it can be about? Really?
These films aren't Terminator and shouldn't be required to play by its rules. And no, Terminator isn't realistic at all. It just painted itself with a layer to grunge to try passing itself off as realistic. And yes, keeping everything grounded is limiting what they can be about. What works for Terminator does not work for Doctor Strange. He's a frikkin' wizard. He will never be realistic.

So would the Godfather be better if Michael Corleone had super powers? Like, could fly? After all the Godfather is limited in what it can be about if Michael Corleone is a regular human.
…You do realize we're talking about superheroes and not mob movies, right? Yes, keeping it grounded is limiting what they can be about, because superhero stories are meant to have fantastic elements.

Not every movie needs to be rated R, but it doesn't need "not" to be either. There's a difference in making something Rated R on purpose, and holding back violence and depth on purpose to avoid an R rating.
And most comic book characters don't need R ratings in any way, shape, or form. So there is no gore being held back. It's not necessary.

The drama between Alfred, Rachel, and Bruce in TDKR for example. The way Michael Caine delivered his lines when he told Bruce about Rachel's note. You don't see that kind of heart and drama in a Marvel movie. It's all about special effects, fancy suits, explosions, "superhero stuff."
Wrong, completely and utterly. In fact, I find the drama in the MCU to be far more relatable and have more heart. To be perfectly honest, the stuff with Alfred, Rachel, and Bruce was melodramatic and overwrought.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

Omg I miss my Deadpool account.

I am addicted to you; I have tasted your mind, and I cannot forgo its flavor.

Re: MCU Series Growth

Actually there is a bar set when it comes to films, there's this thing called artistic integrity. The Marvel movies copy the same old generic formula used in a million other mindless popcorn flicks. Even that Civil War shit was spoiled by said forula "Oh knowwwws, it's getting serious. Quick, pump the fight full of shitty one liners and comic relief before people can take any of it seriously".

Look at all the awards they've won, such good stuff… lol, geek.

Re: MCU Series Growth

Yawn. The only thing that's formulaic around here is your tired argument.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

Sure, Mr "That's just your opinion".

What's worse than the Marvel movies is how you've typed all this boring garbage trying to defend them. Get a life.

Re: MCU Series Growth

The boring garbage around here is what you've typed.

Oh, and by the way, Avengers: Infinity War just made $2 billion at the box office. Must suck to be you.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

Go ahead and explain how Marvel making money means it must suck to be me.

From up here in the real world where there's sex drugs and rock n' roll we're thinking that life must suck if you're as dependent on a boring little formulaic franchises for kids as you are, you socially retarded little kid

Like… maybe 2 or 3 of the Marvel movies are legitimately well made. I heard that Ant Man and The Wasp is a real tour de force

Oy, your Marvel movies aren't as good as you and other little comic loser cunts think, how's that make you feel?

Re: MCU Series Growth

Please. If you weren't butthurt about it, you'd have never replied and argued with me in the first place. You'd have just moved onto another topic without even stopping to look in here. If the real world was so much more important to you than these movies and this argument, we wouldn't still be having this exchange. Pure and simple.

Again, everything you just said is only your opinion. And you'll never convince me that you're right. And you do not know better than all the millions of people who love the MCU series.

Your insults are petty and stupid, at best. So I feel nothing while reading your pathetic attempts to rouse some kind of emotion from me.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

lol

Fuck's up with you trying to tell people a movie that makes a lot of money is a quality movie?

And don't try to peddle the Captain America movies as top echelon comic book super hero movies. Civil War was fine, as was Winter Soldier. But they're no where near as good as any of the Nolan Batman movies, Watchmen, Logan, or Spider-Man 2.

Mephistopheles is just beneath and he's reaching up to grab me.

Re: MCU Series Growth

Cap 2 and 3 are way overrated anyway. Completely forgettable other than a few groovy action scenes, especially Civil War.

Re: MCU Series Growth

In your opinion.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

In your opinion the money a movie makes seems to say everything about the movie's quality. That's not my opinion, that's based on the evidence produced in all the garbage you've posted on here. That's scientific, motherfucker

Re: MCU Series Growth

Nope. You completely misinterpreted the point of this topic. I was started this topic to demonstrate how one new studio took a bunch of either relatively unknown characters or completely obscure ones, and turned them into stars. That's the purpose in showing how the series has grown. I was showing how they've gained audience trust through producing good movies.

