Marvel Superheroes 2025 - Rumors & Discussion

[Mandalorianknight]

On 8/16/2025 at 1:07 AM, brickbride said:

Stick with Falconcap (who they inexplicably like no matter how little he manages to engage the audience) and in the marketing and merch play up all the appearances from actually well-liked characters (Spidey, Star-Lord, Thor, Loki, Strange?) no matter how small those might be.

I guess they could try, but even then, we're looking at:

Spider-Man: Yeah, he's spider-man, it'll be a safeish bet, but we'll have just had a spider-man movie, so it's not like people will be missing seeing him. I don't think he'll be enough.

Star-Lord: I personally still like him, but it seems like his popularity's waned a bit, and regardless Star-Lord without the Guardians loses a fair bit of star power.

Thor: I mean I don't know if anyone else feels the same, but endgame and Taiki ruined the MCU's thor for me. Any future appearances by him mean nothing to me.

Loki: People LIKE Loki, but again, I just don't see him at main protagonist level. I think he'll probably be the Nick Fury of this movie and probably the most successful in his role, but we're now at, like, him throwing Spider-man and a bunch of nobodies at Doom.

Strange: Obviously the script's being continuously rewritten but last I heard Strange wasn't even IN Doomsday.

22 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

I mean, it currently appears to be an evil iron man movie.

If Doom's plan in this movie really is "kidnap a small child and commit multiversal genocide" and marvel still manages to mess up the protagonists badly enough that people root for him, I really do think they should just have Morbius lead the Samvengers at that point.

5 hours ago, JeanGreyForever said:

I can see Marvel heavily reducing the screentime of all the recent flop characters (Sam, Thunderbolts, FF) and instead pushing in the moneymakers.

But, like, this is everybody they have. The Thunderbolts and FF are the only active teams, and the Samvengers are the only other 616 "team" (despite their setup being... one line in the thunderbolts post credits scene). Everyone you mention is either dead or from outside 616, and I mean... there's no way that works without either being 50% exposition or just going "look, here's the only characters left anyone cares about, don't ask how they're here or why they're working together"

[JeanGreyForever]

4 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

I guess they could try, but even then, we're looking at:

Spider-Man: Yeah, he's spider-man, it'll be a safeish bet, but we'll have just had a spider-man movie, so it's not like people will be missing seeing him. I don't think he'll be enough.

Star-Lord: I personally still like him, but it seems like his popularity's waned a bit, and regardless Star-Lord without the Guardians loses a fair bit of star power.

Thor: I mean I don't know if anyone else feels the same, but endgame and Taiki ruined the MCU's thor for me. Any future appearances by him mean nothing to me.

Loki: People LIKE Loki, but again, I just don't see him at main protagonist level. I think he'll probably be the Nick Fury of this movie and probably the most successful in his role, but we're now at, like, him throwing Spider-man and a bunch of nobodies at Doom.

Strange: Obviously the script's being continuously rewritten but last I heard Strange wasn't even IN Doomsday.

But, like, this is everybody they have. The Thunderbolts and FF are the only active teams, and the Samvengers are the only other 616 "team" (despite their setup being... one line in the thunderbolts post credits scene). Everyone you mention is either dead or from outside 616, and I mean... there's no way that works without either being 50% exposition or just going "look, here's the only characters left anyone cares about, don't ask how they're here or why they're working together"

I agree that I don't think the Tom Holland Spider-Man will be a draw, particularly so soon after his own solo movie. Another thing to keep in mind is that in the Spider-Man franchise, only two movies made over a billion. Far From Home was the first MCU movie after Endgame and was essentially an epilogue. And NWH which only made the amount of money it did because of Tobey and Andrew. Tom alone is not that big a draw.

I also agree that Thor is tainted goods now. Love and Thunder really started the downfall of the MCU and that's why there haven't been any definite plans for Thor 5. I think people are over him now, especially with how overused he's been. Less sure about Star-Lord but I think his popularity correlates with the entire GOTG rather than as a solo hero.

Strange isn't currently in Doomsday and Benedict Cumberbatch has said he's only in Secret Wars. But I personally wouldn't be surprised if he does wind up in Doomsday. I'm sure only half the cast has been revealed so far and there's a somewhat credible leak that Cumberbatch will be in the next batch of cast reveals. I don't see how you could do a multiverse movie and not include him. Strange and Spidey are the biggest names left in the MCU who are still alive, so not having at least one of them would be crazy.

The FF have been established as coming to the MCU with just one end-credits scene in Thunderbolts. It wouldn't be hard to do the same for some of the other big names like Tobey Maguire or Hugh Jackman, with just a quick intro to pull them into the story. And like you said, we've never even seen Sam's Avengers. There's only one line in Thunderbolts' end-credits scene that mentions them, so they would also need time to be set up and introduced in Doomsday, which wouldn't make them much different from any of the big names coming from different universes in terms of the amount of exposition necessary. And I think audiences wouldn't mind a little exposition to see those big names, rather than having it wasted on polarizing characters like Sam, She-Hulk,  Captain Marvel or whoever actually ends up on the main Avengers team. The last line in quotes is something I could see Deadpool saying and due to the nature of his character, he'd also be easy to incorporate.

[RobbieHxC]

On 8/16/2025 at 7:58 AM, CloneCommando99 said:

I mean, it currently appears to be an evil iron man movie.

 

I think Doomsday will fail or make very little money. It’s got like at least a 500 million dollar budget if not more. Then it’ll need at least 100 million for marketing. Meaning it needs to make at the very least 600 million just to break even. General audience no longer stands with marvel. The cast is too stuffed to give everyone a satisfying character arc. 3/4 of the characters aren’t even well loved by fans.

 

Spiderman, Dune Messiah and Supergirl are probably going to win the 2026 box office battle. I can’t see Mandalorian and Grogu doing that well either, not after season 3 and TBoBF.

The box office required to break even on a hypothetical $500M budget would be a lot higher than $600M.   There is almost zero chance that Avengers: Doomsday would make less than $600M, given that the lowest grossing Avengers film made $1.4B, and the last Avengers film was the highest grossing film of all time, at time of release.  Even Fantastic Four: First Steps, which features less popular characters, is at $450M currently and still showing in cinemas.  I think we've seen time and time again that internet forums, social media comments, and cinephiles do not reflect the general movie-going public, especially with family friendly brands.  Look at recent runaway successes like The Super Mario Bros Movie, Inside Out 2, Moana 2, and A Minecraft Movie.

Avengers is still a household name, loved by many adult and child fans alike, and is a juggernaut merchandise seller.  There was doom and gloom after The Marvels only made $200M at the box office, only to be bounce back with its very next film, mega hit Deadpool and Wolverine at $1.3B.  With its most iconic characters and cast, the data shows that the MCU is almost unbeatable - which annoys those trying to fit the facts around their narrative to hate Disney or Marvel.

