Avengers: Age of Ultron (May 1st, 2015)

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Admittedly I haven't watched much of it, but what I have seen was yawn-inducing, and felt very cheap, befitting some generic TV show. Which isn't really excusable, as some even non-premium TV shows are putting out nearly film-quality work every time out.

I'll be the first to admit it took a while to get off the ground with the hassle of establishing characters and trying to build the team up (as is the case with most television shows), but there was little about the season premiere last week that was "boring" or "cheap."
 
Fair enough, but there is too much great TV out there for me to invest my scarce TV watching time giving shows a chance to improve when they start out badly. I'm just now getting around to Homeland season 1. Now there's a ****ing TV show.
 
Fair enough, but there is too much great TV out there for me to invest my scarce TV watching time giving shows a chance to improve when they start out badly. I'm just now getting around to Homeland season 1. Now there's a ****ing TV show.

:lol I wouldn't bother getting involved with Homeland. The first two seasons were awesome, but they completely killed it with the third, stripping the show of it's very reason for existence. If this next season doesn't "wow" me by the third episode, I'm bowing out. I agree with too much good TV right now. ATM, I know I'm missing good shows because of the loaded schedule.
 
Damn. Well, I'm not against stepping away when a show loses whatever it was that initially made it great. The Homeland thing doesn't shock me, though. It seems like there's only so far they can go with that story, without completely changing the characters involved, without it jumping the shark into 24 territory (not that 24 didn't jump the shark very well). If Agents of SHIELD does appear on Netflix or something eventually (very possible considering the agreement they have with Marvel), then I might give it a shot one of these days.
 
I'll be the first to admit it took a while to get off the ground with the hassle of establishing characters and trying to build the team up (as is the case with most television shows), but there was little about the season premiere last week that was "boring" or "cheap."

The effects for the Absorbing Man were very well done for one thing.
 
Played by Nic Nolte? :pray:

giphy.gif
 
Anyone ever hear of this supposed plot line? I found it on SHH a couple months ago. Likely fake:

• Leaked reported info from Unit Producer John M. is as follows:
The entire story has to do with time. Strucker is trying to go back to the days of Hydra and prevent things from happening so it can still be in command. He is in possession of not Loki's staff, because Loki had it at the end of Thor and he doesn't work with the humans. Strucker has the Time Gem. He tests it on QS and SW resulting in their powers. (Speed=aka slowing down time around him, and probability manipulation)
The film opens like Cap 2 with them on a mission successively stopping Strucker and "rescuing" the twins to bring them to the good side. The person who commands this is Tony by deploying a robot team. This is when it goes to the party at the Avengers tower. Ultron is in the back room, where the scenes cut back and forth as he becomes aware of the constant destruction Tony is causing with robots like himself so he commands a few of them and attacks and escapes.
Tony is forced to reveal to the team everything. The Vision he'd been working on and the dealings with Fury he has on the side to not consistently put them at risk.
The race is on to find Ultron resulting in the globe spanning battles seen in the teaser from Comic-Con. Ultimately at the beginning of the Third Act Widow, QS, Thor, Hawkeye, Rhodes, and Cap are all killed by Ultron's robots. The Hulk is the most upset by this as he had a budding relationship with Widow. The Hulk blames Iron Man and the fight it out big time. Iron Man is saved by Vision and SW-where we first get a glimpse of their "relationship" on screen as a trust/tandem.
• As Hulk is confused and sent away by SW to the snowy field. The last consisting of Iron Man, Vision, SW, Nick Fury, and Maria Hill decide to send Vision back in time with the power of the orb to stop the creation of a key A.I element installed in Jarvis. Effectively eliminating Vision but maintaining Jarvis. As things go back to "normal" and everyone is alive the Time Gem is taken to the Collector by Thor not knowing the Collectors intention/master. Hulk and Widow reconcile although Hulk and Iron Man do not. SW gets her brother back. Rhodes and Hawkeye have no clue. Fury is aware. Cap questions everything and has a hunch as he has been throughout time already and has memories of back when Stark Sr. was doing things.
The key that ties this film into the others is the age of Hank Pym. We see him as a younger scientist when Vision goes back. He becomes the actual "creator" of Ultron in this new reality but is "stopped" from having it come to life by the AI element implanted by Vision. (Technically a virus, like the book) But Pym, being Pym, wants to solve this problem so, as he gets older and unable to, he hires a young gun to do his thievery for him looking for a specific item. (Paul Rudd's character)
The movie is reported to end with Thanos actually visiting Loki to retrieve the gauntlet accompanied by the Collector. (Ending in yet another "bad guy" end credits scene)
The other mention is Dr. Strange witnessing the recorded powers of SW while in the Hospital with bandages on his hands. Supposedly from the wreckage and ends with a slight smile as he will actively seek out other-worldly abilities. *slight change but makes sense)
PS I’m sure a lot of this will change but I challenge anybody to screenshot this and wait for more trailers/the movie. The source who provided this info is at LEAST 70% reliable.
 