And again, the only one posting garbage here… is you.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

The Captain America films are top echelon comic book super hero movies. They're way better than any of the crap you just listed.

Also, since it's obvious that you're the same Rocket-Man from Colden's Hellfire Club, I'll be blocking you here, too.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

The Captain America films are top echelon comic book super hero movies.
Well that's just wrong, my man. You may really like them, but that doesn't make them these great pieces of filmmaking that'll stand the test of time and be remembered years from now. Now I know you're retort will be, "Just because you don't like them, doesn't mean they aren't great movies" and I don't dislike them, I actually find them to be fun movies to watch in a movie theater. But I don't remember anything about those movies aside from an action scene or two and some jokes.

Can't really say that for movies like Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises, Spider-Man 2, Logan, and Watchmen. All have memorable performances and scenes. None of them come off as mass produced bull shit like the Captain America movies.

Also, the emoticon actually has to work in order for "" to have any weight.
What does that even mean??

Mephistopheles is just beneath and he's reaching up to grab me.

Re: MCU Series Growth

But the random dude's whole plan to make Iron Man angry at Captain America in Civil War was such riveting stuff! ……

I'm also glad they started joking with each other like guest characters in an episode of Buffy during the airport face-off, the tension seemed to be building for a while there but 'phew', thank god they didn't have the balls to let their movies make me feel emotions.

Re: MCU Series Growth

Ah, stock hater complaints. Get back to me when you have an actual argument.


You know, you're doing a pitiful job of proving how little you care. If you really cared as little about this argument as you claim, you'd stop replying.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

"Stock hater complaints"

What kind of argument is that?

Lets break it down.

"Stock" - Implying that these are things that many people have complained about. Your argument is that many people saw the movie so it must be good, meanwhile it seems that many people complained about the flaws but, since that doesn't fit your narrative, numbers suddenly don't seem to matter

"Hater" - A term used to disregard criticism used by, more than anyone, Miler Cyrus. Basically a bullshit term used by social retards.

"Complaints" - Fuck oath. That romance between The Hulk and Black Widow was riveting, same with that boring flying fuck and the Witch chic. CAPTIVATING CHARACTER DRAMA

Oy, none of those movies are on par with Logan or The Dark Knight.

How does that make you feel?

Re: MCU Series Growth

Just keep showing me that you care more about making me agree with you than you'd like to let on. Your counter"arguments" are lacking at best and you have yet to present anything objective.

"Stock" - Every popular film has had many people complain about some aspect of them. Detractors will usually zero in on something that's popular to complain about whether it is warranted or not, even the classics. Your counter"argument" means nothing in light of that.

"Hater" - How ironic someone as mentally deficient as you should use the word "retard" as an insult aimed at someone else. In my experience, most people stop using "retard" as a slight after the age of 12, suggesting you are still emotionally a child. It would certainly explain your obsession with me. You obviously need me to validate your existence by agreeing with you. Until that time, you will feel compelled to keep this insipid little argument going. However, I can choose to stop toying with you and just block you any time I want.
Furthermore, for someone who claims to be oh so social, you certainly are wasting of lot of time arguing with me. It's almost like you're actually some bloated neckbeard in real life who can only get kicks out of being a troll.

"Complaints" - I agree, both of those romances are riveting. Also, you forgot to add a "k" to end the word "chick."

How does that make me feel? Nothing when it comes from you. If you were a credible source, your claims might actually stir some kind of emotion.
Of course, if you were a credible source, you wouldn't be wasting your time arguing with me on this website.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

WeirdRaptor said... Just keep showing me that you care more about making me agree with you than you'd like to let on. Your counter"arguments" are lacking at best and you have yet to present anything objective.

"Stock" - Every popular film has had many people complain about some aspect of them. Detractors will usually zero in on something that's popular to complain about whether it is warranted or not, even the classics. Your counter"argument" means nothing in light of that.

"Hater" - How ironic someone as mentally deficient as you should use the word "retard" as an insult aimed at someone else. In my experience, most people stop using "retard" as a slight after the age of 12, suggesting you are still emotionally a child. It would certainly explain your obsession with me. You obviously need me to validate your existence by agreeing with you. Until that time, you will feel compelled to keep this insipid little argument going. However, I can choose to stop toying with you and just block you any time I want.
Furthermore, for someone who claims to be oh so social, you certainly are wasting of lot of time arguing with me. It's almost like you're actually some bloated neckbeard in real life who can only get kicks out of being a troll.

