Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase 4 General Discussion (Spoilers discussed for All Films -- Please Read First Post) (1 Viewer)

[Alex...]

 

[Alex...]

 

[Joe Wong]

2 Avengers films in 2025!

 

[Joe Wong]

There are some new Marvel film titles that have apparently just been trademarked (not coincidentally 1 day before Marvel's session in Hall H on Saturday July 23 at Comic-Con).

Spoiler

Avengers: Secret Wars is expected... and Avengers: The Kang Dynasty sounds cool!

So not only have those trademarked titles been announced, but people have unearthed a few more trademarks:

Spoiler

 

[Joe Wong]

3 movies in Fall of 2024?

EDIT: I forget, the other 2 could be D+ shows.

 

[Jake Lipson]

2 Avengers films in 2025!

It isn't surprising to me that they want to do another two-part event, but it is a surprise that they are back-to-back on the release schedule. I figured if they would do a year between movies again in order to have both of them play in the summer.

I liked Ant-Man and the Wasp and Captain Marvel for what they are, but they do sit sort of oddly shoehorned between Infinity War and Endgame which want to be a larger story. Last time, they had this huge cliffhanger of Thanos having won, but didn't want to shut down the MCU for a year to wait for Endgame. I think just having them both back-to-back will be a lot smoother for the storytelling.

 

[Joe Wong]

Many people on social media are saying that Marvel is moving too fast, and putting out too much too soon, and being bombarded with new content almost every couple of weeks.

Given the tweet above, with the Multiverse saga / Phases 4-6 completed in essentially 4 years (2021-2025), it’s certainly a much shorter time than the Infinity Saga / Phases 1-3.

But if one feels too much is coming out, well, one doesn’t have to watch any of them as they’re released (especially the D+ shows). One could wait for, say, Ms Marvel, to complete its run and then watch all 6 episodes when you can set aside 5-6 hours.

I mean, even if there are 4 movies a year (8-10 hours total), and 4 or 5 D+ shows (22-30 hours approximately)… a total of 30-40 hours of content in a year is not exactly a huge investment of time.

I, for one, love all the content that’s scheduled to come out! I can’t wait to see what Feige has planned for post-2025.

 

[Joe Wong]

It isn't surprising to me that they want to do another two-part event, but it is a surprise that they are back-to-back on the release schedule. I figured if they would do a year between movies again in order to have both of them play in the summer.

I liked Ant-Man and the Wasp and Captain Marvel for what they are, but they do sit sort of oddly shoehorned between Infinity War and Endgame which want to be a larger story. Last time, they had this huge cliffhanger of Thanos having won, but didn't want to shut down the MCU for a year to wait for Endgame. I think just having them both back-to-back will be a lot smoother for the storytelling.

Not so much surprise as impressed and excited!

 

[Joe Wong]

More dates staked out (for films not yet announced):

 

[Jake Lipson]

I mean, even if there are 4 movies a year (8-10 hours total), and 4 or 5 D+ shows (22-30 hours approximately)… a total of 30-40 hours of content in a year is not exactly a huge investment of time.

I don't think the number of hours of content is the issue. I'm a big fan of the MCU and I still like most of what they've been doing recently. I'm not remotely interested in jumping off the train. But I think there are two things here:

1) You are talking from the perspective of an obsessive fan. I want to be very clear that do not mean that as a negative or as a personal attack in any way. I am an obsessive fan too and I am proud of it. But we do not represent the majority of the moviegoing audience.

It is important to remember that in order to be a huge success, the MCU needs to reach casual moviegoers. Endgame could not have become the biggest film of all time (for a while) without reaching well beyond the die-hard fan base. People who go to the movies a few times a year at most need to feel like they can go to these movies without having to have a degree in Marvel in order to understand it. For those people, an announcement like this is a lot of content.

2) The quality is eroding a little as Marvel has expanded the amount of material that Marvel puts out. I don't think the sky is falling. They haven't made anything the audience has completely rejected. But I do think we can see that people aren't necessarily quite as enthralled with the recent MCU stuff as before.

Thor was the only MCU movie prior to Phase Four to receive a Cinemascore grade from opening night audiences that was below an A-. It received a B+. Every other movie in the MCU got an A+, A or A- Cinemascore.

The Cinemascore grades for Phase Four are as follows:

Black Widow - A-
Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings - A
Eternals - B
Spider-Man: No Way Home - A+
Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness - B+
Thor: Love and Thunder - B+

This is a pattern which demonstrates that opening night audiences are not coming out with as favorable of an opinion as they used to as consistently as they used to. So we're getting a lot more stuff, but it is resonating a little bit less than it used to. That should be something Kevin Feige and his team are talking about because there is often a correlation between the Cinemascore grade and the legs that a film has at the box office. Most of the Phase Four films have tended to be quantifiably more frontloaded than they have ever been before, and that is also something that Kevin Feige should keep in mind. I don't think any of this qualifies as a crisis, but it does demonstrate a change in consumer attitudes.

