Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 21, 2017, 08:48:35 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
Donate! | Subscribe! | Shop: Amazon

***DONATION DRIVE 2 HAS BEGUN:
CLICK HERE TO BURN MONEY***
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  Movies  |  Topic: Marvel Universe (Thar be spoilers ahead.) 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 58 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Marvel Universe (Thar be spoilers ahead.)  (Read 105512 times)
Evildrider
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5521


Reply #35 on: March 06, 2013, 02:17:01 PM

Planet Hulk is palpably a stupid idea in a way recognisable by studio execs, also it has no obvious sales value. Wheras Venom is only a palpably a stupid idea to someone who has actually read a Spiderman comic.

I'm doubtful we'll see a standalone Hulk movie soon.

I also seriously doubt anyone worth a salary has been wasting their time on potential plots of 2016 movies four years ahead of time.


With how popular the Hulk was in The Avengers, you'd be wrong thinking Ruffalo won't get himself a Hulk movie.
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10292


Reply #36 on: March 06, 2013, 02:19:28 PM

Btw, when I first heard about GoG, my first thought was 'Green Lantern the movie'. That is how weird and shitty GoG could get.

As for Thanos, they don't really need to introduce him before Avengers 2.

Avengers movies aren't dependent on the villian as an antagonist, there isn't much screen time left after the Avengers finish antagonising each other. There may be threads and references, but it can work with or without the thing they did with Loki.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10292


Reply #37 on: March 06, 2013, 02:20:49 PM

Planet Hulk is palpably a stupid idea in a way recognisable by studio execs, also it has no obvious sales value. Wheras Venom is only a palpably a stupid idea to someone who has actually read a Spiderman comic.

I'm doubtful we'll see a standalone Hulk movie soon.

I also seriously doubt anyone worth a salary has been wasting their time on potential plots of 2016 movies four years ahead of time.


With how popular the Hulk was in The Avengers, you'd be wrong thinking Ruffalo won't get himself a Hulk movie.

Meh, maybe, I doubt it'll even be planned till they see how Avengers 2 pans out.

The lead actors weren't the reason that the last two attempts were shit.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Ironwood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 26407


Reply #38 on: March 06, 2013, 02:21:59 PM

Eh. Dismissal by someone like Whedon really doesn't give me a CASE CLOSED. Hell, Raimi denied all the time that there was  NO VENOM in his Spidey flick. He even said it was a stupid idea (which it was, ultimately).

STOP IT.  WHY MUST YOU STIR THE CUP OF MY PERSONAL PAIN.

"Mr Soft Owl has Seen Some Shit." - Sun Tzu
Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536


Reply #39 on: March 06, 2013, 07:12:16 PM


With how popular the Hulk was in The Avengers, you'd be wrong thinking Ruffalo won't get himself a Hulk movie.
[/quote]

If not for Hulk 1 and 2, you'd probably be right. However, nobody's chomping on that bit just because he had a few good scenes amongst a cast of a dozen other superheroes after two under-performers.
Evildrider
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5521


Reply #40 on: March 06, 2013, 08:15:15 PM

The point is that The Hulk in Avengers is what people have been asking for.  He's not just the total rage monster, he seemed to be in the more symbiotic Hulk/Banner stage. 
Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8420


Reply #41 on: May 30, 2013, 09:35:08 AM

Lots of interesting stuff going on now with casting news and such.

Pretty clear that they're not going at Guardians of the Galaxy with faint heart--the current casting rumors around John C. Reilly and Glenn Close are that they're being looked at for relatively minor parts as officers of the Nova Corps, which is apparently being set up as the outer space and aliens counterpart to SHIELD. Continuing rumor that they're casting Tennant as Rocket Raccoon's voice, which seems a good idea to me. Contrary to my original guess, it doesn't seem like Thanos is the major villain of the film--sounds more like the Collector is going to be it. Though I wouldn't be too surprised if Thanos shows up in the background somewhere.

Quicksilver and the Scarlet Witch seem pretty certain for Avengers 2--Whedon's been talking about that explicitly in public.
UnSub
Contributor
Posts: 8064


WWW
Reply #42 on: May 31, 2013, 02:58:21 AM

And there are numerous reports that "Thor 2" is in big trouble.

Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7423


Reply #43 on: May 31, 2013, 11:00:33 AM

And there are numerous reports that "Thor 2" is in big trouble.

