Captain Marvel - Spoilers - Enter at your own risk

Captain Marvel has passed the "mighty" Wonder Woman in box office gross.

As of today (27th March 2019), Captain Marvel has grossed  $914,562,595 worldwide.  That's in just under 3 weeks.

By comparison WW took  $821,847,012 worldwide in its entire run.

Future is looking bright for Carol Danvers it seems.

Peace.

/K

Not really the same thing K.

One - an essentially stand alone origin story that didn't really do much to further the DCEU - an already floundering product.

the other - an origin story that continues the already good story lines of the MCU - a very popular product.

Or are you arguing that the movie was really that good?  Unless the movie was horrible, it was going to make money even if only filler for endgame.  I know not one person who saw the movie that thought it was great.  What it was is it wasn't bad and had some good moments to it almost in spite of the lead actress.

Glad they made money since I enjoy the heck out of most of the MCU's offerings and I'm sure I'll continue to do so.  Carol Danvers - or not.

In fact - set the money aside - which movie did you enjoy more?  WW or this one.  WW was flawed as well but still better than this movie.  As far as the leads - Gal Gadot is a class act.  Nuff said.

Edit to add:  Most of the bump versus WW was overseas (200mil) and likely to still grow a tad.  It's still lagging by about 3/4 domestic versus WW.  Maybe it'll catch it, maybe not.  Sad for an MCU product.  Then again, there aren't a lot of "white dudes" in China or many of the other places.  Likely not much reporting on the story either.

Oh I def agree the fact that this is linked to the MCU (and Endgame) was a huge factor in its overall gross.  But that is a HUGE gross for a character who I would wager a small fraction of the MCU audience even heard of before going in.  Compared to WW who is probably the most famous female superheroine of all time.

Most of the bump versus WW was overseas (200mil) and likely to still grow a tad.  It's still lagging by about 3/4 domestic versus WW...

I just want to make a small point on this.  Captain Marvel won't catch it.  But thats because America is SJW heaven in general, and WW was marketed to hell on that ideology alone. This is why the domestic on WW is so high, percentage wise, compared to its overseas.  You were called a sexist, misogynist or whatever if you didn't see and praise WW when it came out.

If WW was so good, why did it not perform as well overseas?  And where were these WW "fans" for Justice League? (Which bombed atrociously despite having the three biggest superheroes of all time in it)

In terms of the quality of the films, personally I enjoyed Captain Marvel a lot more then WW.

As I mentioned in my review of Wonder Woman, that film is LITERALLY Captain America: The First Avenger.  They took that script, scribbled out "Captain America" and wrote "Wonder Woman" instead.

Additionally, Chris Pine did a LOT of the heavy lifting in that film.

Captain Marvel wasn't great or outstanding to be fair, but at least it told its own story.  And it had a fun and colorful vibe to it, which also helped.

I genuinely don't get this critique of Brie Larson in the role.  Was it an outstanding performance?  No.  But the role wasn't anything outstanding,  Her performance was exactly what was called for by the script and directors.  How can I say this?  Because Brie Larson is a talented actress - and recognized as one.

Gal Gadot is a pretty face and thats it.

I feel a lot of the "hate", shall we say, regarding Larson, comes from her politics.  And while I certainly don't agree with them, my view of her in the role is not diminished.  Funny how no one mentions Chris Evans, whos politics are the same, and is just as vocal as Larson, and his performance as Capt. America.

Peace.

/K

kikass2014 wrote: Oh I def agree the fact that this is linked to the MCU (and Endgame) was a huge factor in its overall gross.  But that is a HUGE gross for a character who I would wager a small fraction of the MCU audience even heard of before going in.  Compared to WW who is probably the most famous female superheroine of all time.

Most of the bump versus WW was overseas (200mil) and likely to still grow a tad.  It's still lagging by about 3/4 domestic versus WW...

I just want to make a small point on this.  Captain Marvel won't catch it.  But thats because America is SJW heaven in general, and WW was marketed to hell on that ideology alone. This is why the domestic on WW is so high, percentage wise, compared to its overseas.  You were called a sexist, misogynist or whatever if you didn't see and praise WW when it came out.

If WW was so good, why did it not perform as well overseas?  And where were these WW "fans" for Justice League? (Which bombed atrociously despite having the three biggest superheroes of all time in it)

In terms of the quality of the films, personally I enjoyed Captain Marvel a lot more then WW.

As I mentioned in my review of Wonder Woman, that film is LITERALLY Captain America: The First Avenger.  They took that script, scribbled out "Captain America" and wrote "Wonder Woman" instead.

