Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Movies' started by Nigel P, Jul 25, 2016.
It''s still not at $700M domestic box office.
It will crawl there. But they'd have had it already if the disc had been delayed just a little bit.
I see that BLACK PANTHER finally made it past the $700M threshold this weekend. My question is how? It had a 1,300% increase in ticket sales this weekend, according to Box Office Mojo. How did it accomplish that, when it's been out on video and streaming for weeks, and was only earning a couple of thousand bucks each of the past few weekends. I know it's been gone from the subrun theatre near me for a while now.
A 1300% increase at this point in its run only amounts to $32,500. Disney boosted the film from 15 theaters back up to 25 theaters, which explains much of the difference.
They'd tried to nudge it over the $700 million mark two weekends ago, putting it into 154 theaters, but didn't quite make it.
In news that should surprise no one but is still good to have confirmed, Ryan Coogler has made his deal and signed to write and direct the sequel.
Heaven forbid that they wait until May to announce it...
At this rate, Avengers 4 will have its secrets completely spoiled before it even is released.
Did you think there was any chance at all that they wouldn't do Black Panther 2 regardless of what happened in Infinity War?
This is just common sense.
I believe it’s entirely possible that any film might not automatically get a sequel.
If Black Panther being a one-off was ever possible, the $700 million success ensured it would not remain so.
We know Spider-Man is getting a sequel after Avengers 4.
I really don't see how knowing that Black Panther will get one is any worse than that. Particularly when the comic book being adapted also reversed things.
We still don't know how it will happen.
We've been over this on different threads, and I don't think I'm ever going to convince you of my point of view, and I don't think you're going to convince me of yours. Respectfully, it may be best for us to agree to disagree on this topic.
I would have loved to have walked into Avengers 4 without knowing for a fact that the deaths of Spider-Man and Black Panther were going to be undone. If you asked me if I thought it was likely that they would be undone, I'd say yes, but I also try not to think too much about that in advance of the film. And given that Holland's MCU contract is believed to end with Far From Home, it was easy for me to believe that Far From Home could have taken place after Homecoming but before Infinity War, just as Ant-Man And The Wasp takes place after Civil War but before Infinity War.
I would just have strongly preferred to walk into Avengers 4 without having its ending spoiled by the too-far-in-advance announcement of future films. It doesn't make sense to me that, on one hand, Marvel cares so much about secrecy that they won't even tell us what Avengers 4 is even called, but they're already telling us how it ends.
Excellent news. Even more than James Gunn and "Guardians", he is an auteur that made the first one as special as it was.
I feel like once the Spider-Man: Homecoming sequel was announced by Sony, the cat was already out of the bag.
Technically, though, Black Panther is a mantle, not a specific individual. For all we know, the sequel could follow Shuri or someone else as the new Black Panther.
The only reason that doesn't bother me as much is that it seems entirely possible that Far From Home could take place before Infinity War, just as Ant-Man And The Wasp took place before Infinity War. With Far From Home currently the last film in the MCU-Sony shared contract, it doesn't seem so outrageous that Marvel would be fine with dispensing of that version of the character rather than risking Sony making a Holland-themed Spider-Man film without their participation.
Kevin Feige said before Infinity War came out that Far From Home picks up minutes after the end of Avengers 4 and that Peter Parker will hold our hand going into the post-Avengers 4 MCU. I don't remember the exact quote, so full disclosure that's paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it.
We can disagree on the merits of Marvel announcing this information ahead of time, but in the case of Far From Home, Sony is going to want to market that film before Avengers 4 comes out, so it was going to become clear anyway. This is a price they pay for working with Sony rather than fully controlling Spider-Man.
I think it’s really strange to even entertain the thinking that there wouldn’t be a sequel to BP.
I don’t see a point in pretending about it and not announcing it when they want to.
I accepted that Sony was gonna do what it was going to do.
I still think it’s bizarre that Marvel cares so much about secrecy that they won’t even tell us the name of Avengers 4, but they have no problem spoiling the ending of Avengers 4 by disclosing its sequels, the very existence of which gives away the ending. This could have waited until the second week of May.
I agree with your point of view, though I would point out that this isn’t something that has been “announced” by Marvel Studios. The Hollywood Reporter is basing this article on leaks from sources, which can and will happen with anything which holds interest to the public.
Reporters like to dig, insiders like to talk, agents like to brag, etc... And in this story they are saying that all of this is something that was “quietly” done. So it wasn’t something Marvel wanted to shout out to fans just yet.
So while I agree with your sentiment, I’d direct my frustration to the trades like THR instead of Marvel in this case.
That’s not Marvel announcing or revealing anything. That’s entertainment reporters doing what they do.
Sean, that’s a great point.
That is a great point.
Maybe they'll just call it Avengers 4 at this point.
Don't we know how these things end?
"The only significant character in comics who ever stays dead is Uncle Ben."