Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 6358727" data-attributes="member: 22424">Not so, because...I specifically noted that Iron Man's recognition was due to RDJ's casting, and also noted that Thor was less known.('course, it was three characters in a wall of text, so easy to miss! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> )I don't believe Captain America had less name recognition - sticking "America" in the title is always going to get attention. It is fair to say that association with previous films might be negative... but if so, that would also be relevant to D&D as well.Absolutely. Unfortunately, a lot of that recognition is going to be negative - 'the' D&D film was terrible, and it's not as if the straight-to-video sequels did anything to help. That's not to say a good film couldn't turn it around, but it will be an uphill struggle.I don't disagree with any of that. I just don't think the massive success of Guardians, by itself, disproves the "name recognition" argument. Because by the time it arrived Marvel had name recognition (even if we disagree about how, and at what point, they got it).(Of course, the "known actors" is only a help, not a guarantee - see Liam Neeson and "Battleship" or Birch/Irons and "Dungeons & Dragons". <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> )</blockquote>

Verification