Watching Disney crash and burn has been way more entertaining than any “content” they have put out in over half a decade. Let’s see here… Terrible writing? Check! Obnoxious identity politics? Check! Hating their own fans? Check! Hating their own properties? Double check! Awful effects? Check! Oversaturation of low quality content? Check! Garbage editing? Check! Boring action sequences? Check! Terrible acting? Check! Massive plot holes everywhere? Check! Blatant political messaging over storytelling? Check! Zero consequences for repeated failure? And we have a bingo! Disney forgot one important lesson. The opposite of love is not hate, it is apathy. If someone is angry about their favorite franchises getting destroyed, they still care. When they no longer care, then you are never getting them back. Enjoy the dumpster fire and stock crashes ladies and gentleman!
I have had Disney+ for a couple of months and it is not that bad, however I have not watched nor am I interested in watching any of the marvel stuff, and neither are my kids.
However I do watch the boys (along with the new gen V) and Invincible on Amazon and I do like them, so maybe there is hope…
Emre S
5 months ago
How do you write about this and not mention the new South Park episode about it at least in passing?
How do you mention South Park without acknowledging the fact (at least in passing) that its ‘fearless, irreverent and iconoclastic’ creators ducked out of satirising muslims and opted instead for taking the mick out of Mormons?
Have you not seen any of their numerous references to the unnameable prophet that appears only as a silhouette?
They had a whole two part episode parodying Family Guy having a script with Mohammad that triggered terrorist attacks. This was also satirising the studios who would put pressure on what was acceptable content so as not to cause offence.
The plot was roughly this:
They had a parody version of Family Guy, in which there was a plotline containing Mohammed. Islamic terrorists were threatening Jihad if the show wasn’t pulled or Mohammed removed. Unfortunately Family Guys script writers, which turned out to be Manatees, would get very upset if the episode content was changed.
In much earlier episodes, the super friends group (consisting of various religious figures, including Jesus, Krishna etc) included Mohammed, but he would only appear as a silhouette covered in question marks.
Dylan Blackhurst
5 months ago
Is the Marvel Universe going to implode?
Let’s hope so. It’s dire!
John Riordan
5 months ago
Maybe it’s my age, but I find all these films to be incomprehensible now anyway. About 10 years ago the first one with Thor in it came out, and it was both funny and spectacular, so I was quite pleased I’d gone to see it.
But now I have absolutely no idea what’s going on even if I watch the movies with the Wikipedia plot guide to hand. I suspect it’s that the whole thing takes itself too seriously: spandex-clad oddballs with superpowers can never by anything much beyond a joke, and trying to make them serious just makes the movies ridiculous without being funny.
Laura Pritchard
5 months ago
I think the writer should recognise the one universal fact of living one’s youth in a nerd world. When it feels like that world is disintigrating, it probably just means you’re getting old. Or growing up. Or some such other trope about time passing.
Last edited 5 months ago by Laura Pritchard
Tyler Durden
5 months ago
That level of commercial success has not continued. Marvel has not caught the imagination of Generation Z. It may be that they prefer the stars of YouTube and immersion in sophisticated video game fantasy worlds like that of the Elden Rings. They may very well not be interested in high-concept TV either.
Graeme Crosby
5 months ago
You mean adults watch these films? Without children?
In case you hadn’t noticed, they also write about them endlessly, and in pitiless detail.
R M
5 months ago
Like Mark Twain, rumours of the death of the Marvel Cinematic Universe have been greatly exaggerated. Often in similar articles to this in The Guardian, where the pseuds lap up any perceived affirmation of their conviction that the masses really would prefer to watch a foreign language film about an Iranian orphan’s lost bicycle, if only the hated Tories hadn’t shut down all the libraries.
It is true that the MCU probably passed its peak cultural and commercial moment with the release of the Avengers: Endgame. But there’s lots of money to be made from continuing to produce films which are merely profitable, rather than all-consuming box-office behemoths. After all, (pre-Daniel Craig) James Bond films arguably peaked critically and commercially in the mid-60s with Goldfinger and Thunderball. Then followed 30 years of churning out a profitable formula, interspersed with occasional high points (The Spy Who Loved Me, Goldeneye), before Casino Royale supercharged the franchise again.
A rule of thumb formula is that major Hollywood blockbusters must earn 3 x production budget at the box office to break even on initial release. The MCU numbers are staggering. Just under $30bn combined box office on total production costs of less than $7bn. Apply the 3 x rule and the break even point is about $20bn-$21bn, so the MCU has earned something like $9bn+ profit in just 15 years since Iron Man came out. And remember, this is after everyone who matters gets paid but before revenue from tie-ins, DVDs, streaming etc etc.
