And what about the people that suck at working at the office? And those that don’t get any or are not interested in a work based social life?

Reality is that there’s diversity and lots of in betweens. Thus diversity and flexibility and the value of managers in bringing it all together (like maybe they were always supposed to?)

Excellent suggestion!!

Yea I realised a while ago that time just stopped passing for me around 2018 ... everything's just a blur since then.

Thanks so much for the suggestions! I was worried no one would be into this "fringe" idea!!

Thanks for the suggestion! I was worried no one would be into this "fringe" idea!!

It appears to be on Disney+ AFAICT (I'm not subscribed).

and lacks subtitles.

This I suspect is an underappreciated aspect of the dynamics at the moment. More broadly, it's about the personalisation of the watching experience. Screen size, seating/lying position, noise and brightness, subtitles and their language, audio configuration (where you can optimise your home set up to help with dialogue clarity or "epicness")

2013 and 2017 seemed particularly bad ...

From box office mojo, the listings were (https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/2013/?grossesOption=calendarGrosses)

2017

1. Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi
2. Beauty and the Beast
3. Wonder Woman
4. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
5. Spider-Man: Homecoming
6. It
7. Thor: Ragnarok
8. Despicable Me 3
9. Logan
10. The Fate of the Furious

2013

1. Iron Man 3
2. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
3. Despicable Me 2
4. Man of Steel
5. Monsters University
6. Frozen
7. Gravity
8. Fast & Furious 6
9. Oz the Great and Powerful
10. Star Trek Into Darkness

Each column is the top 10 films of a single year. They seem to increase in box office takings as you go up the column.

entering data is beautiful mode ...

It's not a basic 2D graph. And honestly it generally works, especially as the bubble size gives a clear enough sense of the actual box office takings.

It could be 2D though, with the vertical axis representing box office, and that'd probably work too, but it wouldn't be as aesthetically pleasing.

It would be more damning if they said “part of a franchise”.

For sure, but part of what the MCU "unlocked" was a non-linear franchise, where it's not just sequels or prequels but an arbitrary network of films that connect in some way or another. Thus all of the MCU films.

The thing though, I suspect, is that a sense of linearity in the overall story was actually pivotal to the Ironman-Endgame era of the MCU. There was always a sense of the whole thing pushing in a single general direction. And post Endgame, that sense disappeared and Marvel frankly kinda shat the bed on recreating it in some way.

So given that, and the way IronMan/RDJ was the single linear thread through the whole thing, along with the rest of the "the band", I think it makes a lot of sense to treat that sprawl of films as a giant series of sequels.

Furiosa

Maybe controversial, depending on who you talk to I suppose. It's no Fury Road, at all. But it's in the same world and it's a good film. I'd imagine following with Fury Road directly after works quite well as a pairing