[Movie/TV/Comic] Marvel Cinematic Universe: A place to talk all things Marvel

[Endus]

True, but the bigger narrative problem is that the end of Loki implied that the sacred timeline no longer exists. That means that Kang should exist in the multiverse and be conquering timelines.

Specifically, the Loki show explicitly described how without He Who Remains, each separate universe/timeline would inevitably produce its own Kang, and all those Kangs would battle across the Multiverse until only one remained supreme.

That's literally what He Who Remains had done in his own Kang days, and pruning alternate timelines was all about preventing other Kangs from emerging to challenge him.

This movie immediately contradicts that story with this council of Kangs because that council shouldn't exist because it basically a rehash of the sacred timeline story.

Nope, because those Kangs are a natural outcome, and sometimes Kangs team up to fight other Kangs (in the hopes they can clear the field and turn on each other). Yes, Kangs are all gonna try the same kinds of tactics as He Who Remains, because he's a Kang too. The Council is essentially an earlier attempt at the same endpoint. There's no contradiction, here; it's explicitly what the Loki show said would happen. Not the teaming up specifically, but the many Kangs scrabbling for any advantage over other Kangs to be the last remaining Kang. Teaming up is just a valid short-term tactic to that goal.

Not only that it totally ignores everything in Loki season 1, as if all these version of Kang were there all along and not affected by the TVA maintaining the sacred timeline. If Kang is a threat he should be shown out in the multiverse actually conquering timelines not sitting in the TVA or in the Quantum realm moping around.

Those Kangs did exist. He Who Remains is the Kang who killed them all and then purged their universes. That's literally his backstory, told explicitly. He conquered all timelines. Sitting in the TVA and ensuring no new Kang can ever appear is "victory". An admittedly Pyrrhic one, which is why he wanted to die.

There is no way he could prune all versions of himself in the multiverse because if that was the case, he wouldn't exist in the TVA.

All but one the one who emerged in the Sacred Timeline. Himself.

That's the point of the story in Loki.

On top of that, the end of Loki shouldn't magically recreate all the various universes and timelines, including the one with the original future Kang that started everything.

There was no "original". Each universe is the "original" from its own perspective. There's no way to identify any "original" Kang.

So the idea that after killing He who remains all of a sudden all these Kangs would just pop up in the multiverse simply from some Nexus event is silly. It totally is a contrived story as a result of drastically changing the comics story of the TVA which is a totally separate entity and not under the control of Kang in the comics.

You're ignoring the time angle. Without He Who Remains, those alternate timelines stopped being pruned, and because time's a vector that can be travelled, those timelines are branching off from every moment in time. Millions of years ago to millions of years in the future, from the beginning to the end of time. It's displayed in the TVA as a process you can see, but it's outside of time; from inside the multiverse in any given universe, it would have gone from the Sacred Timeline to having always been a complex multiverse without there ever being a Sacred Timeline.

And then on top of that, they implied that another version of Kang is in charge of the TVA which would be the most powerful being in the universe, even beyond Thanos, yet that is obviously a bait and switch as we will see in season 2 of Loki.

We have no idea what that Kang wants or if his TVA has been successful, where He Who Remains had been. We can presume he hasn't been, because the multiverse exists, so either that Kang is unable to prune all timelines back to a Sacred Timeline, or is mid-process (though being outside time makes that idea ridiculous), or doesn't even want to, for whatever reason.

[Northern Goblin]

True, but the bigger narrative problem is that the end of Loki implied that the sacred timeline no longer exists. That means that Kang should exist in the multiverse and be conquering timelines. This movie immediately contradicts that story with this council of Kangs because that council shouldn't exist because it basically a rehash of the sacred timeline story. Not only that it totally ignores everything in Loki season 1, as if all these version of Kang were there all along and not affected by the TVA maintaining the sacred timeline. If Kang is a threat he should be shown out in the multiverse actually conquering timelines not sitting in the TVA or in the Quantum realm moping around.

You're looking at time in a linear fashion. The moment HWR was killed, all Kangs came into existence as if they always were there, the sacred timeline never was a thing and all of history always happened prior to that moment, so the multiversal war was still ongoing (as explained by Miss Minutes prior to HWR's victory and the establishment of the sacred timeline) At some point in the timeline the Council of Kangs was formed to deal with the Conqueror from Quantumania and set him up to be exiled in the Quantum realm. This may have been the culmination of the multiversal war, with the Council then forming to form a truce (however stabled that may be)

It's not well explained, and there's a lot of "tell, don't show" but it remains consistent. I'm hoping that with What If? 2, the second season of Loki and other upcoming films that we get a better explanation of this.