Spider-Man: Brand New Day is also expected to be a huge success, but may not be end up being as successful as Spider-Man: No Way Home, which was one of the few blockbusters to come out during the pandemic and reaped the reward of less competition, as well as bringing back fan favourite characters.  I think Dune: Messiah will continue its trend of growing its audience and box office, but I don't think it's a billion dollar franchise yet - although could be wrong here.  With Superman still flying under $600M, I doubt Supergirl is going to match the film starring her more popular cousin.

I'm a big fan of both Marvel and DC and would love to see them both doing well and succeeding, and most importantly having lots of LEGO sets to accompany them!

[CloneCommando99]

2 hours ago, RobbieHxC said:

 Look at recent runaway successes like The Super Mario Bros Movie, Inside Out 2, Moana 2, and A Minecraft Movie.

Avengers is still a household name, loved by many adult and child fans alike, and is a juggernaut merchandise seller.  There was doom and gloom after The Marvels only made $200M at the box office, only to be bounce back with its very next film, mega hit Deadpool and Wolverine at $1.3B.  With its most iconic characters and cast, the data shows that the MCU is almost unbeatable - which annoys those trying to fit the facts around their narrative to hate Disney or Marvel.

A few things,
 

1. Because those were kids movies. All of which had no prior instalments that soured people’s taste of the film franchise’s brand. (Except for Mario, but everyone wanted to forget the live action movie from 30 years ago)

2.  Captain America is still a household name. How did Brave New World do? I do not believe for a second that reported $180 million budget is true with all the reshoots. 

3. Which iconic characters are actually part of the Avengers lineup in Doomsday? When the GA thinks of the Avengers they think of the original 6, the 4 2nd generations, Black Panther, Spider-Man and Doctor Strange. Now, who’s currently in Doomsday? Thor and arguably Falcon cap and that’s it. The rest are either Disney + characters from shows that a fraction of the GA watched or characters who haven’t been seen on screen in 5 years (Shang Chi). 

4. Deadpool and Wolverine succeeded because of Ryan Reynolds, Hugh Jackman and the previous instalments being loved. Remember Deadpool was its own thing, not connected to the MCU, and therefore didn’t have Phase 4 and 5 to tarnish its reputation.

5. Oh the MCU is very much vulnerable. Why else do you think Disney/ Marvel execs thought it was necessary to pay RDJ the GDP of a small country to return? Or supposedly bring Chris Evans and the Fox X-Men back? They’re afraid. And they have reason to be. 

Even Superman, who you say is not making that much, is outdoing every single Marvel movie this year. You’re right to say that Supergirl has an uphill battle. But it doesn’t matter as much if it makes less. It’s certainly going to have a smaller budget than Doomsday and therefore won’t need to make as much money to be considered successful. 

And then there’s the matter of quality. Doomsday is still experiencing rewrites and has 30 characters (if not more if the rumoured upcoming 2nd cast announcement is true) to juggle within reportedly 2.5 hours of length. Meanwhile Supergirl, a very iconic character from before the era of superhero movies, has a completed script that is supposedly so good that the writer was subsequently hired to write both Teen Titans and Wonder Woman. Which one is more likely to result in quality? And therefore have a better chance with the GA now superhero movies are on thin ice.

 

2 hours ago, RobbieHxC said:

- which annoys those trying to fit the facts around their narrative to hate Disney or Marvel.

If you’re talking about the anti-woke crowd… yes they are annoying. And I assure you, my argument is in no way affiliated with them. I am just facing the facts. 
 

My apologies for yapping but the age of Marvel’s dominance is over. Doomsday and Marvel is under risk whether you like to accept it or not.

Edited Sunday at 02:09 PM by CloneCommando99

[Mandalorianknight]

7 hours ago, RobbieHxC said:

The box office required to break even on a hypothetical $500M budget would be a lot higher than $600M.   There is almost zero chance that Avengers: Doomsday would make less than $600M, given that the lowest grossing Avengers film made $1.4B, and the last Avengers film was the highest grossing film of all time, at time of release.  Even Fantastic Four: First Steps, which features less popular characters, is at $450M currently and still showing in cinemas.  I think we've seen time and time again that internet forums, social media comments, and cinephiles do not reflect the general movie-going public, especially with family friendly brands.  Look at recent runaway successes like The Super Mario Bros Movie, Inside Out 2, Moana 2, and A Minecraft Movie.

Avengers is still a household name, loved by many adult and child fans alike, and is a juggernaut merchandise seller.  There was doom and gloom after The Marvels only made $200M at the box office, only to be bounce back with its very next film, mega hit Deadpool and Wolverine at $1.3B.  With its most iconic characters and cast, the data shows that the MCU is almost unbeatable - which annoys those trying to fit the facts around their narrative to hate Disney or Marvel.

I mean this in the most respectful way possible, but the writing style of this comment is very similar to ai generated prompts. It also doesn't make a lot of sense.

Internet forums and social media didn't hate all those animated children's films you mentioned. The minecraft movie (which I guess is "live action", but I mean, really it's a who framed roger rabbit mix of both) was disliked in the first trailer or two, but internet opinion on the movie swung around long before release. Moana 2 wasn't considered as good as the first but it wasn't hated. And people LOVED inside out 2 and the mario movie. But the more important point about that is why are you bringing up animated kid's movies that made money when talking about the MCU? Even if those movies got a lot of internet hate around release, the primary audience is one that's not writing reviews or active on social media.

Also, you bring up the fantastic four, the fantastic four bombed. There's no way around it. I liked it, I think most people who saw it did, but similar to thunderbolts, being liked by fans doesn't translate to success if not enough people watch the movie in the first place.

You talk about "trying to fit the facts around their narrative to hate disney or marvel", as if the MCU's actually doing great. The facts clearly show that the MCU is not in a good place. For every hit it manages to squeeze out, three movies bomb. This year alone, all three MCU movies released likely failed to break even. The few movies that still do well are ones using nostalgia from outside the MCU, such as Hugh's Wolverine or Tobey's spider-man. There was a time when MCU movies were more or less guaranteed hits, and we're now at the point where the majority of movies the last few phases have failed. You can talk all you want about how internet comments don't translate to a movie's financial situation- the MCU is objectively losing money hand over fist. And that's not even mentioning all the disney+ shows...

8 hours ago, JeanGreyForever said:

The FF have been established as coming to the MCU with just one end-credits scene in Thunderbolts. It wouldn't be hard to do the same for some of the other big names like Tobey Maguire or Hugh Jackman, with just a quick intro to pull them into the story. And like you said, we've never even seen Sam's Avengers. There's only one line in Thunderbolts' end-credits scene that mentions them, so they would also need time to be set up and introduced in Doomsday, which wouldn't make them much different from any of the big names coming from different universes in terms of the amount of exposition necessary. And I think audiences wouldn't mind a little exposition to see those big names, rather than having it wasted on polarizing characters like Sam, She-Hulk,  Captain Marvel or whoever actually ends up on the main Avengers team. The last line in quotes is something I could see Deadpool saying and due to the nature of his character, he'd also be easy to incorporate.