Could you expand on this? Havent heard anything.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Trippy
Administrator
Posts: 20404


Reply #44 on: May 31, 2013, 12:11:53 PM

Marvel has been keeping tight control over the movies they are directly producing and they keep butting heads with key people that are involved with the movies. The original Thor 2 director left over "creative differences" and the current director is fighting Marvel over the run time and edit of the movie. He wants a 150 minutes movie edit but Marvel only wants 120 minutes. The composer was also just fired.
Merusk
Terracotta Army
Posts: 27086

Badge Whore


Reply #45 on: May 31, 2013, 12:24:48 PM

I can see Marvel's point.  If it were 10 mins more, ok.  30 mins more, though? What could he possibly be adding to the story that isn't wank when it requires that much more time?

I can't get past the panties - Alluvian
I really like the cocks. - Lantyssa
People rarely believe just how good I am at sucking. - Lantyssa
I love the swinging dongs - Signe
Trippy
Administrator
Posts: 20404


Reply #46 on: May 31, 2013, 12:28:27 PM

Dunno. Avengers was 140 minutes, though, and some people say the extended version of the Ed Norton Hulk was a better edit. Marvel presumably prefers it to be shorter cause that means more showings per day and presumably more money initially.
Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8420


Reply #47 on: May 31, 2013, 07:44:05 PM

When you look at the history of how Marvel films got to this point, it's a razor-thin balancing act between control-freakery, weird corporate power battles, and a few inspired creative decisions. Like most corporate types, they're likely to think that a) and b) explain how they're making oodles of money rather than c), but c) is really where it's at.

Sean Howe's Marvel book is pretty good at laying out the strange maneuvers involved to get to this point.
Merusk
Terracotta Army
Posts: 27086

Badge Whore


Reply #48 on: May 31, 2013, 07:57:05 PM

Dunno. Avengers was 140 minutes, though, and some people say the extended version of the Ed Norton Hulk was a better edit. Marvel presumably prefers it to be shorter cause that means more showings per day and presumably more money initially.

Avengers was justified as an ensemble piece.  30 extra mins in a movie with 4-6 main characters? Flys by in chunks of interaction.  30 mins longer in a single-character piece like Thor, Spider Man or Iron Man?  Wankery.  If we'd lost the kid in IM3 would it have been a worse movie?

I can't get past the panties - Alluvian
I really like the cocks. - Lantyssa
People rarely believe just how good I am at sucking. - Lantyssa
I love the swinging dongs - Signe
Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8420


Reply #49 on: May 31, 2013, 08:14:13 PM

Christ on a stick. 30 minutes in a great script, with great direction, are great. 30 minutes in a dull bit of summer action-movie Michael Bay explosions and shit are agonizing no matter what.

30 minutes nothing until you see what the 30 minutes are. Do you trust Ike Perlmutter or people like him to decide which 30 minutes are the awesomesauce? Some of the mid-level bean counters at Marvel apparently tried to block Whedon's selection ("too cultish") and then a lot of his specific calls about how to do the movie.

The whole line is going to need to be considerably less calculated if it's going to thrive and not slowly degenerate into the Bond-style equivalent of "Octopussy".
Tannhauser
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4436


Reply #50 on: June 01, 2013, 05:05:28 AM

Your distrust of Marvel doesn't change the fact that they have put out two movies (Avengers, IM3) that are in the top 10 money makers of all time.  Maybe they actually know what they are doing.

Having said that, they will have a flop sooner or later.  I say "Guardians of the Galaxy".  It could be interesting to see how that affects their plans down the line. 
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10292


Reply #51 on: June 01, 2013, 02:23:43 PM

Without seeing it obviously no one here can know.

But too long movies are fashionable at the moment because directors are being indulged. If the producer is pushing a director to cut tighter then it sounds like hes doing his job.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7423


Reply #52 on: June 01, 2013, 06:45:50 PM

Even Django Unchained, which I thought was perhaps the best movie of 2012 and and probably a few years back...was easily 30min too long.  Tarantino was indulged and of course if he wasn't then it wouldn't be a Tarantino film BUT even great movies can go too long.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Evildrider
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5521


Reply #53 on: June 03, 2013, 05:18:41 PM

Benicio Del Toro just signed a multi picture deal with Marvel.  He'll be playing the lead villain in Guardians of the Galaxy.  Also I read that Guardians is going to be similar to movies like Ghostbusters and Galaxy Quest than a straight up action movie.
Tannhauser
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4436


Reply #54 on: June 03, 2013, 05:28:18 PM

Even Django Unchained, which I thought was perhaps the best movie of 2012 and and probably a few years back...was easily 30min too long.  Tarantino was indulged and of course if he wasn't then it wouldn't be a Tarantino film BUT even great movies can go too long.

I agree completely.  A good editor makes a good movie great.  Although when I buy it on blu-ray I want all the deleted scenes they can scrape off the 'cutting room floor'.
Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8420


Reply #55 on: July 21, 2013, 11:09:55 AM

So the news from the Comic-Con panel is interesting.

