Latest news with #TheMarvels
New York Times
a day ago
- General
- New York Times
Editors' Note: July 30, 2025
An article on Friday about people in Gaza suffering from malnutrition and starvation after nearly two years of war with Israel lacked information about Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq, a child suffering from severe malnutrition and whose photo was featured prominently in the article. After publication of the article, The Times learned from his doctor that Mohammed also had pre-existing health problems. Had The Times known the information before publication, it would have been included in the article and the picture caption. An article on Monday about a family who uploaded their father's lengthy reading list after his death in hopes of inspiring readers misstated the name of the high school that the man, Dan Pelzer, attended. It was Detroit Catholic Central High School, not Detroit Central Catholic High School. An article on Monday about the box office earnings for Marvel's 'The Fantastic Four: First Steps' misidentified the movie with the lowest box office total in Marvel's history. 'Thunderbolts*' had the second-lowest box office total in Marvel's history, after 'The Marvels,' which had the lowest. A Critic's Notebook article on Monday about the National Ballet of Japan making its British debut referred imprecisely to a debut of the National Ballet of Japan. Its European debut was in Moscow in 2009, not last week. The error was repeated in a capsule summary of the article and a picture caption. A photo caption with an article on Tuesday about NASA's soft drink space race misspelled the surname of an astronaut. He was Karl G. Henize, not Karl Heinz. An obituary on Saturday about Joe Vigil, a renowned coach and leading expert on distance running and altitude training, misstated the branch of the military in which he served. It was the U.S. Navy, not the Army. Errors are corrected during the press run whenever possible, so some errors noted here may not have appeared in all editions. To contact the newsroom regarding correction requests, please email nytnews@ To share feedback, please visit Comments on opinion articles may be emailed to letters@ For newspaper delivery questions: 1-800-NYTIMES (1-800-698-4637) or email customercare@
Forbes
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- Forbes
‘The Marvels' Cost Four Times More To Make Than Sci-Fi Film ‘The Creator'
The level of spending on 'The Marvels' has been highlighted by the significantly lower budget of ... More 'The Creator' Photo courtesy of Marvel Studios. © 2023 MARVEL. Marvel Studios' president Kevin Feige claims he has found the magic formula for making cheaper movies and he wants everyone to know about it. Earlier this week the baseball cap-wearing boss of the super hero studio told Variety that it has been been given tips by the team behind The Creator, the 2023 sci-fi epic which earned an Oscar nomination for its visual effects even though it was reportedly made for a fraction of the cost of a Marvel movie. It has now come to light exactly how cheap it was. The Creator is set in a dystopian future where the western world is at war with New Asia, fictional region which is under the spell of a rogue artificial intelligence system. An ex-special forces agent played by Tenet's John David Washington is recruited to bring an end to the battle by hunting down and killing the Creator, the elusive architect of the AI. Along the way he comes across a potential savior in the form of a child who can control electronics with her mind which eventually saves the day. It was a breakout role for Madeleine Yuna Voyles, a then 7-year-old actress from San Diego who has yet to appear in other major productions. The most well-known members of the rest of the cast are perhaps Eternals actor Gemma Chan, Ken Watanabe, the Japanese star of The Last Samurai, and Ralph Ineson, who provides the motion capture for the villain in this month's the Fantastic Four: First Steps. The Creator lacked a line up of big household names which helped its director Gareth Edwards keep costs down. 'The Creator' was nominated for an Oscar for its low-budget visual effects © 2023 20th Century ... More Studios. All Rights Reserved. The movie was also shot on the low-cost prosumer Sony FX3 camera and instead of recreating locations with sets or costly computer generated imagery, Edwards sent a small crew to film in 80 locations using natural lighting and limited sound recording. There's no need to speculate about the impact this had on the cost. Interior scenes and stuntwork for The Creator were shot at Pinewood Studios in the United Kingdom and this shines a spotlight on how much was spent on the movie. The cost of making films in the United States is a closely-guarded secret as studios tend to combine their spending on individual pictures in their overall expenses and don't itemize the budgets of each one. In contrast, studios filming in the U.K. benefit from its Audio-Visual Expenditure Credit which gives them a cash reimbursement of up to 25.5% of the money they spend in the country. To qualify for the reimbursement, movies must pass a points test based on factors such as how many of the lead actors are from the U.K. and how much of the production work is done there. Furthermore, at least 10% of their core costs need to relate to activities in