So we generally agree that the only characters they really have as draws are ones from other universes, the only problem is that we haven't seen any indication they're bringing in anyone you mentioned besides Deadpool. And even if they decide to shell out even more money to get Tobey (which probably requires some sort of deal with Sony, I'd imagine), Hugh Jackman, etc, we're now at an avengers movie in which spider-men and the X-men fight Dr. Doom, where most of the characters aren't from the main universe we've been following, and the script would have to be completely rewritten like a year out from release. I wouldn't put money on that going well.

5 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

Captain America is still a household name. How did Brave New World do? I do not believe for a second that reported $180 million budget is true with all the reshoots. 

I agree with you general points, but to be fair here, it's Captain America in name only. Unless your only knowledge of the film going in is the title, you know it's not Steve, and as marvel comics learned in the mid-2010s, throwing a beloved hero's name and powers to someone else doesn't automatically make them beloved as well. There's a reason nobody's clamoring for Ironheart sets. And in general why the MCU's in the state it's in- because for whatever reason it looked at marvel comics' failure in the ANAD era and went "what if we replicated that in a medium that's significantly more expensive to make projects in?".

Edited Sunday at 06:54 PM by Mandalorianknight

[RobbieHxC]

6 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

1. Because those were kids movies. All of which had no prior instalments that soured people’s taste of the film franchise’s brand. (Except for Mario, but everyone wanted to forget the live action movie from 30 years ago)

2.  Captain America is still a household name. How did Brave New World do? I do not believe for a second that reported $180 million budget is true with all the reshoots. 

3. Which iconic characters are actually part of the Avengers lineup in Doomsday? When the GA thinks of the Avengers they think of the original 6, the 4 2nd generations, Black Panther, Spider-Man and Doctor Strange. Now, who’s currently in Doomsday? Thor and arguably Falcon cap and that’s it. The rest are either Disney + characters from shows that a fraction of the GA watched or characters who haven’t been seen on screen in 5 years (Shang Chi). 

4. Deadpool and Wolverine succeeded because of Ryan Reynolds, Hugh Jackman and the previous instalments being loved. Remember Deadpool was its own thing, not connected to the MCU, and therefore didn’t have Phase 4 and 5 to tarnish its reputation.

5. Oh the MCU is very much vulnerable. Why else do you think Disney/ Marvel execs thought it was necessary to pay RDJ the GDP of a small country to return? Or supposedly bring Chris Evans and the Fox X-Men back? They’re afraid. And they have reason to be. 

Even Superman, who you say is not making that much, is outdoing every single Marvel movie this year. You’re right to say that Supergirl has an uphill battle. But it doesn’t matter as much if it makes less. It’s certainly going to have a smaller budget than Doomsday and therefore won’t need to make as much money to be considered successful. 

1. If you think that Marvel films are not family friendly you are kidding yourself.

2. Although Captain America is a household name, Sam Wilson's version is not.

3. Pretty sure the film will focus on the popular Avengers, X-Men, and Fantastic Four.  Not Yelena's new team with a gimmicky name, or Young Avengers, or other C-Listers.

4. Pretty sure Deadpool and Wolverine will return for at least one of Doomsday or Secret Wars, since the rest of the X-Men are.

5. Disney has consistently been paying RDJ a ridiculous $50M or more for each Avengers more since the first.

6. Superman has indeed beat out all the MCU films this year - but not by a huge margin.  Fantastic Four: First Steps is trailing around $100M behind and released 2 weeks later.  It's not an overwhelming victory like last year's Deadpool and Wolverine vs Joker: Folie a Deux.

6 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

And then there’s the matter of quality. Doomsday is still experiencing rewrites and has 30 characters (if not more if the rumoured upcoming 2nd cast announcement is true) to juggle within reportedly 2.5 hours of length. Meanwhile Supergirl, a very iconic character from before the era of superhero movies, has a completed script that is supposedly so good that the writer was subsequently hired to write both Teen Titans and Wonder Woman. Which one is more likely to result in quality? And therefore have a better chance with the GA now superhero movies are on thin ice.

I think we should judge the matter of quality of when the film comes out.  All four of the Russo brother's Marvel films have a strong track record of quality, especially by the general movie-going audience.  I think it's always better to make your own decision when a film comes out, rather than rely on the bias points of view from those within the studio.  Remember that James Gunn did say that The Flash  was one of the greatest superhero movies he'd ever seen 

6 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

If you’re talking about the anti-woke crowd… yes they are annoying. And I assure you, my argument is in no way affiliated with them. I am just facing the facts. 

My apologies for yapping but the age of Marvel’s dominance is over. Doomsday and Marvel is under risk whether you like to accept it or not.

Reassured and glad to hear you're not one of those 

I definitely think parts of Marvel are at risk, and it has lots of issues.  For example, Marvel has expanded too wide and lots of the C-List characters evidently cannot hold their own film or series, as their poor audience interest and box office reflects that.  I just don't think that the next entry to the record-breaking super successful Avengers series is gonna make less than $600M or be beaten by Supergirl , like your original claim.

[RobbieHxC]

1 hour ago, Mandalorianknight said:

I mean this in the most respectful way possible, but the writing style of this comment is very similar to ai generated prompts. It also doesn't make a lot of sense.

I don't use or need or want AI to express my opinions, thanks.  I just try to write clearly so my points could not be misconstrued.

1 hour ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Internet forums and social media didn't hate all those animated children's films you mentioned. The minecraft movie (which I guess is "live action", but I mean, really it's a who framed roger rabbit mix of both) was disliked in the first trailer or two, but internet opinion on the movie swung around long before release. Moana 2 wasn't considered as good as the first but it wasn't hated. And people LOVED inside out 2 and the mario movie. But the more important point about that is why are you bringing up animated kid's movies that made money when talking about the MCU? Even if those movies got a lot of internet hate around release, the primary audience is one that's not writing reviews or active on social media.

I was trying to make a point that family friendly films are doing well post-pandemic, and Marvel as a brand is extremely favoured by children.  As well as adults of course, as we are all here!   Exactly, a lot of Marvel's audience are not online.

1 hour ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Also, you bring up the fantastic four, the fantastic four bombed. There's no way around it. I liked it, I think most people who saw it did, but similar to thunderbolts, being liked by fans doesn't translate to success if not enough people watch the movie in the first place.

