I use the 100 issues in a solo book as a nice shorthand of who could carry a movie. If you can carry that many issues over a single run or over time it shows there is enough staying power in the character's concept to move forward.
Using that marker only She-Hulk, Spider Girl, and Ms. Marvel/Captain Marvel qualify. You can not do Spider Girl for the same reason I don't think you should use Spider-Woman. Neither make sense without a Spider-Man in the universe.
A She-Hulk movie/tv show would work when you have more heroes in the world. A Dan Slott style She-Hulk super hero lawyer project would be really fun. The hard part would how do you show She-Hulk, would it be CG only or a woman in green paint.
A Captain Marvel movie would be easiest new character to work into the existing Cinematic Universe. You already have the Kree introduced so that part is out of the way. I know this is a crazy thought, but I wouldn't mind introducing Captain Marvell during a season of Agents of SHIELD. Have him die during the season from cancer, and have Carol take up the reigns in a movie.
Personally, I think making her the leader of a team would probably be the best use of her as the lead. A Thunderbolts movie maybe? Reformed bad guys who can do what the Avengers can't? Damn, now I want to see that movie.
I think the recent success of Guardians of the Galaxy has proven that you don't need ANY prior exposure to have a successful movie. That's just an assumption and I think DC is wasting a lot of time building up their universe.
That said, my selection would be Ms Marvel, She-Hulk (as a comedy of course), and maybe Black Widow - if Hawkeye or other heroes were included.
Marvel's House of Ideas has earned my confidence so much that they could probably do a Squirrel Girl movie and it would be a smash hit.
I think I'd prefer a Dazzler movie over a Wasp film, but I'm guessing FOX would have to produce that project since she crossed into X-men and Fantastic Four territory so often.
Wasp seems more suited to team scenarios, but hey, if Marvel decided to green light it, I wouldn't poo-poo the idea immediately.
If they are going to do Captain Marvel, I hope it's Monica Rambeau. If they are going to do Carol Danvers, I'd love to see her as Warbird (her alcoholism plot line was well done by Busiek). Of course, I'd really like to see her as Binary, but that may be tied up with the X-Men properties.
If they are going to do Captain Marvel, I hope it's Monica Rambeau.
I'd say the odds of that happening are approximately zero.
Just make Carol black if there's a perceived need for diversity. There would be no harm to her character by doing so.
That is too bad. Monica's Captain Marvel is in my top 10 favorite Marvel characters of all time. They don't seem to be doing anything with her in the comics, but I think her powers would be amazing on the big screen
If they are going to do Captain Marvel, I hope it's Monica Rambeau.
I'd say the odds of that happening are approximately zero.
Just make Carol black if there's a perceived need for diversity. There would be no harm to her character by doing so.
That is too bad. Monica's Captain Marvel is in my top 10 favorite Marvel characters of all time. They don't seem to be doing anything with her in the comics, but I think her powers would be amazing on the big screen
She's still on Luke Cage's Avengers team.. I think,
If they are going to do Captain Marvel, I hope it's Monica Rambeau.
I'd say the odds of that happening are approximately zero.
Just make Carol black if there's a perceived need for diversity. There would be no harm to her character by doing so.
That is too bad. Monica's Captain Marvel is in my top 10 favorite Marvel characters of all time. They don't seem to be doing anything with her in the comics, but I think her powers would be amazing on the big screen
She always struck me as a check-off-two-boxes Token character (just like the female Dr. Light) plus making sure they always have a Captain Marvel, so DC can't re-assume the name.
If they are going to do Captain Marvel, I hope it's Monica Rambeau.
I'd say the odds of that happening are approximately zero.
Just make Carol black if there's a perceived need for diversity. There would be no harm to her character by doing so.
That is too bad. Monica's Captain Marvel is in my top 10 favorite Marvel characters of all time. They don't seem to be doing anything with her in the comics, but I think her powers would be amazing on the big screen
She always struck me as a check-off-two-boxes Token character (just like the female Dr. Light) plus making sure they always have a Captain Marvel, so DC can't re-assume the name.
i bought that one shot... with amazing art from the guy who did Quantum and Woody... MD Bright?
i wouldn't dismiss her character just coz shes black and female... i thought it was a solid book
If I had the ear of "The-Powers-That-Be" I'd suggest She-Hulk. It would have the "hulk smash!" action with lots of humor and maybe even a little fourth wall breaking.
