This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"I have a message for you from inside the Dollhouse."
11983 members | you are not logged in | 29 May 2017




Tweet







September 03 2015

Avengers:Age Of Ultron considered a failure by Disney? Bleeding Cool is reporting that sources are saying to them that Disney was disappointed with how the Avengers sequel performed.

They go on to say that this gave Kevin Feige the leverage that led to this weeks news of the major Marvel Studio restructuring.

For those who do not know.

Marvel Studios is no longer going to be overseen by Marvel Entertainment head Ike Perlmutter.Kevin Feige will now answer to Disney directly via head Alan Horn which many see as giving Feige and Marvel Studios more creative freedom.

Also The Marvel Creative Committee(Alan Fine President of Marvel Entertainment,Brian Michael Bendis Marvel Comics writer,Dan Buckley Marvel Comics publisher
and Joe Quesada Marvel Chief Creative Officer) has been disbanded.

It should be noted that Marvel TV and Animation run by Jeph Loeb is still under Ike Perlmutter's control.So this would include Agents Of Shield,Agent Carter and the Netflix shows.

Well, that's stupid. "Disappointed" is not the same as "failure." They could be disappointed that it didn't make as much money as the first Avengers movie, but they can't call it a failure, not with the amount of money it did make.
Age of Ultron is 6th on All Time Box Office. I want to fail that bad too.

That said. Wish Marvel TV would stay in the family, keep it protected.

... I did my reading, I don't trust Perlmutter with the M universe or its ladies.

PS. Black Widow movie! I vote before she met Clint up to meeting him.
So what does this mean for future films/TV shows? By what criteria was AOU a failure?
they wanted to beat Avatar.
Can I please fail like that too? Could use some failure money.

Corporations are insane.
Poor Joss. I can easily see why he was like, "Y'know what? I'm done. Peace, y'all." *under breath* "[expletives]."
If AoU was a failure, what do they call Tomorrowland? I guess they just don't like being outperformed at the box office by Universal.
Can I please fail like that too? Could use some failure money.

Corporations are insane.

D-e-f- | September 03, 21:37 CET


Everything you said!
By what criteria was AOU a failure?


I guess in Disney's corporate plan they had predicted it would gross more than the first Avengers' movie and planned and budgeted accordingly. Also it seems like various factions in the Disney/Marvel camp are briefing against each other so be careful what you read in the trades and comic book gossip sites.
Mainly it is that the film underperformed in the US compared to the first one. The US is where the profits are the greatest and
its home field for the ego parade. In short unmet expectations rather than anything concrete.
I wish I could fail with 1.4 billion dollars.
Sounds like the fact it didn't financially build upon the first one and the more mixed reception did below what they were hoping for. It could also be hurt by being "the middle" of the Avengers films. This guy is just a fan but he is usually on point with what he says, his take on this article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy7wSdrkKUU

Also a breakdown of the shift happening at Marvel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WM46f4EYnA8
I'm reading through bleedingcool's articles right now and they seem to be on a HEAVY anti-Kevin Feige slant right now so I'm taking this article with a HUGE dump truck full of salt. ANY studio would be happy with the gross that Age of Ultron had and it is completely ridiculous to expect the sequel to outgross a phenomenon.
Rolling my eyes pretty hard at all of this. All of it is BS being played out on shady press sites loving the gossippy drama of it all. It was not a failure. It may have fallen short of the the high end of projections. Big deal. That is expected to happen at times and it all evens out in a portfolio business.

None of this is going to actually affect anything the normal fan would be aware of. Interesting if you are obsessed with inside corporate personnel machinations but that's it. I'm bored.
It sounds like the article was written with a little information and a lot of speculation. The problem with unnamed sources is that you never know if it is coming from several people in the inner circle or one guy in the mail room who heard from a friend who heard from a friend who etc etc etc.
The Hollywood Reporter has a article up now indicating that the budget of Captain America Civil War is major part of this situation.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/marvels-civil-war-why-kevin-820147

[ edited by Buffyfantic on 2015-09-03 23:46 ]
Maybe Disney was not happy about AoU numbers in comparation with two other this year releases, Jurassic World and Fast and Furious 7.
I think Buffyfanatic's article has the heart of it. It reads as if Feige is pushing Civil War to be more Avengers 2.5 than Cap 3.0
and Perlemutter the opposite. I'm a bean-counter and the "its more Cap 3.0" position is understandable to me. There seems to
me to be a fair amount of anti-Cap perception, especially overseas. That makes an AV 2.5 budget a lot more risky imo.

[ edited by JDL on 2015-09-04 05:48 ]
There are two ways to look at things.

1) The sequel cost more and made less.

2) The sequel made a lot of profit.

There absolutely *have* to be some people in the studio who think one way and other people who think the other way. This story doesn't even need a source because that's just how people think.

The question isn't whether there exists someone at the studio who is at least a little disappointed. Of course there is. The question is whether or not there are enough people who are enough important are enough disappointed to actually *do* something. The Bleeding Cool article states the obvious and infers the unproven.
I think this is an over-reaction to some recent thinking that was pretty much off the mark to begin with. What I mean is, when I grew up in the 80es it was always accepted that a sequel would make less than the big hit original. Anything that did the opposite was regarded as the exception, not the rule.

But recently the studios and their fans have been involved in this rush to outdo the previous film, and that can't keep happening. Maybe by the time the next Avatar comes around, and doesn't make anything near what the first one did, they'll start to realise that their business model and ever growing expectations are unrealistic..

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home