|
site posted:It's probably a lot easier to say make more of these specific shows when you're not trying to schedule production on 12 different shows or looking at the $500 million price tag for all of it When I say they, I obviously mean Marvel and Netflix combined, since neither company can call the shots on their own. These shows are also already fewer episodes than a typical TV show which means scheduling is less of a hassle, especially since there are no broadcast schedules and sweeps to manage. They would know how much they cost and how much they gain from it. If they were ok adding new seasons that weren't planned and new spin offs, then the costs of a show don't seem to be the biggest hurdle for them. They clearly have a lot of wiggle room if they smell success. Pretty much the one of the biggest things stopping them would be actor scheduling, but that is manageable with planning. Like I mentioned, they already are shooting on average about half the TV hours that a standard prime time show would get, so it isn't like they would be asking actors to go above and beyond normal scheduling to shoot slightly longer. Actors being busy is only a problem when you are letting your actors book other projects, which is where planning on the producing side, and a bit of money, comes in. You don't have Grant Gustin going "sorry guys, I am too busy shooting something else to work too much on the second half of season 3! What an unfortunate situation they couldn't be avoided!" You book him for X episodes, for X seasons if you have to. Other than that, it would be just come down to corporate will. If they don't want to do it then it won't be done, and companies like these have made baffling decisions before. These shows are clearly good for Netflix, which is why they are expanding so rapidly, which means they are making money. If they are doing well then they have the money to invest to insure a steady flow of content. Adding a third show per year isn't actually that much considering how Netflix releases shows, and considering that each Marvel show for them has been a hit for them so far.
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:They need to just bump the Marvel schedule to 3 per year. The demand is there so why not? For now at least. That's a lot of rushed production. Better to have these things spaced out so they have at least a little time to iron out wrinkles and mistakes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:When is Netflix punisher? Cause I'd wonder how him and nuke would go at it? No announced date, but they're apparently testing people to play Microchip now
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
HIJK posted:That's a lot of rushed production. Better to have these things spaced out so they have at least a little time to iron out wrinkles and mistakes. Well it would be too late to do 3 for next year now. 2018 wouldn't be rushing anything though. All of the shows are already separate productions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
It should be noted Fuller House had way more viewers than any Marvel show and is probably cheaper to make. Like I doubt Netflix is unhappy about the Marvel shows, they're still very successful and critical darlings, but I could see why they may not want to add more shows to the schedule instead of other shows that appeal to different demographics.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
site posted:It's probably a lot easier to say make more of these specific shows when you're not trying to schedule production on 12 different shows or looking at the $500 million price tag for all of it Marvel seems to be very hands off with the Netflix shows, but it probably helps that the Netflix shows aren't in "real" time and are still taking place sometime between Avengers 1 and Avengers 2. So they don't even have the opportunity to be asked to shoehorn in a Civil War or AOU tie-in. I think the Daredevil guys said the only interference they got was wanting to use Night Nurse, who is probably being reserved for Dr. Strange. So they went with the C-list Luke Cage character Claire Temple instead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
Oh my goodness, I love it! http://www.ew.com/article/2016/08/18/the-tick-amazon-video-clips Peter Serafinowicz is the best. I'm so down for this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
The pilot's already up!
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
It is! About to watch. https://www.amazon.com/The-Tick/dp/B01J776HVW/
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Gaz-L posted:The pilot's already up!
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
The Tick gets a 5/5 rating for a pilot. The show is more grounded, but the main characters are just as insane as they are in previous incarnations which makes it feel even wilder in a grounded world. Also Wally Pfister (Chris Nolan's longtime cinematographer) directed the pilot. So to say it's shot beautifully is an understatement.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
X-O posted:The Tick gets a 5/5 rating for a pilot. The show is more grounded, but the main characters are just as insane as they are in previous incarnations which makes it feel even wilder in a grounded world. Yeah, that was pretty dang spectacular. "That's the hero's journey. That's why they get up in the morning; to go mano a monomyth with the darkness." may be one of my new favorite lines of anything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 06:27
|
|
|
X-O posted:The Tick gets a 5/5 rating for a pilot. The show is more grounded, but the main characters are just as insane as they are in previous incarnations which makes it feel even wilder in a grounded world. Yeah, that was a
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
Jackie Earle Haley is having a hell of a year.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 01:50
|
|
|
redbackground posted:Jackie Earle Haley is having a hell of a year. Isn't this his fourth comic book adaptation, after Watchmen, Human Target, and Preacher?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 04:39
|
|
|
This Tick pilot made me realize that I enjoy watching Peter Serafinowicz do absolutely anything. I mean, the rest of it was good but man, if Brian Butterfield didn't exist this would be the role he was born to play.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
I've been rewatching some Supergirl and landed on the episode where she is exposed to the red kryptonite. It's so funny the way they have to check their language, you know she's evil because she no longer cares to wear those dowdy tops her sister had her in she wears darker colours now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
I love all the nods to Superman III in that episode: the synthetic Kryptonite, Kara flicking peanuts in the bar. Also Kara's reaction when she comes down from the Red Kryptonite is one of my favorite bits of acting in the entire season.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
Marvel Television is developing New Warriors as a half-hour comedy, with Squirrel Girl as a major (lead? it's not quite clear) character. http://tvline.com/2016/08/30/squirrel-girl-tv-series-comedy-new-warriors-marvel/
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 01:06
|
|
|
Barry Convex posted:Marvel Television is developing New Warriors as a half-hour comedy, with Squirrel Girl as a major (lead? it's not quite clear) character. yessss
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
That girl from Stranger Things needs to get her agent on the phone right the gently caress now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Gaz-L posted:That girl from Stranger Things needs to get her agent on the phone right the gently caress now. She just signed on to Riverdale.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
She just got cast in Riverdale, the CW Archie show.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:She just signed on to Riverdale. For 3 episodes! She can do a pilot!