It is fair of course to say that the commercial performance of the MCU films have overall become patchier since Endgame. Partly due to escalating costs, partly due to audience fatigue, and partly due to some lacklustre or ill-thought out product like Black Widow and Eternals. But the numbers are still impressive. Not including The Marvels, 10 MCU films have been released since Endgame. They have taken approx. $8.2bn in box office against production costs of about $2.2bn. Apply the break even at 3 x production cost rule, and that leaves clear profit of about $1.7bn in just 4 years.
Or to look at this another way, collectively since Iron Man MCU films have taken 4.28 x their production costs. Since Endgame, MCU films have collectively taken 3.8 x their production costs. A bit less profitable, but still eminently worth the effort when dealing with such huge raw numbers. It bears repeating that this is before revenue from other sources like streaming, commercial tie-ins and so on.
There may well come a time when interest in the MCU declines so much that the big production costs are no longer justified. But it isn’t now and I very much doubt it will be soon.
You might have a point if every film was bombing. But they’re not. Working back through Phase 5 and Phase 4, from the most recently released:
The Marvels (only just released but not looking great)
Guardians 3, $845M (on a $250M budget)
Quantumania, $476M ($200M)
Wakanda Forever, $860M ($250M)
Thor: Love and Thunder, $760M ($250M)
Multiverse of Madness, $955M ($200M)
Spiderman NWH, $1.9bn (200M)
Eternals, $400M ($236M)
Shang-Chi, $432M ($200M)
Black Widow, $380M ($200M)
So Spiderman: No Way Home turned a massive profit. MofM turned a big profit. Guardians 3 and Wakanda Forever turned solid profits. Thor: L&T broke even.
Quantumania, Eternals and Shang-Chi underperformed (a shame in Shang-Chi’s case because it was really good). Black Widow was just a bad idea they didn’t really want to make but were tied into it.
Marvel are much like Pixar these days. They can no longer rely on every release being a hit, but like any other studio they have a mix of massive hits, moderate hits, break evens, and misses. The overall result is that they are still making lots of money, they’ve just settled into that stage where they accept the hits will have to cover the misses.
Nice to see you posting the shill numbers that somehow do not include advertising or reshoots. Looking at your numbers one might even get the crazy idea that Quantumania and The Eternals weren’t massive flops.
Impressive.
You managed to write an article about another woke failure story without mentionning wokeness.
Joshua Sterling
5 months ago
Comic books have always struck me as niche. In that vein, it is surprising they have had such mass appeal at the cinema for so long. I would also posit that comics were historically aimed at kids, so naturally they would run out of steam for adult audiences. Also, Hollywood usually ruins great ideas through repetition / sequels.
Josh Allan
5 months ago
‘The Marvels, which reportedly cost $250 million, looks set to be a flop, joining the ranks of its other failures this year, Ant Man and The Wasp.’
Great article, but just wanted to point out Ant Manand The Wasp is one film, rather than two separate films. It also came out in 2018. The 2023 film is Ant-Man and The Wasp: Quantumania.
Leaving aside the misidentification of the films, Ant-Man is a great example of why its a mistake, often made in articles criticising the MCU, to concentrate too much on the performance of individual films in the franchise when trying to make the claim that the MCU is crashing and burning. Quantumania unperformed and probably marks the end of the end of theseparate Ant-Man films, but collectively the 3 Ant-Man films have taken about $1.62bn in box office against production costs of $492M. Apply the 3 x production costs rule and collectively Ant-Man films net a profit of about $150M. Not spectacular by superhero blockbuster standards, but certainly a nice enough earner which justified going back to the well a couple of times.
Here’s the thing though. Ant-Man was never expected to or required to be a big hit. Its main purpose was to fill the space in the schedule between Ultron and Civil War (which together grossed $2.5bn+) and also introduce characters and plot points which were going to be needed later in the franchise. Obviously Marvel want all their films to make money, but the fact that Ant-Man (and its sequel) turned into a big hit in its own right was more like a bonus than the plan.
I liked the first 2 Ant-Mans more than most of the other Marvel movies, although I haven’t watched the 3rd installment. I’m not a huge Marvel fan so I guess I’m not the target audience, I just thought the movies had more “heart”, and maybe that’s because they weren’t meant to be the giant blockbusters. So, writers could actually be creative instead of bouncing their ideas off an algorithm.
Last edited 5 months ago by Ali W
Kirk Susong
5 months ago
Wait, what…? The Western is dead?
