Do you think will get an Agents of Smash style team up in Secret wars?
Since we have now 4 of 5 Hulks in the mcu, but no Rick Jones aka Atom bomb, I think it would be nice to see a team of hulks working or interacting with each other in secret wars if it ever happens or not. I would like to see it, because it would be cool to have all together in a different and very creative way.
Commentaires
Still definitely want to see him throw down though.
The Marvels lost hundreds of millions.
Brave New World, Thunderbolts, and Quantumania all barely broke even, which is flopping since no one spends hundreds of millions of dollars to break even.
Fantastic 4 may have broken even, or it may have lost several million dollars. The only number we have for the budget right now is "north of 200 million", so depending on how far north it either broke even or lost money. Either way, still a flop, since no one spends north of 200 million to not generate profit.
Deadpool isn't a MCU movie. It's the third entry in a Fox trilogy, using Fox characters, set in a Fox universe, with Fox lore, largely written by Reynolds not Feige. It was labelled a MCU movie because Disney wanted to distract shareholders since everything they had in 2022 and 2023 failed across all divisions except for Avatar, and the next things up were Snow White and Captain America 4, which they knew would fail. It was all to pacify shareholders, Deadpool isn't an MCU movie and never was.
Right — it lost about 237 million on a 374M budget and 206M gross. No argument there, but acting like that’s the *default* for Marvel is just wrong. Every studio has duds — DC had “The Flash” lose more than that, and even Pixar stumbled with “Lightyear.”
> “Brave New World, Thunderbolts, and Quantumania all barely broke even.”
Let’s fact-check:
- Captain America: Brave New World cost 180M, grossed 415M, and had a breakeven around 425M. A small deficit, not a flop.
- Thunderbolts had a 180M budget, made 369.5M worldwide. It roughly doubled its budget and added ancillary profits later.
- Quantumania generated 476.1M on a 330M net budget. That’s a minimal but real profit... a weak showing, not a failure.
> “Fantastic Four may have broken even, or it may have lost several million.”
It earned 520.6M globally on a 200M budget, making it one of 2025’s top 10 grossers. That’s a modest success by any metric.
> “Deadpool isn’t a MCU movie.”
That’s incorrect. Kevin Feige explicitly confirmed Deadpool 3 is set in the MCU and produced under Marvel Studios, it's the first R-rated MCU release. It keeps the Fox continuity as a story element, but it’s part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe canon. U cannot claim it isn't MCU when the producer themselves say it is, Disney bought Fox for its IP and and now it is integrating it's IP into the MCU, DP3 is a MCU movie.
And just to clarify the “break-even” myth — those numbers floating around Reddit or BoxOfficeTheory are not official studio figures. The 2.5× rule of thumb exists because studios typically keep about 50–55% of domestic revenue, 40% of international, and around 25% of China’s, while marketing (P&A) can equal half the production cost. It’s a rough heuristic, not an audited number, the real breakeven varies wildly depending on backend deals, streaming rights, and merchandise contracts.
So when someone says “it barely broke even,” remember: that means we’re working off incomplete, public estimates not Marvel Studios’ internal ledgers.
Marvel isn’t invincible, but it’s not on life support, either. It’s just in its “Phase of Mid”, still pulling 300-500M globally per release, which is more than almost any other franchise can dream of.
>Captain America: Brave New World cost 180M, grossed 415M, and had a breakeven around 425M. A small deficit, not a flop.
>Thunderbolts had a 180M budget, made 369.5M worldwide. It roughly doubled its budget and added ancillary profits later.
>Quantumania generated 476.1M on a 330M net budget. That’s a minimal but real profit... a weak showing, not a failure.
Each of those are failures and flops. No one spends hundreds of millions to sort-of break even. No one at Disney is talking about doing anything with any of those properties again, because they'd all be fired in an hour if they announced the sequel to a movie that made no money.
>It earned 520.6M globally on a 200M budget, making it one of 2025’s top 10 grossers. That’s a modest success by any metric.
Its budget was NORTH of 200M, not 200M. It's only one of the top 10 grossers because everything else this year has been flopping, and it'll be out of the list in the next few weeks.
That's also not how success is measured. Success is measured by profit. Disney is a business, they don't care about charts, they care about profit.
I can claim it's not an MCU movie when it's not an MCU movie. They can claim Indiana Jones is an MCU movie and it still isn't. It's a Fox movie in a Fox series and the only reason it was billed as MCU was because the MCU was collapsing. Shareholders were already rebelling at that point.
>And just to clarify the “break-even” myth — those numbers floating around Reddit or BoxOfficeTheory are not official studio figures....