With Marvel's recent track record, I'd probably be willing to see any of the female led heroine movies mentioned in this thread, but one thing that's possibly being overlooked here, but has been brought up elsewhere, is there is a real business factor that will probably prevent most of the suggestions here from ever seeing a green light. Historically, female super hero movies bomb at the box office.
Elektra crashed and burned, grossing just $24M on a $43M production budget, not counting their marketing and advertising budget. This is following her appearance in the marginally successful Daredevil film.
Catwoman (2004) had a huge budget ($100M) and starred Oscar winner Halle Berry and Oscar nominee Sharon Stone. The movie only made $40 million.
The comedy My Super Ex-Girlfriend (Uma Thurman, Luke Wilson, director Ivan Reitman), took in a paltry $22.5 million.
Supergirl (1984) grossed less that $14 million, that’s 0 for 4 when it comes to female super hero flicks. Not to mention Tank Girl, Barb Wire, Red Sonja, et al.
I surmise that the studio execs have asked where is the money in making female led superhero films?
Only slightly kidding. Plus, any future female led super movie will come with support from whichever universe it spawns from. Spider-Woman from Spider-Man, Black Widow from Avengers, etc and Wonder Woman from BvS or Justice League. Which let's face it - those lead in movies are much stronger than the original Daredevil or, if you want to count it, Batman and Robin.
With Marvel's recent track record, I'd probably be willing to see any of the female led heroine movies mentioned in this thread, but one thing that's possibly being overlooked here, but has been brought up elsewhere, is there is a real business factor that will probably prevent most of the suggestions here from ever seeing a green light. Historically, female super hero movies bomb at the box office.
Elektra crashed and burned, grossing just $24M on a $43M production budget, not counting their marketing and advertising budget. This is following her appearance in the marginally successful Daredevil film.
Catwoman (2004) had a huge budget ($100M) and starred Oscar winner Halle Berry and Oscar nominee Sharon Stone. The movie only made $40 million.
The comedy My Super Ex-Girlfriend (Uma Thurman, Luke Wilson, director Ivan Reitman), took in a paltry $22.5 million.
Supergirl (1984) grossed less that $14 million, that’s 0 for 4 when it comes to female super hero flicks. Not to mention Tank Girl, Barb Wire, Red Sonja, et al.
I surmise that the studio execs have asked where is the money in making female led superhero films?
I think the fact that we have to have a "Which Female Marvel Superheroine could carry her own Movie?" thread is because that is implicit. But like Kevin Fiege said, those female-led comic book movies are also terrible movies. And they all looked terrible right from the beginning. Studio execs who think those movies failed because they were led by women and not because of their disregard for quality are idiots. True, worse movies starring men have done better but good actioners/genre movies starring women do well, Salt, Hunger Games, Lucy (haven't seen it) etc. So a question of what characters have the most potential for a good movie is relevant.
Also grammar nitpick: all Marvel's superheroines are female. (I don't want to discount any transgendered characters out there but I can't think of any).
Also grammar nitpick: all Marvel's superheroines are female. (I don't want to discount any transgendered characters out there but I can't think of any).
Only slightly kidding. Plus, any future female led super movie will come with support from whichever universe it spawns from. Spider-Woman from Spider-Man, Black Widow from Avengers, etc and Wonder Woman from BvS or Justice League. Which let's face it - those lead in movies are much stronger than the original Daredevil or, if you want to count it, Batman and Robin.
I think it's men who lead the demographics for these kinds of movies and they simply don't identify with female leads in heroic roles. There may indeed be some anomalies, but it's not going to be common.
Frozen, which I would defy anyone to tell me is not a story about a woman with powers-- essentially a superhero origin story, is up to $400M.
If studio executives are stuck in the past, then they are leaving money on the table.
