Toonview

[QUOTE=Count Dooku;14178696
I mean, if what you are saying is true, then they would have just recast Black Panther and moved on, right?[/QUOTE]

They could have recast. They chose not to. It wasn't a cohesive universe decision at all.

Xander

This was fucking awesome. I love the 4th wall stuff, love that Marvel is doing something totally different (and poking fun at themselves while doing it), love DD, loved everything about this. Can NOT wait for season two!

Hokeyboy

I would simply say that most people aren't watching all the movies and certainly not all the television shows. The big fans, sure, but they are the smallest fraction of the audience.

A soccer mom in Duluth might enjoy watching Marvel movies with her family, and might even think She-Hulk is great fun, but if She-Hulk shows up in, say, a Fantastic Four movie, and she doesn't start breaking the fourth wall, they are not going to be "confused". They'd most likely just think "Oh cool, there's She-Hulk, awesome!" and move on.

As far as Black Panther, that's not an apt comparison; that movie was viewed as "groundbreaking" for being the "first big-budget black superhero movie" (which it wasn't), and Chadwick Boseman was a huge part of that. And he was a charismatic actor who died way too young. There were a lot more factors at play here than, say, if Isiah Washington played the role and then left the franchise due to whatever conflicts, and they had to make a recasting decision.

Count Dooku

My Black Panther comment/question is in response to the claim that audiences don't care about continuity and casting.

Hokeyboy

Just as a clarification, my "who's starring as what" comment was not about recasting established roles, but from fanboys insistence that an actor playing a role in one media (unconnected to any "cinematic universe" or whatever) simply must maintain the role in all other media (e.g. Dean Cain as a movie Superman despite the film having nothing to do with the craptacular 90s show).

Draven

My wife has learned most of her Marvel information from watching everything in the MCU and me pausing what we're watching to explain things like what it means when Jennifer Walters uses the term "fridging". I guarantee that she doesn't care if She-Hulk breaks the 4th wall or not in a FF movie.

Count Dooku

Well, what percentage of MCU fans are casual fans versus being all-in is question that I don't know the answer to. Maybe Disney has research, but I don't think anyone just knows. But please note that I did not claim that most people are watching every MCU property, I said that was how Disney marketed the MCU.


Black Panther is a movie. General audiences went to see it to be entertained and have a good time for a couple hours, right? Black Panther made $1.3 billion. Boseman dying is sad, but this is a business decision. Recast and move on. Bet on the apathy of general audiences with regard to continuity and who stars in a movie.
Hokeyboy posted #55 while I was typing, but I am going to leave my reply as is because I went to the trouble of typing it.
|
|
|

And I will say this: The care and thought that goes into the coherence of the MCU speaks to the quality of the brand. General audiences may not ponder over the timeline and any possible mistakes, but they know that this stuff is not just being thrown onto the screen willy-nilly, and they respond to that. The MCU properties have earned the position of being elevated in people's estimation as being above completely disposable entertainment products. The MCU does ask audiences to pay attention, and people like that. People like to be treated like they are thinking beings.

Draven

There is absolutely no reason to recast Black Panther. Audiences liked Boseman in the role. And considering that he's a character who is literally designed to pass on the mantle after his death, then they've got a built-in excuse to appease the fanboys to bring in someone else to play a different character who also happens to be the Black Panther. Are you saying it has to be T'Challa?? Why? I'd argue most of the MCU-viewers don't even know that's his real name.

This is the same reason they don't need to introduce a new character named Tony Stark. But they can have the Iron Man legacy carried on through Rhodey, Ironheart, etc. The MCU has earned the ability to add new characters rather than "rebooting". I would hate for it to turn into a Batman situation, where there is a new actor play the character every time you turn your head.

Count Dooku

I am not saying this is my issue, but THE issue is more than breaking the fourth wall with asides to the camera.

If She-Hulk possesses a complete awareness that she exists in fictional world made up of writers' constructs that can be altered at any time, how does that impact her involvement in any other MCU stories? Can't she just stop them all when she wants and request that things be changed? Can K.E.V.I.N. resurrect Black Widow just because?

Yes, they can just set that aside and ignore it, which they will, but let's not pretend that for the sake of this one episode of this one show, they opened big jar of worms for anyone inclined to take it seriously, which some people want to do.

Draven

But again, this is already a non-issue in the comics (She-Hulk showing up in other books) and Deadpool is about to arrive in the MCU and I haven't seen a single complaint from the fandom that he'll have this same "problem" and mess everything up. I mean hell, Deadpool has already killed Ryan Reynolds in his movies. So how can Ryan Reynolds be playing the character in the MCU? Same problem but it only seems to be an issue with She-Hulk.

Count Dooku

You are a corporation that has made a movie about a superhero character that has made $1.3 billion at the box office, killing him off after one movie is crazy from a business perspective.