"Complaints" - I agree, both of those romances are riveting. Also, you forgot to add a "k" to end the word "chick."

How does that make me feel? Nothing when it comes from you. If you were a credible source, your claims might actually stir some kind of emotion.
Of course, if you were a credible source, you wouldn't be wasting your time arguing with me on this website.
expand
You thinking those romances were riveting makes your opinion even less valid


You need those movies to be as well crafted and as relevant as you THINK they are in order to feel like you're relevant yourself

I like how you claimed you're toying with me when all the while I'm clearly the one toying with you, geek bitch kid with the personality with a cardboard box, you are. You know this is true, with a personality as retarded as yours I highly doubt there hasn't been attention called to it out there in your real world.

Oy, at least half of the MCU movies are completely forgettable. How does that make you feel?

Re: MCU Series Growth

SpringheelJack1837 said... You thinking those romances were riveting makes your opinion even less valid


You need those movies to be as well crafted and as relevant as you THINK they are in order to feel like you're relevant yourself

I like how you claimed you're toying with me when all the while I'm clearly the one toying with you, geek bitch kid with the personality with a cardboard box, you are. You know this is true, with a personality as retarded as yours I highly doubt there hasn't been attention called to it out there in your real world.

Oy, at least half of the MCU movies are completely forgettable. How does that make you feel?
expand
"You thinking those romances were riveting makes your opinion even less valid"

Seriously? How are you unable to see that's exactly something a child would say, right down to the way you worded it?
"YOUR OPINION IS WAY MORE INVALID THAN MINE!"
Honestly, that is something a 5 year old would say. You just outed yourself as a minor, a developmentally stunted teenager at the oldest. No adult speaks that way.

Also, you're not helping your case by forgetting proper punctuation.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

WeirdRaptor said... "You thinking those romances were riveting makes your opinion even less valid"

Seriously? How are you unable to see that's exactly something a child would say, right down to the way you worded it?
"YOUR OPINION IS WAY MORE INVALID THAN MINE!"
Honestly, that is something a 5 year old would say. You just outed yourself as a minor, a developmentally stunted teenager at the oldest. No adult speaks that way.

Also, you're not helping your case by forgetting proper punctuation.
expand
You talk about specific wording and then use quotation marks to quote something I didn’t say at all

You honestly think 5 year olds go around using the word “invalid”?

You outed yourself as a socially retarded reject virgin with this entire thread. I know that deep down you know you’re a fucking boring idiot, I bet all the cool kids loved you in school

Re: MCU Series Growth

SpringheelJack1837 said... You talk about specific wording and then use quotation marks to quote something I didn’t say at all

You honestly think 5 year olds go around using the word “invalid”?

You outed yourself as a socially retarded reject virgin with this entire thread. I know that deep down you know you’re a fucking boring idiot, I bet all the cool kids loved you in school
expand
Actually, I have heard a 5 year old use "invalid", and correctly at that, first of all.

Your return time and again, without fail, is painting a sad little picture of a little boy without any friends, who is bored with life. Well, in any case, I won't be a source of amusement anymore, because I'm blocking you after I press "Create Post."

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

WeirdRaptor said... Actually, I have heard a 5 year old use "invalid", and correctly at that, first of all.

Your return time and again, without fail, is painting a sad little picture of a little boy without any friends, who is bored with life. Well, in any case, I won't be a source of amusement anymore, because I'm blocking you after I press "Create Post."
expand
Raptor, you're such a little girl.

Mephistopheles is just beneath and he's reaching up to grab me.

Re: MCU Series Growth

WeirdRaptor said... Actually, I have heard a 5 year old use "invalid", and correctly at that, first of all.

Your return time and again, without fail, is painting a sad little picture of a little boy without any friends, who is bored with life. Well, in any case, I won't be a source of amusement anymore, because I'm blocking you after I press "Create Post."
expand
Pretty sure you’re the one that bumped this stupid long forgotten thread to tell me how much money an Avenger’s movie made and how I must feel like shit because of it

Dumbass. I haven’t even seen it yet because I’ve learned not to buy into the hype of these movies so I wait for the shit to die down to avoid high expectations and disappointment, easy.

