With some Phase 4 and Phase 5 Marvel Cinematic Universe films underperforming, Variety has joined the chorus asking: Is Marvel in trouble?
Variety’s piece focuses on the legal challenges of Phase 5 big bad Kang the conqueror actor Jonathan Majors, who might have to exit the role if he loses his domestic violence court case, as well as how audiences have been overtaxed by an “ensuing tsunami of spandex.”
Commentators online have speculated that the superhero genre is on the way out, destined to go the way of the western, especially after Phase 4’s stumbles. But are they right? Is this the end for Marvel and the genre?
Not quite, but it’s not necessarily smooth sailing.
Phase 4 was marked with a huge, pandemic-sized asterisk. Many of its early films vastly underperformed — “Black Widow” (which saw over $100 million in additional revenue thanks to its $29.99 fee to watch it on Disney Plus at the time), “Shang-Chi” and “Eternals” all earned around $400 million off $150 million and $200 million budgets, eking out small profits to losses.
But then Marvel picked up steam, particularly after “Spider-Man: No Way Home” earned almost $2 billion. After that, Phase 4 saw successes in “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness,” “Thor: Love and Thunder,” and “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever.” Phase Five thus far saw “Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania,” which Marvel might have lost north of $100 million on, and “Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol. 3,” which was another hit.
Marvel’s Disney Plus show similar middling success, with “WandaVision,” “Loki” and “Moon Knight” being widely well-received, shows like “The Falcon and the Winter Soldier,” “Hawkeye” and “She-Hulk: Attorney at Law” being neither smash hits nor overwhelming failures, and “Ms. Marvel” and “Secret Invasion” greatly underperforming.
Marvel has learned the hard way that not all of its film fans will be on board for it shows, as CEO Bob Iger has criticized them from diluting the brand, which I agree. The TV format works well for smaller, street-level heroes like “Daredevil,” especially because there’s a level of complexity to his stories that isn’t there for someone like “She-Hulk” or “Ms. Marvel,” and it didn’t make any sense to hold hostage the next Hawkeye and Sam Wilson’s debut as Captain America in order to push streaming subscriptions.
Financially, Marvel has taken some hits, but its fourth phase films still made $5.7 billion off an overall $1.5 billion to $1.7 billion budget. So far, Phase 5 is a similar tale, as its boosted by the success “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3” and is hindered by the failure of “Ant-Man” 3. Its shows are harder to quantify, as they don’t make a profit — they’re made to sell Disney Plus subscriptions as well as retain existing subscribers. As such, only Disney can determine if the money they put into those shows are worth it to them.
Structurally in terms of the story they laid out, they’re in a bit of hot water, as even if Majors’ bad press went away for tomorrow, “Ant-Man” 3 still greatly fumbled the introduction to Kang to cinema audiences — which is a big deal, because they want to make him an “Avengers” villain.
Marvel is still in a position where it makes movies that do phenomenally well at the box office, though they are often undermined by bloated budgets. I think we’re also seeing a lack of an repetitive for average superhero films that come with a $200 million price tag and is filled with ugly CGI.
When Marvel aptly gives people a reason to turn out to see a film, audiences come. When they go through the motions, much less do, but not so much that the company hemorrhages cash. When Marvel loses money, it’s so close that it’s almost unknowable until the exact financial information is released much later, if at all.
Marvel and the superhero genre is not dead by any means, but they also aren’t as strong as they once were. I think they’ll find that their Disney Plus shows were a mistake, and they need to revisit the fundamentals of what made some of the prepandemic films great.
InReview 
Leave a comment