You talk about "trying to fit the facts around their narrative to hate disney or marvel", as if the MCU's actually doing great. The facts clearly show that the MCU is not in a good place. For every hit it manages to squeeze out, three movies bomb. This year alone, all three MCU movies released likely failed to break even. The few movies that still do well are ones using nostalgia from outside the MCU, such as Hugh's Wolverine or Tobey's spider-man. There was a time when MCU movies were more or less guaranteed hits, and we're now at the point where the majority of movies the last few phases have failed. You can talk all you want about how internet comments don't translate to a movie's financial situation- the MCU is objectively losing money hand over fist. And that's not even mentioning all the disney+ shows...

All three MCU movies this year have underperformed, but I wouldn't say Fantastic Four: First Steps bombed when it's the highest grossing F4 movie and tracking for $500M range.  I think people have poor memory and look through rose-coloured glasses since the MCU has ALWAYS been a mixed bag in terms of box office and quality (except for a 2-year period between 2017 and 2019, which featured two Avengers movies).  The one consistent money maker has been the Avengers films, which is why I'm defending that Doomsday will likely make more than $600M and more than Supergirl, as someone had claimed earlier.

Anyways, to end on a positive note, I hope future films are good quality for both Marvel and DC so we can continue to enjoy our LEGO hobby!

[Renny The Spaceman]

8 hours ago, RobbieHxC said:

.Look at recent runaway successes like The Super Mario Bros Movie, Inside Out 2, Moana 2, and A Minecraft Movie.

None of those are comparable.  No-one was thinking these were going to flop, they looked and were ratshit but we're so obviously gonna make money

 

44 minutes ago, RobbieHxC said:

1. If you think that Marvel films are not family friendly you are kidding yourself.

That's true, they are kid's movies at their core, they change the costumes every film to sell more toys and such but there is a difference between "4 quadrant family friendly action blockbuster" and a straight kids movie like Minecraft or Mario, many ultra protective parents will not take their kids to see a film with with swearing or violence or whatever but IP based kids films are safe money that every family will see, no parent refuses to take their kid to Mario.

A big problem is also these superhero movies appeal less and less to kids every passing year, there'll be 10 year olds when the new one comes out who haven't had any Avengers film release in their memory. They all get more insular and rely on people having seen more and more earlier ones, this always, in and medium does lead to the infallible falling. In LEGO's case look at Bionicle, kids still are a big part of the audience but the audience makes up a smaller amount of the population of kids year upon year. Maybe it'll make money but it's absolutely not a sure thing, especially as it's gonna be a ridiculously expensive movie. There's a real chance it could do like 700 mil and still be considered a flop, budget is the big killer with most blockbusters now 

[Mandalorianknight]

1 hour ago, RobbieHxC said:

1. If you think that Marvel films are not family friendly you are kidding yourself.

You yourself used a movie that dropped the F-bomb something like 127 times as your example for marvel's best success in the post-endgame era. Yeah, a lot of kids and families go watch them, just like most PG-13 franchise films that aren't horror, but they aren't specifically developed for kids like all the movies you tried to use as examples. Nobody's walking out of Thunderbolts thinking the target audience was elementary schoolers.

1 hour ago, RobbieHxC said:

All three MCU movies this year have underperformed, but I wouldn't say Fantastic Four: First Steps bombed when it's the highest grossing F4 movie and tracking for $500M range.  I think people have poor memory and look through rose-coloured glasses since the MCU has ALWAYS been a mixed bag in terms of box office and quality (except for a 2-year period between 2017 and 2019, which featured two Avengers movies).  The one consistent money maker has been the Avengers films, which is why I'm defending that Doomsday will likely make more than $600M and more than Supergirl, as someone had claimed earlier.

No, not just "underpreformed", bombed. Lost money. Net negative. Cost more to make and market than made back in sales. Three consecutive marvel movies losing money at the box office is a really, really bad thing, not to mention how many other bombs we've had the past few years. The ratio of NWHs/DP&Ws to money losers is not enough to keep the franchise profitable at this rate. And it's not helping the merch for them is either shelfwarming (How's that Samcap set doing?) or just didn't get made in the first place (there's barely anything for Thunderbolts.) (Also, highest-grossing F4 movie is really stretching our criteria for what a success is when the franchise is known for failing on the big screen, especially when, if you account for inflation, that's not even true.)

The avengers movies didn't work because the avengers name was massive. It wasn't. It (and the guardians) were made of a bunch of B-tier heroes at best, C-listers at worst, and the movie worked because we'd had good, popular movies before it that endeared the audience to these characters and built to something. By the time we reached infinity war, the avengers and guardians WERE household names. Doomsday, on the other hand, has:

As discussed, no semblance of a team being built, and very few people anyone cares about. The Samvengers, who have had no buildup (and plenty of the movies featuring their members have bombed), are heavily controversial and disliked. Thunderbolts and F4 lost money. The consensus seems to be that the only way to get characters people care about is to have the only post-endgame ones to make money- the outside-the-MCU spider-men and Deadpool/wolverine- apparate in to be the new stars, and unfortunately, not much over a year out, all concept art and set leaks so far are backing up the "Half the F4 and Thunderbolts go with the samvengers to do the main plot while the other halves stay home" lineup. Sure, they could make changes to the film's core cast along the way, but to do so you're adding MORE expensive actors, as characters who are more of a nostalgia factor than anything else- and ones that'll get diminishing returns. To say nothing of the fact that the whole "but they could just swap out the main cast for the few people left the audience DOES care about" cope exposes that if they do end up doing it, they clearly have no idea what kind of story they're trying to tell here and are blindly focused on trying to salvage something of the past half-decade by mashing everyone left into a multiversal meat grinder.

No real buildup- sure, we've had the multiverse thrown at us so much that the last successful MCU movie actively mocks it, but aside from the generic concept that universes are colliding, there's not much. This'll be our first time seeing Doom aside from a two-second clip of him in another universe standing by a magic toddler. There's no Thanos level buildup, for one thing because they had to swap out their Thanos-level threat.

Really the best thing going for Doomsday is the Avengers name, but as we just saw with brave new world, slapping the name of something people liked on something else isn't any guarantee of success.

Will it make more than $600 million? I wouldn't be shocked. Will it come even CLOSE to making back what it costs to make and market it? I would bet massive amounts of money that no, it does not.

Edited Sunday at 09:27 PM by Mandalorianknight

[RobbieHxC]

1 hour ago, Mandalorianknight said:

You yourself used a movie that dropped the F-bomb something like 127 times as your example for marvel's best success in the post-endgame era. Yeah, a lot of kids and families go watch them, just like most PG-13 franchise films that aren't horror, but they aren't specifically developed for kids like all the movies you tried to use as examples. Nobody's walking out of Thunderbolts thinking the target audience was elementary schoolers.

