Comics and Movies

DallasEast said:

Marvel’s Kevin Feige Talks Scaling Back, Losing Kang and His Texts to James Gunn After ‘Superman’​

By Borys Kit, Pamela McClintock | The Hollywood Reporter
July 20, 2025

Read more

A very long but interesting article. Each sub-topic heading below can be clicked and take the reader to that specific section of the article:
Click to expand...
Some informative stuff here.

I think Kang could have worked. Ant Man killed that before it can even get off the ground.

I love Marvel stuff I don’t think too much shows was the problem but I do agree that it became like a job. I don’t think all the shows needed to be connected but I loved when they did. Wandavision in Dr Strange was done well. Thunderbolts as well.

Maybe less is better to get things back on track.
 
quickccc said:
My review on Superman contains some Spolier Alerts - that i've not mastered how to shadow them yet.

053d8decead0b4003524dbabdda487e6.jpg



I finally saw Superman 2025. both at theaters and streaming

What I did like:

As expected, it’s absolutely loaded with tantalizing, impressive CGI graphic imaging and fight battle sequences.
(Lex go-bots and neo-techs,clones, pocket dimension blackholes, mutants giant creatures,etc) Slo-mo clips, pocket Matrix format like actions, etc.

- What will make this Superman version different from previous Superman movies is that it features a great deal more interesting number of " characters” .
Both good guys & villains.

- And not just other superhero teammates, but even a trusted, very frisky, lively pet dog, several Daily Planet members, and a host of Lex Luther’s superpowered lead henchmen.

- I got to admit that I didn’t think the super dog Kryto was going to play such a prominent role than what the trailer(s) hinted. But it wasn't just a mere small cameo but
It also tries to follow the format pattern of director James Gunn involving a familiar Blend of superhero fighting/CGI image and light hearted comedy.
much like "Guardians of the Galaxy. " so Gunn's version will be cheesy campy than dark serius

- I was particularly impressed with one of the final battles scenes near the end that saw how Superman dealt with and overcame a near-suffocating ordeal.

-- This version of Superman is also different in its Clark background, as he has both foster parents alive and appearing.
It didn’t give as much details on Clark’s real, biological parents Jor-El (Bradley Cooper) & wife Lara as i thought it would. .

-Very admirable performance by Lex Luther actor Nicholsa Hoult - he brought intrigue to the role, no matter what mood he was in.
Though I still preferred ex-Super actor Henry Cavill, i had no problem with current Superman David Corenswet.

-I thought it was obvious how director James Gunn was setting up characters for potential future spin offs. - and kudos to Gunn to include a very small cameo appearance by the late actor Christopher Reeves actual son.

- At last, it was finally explained how Clark Kent is successfully able to conceal his secret identity as Superman, by wearing " Neuro" effect -eye glasses that affect the brain patterns and vision surrounding Clark.

- Also clever how it was explained how Lex Luther somehow gained entry access to Superman's secret Fortress of Solitude with such ease.

What I did not like:

Sorry, but I just didn’t get into the Clark/Superman & Lois Lane relationship. it seemed more like yabbering ranting . and it wasn’t near as on the interest relationship level of 1978 Superman II movie, Lois/Clark pairing (starring Christopher Reeves/Margot Kidder)

To go further, I wasn’t all impressed or moved with Lois Lane performance of actress Rachel Brosnahan - i just didn't find anything that stood out with her.
She was just okay, but not memorable.

- And I certainly didn't get into the reporter Jimmy Olsen/Miss Tesmacher secret relationship - it was confusing, very annoying goofy and wastefully unnecessary, imo.
-
i also thought the Perry White (Daily Planet editor-in chief) Olsen & Lois joining in spaceship journeys was a mess , and i didnt get the biological monkeys
at the control panels.

- Superman 2025 will have some light comical spots that Man of Steel did not. but there are some predictable elements in it. ala the " Brains over Brawn " turning moment
-But Add me to one of many that did not like this superman costume per colore, design trunks, CGI cape, etc. .

- Another pet peeve I keep having with comic book movie flicks is question & confusion of why directors tend to want to go with an actor whose face has already been in previous superhero films (ala Ryan Reynolds in Deadpool, Blade Trinity, and Green Lantern) Gunn version also included such as actor Ed Gathegi -aka Mr. Terrific (from Xmen First Class) and Frank Grillo (from Winter Soldier)


* Overall, while it does have some flaws & holes, Gunn's all in blend of CGI, battle fights, light humor, and multiple characters managed to combine to make Superman a solidly entertaining popcorn flick,

It's Solid, but not to be confused with all time greats great and extraordinary (ala Avengers Infinity , Dark Knight, or Winter Soldier)

On a scale of 1 to 10,.. i'd give Superman 7.0
Click to expand...
Gunns films especially when they cross over from
DC to Marvel share similar actors Nathon Dillian and his brother were all in Guardians and Suicide Squad.