[Jotaux]

Where from your arse did you randomly decide that it needed to pull 3x its budget, when the rule of thumb is 2-2.5x?

Depending on the location Disney would only get 40-60% of the box office, for estimates most use 50%. Generally in addition to their budget a movie will spend another .5 of that on marketing. So 1.5x in expenses, you have to do 3x to break even.

Everything else that person said is ridiculous but that revenue figure makes sense to me.

[Syegfryed]

I mean you listed a bunch of them right there, the film is doing well for itself, it's not doing better than other films. If it was doing better than other films it wouldn't be fourth.

So, you decide what is relevant or not, thats a neat joke.

And yes, its doing better seeing how its nicher, have less theaters, less advertisement and fucking less budget

Lets see after their eun who lost money and who did profit and i want to hear again who did better.

- - - Updated - - -

Depending on the location Disney would only get 40-60% of the box office, for estimates most use 50%. Generally in addition to their budget a movie will spend another .5 of that on marketing. So 1.5x in expenses, you have to do 3x to break even.

Everything else that person said is ridiculous but that revenue figure makes sense to me.

You also need to pay for the reshoots, and those movies had a lot.

[Northern Goblin]

So, you decide what is relevant or not, thats a neat joke.

Or you go on any box office ranking site and they'll tell you the only that matters in terms of who's doing better.

It's ticket sales. Anything excuses you want to factor in to that to argue why some niche anime film is somehow doing better despite selling less tickets is raw copium.

[Syegfryed]

Or you go on any box office ranking site and they'll tell you the only that matters in terms of who's doing better.

It's ticket sales. Anything excuses you want to factor in to that to argue why some niche anime film is somehow doing better despite selling less tickets is raw copium.

Or, you could see things are different, and you can use the same metric for anything, its like comparing a indie game to a triple A made by santa monica.

This isn't a matter of "copium" but if you have a movie with a budget of 1km and it makes 450m, compared to a movie with a budget of 250/300m, with more advertise and more theaters and only does 500m/600m you can see who did better overall

[Surfd]

So, you decide what is relevant or not, thats a neat joke.

And yes, its doing better seeing how its nicher, have less theaters, less advertisement and fucking less budget

Lets see after their eun who lost money and who did profit and i want to hear again who did better..

If historical precedent for Anime stuff is any indication, Ant-man will kick it's ass, no question.

Most anime movies usually get a 2 week run (2 weeks is usually the minimum a distributor will let you book something that is being offered as a "feature" run, as opposed to limited event showings). It's very VERY rare that an anime movie gets full theatre booking past 2 weeks. Even stuff like Dragonball won't get anything close to the feature run of something like Antman, cause their distributors won't have anything vaguely close to the pull Disney does. They tend to perform very well in their opening week as all the fans turn out to watch, then crater off a cliff in their second week. Very few ever get 3 weeks or more, as they usually get bumped out for newer, better stuff.

So sure, Demon Slayer may look like it's doing great, but that's basically because it's a firecracker, burning hot and fast and about to explode and disappear.

[Syegfryed]

If historical precedent for Anime stuff is any indication, Ant-man will kick it's ass, no question.

Most anime movies usually get a 2 week run (2 weeks is usually the minimum a distributor will let you book something that is being offered as a "feature" run, as opposed to limited event showings). It's very VERY rare that an anime movie gets full theatre booking past 2 weeks. They tend to perform very well in their opening week as all the fans turn out to watch, then crater off a cliff in their second week. Very few ever get 3 weeks or more, as they usually get bumped out for newer, better stuff.

So sure, Demon Slayer may look like it's doing great, but that's basically because it's a firecracker, burning hot and fast and about to explode and disappear.

If we go by the metrics of the previous movie, mugen train i think, movie made 450m out of a budget of 15m, that was insane, taking account how niche animes movies are in general. And didn't even air in most theaters, i know the ones close where i lived didn't. So yeah, to me is a feat and its doing very well overal compared.

