I'm a fan of the Eternals but I can also recognize when a title is considered B or C list. I doubt there was anyone clamoring for this.

On the flip though, nobody was checking for the Guardians of the Galaxy before the movie made them take off.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/chloe-zhao-direct-marvel-studios-eternals-1143547

Iron Man was considered a risk. Nobody was chomping at the bit for a movie about him or Cap. He's inarguably the most successful and beloved film adaptation of any comic book hero ever, and Cap isn't far behind at this point.

Add to that, they built an entirely unrivaled movie universe around him.

The entire MCU was built on Iron Man.

Green Arrow is a second string player at best, and yet CW wound up building multiple highly successful franchises with green Green Arrow as the foundation.

Marvel has been successful due to consistently reat casting, solid storytelling, and quality long term planning, just for starters.

B,c,d, all that is immaterial. Tell a compelling story about compelling characters, add layers of connective tissue, all processed through a highly refined machine that's proven to excute over and over and kver again, and it's a wrap.

I'd see a Howard The Duck movie on opening night at this point.

>I'd see a Howard The Duck movie on opening night at this
>point.
>
>

lol... yeah I'd watch that too.

>Iron Man was considered a risk. Nobody was chomping at the
>bit for a movie about him or Cap. He's inarguably the most
>successful and beloved film adaptation of any comic book hero
>ever, and Cap isn't far behind at this point.

Yeah, but the the Avengers was much less of a risk than Guardians of the Galaxy or the Eternals. The Avengers were an A-list comic book franchise and consistently one of Marvel's top books. To the mainstream, it may have been a risk. But to those of us who followed the books, it made sense.

>B,c,d, all that is immaterial. Tell a compelling story about
>compelling characters, add layers of connective tissue, all
>processed through a highly refined machine that's proven to
>excute over and over and kver again, and it's a wrap.

I definitely agree with this. Like I said, I love a lot of C & D level characters. There are absolutely a lot of good stories to be told. I think my surprise is that Marvel seems to skip over some of the more popular characters and dig deep for some lesser known ones.

>Iron Man was considered a risk. Nobody was chomping at the
>bit for a movie about him or Cap. He's inarguably the most
>successful and beloved film adaptation of any comic book hero
>ever, and Cap isn't far behind at this point.

You make lots of great points but I’d argue a couple of the Batmans against this.
>
>Add to that, they built an entirely unrivaled movie universe
>around him.
>
>The entire MCU was built on Iron Man.
>
>Green Arrow is a second string player at best, and yet CW
>wound up building multiple highly successful franchises with
>green Green Arrow as the foundation.
>
>Marvel has been successful due to consistently reat casting,
>solid storytelling, and quality long term planning, just for
>starters.
>
>B,c,d, all that is immaterial. Tell a compelling story about
>compelling characters, add layers of connective tissue, all
>processed through a highly refined machine that's proven to
>excute over and over and kver again, and it's a wrap.
>
>I'd see a Howard The Duck movie on opening night at this
>point.
>
>

I didn't even think about that angle.

And likely introduce the Kree and flesh out the Skrulls before what i imagine is going to end up being Secret War

simply because they don't have the movie rights to the X-men.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

which fits into them doing Eternals since thats why we have mutants in the first place. It explains away why mutants would be just suddenly appearing in the MCU

Because the whole point of mutant persecution has been that they can't hide who they are. So if they've been there this whole time, you can't really square that with a mutant-less MCU. Have the mutants existing in another universe that get brought to the MCU for some reason.

the first mutant didn't show up until 1,000s of years after the Eternals did whatever they did. They'd just shift the timeline. I do think the farther we get away from WWII, it harder it is to have Magneto just show up out of place.

and to be honest, it really doesn't matter what they do as long as its good.

the Rider might be the best movie this year, what a jump-off for her

still waiting for "super hero fatigue" to set in?

It was more about wondering why the Eternals are slated for a film when there are way more popular characters out there. It feels like someone pulled their name out of a hat full of old, discarded titles.

Like I said, I'm a fan. But the Eternals haven't had a title in forever. They made a brief appearance in this new Avengers book but before that, I couldn't tell you when I last saw them.

There was the Neil Gaiman/JRJR mini-series right after the first "Civil War," which read like a Marvel Comics PG-13 version of American Gods. And right afterwards there was a series that lasted about 12-13 issues. From the plot description above, it seems like their sorta using some of the elements from those to create this film.

I have no idea if Cersei/Makarri/The Forgotten One still show up in other Marvel titles.

https://twitter.com/matte_bIack/status/1043555936399282176

And I absolutely agreed on Capt. America 1-3.

That clip was good for some laughs.

I am a bit late to the MCU so I am slowly checking these films out.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"