No, not just "underpreformed", bombed. Lost money. Net negative. Cost more to make and market than made back in sales. Three consecutive marvel movies losing money at the box office is a really, really bad thing, not to mention how many other bombs we've had the past few years. The ratio of NWHs/DP&Ws to money losers is not enough to keep the franchise profitable at this rate. And it's not helping the merch for them is either shelfwarming (How's that Samcap set doing?) or just didn't get made in the first place (there's barely anything for Thunderbolts.) (Also, highest-grossing F4 movie is really stretching our criteria for what a success is when the franchise is known for failing on the big screen, especially when, if you account for inflation, that's not even true.)

The avengers movies didn't work because the avengers name was massive. It wasn't. It (and the guardians) were made of a bunch of B-tier heroes at best, C-listers at worst, and the movie worked because we'd had good, popular movies before it that endeared the audience to these characters and built to something. By the time we reached infinity war, the avengers and guardians WERE household names. Doomsday, on the other hand, has:

As discussed, no semblance of a team being built, and very few people anyone cares about. The Samvengers, who have had no buildup (and plenty of the movies featuring their members have bombed), are heavily controversial and disliked. Thunderbolts and F4 lost money. The consensus seems to be that the only way to get characters people care about is to have the only post-endgame ones to make money- the outside-the-MCU spider-men and Deadpool/wolverine- apparate in to be the new stars, and unfortunately, not much over a year out, all concept art and set leaks so far are backing up the "Half the F4 and Thunderbolts go with the samvengers to do the main plot while the other halves stay home" lineup. Sure, they could make changes to the film's core cast along the way, but to do so you're adding MORE expensive actors, as characters who are more of a nostalgia factor than anything else- and ones that'll get diminishing returns. To say nothing of the fact that the whole "but they could just swap out the main cast for the few people left the audience DOES care about" cope exposes that if they do end up doing it, they clearly have no idea what kind of story they're trying to tell here and are blindly focused on trying to salvage something of the past half-decade by mashing everyone left into a multiversal meat grinder.

No real buildup- sure, we've had the multiverse thrown at us so much that the last successful MCU movie actively mocks it, but aside from the generic concept that universes are colliding, there's not much. This'll be our first time seeing Doom aside from a two-second clip of him in another universe standing by a magic toddler. There's no Thanos level buildup, for one thing because they had to swap out their Thanos-level threat.

Really the best thing going for Doomsday is the Avengers name, but as we just saw with brave new world, slapping the name of something people liked on something else isn't any guarantee of success.

Will it make more than $600 million? I wouldn't be shocked. Will it come even CLOSE to making back what it costs to make and market it? I would bet massive amounts of money that no, it does not.

Honestly, I am not trying to argue with you that MCU doesn't have problems because it clearly does.  I also don't want to start arguing about more things.

All I wanted to defend was that, given the power of the Avengers brand with families and its historical record-breaking box office grosses, it would be extremely unlikely for Doomsday to gross under $600M, or be be lower than Supergirl, as someone had claimed.  I would bet massive amounts of money on that.

Edited Sunday at 10:33 PM by RobbieHxC

[JeanGreyForever]

9 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

2.  Captain America is still a household name. How did Brave New World do? I do not believe for a second that reported $180 million budget is true with all the reshoots. 

3. Which iconic characters are actually part of the Avengers lineup in Doomsday? When the GA thinks of the Avengers they think of the original 6, the 4 2nd generations, Black Panther, Spider-Man and Doctor Strange. Now, who’s currently in Doomsday? Thor and arguably Falcon cap and that’s it. The rest are either Disney + characters from shows that a fraction of the GA watched or characters who haven’t been seen on screen in 5 years (Shang Chi). 

Disney is infamous for underreporting their budgets. Not just for Marvel, but for every film studio they have in their clutches. No one's ever taken the $180 million dollar budget at face value, especially since BNW is probably the most reshot MCU movie of all time. Sources say the real budget could have been anywhere from $300-380 million.

https://www.ign.com/articles/captain-america-brave-new-world-real-budget-box-office

The Avengers brand was only strong because of the individual Avengers like Cap, Iron Man, Thor, etc. Doomsday's Avengers will be a completely different group of people, most of whom are polarizing at best and have not had strong box office success. The one classic Avenger will be Thor and even he's considered damaged goods now. This is why Robert Downey Jr. was asked back, because it's the easiest way to bring back Iron Man without actually bringing him back. And I can see Marvel being desperate enough to claim that Doctor Doom is really just a Tony variant, especially since MoM established that most Doctor Strange variants go bad. Strange was meant to be this generation's Iron Man, so it would be easy enough to depict Doom as evil Iron Man. This is also why it's plausible that Chris Evans will be back with a big role, since Marvel must realize that most of the films (and TV shows) after Endgame were barely seen by anyone. Doomsday will have to structure itself as a direct sequel to Endgame to be relevant, and Anthony Mackie has basically hinted at this too. 

Anthony Mackie says 'AVENGERS: DOOMSDAY' picks up the emotional end of Endgame and turns it into chaos. “I think this is a lot of carrying over and feel and depth of [Avengers: Endgame] coming into a new universe. Because from my movie, we were building on top of that to this just being a chaotic destruction of the world.”

2 hours ago, RobbieHxC said:

All three MCU movies this year have underperformed, but I wouldn't say Fantastic Four: First Steps bombed when it's the highest grossing F4 movie and tracking for $500M range.  

Highest grossing FF movie isn't saying much, especially since it's not accounting for inflation. Looking at what the box office experts are saying, the 2005 movie will probably still be more successful if you adjust for inflation. 

2 hours ago, Renny The Spaceman said:

A big problem is also these superhero movies appeal less and less to kids every passing year, there'll be 10 year olds when the new one comes out who haven't had any Avengers film release in their memory. They all get more insular and rely on people having seen more and more earlier ones, this always, in and medium does lead to the infallible falling. In LEGO's case look at Bionicle, kids still are a big part of the audience but the audience makes up a smaller amount of the population of kids year upon year. Maybe it'll make money but it's absolutely not a sure thing, especially as it's gonna be a ridiculously expensive movie. There's a real chance it could do like 700 mil and still be considered a flop, budget is the big killer with most blockbusters now 

There is also a big problem that kids are not interested in Marvel anymore. The MCU is catered towards millennials and older Gen Z. Younger Gen Z and Gen Alpha (the kids born after 2010, so basically when the MCU started) are tuned out. This is why the MCU hasn't been able to grow and expand its audience. You can even see this with the Lego sets we're getting for Marvel. The vast majority of them are for Endgame or Civil War, and more geared towards collectors who are millennials or older Gen Z. The new movies are getting one set at best, if they get any at all (like Thunderbolts getting no new sets) because there's no nostalgia for older audiences and younger kids aren't buying. 

