₦airaland Forum

MSGAMBLE9:
Even the so called "successful era" has it misses e.g. for every CA : The Winter Soldier there has always been Thor : The dark world ......

phr0nesis:
This list I'm seeing or another list?

oyaskii:
That period after "Endgame" (2019), when Kevin Fiege was greenliting every slop that came through his doors, did irreparable damage to the MCU, i mean filth like "She Hulk", "Secret Wars" and Antman: Qantumlovmbiaxx and The Marvels were their response to as a follow up to a hugely successive period, so people just got tired of shît, so it's no surprises that the wave for their slops, dwindles after opening weekend.

The next Avengers movie is the utmost litmus test for this franchise, even that is on shaking legs, i mean they got so spooked that they had to cast a beloved hero in the successful period, as a villain, just to got some sort of fan service going... doesn't bode well at all.

SOZINN:
How convenient of you to cherry-pick only the underperforming films as evidence of Kevin Feige's response to the MCU’s Endgame-era success. Alright, let’s go with your logic. Here's his actual response:

Spider-Man: No Way Home – $1.9 billion

Spider-Man: Far From Home – $1.1 billion

Deadpool & Wolverine – $1.3 billion
Meanwhile, Doctor Strange 2, Wakanda Forever, and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 each landed between $845 million and $952 million.

abduleez1:
I've watched 8 out of the 10 films on that list except presently in-theatres movie Together and Companion.

Objectively and narratively speaking those two movies are significantly weaker than films like X-, NOSFERATU, Barbarian and The Substance, in my opinion.

And almost on par with Longlegs.

BlackManta:
Of course, not all post-Endgame MCU movies are trash.
But the truth is, the majority of them are.

Let’s go through the full list of MCU films released after Endgame and break down which ones were average or just plain underperformed.

Spider-Man: Far From Home
A billion-dollar movie riding the momentum of Endgame. Plus, it’s Spider-Man—Marvel’s biggest and best-selling character. No surprise it was a hit.

Black Widow
This movie flopped so badly, Scarlett Johansson sued Disney. Yes, it came out in 2021 (a COVID year), but it’s still a flop, forgettable and below average.

Shang-Chi
Good movie, sure. Still a flop.

Eternals
The first MCU movie to go rotten on Rotten Tomatoes. Not only did it flop, it damaged the franchise. You’ll never see the Eternals again, not even as a cameo.

Spider-Man: No Way Home
Massive fan service with all three Spider-Men. Obviously, it was a hit.

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness
Released in 2022, this was the first time the MCU had back-to-back hits since Endgame.

Thor: Love and Thunder
Made money, but no one likes it. It underperformed, and Taika Waititi has been in director jail ever since.

Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
Not as good as the first. Slightly underperformed but still a win overall.

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania
One of the worst comic book movies of all time. The damage this film did to the MCU will take years to fix.

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3
James Gunn doesn’t miss. Solid movie.

The Marvels
The biggest box office bomb in MCU history. Cost over $220M and didn’t even make that back. A complete disaster.

Deadpool & Wolverine
Another multiverse cash grab built to pander to X-Men fans. Full of cameos and fan service—because that’s apparently the only way the MCU can make money now. No wonder they’re rushing to bring back Robert Downey Jr. for the next Avengers.

Captain America: Brave New World
Nothing to write home about. No redeeming qualities.

Thunderbolts
Not bad, not good. Just there. Another big flop.


Now let’s talk about the Disney+ shows:

WandaVision – Decent.

The Falcon and the Winter Soldier – Mid.

Loki – Decent.

Hawkeye – Mid.

Moon Knight – Mid.

Ms. Marvel – Mid.

She-Hulk: Attorney at Law – Disgusting.

Secret Invasion – Makes She-Hulk look like prestige TV.

Echo – Did anyone even watch this?




You can defend the disastrous post-Endgame run all you want, but let’s not pretend Phase 1–3 was ever this messy.

Between 2008 and 2019, Marvel released 23 movies. Only two were genuinely bad: Thor: The Dark World and Captain Marvel.

Now compare that to the post-Endgame era.
Be serious.

BlackManta:
So out of the 15 post-Endgame movies released so far.

Only 6 are hits.

SOZINN:
[img][/img]


Oga pay close attention to the figures and stop yapping. The MCU spent approximately $3.033B to $3.113B post endgame and grossed $9.336B at the box office. Going by conventional calculations the MCU's break even is currently set at $7.8 to $8.3B. So the MCU is still in profit if you're calculating just grosses post endgame without digital revenue, yes they are experiencing diminishing returns but they are still profitable. All these are before the release of Spiderman: Brand New day and 2 Avengers movies, so going forward the MCU will still be profitable.