As I am sure @RepoMan knows, The Hunger Games was a success mostly because it is based on one of the most popular young adult novels of all time; it would’ve been hard to screw that one up. As we’ve seen, there are essentially no existing, female-only properties that it would make business sense for Marvel to adapt. But maybe audiences will grab on to a marginal lady-hero and flock to the theaters anyway. The average studio head, however, doesn’t rely on “maybe.” They rely on history. And history shows that female-driven superhero movies are box office death.
And Frozen? Well, for one, it's a Disney cartoon/musical, and is simply the latest in a long line of Disney cartoons about female heroines. Her having powers is not exactly new to their genre and not exactly an equal to super heroine led comic book movies.
I'm not saying I wouldn't give whatever Marvel wants to try a shot. I said that in my first post, but I'm simply being a realist here. Don't mean to rain on anyone's parade, but there’s actually some very compelling evidence that standalone super-heroine comic book films are not an awesome investment. It's called history. Maybe today it’s different! Maybe audiences have been primed by an endless glut of Spider-Man and X-Men and Marvel Cinematic Universe and Batman films that they’ll say “Okay, sure, I’m down with this.” But, also, maybe not. Let’s not pretend that studios are, like, holding off on green-lighting "Black Cat" the movie because of ignorance, or worse, sexism.
Frozen, which I would defy anyone to tell me is not a story about a woman with powers-- essentially a superhero origin story, is up to $400M.
If studio executives are stuck in the past, then they are leaving money on the table.
As I am sure @RepoMan knows, The Hunger Games was a success mostly because it is based on one of the most popular young adult novels of all time; it would’ve been hard to screw that one up. As we’ve seen, there are essentially no existing, female-only properties that it would make business sense for Marvel to adapt. But maybe audiences will grab on to a marginal lady-hero and flock to the theaters anyway. The average studio head, however, doesn’t rely on “maybe.” They rely on history. And history shows that female-driven superhero movies are box office death.
And Frozen? Well, for one, it's a Disney cartoon/musical, and is simply the latest in a long line of Disney cartoons about female heroines. Her having powers is not exactly new to their genre and not exactly an equal to super heroine led comic book movies.
I'm not saying I wouldn't give whatever Marvel wants to try a shot. I said that in my first post, but I'm simply being a realist here. Don't mean to rain on anyone's parade, but there’s actually some very compelling evidence that standalone super-heroine comic book films are not an awesome investment. It's called history. Maybe today it’s different! Maybe audiences have been primed by an endless glut of Spider-Man and X-Men and Marvel Cinematic Universe and Batman films that they’ll say “Okay, sure, I’m down with this.” But, also, maybe not. Let’s not pretend that studios are, like, holding off on green-lighting "Black Cat" the movie because of ignorance, or worse, sexism.
I didn't say it was ignorance or sexism. I did not make a value judgment on those that might shy away from these investments. (Let's keep words out of mouths that weren't there- I don't see this as a conversation about sexism, I see this as a conversation about business.)
What am I saying is that if execs don't look at the success of not only Frozen, but of the Elsa character (hell, exactly when I was typing that post earlier, my toddler was running around the house pretending to be Elsa and using her "powers" to freeze things-- yes, it is a Disney cartoon with princesses, but I think it is no coincidence, given its enormous, and crossover to boys, success that it is also absolutely a superhero story); the success of not only the Hunger Games movies but also of Katniss as, essentailly, a super character; as well as of the success of a movie like Lucy and see a potential audience to be capitalized on, then that is their loss.
And it may be that Marvel might need to go with a new, or newish character rather than rely on an older one to do it with, as I agree there is not a deep bench of available Marvel Studio characters to work with. But, we'll see. Hell, if you had asked me ten years ago if every kid would someday know who Iron Man was and kids would dress as him for Halloween, I wouldn't have believed it. And now there will be kids who want to be Rocket Raccoon for Halloween. A lot can happen with a well made movie.
And, yes, there has been times when a female-driven superhero movie was box-office death. And then there have been times, again, like Lucy a few weeks ago, when it was not that.
There was a time when it was believed that horror movies were dead at the box office, and then Scream made huge money, disrupting that old belief.
There was a time when it was believed that there was not a specific Latino family audience to be targeted, then Spy Kids exploded.