Additionally, Chris Pine did a LOT of the heavy lifting in that film.

Captain Marvel wasn't great or outstanding to be fair, but at least it told its own story.  And it had a fun and colorful vibe to it, which also helped.

I genuinely don't get this critique of Brie Larson in the role.  Was it an outstanding performance?  No.  But the role wasn't anything outstanding,  Her performance was exactly what was called for by the script and directors.  How can I say this?  Because Brie Larson is a talented actress - and recognized as one.

Gal Gadot is a pretty face and thats it.

I feel a lot of the "hate", shall we say, regarding Larson, comes from her politics.  And while I certainly don't agree with them, my view of her in the role is not diminished.  Funny how no one mentions Chris Evans, whos politics are the same, and is just as vocal as Larson, and his performance as Capt. America.

Peace.

/K

memegenerator.net/img/instances/58644582...rong-in-this-one.jpg

MOD: I realise this was likely intended in humour, but let's try to avoid potentially inflammatory meme images and stick (as best possible) to robust but measured debate. -R5-

Haha long time no see JD  

Peace.

/K

Aren't most superheroes technically SJWs?  "Truth. Justice. American Way," "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility," etc.  etc.  Not sure how we draw the line on this one.  Same with Star Trek

There is one point a lot of you seem to be overlooking. Inthe last few years there have been two major films (Wonder Woman and Captain
Marvel) and at least two mainstream TV series (Supergirl and Jessica Jones) all starring very powerful female superheroes, and all of them have been successful. ALL OF THEM.

Plus there are plenty of other high profile powerful female characters that have emerged over the last few years such as Valkyrie, The Wasp, Alita and half the cast of legends of tomorrow (just off the top of my head). Any idea that people are not interested in
seeing powerful  women on screen has been firmly dispelled, and given how Hollywood/TV likes to jump on a bandwagon it is
likely we will see more superwomen on screen in the future,

Whatever you might think of Captain Marvel  I think we can all agree that more mainstream films starring someone as powerful as her  is a good thing.

The Highlander wrote: There is one point a lot of you seem to be overlooking. Inthe last few years there have been two major films (Wonder Woman and Captain
Marvel) and at least two mainstream TV series (Supergirl and Jessica Jones) all starring very powerful female superheroes, and all of them have been successful. ALL OF THEM.

Plus there are plenty of other high profile powerful female characters that have emerged over the last few years such as Valkyrie, The Wasp, Alita and half the cast of legends of tomorrow (just off the top of my head). Any idea that people are not interested in
seeing powerful  women on screen has been firmly dispelled, and given how Hollywood/TV likes to jump on a bandwagon it is
likely we will see more superwomen on screen in the future,

Whatever you might think of Captain Marvel  I think we can all agree that more mainstream films starring someone as powerful as her  is a good thing.

Absolutely right on!  Powerful female comicbook characters are a bigger thing now than male characters in movies and TV. I think the pendulum has finally swung our way. How far the pendulum will swing is unknown, but cultural forces suggest that female empowerment is likely to be a growing theme for some time. 

This is the most wonderful time to be a fan of superpowered females in my 70 years, as we haven't seen the top of the pendulum swing yet. 

Misogynists will grumble and moan and predict failure, but I'm beginning to think the 21st century is going to be a female-centric century in the way the 20th century was male-centric. I have zero issue with this, and like most things, fiction and movies and TV will lead teh way, driving the cultural forces forward. 

Will this lead to a more just and humane world?  I have my doubts about that. Empowered women don't appear to be most compassionate and just than men, in general, although we have yet to see the equivalent of the worst male autocrats. But the nice thing about fiction is that we can explore that theme before it happens, assuming it does. Until then, male villains like Lex Luthor will still drive the dark side.

My take is that once the societal bounds are removed, humans are humans and the differences between male and female thinking will largely disappear. But for now, we SWMers are being rewarded for helping keep the flame of female superheroines alive until the culture FINALLY began catching up with us .

Or so I see it...

Shadar. 

Totally agree Highlander

There does seem to have been a shift towards strong and/or super powered females.  Which is certainly good for fans like us

I for one am not complaining

Peace.

/K

kikass2014 wrote: Oh I def agree the fact that this is linked to the MCU (and Endgame) was a huge factor in its overall gross.  But that is a HUGE gross for a character who I would wager a small fraction of the MCU audience even heard of before going in.  Compared to WW who is probably the most famous female superheroine of all time.

Most of the bump versus WW was overseas (200mil) and likely to still grow a tad.  It's still lagging by about 3/4 domestic versus WW...