I’m fine with it because these are much better characters then then previously played. The way that character died in First Class was completely stupid and glad Gunn gave him more to work with here.
 
TheMarathonContinues said:
Some informative stuff here.

I think Kang could have worked. Ant Man killed that before it can even get off the ground.

I love Marvel stuff I don’t think too much shows was the problem but I do agree that it became like a job. I don’t think all the shows needed to be connected but I loved when they did. Wandavision in Dr Strange was done well. Thunderbolts as well.

Maybe less is better to get things back on track.
Click to expand...
Ant-Man did not kill off the Kang plotline. I believe Feige is correct stating timing was the primary reason connected with Disney's acquisition of the Fox properties, which included Doctor Victor Von Doom.

That said, I am certain (even without any proof) Majors legal troubles aided the decision to go full Doom. And it will not surprise me if Kang remains as a minor sub-plot line for future MCU projects--even beyond its current Multiverse Saga Phase.
 
DallasEast said:
Ant-Man did not kill off the Kang plotline. I believe Feige is correct stating timing was the primary reason connected with Disney's acquisition of the Fox properties, which included Doctor Victor Von Doom.

That said, I am certain (even without any proof) Majors legal troubles aided the decision to go full Doom. And it will not surprise me if Kang remains as a minor sub-plot line for future MCU projects--even beyond its current Multiverse Saga Phase.
Click to expand...
Kang is a letdown when compared to this. Fans knew it, Marvel knew it.





Versus Kang intro:



If would have kept Kang to stuff more like this, we would have cared, but even then just not as menacing as the big guy:



IMO, they should have saved Galactus for the Avengers when they got the 20th Century Fox rights. Just seeing his shadow on the ground in the FF trailer is cool enough.

 
VaqueroTD said:
Kang is a letdown when compared to this. Fans knew it, Marvel knew it.
Click to expand...
Some fans knew it. That does not include myself. I was willing to give the Kang strategy a chance.

Few Marvel villains compare to Thanos. Feige and his initial group understood their MCU strategy hinged hitting general audiences with the best, relatable comic book storyline in Marvel's library. They settled upon the early 1990's (or was it late 1980's) Infinity Gauntlet series with Thanos as its central antagonist. The rest is history.

Before acquiring the Fox characters, they preplanned for Thanos' villainous successor, along with another relatable comic book storyline. That turned out to be the 1980's Secret Wars storyline. (I know it was re-done during the last decade but I doubt that was the real factor).

Let's look at what they had to work with. The Beyonder initiated the Secret Wars. Not sure if that character property was available during the planning stages.

Even if it was, I do not think they conceived of a way to make the general audience (not comic book fans of course) understand and accept a story revolving around a literal, all-powerful entity from another universe as its antagonist. Heck. They signed off on Taika Waititi's concept of Eternity in Thor: Love and Thunder, which he utterly flubbed.

Scratch The Beyonder. Doctor Doom was an eventual main antagonist in SW, but not its first AND the character was not readily available. Guess which character was both available at the time AND SW's antagonist between The Beyonder and Doctor Doom?

Answer: Kang the Conqueror

Sure. Most of the overall audience, comic book fans included, were disappointed in Kang's inclusion into the MCU. I do not argue that most probable fact. On the other hand, I could *see* Kang's potential as a main MCU villain if done correctly as I saw it. In the end, it was Que sera sera for the timelord. So, bring on DOOM! :D
 
DallasEast said:
Ant-Man did not kill off the Kang plotline. I believe Feige is correct stating timing was the primary reason connected with Disney's acquisition of the Fox properties, which included Doctor Victor Von Doom.

That said, I am certain (even without any proof) Majors legal troubles aided the decision to go full Doom. And it will not surprise me if Kang remains as a minor sub-plot line for future MCU projects--even beyond its current Multiverse Saga Phase.
Click to expand...
Oh it did for me. They made Kang weak. Kang was already a suspect villain to begin with. Coming off of Thanos and going to Kang is like facing the Philadelphia Eagles and next week going to face the Buccaneers.

To make Kang more impactful that terrible Ant Man movie shouldn’t have been made and they shouldn’t have defeated him as easily as they did.