Re: MCU Series Growth

In your opinion.

Re: MCU Series Growth

Yes. Yes, it is. Everything we're both saying is subjective. Thank you for agreeing with me.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

👍

Yuk yuk yuk

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: MCU Series Growth

Iron Man
Iron Man:                               $585.2 million               94%
Iron Man 2: $623.9 million 73%
Iron Man 3: $1,214.8 billion 80%

Captain America
Captain America: The First Avenger:     $370.6 million               80%
Captain America: Winter Soldier: $714.3 million 89%
Captain America: Civil War: $1,153.3 billion 91%

Thor
Thor                                    $449.3 million               77%
Thor: The Dark World: $644.6 million 66%
Thor: Ragnarok: $850.3 million 92%

The Avengers
The Avengers:                           $1,518.8 billion             92%
Avengers: Age of Ultron: $1,405.4 billion 75%

Guardians of the Galaxy
Guardians of the Galaxy:                $773.3 million               91%
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2: $863.7 million 83%

I wanted to see if Rotten Tomatoes scores would shed any light on the box office returns. Inconclusive.

Disney is CIA for kidz!

Re: MCU Series Growth

according to rottentomatoes, captain america is now one of the greatest trilogies of all time, trouncing back to the future and just a notch below star wars:

Back to the Future Trilogy
Back to the Future (1985)                         96%
Back to the Future Part II (1989) 63%
Back to the Future Part III (1990) 74%

[b]average: 78%[/b]

Star Wars
A New Hope (1977)                                 93%
The Empire Strikes Back (1980) 94%
Return of the Jedi (1983) 80%

[b]average: 89%[/b]


Captain America
Captain America: The First Avenger:               80%
Captain America: Winter Soldier: 89%
Captain America: Civil War: 91%

[b]average: 87%[/b]
wutthuhhayel? have i been missing out on a cinematic classic?

Re: MCU Series Growth

The first one is a fun wartime adventure film, but the second two are truly great comic book movies that also happen to be politically relevant.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

"So this is not a downward spiral. This is a series of franchises that are consistently performing better and better."
True but Marvel needs to do some serious work on both quality control and diversification. CAPTAIN AMERICA: TFA is one of the only genuinely godawful Marvel movies–borderline unwatchable–whereas THE WINTER SOLDIER is one of the best of the Marvels. CIVIL WAR isn't as good as TWS but it's still pretty damn good. It's basically an Avengers movie. IRON MAN is a strong opener, then IM2 is right down near TFA at the absolute bottom of the pile, while IM3 isn't much better. The first AVENGERS is one of the best comic-book movies ever made; the 2nd one is just sort of meh. It's not awful but boy, does it ever cover the same ground all over again. The GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY movies are pure gold. THOR was great and THE DARK WORLD wasn't bad (your assessment of it isn't supportable). I haven't seen RAGNAROK yet. THE INCREDIBLE HULK was crippled from conception; Marvel made the right decision in basically just ignoring it in subsequent films and working from the much better Ang Lee movie instead. SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING is a fun movie but it isn't Spider-Man, which is crushingly disappointing. The character and his world are unrecognizable, and that's not why I wanted Marvel to get him back. ANT MAN was a fun flick but it's impossible to watch it without thinking of how much better it would have been with Edgard Wright directing. DR. STRANGE isn't bad, it's just nowhere near as good as it should have been–far too tied down to standard-issue superhero movie formula when a different approach was called for. It should be more like a psychedelic horror movie/fairy tale.

"The Dig"
http://cinemarchaeologist.blogspot.com/

Re: MCU Series Growth

Finally, someone who isn't here just to shout at me about how stupid I am for liking the MCU.

They actually are working on diversification right now. I know the series has had its issues as ALL series have, but they are working on improving it all the time.

