| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unless we have any proof Shuri invented pretty much everything we see, I'm still putting Tony down as the smarter of the two for basically inventing all his stuff on his own (barring the superelement and basic repulsors his daddy invented). Shuri has the backing of an entire country and centuries of developmnet, while Tony had basically his dad who he was never close to and a box of scraps. Shuri has the benefit of better techbase to work with.
An often used paraphrase from Isaac Newton is probably relevant here: "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." Shuri has the advantage of working with a mature infrastructure of vibranium nanotech for her designs. This is not to imply that she's less intelligent or talented than Tony, it's just that she's starting from a more advanced point.
Although Tony has definitely had more motivation behind his advances (it's a lot more personal for him) since Afghanistan than Shuri (who is, bless her, still in large part a tech geek playing with her toys*).
*- again, this is less a knock on her than recognition that Tony has become a much more driven personality than the "playboy" he started off as.
I bet they have more hidden somewhere. THey aren't stupid.I would have assumed that it grew naturally *somewhere* in the country, and that not every single example of the McGuffin was in that room.
This is comic book/movie stupidity: Characters are exactly as stupid (or smart) at any given moment as needed to advance the plot...
Unless we have any proof Shuri invented pretty much everything we see, I'm still putting Tony down as the smarter of the two for basically inventing all his stuff on his own (barring the superelement and basic repulsors his daddy invented). Shuri has the backing of an entire country and centuries of developmnet, while Tony had basically his dad who he was never close to and a box of scraps. Shuri has the benefit of better techbase to work with.An often used paraphrase from Isaac Newton is probably relevant here: "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." Shuri has the advantage of working with a mature infrastructure of vibranium nanotech for her designs. This is not to imply that she's less intelligent or talented than Tony, it's just that she's starting from a more advanced point.
The parody version of that was 'Standing on the Shoulders of Freaks"
I bet they have more hidden somewhere. THey aren't stupid.But if that were the case, why would they have needed to steal one just before the rest got burned? They could have gone to the secret cache.
My No-Prize answer is that there are seeds stored somewhere in a secret vault, but those seeds take time to grow into the full herb. T'Challa's family needed help immediately, so they didn't have time to break into the vault. That would also explain why just the herb was taken, and not a whole plant to keep the line going.
So... anyone care to bet if it breaks the 1.5 or 1.9 billion mark?
Simple. BP cost $200m to make and might bring in 10x that. IW cost $1B to make, and might bring in 2x that. Which is the better investment?
It's not that simple. In your example on a Black Panther nets 1.8 billion versus 1.0 billion for IW, but what about follow up impacts? Does IW increase interest in other MCU properties? IF IW boost receipts for future Spiderman, Thor , guardians, and others by several hundred million, then its more profitable.
The problem is no way to gauge the impact OF IW ahead of time and even after..i.e. pretty much a sure bet the next Spidey will go very well, but would a Black Widow movies benefit from IW?
I'm with Dougal, there's a false assumption that just because IW doesn't shatter box office numbers that some how, it will shelve the rest of the MCU in the future. Mostly because Disney will look at the OVERALL success Marvel has had, versus say, DC Comics...
Remember these are the same people that took this long to green light Black Widow because they looked at the box office on Supergirl, Catwoman, Tank Girl, Aeon Flux, etc. and the take away was audiences don't want to see female lead comic book movies.
Or the same industry that heard fan reaction to David Kelly's Wonder Woman pilot and decided the problem was her shiny pants.
The main reason that a Black Widow or any movie with female lead were not made seems to be that the boss of marvel comics was against it. After he was taken out of the movie decesions, they got them started.
And regarding Infinity War, whos to know how much profit it will make. Some people said Black Panther will not be very sucessful, because its viewer group would be too narrow.
Guardians was said to be the first Marvel flop.
So I will wait till the numbers get out and who knows? It may be the next big hit^^
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Black Panther is the first film since Avatar eight years ago to top the chart for five consecutive weekends, and only the third film to do so in 19 years after Avatar and The Sixth Sense.
The Disney and Marvel superhero pic finished Sunday with a domestic total of $605.4 million and $1.182 billion globally. In the U.S., it is only days away from overtaking fellow Marvel film The Avengers ($623 million) to become the top-grossing superhero film of all time in North America, unadjusted for inflation.
Sweet! :) Now if it can break 1.5 mil I'll be REALLY happy. :)
Remember these are the same people that took this long to green light Black Widow because they looked at the box office on Supergirl, Catwoman, Tank Girl, Aeon Flux, etc. and the take away was audiences don't want to see female lead comic book movies.
Or the same industry that heard fan reaction to David Kelly's Wonder Woman pilot and decided the problem was her shiny pants.
I personally loved Tank girl.
Catwoman was written so poorly that halle berry in skin tight leather wasn't enough to save it.