Why is Batman always Bruce Wayne, over and over and over again? Why did they make Spider-Man be Peter Parker in three franchises? Because that's good business.

Draven

You think it made 1.3 billion at the office because the character was named T'Challa?

Maybe. We'll never know if not using Bruce Wayne for the 1 millionth time or putting Miles Morales in instead of Peter Parker would have gone any better.

Count Dooku

The idea of having characters realize that they are characters in a production has been around for a long time, and my experience has always been that audiences treat it as a clever joke. So that's the thing. If you want to laugh the She-Hulk finale off as a clever joke, then you can do that, and good for you.

But some people feel like there is a kind of covenant between producers and audience. If the producers want the audience to come back to the show week after week, and invest in the characters and the dramatic stakes, then the producers have to take it seriously.

I'm sorry to bring Black Panther up again, but people are crying at the trailer for BP2. They wouldn't be doing that if Marvel was shoving it in their face that it's all just a joke.

Hokeyboy

Her awareness has zero impact upon her involvement in other MCU properties. It's all about context and what works for the story being told.

Think of like the old-school Gary Shandling Show. Gary's character knew he was on TV, in a sitcom, and would directly address the studio audience from time to time. A cute in-joke for the audience, but nothing else. For the purposes of the show, his awareness had zero impact on the other characters, the plot, or the story resolution. Those aspects played out like your typical 80s sitcom.

Same with Deadpool; none of the other characters in his movies share his awareness, nor does it drive or impact the narrative. His wall-breaking is just some cheekiness. Deadpool could show up in any Marvel movie as a glib, zany merc-with-a-mouth without having to turn to the screen and address the audience or the fact that he's in a movie.

windom

Glad to see that Marvel has fully hopped aboard the "let's attack our customers" train. I hope that works out well for them.

This show was a true abomination. Stage 4 Marvel is a terrible thing. I don't expect stage 5 to be any better.

At least I won't be watching this nasty female character on TV every week now.

cultshock

The Gary Shandling Show is a good comparison (man, I loved that show).

Count Dooku

.............And people keep accusing me of trolling?




I just know that there is proof that one way has worked at the box office for the past 45 years. DOLLAZ don't lie!

Count Dooku

Well, first, it's Garry with two Rs

Second, and much more importantly, Garry Shandling NEVER made any attempt to convince his audience that they were supposed to take ANYTHING about the show seriously. As a dramatic presentation, the show was more on the level of sketch comedy than even a typical (shitty) 80s sitcom, and certainly not at the level of what the MCU is trying to accomplish with their movies.

Draven

Or maybe you’re way too sensitive and taking something personally that has nothing to do with you personally.

Hokeyboy

"nasty female character"...

Draven

How am I trolling? You said BP1 made over a billion dollars so they should have recast Boseman after he died. I’m saying that recasting doesn’t fix the death of one of the major reasons it made that money. Most people don’t care that the character of T’Challa is the lead. They liked the strong black representation of culture and casting….which is still there in the sequel. No one is going “oh it’s not T’Challa as Black Panther? I ain’t going.”


And maybe they would have made even more if they tried something different. The point is, we’ll never know.

ViewAskewbian

And her name ain't Female, it's She Hulk
Mizz Walters if you're nasty

beavis69

Imagine getting this worked up over a green woman comic book character haha. Also why are you watching it? This isn't 1981, there are more than 4 channels to choose from. You not only had to go out of your way to get a subscription to an app that focuses on a very particular brand of movies/tvs, you had to keep watching week to week knowing the content was going to be like this from day one. What weird personal decision to keep handing them money. Sure are learning them huh.

Count Dooku

The Iron Man movies were about the character Tony Stark. The Beverly Hills Cop movies are about the character Axel Foley. All the Batman movies ever made are about the character Bruce Wayne. All the Sherlock Holmes movies ever made are about the detective character Sir Arthur Conan Doyle created. James Bond is a character. Harry Potter is character.

Do you see where I am going? T'Challa is a character.
In addition to being the crime-fighting superhero Black Panther, he is the king of Wakanda, so he is a world political figure. He is the son of a murdered father. He has an ongoing love interest in Nakia. His relationship and partnership with his sister Shuri is huge part of life.

The normal business decision would be for Disney/Marvel to recast. They invested a lot of time and money and film stock in creating and defining this character, and the world responded with adoration for this character. They have a franchise based on the T'Challa character. With Tony Stark and Steve Rogers and Natasha Romanov gone, T'Challa would have been at the forefront of any new Avengers coalition.

It is incredibly unusual and actually shocking that they would kill off the character because the actor died. We know why they made that decision, but goes to prove that it is invalid to say that the MCU movies can be dismissed as disposable popcorn entertainment.

Oh, and I never said they SHOULD have recast. I'm saying that would have been the normal business decision.

cultshock

Point for you I guess, congrats.