millarworld.tv Comics Creators

What does GOTG, SS, Kingsman & Deadpool success mean?


#1

All the big movies featuring characters we’ve known our whole lives are costing more and making less at cinemas. Avengers 2 opening down 20% on the first, Civil War’s opening 20% less than Age of Ultron, despite essentially being an Avengers movie. Spider is struggling, now back in high school to fix him back up, Thor and Hulk are buddying up to get a little combined power. Batman V Superman lost money as did Man of Steel before it. But all the new stuff is over-performing.

GOTG, Suicide Squad, Kingsman and Deadpool all made about twice what people were expecting. Is it time for the new? Does the old feel old? Great article here that’s very exciting and echoes very good observation by our chum Jim O recently about SS being F7 for superheroes…

http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2016/08/11/suicide-squad-4-reasons-its-box-office-blowout-is-good-news/#716709c240fc

MM


#2

In the case of Kingsman, Deadpool and GotG think they were all better movies, where the creative control was mostly handed over to those involved directly with the movie and all three had a bit of punk attitude to them not to mention being well marketed to stand out from the crowd.

I didn’t like Kingsman, I much preferred Secret Service and I feel it lost a bit of the edge that your comic had - but I know that it’s almost universally loved and it’s a really well made, well paced movie.

With Suicide Squad I can’t comment as yet because I have not seen it, but there was a great job in marketing this movie over the year leading up to it because a bunch of my friends who have never heard of the Suicide Squad in their life had been buzzing about it for months, although I have to be honest and say Margot Robbie played a bit part in that. And the trailers seemed to go down well with everyone apart from me. It also seems to share that punk attitude of the other 3 and we’re all a bit pissed off round the world about the establishment so this is almost like a subconscious form of rebellion, supporting these movies in the cinema - if only Corban could have somehow latched onto this.


#4

Deadpool was because of the i ternet hype. Also the budget was peanuts.

But it was more of an hype. Our friend Van Wilder was all over imgur and reddit.

As for GoTG. Thank again Parks and Rec. Its all because of Pratt and the internet hype. Again, thank imgur and others. As for Suicide Squad. Margot. Her presence online was huge.

It’s all p&a.


#5

I understand that there is a tendency among the big studios to stick to sequels and remakes of previously-successful films; they are committing bags of cash to these films, so they want some kind of guarantee that there will be an audience for those films.

Most of the movies in the thread title have a couple of things in common: they are primarily characters never seen before on-screen and are not sequels or remakes, but at the same time they have an association with previously-successful films. The only real stand-alone there is Kingsman, which is not associated with the Marvel, X-men, or DC franchises and still found a huge audience.

I can only conclude that it is due to the MillarWorld juggernaut. :slight_smile:


#6

I think Jerry’s right. People want to see new things in the theater but sometimes it helps if those new things are a play on or connected to something they’re familiar with so it’s not a complete gamble.

Guardians was connected to the MCU; Suicide Squad was connected to DCCU; Deadpool was connected to X-Men; and Kingsman had a vibe somewhere close to old James Bond films.

They also all had releases that weren’t during the peak tentpole season which is becoming more and more of a red ocean situation.

I think this should be encouragement to hit the throttle on other Millarworld properties. They’re similar enough to other comic film properties but all offer something new and different.


#7

I think those films also filled a void.

I think that Deadpool, GotG and Kingsman are loving homages and piss-takes of their genres (superhero, sci-fi and spy, respectively). They were not parodies but they did wink their eyes at certain conventions of their genres.

I think they also gave people something they were missing and wanted desperately:

  • Deadpool gave people a solid adult comedy that did not hold anything back. People like to laugh and good comedies are few and far between.
  • GotG provided an entertaining sci-fi adventure. People want a good sci-fi escape and many could picture themselves as Peter Quill. It was also fun, which is a hard trick to pull off.
  • Kingsman was a fresh take on the spy genre. It was lighter and easier to take in. While James Bond films are still the gold standard, they have been overly serious of late. Kingsman actually draws upon the Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan eras which were a bit looser with the character.

I can’t speak to SS as I haven’t seen it and don’t want to.

Deadpool, GotG and Kingsman also all share a passion by the people behind the scenes. It was the right directors, writers and actors that made them stand out.


#8

What do these films have in common? Look at the pop music. It’s 70s rock, man!

Kingsman- Freebird

GOTG- A whole Awesome Mix

Suicide Squad- An entire jukebox worth of songs

Deadpool- OK, not 70s rock but already iconic uses of “Shoop” and that DMX song

Let’s not forget that the entire Marvel cinematic universe was built on the back of riffs by Black Sabbath and AC/DC. I am not joking.

If you want to break your franchise out, and let audiences feel like they discovered you and have been waiting for your movie their whole lives, let this be your Bible:

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51BEWFVT1KL.jpg

It worked OK for Tarantino and Scorsese too!