Guardians looks like it's shooting for a funny tone, which I think is wise.

Though it doesn't look like it's being used to set up Avengers 2, contra my own guess. Just to establish a space setting for the Marvel U. pictures, really.

Winter Soldier is looking pretty interesting--going for a taut conspiracy-filled thriller feeling, apparently.

The big surprise to me is that Avengers 2 chief bad-guy is not Thanos (who is at least name-dropped in Guardians, apparently) but Ultron. That means almost of necessity that in addition to Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver, who have been confirmed as additions, that Hank Pym has pretty much got to move over from Wright's Ant-Man film into Avengers 2 *or* it means that Tony Stark will be the person who makes Ultron instead (which in many ways could make good sense and could keep the character's development from Iron Man 3 humming along--explaining among other things why he might get back into the armor.

I do wonder how they'll update Ultron or make him relevant given that he could easily come off as a superhero-franchise version of Skynet or some such. Also of interest now is the rumor about Vin Diesel being cast as the Vision--the Vision is a natural accompaniment to Ultron but maybe Diesel could actually *be* Ultron?

No discussion of Doctor Strange, apparently, despite the fact that there's been a lot of rumors about a completed script and some casting going on.
Nevermore
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4740


Reply #56 on: July 21, 2013, 11:13:32 AM

I really hope they don't fall into the trap of having too many characters, because Avengers 2 sure sounds like it's going to have a lot of them.

Over and out.
Evildrider
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5521


Reply #57 on: July 21, 2013, 02:52:26 PM

So the news from the Comic-Con panel is interesting.

Guardians looks like it's shooting for a funny tone, which I think is wise.

Though it doesn't look like it's being used to set up Avengers 2, contra my own guess. Just to establish a space setting for the Marvel U. pictures, really.

Winter Soldier is looking pretty interesting--going for a taut conspiracy-filled thriller feeling, apparently.

The big surprise to me is that Avengers 2 chief bad-guy is not Thanos (who is at least name-dropped in Guardians, apparently) but Ultron. That means almost of necessity that in addition to Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver, who have been confirmed as additions, that Hank Pym has pretty much got to move over from Wright's Ant-Man film into Avengers 2 *or* it means that Tony Stark will be the person who makes Ultron instead (which in many ways could make good sense and could keep the character's development from Iron Man 3 humming along--explaining among other things why he might get back into the armor.

I do wonder how they'll update Ultron or make him relevant given that he could easily come off as a superhero-franchise version of Skynet or some such. Also of interest now is the rumor about Vin Diesel being cast as the Vision--the Vision is a natural accompaniment to Ultron but maybe Diesel could actually *be* Ultron?

No discussion of Doctor Strange, apparently, despite the fact that there's been a lot of rumors about a completed script and some casting going on.

I hope that they stick with Ultron being made by Hank Pym, I'd rather not see it changed to Stark.  Besides those two never got along too well in the comics, so I'd find it funny if Pym stole or collected some of the "destroyed" Iron Man armors from the 3rd movie and used it to make Ultron.

I think that Vin Diesel would make a decent Vision.  I'm not sure who else he could play besides doing the voice for Ultron.
Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10393


Reply #58 on: July 21, 2013, 03:58:02 PM

Vin does have the right face shape for Vision I think. I think it would fall apart once he started talking though.

"I think its pretty troubling when a backyard decoration comes out swinging harder against Nazis than the President of the United States." Stephen Colbert
Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8420


Reply #59 on: July 21, 2013, 04:20:57 PM

Whedon has given a short follow-up interview stating that this Ultron will not be created by Hank Pym, and that they want to leave Edgar Wright to do his own thing with Ant-Man without any presumptions about that character. That kind of makes me think that the Ant-Man they're using for that film is not Pym in his comics personality but more like the Irredeemable Ant-Man version.
Fordel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8292


Reply #60 on: July 21, 2013, 04:31:27 PM

I could see Diesel doing the Ultron voice easily. His most important role ever was already a robot!

and the gate is like I TOO AM CAPABLE OF SPEECH
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10292


Reply #61 on: July 21, 2013, 04:44:39 PM

If they turn CA2 into a genuine thriller I'll be impressed.

I think they need to take some risks with avengers to stop it going stale.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #62 on: July 21, 2013, 08:14:46 PM

But too long movies are fashionable at the moment because directors are being indulged. If the producer is pushing a director to cut tighter then it sounds like hes doing his job.