Marvel thought they could get young people interested again by replacing or recasting the original cast with younger versions (which also has the benefit of meaning they can afford to pay these new actors less, since they're less established) but that's backfired. Nobody cares about the Young Avengers characters. I think Florence Pugh's Yelena, Iman Vellani's Ms. Marvel, and Hailee Steinfeld's Kate Bishop have been well-received but they're not necessarily money-makers, as Thunderbolts showed with Yelena and The Marvels showed with Ms. Marvel. Marvel saying they plan on rebooting the X-Men with a younger cast after Secret Wars is also ominous. The X-Men's most successful films have Hugh Jackman and the original Fox cast (the attempt to reboot with First Class failed). The only billion dollar movie in the X-Men franchise is a team-up of Deadpool and Jackman's Wolverine. Remove Hugh Jackman and I don't see the X-Men being a feasible franchise. Movies like Apocalypse and Dark Phoenix tried to introduce a young, unknown cast and that failed miserably so just like the FF's constant reboots have failed, I see the X-Men falling in the same trap. 

[JeanGreyForever]

1 hour ago, Mandalorianknight said:

No, not just "underpreformed", bombed. Lost money. Net negative. Cost more to make and market than made back in sales. Three consecutive marvel movies losing money at the box office is a really, really bad thing, not to mention how many other bombs we've had the past few years. The ratio of NWHs/DP&Ws to money losers is not enough to keep the franchise profitable at this rate. And it's not helping the merch for them is either shelfwarming (How's that Samcap set doing?) or just didn't get made in the first place (there's barely anything for Thunderbolts.) (Also, highest-grossing F4 movie is really stretching our criteria for what a success is when the franchise is known for failing on the big screen, especially when, if you account for inflation, that's not even true.)

The avengers movies didn't work because the avengers name was massive. It wasn't. It (and the guardians) were made of a bunch of B-tier heroes at best, C-listers at worst, and the movie worked because we'd had good, popular movies before it that endeared the audience to these characters and built to something. By the time we reached infinity war, the avengers and guardians WERE household names. Doomsday, on the other hand, has:

As discussed, no semblance of a team being built, and very few people anyone cares about. The Samvengers, who have had no buildup (and plenty of the movies featuring their members have bombed), are heavily controversial and disliked. Thunderbolts and F4 lost money. The consensus seems to be that the only way to get characters people care about is to have the only post-endgame ones to make money- the outside-the-MCU spider-men and Deadpool/wolverine- apparate in to be the new stars, and unfortunately, not much over a year out, all concept art and set leaks so far are backing up the "Half the F4 and Thunderbolts go with the samvengers to do the main plot while the other halves stay home" lineup. Sure, they could make changes to the film's core cast along the way, but to do so you're adding MORE expensive actors, as characters who are more of a nostalgia factor than anything else- and ones that'll get diminishing returns. To say nothing of the fact that the whole "but they could just swap out the main cast for the few people left the audience DOES care about" cope exposes that if they do end up doing it, they clearly have no idea what kind of story they're trying to tell here and are blindly focused on trying to salvage something of the past half-decade by mashing everyone left into a multiversal meat grinder.

No real buildup- sure, we've had the multiverse thrown at us so much that the last successful MCU movie actively mocks it, but aside from the generic concept that universes are colliding, there's not much. This'll be our first time seeing Doom aside from a two-second clip of him in another universe standing by a magic toddler. There's no Thanos level buildup, for one thing because they had to swap out their Thanos-level threat.

Really the best thing going for Doomsday is the Avengers name, but as we just saw with brave new world, slapping the name of something people liked on something else isn't any guarantee of success.

Will it make more than $600 million? I wouldn't be shocked. Will it come even CLOSE to making back what it costs to make and market it? I would bet massive amounts of money that no, it does not.

The lack of sold merchandise is a dead giveaway. Eternals toys are still rotting away on shelves. Black Panther: WF technically did well at the box office, but its merchandise can still be found everywhere too. We also have to keep in mind that Disney is bleeding financially, not just with the MCU but with all their studios. The have the occasional gigantic hit, like Inside Out 2, Moana 2, and Lilo & Stitch's remake, but most everything else they've been making is flopping hard. And you can see the pattern that all their successes (the aforementioned three movies plus GOTG3 and Deadpool & Wolverine) all rely heavily on nostalgia and are sequels/remakes of their earlier hits. Their original films are all failing. NWH is a special case since Disney only gets Spider-Man merchandise profits. Sony puts up the money for the actual movie and they get all the money the movie makes. So NWH doing as well as it did actually doesn't benefit Disney, since Sony is recouping the profit. If anything, it shows that audiences will show up for Spider-Man but not for most other Marvel characters. After ASM2 failed to meet expectations, Sony was in dire straits, which is why they agreed to team up with Marvel for the MCU. Now the reverse has happened. The MCU is failing and Sony can see they don't need to rely on the MCU for Spider-Man. You can see this with the Lego sets too and how most of the ones we're getting are all Spider-Man related (whether from the movies or comics), although Disney does benefit from this since they get the merchandise profits.

The concept art that was leaked a few months back and posted here only focused on MCU characters. I see that massively changing especially since the first cast announcement had an emphasis on the FoX-Men. There were only a few names there like Professor X, Magneto, Mystique, Nightcrawler, Beast, Gambit, and Cyclops, but it's safe to say there will probably be a few more added to this list over time (Wolverine, Jean, and Storm come to mind as the most likely contenders). Will they only be cameos, meant to be killed off for shock value, or will they have actual supporting roles like Tobey and Andrew did in NWH, I don't know. But Kevin Feige's career at Marvel started with the original X-Men movie trilogy, so he feels quite connected to the cast and that makes me think their roles could be more than just cameos, especially with Rebecca Romijn (Mystique) saying the script is in flux and everything's being made up as it goes. This means rewrites and rewrites and based on the failures of the last three MCU movies, it seems Doomsday would be set up for failure if they focus primarily on Sam's Avengers, the Thunderbolts, and FF. There were rumors too that Monica was going to be one of the most pivotal characters, due to her ending up in the FoX-Men universe, but I think centering a film around her would be the best way to tank Doomsday. She's a Disney+ character, not even the lead, who co-starred in the biggest flop of all time. As soon as The Marvels flopped, I'm sure there was damage control to limit her role down to the bare minimum.

The weird thing about Doom is that apparently Feige said Robert Downey Jr. actually played Doom in that FF scene. It wasn't a stunt double. The fact that they went ahead and used Robert Downey Jr. but didn't show his face or give him any lines, tells me that they didn't want to establish his character yet because they still don't know what they're doing with him in Doomsday. Anything he might do in that end-credits scene might not match up with what he does in Doomsday, so that's why they kept him hidden. Like people are saying the FF end credits scene in Thunderbolts doesn't match up with the final FF movie but with the original FF movie, before reshoots, where Galactus would have succeeded in destroying their world/universe and the FF escaped to the 616 reality. 