BlackManta:
Yes, I'm sure all is well with the MCU.

Maybe I'm just talking nonsense and made up bullish!t.

Disney CEO was probably talking out of his ass when he made this statement

oyaskii:
I could actually give no flying toss about what filths that you mentioned up there make at the BO, i simply do not care, my own rift is with critical ratings which directly affects the BO returns in some way, which my post was about, so yes, i stand by what i said, most of the MCU releases, post Endgame (2019) have been dirt bags critically..

Now, I don't even know how old you are, but i just assume you are an adult, so you might want to leave all these secondary school boyish traits behind, bothering your head about how much a film makes, when it has no direct impact on you, just so you can score some kinda point in a fandom war you made up in your head, makes zero sense to me...in fact it sucks the joy out of even seeing movies imo, sef.

You probably do not know my history here, i might as well, have praised more MCU movies here than DC, because MCU had a hugely successful period, it's just so unfortunate that they are synonymous with gutter quality media these days, i hope they find their way some day, but for now, i am well within my rights to criticise every garbage they put out, in this their down bad era, and if DC also release a slob, then i will call it out too.

Because unlike you, i am not tie down to any fandom that has warped any sense of logic, i see everything, criticise when it is necessary and praise when it's necessary too...you should try it something, maybe you'd enjoy movies more and every of your post wouldn't be about defending a franchise that clearly doesn't even know you exist in the first place..

Shalom ✌🏿

SOZINN:
How convenient of you to cherry-pick only the underperforming films as evidence of Kevin Feige's response to the MCU’s Endgame-era success. Alright, let’s go with your logic. Here's his actual response:

Spider-Man: No Way Home – $1.9 billion

Spider-Man: Far From Home – $1.1 billion

Deadpool & Wolverine – $1.3 billion
Meanwhile, Doctor Strange 2, Wakanda Forever, and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 each landed between $845 million and $952 million.

Now what stupid litmus test are you talking about? Does the success or failure of one film dictate the performance of every film that follows? If that’s your logic, is Superman now the ultimate benchmark for the DCU’s future? Do you honestly think $551 million for a James Gunn Superman movie is impressive? Isn't Superman supposed to be one of the top three most iconic characters in comics? Don’t forget—Gunn pulled in over $750 million with a bunch of no-names in Guardians of the Galaxy.

Since when is fan service in sequels to successful films a bad thing? Far From Home crossed a billion. No Way Home, which was packed with fan service, made nearly $2 billion. Honestly all this yapping about fan service is really why I'm so glad The Flash happened, because DC tried fan service and odidn’t even come close to success.

phr0nesis:
It's good you mentioned in your opinion.
Of the four movies you mentioned (Nosferatu, Barbarian, The Substance and X), The Substance is the only one I haven't watched, and in my opinion, Sinners is better than them.
If we should keep our opinions aside, Sinners tops all four movies in every major ratings (RT, Metacritic, IMDb, RT Audience score, and Cinemascore).

abduleez1:
Now Phr0nesis can you look me in the eye and tell me that because SINNERS has a 97% RT score that it's better than OPPENHEIMER who has 93% RT score??

Now you have to understand the concept that while "all films are equal, some films are more equal than others".

I can give a movie 9/10 and give another film 8.5/10
Logically the one with the higher score is the better one right?

But when you look at each films and understand that thematically and tonally they're different you begin to see that at times their ratings don't necessarily correlate or apply like for like.
The topics they touched on, the technical aspect of the films (lighting, costume and sound etc), the cinematography, the directing and acting, the execution, in-universe logic, plot holes, plot armour, character development and dialogue; you begin to see that bringing up films that aren't exactly basically the same films, is an apples to oranges comparison if you're looking at ratings and scores solely for determining the better product.

That's why sometimes a film I give that 8.5/10 some years or months ago, I consider the better film than something I gave 9/10.

And when you look at those films, you have to also at times consider the director's pedigree and actors involved as most times as I have come to expect, critics tend to give good reviews for top directors they've come to respect or love. And I have particularly noticed a trend of Ryan Coogler's films always being praised to the high heavens when he does something new as if it's the next best thing after sliced bread.

Also the genre and style of the filmmaker is also another key factor that translates to ratings. Is it a linear format of storytelling or nonlinear format. Is it hard R rated?
Is it a touchy topic and the delivery of the "message"?