I have to disagree with you about Spider-Man Homecoming completely and entirely. That IS Spider-Man as far as I'm concerned.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

"I have to disagree with you about Spider-Man Homecoming completely and entirely. That IS Spider-Man as far as I'm concerned."
For Peter, Spider-Man becomes a release for the frustrations of his life but being Spider-Man is also a serious burden, something one barely finds in the movie. Peter does what he does because of what happened to his uncle, something to which the movie only very vaguely alludes. He's not out trying to impress some asshole elitist billionaire or get on the Avengers to tackle world-shattering menaces–he's your friendly neighborhood Spider-Man. Peter, in fact, has a very low opinion of people with the attitude Stark demonstrates in the movie. Peter doesn't run around in a mega-million-dollar suit of talking armor. May Parker isn't hot Marisa Tomei; she's a frail old lady whom Peter has to support from the time he's a teenager, which is part of what makes life so hard for him. Peter and May are poor. Not dirt-poor but not very well-off. Some draft of the movie did contain this element and there were a few lines that made their way into the finished film where Toombs offers Peter some working-class solidarity but it comes out of nowhere and goes out of the movie the same way. Peter does freelance work at the Daily Bugle and J. Jonah Jameson is a magnificent beat–it's criminal to exclude he and the rest of the Bugle staff from the picture. The best-friend character in the movie with whom Peter is able to share his secret doesn't exist in the comics. I'm told he's taken from one of the Ultimate variants I haven't read but he doesn't belong in the world of the original.

I could go through these all day but this hopefully makes the point. I'm a huge Spider-Man fan since before I could even read the books myself. The character and world in HOMECOMING isn't recognizable. It's an entertaining movie but it's galaxies removed from the source material.

"The Dig"
http://cinemarchaeologist.blogspot.com/

Re: MCU Series Growth

They had to make SOME changes to the material, since the Raimi-Maguire movies were pretty faithful adaptations and from not that long ago. And Pete isn't running around being a hero to impress Tony. Yes, he wants to impress Tony, but he was already running around saving lives before Stark dropped into his apartment in Civil War. Him wanting to prove himself to an older superhero is pretty typical teenager behavior, and Pete has never been the paragon of maturity, anyway. So I don't have an issue with any of this. And Pete is doing this because of his Uncle. They're just not making us rewatch Uncle Ben die a third in time fifteen years.
Marisa Tomei is a more realistic Aunt May. The only reason Aunt May in the comics was a frail old woman was to make it clear she was older than Pete, since comic art was very simplistic in those days. They had to exaggerate a lot of things to get the point across visually. My oldest Aunt is only 35 years older than me. She's only now an older woman now that I'm in my thirties.

The Daily Bugle doesn't come around until later.

"The best-friend character in the movie with whom Peter is able to share his secret doesn't exist in the comics. I'm told he's taken from one of the Ultimate variants I haven't read but he doesn't belong in the world of the original."
This is an adaptation, not the original comics.

And I could go on all day about why I like Homecoming. I'm in the same boat as you about being a Spider-Man fan, and I absolutely loved this movie. I just don't have an issue with the MCU creating a different take on the Spider-Man character. The Raimi films, as I said, aren't that old, so it's not like they're having to reintroduce Spider-Man to a whole new generation with the character having been gone off the big screen for decades.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

Don't you love how rabid DCEU fans always point to the fact that the first four films in their franchise made more than the first four films in the MCU? Naturally, they're not taking into account that most of the characters in the latter series were mostly unknown to general film-going audiences at the time of their first film's inception. The MCU had to grow basically from the ground up, and got really lucky that all the pieces fell into place perfectly with the original Ironman (2008). Whereas the DCEU brought out the big guns, Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and such from the word go, so yeah, their films made more by proxy of having the most well-known names in the business in their titles. Yet for their initial boost, its been quick to wear off as of the release of Justice League, whereas the MCU just keeps building and building upwards. Let's take a look:

Marvel Film Grosses:


Phase One (2008-2012)
1. Ironman: $585.2 million
2. The Incredible Hulk: $263.4 million
3. Ironman 2: $623.9 million
4. Thor $449.3 million
5. Captain America: The First Avenger: $370.6 million
6. The Avengers: $1,518.8 billion


Phase Two (2013-2015)
7. Ironman 3: $1,214.8 billion
8. Thor: The Dark World: $644.6 million
9. Captain America: Winter Soldier: $714.3 million
10. Guardians of the Galaxy: $773.3 million
11. Avengers: Age of Ultron: $1,405.4 billion
12. Ant-Man: $519.3 million


Phase Three (2016-2019)
13. Captain America: Civil War: $1,153.3 billion
14. Doctor Strange: $677.7 million
15. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2: $863.7 million
16. Spider-Man: Homecoming: $880.2 million
17. Thor: Ragnarok: $850.3 million


Looking down this list you can see that there is definite growth and audiences are becoming very familiar and comfortable with the characters, stories, esthetic, and setting.
The MCU has definitely moved on from the days of Phase One, when only half the films would break past the $500 million barrier.
Starting from 2013-onward, the only film in the entire series to make less than $600 million world wide is Ant-Man. Yep, out of the 11 films that have been made since The Avengers, only one couldn't crack $600 million.