I just want to make a small point on this.  Captain Marvel won't catch it.  But thats because America is SJW heaven in general, and WW was marketed to hell on that ideology alone. This is why the domestic on WW is so high, percentage wise, compared to its overseas.  You were called a sexist, misogynist or whatever if you didn't see and praise WW when it came out.

If WW was so good, why did it not perform as well overseas?  And where were these WW "fans" for Justice League? (Which bombed atrociously despite having the three biggest superheroes of all time in it)

/K

Why did it not perform well overseas?  I already answered that - DC's broken and struggling universe.  *IF* their storytelling had been as popular (and good) as the MCU, that might have been different.  Also - if you think Gal Gadot is only a pretty face, you've never seen her interviewed.  I wasn't particularly a fan for her for the role (weak acting and underwear model versus someone who looked the part and could act) but she comes across as someone who is fun and nice. Maybe that's all an act, but then I'll have to bump up my evaluation of her acting ability.

As to Chris Evans and any other Hollywood actor having the same politics - exactly where did Chris say that there were too many white people doing a particular job?  I'll wait.

I have no problem with Democrats - they are entitled to their point of view and we have elections every so often that change out one corporate backed group for the other .  I have a problem with racists and people who justify their racism with identity politics and intersectionality.  I'm a nationalist (not to be confused by placing 'white' in front of it) and believe that all CITIZENS of the US are endowed with certain unalienable rights (you might be familiar with the document.)  I also have a strong belief in the foundation of our society which is rooted in English common law.  Discrimination is wrong - regardless of whether one bundles it in post-modern Marxism or not.

Answer me this, K - if you review a movie is it invalid because of your race or gender?  Is it possible for other people reading your review to be intelligent enough to determine for themselves your take on the movie?  If so (and assuming you're a white male) you inherently invalidated her criticism.  Of course, if your elitist view is that everyone is stupid and incapable of evaluating what they read or see such that 'white men' making reviews are exerting undue influence on their ability to evaluate the content being reviewed, I'd find that sad.  We need more non-white movie critics like we need more white NBA players.  Or maybe let the people who are actually good at the job rise to the top based on merit.

Everything turns to politics AGAIN!

shadar wrote:

The Highlander wrote:
Misogynists will grumble and moan and predict failure, but I'm beginning to think the 21st century is going to be a female-centric century in the way the 20th century was male-centric. I have zero issue with this, and like most things, fiction and movies and TV will lead teh way, driving the cultural forces forward.

Shadar. 

Which gender controls reproduction?  Meaning - we already are and have been female-centric INCLUDING the wealth disparity.  Men want to reproduce, so we bust our hind parts working 60+ hours a week and much time away from home to earn enough to support the family.  In fact, the more egalitarian the society, the more women choose to work less.

Men who make a lot are more likely to select a woman of less means as a partner.

Women who make a lot are more likely to select a man of equal or greater means as partner.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

You want to truly equalize the sexes?  Allow a path for men to reproduce as easily as women and without the need for attachment.  Now THAT would truly be an equalizing technology.  Note - I realize this is nothing more than a science fiction idea.  Also, biologically, it's incredibly naive to assume that we, as a species, will undermine a few million years of genetic selection with a couple of culture changes and government programs.  Now THAT is nothing short of hilarious.  Hell, we're still adjusting to what the pill did to the gender equation.

I love strong, athletic, competent, competitive women.  That's not mainstream nor will it likely ever be since most men aren't in this standard deviation and most women want to attract most men.  I'm glad that the revolution in fitness and empowered athletic women has arrived but I don't see it suddenly making more men be attracted to the same things I am.  The genetic programming just isn't there for the majority.

shadar wrote: Everything turns to politics AGAIN!

I was answering K Shadar.  Don't get twisted over it.  Just like some of your own postulations, they are merely words.  I don't know if there is a way to block me on this forum, but if discussions bother you this much, then kindly do so.  Trust me, I won't be offended.

Starforge wrote:

shadar wrote: Everything turns to politics AGAIN!

I was answering K Shadar.  Don't get twisted over it.  Just like some of your own postulations, they are merely words.  I don't know if there is a way to block me on this forum, but if discussions bother you this much, then kindly do so.  Trust me, I won't be offended.

A few things...

1) This isn't an American forum... it's an international one. So talking about American politics is inappropriate unless we want to talk about Italian and UK, Australian and EU politics, etc.. Not to mention Asian, Russian, etc..

2) As is race.

3) But talking about socio/cultural changes that involve women, especially as it is tied to the typical group fantasies, is on-topic. The problem is that can drift into actual politics (political party names, SJW, etc etc) pretty easily. The trick is to stay focused on superwomen and the growth and success of media that supports our shared interest. 