Hell, around the time X-Men happened, a lot of history of the prior years could be cited that superhero movies had become "box office death". And then X-Men, and soon Spider-Man, began to build towards the time we are in now where it seems like it is the rare summer movie that ISN'T a superhero one.
Sometimes the smart money has to be the disruptor that takes a chance, and doesn't just perpetuate old ideas.
History is just that, history. As the old disclaimer goes, 'past performance is no guarantee of future returns'. And that can swing both ways.
Not putting words in your mouth, but I've been seeing this trend lately how Marvel must be sexist to select a movie made with obscure team like Guardians of the Galaxy instead of a female driven movie and I indicated that simply assuming the studio execs are ignorant or worse is silly. They know what they're doing. Kids went to see Frozen because... Disney; cartoon; princess. Maybe DC can tap that vein with Diana Prince, but Marvel isn't prepared to take that kind of risk at this time, in my opinion. There is a reason they haven't done it yet, and based on Marvel's track record, I wouldn't call them ignorant for their decision making... yet.
"I think it's men who lead the demographics for these kinds of movies and they simply don't identify with female leads in heroic roles."
For which movies? The current crop of Marvel movies? While men may lead, don't shortchange the attraction these movies have for women AND families. It would be shortsighted to suggest anything otherwise. Haha. And why do I have to identify with any lead character? Is that really the only thing we're supposed to base our movie watching on? That's incredibly limited.
"As I am sure @RepoMan knows, The Hunger Games was a success mostly because it is based on one of the most popular young adult novels of all time; "
I can "speak" for myself, thanks. Harry Potter was a success because it was based on a novel. Hunger Games was a hit because of great promotion, a strong actress in the lead and great buzz. And oh yea, it was a book too? Sweet. I only read the books BECAUSE I saw the trailer. Same with my wife.
Not sure why it's so hard for some to just accept that it's not only us white men who want to see movies. Haha.
Comments
Using that marker only She-Hulk, Spider Girl, and Ms. Marvel/Captain Marvel qualify. You can not do Spider Girl for the same reason I don't think you should use Spider-Woman. Neither make sense without a Spider-Man in the universe.
A She-Hulk movie/tv show would work when you have more heroes in the world. A Dan Slott style She-Hulk super hero lawyer project would be really fun. The hard part would how do you show She-Hulk, would it be CG only or a woman in green paint.
A Captain Marvel movie would be easiest new character to work into the existing Cinematic Universe. You already have the Kree introduced so that part is out of the way. I know this is a crazy thought, but I wouldn't mind introducing Captain Marvell during a season of Agents of SHIELD. Have him die during the season from cancer, and have Carol take up the reigns in a movie.
That said, my selection would be Ms Marvel, She-Hulk (as a comedy of course), and maybe Black Widow - if Hawkeye or other heroes were included.
Marvel's House of Ideas has earned my confidence so much that they could probably do a Squirrel Girl movie and it would be a smash hit.
I'd like a heroes for hire with heavy emphasis on Misty Knight as the lead.
Wasp seems more suited to team scenarios, but hey, if Marvel decided to green light it, I wouldn't poo-poo the idea immediately.
I most want to see Shulkie, though.
Just make Carol black if there's a perceived need for diversity. There would be no harm to her character by doing so.
i wouldn't dismiss her character just coz shes black and female... i thought it was a solid book
Elektra crashed and burned, grossing just $24M on a $43M production budget, not counting their marketing and advertising budget. This is following her appearance in the marginally successful Daredevil film.
Catwoman (2004) had a huge budget ($100M) and starred Oscar winner Halle Berry and Oscar nominee Sharon Stone. The movie only made $40 million.
The comedy My Super Ex-Girlfriend (Uma Thurman, Luke Wilson, director Ivan Reitman), took in a paltry $22.5 million.
Supergirl (1984) grossed less that $14 million, that’s 0 for 4 when it comes to female super hero flicks. Not to mention Tank Girl, Barb Wire, Red Sonja, et al.
I surmise that the studio execs have asked where is the money in making female led superhero films?