the U.K. and in order to demonstrate this to the government, studios set up a separate Film Production Company (FPC) there for each picture. The terms of the reimbursement state that each FPC must be "responsible for pre-production, principal photography/shooting and post-production of the film; and for delivery of the completed film." In summary, the FPC's financial statements have to show the production's entire costs, not just those incurred in the U.K. Likewise, studios aren't allowed to hide costs in other companies as the terms also state 'there can only be one FPC in relation to a film.' Each FPC has to file annual financial statements which lift the curtain on everything from salaries and social security payments to the total cost of the production and the level of reimbursement. It takes a bit of detective work to get the information. The companies usually have code names so they don't raise attention with fans when filing permits to film on location. Tallying the company names with the productions they are responsible for requires deep industry knowledge which my colleague and I have built up over nearly 15 years reporting on the movie industry. We are the only journalists worldwide who specialize in covering the financial statements of U.K. film production companies for national media and we have reported on them for more than 10 leading titles including The Times of London, The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph, The Independent and the London Evening Standard. The Creator was distributed by Disney-owned 20th Century Studios and the FPC behind it is named NeoAsia Productions after the renegade region which embraces AI in the movie. NeoAsia Productions is ultimately owned by billionaire Israeli businessman Arnon Milchan who was one of the producers of the movie and founded the production company Regency Enterprises which was also behind it along with Entertainment One. Milchan has been involved with more than 130 pictures including 12 Years a Slave, JFK, Heat, Fight Club and Mr. & Mrs. Smith. The Creator was one of the cheapest. 'The Creator' was made for only a quarter of the budget of 'The Marvels'. © 2023 20th Century ... More Studios. All Rights Reserved. In 2023 Variety claimed that the movie cost $80 million to make and put it to Edwards. "I'm a bit embarrassed it was $80 million," he responded. "We should've done it for less." He wasn't exaggerating. There were two reasons why Edwards was embarrassed. Firstly, the latest financial statements for NeoAsia Productions reveal it is indeed correct that Edwards should have made the movie for less as they state that its "budget has been exceeded". They also reveal that it cost more than $80 million to make. Not much more though as the financial statements show total expenditure of $93.5 million (£75.3 million) which was reduced by a $7.5 million (£6 million) reimbursement. The U.K.'s reimbursement is calculated on up to 80% of core expenditure so in order for a production company to get back the maximum 25.5% of the money it spends in the country, it needs to ensure that at least 20% of its core costs are incurred elsewhere. The Creator had no problem with this and amongst its many filming locations a good deal of principal photography took place in Thailand. There is no limit to the amount of reimbursement that a production company can receive in the U.K. and that's not all. In addition to claiming on direct spending in the U.K., studios can also get a pro rata reimbursement on what are known as neutral costs throughout the production such as insurance and payment to senior producers, writers and directors. These costs can be claimed in proportion to the amount of the activity in the U.K. so, for example, if the spending there represents 22% of the total budget then 22% of the neutral costs will also qualify for reimbursement. Accordingly, the level of reimbursement can rise close to a third of the total costs which is a blockbuster sum. The reimbursement received by NeoAsia Productions only represented around 8% of its total costs but this still brought the net expense down to just $86 million which is a tiny sum compared to similar movies made by other studios. Testimony to this, two months after The Creator was released, Disney debuted its own sci-fi flick, The Marvels, which cost a massive $374 million (£307.8 million) to make as this report revealed. It was precisely four times the sum spent on The Creator making it a much bigger gamble, even after a $66.7 million (£54.9 million) reimbursement reduced its expenses to a net $307.3 million. Neither movie was particularly well-received. Review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes shows that The Marvels earned 62% from critics and 79% from audiences whilst The Creator's critics score was five percentage points higher and its rating from audiences was four percentage points lower. In contrast, The Marvels grossed $206.1 million according to industry analyst Box Office Mojo whilst The Creator's tally came to just $104.3 million. Studios typically receive around 50% of the takings which left The Marvels with an estimated $204.3 million loss at the box office whilst The Creator was only $33.9 million in the red. It's not a dream ticket but it makes it a lot easier for a film to make a profit in theaters and for Marvel that really is a whole new world.
