Talk:Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Scarlet Centurion

@Trailblazer101 Hi, I think we should hold off on listing the Scarlet Centurion as the third variant leading the Council of Kangs alongside Immortus and Rama-Tut. Neither of the two attached sources (The Hollywood Reporter and /Film) confirm this individual to be the Scarlet Centurion, using the language "likely to be the Scarlet Centurion" (THR), "maybe a not-scarlet version of the Scarlet Centurion", and "the centurion (?)" (/Film). This uncertainty, coupled with the fact that his look in no way resembles the red armor seen in the comics (though interestingly, there is a variant in the stadium wearing red armor if you watch the New Rockstars breakdown video), leads me to suggest just leaving the name off of the list for now. TNstingray (talk) 18:30, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

At the moment, most sources are saying its an MCU version of Scarlet Centurion, so I think it should stay. Come next Friday (Feb 24th), I think the spoiler interview embargo will be lifted, so sites might give us more definitive answers/quotes from Reed and other creatives. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:59, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

My thinking behind why this should stay is because the sites used came to a logical conclusion that it most likely is the Scarlet Centurion. That version is different looking, but that happens a lot with adaptations of comic material. I agree with Favre that we should wait to see what interviews speak of it. Trailblazer101 (talk) 00:06, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

I think we should leave the name off until then to be on the safe side since these sites (and everyone checking the Wikipedia articles) are just jumping to conclusions simply because Scarlet Centurion is a notable variant in the comics. TNstingray (talk) 15:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

WP:VNT would apply in this situation. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:59, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

@Trailblazer101 and TNstingray: FWIW, Reed says the one thought to be Scarlet Centurion is "a Centurion" and "a character based on Scarlet Centurion". These were the only two sites I came across naturally throughout the day that discussed the scene (I also didn't look for others at the moment). Seeing both those quotes, perhaps calling him simply "Centurion" would be correct. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:09, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

I just did a quick search and that's all I found as well, so I guess "Centurion" like you suggested may be best. -- Zoo (talk) 01:23, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Reed has been pretty consistent in calling the character "Centurion" in other interviews as well, see here and here. I'll update the articles accordingly. InfiniteNexus (talk)

Simply "Centurion" works per the sources. Trailblazer101 (talk) 01:58, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

box office flop

is this film not a box office flop due to that fact that many reliable film sites have stated ant man 3 required $475 million in order to break even which realistically, it will fail to do so? 120.150.118.212 (talk) 17:17, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

No, Wikipedia does not predict the future. If reliable sources say that the film requires $475 million to break even, then we can say that it requires $475 million to break even. If reliable sources describe the film as a flop (as in, they say so specifically in more or less those exact words) that's when we can say that. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:24, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

"Flop" and "break even point"

- https://cosmicbook.news/ant-man-wasp-quantumania-huge-flop-kevin-feige-box-office

- https://www.thewrap.com/ant-man-and-the-wasp-quantumania-box-office-explained/ 49.188.85.190 (talk) 01:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

A counter to the negative critical response

The low critical score on, for instance, Rotten Tomatoes (47%), has been countered by a high audience score (83%). I think it's only fair to note this. The box office figure is also only for the first weekend, I believe. Digikit (talk) 05:58, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

The Rotten Tomatoes audience score is not considered reliable. Box office is independent from the critical response as they're not always or necessarily correlated. Both the critical response and the box office gross are duly noted in the article. —El Millo (talk) 07:59, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

There is a problem though, sometimes the critics seem unfair towards a project. Eg: The Last Jedi reported generally favorable views from Critics, giving it a high percentage. However, for audiences, it is extremely low due to the fact that most of the characters from Original Trilogy had been wasted and also heavy criticism on the writing part.

</br>For Venom 1, Critics gave it a lower percentage but the audience have given a high percentages. I did not mean to say that we should use Audience score but in case there is a huge gap (As evidenced by Last Jedi and Rise of Skywalker), we could note it in reception section.

Thoughts? JEDIMASTER2008 (talk) 03:42, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Only if there's an exceptional level of coverage by reliable sources on the gap, as, again, the audience percentage is unreliable. That is the case for The Last Jedi, and the whole audience reception is covered there. It isn't the case here. —El Millo (talk) 15:49, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Okay then JEDIMASTER2008 (talk) 03:50, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Box office bomb

500 break even, box office 451.2 Isn't it a box office bomb? Mr.sandippaul (talk) 08:55, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

For us to call it a bomb, reliable sources have to generally refer to the film as a bomb. For us to personally conclude that is original research and thus incorrect. —El Millo (talk) 21:48, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Films not breaking even doesn't automatically make them a bomb. -- Zoo (talk) 22:18, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Yup, still considered a flop which therefore needs to be mentioned unless an agenda is going on. 106.70.176.18 (talk) 12:37, 18 March 2023 (UTC) strike sock -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:53, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Then WP:CITE a source. Mike Allen 14:22, 18 March 2023 (UTC)