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
5 months ago
“Even for this recovering comic-book fan who left the community two decades ago”
Anyone who admits to having been a comic-book fan cannot have any credibility
Watching Disney crash and burn has been way more entertaining than any “content” they have put out in over half a decade. Let’s see here… Terrible writing? Check! Obnoxious identity politics? Check! Hating their own fans? Check! Hating their own properties? Double check! Awful effects? Check! Oversaturation of low quality content? Check! Garbage editing? Check! Boring action sequences? Check! Terrible acting? Check! Massive plot holes everywhere? Check! Blatant political messaging over storytelling? Check! Zero consequences for repeated failure? And we have a bingo! Disney forgot one important lesson. The opposite of love is not hate, it is apathy. If someone is angry about their favorite franchises getting destroyed, they still care. When they no longer care, then you are never getting them back. Enjoy the dumpster fire and stock crashes ladies and gentleman!
I have had Disney+ for a couple of months and it is not that bad, however I have not watched nor am I interested in watching any of the marvel stuff, and neither are my kids.
However I do watch the boys (along with the new gen V) and Invincible on Amazon and I do like them, so maybe there is hope…
How do you write about this and not mention the new South Park episode about it at least in passing?
Simple, it’s Bateman.
I came here to say exactly that. It was a good episode.
How do you mention South Park without acknowledging the fact (at least in passing) that its ‘fearless, irreverent and iconoclastic’ creators ducked out of satirising muslims and opted instead for taking the mick out of Mormons?
Have you not seen any of their numerous references to the unnameable prophet that appears only as a silhouette?
They had a whole two part episode parodying Family Guy having a script with Mohammad that triggered terrorist attacks. This was also satirising the studios who would put pressure on what was acceptable content so as not to cause offence.
Nope, I’ve not seen it. I’m confused. Did they parody Mohammed or just Family Guy having a script with Mohammed? Or what?
The plot was roughly this:
They had a parody version of Family Guy, in which there was a plotline containing Mohammed. Islamic terrorists were threatening Jihad if the show wasn’t pulled or Mohammed removed. Unfortunately Family Guys script writers, which turned out to be Manatees, would get very upset if the episode content was changed.
In much earlier episodes, the super friends group (consisting of various religious figures, including Jesus, Krishna etc) included Mohammed, but he would only appear as a silhouette covered in question marks.
Is the Marvel Universe going to implode?
Let’s hope so. It’s dire!
Maybe it’s my age, but I find all these films to be incomprehensible now anyway. About 10 years ago the first one with Thor in it came out, and it was both funny and spectacular, so I was quite pleased I’d gone to see it.
But now I have absolutely no idea what’s going on even if I watch the movies with the Wikipedia plot guide to hand. I suspect it’s that the whole thing takes itself too seriously: spandex-clad oddballs with superpowers can never by anything much beyond a joke, and trying to make them serious just makes the movies ridiculous without being funny.
I think the writer should recognise the one universal fact of living one’s youth in a nerd world. When it feels like that world is disintigrating, it probably just means you’re getting old. Or growing up. Or some such other trope about time passing.
That level of commercial success has not continued. Marvel has not caught the imagination of Generation Z. It may be that they prefer the stars of YouTube and immersion in sophisticated video game fantasy worlds like that of the Elden Rings. They may very well not be interested in high-concept TV either.
You mean adults watch these films? Without children?
Jeez.
In case you hadn’t noticed, they also write about them endlessly, and in pitiless detail.
Like Mark Twain, rumours of the death of the Marvel Cinematic Universe have been greatly exaggerated. Often in similar articles to this in The Guardian, where the pseuds lap up any perceived affirmation of their conviction that the masses really would prefer to watch a foreign language film about an Iranian orphan’s lost bicycle, if only the hated Tories hadn’t shut down all the libraries.
It is true that the MCU probably passed its peak cultural and commercial moment with the release of the Avengers: Endgame. But there’s lots of money to be made from continuing to produce films which are merely profitable, rather than all-consuming box-office behemoths. After all, (pre-Daniel Craig) James Bond films arguably peaked critically and commercially in the mid-60s with Goldfinger and Thunderball. Then followed 30 years of churning out a profitable formula, interspersed with occasional high points (The Spy Who Loved Me, Goldeneye), before Casino Royale supercharged the franchise again.
A rule of thumb formula is that major Hollywood blockbusters must earn 3 x production budget at the box office to break even on initial release. The MCU numbers are staggering. Just under $30bn combined box office on total production costs of less than $7bn. Apply the 3 x rule and the break even point is about $20bn-$21bn, so the MCU has earned something like $9bn+ profit in just 15 years since Iron Man came out. And remember, this is after everyone who matters gets paid but before revenue from tie-ins, DVDs, streaming etc etc.
