• MaroonMage@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    …though sources say that even before Majors’ conviction, the studio was making moves to minimize the character after Quantumania underperformed, grossing $476 million

    Jonathan Majors-related stuff aside, this sentence makes me shake my head.

    Why does it seem like Hollywood always takes the wrong lesson from box office results? Quantumania isn’t well received, and instead of assuming it’s because of the bad script or bad story or rushed CGI, their impulse is to retool their entire franchise to minimize a character? Especially a character who people were generally into (at that time, at least…again, Majors stuff aside).

    People disliked Quantamania not because of Kang, people disliked it because it wasn’t a good movie. Maybe if you tie good stories and good filmmaking to your multi-billion dollar franchise and stop plopping out half thought out turds, then people will go see your movie.

    • MamboGator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      The thing I hated most about Quantumania was that nothing was real. Every background was a CGI mess made of a bunch of ethereal looking blobs of land and sky. It’s like whoever designed the quantum realm saw a couple photos of space nebulae and desert hoodoos and thought that would somehow work if they slapped a bunch of actors on top.