Published October 05, 2014 by Devin Faraci

Your Favorite Avengers May Not Be In AVENGERS 3


How will Marvel deal with their contractual disputes?


Once Avengers: Age of Ultron hits, the Marvel Cinematic Universe goes into Phase Three... and possibly the beginning of the end. The studio's biggest actors are under limited contracts, and those contracts will begin to expire in Phase Three. Chris Evans, for instance, has just two more movies left on his contract, and Captain America 3 will eat one of those up. Robert Downy Jr has one more film, and Chris Hemsworth is also entering the home stretch. Renegotiations can happen, but they would be costly and go against Marvel's general spirit of keeping things cheap.


Guardians of the Galaxy is the solution for Marvel; they've proven the brand is big enough that they can keep introducing new characters to take the places of older ones, and Phase Three will see Doctor Strange, Ant-Man and maybe Ms. Marvel trying to step in for the older franchises. But how does Marvel make the most of this changeover? Will all of the current Marvel franchises come to a basic end after Avengers 3?


Not exactly. Last week a rumor hit that Marvel was going to split Avengers 3 into two movies, and this would be how they would get around the ending of actors' contracts. I explained why that isn't possible, from a basic legal standpoint, but while doing some digging on this rumor I discovered it was closer to truth than I ever imagined. Marvel isn't spltting Avengers 3 into two movies, but they are planning Avengers 3 as the springboard to... something else. And they're going to use their biggest characters in that something else, keeping them out of Avengers 3.


Imagine an Avengers 3 without Thor or Captain America, maybe without Black Widow. It's a movie where the secondary characters from the MCU get to stand up and prove their worth, possibly even setting up their own spin-offs. With Guardians Marvel has shown that their brand is the star, and by the time we get to A3 clearly people will be on board with the entire universe. Keep Iron Man - Robert Downey Jr's renegotiated contract seems to specify Avengers 3 as his next film - and you have a new launching pad for characters to take over from the current big guns.


Storywise this is all easy to do - Cap will be very busy with the fallout of Captain America 3, and I wouldn't be shocked to see Steve Rogers give up the shield at the end of that movie. Thor 3 is going to wrap up all the Asgardian drama, and could very well end with Thor forced to sit on his father's throne. Black Widow is easy to write out on another adventure. Hulk... well, Hulk's planet of residence could well be up in the air by 2018 or so.


For the actors this is all good news. Chris Evans has been living in the Marvel Cinematic Universe non-stop for the last few years. A year off to pursue other projects could help soften him up for further negotiations. And this just whets the audience's appetite for what comes next, especially if what comes next hits theaters the very next year.


This next part is speculation, but what if the big guns sit out Avengers 3 so that Marvel can bring them in for a crossover movie? A huge, all-franchise crossover that could be called Marvel's Infinity Gauntlet or Marvel's Secret War? What if Avengers 3 isn't the conclusion of the Thanos story but just the spark that ignites it in the massive crossover film that brings all the Marvel characters - TV included - together in one film? That's the sort of next-level thinking we expect from the House of Cinematic Ideas at this point.


Like I said, that last bit is speculation, but the rest comes from sources close to the actors, who have been having scheduling discussions with Marvel. We're still a ways off from any of this being official, but this is all part of the plan that Kevin Feige and the creative committee hatched some time ago. I really think they're about to redefine blockbuster moviemaking again.
 
I don't really get why Marvel wouldn't just pay the "big guns". The movies make MASSIVE money and a few million more each for the big guns won't put much of a dent in that bottom line. If you were entering territory where paying actors too much was the difference between a profitable film and a money losing film then I get it, but these films are in zero danger of flopping.
 
I don't really get why Marvel wouldn't just pay the "big guns". The movies make MASSIVE money and a few million more each for the big guns won't put much of a dent in that bottom line. If you were entering territory where paying actors too much was the difference between a profitable film and a money losing film then I get it, but these films are in zero danger of flopping.

You kind of answered your own question.
 
Well, heres the thing, when Marvel Studios started these flicks with Hulk and Iron Man, no studios were biting (gee, wonder why? Thanks Ang Lee), so to get produced they were putting their own crazy money down to then get produced(I've read 15 to even 25%). Their barebones, no pay out worked and got them flying basically thanks to RDJ and IM1.

But, as others have pointed out, thats no longer where they're at, several mega super hits, supported by several merchandising coups, and a buyout by Disney has made them a Juggernaut, they're no longer having to beg for studio space, so keep it thrifty, sure, but pay these people who helped build the empire what you can afford, they're making you money, whether they all have RDJ star power or not.
 
Back
Top