It is fair of course to say that the commercial performance of the MCU films have overall become patchier since Endgame. Partly due to escalating costs, partly due to audience fatigue, and partly due to some lacklustre or ill-thought out product like Black Widow and Eternals. But the numbers are still impressive. Not including The Marvels, 10 MCU films have been released since Endgame. They have taken approx. $8.2bn in box office against production costs of about $2.2bn. Apply the break even at 3 x production cost rule, and that leaves clear profit of about $1.7bn in just 4 years.
Or to look at this another way, collectively since Iron Man MCU films have taken 4.28 x their production costs. Since Endgame, MCU films have collectively taken 3.8 x their production costs. A bit less profitable, but still eminently worth the effort when dealing with such huge raw numbers. It bears repeating that this is before revenue from other sources like streaming, commercial tie-ins and so on.
There may well come a time when interest in the MCU declines so much that the big production costs are no longer justified. But it isn’t now and I very much doubt it will be soon.
Actually every film bombing means you are at that point.
You might have a point if every film was bombing. But they’re not. Working back through Phase 5 and Phase 4, from the most recently released:
The Marvels (only just released but not looking great)
Guardians 3, $845M (on a $250M budget)
Quantumania, $476M ($200M)
Wakanda Forever, $860M ($250M)
Thor: Love and Thunder, $760M ($250M)
Multiverse of Madness, $955M ($200M)
Spiderman NWH, $1.9bn (200M)
Eternals, $400M ($236M)
Shang-Chi, $432M ($200M)
Black Widow, $380M ($200M)
So Spiderman: No Way Home turned a massive profit. MofM turned a big profit. Guardians 3 and Wakanda Forever turned solid profits. Thor: L&T broke even.
Quantumania, Eternals and Shang-Chi underperformed (a shame in Shang-Chi’s case because it was really good). Black Widow was just a bad idea they didn’t really want to make but were tied into it.
Marvel are much like Pixar these days. They can no longer rely on every release being a hit, but like any other studio they have a mix of massive hits, moderate hits, break evens, and misses. The overall result is that they are still making lots of money, they’ve just settled into that stage where they accept the hits will have to cover the misses.
Nice to see you posting the shill numbers that somehow do not include advertising or reshoots. Looking at your numbers one might even get the crazy idea that Quantumania and The Eternals weren’t massive flops.
Feel free to post the “real” numbers then.
Impressive.
You managed to write an article about another woke failure story without mentionning wokeness.
Comic books have always struck me as niche. In that vein, it is surprising they have had such mass appeal at the cinema for so long. I would also posit that comics were historically aimed at kids, so naturally they would run out of steam for adult audiences. Also, Hollywood usually ruins great ideas through repetition / sequels.
‘The Marvels, which reportedly cost $250 million, looks set to be a flop, joining the ranks of its other failures this year, Ant Man and The Wasp.’
Great article, but just wanted to point out Ant Man and The Wasp is one film, rather than two separate films. It also came out in 2018. The 2023 film is Ant-Man and The Wasp: Quantumania.
Leaving aside the misidentification of the films, Ant-Man is a great example of why its a mistake, often made in articles criticising the MCU, to concentrate too much on the performance of individual films in the franchise when trying to make the claim that the MCU is crashing and burning.
Quantumania unperformed and probably marks the end of the end of the separate Ant-Man films, but collectively the 3 Ant-Man films have taken about $1.62bn in box office against production costs of $492M. Apply the 3 x production costs rule and collectively Ant-Man films net a profit of about $150M. Not spectacular by superhero blockbuster standards, but certainly a nice enough earner which justified going back to the well a couple of times.
Here’s the thing though. Ant-Man was never expected to or required to be a big hit. Its main purpose was to fill the space in the schedule between Ultron and Civil War (which together grossed $2.5bn+) and also introduce characters and plot points which were going to be needed later in the franchise. Obviously Marvel want all their films to make money, but the fact that Ant-Man (and its sequel) turned into a big hit in its own right was more like a bonus than the plan.
I liked the first 2 Ant-Mans more than most of the other Marvel movies, although I haven’t watched the 3rd installment. I’m not a huge Marvel fan so I guess I’m not the target audience, I just thought the movies had more “heart”, and maybe that’s because they weren’t meant to be the giant blockbusters. So, writers could actually be creative instead of bouncing their ideas off an algorithm.
Wait, what…? The Western is dead?
“Even for this recovering comic-book fan who left the community two decades ago”
Anyone who admits to having been a comic-book fan cannot have any credibility