Upcoming Marvel Hero Films

[IrishJedi]

LoL!! are you F'n kidding me!? they are seriously considering Smith as Cap?

Apparently.

Hopefully it's just hot air, though.

 

[Darklord Dave]

They haven't been concerned with someone being an "international star" when casting Thor - he's a virtual unknown.

 

[The Mike]

True but the director is a well known International name which might have counterbalanced it.

 

[Darklord Dave]

True but the director is a well known International name which might have counterbalanced it.

Most casual movie goers don't go to a film because they recognize the director's name. And Branagh really only means something to a more sophisticated film fan - to most comic fans it might as well be McG.

 

[The Entity]

So, about the Avengers movie...

In IrishJedi's post it says that there probably will be a global threat that one single hero can't defeat. Any guesses what that might be???

Like a Skrull invasion or something
I'm not really familiar with the Avengers comics so I don't know if there already is a supreme enemy that they often fight or something like that...

 

[The Mike]

All it says is that it will feature more international locations and actors than any other Marvel movie. That's because the original treatment of Captain America has him fighting in WWII getting frozen at the end and unfrozen during The Avengers film. The Skrulls could be possible as a villain for the Avengers but most of their enemies are on the grander scale to really show why they need multiple heroes.

Most casual movie goers don't go to a film because they recognize the director's name. And Branagh really only means something to a more sophisticated film fan - to most comic fans it might as well be McG.

Yeah because most Terminator fans or even the casual fan was able to get past the McG director reference and placement for Salvation right? Slap Uwe Boll on it and see if the average Comic fan just shrugs. The comic community went nuts when they heard Downey and Norton were signing up for roles followed by Patrow because it gave creditability to the genre. That is also why some are scratching their heads at the THOR casting because they figured another A Lister would be placed in that role. The Director will have more of an impact then you are aware of.

 

[TOE]

So, about the Avengers movie...

In IrishJedi's post it says that there probably will be a global threat that one single hero can't defeat. Any guesses what that might be???

Like a Skrull invasion or something
I'm not really familiar with the Avengers comics so I don't know if there already is a supreme enemy that they often fight or something like that...

In the comic book it was usually the Ultrons, Skrull Empire, and Kree

 

[The Entity]

All it says is that it will feature more international locations and actors than any other Marvel movie. That's because the original treatment of Captain America has him fighting in WWII getting frozen at the end and unfrozen during The Avengers film. The Skrulls could be possible as a villain for the Avengers but most of their enemies are on the grander scale to really show why they need multiple heroes.

In the comic book it was usually the Ultrons, Skrull Empire, and Kree

OK thanks you guys!

I only know the Kree and Skrull from that Silver Surfer cartoon. In the first episode they go to Zenn-la to study there.

And talking about Silver Surfer, after Fantastic Four 2, there were talks about a Silver Surfer movie. On IMDb is says it's a 2012 release with Doug Jones rumored as the Surfer.
I wouldn't mind seeing a Silver Surfer movie, especially if it's like that cartoon series. I always liked that.

 

[Hulksmashed]

So, about the Avengers movie...

In IrishJedi's post it says that there probably will be a global threat that one single hero can't defeat. Any guesses what that might be???

Like a Skrull invasion or something
I'm not really familiar with the Avengers comics so I don't know if there already is a supreme enemy that they often fight or something like that...

I would put money on the Hulk being one of the "villians" as opposed to an Avenger. In the original incarnation of the Avengers, the Hulk was brought in to fight alongside the other Heroes. Unfortunately, by the second comic book he proved to be to unstable and the rest of the year was spent hunting the hulk to put an end to his reign of destruction.

So, I have a feeling, that if Hulk isnt the villain in the first Avengers movie, by the end he will be set up as the villain for the second.

 

[The Mike]

And talking about Silver Surfer, after Fantastic Four 2, there were talks about a Silver Surfer movie. On IMDb is says it's a 2012 release with Doug Jones rumored as the Surfer. I wouldn't mind seeing a Silver Surfer movie, especially if it's like that cartoon series. I always liked that.

