Look at all this star power in a non MCU movie just to flop in 2022. He would have a point if they were cranking out legit competition with these "real movies".
In 2022, almost 2023, the movie star is nearly extinct.
The days of people packing out theaters to see a movie solely because a specific actor is leading it are pretty much over. Social media and streaming changed the game.
HuhLook at all this star power in a non MCU movie just to flop in 2022. He would have a point if they were cranking out legit competition with these "real movies".
That's not what he's arguing though.I agree, but thats a good thing imo. Hate when a story is catered too heavily around the actors and not the characters
Fox made this mistake with Jennifer Lawerance as mystique.
How did Doolittle do?Depends
Sam Jackson > Nick Fury
Robert Downy > Ironman
Spiderman > Tom Holland
Have they? And what good is being a household name if they're in a movie outside of MCU and no one gives a fukk about it.But even then, the actual actors of the MCU have become household names.
QT's last movie made $377M.People aint in the mood nowadays for some depressing ass Tarantino or Scorsese movie, mfs need hope lmfao.
Someone mentioned 21 Bridges not really doing well at the box office, same with Marshall.They were stars before those movies. On top of that. Alot of their other movies don't do well. Chadwick and Reynolds may be the only ones on that list who can generate outside of their marvel characters. Maybe Hugh.
It has to be about more than them getting paid more for other roles though.Marvel made me a fan of RDJ, Chris Evans, Hemsworth, even Chad Boseman. I also became a fan of Si Limu.
I wasn't checking for any of them until they were in Marvel.
Marvel made them stars. They're getting paid more for other roles due to becoming stars with Marvel.
He would have a point if movies that weren't just "characters" were consistently competing with the MCU. Amsterdam was full of movie stars and someone like Taylor Swift who just broke Ticketmaster. He's acting like "movie stars" means something when it doesn't. It's a whole nothing ass argument.Huh
That's not even the point they made
That wasn't his point though.He would have a point if movies that weren't just "characters" were consistently competing with the MCU. Amsterdam was full of movie stars and someone like Taylor Swift who just broke Ticketmaster. He's acting like "movie stars" means something when it doesn't. It's a whole nothing ass argument.
You can get the best actors in the history to play these superhero roles, but if audiences aren't checking for them when they aren't playing the superhero, are they a star?That aside, I mostly agree wit Tarantino's assessment. Maybe the need to incorporate better actors, into some of these character roles.
That is his point. He's complaining that the MCU actors are just plug and play and that it's just a system, like a college quarterback being a system QB. Usually systems can only do so well, and truly talented players (in this cast truly talented actors) should be able to shyt all over the MCU and fukk them box offices up. Amsterdam is an example of a movie full of star power and that bytch went brick. Star power doesn't mean shyt. Complaining about well it's the characters not the actors...like well get you some characters and ADJUST TO THE TIMES.That wasn't his point though.
FactsThat is his point. He's complaining that the MCU actors are just plug and play and that it's just a system, like a college quarterback being a system QB. Usually systems can only do so well, and truly talented players (in this cast truly talented actors) should be able to shyt all over the MCU and fukk them box offices up. Amsterdam is an example of a movie full of star power and that bytch went brick. Star power doesn't mean shyt. Complaining about well it's the characters not the actors...like well get you some characters and ADJUST TO THE TIMES.
Tom Cruise says hi. Top Gun or mission impossible starring Chris Evans or hemsworth would go double wood