These are things that play out and I say to you SINNERS has one of the easily digestible plot and storytelling ever. It's not even a challenging story as it's very straightforward and mostly surface level with a garb of Africanism at its roots. It just has so many people praising the technical aspect of the film— the music, the directing and people easily going to attack the racial themes in it — the Whites vs the Blacks; without people really digging into the "African roots" and its authenticity Ryan Coogler was trying to sell. Which I find ironic myself.

It might come off as hate but he's the easiest vibes and insha'Allah director of this present generation. Imagine people comparing this dude to Christopher Nolan, David Fincher and Denis Villeneuve.....and guess what the main reason I suspect these dude's put up Coogler up there with this industry big wigs — it's just basically cos his movies are very successful and well liked. Trust me, if SINNERS was a catastrophic bomb, no ONE would line him up with the GREATS.


The key to looking at something; was it good? If Yes. Then you now compare on a personal basis cos every review whatsoever has a personal bias no matter what. You now say how objectively better on a narrative POV this said film is better than the other.

Just going about and bandying scores comparing different films on differing themes and topics is just disingenuous at best.

MSGAMBLE9:
You dey mind them

abduleez1:
EXHUMA (2024)


These Asians are born, shaped and moulded by it; while Hollywood filmmakers just adopted the artform.

phr0nesis:
Sinners has a higher RT score than Oppenheimer, but Oppenheimer has better IMDb and Metacritic scores.
I get the point you are driving at, but saying Sinners can't lace the shoes of the other movies in that list is absolute blasphemy.
Regarding personal bias, Coogler isn't among my favorites, and neither do I have a soft spot for black movies. I'm judging based on the fact that almost everything put in place to make this movie - the music, cinematography, dialogue, acting, lighting, plot - average or not, all worked out well for it.

SOZINN:
I just decided to look back on the statistics because even while they were yapping their nonsense I knew it was grossly exaggerated. I looked back at phase 1 and they made decent profit, although some of the movies in that phase had controlled budgets - making profit while earning under $500M. The profits were larger in phase 2 but phase 3 was where the MCU became a certified cash cow, that was the peak, then from there onward was diminishing returns.

Also, all these talk about green lighting movies here and there is funny because phase 4 had 7 movies and phase 5 had 6, these numbers are not out of the norm. Phase 1 and 2 had 6 movies each, in fact before the release of endgame Kevin approved 9 movies - 9. Phase 3 ended with a total of 11 movies, but we didn't hear all these nonsense because it put the MCU at the forefront of CBM success. Now DC tards want to come out of their caves after rebooting their universe (as if that guarantees success).

Thankfully 2 movies are coming from there next year. I really want to see the numbers Clayface and Supergirl (the one where they couldn't find anybody else to play Lobo they had to recast the previous hero "Aquaman" )will do at the cinemas.

abduleez1:
I don't know if we've descended into some sort of authoritarianism here on Nairaland.
Cos someone can't even talk about some serious topics or even play with words in a silly manner.
Everything is just damn effing flagged for no reason. What's funny is many of it is nonsensical.

I doubt if even China is this totalitarian. 💀💀

abduleez1:
Going with this your logic of having better critics scores across board means a film is objectively better than another.

Can you tell me that SINNERS is better than THE BRUTALIST and DUNE PART TWO simply because it has better overall RT, Metacritic and IMDB scores than them?

I just don't want to drag this thing too much but even with all that technical fields like music, cinematography, lighting, dialogue and acting etc you listed, NOSFERATU trumps SINNERS hands down, eyes closed on any technicalities you want to bring.

This is just the most hyped films of the year. I'm not saying the film and it's technicalities didn't work for it, I'm saying compared to what I saw versus other fellow horror films, they were narratively better than SINNERS. While some might not trounce SINNERS in all categories (some actually do), the strengths of other films do well to put them above SINNERS in my opinion.

That list I've stated how flawed it is. And my own version of the best horror works of the 2020s would easily erode both SINNERS and NOPE from that list replacing them with titles like SMILE 2, PEARL, ODDITY, EXHUMA, THE BLACK PHONE, SPEAK NO EVIL.
So weaker films like Talk To Me and Barbarian will also be wiped off.

Well, no wahala sha...... Awards season is fast approaching and we'll see sooner than later movies that will actually compete for the BEST in all categories come next year.
So we will see if this universal praise for SINNERS is actually genuine or not.

DieRich5:
I think this is my first time seeing 0% on debut RT

armadeo:
I gave a warning about this movie some says back. Watch at your own peril.