Avatar image for heatforce
#1 Edited by Heatforce (5102 posts) - - Show Bio

https://screenrant.com/brie-larson-marvel-studios-contract-length/

Edit: apparently Brie debunked the story

https://www.ign.com/articles/2018/10/11/brie-larson-disputes-reports-that-she-signed-a-seven-film-deal-with-marvel

Avatar image for dirtytree332
#2 Edited by dirtytree332 (141 posts) - - Show Bio

We'll see how she is in CM.

Avatar image for cyberpunkcop
#3 Edited by CyberpunkCop (378 posts) - - Show Bio

I share your grief

Edit: my reaction when her movie turns out to be a flop

Loading Video...

Avatar image for jedixman
#4 Posted by JediXMan (41884 posts) - - Show Bio

Rather premature.

Moderator
Avatar image for stahlflamme
#5 Edited by Stahlflamme (5385 posts) - - Show Bio

Uh, and?

Yeah, of course they give actors an immediate contract for multiple movies can you imagine what kind of leverage in pay negotiations an actor would have once in a succesful marvel movie or how bad their plans could get screwed by an actor leaving unexpected without them getting to explain their characters dissappeareance? Even Clark Gregg signed a three picture deal immediately and at that point his character was called Agent.

Seven picture deal seems to be standard for the leads of a movie given that both Evans and Hemsworth contracts run out after the next infinity war with Evans suggesting he leaves and Hemsworth being in negotiations with marvel.

Avatar image for mrmonster
#6 Edited by mrmonster (11797 posts) - - Show Bio

Well, aside from Avengers 4, that's 6 Marvel movies I will probably not be seeing in theaters.

Look, I hope I'm wrong, I hope Brie Larson is a great Captain Marvel. But so far, I have no reason to be hopeful for her at all. In the CM trailer, she had the exact same expression the entire time, an expression of "Ugh, do I have to be in this movie."

I hope for the best, but I'm not exp expecting much at all from her.

Avatar image for kingofwakanda
#7 Posted by KingOfWakanda (1394 posts) - - Show Bio

Standard deal. No surprise. Covers a possible trilogy, A4 and 3 more "Avengers" type ensemble movies.

Let's not cry about it until the movie is out.

Avatar image for stahlflamme
#8 Posted by Stahlflamme (5385 posts) - - Show Bio

@mrmonster: So you are not going to watch the second part of infinity war? That's the number 2 movie on that contract.

Avatar image for mrmonster
#9 Posted by mrmonster (11797 posts) - - Show Bio

@stahlflamme: Oh, I forgot that. I'll definitely see that in theaters. But unless Brie Larson proves me wrong, I'm probably not bothering with the other movies.

Avatar image for stahlflamme
#10 Posted by Stahlflamme (5385 posts) - - Show Bio

@mrmonster: Presumably those include Avengers 5 and 6 starring her along all the heroes again... but sure preemtively assume you're not going to see those just because of her presence in them even though you don't know how big a part she will play in them and before you even saw her in anything... seems rational...

Avatar image for rogueshadow
#11 Edited by rogueshadow (28478 posts) - - Show Bio

What's everybody's problem with Brie Larson?

Moderator
Avatar image for heatforce
#12 Posted by Heatforce (5102 posts) - - Show Bio

@rogueshadow: I'm personally not a fan of her but either way, her 7 picture deal should make her fans and fans of the character excited.

Avatar image for stahlflamme
#13 Edited by Stahlflamme (5385 posts) - - Show Bio

@rogueshadow: The Captain Marvel trailer looked underwhelming I assume. Or they still got their jimmy rustled after hearing Cap Marvel would be the strongest hero so far.

Avatar image for kingofwakanda
#14 Posted by KingOfWakanda (1394 posts) - - Show Bio

@rogueshadow: I think people have a problem with her being too outspoken about her beliefs and those beliefs not lining up with theirs. Or they think she's not hot enough.

Personally, I think she's a really good actress and I look forward to seeing her in the MCU.

Avatar image for ready_4_madness
#15 Posted by Ready_4_Madness (13040 posts) - - Show Bio

I’m looking forward to seeing her.

Avatar image for veshark
#16 Posted by Veshark (10159 posts) - - Show Bio

I don’t know why everyone’s surprised. Didn’t Sebastian Stan sign like a 9 picture deal too? That’s the one that really seems premature, given that Stan has an average of like six lines of dialogue in each MCU movie he’s appeared in, and has never really gotten the chance to flex his acting chops.