4) I have no interest in blocking anyone, but simply tossed a caution into my earlier comment because I thought we were drifting across the line from on-topic cultural issues that affect the superwoman fantasy, and actual US politics. 

But I understand the line gets pretty blurry and very narrow sometimes, It's up to the moderators to draw the hard "no politics" lines. 

Shadar

@Starforge

Appreciate the response.  There is a lot to break down, so I will do my best to respond as best I can.

Why did it not perform well overseas?  I already answered that - DC's broken and struggling universe.  *IF* their storytelling had been as popular (and good) as the MCU, that might have been different. 

That’s exactly my point.

Also - if you think Gal Gadot is only a pretty face, you've never seen her interviewed.  I wasn't particularly a fan for her for the role (weak acting and underwear model versus someone who looked the part and could act) but she comes across as someone who is fun and nice. Maybe that's all an act, but then I'll have to bump up my evaluation of her acting ability.

I have seen her interviewed MANY times.  She seems like a nice enough person.  But that wasn’t what I was referring to.  In regards to her acting, yes, she is just a pretty face.

As to Chris Evans and any other Hollywood actor having the same politics - exactly where did Chris say that there were too many white people doing a particular job?  I'll wait.

This is also exactly my point.  I don’t care if, when or what he, or Larson, said or say.  They are actors and it is what they say, and how they act on screen that counts for me.

I have no problem with Democrats - they are entitled to their point of view and we have elections every so often that change out one corporate backed group for the other . 

Agree.

I have a problem with racists and people who justify their racism with identity politics and intersectionality. 

And yet you may, or may not to be fair, have a problem with Gadot and her pro-Israeli stance. But that’s by the by to be honest.

I'm a nationalist (not to be confused by placing 'white' in front of it) and believe that all CITIZENS of the US are endowed with certain unalienable rights (you might be familiar with the document.)  I also have a strong belief in the foundation of our society which is rooted in English common law.  Discrimination is wrong - regardless of whether one bundles it in post-modern Marxism or not.

Ofc discrimination is wrong.  I am assuming you are referring to Larson when she said she doesn’t want to be interviewed anymore by “white dudes”. 

See, heres the rub of it.  SHE has that right.  If she feels she doesn’t want to be interviewed based on the color of the persons skin, or gender, or politics, it’s HER choice.  She is a person as much as the next man or woman. 

Does this make it right or wrong?  I personally don’t think that dichotomy applies.  Imo, she has the right to converse with whomever she chooses.  Just like everyone else.

Answer me this, K - if you review a movie is it invalid because of your race or gender?  Is it possible for other people reading your review to be intelligent enough to determine for themselves your take on the movie?  If so (and assuming you're a white male) you inherently invalidated her criticism.

Ofc a review isn’t invalid because of race or gender. Again, I am going to assume this is in reference to Larson and her “white dudes” remarks.

If you look at that, this isn’t what she was saying.  To put that in context, I’ll try and give this example. 

A black person (man or woman) will review, let us say, Black Panther from a different point of view then a white person (man or woman).  This is undeniable given that the critic (regardless of gender or race) draws on their own experiences, culture and so forth.

Both can review the technical aspects of the movie with equal weight, but which carries more overall weight with regards to themes, characterization, and so forth? 

Unless the “white dude” is an expert on African culture and studies (which I assume most aren’t), then any critique with regards to those elements, will invariably be invalid (or at least less valid) compared to a, let us say, African critic, who was bought up in that culture.  This is just logic.

I wouldn’t comment on say, the authenticity of the set or costume design in Black Panther for example.

In addition, the film isn’t aimed at me. I am not the target audience.  Thus my views on it (outside commentating on technical aspects of film making), will be less valid and carry less weight.

The same applies to gender.  There are films aimed at a female audience which I couldn’t possibly comment on with any form of validity, as I am not a woman (outside of what I noted as being the technical aspects of the film).

So, to bring it back to Larson, the core of what she is saying is valid.  She isn’t saying “white dudes shouldn’t critiques these films”.  She is posing the premise I’ve tried to illustrate above, albeit perhaps in a clumsy fashion (much like me too maybe )

Of course, if your elitist view is that everyone is stupid and incapable of evaluating what they read or see such that 'white men' making reviews are exerting undue influence on their ability to evaluate the content being reviewed, I'd find that sad.  We need more non-white movie critics like we need more white NBA players.  Or maybe let the people who are actually good at the job rise to the top based on merit.

I’m not sure I totally follow what you mean here, but I totally agree with the bold part.  All things should be based on a persons merit, and not their gender, class, or race.