I want to note here that critic Dan Murrell covered this on his box office show. I wrote this post myself and I stand by my opinoons, but he is the one whose reporting brought the recent Cinemascore declines to my attention. Here is his analysis.

Here's a video explaining what Cinemascore is for those who may not already know, as well as Dan's two most recent box office videos discussing trends within the MCU. He is a professional critic who is a member of the critics association that administers the Critics Choice Awards and is also listed on Rotten Tomatoes.







Given all of these recent developments, I don't think concern about the sheer size of this slate is completely unfounded. I'm excited, but it is a lot of stuff.

 

[Sean Bryan]

It isn't surprising to me that they want to do another two-part event, but it is a surprise that they are back-to-back on the release schedule. I figured if they would do a year between movies again in order to have both of them play in the summer.

Initially I would have expected the same, but you can see that this second grand “3-phase saga” is being told within a tighter time frame than the Infinity Saga (11 years vs about 4 years), though with much more entries. So it makes sense considering that time frame.

 

[Sean Bryan]

More dates staked out (for films not yet announced):

Definitely some X titles in there. And I’m sure between now and the end of 2026 there will be at least one more Spider-Man (though likely 2 more within that general timeframe.

I’m sure at least some of these will be announced later this year at D23

 

[Jake Lipson]

And I’m sure between now and the end of 2026 there will be at least one more Spider-Man (though likely 2 more within that general timeframe.

I don't think Spider-Man is Disney's to announce. I absolutely agree that it will continue, but we know that Sony will be the distributor for that. So I think those dates are Sony's to reveal when they are ready, even if Marvel remains a co-producer. This is also why I don't think that Spider-Man will be announced at D23.

 

[Sean Bryan]

I don't think Spider-Man is Disney's to announce. I absolutely agree that it will continue, but we know that Sony will be the distributor for that. So I think those dates are Sony's to reveal when they are ready, even if Marvel remains a co-producer. This is also why I don't think that Spider-Man will be announced at D23.

Of course

 

[Joe Wong]

I don't think the number of hours of content is the issue. I'm a big fan of the MCU and I still like most of what they've been doing recently. I'm not remotely interested in jumping off the train. But I think there are two things here:

1) You are talking from the perspective of an obsessive fan. I want to be very clear that do not mean that as a negative or as a personal attack in any way. I am an obsessive fan too and I am proud of it. But we do not represent the majority of the moviegoing audience.

It is important to remember that in order to be a huge success, the MCU needs to reach casual moviegoers. Endgame could not have become the biggest film of all time (for a while) without reaching well beyond the die-hard fan base. People who go to the movies a few times a year at most need to feel like they can go to these movies without having to have a degree in Marvel in order to understand it. For those people, an announcement like this is a lot of content.



Given all of these recent developments, I don't think concern about the sheer size of this slate is completely unfounded. I'm excited, but it is a lot of stuff.

Re: 1)

I understand your point, which is good and valid.

Marvel did announce a lot of content at Comic Con, so I'm certainly not disagreeing if someone on Twitter says it's too much. It's an individual perspective. My comment is that the 30-40 hours it takes to watch what they release in the course of a year is not really a lot of time for consuming content. (Eg., Before streaming, a network TV show like 24 would require a commitment of 24 hours every season if one wanted to follow it.) And with the D+ shows, they can watch whenever they want. My older son hasn't seen Hawkeye, Moon Knight or Ms Marvel, due to college and other pursuits. But he says he'll catch up when a film is about to be released where it would be beneficial, eg. The Marvels.

With respect to how obsessive a fan we are of the MCU, it's more a matter of degrees. You and I are definitely invested (I prefer that term instead of obsessive ) given how much we discuss the MCU in these forums.

On the other end, I'll use the example of my father, who is a long-time movie fan but does not follow the MCU in any shape or form and thinks some of the latest ones like Shang-Chi are horrible. (History: I had played Infinity War on Blu-ray when he had travelled from Australia to visit me in Minnesota in August 2018 - he thought it had plenty of action but was a little confused at all the characters. With Endgame, he couldn't understand what it was all about. Then I asked him about Shang-Chi since he had raised me on a diet of martial arts films - but he hated it.)

The comments I see on social media bemoaning the amount of content, I would have to believe (and obviously I'm assuming here), are from folks who are a bit more invested in the MCU than my father, otherwise why would they care what Feige is announcing at Comic Con (and care enough to then comment on it)? My father definitely wouldn't.