Avatar image for marvelanddcfan24
#17 Posted by MarvelandDCfan24 (6063 posts) - - Show Bio

No behind

Online
Avatar image for joviolma
#18 Posted by JOVIOLMA (3731 posts) - - Show Bio

LOL.

Avatar image for amcu
#19 Posted by Amcu (14042 posts) - - Show Bio

Is anyone surprised? I mean you think Marvel would invest in the movie and character while having the risk of an actor deciding that they don't want to do it later. Or deciding that they want to be payed way more than expected? I don't.

Online
Avatar image for stahlflamme
#20 Edited by Stahlflamme (5385 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark: True but he's already three movies in(cause I doubt the black panther cameo counted) and if Avengers four is his fourth he will have five movies left, the same number as remaining on Larsons contract after A4. With Chris Evans stopping and Stan possibly taking over as Captain America I see the logic to that. With the MCU supposedly planned out till 2028 we've got another Captain America trilogy and two Avengers appeareances over the next ten years.

Avatar image for ready_4_madness
#21 Posted by Ready_4_Madness (13040 posts) - - Show Bio

She debunked it

Avatar image for heatforce
#22 Posted by Heatforce (5102 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for tomkatie
#23 Posted by Tomkatie (2699 posts) - - Show Bio

I mean I'm definitely not a Carol Danvers fan, but come on guys, we haven't even seen her MCU version yet. Let's wait until we've seen at least her movie before we make any judgements

Avatar image for deactivated-5bc2c7b81b701
#24 Posted by deactivated-5bc2c7b81b701 (421 posts) - - Show Bio

The hate for Brie is ridiculous

Avatar image for ready_4_madness
#26 Posted by Ready_4_Madness (13040 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for oeselian
#28 Posted by Oeselian (245 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark said:

I don’t know why everyone’s surprised. Didn’t Sebastian Stan sign like a 9 picture deal too? That’s the one that really seems premature, given that Stan has an average of like six lines of dialogue in each MCU movie he’s appeared in, and has never really gotten the chance to flex his acting chops.

Difference is, Stan is a good actor. Larson can't act her way out of a wet paperbag.

Avatar image for heatforce
#29 Edited by Heatforce (5102 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for veshark
#30 Edited by Veshark (10159 posts) - - Show Bio

@oeselian: Based on what exactly? The couple of lines he gets in each MCU movie? Not saying he’s a bad actor necessarily but what has Stan done that makes you think he’s that much more superior an actor to an award-winning actress who has played the lead role in multiple acclaimed films?

Avatar image for cyberpunkcop
#31 Posted by CyberpunkCop (378 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark said:

@oeselian: Based on what exactly? The couple of lines he gets in each MCU movie? Not saying he’s a bad actor necessarily but what has Stan done that makes you think he’s that much more superior an actor to an award-winning actress who has played the lead role in multiple acclaimed films?

Multiple acclaimed films that literally nobody has watched

Avatar image for oeselian
#32 Posted by Oeselian (245 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark: Lines doesn't make the actor. The way he is able ton convey emotion and the overall mental distress of the character even with the limited amount of time he gets, is impressive. If anybody disagree's with that, rewatch TWS and Civil War.

The only movies Larson has done of late which was some what widely received and ones she had a larger role in is The Room and Kong Skull Island. The Room is okay - but nothing amazing imo. I loved Skull Island as I'm a big King Kong fan; however, she was totally forgettable in that and despite me having seen it several times, I didn't even know who Brie Larson was when she was cast as CM.

Avatar image for magian
#33 Edited by Magian (149600 posts) - - Show Bio

I wouldn't be so surprised if this turned out to be true. They want to make her the next face of the MCU, of course they would do something like this.

Avatar image for veshark
#34 Edited by Veshark (10159 posts) - - Show Bio

@cyberpunkcop:

...Okay? And your point, even if it was true, is what exactly? That a film’s critical acclaim and industry recognition is invalidated because it’s not watched by as many people as a mainstream Marvel film?

Avatar image for oeselian
#35 Posted by Oeselian (245 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark said:

@oeselian: Based on what exactly? The couple of lines he gets in each MCU movie? Not saying he’s a bad actor necessarily but what has Stan done that makes you think he’s that much more superior an actor to an award-winning actress who has played the lead role in multiple acclaimed films?