The Silver Surfer was greenlit but then halted when the idea of rebooting the Fantastic Four came into being. Its been shelved and probably will not be revisited until the FF are out in the theaters again.

I would put money on the Hulk being one of the "villians" as opposed to an Avenger. In the original incarnation of the Avengers, the Hulk was brought in to fight alongside the other Heroes. Unfortunately, by the second comic book he proved to be to unstable and the rest of the year was spent hunting the hulk to put an end to his reign of destruction. So, I have a feeling, that if Hulk isnt the villain in the first Avengers movie, by the end he will be set up as the villain for the second.

I think he'll be the villain in the beginning, them hunting him and finding Captain America along the way, having to need him to intervene to overcome whatever villain they are facing and having him escape ultimately not really being apart of the team.

 

[Hulksmashed]

I think he'll be the villain in the beginning, them hunting him and finding Captain America along the way, having to need him to intervene to overcome whatever villain they are facing and having him escape ultimately not really being apart of the team.

Could definately be! I was thinking that the "control" Banner seemed to be showing over the hulk at the end of the Hulk movie would play into it somehow. For example, banner would have control over Hulk in the begining (psuedo professor hulk) and then either lose control or realize he never had control. Ultimately leading to a fight between savage hulk and the Avengers...

 

[Sweet Rabbit]

I think he'll be the villain in the beginning, them hunting him and finding Captain America along the way, having to need him to intervene to overcome whatever villain they are facing and having him escape ultimately not really being apart of the team.

it depends if they follow the 616 or ultimate universe

 

[ProgMatinee]

looks like the Ultraverse Prime movie once rumored is still canned.

 

[Darklord Dave]

Could definately be! I was thinking that the "control" Banner seemed to be showing over the hulk at the end of the Hulk movie would play into it somehow. For example, banner would have control over Hulk in the begining (psuedo professor hulk) and then either lose control or realize he never had control. Ultimately leading to a fight between savage hulk and the Avengers...

I think it would make more dramatic sense to form the Avengers to go after the Hulk, but a greater threat appears and the Hulk reluctantly helps the other 3 against this new menace.

 

[The Mike]

it depends if they follow the 616 or ultimate universe

They'll use both.

The Ultimate Universe's storyline in the beginning was a reimagining of what was said to be occurring in Avengers 2 and 3 when Loki tricks the Hulk into destroying a railroad track to cause a fight between Hulk and Thor. The Hulk leaves once he realizes how much the others fear his unstable personality. Feeling responsible, the Avengers try to locate and contain the Hulk which ultimately leads them to Captain America.

In the Ultimates version, Banner injects himself with the SS Serum to control his Hulk tendancies and rampages uncontrolably causing the Ultimates to have to contain him. They fight against the Chitauri (Ultimate Skrulls) and have to relucantly use Hulk to win the fight.

I guarantee you'll see a mix of both of these where it might not be Skrulls but some greater force bringing them together short term.

 

[The Mike]

Even More Marvel Movie Madness

Remember last week when we had that write-up of what Kevin "Head of Marvel Movies" Feige said about Marvel’s ongoing plans to dominate the movie theaters, releasing up to 4 movies a year in a variety of genres? No? OK, well it’s right here.

ANYhoo, apparently that was an unofficial interview or something and Paramount had a bunch of websites take the story down. But now, they’ve had conference in which Feige went on record with Marvel’s plans. Firstshowing.net has a pretty interesting write-up of the conference you can read about here, but as usual we’ve got the juicy bits for you:

Marvel Studios realized the movies need to be about the characters after the abysmal failure of "Batman and Robin" in 1997–see? Something good came out of that.

Iron Man 2 is half way done shooting–most of the dialogue scenes have been shot, and the next 6 weeks are all about the action.

He drops a hint that Scarlett Jo’s portrayal of Black Widow has ‘two sides’…HMMMMMM…

"Thor" is going be set on modern-day earth and "other worlds (plural)" like Asgard.

Branagh won’t allow classic Shakespearian dialogue in the movie like it was in the comics. Thank ye gods.