Time Out
22-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Time Out
‘The Fantastic Four: First Steps': Marvel goes interstellar in an amiable outing for comic books' First Family
First, the good news: you can take your seat for this semi-standalone Marvel blockbuster and enjoy the zippy action and affectionate banter of its charismatic cast without the nagging concern that you haven't seen 17 or so other films first, or need to go on a Google dive in the multiplex foyer. Your past failure to watch, say, The Marvels or The Incredible Hulk will not be punished via an obscure but pivotal reveal midway through. A full 36 films into the MCU, it's a weight lifted. First Steps, the third and best go at the Fantastic Four (low bar), is set in what you might call the CDMCU (A Completely Different Marvel Cinematic Universe). We're in the New York of Earth 828, a '60s-coded metropolis of flying cars and stylish Mad Men aesthetics. Full marks to director Matt Shakman and his production designer Kasra Farahani for creating a retro-futuristic Big Apple that looks this good on a studio backlot. Here, Earth's mightiest heroes are space-age pioneers too: the pregnant Sue Storm/Invisible Woman (Vanessa Kirby), her scientist hubby Reed Richards/Mister Fantastic (Pedro Pascal), her headstrong brother Johnny Storm/Human Torch (Joseph Quinn), and Reed's best pal, hulking concrete-faced enforcer Ben Grimm/The Thing (Ebon Moss-Bachrach). There are no other superheroes to clutter up the scene, leaving the four to protect humanity together – when they're not squabbling amicably in their gleaming HQ. Having previously demanded near PhD-level knowledge of their interlocking stories, superhero movies now seem to be flipping to the other extreme. As with James Gunn's Superman, the back story and set-up are brushed past swiftly, via an ABC special fronted by Stephen Moffat, First Steps ' answer to Basil Exposition. The quartet, we learn, were zapped by cosmic rays on a space voyage and returned to Earth with superpowers. What those powers are, and why they're all different, remains a little hazy for anyone not versed in MCU lore. But there's plenty of chance to figure them out in the action ahead – including a 2001 -esque foray into space. Gender-swapped (deal with it) space-nymph the Silver Surfer (Julia Garner) arrives to share the news that giant, planet-munching superbad Galactus (Ralph Ineson) is en route to make Earth the latest Malteser in his interstellar buffet. For a movie that looks this sleek, there's a lot of scrappiness around the fringes It's all entertaining enough, with Moss-Bachrach an earthy presence beneath Ben Grimm's rocky CG exterior and Quinn injecting a note of boyish vulnerability into an offbeat flirtation with the Silver Surfer. Kirby anchors the drama as a mum-to-be trying to pull off the ultimate juggle, while Pascal is charmingly gawky as the anxious Reed, who reacts to impending fatherhood by having the city's villains rounded up. 'You're baby-proofing the world,' notes Grimm. For a movie that looks this sleek, there's a lot of scrappiness around the fringes. Paul Walter Hauser is fun as subterranean mastermind Mole Man, but gets barely a toehold on the plot. Half of whatever Natasha Lyonne's character, a teacher with a thing for The Thing, was due to be doing is surely on the cutting room floor. The Four's droid helper H.E.R.B.I.E. doesn't leave a massive impression. Needless to say, don't leave your seat as the credits roll, as a crucial new character gets intro'ed (the second post-credit sting is the very definition of inessential). Next stop? Avengers: Doomsday. Your research starts now. .