"BUT WEIRDRAPTOR! AGE OF ULTRON MADE LESS THAN THE FIRST AVENGERS FILM! THAT PROVES THE SERIES HAS PEAKED AND ON ITS WAY OUT!"

Sigh… Alright, DC-Fan, I'll bite. Yes, Age of Ultron made less than The Avengers, but…


Every Non-Avengers Phase 2 Film consistently made more money than every Non-Avengers Phase 1 Film, with the sole exception of Ant-Man, which clocked in with less than the first two Ironman films. But it still made more than Incredible Hulk, Thor, and Cap: TFA.

Ironman 3 is the most successful Ironman film to date.

Thor: The Dark World, despite easily being the worst MCU film, still beat its predecessor.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier beat its predecessor to a bloody pulp and then buried the carcass.

The Guardians of the Galaxy outdid Ironman 2, Phase 1's most financially successful Non-Avengers film by over a hundred million.
And yes, Age of Ultron made less money than the original Avengers, but that's not because the entire franchise is dying. That's because Age of Ultron just isn't the fun romp its predecessor was. It wasn't intended to be. It was heavier, darker, bleaker, more dramatic, and just not as rewatchable for it.

Back on the topic of growth, so far every Non-Avengers Phase 3 Film has continued the trend.


Captain America: Civil War outpaced The Winter Soldier by $400 million. No, it's not an Avengers film. It is a Captain America film. The next Avengers film will be Infinity War.

Doctor Strange, the new weird character on the block performed as well as everyone was expecting him to. Like Thor, Cap: TFA, and Ant-Man before it, it pulled a healthy, but average box office. In fact, it’s the most successful new sub-franchise in the series second only to the first Guardians of the Galaxy. And yes, the other previously new properties (Ironman 1, Hulk, Thor, Cap: TFA, Guardians, and Ant-Man) are the films to compare it to. Just as Black Panther and Captain Marvel will be compared to the other previously new properties when they come out.

And Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 has already beaten its predecessor at the box office, finishing at about $90 million more than Vol. 1.
Spider-Man: Homecoming, the newest entry-film of the franchise is easily the highest grossing superhero film of 2017.
And at the end of 2017, we have Thor: Ragnarok, which successfully atoned for the sins of The Dark World, joining its brothers in making over $850 million at the box office in 2017.

Now for an update.

Marvel Film Grosses:


Phase One (2008-2012)
1. Ironman: $585.2 million
2. The Incredible Hulk: $263.4 million
3. Ironman 2: $623.9 million
4. Thor $449.3 million
5. Captain America: The First Avenger: $370.6 million
6. The Avengers: $1,518.8 billion


Phase Two (2013-2015)
7. Ironman 3: $1,214.8 billion
8. Thor: The Dark World: $644.6 million
9. Captain America: Winter Soldier: $714.3 million
10. Guardians of the Galaxy: $773.3 million
11. Avengers: Age of Ultron: $1,405.4 billion
12. Ant-Man: $519.3 million


Phase Three (2016-2019)
13. Captain America: Civil War: $1,153.3 billion
14. Doctor Strange: $677.7 million
15. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2: $863.7 million
16. Spider-Man: Homecoming: $880.2 million
17. Thor: Ragnarok: $850.3 million
18. Black Panather: $1.347 billion
19. Avengers: Infinity War $2.043 billion
20. Ant-Man and the Wasp Still in theaters

And the momentum continues to build.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

bump

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

Aquaman will make more than all of those combined

Re: MCU Series Growth

Sarcasm.

Re: MCU Series Growth

I do hope it does well, regardless of how much it makes and what it beats.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

Re: MCU Series Growth

bump

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf
Top