He confirms that the actors that are signed up for current movies are also signed up for MULTIPLE movies–including Scarlett Johannson, Chris Hemsworth, and Tom "Loki" Hiddleston. Hemsworth isn’t a surprise, ‘cause Thor is totally in "The Avengers", but it looks like Black Widow and Loki will be, too. Could that mean Loki is the villian in "The Avengers"? Man, I hope so. Or at least a villian behind the scenes/revealed to be the ultimate villian like in the comics.

The Captain America movie will be ‘primarily’ a period piece (set it WWII, natch), and they’ll try to ape the style and tone of "Raiders of the Lost Ark", which I am absoultely fine with, since it’s one of the greatest action/adventure movies ever made.

They’re still considering "Ant-Man" by awesome geek-tastic director Edgar Wright. Wright will be submitting another draft of the script for Marvel Studios to look at when he wraps "Scott Pilgrim".

And last but not least–

BUCKY IS IN "THE FIRST AVENGER: CAPTAIN AMERICA"!! Specifically, Feige said "it’s a safe bet" that Bucky will be in it "in some capacity".

I hope the "capacity" is that the Army dudes who created Captain America introduce him to their latest idea–a sidekick teenager to serve as a recruitment tool–and Cap takes one look at them, asks them if they’re nuts, and walks out of the room.
And now I’ll go on record:

SIDEKICKS SHOULD NOT BE IN FILMED ADAPTAIONS OF COMIC BOOKS.

Sidekicks were pointless, cynical additions meant to lure in younger kids to comics so they could ‘identify’ with the characters. I don’t know about you, but I never once identified with Robin or Bucky or any frigging body else, I always wanted to be Batman or Captain America or whoever the main dude was. Plus, movies by their very nature need to be more realistic than the comics, it’s just an inescapable fact. And ANY superhero with a sidekick in the real world would be justifiably looked at as a crazy weirdo willing to endanger the lives of minors. Fingers crossed that we never see a sidekick in a supposed-to-be-taken-seriously comic book adaptation ever again.

What do you guys think? Excited? Approve of Bucky? Someone argue with me so we can refer back to it as "Buckygate" over and over.

 

[ProgMatinee]

is the above your writing or a cut and paste?

 

[tylerdurden]

The Captain America movie will be ‘primarily’ a period piece (set it WWII, natch), and they’ll try to ape the style and tone of "Raiders of the Lost Ark", which I am absoultely fine with, since it’s one of the greatest action/adventure movies ever made.

And now I’ll go on record:

SIDEKICKS SHOULD NOT BE IN FILMED ADAPTAIONS OF COMIC BOOKS.

Sidekicks were pointless, cynical additions meant to lure in younger kids to comics so they could ‘identify’ with the characters. I don’t know about you, but I never once identified with Robin or Bucky or any frigging body else, I always wanted to be Batman or Captain America or whoever the main dude was. Plus, movies by their very nature need to be more realistic than the comics, it’s just an inescapable fact. And ANY superhero with a sidekick in the real world would be justifiably looked at as a crazy weirdo willing to endanger the lives of minors. Fingers crossed that we never see a sidekick in a supposed-to-be-taken-seriously comic book adaptation ever again.

if they can successfully pull of the raiders of the lost ark tonality, then capt america should be a kickass period piece! but it's really hard to accomplish. not even the last indy movie could pull it off, let alone other movies.

and i don't have a problem with comic book sidekicks per se. in themselves i don't think there's anything really wrong. it' s how they're used that matters. frank miller and alan moore showed they can be compelling & useful characters if treated maturely and intelligently. now, if only hollywood screenwriters can do the same...

 

[IrishJedi]

Let's revive this thread. I just watched THE INCREDIBLE HULK again. Nothing gets me more excited for THE AVENGERS that that little genius bit and the end with Hurt and Downey.

 

[Deckard]

Yea Hulks cool, I watched Iron Man on DVD the other day and Hulk just started on HBO as Iron Man ended so I got to watch them back to back.

I look forward to seeing what exactly they come up with for Avengers and of course whats really great, character development shouldn't be an issue since all of the mains will have had their own movie.

I just want to see Stark in Hulkbuster armor and Hulk go at in the streets for a good ten minutes.