Rant on the Tobey topic

Rant: I really don’t give a fuck if the old school X-men, RDJ, Chris Evans, and Tobey Maguire show up in Doomsday.

I get that Deadpool and NWH made money and their takeaway was cameos=money.

But I just want to keep pushing forward, New Avengers, Sam’s Cap, whoever else is a step forward versus, “this thing is from my childhood”.

This seems like a clusterfuck and I am sure the version without all the cameos makes less money but creatively and financially there will be diminishing returns.

Voir le contenu lié

Commentaires

Redditeer282025-11-16 23:21

![gif](giphy|kd9BlRovbPOykLBMqX)

This is what cinema has devolved into.

Caciulacdlac2025-11-16 23:26

Sam's Cap and New Avengers just had movies and they flopped. And in the case of the latter, it was not because of the bad quality.

Redditeer282025-11-16 23:44

>it was not because of the bad quality.

But it *was* because of the quality of the films that came immediately before.

Caciulacdlac2025-11-16 23:48

So if now Marvel makes a streak of good movies like Thunderbolts and Fantastic Four, then in the future a movie like Thunderbolts would be profitable?

Redditeer282025-11-16 23:50

Yes. Gain the audiences trust and audiences will trust you. It's why many bad movies make money and many good movies don't.

Caciulacdlac2025-11-16 23:53

I've seen many bad movies that were very successful and many great ones that flopped so I'm not that sure.

Redditeer282025-11-16 23:57

It's one of the reasons Bumblebee (the only good Transformers movie) didn't make much when the previous one made a bunch. People were sick of the films being shit that they didn't see the next one, even though it was good.

People can't judge the quality of a film they haven't seen, but they will judge others in the series and decide if they want to see the next one based on that.

Batman Begins didn't make a lot because Batman and Robin hurt the brand. When people watched Begins later and realized it was good, they supported the sequel.

Caciulacdlac2025-11-17 00:02

Can't explain Furiosa with this logic. The previous movie, Fury Road, was very well received, and then came Furiosa which flopped, despite being a really good movie. I can give you many examples like this.

Redditeer282025-11-17 00:03

It's not an absolute rule. There are many reasons a film will do well or do poorly. It's just one of many factors.

For a real head scratcher. Try to explain Aquaman 1.

Caciulacdlac2025-11-17 00:07

Aquaman was just peak superhero movie era. People would have watched any superhero movie that wasn't complete crap. Rules from that era don't apply now.

Redditeer282025-11-17 00:10

Aquaman was sandwiched between Justice League which made less than $700 Million and Shazam which only made a little over $350 Million. So no, people weren't watching *any* superhero movie at the time.

> wasn't complete crap.

How would they know if they hadn't watched it? 🤔

FewWatermelonlesson02025-11-17 00:20

If you don’t think there’s a direct correlation between the downturn in public interest in the MCU and the fact that a lot of the movies and shows post-Endgame weren’t very good, I don’t know what to tell you.

Part of the reason the franchise built such an audience was that it had a reputation for reliable quality control.

Caciulacdlac2025-11-17 00:23

I'm not saying that there isn't, I'm saying that I'm not sure if they can ever regain it, even if they only make good movies from now on.

pkjoan2025-11-16 23:31

I couldn't care less about Sam Cap. I want him back as Falcon, he was a much more interesting character.

PCofSHIELD2025-11-17 01:19

You're completely right

Hippo_in_limbo2025-11-17 06:43

You mean he was interesting when you didn't have to care about him. Let's just be real.

FewWatermelonlesson02025-11-16 23:33

I’m so ready for this saga to be over so we can be done with the multiverse.

Wooden-Radish-90082025-11-16 23:39

Why do yall reduce these characters to cameos? A lot of the "cameos" in the movies you mentioned are actually supporting characters that contribute to and influence the plot.

Redditeer282025-11-16 23:46

It's probably because these characters are only introduced for the same reason cameo characters are. To make the audience go "oh cool, it's them".

Wooden-Radish-90082025-11-17 00:42

I mean, this whole genre is meant to evoke "oh cool" but you cant just call a supporting character a cameo

Phaze_Nero2025-11-17 00:19

Because this is the MCU. At least its supposed to be. Not a free for all for every Marvel property that ever existed. Before the multiverse nonsense, the MCU was built slowly with its own, definitive version of their characters. Now these movies are excuses to throw in nostalgia bait and have people cheer. I hated NWH for this and Doomsday and Secret Wars are going to sour my enjoyment of those movies.