Multiple acclaimed films that literally nobody has watched

This right here. She's never held a big role and there's plenty of actors that came from similar "multiple acclaimed films" that the general public had never even heard of and then basically flopped in bigger budget movies

Avatar image for veshark
#36 Posted by Veshark (10159 posts) - - Show Bio

@oeselian: I mean, they kinda do. The amount of material determines the amount of acting range an actor can showcase. You mentioned Larson in Skull Island, which is a good example of that. An actor can’t act if their character isn’t given much material to work with.

I’m not saying Stan can’t act, but to put him on a pedestal above Larson in terms of thespian skills doesn’t really seem like an argument backed by much evidence. I.e. Stan hasn’t done much beyond supporting roles in movies while Larson has won actual Academy Awards and Golden Globes for her work.

Avatar image for oeselian
#37 Edited by Oeselian (245 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark said:

@oeselian: I mean, they kinda do. The amount of material determines the amount of acting range an actor can showcase. You mentioned Larson in Skull Island, which is a good example of that. An actor can’t act if their character isn’t given much material to work with.

I’m not saying Stan can’t act, but to put him on a pedestal above Larson in terms of thespian skills doesn’t really seem like an argument backed by much evidence. I.e. Stan hasn’t done much beyond supporting roles in movies while Larson has won actual Academy Awards and Golden Globes for her work.

Here's the issue though, you brought up Stan. Stan has done nothing but be a supporting role in all the movies. Larson will NOT be a supporting role. Therefore if you really want a fair comparison, compare her to another actor in the marvel series who has a main role and has done very well.

Let's take Chris Hemsworth. Thor was decent, Thor 2 was forgettable and he was pretty solid in Avengers. Outside of the MCU, Hemsworth usually get's pretty type casted (at least early in his rise to popularity) and became pretty forgettable. However, they were still roles in major motion pictures (Red Dawn, The Cabin in the Woods and Snow White and the Hunstman). All three of those were "meh" movies, though I do know some people really enjoy Cabin in the woods. Sure they weren't critically acclaimed like Larsons movies, but their movies the majority of people are more familiar with.

Now let's look at the past few years of Hemsworth. He's developed dramatically - he can be the big tough action guy (Thor), he can be pretty damn funny (Thor and Ghost Busters) - he's overall improved a lot as an actor and shows a very good range, especially for an action-based movie star. Sure, Larson has a ton of "critically acclaimed movies", but when compared to other lead actors/actresses in the MCU she's severely outclassed. Hemsworth, Evans, Scarlett, Boseman and the list goes on. If you truly think she is in the same league as those A-class actors, I don't even know what to say to that.

Sure, Larson has a ton of "critically acclaimed movies", but when compared to other lead actors/actresses in the MCU she's severely outclassed. Hemsworth, Evans, Scarlett, Boseman and the list goes on. If you truly think she is in the same league as those A-class actors, I don't even know what to say to that.

You also use the premise that having awards automatically means you're a great actor/actress. There a long list of performers who are incredible at what they do and haven't gotten an award or took a long long time to get one. Dicaprio is the first to come to mind

Here are some actors who haven't won an oscar: Liam neeson, Brad Pitt, Sigourney Weaver, Tom Cruise, Alan Rickman, John Travolta, Jamie Lee Curtis, Joaquin Phoenix - and those are just off the top of my head.

Avatar image for tonymartial
#38 Posted by TonyMartial (6207 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for veshark
#39 Edited by Veshark (10159 posts) - - Show Bio

@oeselian:

Not really the issue. You can’t change the goal posts of the argument just because you can’t support your own points.

The reason why I brought up Stan was because he was given a nine picture deal, presumably with the intention of having him take over as Captain America, aka a main lead. I’m doubtful that Marvel would sign Stan on and secure him for nine movies just to have him in a minor guest-starring role for the next Avengers, right?

And my original point was I don’t understand why people are surprised that Larson got a similar deal. Larson is obviously being groomed to take a major role in a post-Infinity War MCU, much like Stan. And unlike Stan, Larson seems like a surer bet given her overall higher industry profile and proven ability to act, compared to Stan who, again, hasn’t been given much of a chance to show that he can hold a major role despite already appearing in three MCU films.

Your claim was that Stan evidently deserves a multi-picture deal more than Larson because he’s a better actor. My only question was: based on what? On what metrics besides your own personal opinion? On critical acclaim and recognition? On awards and filmography? Also, I never said Larson was a superior actor to heavyweights like RDJ or Johansson. Don’t insinuate points that I never made. All I’m saying is if Stan can secure a deal like that, I don’t see why Larson wouldn’t.