I think they are going to Doom too early I mean I get why now it’s necessary now but doing it after Yhsnks would’ve been too early IMo.
 
DallasEast said:
Some fans knew it. That does not include myself. I was willing to give the Kang strategy a chance.

Few Marvel villains compare to Thanos. Feige and his initial group understood their MCU strategy hinged hitting general audiences with the best, relatable comic book storyline in Marvel's library. They settled upon the early 1990's (or was it late 1980's) Infinity Gauntlet series with Thanos as its central antagonist. The rest is history.

Before acquiring the Fox characters, they preplanned for Thanos' villainous successor, along with another relatable comic book storyline. That turned out to be the 1980's Secret Wars storyline. (I know it was re-done during the last decade but I doubt that was the real factor).

Let's look at what they had to work with. The Beyonder initiated the Secret Wars. Not sure if that character property was available during the planning stages.

Even if it was, I do not think they conceived of a way to make the general audience (not comic book fans of course) understand and accept a story revolving around a literal, all-powerful entity from another universe as its antagonist. Heck. They signed off on Taika Waititi's concept of Eternity in Thor: Love and Thunder, which he utterly flubbed.

Scratch The Beyonder. Doctor Doom was an eventual main antagonist in SW, but not its first AND the character was not readily available. Guess which character was both available at the time AND SW's antagonist between The Beyonder and Doctor Doom?

Answer: Kang the Conqueror

Sure. Most of the overall audience, comic book fans included, were disappointed in Kang's inclusion into the MCU. I do not argue that most probable fact. On the other hand, I could *see* Kang's potential as a main MCU villain if done correctly as I saw it. In the end, it was Que sera sera for the timelord. So, bring on DOOM! :D
Click to expand...
I think the biggest issue was they treated the movies/TV shows like the modern Marvel comic books.
  • Confusing multi-verse
  • new versions (often different sex, sexuality or race) of classic characters, which is even worse in a movie since the audience knows a specific face
  • characters given their title who even hardcore comic fans never bothered to carry past issue 50
  • picking up the subplot in the TV show the same way a comic book tells you to go read another title for the crossover event
Marvel/DC superhero comics are horrible these days. I don't know why anyone would think it's a great model for blockbuster movie franchises.

Here is a better idea:
  • Only multi-verse Stories that are crowd pleasers like the last Spider-Man and Deadpool/Wolverine. Really are homage to the movies more than the comics which is why the audience understands them better and they bring in more movie goers.
  • If you're going to reboot the character, reboot everything. Just like DC did numerous times with Superman & Batman. Don't sit here though and be surprised when Captain America 4 with drum roll.... Falcon with a Shield and a Red Hulk.... doesn't do as well as the previous two films.
  • Just like the comics, if it's an obscure character, it better be one hell of a story, or in this case, movie. Like Guardians of the Galaxy.
  • Instead of going from TV to Movie, they should have gone from Movie to TV. Like Hawkeye. Link the TV Shows together, such as both companies want a Young Avengers or Teen Titans. Why not give each character a special, or series on their streaming to build up the main event which could either be a movie or just another streaming special that brings them together. Instead, I have several with different plots, and not sure which ones tie into which movies. It was hard enough to get me to buy into a show about Vision & Scarlett Witch, now I have to watch Echo and Agatha?
 
VaqueroTD said:
I think the biggest issue was they treated the movies/TV shows like the modern Marvel comic books.
  • Confusing multi-verse
  • new versions (often different sex, sexuality or race) of classic characters, which is even worse in a movie since the audience knows a specific face
  • characters given their title who even hardcore comic fans never bothered to carry past issue 50
  • picking up the subplot in the TV show the same way a comic book tells you to go read another title for the crossover event
Marvel/DC superhero comics are horrible these days. I don't know why anyone would think it's a great model for blockbuster movie franchises.

Here is a better idea:
  • Only multi-verse Stories that are crowd pleasers like the last Spider-Man and Deadpool/Wolverine. Really are homage to the movies more than the comics which is why the audience understands them better and they bring in more movie goers.
  • If you're going to reboot the character, reboot everything. Just like DC did numerous times with Superman & Batman. Don't sit here though and be surprised when Captain America 4 with drum roll.... Falcon with a Shield and a Red Hulk.... doesn't do as well as the previous two films.
  • Just like the comics, if it's an obscure character, it better be one hell of a story, or in this case, movie. Like Guardians of the Galaxy.
  • Instead of going from TV to Movie, they should have gone from Movie to TV. Like Hawkeye. Link the TV Shows together, such as both companies want a Young Avengers or Teen Titans. Why not give each character a special, or series on their streaming to build up the main event which could either be a movie or just another streaming special that brings them together. Instead, I have several with different plots, and not sure which ones tie into which movies. It was hard enough to get me to buy into a show about Vision & Scarlett Witch, now I have to watch Echo and Agatha?
Click to expand...
First, a cautionary note. I am 100% certain you are not introducing a controversial topic or topics but experience tells me there is a possibility another reader may take one of your observations that *might* eventually evolve into a site rule #5 issue needing moderation. I do not think it will but just a heads up if it does. :)