You're rationalizing. It's not a myth, it's a decades established industry metric, and you're skipping over the part where it factors in the marketing budget.
You're also factoring in magic numbers that aren't actually there. There's no streaming rights number, it's on Disney+ not HBOMax. Nor does anyone offer a big number for a box office flop for streaming rights for any movie.
No one buys merchandise for a movie they chose not to see, that merchandise costs Disney more money because big-box retailers have contracts that require them to buy back the merchandise they can't sell and then destroy it.
The bottom line is, the movies didn't succeed, no one at Disney considers them successes, there's no magic dollars that saved these movies. They flopped.
There's streaming numbers, merchandise sales, hype for the next movies, and many more that are not known to the public. It's on Disney plus, if there's x number of people buying the subscription for the month to watch this movie that's a metric Disney can and does track....
They don't release the data doesn't mean that there's no data.
>You're rationalizing. It's not a myth, it's a decades established industry metric, and you're skipping over the part where it factors in the marketing budget.
It's a complete myth, there's no rule that a movie has to put 50% of its budget on marketing, and this is 2025 there's revenue from games, merchandise, next movies in the franchise, streaming, product placement deals and so much more that makes up a movie's revenue not just the box-office nowadays. Everything u say is just speculation without a source. All these movies made a profit except for the Marvels which lost money. This is a fact unless Marvel or Disney discloses their marketing budgets and all the other sources of revenue movies generate...
>The bottom line is, the movies didn't succeed, no one at Disney considers them successes, there's no magic dollars that saved these movies. They flopped.
Did Kevin tell u that he doesn't consider them a success? I'm guessing no. If Disney really believed 5/6 movies didn't make money or lost money as u say it would not be a good business decision to make more movies of the same universe would it? But guess what the MCU has been greenlit till the end of Doom saga and beyond, can you guess y because it is making goddamn money... If u cannot see this simple fact ur beyond stupid. MCU is what I call Pokemon of the movies, they can make as mid shit as possible and still earn more than any other competitors and come out profitable.... At this point Marvel looks to be back on track with FF, Thunderbolts and partially the new teases at the Comic Con.... It's profitable and actually better than almost all other Cinematic Universes u can choose to believe it otherwise but that'd be a stupid hill to die on that a company is pouring literally Billions of dollars into a series of movies that had 5 flops in a row.
Did you watch the movie? Because it isn't set in the main MCU outside of one scene.
2) She never belittles Bruce. She just doesn’t want to be trapped on a fucking island for the next decade.
3) How does she avoid the consequences? She didn’t listen to Bruce and so she lost control of her anger and became hated by everyone.
4) Not sure how that is being a Mary Sue? She can break the 4th wall just like Deadpool. He even uses it to find the perfect Wolverine during D&W montage.
She literally says that better than Bruce (that has experienced a lot of shit) knows about stress (only all this turned out to be empty words) and that he did not teach her.
Well, you know, for example, it could be shown a battle, how the heroine uses her legal knowledge. She didn't break the fourth wall and ask the producer's uncle for a proper ending.
Deadpool didn't ask Uncle Feige to rewrite his story so that all the problems (the death of his girlfriend, his breakup, his unemployment, and the death of his world) would disappear.
Bruce having DID is something a Hulk project should cover. She-Hulk is her own character. Why are you hating on She-Hulk because the Incredible Hulk did a bad job at showcasing Bruce’s backstory?
She-Hulk doesn’t have DID and they shouldn’t have to say that. It’s like asking “Why doesn’t Kate Bishop have psychosis?”. It’s completely irrelevant to her so why bring it up? Literally just logic.
My guy, breaking the 4th wall is a meta effect, just like how Deadpool literally moves the camera around. They said that the reason she was able to change the ending was due to a flaw in the system that allowed her to get out and that was patched by KEVIN. That is something that is not canon and will never be brought up again. The new ending was always the ending.
It was with Bruce that we saw how he learned to control himself. For us, the viewers, it was believed that this works with all gamma mutants. But since the films show us that there are Hulks without split personalities, then we need to explain why. They didn't explain it in the series? That means it's a failure.
And what moral is the viewer supposed to draw from this ending? That if everything goes badly for you, you just need to turn to a higher power to make your life perfect? Once again, Deadpool didn't change the plot in any way, he only communicated with spectators.
I'm really not sure what your point here was supposed to be. You phrased that like it was a rhetorical question but it really only proves *my* point?
Wasted potential would be like Taskmaster where they have a significant appearance but it isn’t done properly only to kill her off immediately after. All we got was “This is my son, Skaar” and you called it wasted potential. You just met the guy.
Yeah, the audience can't love a whiner who doesn't do anything.