Avatar image for cyberpunkcop
#40 Posted by CyberpunkCop (378 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark said:

@cyberpunkcop:

...Okay? And your point, even if it was true, is what exactly? That a film’s critical acclaim and industry recognition is invalidated because it’s not watched by as many people as a mainstream Marvel film?

What i mean is her only big mainstream outing is King: Skull Island and she was as bland and forgettable as an actor can possibly get yeah you can chalk it up to not having enough material to work with but her Co stars like John Goodman Tom Hiddleston and Samual L Jackson all did a considerably better job with the same material

TLDR: She should have stuck with small low budget movies like the Room where there aren't many great actors that can and will outperform her

Avatar image for veshark
#41 Edited by Veshark (10159 posts) - - Show Bio

@cyberpunkcop:

Not really. All three actors you mentioned were given far more expansive and interesting characters to work with compared to Larson, especially Goodman and Jackson.

And again, going back to my original point, how does any of this mean that Stan is a proven better actor and more deserving of a multi-picture Marvel deal than Larson?

Avatar image for oeselian
#42 Posted by Oeselian (245 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark:

Alright. Well, why do I think Stan deserves it more? First of all, when Stan was introduced to MCU, and even till this point he's been nothing but a supporting role. It allowed him to be groomed into the character. Sure, the intention is to make him into the next Cap, but the majority of the movies in his contract he'll be a supporting actor. He's getting a decent amount of development despite the limited screen time that will make a fairly seamless and sensible transition to Cap. The time it has taken him to grow into the character has made people love Stan, as both an actor and his character. He's my personal favourite and I know largely that everybody looks at him in an extremely positive light.

With CM and Larson, she was literally introduced with writers/producers/whoever saying she'll be the most powerful being introduced to marvel yet...zero character development and with a character barely anybody knows about and the majority of people who know the character don't like her. If people liked the character, her books would actually sell and wouldn't need to be constantly rebooted.

Stan may have signed a 9 movie deal, however, like CM, Bucky is relatively unknown to the general public. But they've done a decent enough job with it that fans think it would be natural for him to become Cap eventually. Stan hasn't had a solo/title movie either. Will it come? Maybe eventually. Hell, Black panther was introduced a supporting cast member before getting his own movie.

I'm saying it's a huge gamble compared to Stan, because CM is pretty unknown, those that do know the character don't like her, MCU is stepping off on the wrong foot with outright saying she'll be more powerful than all the characters movie-goers have come to love over nearly 10 years (especially Thor who was given a massive buff in Ragnarok and finally fell into his role of team powerhouse). With regards to Larson herself, it's very clear Marvel wants to push a powerful female character - it was only a matter of time given the current state of their comics. She totally embraces this and the stuff she says online just shows, imo that she cares more about a woman being the most powerful hero in marvel than about the hero itself.

Despite all that, I gave it the benefit of the doubt. Watched the trailer and was not impressed even slightly. She doesn't look like she wants to be there whatsoever. Signing somebody to a huge multi-movie deal when you don't know how they can handle a m najor motion picture in a movie universe that is incredibly established is a massive gamble. Signing Stan in a huge multi-movie deal in a universe that was just then developing allowed them the freedom to develop the character properly and Stan to fill out the boots before being slapped in the big ones when he actually becomes Cap.

You could argue Guardians was a pretty big gamble as the MCU was decently established when they came out and they were pretty unknown to the public. However, their role in the universe as a hole started quite small and seemed isolated from what was actually going on in the then current MCU. They were allowed time to develop in and eventually tie into MCU proper. Also, nobody made Guardians out of necessity to fill a gender quota. If you think CM isn't to fill a gender quota, especially after the success of Wonder Woman, I would have to say that I think that's hilarious.

Furthermore, you haven't addressed why you think Brie is a good actor at all. You brought up awards and I countered that with all the amazing actors who don't have awards.

I also responded the way I did, comparing Larson to other MCU heavyweights, not because I couldn't support my own points but because it's A MORE FAIR COMPARISON. Evans, Hemsworth and RDJ were all signed in a multi movie deals. I also substantiated in my first post why I personally think Stan is a better actor (by the use of other things besides lines like human emotion which Larson has none of). I also never put him on a pedestal as you stated previously, I just appreciate the guy's work with the little amount of screen time he's given. He nails the character with little to work with. Larson was given little to work with in Skull island and was forgotten about.