Sorry for the long winded reply. I hope I have responded to your points in a clear manner.

Good discussion.

Peace.

/K

shadar wrote:

Starforge wrote:

shadar wrote: Everything turns to politics AGAIN!

I was answering K Shadar.  Don't get twisted over it.  Just like some of your own postulations, they are merely words.  I don't know if there is a way to block me on this forum, but if discussions bother you this much, then kindly do so.  Trust me, I won't be offended.

A few things...

1) This isn't an American forum... it's an international one. So talking about American politics is inappropriate unless we want to talk about Italian and UK, Australian and EU politics, etc.. Not to mention Asian, Russian, etc..

2) As is race.

3) But talking about socio/cultural changes that involve women, especially as it is tied to the typical group fantasies, is on-topic. The problem is that can drift into actual politics (political party names, SJW, etc etc) pretty easily. The trick is to stay focused on superwomen and the growth and success of media that supports our shared interest. 

4) I have no interest in blocking anyone, but simply tossed a caution into my earlier comment because I thought we were drifting across the line from on-topic cultural issues that affect the superwoman fantasy, and actual US politics. 

But I understand the line gets pretty blurry and very narrow sometimes, It's up to the moderators to draw the hard "no politics" lines. 

Shadar

Shadar, I'm all for rich fantasy ideas especially when it comes to our favorite topic.  People create sometimes simplistic and sometimes (less frequently) detailed worlds covering such.  I'm all for it.  Unfortunately, however, some seem to blur the line as to their fantasy life and the real world..

Attack of the hyper muscular Amazons come to the world to crush your tanks and men!  Good.

Men are misogynistic pigs who hold women down and it's about time women stood up and did something about it! - Not so good.  It's a generalization that isn't true on many levels and usually is supported by anecdotal evidence or pure opinion at best.

Keeping all politics out would be fine - but that would include (IMO) speculation about how current policies or current gender ideas in the real world apply because such things are inherently political.  Diving into one is the same as diving into the other.

Thats fair enough Fats.  No worries.

Peace.

/K

I wanted to make a quick comment on Capt. Marvel's appearance in "Avengers: End Game."  Well in short, she doesn't appear that often in the movie at all - only a couple of times.  She does however appear at the critical moments.  I discussed with a buddy of mine why she didn't appear much in the movie and we came up with two reasons:  1) She wasn't a part of the original Avengers team and the movie focused more on the characters we have grown familiar with and the bonds they have formed with each other while battling evil together all these years; and 2) she is just too powerful.  In the climactic battle, we see that defeating Thanos and his army single-handedly is well within her capabilities.  She doesn't, because of some clever improvisation on Thanos' part while battling her, but she is definitely powerful enough.  Having her engage more in the battle would result in it ending too quickly - for audiences.

She says in the beginning with a dead pan, matter of fact voice that she was going to go find and kill Thanos.  It was kind of funny, but it turns out, she could.

It makes sense though.  She travels the universe helping those that need help and in Earth's battle v Thanos it was no different.  She allocated just enough time and effort to help the Avengers win and then it's off to the next one.

My thoughts / 2 cents.  Curious what others think.

Remember how some people were railing against Brie Larson as a stuck-up Social Justice Warrior? Now others are railing against her as an icon of white supremacy!

www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/972/6...29kTvug7zcqRWDIS1YYo

In today's stupid ideological wars, you can't win!

--Brantley Thompson Elkins

brantley wrote: Remember how some people were railing against Brie Larson as a stuck-up Social Justice Warrior? Now others are railing against her as an icon of white supremacy!

www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/972/6...29kTvug7zcqRWDIS1YYo

In today's stupid ideological wars, you can't win!

--Brantley Thompson Elkins

Last I heard she was just another actress. A moderately good one who is still learning how to manage her public persona. 

Seems to me people confuse characters with actors way too much. It's all fantasy in the end.

Shadar

A bit of added craziness for that petition.

1) The petition is because Captain Marvel was "Whitewashed", claiming the original Captain Marvel was a black woman. This of course, misses that the Captain Marvel they are referring to was in fact the 3rd comic book character to have that name - following one white male and one visually white skinned alien male, the second one in Marvel alone, and whose only relation to the character's "Captain Marvel" involved in this story is that she adopted her name in recognition of the original.

2) The Captain Marvel they refer to is actually in the movie played by a black woman. She is the main character's friend, Monica - and they are using the current continuity of the comics that has the two characters having served in the air force together.

It's always good to know the history of a character before claiming they're whitewashed, and getting over 9000 (closing quickly on the 10000 that will trigger it sending to Disney) signatures..