Geek Girl Authority
11-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Geek Girl Authority
Lowest-Grossing Marvel Movies in the Entire Franchise
It took me a good while to actually appreciate the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) franchise, but I'm glad I got there because I really had fun binge-watching all the films chronologically. But then, as much as I'd hate to admit it, not every movie really hit the spot. This led me to actually check how well the movies did at the box office. Surprisingly enough, I discovered that even some of the movies I genuinely enjoyed actually flopped, and I had to find out why. If you're planning to watch Marvel movies on streaming services and are simply wondering which really flopped and why, stick around and find out. Let's start! The Marvels Gross Worldwide: $206 Million Gross Production Budget: $374 Million I was surprised to know that The Marvels flopped because I genuinely enjoyed it. Although I get that it's not as good as other MCU movies because it lacked a lot of depth and character development and the plot felt rushed at times. The chemistry of the trio was fun, but the script didn't give them enough meaty material to showcase their potential at all. But still, I'd consider it a decent watch. With a production budget of $374 million, it's clear why Disney expected more bang for their buck. The global box office of $206 million was a tough pill to swallow, especially compared to other MCU hits. The flop could also stem from superhero fatigue, as audiences have been bombarded with MCU content. The mixed reception to Phase 5, with some calling it disjointed, didn't help. The Incredible Hulk Gross Worldwide: $265.6 Million Gross Production Budget: $150 Million The Incredible Hulk (2008) had a solid but unspectacular run at the box office, pulling in $265.6 million worldwide against a $150 million production budget. While it turned a profit, it's often seen as one of the MCU's weaker entries because it was overshadowed by the juggernaut that was Iron Man, which was released the same year. I can actually see why it didn't become successful as expected because the entire movie leaned heavily on action, and the CGI was really heavy on the climax. Compared to The Marvels, The Incredible Hulk had a better financial outcome relative to its budget, but it faced similar issues with audience connection and marketing. Captain America: The First Avenger Gross Worldwide: $370 Million Gross Production Budget: $140 Million The first time I watched Captain America: The First Avenger, it was a bit challenging for me to focus on the movie itself because I was so caught up in the excitement of the MCU's early days. Knowing it was building toward The Avengers made every hint feel like an actual treasure hunt (something I really love to be honest). Even though it was considered a flop, I think it's underrated for how well it grounded the MCU's moral compass. Steve's 'do the right thing' ethos literally became the franchise's backbone. But its period piece style and lack of flashy action might've made it less memorable for some. Captain America: Brave New World Gross Worldwide: $415 Million Gross Production Budget: $180 Million Actually, this movie earned money, but it was considered a flop for many because it didn't stand out in the MCU. I honestly think it just fell short of expectations for a modern Marvel movie, especially since it was tied to The Falcon and the Winter Soldier. I enjoyed Anthony Mackie's take on Sam Wilson as Captain America, but the entire plot felt formulaic to some, including me, to be honest. The Bottom Line These are the four lowest-grossing Marvel movies at the box office. To be frank, most of them are decent watches, but they just fall short on a few things that made a big impact on how fans and viewers perceived the entire movie. Nevertheless, Marvel is Marvel, and the franchise really has nothing left to prove. However, what they need to do is make sure that fans are satisfied with their new releases. M3GAN 2.0 Spoiler Review RELATED: Bring Her Back Spoiler Review
Hype Malaysia
10-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Hype Malaysia
Park Seo Jun Pals Up With lululemon For Heart-Pumping 'Stretch Your Limits' Campaign
It's the collab we didn't know we needed! lululemon has launched its latest campaign, 'Stretch Your Limits', a powerful tribute to human potential, perseverance, and performance. At the heart of the campaign is lululemon's second collaboration with acclaimed South Korean actor and brand ambassador, Park Seo Jun, reinforcing his authentic connection to the brand and its values. Joining him is Haram Bae, CrossFit coach, model, and lululemon ambassador for the Myeong-dong Timewalk store. Together, they embody the spirit of pushing boundaries and inspire others to pursue growth through movement. Park, widely recognised for his roles in the Netflix series 'Gyeongseong Creature' and Marvel Studios' 'The Marvels,' is equally admired for his dedication to running, calisthenics, and weightlifting – a commitment to movement that mirrors the intensity and passion he brings to the screen. 'I'm excited to share my favourite gear with you. As someone who's always on the go, I rely on lululemon's versatile products to keep up with my active lifestyle – whether I'm training, travelling, or tackling everyday life,' said Park Seo Jun. The campaign spotlights the Pace Breaker Shorts, a staple in lululemon's men's lineup. Designed with lightweight Swift™ fabric, it offers exceptional breathability and multi-directional stretch – supporting movement in every direction, whether in training or daily life. Also featured is the Metal Vent Tech collection, engineered with seamless construction to reduce chafing and distractions. Its Silverescent™ technology, powered by X-STATIC®, helps inhibit odour-causing bacteria, keeping wearers fresh and focused. 'Stretch Your Limits' is more than a campaign – it's a movement. With Park Seo Jun and Haram Bae leading the way, lululemon invites everyone to explore what's possible when you go beyond. Swing by lululemon's official website for more information.