I fully agree that Disney/Marvel need the casual audiences as well. My point (I've mentioned this previously) is that the content is there if you want to be caught up. If not, that's also one's choice. Is it a lot to take in or absorb? Well, yes, but it's part of the MCU fabric now. The fact is, and we all know this, the MCU is a giant universe (or, more precisely, multiverse ), whether one likes it or not. The filmmakers/showrunners can't always recap everything that's gone before - it's up to the viewer if they want to be prepared, since the prior content is available. If Disney/Marvel went back to more independent entries (similar to what Warner/DC did after Justice League), then it wouldn't be the MCU we have come to be invested in.

So casual audiences can still enjoy Secret Wars in 2025 without getting too invested in the MCU. But I have to believe it would be more enjoyable if they were.

Apologies for the length of my response - maybe I am obsessed! I'm just one who likes the complexities and story potential the MCU brings as it continues to expand.

 

[Jake Lipson]

If Disney/Marvel went back to more independent entries (similar to what Warner/DC did after Justice League), then it wouldn't be the MCU we have come to be invested in.

Sure it would. We've discussed Love and Thunder. I don't love that movie, but I liked parts of it. The best thing about it in my opinion is that it wasn't concerned with the current multiverses goings-on. I'm caught up with everything, but I didn't need that movie to advance the multiverse arc. It was just about Thor and Jane and (mostly) people we already knew. The multiverse presents interesting possibilities, but that doesn't mean everything in the entire franchise has to connect to it.

So casual audiences can still enjoy Secret Wars in 2025 without getting too invested in the MCU. But I have to believe it would be more enjoyable if they were.

Secret Wars might not be the best example because it is the next culmination film like Endgame. So I think it's okay for things like that to assume more knowledge than other things in the MCU. But I look at something like Black Panther. Yes, it follows on from T'Challa's experiences in Civil War when his father died, but it makes sense even if you didn't see Civil War. The fact that it doesn't contain a ton of little references to other MCU movies made it easier for that particular film to be seen by audiences who don't normally go to MCU films.

I also think that is part of why Black Panther was easier for the Academy to recognize than something like Endgame because it was more accessible to audiences who don't follow the overarching MCU narrative. My mom probably doesn't know what "the MCU" means, but she watched Black Panther after it was Oscar nominated. I don't think it went over her head. Something like Multiverse of Madness, on the other hand, is basically impenetrable if you're not familiar with multiple different areas of the MCU.

There was an interview with Michael Douglas while he was doing press for Ant-Man and the Wasp where he said that he was confused when he got the script because he didn't understand why Hank was mad at Scott. No one told him that he ended to see Civil War to understand that, and he is in the MCU. There are certainly going to be some projects in the MCU that work better for fans who follow the connections, but Marvel doesn't want to leave the Michael Douglases of the world completely out of their audience either.

Honoring continuity between multiple sub-franchises is wonderful and can lead to incredibly satisfying films like Endgame. But having so much of it that you choke on it and there are no entry points for casual viewers is exclusionary toward casual audiences, and that is probably not a good idea. There needs to be a mix of both.

Apologies for the length of my response - maybe I am obsessed! I'm just one who likes the complexities and story potential the MCU brings as it continues to expand.

Don't apologize. I enjoy reading your posts. If I didn't, I wouldn't be part of this discussion. Also, to be completely clear, I view "obsessed" as a positive thing in this specific context. I am obsessed with the MCU too. But it doesn't hurt anybody for me to love Marvel. If we were talking about being a crazy stalker obsessed with causing harm to your ex-lover because no one else can have them, that's obviously a very bad thing. But we're not talking about that. Being very passionate about movies and finding a community with which to share that passion in a way that brings joy is a good thing.

 

[Joe Wong]

Sure it would. We've discussed Love and Thunder. I don't love that movie, but I liked parts of it. The best thing about it in my opinion is that it wasn't concerned with the current multiverses goings-on. I'm caught up with everything, but I didn't need that movie to advance the multiverse arc. It was just about Thor and Jane and (mostly) people we already knew. The multiverse presents interesting possibilities, but that doesn't mean everything in the entire franchise has to connect to it.


Secret Wars might not be the best example because it is the next culmination film like Endgame. So I think it's okay for things like that to assume more knowledge than other things in the MCU. But I look at something like Black Panther. Yes, it follows on from T'Challa's experiences in Civil War when his father died, but it makes sense even if you didn't see Civil War. The fact that it doesn't contain a ton of little references to other MCU movies made it easier for that particular film to be seen by audiences who don't normally go to MCU films.

I also think that is part of why Black Panther was easier for the Academy to recognize than something like Endgame because it was more accessible to audiences who don't follow the overarching MCU narrative. My mom probably doesn't know what "the MCU" means, but she watched Black Panther after it was Oscar nominated. I don't think it went over her head. Something like Multiverse of Madness, on the other hand, is basically impenetrable if you're not familiar with multiple different areas of the MCU.