Only slightly kidding. Plus, any future female led super movie will come with support from whichever universe it spawns from. Spider-Woman from Spider-Man, Black Widow from Avengers, etc and Wonder Woman from BvS or Justice League. Which let's face it - those lead in movies are much stronger than the original Daredevil or, if you want to count it, Batman and Robin.
Lucy us up to $85M.
Frozen, which I would defy anyone to tell me is not a story about a woman with powers-- essentially a superhero origin story, is up to $400M.
If studio executives are stuck in the past, then they are leaving money on the table.
Also grammar nitpick: all Marvel's superheroines are female. (I don't want to discount any transgendered characters out there but I can't think of any).
And Frozen? Well, for one, it's a Disney cartoon/musical, and is simply the latest in a long line of Disney cartoons about female heroines. Her having powers is not exactly new to their genre and not exactly an equal to super heroine led comic book movies.
I'm not saying I wouldn't give whatever Marvel wants to try a shot. I said that in my first post, but I'm simply being a realist here. Don't mean to rain on anyone's parade, but there’s actually some very compelling evidence that standalone super-heroine comic book films are not an awesome investment. It's called history. Maybe today it’s different! Maybe audiences have been primed by an endless glut of Spider-Man and X-Men and Marvel Cinematic Universe and Batman films that they’ll say “Okay, sure, I’m down with this.” But, also, maybe not. Let’s not pretend that studios are, like, holding off on green-lighting "Black Cat" the movie because of ignorance, or worse, sexism.
Horror/Teen drama - Runaways. It is a female heavy team that could fill a niche Marvel hasn't tried to reach yet.
Revamp the formula that work so well with Blade and use Elsa Bloodstone to hunt down vampires/werewolves.
What am I saying is that if execs don't look at the success of not only Frozen, but of the Elsa character (hell, exactly when I was typing that post earlier, my toddler was running around the house pretending to be Elsa and using her "powers" to freeze things-- yes, it is a Disney cartoon with princesses, but I think it is no coincidence, given its enormous, and crossover to boys, success that it is also absolutely a superhero story); the success of not only the Hunger Games movies but also of Katniss as, essentailly, a super character; as well as of the success of a movie like Lucy and see a potential audience to be capitalized on, then that is their loss.
And it may be that Marvel might need to go with a new, or newish character rather than rely on an older one to do it with, as I agree there is not a deep bench of available Marvel Studio characters to work with. But, we'll see. Hell, if you had asked me ten years ago if every kid would someday know who Iron Man was and kids would dress as him for Halloween, I wouldn't have believed it. And now there will be kids who want to be Rocket Raccoon for Halloween. A lot can happen with a well made movie.
And, yes, there has been times when a female-driven superhero movie was box-office death. And then there have been times, again, like Lucy a few weeks ago, when it was not that.
There was a time when it was believed that horror movies were dead at the box office, and then Scream made huge money, disrupting that old belief.
There was a time when it was believed that there was not a specific Latino family audience to be targeted, then Spy Kids exploded.
Hell, around the time X-Men happened, a lot of history of the prior years could be cited that superhero movies had become "box office death". And then X-Men, and soon Spider-Man, began to build towards the time we are in now where it seems like it is the rare summer movie that ISN'T a superhero one.
Sometimes the smart money has to be the disruptor that takes a chance, and doesn't just perpetuate old ideas.
History is just that, history. As the old disclaimer goes, 'past performance is no guarantee of future returns'. And that can swing both ways.
For which movies? The current crop of Marvel movies? While men may lead, don't shortchange the attraction these movies have for women AND families. It would be shortsighted to suggest anything otherwise. Haha. And why do I have to identify with any lead character? Is that really the only thing we're supposed to base our movie watching on? That's incredibly limited.
"As I am sure @RepoMan knows, The Hunger Games was a success mostly because it is based on one of the most popular young adult novels of all time; "
I can "speak" for myself, thanks. Harry Potter was a success because it was based on a novel. Hunger Games was a hit because of great promotion, a strong actress in the lead and great buzz. And oh yea, it was a book too? Sweet. I only read the books BECAUSE I saw the trailer. Same with my wife.
Not sure why it's so hard for some to just accept that it's not only us white men who want to see movies. Haha.