Avatar image for oeselian
#43 Posted by Oeselian (245 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark said:

@cyberpunkcop:

Not really. All three actors you mentioned were given far more expansive and interesting characters to work with compared to Larson, especially Goodman and Jackson.

And again, going back to my original point, how does any of this mean that Stan is a proven better actor and more deserving of a multi-picture Marvel deal than Larson?

Goodman was hardly given a more expensive and interesting character to work with. No matter what gets given to either of those two, they knock it out of the park. Ever think a large part of their impressive acting in that movie is simply because they're better actors?

Yes, the character you're given does largely affect how well you can portray it. But, you can tell when an actor also doesn't care or can't act and that's Larson.

And again, restating what I've said. Stan started out and still is in a largely development role. Larson is being thrust right to the top of power level and importance right from the start.

Avatar image for eto
#44 Posted by Eto (5041 posts) - - Show Bio

Makes sense.

- her own trilogy

- Infinity War part 2

- “New” Avengers trilogy

I could see something like this in the foreseeable future.

Avatar image for veshark
#45 Edited by Veshark (10159 posts) - - Show Bio

@oeselian:

Your reply doesn’t really offer anything new to augment your argument. Your original claim was that Stan, not because he’s had a more seamless transition into the MCU but because he’s a better actor, deserves a multi-picture deal more than Larson. The implication there being it’s not about your current claim that it’s more justified because Bucky has been in more movies and Stan’s “earned” a major role......but because Sebastian Stan is a good actor and Brie Larson is not. Again, you’re moving the goalposts of your original argument here.

You’re trying to frame it in your most recent post as an issue of the general likeability/popularity of the fictional characters they’re portraying. Or even some tangent about Larson’s personal views. But in your original post, you were the first person to make it a question of acting skills.

Once again: of these actors’ respective acting ability.

So all the points you’re bringing up seem entirely superfluous to your original argument. None of what you said suggests that Stan is a better actor by any metric. Now, you’re right in that awards don’t necessarily determine an actor’s skill at their craft. Plenty of great actors have never won Oscars, you’re right. But it’s one objective metric we can use to quantify an actor’s skill. And comparing Larson’s one Academy to Stan’s zero, what argument do you have for Stan besides your personal subjective opinion? Again I ask, what other metrics do you have to use? Stan has not acheived the level of critical acclaim for his acting that Larson has. You’re gonna ignore all the award-winning movies that Larson was in, just to compare Stan’s three (Three! Two of which he was a main player) MCU movies to one minor role in Kong Skull Island? Ergo, what makes you say that Stan is a good actor, while Larson isn’t? It’s an unfounded claim.

I suspect you have more of an issue with Larson’s purported personal views as well as your belief that her casting is agenda-driven, rather than her actual acting ability.

Avatar image for cyberpunkcop
#46 Posted by CyberpunkCop (378 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark said:

@cyberpunkcop:

Not really. All three actors you mentioned were given far more expansive and interesting characters to work with compared to Larson, especially Goodman and Jackson.

And again, going back to my original point, how does any of this mean that Stan is a proven better actor and more deserving of a multi-picture Marvel deal than Larson?

Or for a very simple and much more likely alternative, they're simply much better actors

And i haven't brought up Stan so idk

Avatar image for veshark
#47 Posted by Veshark (10159 posts) - - Show Bio

@cyberpunkcop: Or....just because Jackson and Goodman are better actors with more experience and more established careers/filmographies.....doesn’t immediately mean that Larson is a bad actor. One doesn’t automatically mean the other.

Avatar image for cyberpunkcop
#48 Posted by CyberpunkCop (378 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark said:

@cyberpunkcop: Or....just because Jackson and Goodman are better actors with more experience and more established careers/filmographies.....doesn’t immediately mean that Larson is a bad actor. One doesn’t automatically mean the other.

Hiddleston gave a better performance too....

Avatar image for kratodamanto
#49 Posted by KratoDaManto (705 posts) - - Show Bio

Its funny how excited everyone was over her after the post credits scene, and when her trailer came out............... Uh yea lmfao. Everyone was shocked.

Avatar image for samhmd1
#50 Posted by samhmd1 (354 posts) - - Show Bio

Its funny how excited everyone was over her after the post credits scene, and when her trailer came out............... Uh yea lmfao. Everyone was shocked.

There were plenty unhappy over the Captain Marvel thing beforehand and in the post-credit scene. The trailer just gave them something to actually criticize whether it's valid or not. Like that idiotic "She doesn't smile" nonsense.

Online