[Surfd]

This isn't a matter of "copium" but if you have a movie with a budget of 1km and it makes 450m, compared to a movie with a budget of 250/300m, with more advertise and more theaters and only does 500m/600m you can see who did better overall

Are you suggesting that you think that Demon Slayer is going to make 450m?!?! Are you insane? It's 3 days in for it's domestic release and has only made 10 and is already seeing pretty significant drop offs DAILY.... Globally, it's been out for a month in Japan (which typically accounts for 90% of the global take for the franchise's movie releases) and has basically cratered off the charts with around 24m to show for it. It will be an absolute miracle if it hits 100m let alone 450, and probably much more realistic that it maybe hits 50k before vanishing into oblivion.

- - - Updated - - -

If we go by the metrics of the previous movie, mugen train i think, movie made 450m out of a budget of 15m, that was insane, taking account how niche animes movies are in general. And didn't even air in most theaters, i know the ones close where i lived didn't. So yeah, to me is a feat and its doing very well overal compared.

The current Demon Slayer movie is no Mugen Train. It's a month in on it's Japan release and has barely pulled 24m total. Mugen Train pulled more than that in its 3rd week alone. This one will be lucky to pull 50 globally before it burns out completely.

Also, keep in mind that like 70% of Mugen Train's take was ENTIRELY from the Japanese market, and we are seeing absolutely nothing even vaguely comparable with this new movie.

[Syegfryed]

Are you suggesting that you think that Demon Slayer is going to make 450m?!?! Are you insane?

No, i was comparing to the previous movie, i don't think this one will do the same no, still are amazing numbers for an anime movie.

Also, keep in mind that like 70% of Mugen Train's take was ENTIRELY from the Japanese market, and we are seeing absolutely nothing even vaguely comparable with this new movie.

This is also more for the japanese market, by example, i have to travel a week to watch in a theater, because it only air in a theater halfway trough the continent, but i could take half a hour to watch ant-man, but i rather do the first, because ant--man was that meh.

[Northern Goblin]

This isn't a matter of "copium" but if you have a movie with a budget of 1km and it makes 450m, compared to a movie with a budget of 250/300m, with more advertise and more theaters and only does 500m/600m you can see who did better overall

None of those numbers are remotely accurate here in your hypothetical scenario.

But in terms of who's doing better, I'll take the film that pulled 10x the opening weekend of the other.

[Kreuger]

No suprise:

https://tvline.com/2023/03/07/darede...-frank-castle/

[Endus]

No suprise:

https://tvline.com/2023/03/07/darede...-frank-castle/

Super excited, but I hope we get a Frank who's a little more over his own shit. This isn't a criticism of the Netflix stuff, but like with Daredevil it feels like an emotional low point both characters should be able to build forward from. Even in Frank's path forward is to get a lot more methodical about his brutality, rather than soaking in his personal tragedy.

[Kreuger]

Super excited, but I hope we get a Frank who's a little more over his own shit. This isn't a criticism of the Netflix stuff, but like with Daredevil it feels like an emotional low point both characters should be able to build forward from. Even in Frank's path forward is to get a lot more methodical about his brutality, rather than soaking in his personal tragedy.

Couldnt agree more, would like that direction aswell

A bit sad we wont see either Page nor Foggy

[Makabreska]

Man, never got into Jon Bernthals Punisher character, simple becasue he is so much smaller compared to his usual comic book depiction.

[Kreuger]

Man, never got into Jon Bernthals Punisher character, simple becasue he is so much smaller compared to his usual comic book depiction.

6ft 200lbs vs 5"11 and 185lbs, wouldnt say its a much smaller dude

[Lorgar Aurelian]

6ft 200lbs vs 5"11 and 185lbs, wouldnt say its a much smaller dude

Heights and weights seems pretty irrelevant compared to how they are drawn and the punisher is up there with Eddie Brock being drawn stupid big half the time.

[Kreuger]

Heights and weights seems pretty irrelevant compared to how they are drawn and the punisher is up there with Eddie Brock being drawn stupid big half the time.

Well, Brock is alot bigger so if they draw them to look the same in comics they are doing it weird for sure

[Triceron]

Hearing the rumor mill talking about Steven Yeun might be playing Sentry in Thunderbolts.

No clue on the validity of it.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Well, Brock is alot bigger so if they draw them to look the same in comics they are doing it weird for sure

Being bigger then Frankie isn’t quite the point.

It’s that from one artist to another (or even the same artist) there sizes can be vastly different. Eddie for examples is some times a head taller then pete with his suit, some times two without it, some times even in height, with or without suit, ect ect.

Depending on what runs you prefer you might get a vastly different mental image of a characters size due to the artist being inconsistent and Frankie is some one who is all over the place like Eddie.