I gave a like because I think you have summed up how a significant portion of the audience, or EVEN possibly the major of the audience, feels about the MCU. I do not necessarily agree.

Sometimes, I may go 'huh?' here or there but I am not confused by Disney's presentation of their movies. Their multiverse flow feels natural to me, even when the release of movies and television shows were more frequent. On the other hand, I somewhat agree with the old DCEU approach--ALTHOUGH I still believe Snyder's 2021 Justice League could have served as a calming factor to it IF he had the chance to release his version in 2017.

The jumping back-and-forth between movies to series and back again is something I really enjoy following. It reminds me of how comics would crossover between many titles when I bought them full-time. Occasionally, I would be forced to locate a title I did not normally collect. I found that fun.

It took me until the past decade or so for me to recognize myself as an apparent oddball comic book fan. My imagination soaks practically all these characters. I was a huge fan of Captain Marvel when I initially started buying comics in the 1970s. My purchases probably helped keep the title afloat for as long as it did, lol.

Likewise, I was a big fan of all Carol Danvers incarnations--from Ms. Marvel forward. When I learned Marvel had officially given her the Captain's mantle, I immediately searched for the title and enjoyed her newest reiteration of the character as much as I did the old one.

...except the omission of the Nega Bands. I did not like that. I did not like that at all :mad: but I digress.

The crowd pleasing audience has already influenced the rate of releases. DC has stumbled enough that it is scraping the DCEU for its new DCU to please them as well. That is a good thing, although I am not fully onboard with the action.

All this stuff is intertwined with my love of comic books. These characters, old ones I know well and ones I have come to know, are equally dear to me. I would roll my eyes if we see a character like SQUIRREL GIRL pop up with the reintroduction of the mutants but I will be okay with that as well, lol.

Please forgive my essay. I really like talking about this junk. :laugh:
 
This comment is totally separate from my sub-convo with @VaqueroTD . I watch TikTok every day. People are freaking out over the Kevin Feige interview (some info in this link) about the upcoming reboot after conclusion of the Multiverse Saga. I will edit this post with a video of a young lady having issues.

Edit



Any and all reboots were eventually going to happen. It happens all the time in comics. Real life actors will eventually age out of their roles (that is unfair but it's life).

Central to the transition was Disney's acquisition of Fox and its characters. The MCU established an Earth and entire universe DEVOID of them. The announcement of the Multiverse Saga Phase should have given everybody a clue of what may be coming down the road.

I mean, stuff like Hugh Jackman. Is the expectation Wolverine will be played by a real life 70 or 80 year old at some point? Is Old Man Logan to be taken literally?

/rant
 

Kevin Feige Reveals Why Recent MCU Movies Flopped (Especially ‘The Marvels’) & He Can’t Be More Right​

By Valentina Kraljik | Comic Basics
July 30, 2025

Kevin Feige, the head of Marvel Studios, recently opened up about why some of the recent MCU movies didn’t do as well as expected at the box office, especially The Marvels. The movie came out in November 2023 but only made about $206 million worldwide, which was disappointing for a Marvel film.

Other movies like Captain America: Brave New World and Thunderbolts* also didn’t hit big numbers, making roughly $415 million and $382 million respectively.

Feige said he thinks the problem started with Marvel’s big push into Disney+ shows. Fans might have felt overwhelmed by all the new content, wondering if they needed to watch all those series before enjoying the movies.

He said, “It’s that expansion that I think led people to say, ‘Do I have to see all of these? It used to be fun, but now do I have to know everything about all of these?’ And I think The Marvels hit it hardest where people are like, ‘OK, I recognize her from a billion-dollar movie. But who are those other two? I guess they were in some TV show. I’ll skip it.’” Read more
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 11 more.
Total: 11,622 (members: 111, guests: 11,511)
Robots: 1,332

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
474,578
Messages
14,546,610
Members
24,212
Latest member
JerryJonesSupporter
Back
Top