BNW was an abysmal failure but even the amount of money it did somehow make hinged on the Captain America IP brand plus the Red Hulk promotion. There were always going to be some audience members who just see the name and watch it, expecting Steve. Ironically enough, I think that hurt The Marvels (one of many, many numerous factors) because it's not an explicit Captain Marvel sequel.

4 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Also, you bring up the fantastic four, the fantastic four bombed. There's no way around it. I liked it, I think most people who saw it did, but similar to thunderbolts, being liked by fans doesn't translate to success if not enough people watch the movie in the first place.

So we generally agree that the only characters they really have as draws are ones from other universes, the only problem is that we haven't seen any indication they're bringing in anyone you mentioned besides Deadpool. And even if they decide to shell out even more money to get Tobey (which probably requires some sort of deal with Sony, I'd imagine), Hugh Jackman, etc, we're now at an avengers movie in which spider-men and the X-men fight Dr. Doom, where most of the characters aren't from the main universe we've been following, and the script would have to be completely rewritten like a year out from release. I wouldn't put money on that going well.

Honestly, I didn't. I'm a huge FF fan especially since they were my intro to Marvel back when the 2005 film came out. I didn't like the new movie at all. Felt like a remake of Rise of the Silver Surfer and I had mixed feelings on the cast. There were some good things but overall, the film was boring and felt like a sequel to an FF movie that should have come out immediately after Endgame. Thunderbolts I did enjoy and that felt fresh, but it also lacked any big names or IP brand to back it up. Hence why before the opening weekend was even over, Marvel was promoting it as the New Avengers on social media.

Is Deadpool confirmed? I know some articles are saying he's in the movie and Ryan Reynolds keeps hinting at it, but I haven't seen Marvel officially confirm it. Which I think is more just Marvel not wanting to confirm it just yet. But if Deadpool is 100% in the movie, there's no way he's included without Wolverine. Tobey I'm less sure of. I do think he'll show up in Secret Wars, because audiences have wanted to see Tobey, Hugh Jackman, Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Evans all together, but I don't know how likely it is he'll pop up in Doomsday. The thing to keep in mind is that technically even Doom isn't from our main universe that we've been following. It seems like he's from the FF universe and he'll need Franklin to give him the power to travel to different universes, but it's still ambiguous. But whatever universe he ends up in, it probably won't be from the 616 reality, especially if he's a Tony variant. And Deadpool & Wolverine featured a Wolverine variant, rather than the version audiences have seen for more than two decades, so I think it's not that big a risk for our heroes to come from different realities to fight a villain also from a different reality. And just to be clear, I don't think this means that all the MCU characters (Sam's Avengers, FF, Thunderbolts) will be cut out or diminished completely. But the original rumors were that Sam would be the lead of the movie, since he's the Avengers leader, and characters like Carol and Reed might also be central. I see that being less likely now, particularly in terms of Sam. He's a dud of a character and is no Chris Evans or Robert Downey Jr. And the script is constantly being rewritten anyway, so it could be used to decrease the roles of the MCU characters to focus on whoever might be capable of attracting more viewers.

[JohnTPT17]

5 hours ago, RobbieHxC said:

but I wouldn't say Fantastic Four: First Steps bombed when it's the highest grossing F4 movie

That's like winning a "most lively chicken" award with a one-legged hen when the competition is a KFC bucket and a Costco rotisserie. Sure, you avoided Fan4stic's level of bombing, but that movie needed to be more of a home run that bunting the ball to 1st - especially when you're supposed to be the lead-up movie to the attempted revival/reboot of your franchise.

2 hours ago, JeanGreyForever said:

Doomsday will have to structure itself as a direct sequel to Endgame to be relevant, and Anthony Mackie has basically hinted at this too.

If that ends up being true, I would hate that on so many levels. What would be the point of the last several films and TV shows - just spinning our wheels for half a decade in order to backtrack it all? And if that does work, are we now going to toss the Disney Star Wars Sequel trilogy into the bin for another reboot tying things back to older, well regarded media? Like, sure, there's probably some good that can come with that, and it might be enough of a carrot to get general audiences back, but it also feels kinda cheap and insincere to those who did like what came before (and I say this as someone who hasn't liked much from either the sequels or post-Endgame MCU). But, I also wouldn't be shocked if that does end up happening, since Marvel seems to be starved for wins that aren't nostalgia-fests (which I am just as guilty as everyone else for watching) and they've already tagged some of the old A-team to come back.

For me, though, at the end of the day, it's not really going to rock my world (in either a watching perspective or a Lego-buying perspective) if things do slow down, or even go dormant for a bit. I've got all of my old stuff that I still enjoy, and it's not going to be going anywhere. And sometimes, a break from something is a good idea - even Lego Harry Potter went on hiatus for awhile, then came back with a reboot and has been going surprisingly strong ever since. Maybe the MCU and Lego Superheroes (both MCU and DC) could do with a bit of a break, or at least a reevaluation and refresh.

[BrickBob Studpants]

Another Spidey heist paperbag is coming, but this time the baddie is Anti-Venom

[JeanGreyForever]

3 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Another Spidey heist paperbag is coming, but this time the baddie is Anti-Venom

Now that we have an Anti-Venom minifigure, they're just going to keep reusing him over and over, until he's as prolific as the regular Venom, Green Goblin, Miles, and Gwen.

Still waiting on a comic accurate Electro and Lizard. Even just a regular Dr. Curt Connors would be nice.

[hikouki]

5 hours ago, JeanGreyForever said:

Now that we have an Anti-Venom minifigure, they're just going to keep reusing him over and over, until he's as prolific as the regular Venom, Green Goblin, Miles, and Gwen.

Still waiting on a comic accurate Electro and Lizard. Even just a regular Dr. Curt Connors would be nice.

Doesn't he have to appear in a mech, then a vehicle?

[Mandalorianknight]

15 hours ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Another Spidey heist paperbag is coming, but this time the baddie is Anti-Venom

You guys can say what you will but for someone who didn't want to shell out $55 for peter's apartment or buy a mech for spider-man, this is a major win. It's not Venom for once. The poly will be a good 50% cheaper than his current BL prices, at least in the US, compared to Venom, who normally runs about a dollar.

 

I'm pretty excited for this January compared to the last few- I'm getting Ghost Rider, his bike, and Anti-Venom for the cost it would run me just to get Anti-venom this past january.

10 hours ago, hikouki said:

Doesn't he have to appear in a mech, then a vehicle?

Anti-Venom car 2027. (Just kidding, I think we're back to a Miles car.)