There was an interview with Michael Douglas while he was doing press for Ant-Man and the Wasp where he said that he was confused when he got the script because he didn't understand why Hank was mad at Scott. No one told him that he ended to see Civil War to understand that, and he is in the MCU. There are certainly going to be some projects in the MCU that work better for fans who follow the connections, but Marvel doesn't want to leave the Michael Douglases of the world completely out of their audience either.

Honoring continuity between multiple sub-franchises is wonderful and can lead to incredibly satisfying films like Endgame. But having so much of it that you choke on it and there are no entry points for casual viewers is exclusionary toward casual audiences, and that is probably not a good idea. There needs to be a mix of both.


Don't apologize. I enjoy reading your posts. If I didn't, I wouldn't be part of this discussion. Also, to be completely clear, I view "obsessed" as a positive thing in this specific context. I am obsessed with the MCU too. But it doesn't hurt anybody for me to love Marvel. If we were talking about being a crazy stalker obsessed with causing harm to your ex-lover because no one else can have them, that's obviously a very bad thing. But we're not talking about that. Being very passionate about movies and finding a community with which to share that passion in a way that brings joy is a good thing.

I do love all the MCU discussion!! Especially with MCU fans like yourself, @Sean Bryan , @Josh Dial , @Adam Lenhardt , and many others!

Re: Thor L&T - yes, it doesn't have anything to do with multiverses, but I would still venture that watching it without having seen any of the previous Thor films may be a little confusing (thought it does have a great framing device with Korg's account of Thor's adventures). One can still follow along and enjoy it, but the brief glimpses of characters like Darcy, Selvig and Sif may be lost on the newcomer. Ultimately it may not have a huge impact, since Darcy, Selvig and Sif don't have much to do, but if one does know who they are, then there's no need to ask any questions.

Re: entry points, your example with Black Panther is great. Mostly a stand-alone picture that exists (both figuratively and even literally) as a separate part of the MCU. So if there are to be entry points for casual viewers, the best ones would most likely be the "origin" or initial films/shows within a particular hero's franchise. Shang-Chi and especially Moon Knight are recent examples.

So, along those lines, forthcoming films/shows like She-Hulk, Blade, Fantastic Four, and maybe even Captain America: New World Order would be good entry points. I would think that, for casual viewers and not fans like us, it probably doesn't matter how much MCU content is being announced since they would mostly just see the ones they've heard of or are interested in as it gets released. Eg. those who are fans of the Wesley Snipes Blade trilogy may be curious about the new iteration with Mahershala Ali. Those who feel it's a lot of content (or me, who doesn't mind the amount!) would already be more than casual fans, as I discuss in my previous post.

Re: obsessive - I know you mean it in a positive manner, so no worries about the use of the word! Maybe I have already tipped over into obsession since I've started purchasing some of the recent runs of comics, which I had never done before and would haven't even considered doing prior to Infinity War/Endgame! But if obsession = passion, that's a perfect way to describe it.

 

[Sam Favate]

Marvel is killing it with these announcements, confirming them as the preeminent studio in the world right now. I mean, by comparison, Warner shows one trailer (Shazam) and announces no new films or streaming shows, and do we even know when the next Star Wars movie is coming? By the time it does, Marvel will have had a dozen films and shows out there.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Warner shows one trailer (Shazam) and announces no new films or streaming shows

I understand the sentiment, but let's be totally fair to WB/DC here. Marvel was in a position where they needed to make an announcement like this soon. The Marvels next July was the last movie officially dated until yesterday, so it was necessary to formalize what the next couple years would look like. They also have a stable slate right now under Kevin Feige. By contrast, WB is simply not in the same place right now.

Warner has just had a huge management change, so they may not be ready to make a slate announcement of this nature. Everything in development at WB right now is being scrutinized and reevaluated by the new owners, so they might not know what their new direction is yet.

They also have a 2023 slate involving controversial actors (Ezra Miller and, for very different and extremely lesser reasons, Amber Heard) and they didn't want to open themselves up to questions about that at Comic-Con. I was surprised The Flash even made it into the Shazam! trailer under the circumstances, and obviously it was cut very deliberately so you don't see Ezra Miller's face in it.

do we even know when the next Star Wars movie is coming?

Yes and no. Disney has a placeholder date for December 22, 2023 on the calendar but appears unlikely to fill it. I suspect we may learn about that in September at D23.

 

[jayembee]

Maybe I've not been paying enough attention to the date-swapping up to this point, but it appears that The Marvels and Quantumania have switched places. They are now Quantumania for 2023 02 17 and The Marvels for 2023 07 28. I could've sworn the last time I checked (which wasn't all that long ago), it was the other way around.

On edit: Before anyone corrects me, I do realize that Quantumania was originally scheduled for 02 17, and Marvels originally for 07 28, but I was sure that some months back, their dates were swapped, and they're now swapped back.

Then again, maybe I'm lost in the Multiverse...