#9

I do think music plays a much bigger part in film enjoyment than people realize. If the Luke Cage TV show is as solid on this front as it’s trailers, it will knock it out of the park.


#10

Meadows is going to want to like this post x1000!


#11

Yes.

To expand, the big franchises still fill seats, but they feel expected. And nothing gets people excited like new. If I say Iron Man 4, most of us can already guess the story, what RDJ will do, and know what will come out of it. RDJ is like that really awesome girl, who’s now our wife, who’s great and all but it’s all a little samey and did you see the new girl working at Starbucks? Not that I would but wow if I were younger and single…

anyway

Marvel, DC, Spidey and XMen are all now performing under expectations. They’re selling less tickets than their highs, meaning a large chunk of their viewers have already moved on. It’s still good dollars, but McDonald have really good dollars too. Some of it is just market habits.

These 4 movies have all exceeded expectations. And I think it’s ok to suggest their sequels will make even more money. They’re the same as Pirates, Austin Powers, The Matrix, Misson Impossible, Terminator, Star Wars, Indiana Jones and Bourne. You just know the next movie will be bigger again (I haven’t seen SS, I don’t know if the bad reviews are overly critical or if they’re justified). They’re on different trajectories than the big 4 superhero franchises, which suggests they’re what the market wants.

So what does it mean? Look at the patterns.

  1. They’re funny.
  2. They’re anti-heroes.
  3. They’re not square jawed white bread leading men.
  4. They’re cool. They all look like they know how to have sex.
  5. They celebrate diversity.
  6. They’re funny. That’s so important it’s worth listing twice.

I kinda don’t want to say this too loud, but I’m beginning to think a JLI movie could be a huge box office smash.


#12

If only it didn’t suck. :wink:


#13

I know you’re taking the mick a bit here but this post really does sum up how I feel about movies. A lot of chat seems to be about how many tickets are sold and how much money is made and I don’t really give a damn about any of that - all I’m caring about it is whether or not the film is going to be good or whether it sucks.


#14

JLI would be very tricky to pull off. I think its success would come down to timing.

Leaving GotG out of the equation as it was more sci-fi than superhero, Deadpool arrived about 8 years after Iron Man. People had gotten comfortable (and maybe even complacent) with the superhero genre. DP was a merciless adult piss-take of superheroes and to an extent, Marvel. It was an exhale of sorts.

The next 3-4 years will potentially be epic in scale. With Marvel, we are gearing up for the finale of the first “arc” of their cinematic universe with the back-to-back Avengers movies. WB/DC will be releasing two Justice League movies that will be huge in scale. DC still needs to establish itself and find its footing. After all of that, people will need to exhale again. That is when you do something like JLI. Let it be a palate cleanser. I think 2020 or 2021 would be the right time for a JLI movie.


#15

Oh, I was just talking about the JLI comics. I’m sure a film would be much better. :wink:

That’s one of the things I was getting at with the difference between reviewers and Joe Blow going to the movies over the weekend. They’re tastes and motivation are going to be very different.


#16

I think it’d be impossible a movie like that to be produced. It’d convey the idea that JL characters are funny, and since Tsujihara talked of “brand manage” or something like that when referring to BvS partial demise, I’m sure they wouldn’t go that way. Too risky for the “brand” perception.
And honestly, I’d love 1000 times more an original IP than the umpteenth DC/Marvel superhero flick. I hope superheroes just becomes a genre (or a sub-genre) and we can see some more personal takes on it (so, not to kiss ass here, but also more of Mr. Millar’s stuff on the big screen).


#17

It will all come down to what WB wants the DC brand to represent.

Marvel’s brand is its name. When you see the Marvel name, you know you will get an entertaining movie based on their comic books. They do serious, funny, superhero, sci-fi, fantasy, etc. which is reflective of their comics line.

WB/DC is still trying to nail down their brand. They could actually follow Marvel’s example and still be a very different beast. They have gotten off to a rough start though it is not too late to stabilize the brand.


#18

I don’t know, man. I can be wrong, but Marvel movies are all “funny family movies” now, with different moods and bits of different genres (and funnier or less funny - but always funny - approach). I guess that is one of the reason why DC went all the dark way down…


#19

It’s the story.

It is always the story.

The story needs to be good, and summed up in a single declarative sentence.

Superman - "Foster parents and planets can be good."
Superman 2 - "Be cautious of what you want - you may well get it.:
Iron Man - Arms manufacturer changes his own life by creating armor.
Kingsman - Poor boy with good brain makes good as a spy.
Guardians of the Galaxy - Orphan boy makes friends.

The Dark Side? I think we have threads full of them. I need more coffee.


#20

If I see downey jr do that stupid landing one more time… :slight_smile:

MM


#21

Yeah! Do that in the Olympics and it’s a .3 deduction!