[psqidexslizer]

On 8/18/2025 at 6:37 PM, JeanGreyForever said:

Now that we have an Anti-Venom minifigure, they're just going to keep reusing him over and over, until he's as prolific as the regular Venom, Green Goblin, Miles, and Gwen.

Still waiting on a comic accurate Electro and Lizard. Even just a regular Dr. Curt Connors would be nice.

Where’s Venomized Anti-Venom? 🤔

[Mandalorianknight]

7 minutes ago, psqidexslizer said:

Where’s Venomized Anti-Venom? 🤔

We managed to summon the Wolvmobile and Venomized Wolverine, so can we get Panda Venom for 2028?

19 hours ago, hikouki said:

Doesn't he have to appear in a mech, then a vehicle?

He was in a mech for his first appearance, and if we stretch it the apartment includes a vehicle.

[brickbride]

On 8/17/2025 at 7:35 AM, Mandalorianknight said:

Thor: I mean I don't know if anyone else feels the same, but endgame and Taiki ruined the MCU's thor for me. Any future appearances by him mean nothing to me.

I like Endgame Thor. I hated the quippy, short-haired Ragnarok version but I could get behind Bro Thor as a plausible bit of character development. Of course then they ruined it all with the utterly unwatchable Taiki movie. 

On 8/17/2025 at 7:35 AM, Mandalorianknight said:

If Doom's plan in this movie really is "kidnap a small child and commit multiversal genocide" and marvel still manages to mess up the protagonists badly enough that people root for him

To be fair that's quite literally what Wanda tried in MoM and apparently we're still to think well of her.

On 8/17/2025 at 7:35 AM, Mandalorianknight said:

Loki: People LIKE Loki, but again, I just don't see him at main protagonist level.

That was my point, though. I don't expect any of the old guard to have a large role but I do expect Marvel to play up their appearances in the marketing and mech.

It's not just that characters like Loki and Strange (and their actors) are charismatic enough to make Falconcap look even more worden, it's also that they're massively overpowered compared to him. Strange can do magic spells that affect the entire world; all Falconcap can do is flap his horrendously fake-looking CGI wings and get beaten up by both Ant-Man and an elderly Hulk. If he's supposed to be the main hero everyone else needs to be written out for most of the movie.

Edited Wednesday at 06:23 PM by brickbride

[JeanGreyForever]

Alan Cumming (Nightcrawler) shared his experience working on Doomsday. Doesn't bode well for the final product imo.

“I did the entire film in isolation. Lots of green screen, face replacement. They even gave characters fake names. I don’t know who I was acting with half the time.”

[BoyLego]

41 minutes ago, JeanGreyForever said:

Alan Cumming (Nightcrawler) shared his experience working on Doomsday. Doesn't bode well for the final product imo.

“I did the entire film in isolation. Lots of green screen, face replacement. They even gave characters fake names. I don’t know who I was acting with half the time.”

In my opinion this is more likely to be one of two things, as he has proven himself to be very bad at keeping secrets in the past.

Either A, these are special measures they have taken specifically for him so he can’t accidentally leak as much or B, he’s had a bit of a telling off and his new strategy in interviews is to pretend he doesn’t know anything.

If you believe everything actors say in interviews then Andrew Garfield isn’t in No Way Home.

[NXS7]

On 8/18/2025 at 11:32 PM, BrickBob Studpants said:

Another Spidey heist paperbag is coming, but this time the baddie is Anti-Venom

It's not really a heist, he's just returning the items

[BrickBob Studpants]

3 minutes ago, NXS7 said:

It's not really a heist, he's just returning the items

I don’t know anything about Anti-Venom’s character, but the notion of him being and doing the exact opposite of Venom à la Bizarro or the anti-fairies from Fairly OddParents gets a good chuckle out of me

[Mandalorianknight]

21 hours ago, brickbride said:

I like Endgame Thor. I hated the quippy, short-haired Ragnarok version but I could get behind Bro Thor as a plausible bit of character development. Of course then they ruined it all with the utterly unwatchable Taiki movie. 

To be fair that's quite literally what Wanda tried in MoM and apparently we're still to think well of her.

That was my point, though. I don't expect any of the old guard to have a large role but I do expect Marvel to play up their appearances in the marketing and mech.

It's not just that characters like Loki and Strange (and their actors) are charismatic enough to make Falconcap look even more worden, it's also that they're massively overpowered compared to him. Strange can do magic spells that affect the entire world; all Falconcap can do is flap his horrendously fake-looking CGI wings and get beaten up by both Ant-Man and an elderly Hulk. If he's supposed to be the main hero everyone else needs to be written out for most of the movie.

 I thought with Infinity War they'd finally perfected thor and that while Bro Thor could have potentially worked as a "fallen Thor" before he goes back to his Infinity war self, he never does. He eventually gets buff in L&T but never gets back to that infinity war characterization. I also just wish the Big Three were all in top form in that final fight, when it's just Tony and Steve who are at their strongest. Thor is still a mess.

Sort of, but I doubt we'll be meant to see Doom as a good guy. I think he's going to end up being evil, doing evil stuff, and yet the audience will like him just because they have so few likeable heroes to oppose him.

I guess that's possible- it'd be a way to draw in fans at least- but there's only so much you can do, especially when to our knowledge many of them aren't showing up. They can always add in surprise cameos or just have well-kept secrets, but then again they wouldn't be in the marketing much and certainly wouldn't have merch.

7 hours ago, BoyLego said:

If you believe everything actors say in interviews then Andrew Garfield isn’t in No Way Home.

This rationalization feels like optimism is overriding logic- "I'm not in the movie I'm not allowed to tell people I'm in" is different than "I'm going to intentionally make up a story about how production works instead of just giving noncommittal/low information answers." Like he doesn't have to respond to questions with the plot of the movie, he can just say things like "there's a lot of talented actors I enjoyed working with", or "it's a pleasure to return to the franchise." Or the standard "the stakes have never been higher than in this movie, everything's on the line, every hero is here" sort of PR answers. I don't think he would just make up an entirely fake and somewhat disconcerting story about how production works for no reason.

Also, we've had other actors say the experience was like this on other movies.

1 hour ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

I don’t know anything about Anti-Venom’s character, but the notion of him being and doing the exact opposite of Venom à la Bizarro or the anti-fairies from Fairly OddParents gets a good chuckle out of me

Like most of the symbiotes, Anti-Venom's character depends on who's writing him and who's bonded with him in the story- sometimes he's literally just venom but white (I don't mean just character-wise, in universe he has at times been just literally the venom symbiote with hydrochloric acid poured on it)- but there have been plenty of times where he serves to function as a direct counter to venom. Legoizing those stories and yeah, he'd be the guy who returns the items Venom stole. 

He's also essentially just a good guy in the mainline comics, so I have no idea why lego keeps making him a villain.