Wooden-Radish-90082025-11-17 00:45

Yeah, youre kind of causing your own problem here.

Hippo_in_limbo2025-11-17 05:55

The cameos in deadpool and wolverine were interchangeable at best. They were absolutely the definition of cameos. Nothing more but spectacle.

Wooden-Radish-90082025-11-17 08:57

I don't know what characters you are talking about

Hippo_in_limbo2025-11-17 09:53

Blade, Electra, Gambit, human torch, etc. all could have been swapped out and nothing plot wise would have changed.

I'm Half and half with X23. Yes she was important to the plot since they made her have moment with wolverine. Which yes, makes sense to us the viewer, but in universe makes absolutely no sense. He changes his mind bc of a talk he has with X23, yet THIS version never had a relationship with her, so her little talk shouldn't have had that major of an effect on him.

Wooden-Radish-90082025-11-17 10:38

No, not really.

Human Torch can't be swapped out because Wade's entire motivation is to be an Avenger, going so far as slam us over the head with images of Captain America at the TVA. The Human Torch bit only works because Chris Evans plays both those people. If you have Blade fill Johnny's role, it literally makes no sense.

It also makes the early point, that's the entire theme of the movie by the way, that the past characters mean "less" then the modern ones. Wade loses interest almost immediately and even sees Torch as expendable once the switch occurs. So no, that's not interchangeable for several reasons.

As for the resistance, I'll give you that, but only kind of. They're interchangeable, but ONLY with similarly historic characters. The point of that group is that the old movies have value despite not being viewed as "important." Them helping Deadpool and Wolverine is a metaphor for those movies and actors paving and clearing the way for this era of superhero media that we have now. So whereas yes, you could replace them with other historic characters, you couldn't replace them with, say, the variants from Loki and it have the same thematic effect.

That talk works on Logan because it's the first time he opens up about what happened to the X-Men. He recounts what occurred and Laura basically makes him see that he's about to let the same thing happen to the resistance. People need his help and they could die, again, because of his drunken loner shtick. He didnt see the similarities in the situation because he had been repressing what happened with the X-Men.

It makes perfect sense. He doesnt change his mind because of Laura, he changes his mind because he finally opened up. She also goes into that conversation because she's comfortable with Logan given her experiences with her Logan. I can admit that you could have written anyone into that scene and had him open up to them, but X-23 is the best choice because we, as the viewer, know the positive impact that Logan had on her and the other kids. X-23 is arguing for us, because we know he's a hero, we know he's capable of good, so she's the right choice to convey what we're feeling because of her experience with that heroism. I think youre misrepresenting that scene quite significantly.

eagc72025-11-17 00:10

Its a multiverse movie, ditto for Secret Wars, unless they decided in the last minute to ditch the Multiverse concept, seeing the legacy characters is to be expected.

People may complain about them bringing back legacy characters, but i am telling you if we were in a world where Marvel decided to do the Multiverse Saga and not use any legacy characters we would see people instead complaining that it was a wasted opportunity to not revisit those characters one last time.

Riley__642025-11-17 02:54

I feel like all things considered the MCU had handled its nostalgic characters really well. They don’t just exist to be cameos and nothing more, an example of an actual cameo is something like Howard the duck appearing in guardians, he appears but plays no role in the story.

Spider-Man no way home used them to help further toms story and help him learn what’s important about being Spider-Man. With great power comes great responsibility and that sometimes means giving up what you love for the greater good.

Deadpool & wolverine acted as a love letter to the pre MCU movies, sure it was more comedic in its take but that’s to be expected from a Deadpool movie.

I think if you want an example of bad nostalgia use look at something like the arrowverse crisis on infinite earths, sure it’s fun seeing these characters from other media but many of the cameos amounted to hey look it’s them and nothing more. It was literally like hey look it’s burt ward anyway moving on.

marvelcomics222025-11-17 08:52

Based on what we've heard, I don't think that the X-Men will be 'cameos'. A cameo is Nick Fury in an early episode of Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D., and I'd say that the Deadpool & Wolverine stuff is cameos, but I wouldn't really consider the Spider-Men cameos, the villains maybe, but not the Spider-Men.

BartleBossy2025-11-17 17:18

> I get that Deadpool and NWH made money and their takeaway was cameos=money.

Fans appear to show up for fan service.

MCU member berries.