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
I assume they already have ideas as to who they want to cast.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
Barry Convex posted:Marvel Television is developing New Warriors as a half-hour comedy, with Squirrel Girl as a major (lead? it's not quite clear) character. Cautiously optimistic for this. I don't care about the new warriors but I don't want SG saddled onto a lovely show
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
site posted:Cautiously optimistic for this. I don't care about the new warriors but I don't want SG saddled onto a lovely show Screw it, let's just go straight up 90s comedy complete with laugh track! Wasn't Anna Kendrick pushing hard for Squirrel Girl?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 01:54
|
|
|
On a different note, I'm watching Powers and so far it's decent, but hilariously Walker and Pilgrim are the worst performances in it. The dude playing Johnny Royale, and Eddie Izzard and Michelle Forbes are all pretty good and I actually like the girl playing Zora, even if the 'Powers are basically mutants' gimmick messes with one of the more fun aspects of her character from the early comics.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 01:58
|
|
|
Medullah posted:Wasn't Anna Kendrick pushing hard for Squirrel Girl? By pushing hard you mean "mentioned it one time offhand in an interview" right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 02:11
|
|
|
I would've thought Marvel didn't have the rights to Squirrel Girl as she was a mutant from her first appearance until like a year ago. Is it just enough that she never actually made it into the X Men? Or maybe that one off single panel joke retcon Ryan North did holds legal weight?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
Mover posted:I would've thought Marvel didn't have the rights to Squirrel Girl as she was a mutant from her first appearance until like a year ago. Is it just enough that she never actually made it into the X Men? Being a mutant doesn't mean you belong to Fox. That joke panel has nothing to do with it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 03:34
|
|
|
X-O posted:Being a mutant doesn't mean you belong to Fox. Except for all the times when it does. Like when Bendis said he was told to stop creating new characters because Fox automatically gained the rights to them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 03:40
|
|
|
Not that I'd like them to run a single joke into the ground, but the joke of Squirrel Girl being able to defeat big name villains wouldn't have as much punch considering that between all the films and TV shows, the only famous one still alive is... Thanos, whom Squirrel Girl is in no way going to ever meet in the MCU. Kingpin or Abomination I guess?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:By pushing hard you mean "mentioned it one time offhand in an interview" right? Why must you poo poo on my hopes and dreams?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:Except for all the times when it does. Like when Bendis said he was told to stop creating new characters because Fox automatically gained the rights to them. Well he still made them anyway and continued to make them. Eden Fesi also proves that newer created mutants don't automatically belong to Fox. Even with Squirrel Girl not being a mutant you have Namor, Eden Fesi, Typhoid Mary, and Molly Hayes. It's more about proximity to X-Men than just being a mutant.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
X-O posted:Well he still made them anyway and continued to make them. Eden Fesi also proves that newer created mutants don't automatically belong to Fox. Even with Squirrel Girl not being a mutant you have Namor, Eden Fesi, Typhoid Mary, and Molly Hayes. It's more about proximity to X-Men than just being a mutant. How many of those characters are being used in the MCU right now? Just because Runaways was announced doesn't mean they are actually going to be able to use Molly Hayes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 03:54
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:How many of those characters are being used in the MCU right now? Just because Runaways was announced doesn't mean they are actually going to be able to use Molly Hayes. Eden Fesi has been mentioned a few times on Agents of SHIELD. Typhoid Mary was specifically part of the Daredevil deal and is back with Marvel. We know that Marvel has character rights to Namor just no distribution rights similar to the Hulk situation. And Molly Hayes is a pretty safe bet. Also Daisy Johnson, Scarlet Witch, and Quicksilver were all still considered mutants when they were put into projects even if they aren't now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
It's also safe to say that Molly, Eden, and Mary, when and should they appear in the MCU, will be something other than mutants as well, since they've shown no problem of stripping the mutant designation from already established characters, as mentioned with Daisy, Wanda and Pietro.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 04:16
|
|
|
Well yeah of course, Marvel can't use the term mutant.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
Daisy was never considered a mutant.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 04:36
|
|
