The Avengers: The Motion Picture Discussion Thread- Open SPOILERS -enter at own risk!

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

:lecture Except for average IM2 and The Incredible Hulk. I thought both were great :rock

But The Avengers movie will contain so much awesomeness, our head's will explode.

3591.jpg

:lol :lol :lol

Simply Awesome, best gif ever!

Scanners FTW :rock

That head explosion was so ahead (pun intended) for its time, same as the crucifix to the snatch with little linda blair.

Lick me FTW!

Avengers needs a head explosion like that, either from a Hulk smash, Repulsor blast, Cap's shield throw or Thor's lightning strike!

You think Marvel will approve :lol
 
Last edited:
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

Bingo. The mouse will not clear anything near R Rated or a hard PG-13. Especially after the Watchmen fiasco which even had DC/WB saying no more R Rated Comic based films.

I'm not expecting intense scenes from Whedon. I am expecting some good fight scenes, snappy dialogue and interesting visuals just based on his prior works. Nothing more.
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

Punisher nor Blade are DC/WB properties.
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

I think he was referring to Disney owning Marvel and staying away from R rated movies.
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

Depends. People forget that Disney owned Miramax. They release pictures that they aren't sure about under other banners. They may or may not decide to allow a Punisher or Blade or any other more adult hero in a film but I doubt it'll have a Walt Disney Pictures presents prefix. The difference is that WB/DC issued statements saying no whereas Disney is an inference based on the company policies so there is a still a chance.
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

Ah, I see. So it is still possible.

Seeing the castle before Marvel movies is going to be weird.
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

Ah, I see. So it is still possible.

Seeing the castle before Marvel movies is going to be weird.

Definitely possible, but I doubt we'll see any Disney/Mouse logos during the opening/closing credits. TBH most comic book movies don't need extreme violence or language. Directors could do all kinds of things to infer stuff continuing off screen (See TDK when Joker killed Gamble).
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

Are we for sure going to see the Disney Caslte? Just because Disney owns Marvel doesn't mean it will show that off. As Mike said, they own Miramax too. I don't remember seeing the Castle in any of Tarintino's movies.

I just think that at this point any Marvel character not farmed out would be under the Marvel Studios banner. So if there was another Punisher or Blade, I would assume they would go back to Marvel since their contract would be up right? I'm still pissed Marvel extended Sony's for Spider-man. I would have thought after forming Marvel Studios, they would have tried to keep everything 'home' from then on.
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

Maybe we won't see the castle. I was just guessing.
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

Are we for sure going to see the Disney Castle? Just because Disney owns Marvel doesn't mean it will show that off. As Mike said, they own Miramax too. I don't remember seeing the Castle in any of Tarintino's movies.

We actually might. Remember this article:

Walt Disney Co. agreed to pay Viacom Inc.’s Paramount Pictures at least $115 million for distribution rights to “Iron Man 3” and the “Avengers,” gaining full control of movies owned by its Marvel Entertainment unit.

Paramount, hired to distribute Marvel films before the movie and comic book company was bought by Disney for about $4 billion in January, will release “Thor” and “Captain America” next year, the companies said today in a statement.

The $115 million will serve as a minimum guarantee to Paramount, the companies said. Disney, based in Burbank, California, has made Marvel and Pixar Animation the focus on its movie-making efforts and agreed in July to sell its Miramax film division to private-equity investors Colony Capital LLC.

So you will see The Avengers and Iron Man 3 as Walt Disney Pictures and Marvel Studios present.

I just think that at this point any Marvel character not farmed out would be under the Marvel Studios banner. So if there was another Punisher or Blade, I would assume they would go back to Marvel since their contract would be up right? I'm still pissed Marvel extended Sony's for Spider-man. I would have thought after forming Marvel Studios, they would have tried to keep everything 'home' from then on.

Yes, if things expire they go back to Marvel/Disney. The Fantastic Four and Daredevil are both on the bubble of that with 20th Century Fox unless new films are made within the next couple of year to extend it. Marvel though has extended both the X-Men license and the Spider-Man license past their expiration dates so who knows. The Spider-Man reboot could have easily been a Marvel Studios production.
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

I don't know much about the movie industry, so would Marvel have the ability to pump out Thor, Cap, Avengers, and the Spidey re-boot? If not, I can see why they did not grab the rights back; they'll get more money this way. If so, it was a really dumb move on their part. Even if we don't have a movie where all the heroes are together, I would love for Parker to go to Mr. Fantastic or Tony for advice on a science project, or for Hank to be brought in to help Reed in FF movie and little cameos like that.
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

They were working on Thor, Captain America and Iron Man 2 all at the same time, hell Ant-Man was even in pre-production. Now they film and release at the same time so it is definitely doable. WB is working on Batman 3, Superman reboot, Green Lantern post production, The Flash and Green Lantern 2 pre production at the same time.

The thing is that they are going the Hasbro route where they sign off on known moneymakers like Spidey and Wolverine and are able to take a slice of the profits while doing absolutely nothing but sticking the Marvel logo before the film after the distributor. The resigning of Spider-Man helped fund Thor and Cap as did the signing of the X-Men over to 20th Century Fox who could have lost the rights after Last Stand.
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

I was thinking that with them being a new studio they may not be able to do alot of movies all at once. I guess it is a trade off with them giving up Spider-Man and X-Men. It sounds like in the long run it's giving us more.
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

It is too bad though since Spidey and the X-men are great for crossovers. Hopefully they can at least get the FF back. Daredevil is kinda loner like Batman so I wouldn't feel too bad about him not joining the fold. But Dr. Doom is like Marvel's ultimate villian so I would love to see the Avengers and FF eventually take him on, and to have him done RIGHT too! He needed a pimp cup. That is why both FF movies failed :lecture
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

It is too bad though since Spidey and the X-men are great for crossovers. Hopefully they can at least get the FF back. Daredevil is kinda loner like Batman so I wouldn't feel too bad about him not joining the fold. But Dr. Doom is like Marvel's ultimate villian so I would love to see the Avengers and FF eventually take him on, and to have him done RIGHT too! He needed a pimp cup. That is why both FF movies failed :lecture

:lol :lol :lol

Oh, and true. :lecture
 
Re: The Avengers: Discussion Thread

They totally screwed up Dr. Doom. And then they freaking unscarred his face. Disgusting.
 
Back
Top