Agree 100%. A Thor movie doesn't need to be two and a half hours. Sure, maybe that extra 30 minutes is some of the best film-making of all time - but probably not. Almost every summer blockbuster that is over 2 hours in length feels pointlessly overlong to me. Most of these movies have very thin material to start with. Economy and density are generally good for movies.

Diesel as Ultron's voice sounds cool. I would like to see Guardians played totally straight - I'm not that familiar with them but don't they have a fucking Ent and a Raccoon on their team? In some ways it would be more comedic to be completely serious with it.

Avengers 2 sounds incredibly overstuffed...and Scarlett Witch is one of the lamest characters in Marvel. Her super-power is incomprehensible bullshit and her role in most stories is to conveniently make whatever the writers wants to have happen happen. Even her costume is terrible.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2013, 08:20:20 PM by Margalis »

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
MahrinSkel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 9124


Reply #63 on: July 21, 2013, 08:39:57 PM

The only thing that occurs to me is that we have a villain (Loki) who embodies the Xanatos Gambit (everything, even his "failures", moves him towards his goals).  So someone who mucks with probability is the logical counter if he is to be defeated.

That and she's one of the characters that freely hops back and forth between the Avengers and X-Men continuity, so maybe they're looking at some kind of crossover or reboot.

--Dave

--Jello Biafra: "If evolution is outlawed, only outlaws will evolve."
Nevermore
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4740


Reply #64 on: July 21, 2013, 08:46:31 PM

That and she's one of the characters that freely hops back and forth between the Avengers and X-Men continuity, so maybe they're looking at some kind of crossover or reboot.

Not unless Disney is willing to spend a whole hell of a lot to get the film rights to the X-Men back from Fox.

Over and out.
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #65 on: July 21, 2013, 08:52:06 PM

My understanding of Scarlett Witch and Quicksilver is that whichever movie franchise (X-Men or Avengers) uses them first owns them, so I'm tempted to think they are being used here in part to reserve them.

"Messing with probability" is such a dumb superpower - probability is not the cause of anything. If you flip a coin and it lands on heads it's because of the way you flipped it, air currents, etc - the probability of it landing on heads was 100% given the circumstances.

It's also a carte blanche to make dumb shit happen.

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
Evildrider
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5521


Reply #66 on: July 21, 2013, 10:22:09 PM

My understanding of Scarlett Witch and Quicksilver is that whichever movie franchise (X-Men or Avengers) uses them first owns them, so I'm tempted to think they are being used here in part to reserve them.


From what Marvel has said they are both using the two different parts of Quicksliver and Scarlet Witch.  Marvel can't make any reference to them being mutants or their connection to the X-men and Fox can't make any mention outside of those parameters.  I wonder if they will be used as villains in Days of Future Past and as heroes in Avengers 2.
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 7797


Reply #67 on: July 22, 2013, 03:55:32 AM

My understanding of Scarlett Witch and Quicksilver is that whichever movie franchise (X-Men or Avengers) uses them first owns them, so I'm tempted to think they are being used here in part to reserve them.


From what Marvel has said they are both using the two different parts of Quicksliver and Scarlet Witch.  Marvel can't make any reference to them being mutants or their connection to the X-men and Fox can't make any mention outside of those parameters.  I wonder if they will be used as villains in Days of Future Past and as heroes in Avengers 2.

It's made me wonder to what extent they can tiptoe around things in Avengers. I mean, they can't mention Magneto being their father, but can it be mentioned that their father is a super-villain and that they themselves are reformed villains? Also, they can't use the term "mutants", but can they say that some people are born with super-powers and that people are starting to fear the growing superhuman population>
Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8420


Reply #68 on: July 22, 2013, 06:30:17 AM

I think the way they're playing it in the MU, nobody's a full-time "superhero" in the leotards-and-patrolling-for-crime sense. Except maybe Cap, and that's just his gig as a soldier or agent in a paramilitary force. So I don't think the idea of "established supervillains" who have children who can reform and become superheroes is going to be quite it for those two--when we see them, I'm guessing it will be as their superpowers activate for the first time, with a relative minimum of backstory. Maybe they'll use elements of the storyline where Ultron kills an entire Eastern European nation and have them be 'discovered' in the course of a battle there.

In Days of Future Past, judging from the Comic-Con panel, I think we're just going to see a bunch of mutants in quick succession in the apocalyptic future. Putting Quicksilver and the Scarlet Witch there is probably just an IP-politics move, not a substantive element of the plot.
sickrubik
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2967


WWW
Reply #69 on: July 22, 2013, 01:51:19 PM

I could see Diesel doing the Ultron voice easily. His most important role ever was already a robot!

That's just his acting.

beer geek.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 58 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  Movies  |  Topic: Marvel Universe (Thar be spoilers ahead.)  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC