The Avengers II - News, Rumors, Cast...

[devilshalo]

'Avengers 2' Is Officially Happening: Disney Announces Sequel Is In Development

The Huffington Post | By Kia Makarechi Posted: 05/08/2012 6:29 pm Updated: 05/08/2012 6:29 pm

Disney announced Tuesday that there would be an "Avengers" sequel.

It's the type of story we have to write, but you saw this coming: "Avengers" is officially getting a sequel. Disney announced Tuesday afternoon that the second ensemble superhero film is already in development.

It's shockingly unsurprising news, for two main reasons: One, there's a post-credits scene at the end of "Marvel's The Avengers" that hints at a future film and, two, the first movie made the most money over an opening weekend in the history of motion pictures.

Still, it's nice to see Disney take a break from <strike>counting their millions</strike> reacting to the positive fan reaction to the film and greenlighting a sequel. Disney CEO Bob Iger announced the news at the beginning of a conference call with reporters, describing the success of the first film as "a great illustration of why we like Marvel so much."

"The Avengers" has been a veritable money tree for Disney and Marvel. The movie dialed up a $200 million stateside over its opening weekend, earning the second-highest single day gross of all time (after "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows Part 2") on its way to its record-shattering biggest weekend of all time.

So yes, a sequel was a tough call to make.

[KillerCannibal]

1. Get Whedon back
2. ???
3. Profit

[Mr. Cinema]

Iron Man 3 arrives May 2013. Thor 2 is November 2013. Captain America 2 is April 2014. They have nothing officially scheduled after that.

Christmas 2014 would seem like the earliest realistic date. I hope we don't have to wait until 2015.

[JasonF]

I still want the Incredible Hulk 2. I predict summer tent pole 2015 for Avengers 2.

[Supermallet]

Bring back Whedon. That is all.

[kgrogers1979]

Iron Man 3 arrives May 2013. Thor 2 is November 2013. Captain America 2 is April 2014. They have nothing officially scheduled after that.

Christmas 2014 would seem like the earliest realistic date. I hope we don't have to wait until 2015.

Don't forget the Ant-Man movie. Ant-Man will likely come out before Avengers 2 as an introduction to Hank and Janet, and then they will probably join the Avengers in the second movie.

So probably Ant-Man will be Christmas 2014 and Avengers 2 in summer 2015.

[Boba Fett]

Don't bring back Scarlett Johansson.

[RocShemp]

Don't bring back Scarlett Johansson.

I agree. She should stay with me (catsuit optional).

Kevin Feige Talks THOR 2, IRON MAN 3, CAPTAIN AMERICA 2, the AVENGERS Sequel, 2014/2015 Releases, and More! (http://collider.com/kevin-feige-thor-2-iron-man-3-avengers-sequel-interview/158942/)

•He’s seen an unfinished version of The Amazing Spider-Man and says it is excellent and should quiet concerns over the idea of rebooting the franchise.
•They have an option for Whedon to direct The Avengers 2 when and if the time comes.
•There are currently no plans to do a new Hulk movie with Mark Ruffalo.
•Iron Man 3 starts filming in five weeks in North Carolina.
•When approaching Iron Man 3, their gut instinct was to not make it be a pseudo-Avengers 2. It’s a full-on Tony Stark movie.
•Iron Man 3 is inspired by the first half of Iron Man 1 in that they’re metaphorically putting Tony back in the cave. He’s stripped of everything, back against a wall, and has nothing but his intelligence to get him out.
•Filming on Thor 2 begins in three months in London and it picks up where the first film left off in terms of Jane and Oden.
•Thor 2 also addresses what’s been happening in the nine realms with the Asgardians unable to use the Bifrost.
•Loki has a part in Thor 2, but there will be a different, big villain.
•The crux of Thor 2 is continuing the dynamic between Thor and Jane, as well as the relationship between Thor and Odin.
•Feige says there are no plans for Marvel and Pixar to team up on a feature.
•Creative talks have been progressing for years between Marvel and Disney about possibly doing a Marvel property as an animated film.
•Edgar Wright did not film something for Marvel recently, but Feige says to pay attention to Wright’s tweets in the coming months “and that might change.”
•They’re still figuring out how much period flashbacks to include in Captain America 2.
•The primary story of Captain America 2 will be Steve Rogers figuring out his place in the world. For the time-being, he’ll be staying with S.H.I.E.L.D.
•They should announce by Comic-Con or before what’s coming out in May 2014.
•Zak Penn did not write a Doctor Strange movie.
•Feige says, “depending on what Edgar Wright films for us” circumstances could possibly force them to make three films in one year.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Don't forget the Ant-Man movie. Ant-Man will likely come out before Avengers 2 as an introduction to Hank and Janet, and then they will probably join the Avengers in the second movie.

So probably Ant-Man will be Christmas 2014 and Avengers 2 in summer 2015.

Wright wants to introduce Pym but he wants the focus on Scott Lang as teh lead mostly. That's the last bit of story I heard.

[kgrogers1979]

Wright wants to introduce Pym but he wants the focus on Scott Lang as teh lead mostly. That's the last bit of story I heard.

What I heard is that they plan to have Hank Pym be Ant-Man in the Ant-Man movie, and then Scott Lang will become the second Ant-Man in Avengers 2. While they haven't said anything about Hank in Avengers 2, I can't believe they would leave him out so I imagine he will become his Giant-Man persona.

[Deftones]

Considering Ant-Man has been in development for like 8 years, I doubt it'll make it out before Avengers 2.

Also, I'm shocked that this announcement came so fast. I mean, it's not even clear if Disney/Marvel can even make money on this franchise. :lol:

[Supermallet]

I hope we get an Edgar Wright Ant-Man before Avengers II.

[superdeluxe]

Scarlett witch and quicksilver plz

[RocShemp]

I still want the Incredible Hulk 2. I predict summer tent pole 2015 for Avengers 2.

Incredible Hulk 2 might have the 2015 slot:

We Might See a New ‘Hulk’ From Marvel in 2015 (http://www.slashfilm.com/hulk-marvel-2015/)

As a comic book character, The Hulk is a pretty interesting creation. Most Marvel heroes have a well-established place in the company’s overarching storyline; despite deviations and alterations here and there, the general persona of guys like Captain America and Spider-Man are well-defined. The Hulk is one who has been mutated (pun intended) many times over the years to be hero, villain, anti-hero, unwitting antagonist, and more.

Even on screen the Hulk has been relatively fluid, if not quite as all over the place as his comic appearances, with three major incarnations over the past decade, played by Eric Bana, Edward Norton, and Mark Ruffalo. Prior to Ruffalo’s appearance in The Avengers, the big-screen Hulks have been marginally successful, with varying degrees of fan appreciation.

The Avengers is doing so well, however, that the Hulk may have another shot at the big screen.

Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige said just a couple weeks ago that the character probably wasn’t going to get another film of his own. The Huffington Post asked him about giving the Hulk “another shot,” to which Feige replied,

Well, no. This was the other shot. Right? I mean, this was the third appearance of Hulk and everything that we had and were going for, we put in to Hulk’s appearance in “Avengers.” So, I love that people are saying that and are feeling that way about Hulk, but mission accomplished at this point. And the way we go forward, we’ll see. But it was a long road to get to this point. … But we’ll be very careful about it and deliberate — as we were in how we wanted to bring him back in “Avengers.”

But today there is a piece in Forbes in which Marvel’s Paul Gitter, aka the company’s President of Consumer Products, suggests otherwise. Gitter says Marvel is “pleasantly surprised by the phenomenal response” to the current incarnation of the Hulk.

His sales are up in a major way. We repositioned him from where he was always misunderstood to now depicting him in a more heroic and aspirational manner.

Gitter wants to sell Hulk as a new corporate icon, and says that if the trend of popularity for the character continues, Marvel will take advantage of it, “[spinning] him off to a stand-alone program next year,” with a new movie in 2015.

What a difference two weeks and a weekend of successful international box office can bring. And while Kevin Feige, as president of Marvel Studios, may seem like he has the last word on whether or not a movie gets made, you can bet that if Marvel sees a big opportunity to sell a character like the Hulk, they’re going to seize it. (Gitter calls franchise moves “big commercials in the sky,” which should make the whole process pretty clear.)

[superdeluxe]

Have hulk come out in may and avengers in july

[bluetoast]

I think it would be cool if they had a team up movie between two people if one character can't carry the whole movie, like what's been hinted at for the Hulk. For example, Banner and Stark. We can have Iron Man 3, Banner teams up with him as a scientist on breakthroughs, but for the final battle, there is a need for both Hulk and Iron Man together. Doubt that'll happen, since Iron Man can carry the whole thing, but it would be a good fit for the Hulk/Banner, if they're not confident about him helming a whole movie on his own merits.

But even if both people could have their own respective movies, I think at least one "two person" movie between now and the Avengers could be pretty cool from any of the main four.

I dunno, it seems that now that we have all of these people together, it's sad to see them going their separate ways. I'd like to see at least a few friendships forged without "ignoring" what happened in these movies only to have them re-unite for a sequel. And I mean real team-ups, not some post credit stuff.

[fumanstan]

I'd love to see a Hulk/Iron Man combo so we can get some Hulkbuster armor out there.

[Michael Corvin]

Don't bring back Scarlett Johansson.

The team needs a female or two, and she's easy on the eyes and looks damn good in a skintight suit.

[RocShemp]

There's talk of a Black Widow solo movie. Hopefully they tack on Hawkeye as an antagonist so we can have a whole cat-n-mouse thing going and we see him spare her life as she mentioned in The Avengers.

[bluetoast]

They just need to give her character a moment where she actually is in danger from the enemy. We knew the Hulk wouldn't kill her, and she always seemed to have her cool, and there was no real threat to her character: With the Russians, with Loki, with Hawkeye, in the final battle. She needs to get shocked/injured or something. At least Hawkeye (the other "normal" person) got brainwashed so he had something to be pissed about.

Like others said in the reviews thread, having these two people fighting alongside the others was kind of weird but they held their own...just would like to see some raised stakes next time since they're playing in the big leagues.

[mcfly]

I think people would look at a Hulk film a little differently now after his role in The Avengers. Wasn't The Incredible Hulk the least profitable of the first batch of movies leading up to this?

A Ruffalo film would be fantastic if they could capture the same tone of Avengers.

[RocShemp]

Well Hulk chasing after her was a missed opportunity to hear "Hulk horny!" But, although it was a fair assumption he wouldn't kill her, Hulk looked plenty threatening and Black Widow seemd plenty scared as she was cowering from him in the helicarrier.

[Michael Corvin]

Well Hulk chasing after her was a missed opportunity to hear "Hulk horny!" But, although it was a fair assumption he wouldn't kill her, Hulk looked plenty threatening and Black Widow seemd plenty scared as she was cowering from him in the helicarrier.

Yeah, she played that scene perfectly.

[kgrogers1979]

The team needs a female or two, and she's easy on the eyes and looks damn good in a skintight suit.

She-Hulk would be awesome.

And if the Ant-Man movie does happen and they bring him into the Avengers, I imagine they will bring in Wasp too.

[Giantrobo]

•Creative talks have been progressing for years between Marvel and Disney about possibly doing a Marvel property as an animated film

They should skip this and leave animated stuff for TV and Direct to Video. I mean shit, they've made The Avengers movie and a few other great Hero films, they shouldn't go back to cartoons.

[Groucho]

They should continue the tradition of having a different dude play Bruce Banner in every movie.

[Giantrobo]

I think people would look at a Hulk film a little differently now after his role in The Avengers. Wasn't The Incredible Hulk the least profitable of the first batch of movies leading up to this?

A Ruffalo film would be fantastic if they could capture the same tone of Avengers.


People are liking Ruffalo and this version of The Hulk A LOT. I would think they would try to cash in on that.

[kgrogers1979]

They should continue the tradition of having a different dude play Bruce Banner in every movie.

Or better yet, bring in Eddie Murphy to play the role of every Avengers member.

[joeblow69]

Have hulk come out
Now THAT Would be an interesting movie!

[Paul_SD]

If they go cosmic, Black Widow (and Hawkeye) would likely feel out of place. However I thought Whedon utilized the character extremely well, and Johanson knocked the performance out of the park. I liked her going in and she was still a surprise to me.

I think here character could work really well in a Captain America film- since both characters are basically SHIELD lifers, and there are several areas where you could explore a natural, organic conflict between these two characters in terms of how they get the job done and what they are willing to do and not do. Caps a hero and she (and Hawkeye) is an assassin.

Mostly what I would like to see in the solo films, is the brief interaction of these other characters- like seeing Pepper Potts in Avengers. Even if BW doesn't figure prominently in the Cap movie, it would more than make sense to see her pop up in a scene or two on the Hellicarrier. Same thing with having Banner pop up in a throwaway scene in Iron Man.

That kind of little embroidery around the edges is what is ultimately going to make this movie universe seem so unique and expansive.

[kgrogers1979]

Have hulk come out

Now THAT Would be an interesting movie!

http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/2365/hulkstr8mb9.jpg

[mcfly]

rotfl

[gmanca]

I hope they save Thanos for when the Marvel Cinematic Universe is fully developed; let the next Avengers film be about Vision/Coulson, which is a great way to get Vision on the screen without much backstory.

[Sierra Disc]

Do NOT make Coulson the Vision. Leave him be. One of the worst things about print comics these days is how nobody stays dead. (Still pissed they brought Norman Osborn back!)

[RocShemp]

Perhaps Coulson isn't dead after all. Clark Gregg was reportedly in talks to reprise the role of Agent Coulson in Iron Man 3 and then there's this interesting writeup in Wikipedia of Coulson's death.

Coulson speaks briefly with Fury and is then seen falling into a non-responsive state as paramedics approach, his last words being to note that the heroes needed something to avenge; Fury relays over the radio that paramedics have called time of death, though they are not shown doing so onscreen. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_coulson#The_Avengers)

The timing of that scene (when Fury says they have a man down and then suddenly claims the time of death had already been called) was rather awkward.

Oh and Andy Lau is joining the cast of Iron Man 3 (http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/23693/andy-lau-to-join-iron-man-3) (but not as the Mandarin).

[Wolf359]

If another Hulk movie is made, I think its key that it be a much more in control Hulk, battling a real villain. We don't need another military vs poor Hulk rehash.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Perhaps Coulson isn't dead after all. Clark Gregg was reportedly in talks to reprise the role of Agent Coulson in Iron Man 3 and then there's this interesting writeup in Wikipedia of Coulson's death.



The timing of that scene (when Fury says they have a man down and then suddenly claims the time of death had already been called) was rather awkward.

Oh and Andy Lau is joining the cast of Iron Man 3 (http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/23693/andy-lau-to-join-iron-man-3) (but not as the Mandarin).

Yes. I posted that in the Avengers thread and also in the IM3 thread, bitch. I'll give you this one though.

[RocShemp]

Yes. I posted that in the Avengers thread and also in the IM3 thread, bitch. I'll give you this one though.

I can't be bothered to be aware of everything you post. :p

[madcougar]

They should continue the tradition of having a different dude play Bruce Banner in every movie.

That's a great idea.

[TomOpus]

It will be curious to see how well Thor 2 and Captain America 2 do. The fans have really embraced The Avengers and maybe the single hero movies won't be enough... other than Iron Man 3. The audience can be fickle at times.

[Giantrobo]

It will be curious to see how well Thor 2 and Captain America 2 do. The fans have really embraced The Avengers and maybe the single hero movies won't be enough... other than Iron Man 3. The audience can be fickle at times.

Interesting thought.

[majorjoe23]

I suspect Marvel will really play up the Avengers ties for Thor and Cap in the marketing. My guess is the extra exposure from the film will help both those sequels.

[Groucho]

Yeah, I would expect some extended cameos in the new films, instead of the post-credit one-liners that we've had up until now.

[Shannon Nutt]

Unless the new movie totally bombs, I'm expecting Spider-man with be part of the Avengers next time around. I think the big key to all future films is to keep Robert Downey Jr. around to play Stark. I don't know that he's contracted beyond Iron Man 3/Avengers 2.

I'm also not sure a full-blown Hulk movie with Ruffalo would work. I almost like him as a secondary character better. Plus, AVENGERS seemed to establish that he had control of the beast, and was no longer seeking a cure - so I'm not sure where a stand-alone movie would go (unless that's it - a cure is discovered, but Banner choses to stay The Hulk).

[Deftones]

Yeah, I would expect some extended cameos in the new films, instead of the post-credit one-liners that we've had up until now.

I'm wondering how that is written in the actor's contracts, though. I know Evans signed a multi-picture deal, but does that cover a full movie himself or cameos. If it covers any appearance, I'd doubt Marvel/Disney is going to burn up an appearance when it's not either a solo movie or an Avengers movie.

Unless the new movie totally bombs, I'm expecting Spider-man with be part of the Avengers next time around. I think the big key to all future films is to keep Robert Downey Jr. around to play Stark. I don't know that he's contracted beyond Iron Man 3/Avengers 2.

I'm also not sure a full-blown Hulk movie with Ruffalo would work. I almost like him as a secondary character better. Plus, AVENGERS seemed to establish that he had control of the beast, and was no longer seeking a cure - so I'm not sure where a stand-alone movie would go (unless that's it - a cure is discovered, but Banner choses to stay The Hulk).

Spider-Man isn't going to be in any Avengers movie unless Marvel/Disney buys him back from Sony. Sony has the rights to him and they aren't going to "lend" him out to a competing movie studio just to make a cool movie.

[Mr. Cinema]

I suspect Marvel will really play up the Avengers ties for Thor and Cap in the marketing. My guess is the extra exposure from the film will help both those sequels.
I also think The Avengers will provide a boost to both of them. The originals were pretty solid hits to begin with, but I think they'll get a bump.

[Mr. Cinema]

Spider-Man isn't going to be in any Avengers movie unless Marvel/Disney buys him back from Sony. Sony has the rights to him and they aren't going to "lend" him out to a competing movie studio just to make a cool movie.
I don't anticipate Sony giving up Spider-man any time soon, if ever. After getting badly burned by Ang Lee's Hulk, Universal quickly gave him back to Marvel. But Spider-man is a cash cow that Sony will hold onto.

[bluetoast]

If Mickey and Bugs can be on the same screen, then it's not out of the realm of possibility that they can get Spidey in on it. Not likely, but not impossible.

[fujishig]

I don't anticipate Sony giving up Spider-man any time soon, if ever. After getting badly burned by Ang Lee's Hulk, Universal quickly gave him back to Marvel. But Spider-man is a cash cow that Sony will hold onto.

X-men/Wolverine are also held by a different studio, right? So no "New Avengers" lineup just yet.

Is FF as a franchise finished at this point?

It's actually kinda surprising how much of a breakout star the Hulk is. Although he's considered a founding member of the Avengers, he wasn't really an Avenger all that long...

[Deftones]

Fantastic Four "reboot" is underway at this point in time. I'm sure we'll see a movie with them in about 3 years or so.

[kgrogers1979]

X-men/Wolverine are also held by a different studio, right? So no "New Avengers" lineup just yet.

A big screen battle between Hulk and Wolverine would be so awesome, but yeah its never going to happen.

Sony owns Spider-Man and Ghost Rider.

Fox owns Fantastic Four, X-Men, and Daredevil.

I wonder how extensive the contracts are. Does Sony own Ben Reilly as the Scarlet Spider or could Marvel use him in their Cinematic Universe? What about Miles Morales as the new Ultimate Spider-Man who was created long after the contracts were drawn up? Then there is Spider-Woman, who despite having "Spider" in her name, isn't related to Spider-Man at all. I'm sure there is some kind of loophole that Marvel could use to get at least one of them if they really wanted to bring a "Spider" into the Avengers.

Kingpin is in the Daredevil movie despite being a Spider-Man villain initially. I'm not really sure why Kingpin didn't fall into Sony's contract instead of Fox's. Kingpin never even fought Daredevil until more than a decade after his first appearance. Sure Kingpin is more of a Daredevil villain in recent years, but a lot of villains cross over like that. Norman Osborn for the last decade or so has been more of an Avengers villain than a Spider-Man villain.

[Double_Oh_7]

I would love to see The Vision in the next one.

[conscience]

The team needs a female or two, and she's easy on the eyes and looks damn good in a skintight suit.

..and she's a good actress and was great in the role.

[Dr. DVD]

While I don't want character overload, I still want to see Nathan Fillion as Hank Pym. There was a brief Avengers spot done after an ep. of Castle with him and Robert Downey Jr. and they seemed to interact quite well. Can't help but wonder if that was Whedon's doing and possibly a way to test the waters for Fillion.
While I don't really know if they want to get Wasp since Widow is a member of the group, it would be cool if Alison Brie got that role, or any for that matter. :D

Since Avengers is so popular, I would look for the next few solo movies to have Avengers bits in them. Basically, Thor or Captain America might make a cameo in the new Iron Man, and so on and so forth. Kind of like it works in the comics.

[superdeluxe]

Avengers assembled comics essentially follow the movie avengers, so who is making a appearance in the next book? Guardians of the galaxy

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=38677

[Mike86]

It's really too bad Marvel didn't just go with one studio when they started making their characters into movies. I'd love to see more characters make appearances in future Avengers films and what not. Granted there's a ton they could still use but seeing some of the bigger characters like Wolverine, Spidey, Reed Richards, etc. make a cameo or something in a future Avengers film would be cool. Highly doubtful that Sony or Fox will ever let the rights expire to any characters they have.

[majorjoe23]

But by going with multiple studios, Marvel got their characters in multiple movies out in the same year. Most other studios would have likely followed the Warner model of one DC movie a year, at best.

[Mike86]

But by going with multiple studios, Marvel got their characters in multiple movies out in the same year. Most other studios would have likely followed the Warner model of one DC movie a year, at best.
Meh I don't see how that's such a big advantage I guess. They could have milked the characters/films for a longer period of time. Plus they maybe could've gotten at least two out per year I'd bet. It would've been a lot nicer having everything with one studio in my opinion but I guess can't change that now.

[superdeluxe]

Avengers with wolverine, spidey would kick major ass

[Abob Teff]

I was pleasantly surprised with Ruffalo in The Avengers ... However I don't think I could tolerate a whole movie with only him.

[Abob Teff]

Perhaps Coulson isn't dead after all. Clark Gregg was reportedly in talks to reprise the role of Agent Coulson in Iron Man 3 and then there's this interesting writeup in Wikipedia of Coulson's death.



The timing of that scene (when Fury says they have a man down and then suddenly claims the time of death had already been called) was rather awkward.

Oh and Andy Lau is joining the cast of Iron Man 3 (http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/23693/andy-lau-to-join-iron-man-3) (but not as the Mandarin).

Am I the only person who NEVER believed Coulson died? In addition to the above, Fury lied about the cards ... he claimed the blood stained cards were in Coulson's pocket ... they were in his locker (presumably NOT covered in blood). Of course he lied about Coulson!

[Deftones]

I could totally see a talking raccoon with guns and a large talking tree in the next avengers movie. :lol:

I know they could change up the Guardians, but they are even more out there in terms of the characters than the Avengers are.

[Deftones]

It's really too bad Marvel didn't just go with one studio when they started making their characters into movies. I'd love to see more characters make appearances in future Avengers films and what not. Granted there's a ton they could still use but seeing some of the bigger characters like Wolverine, Spidey, Reed Richards, etc. make a cameo or something in a future Avengers film would be cool. Highly doubtful that Sony or Fox will ever let the rights expire to any characters they have.

Yeah, would've been too difficult. But something cool that could've come of that, is if they had rights to everyone. they could change up the cast every movie, making it fresh each time. Obviously you could keep some of the more important characters like Iron Man in there, but keep them in rotation. Keep the stories fresh and interesting.

[Michael Corvin]

Couldn't the companies team up and mix up the properties? I'm sure it'd be highly unlikely, but it'd still be possible, right? Say Spider-man is a disaster. Marvel & Sony could keep Spidey hype going by tossing him in Avengers 2. Or simply offering a giant duffelbag of money to "borrow" Wolverine for an appearance.

[Mike86]

I guess I don't see why it would have been so difficult for them to have kept them all together. I mean four of the biggest name heroes were done under the same studio and have probably seen the most success of any of the Marvel films (aside from Spider-Man). They wouldn't have been able to make a ton at one time is the big thing I could see that may have stopped them from doing it that way, but what good did it really do to release a bunch at once when a lot of the Fox/Sony output (aside from Spidey and X-Men) sucked anyways? I guess to me it would've made it a lot easier in my opinion at least for them all to be with the same company and would've been the more logical choice to me. I guess what's done is done though.

[fumanstan]

I guess I don't see why it would have been so difficult for them to have kept them all together. I mean four of the biggest name heroes were done under the same studio and have probably seen the most success of any of the Marvel films (aside from Spider-Man). They wouldn't have been able to make a ton at one time is the big thing I could see that may have stopped them from doing it that way, but what good did it really do to release a bunch at once when a lot of the Fox/Sony output (aside from Spidey and X-Men) sucked anyways? I guess to me it would've made it a lot easier in my opinion at least for them all to be with the same company and would've been the more logical choice to me. I guess what's done is done though.

The logical choice at the time was to license out characters to avoid Marvel comics going bankrupt, right?

[Mike86]

I guess I had sort of forgotten the issues they were having around that period. I'm sure it wouldn't have been a hard sell though to one studio if they made one or two movies that did well for them to get the licensing rights to other Marvel characters sold though. Meh whatever like I say I guess you can't change what's done, it's just too bad they can't acquire those characters back easily (unless they cough up large sums of money).

[kgrogers1979]

Couldn't the companies team up and mix up the properties? I'm sure it'd be highly unlikely, but it'd still be possible, right? Say Spider-man is a disaster. Marvel & Sony could keep Spidey hype going by tossing him in Avengers 2. Or simply offering a giant duffelbag of money to "borrow" Wolverine for an appearance.

DC and Marvel have crossed over many times in the comics. Heck, Punisher even crossed over with Archie Comics once. So a movie crossover would be possible, but probably much less likely than a comics crossover.



The logical choice at the time was to license out characters to avoid Marvel comics going bankrupt, right?

Exactly this. The 90s is widely regarded as the worst decade in comic book history. The industry crashed hard in the late 90s, and it has never fully recovered even to this day. The industry today is a shell of its former self. Marvel almost went bankrupt, and they only sold the movie rights to their characters because they were desperate and had no choice if they wanted to remain afloat.

[nando820]

So in a way it's good it happened cause they were able to rise stronger and eventually make The Avengers.

[kgrogers1979]

So in a way it's good it happened cause they were able to rise stronger and eventually make The Avengers.

The Avengers movie would likely have happened even if the comic industry crash of the 90s never happened. The crash was a bad thing. All it did was all but kill the comic industry and caused Marvel to sell away their character rights. If the crash never happened, we wouldn't be having the problem now of not being able to see Avengers/X-Men/Fantastic Four/Spider-Man crossovers on the big screen. They would have all remained with Marvel and Marvel could have made an even more awesome Cinematic Universe. Imagine a big screen adaption of Secret Wars... that will never happen...

[Solid Snake PAC]

I'd rather go Kree/Skrull war over Secret Wars any day.

Though I do love Secret Wars just cuz it is what it is and it was fun. But K/S is a much better story than SW ever was.

[Super X]

I'd rather go Kree/Skrull war over Secret Wars any day.

Though I do love Secret Wars just cuz it is what it is and it was fun. But K/S is a much better story than SW ever was.

I'd like to see them tackle a Kree-Skrull War storyline in a sequel. This would also give them an excuse to develop a solo Captain Marvel movie as a potential lead-in to it.

[TallGuyMe]

I just want the Avengers to fight a group of recognizable supervillains. Sort of like Superman 2 but on a much larger scale.

[majorjoe23]

Am I the only person who NEVER believed Coulson died? In addition to the above, Fury lied about the cards ... he claimed the blood stained cards were in Coulson's pocket ... they were in his locker (presumably NOT covered in blood). Of course he lied about Coulson!

But if Coulson was alive would he have allowed his mint condition cards to get all bloody? That would definitely make me question his fanboyness.

[The Cow]

Am I the only person who NEVER believed Coulson died? In addition to the above, Fury lied about the cards ... he claimed the blood stained cards were in Coulson's pocket ... they were in his locker (presumably NOT covered in blood). Of course he lied about Coulson!

The wife and I talked about that same thing. They left it 'open enough' for the possibility of a return. Fury said something like "they called it" in the scene. Fury was needing something to bring them together and that did it.

I think it would be pretty cheesy to bring him back, though.

[Solid Snake PAC]

I just want the Avengers to fight a group of recognizable supervillains. Sort of like Superman 2 but on a much larger scale.

Recognizable how?

I'd like that as well but in a small capacity. Which is what I'm expecting from what Whedon is going for. A more "intimate" and smaller scaled film.

[tommyp007]

I would love to see The Vision in the next one.

yes!

[superdeluxe]

I could totally see a talking raccoon with guns and a large talking tree in the next avengers movie. :lol:

I know they could change up the Guardians, but they are even more out there in terms of the characters than the Avengers are.

Looks like Groot may be out of that (based on AA #6 cover)

It does appear that Kevin Feige wants to do a GOTG movie, introducing them somehow in Avengers 2 would help with that.

Here is a recent article:

When you started at Marvel a dozen years ago, were you confident back then that this sort of multi-franchise potential could be achieved?
I was young enough and naïve enough to believe that we could do all of this. [Laughs] And I was often confronted by listing the number of projects that we were working on; most production companies or studios have a lot of movies in development and are only going to make one of those movies, at most. So here I was saying, "Oh, we’re working on this movie and that movie and that movie and this movie," and I remember somebody saying to me once, "You know you’re not going to make all those movies. You’re going to make maybe one of two of them." But I was like, "I think we’ll make them all!"

And have you?
We have! I mean, there are certainly others like Guardians [of the Galaxy], like Inhumans, like Doctor Strange that we haven’t yet, but I am confident that we will. So there’s a lot of satisfaction now, on the eve of Avengers, that this thing that was deemed impossible has actually occurred.

I mean a Cosmic Space Dog, tree and raccoon lol

[Solid Snake PAC]

I'd love to see a Dr. Strange film via Del Toro. :hump:

[superdeluxe]

http://www.craveonline.com/film/articles/190183-exclusive-spider-man-producers-tease-venom-storyline-avengers-crossover

Spider-Man and Avengers cross over?

“Everything is possible,” Arad said. “If something like that happens, it’s great for Disney, it’s great for Sony. If the right story comes in, we are now working on Venom first. It’s our first out. So our thinking is in the right direction. Avengers to me was an expected success so I never looked at it because Avengers was successful.”

The way to make team up movies work, Arad says, is to create the raw materials, both technically and creatively, in other movies first. “Team ups can happen once you create the character, establish the CG, otherwise it’s not affordable.”

[Solid Snake PAC]

That's not saying anything. It's always been possible....if Sony would ever allow it. Which is doubtful.

[kgrogers1979]

That's not saying anything. It's always been possible....if Sony would ever allow it. Which is doubtful.

Marvel/Disney would probably never allow it either. If they put Spider-Man in an Avengers film, they would have to split the revenue with Sony. Spider-Man is a big draw certainly, but not big enough to bring in enough extra revenue that they would want to split it with Sony.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Marvel wouldn't put Spider-Man in an Avengers film at all I'd assume..even on paper unless a "yes" was given by Sony. Marvel would probably like it in some form..but...not until a go ahead was given would ANYTHING get off the ground.

[Solid Snake PAC]

It's official. Marvel's announced that Guardians of the Galaxy is actually happening. Various sources around that..but also this:
- It will be announced as Marvel’s second 2014 movie at Comic Con
- Thanos is in it.
- It will “lead up to” The Avengers 2 in 2015.
- ”THE SCRIPT IS INCREDIBLE”


now..aside from the 1st and 4th (cuz well...I'll believe it when I see and hear more) listing. I'm pretty damn excited.


So i guess we're not getting Thanos..or maybe he will spill over into The Avengers 2? Either way GotG is really being made and it leads up into the sequel for Earth's Mightiest Heroes.


and just in case we don't have dates for the other films:


IRON MAN 3 releases May 3rd, 2013.
THOR 2 releases November 8th, 2013.
CAPTAIN AMERICA 2 releases April 4th, 2014

So...I'm guessing either late summer 2015 after GotG comes out or winter for Avengers 2? Doesn't seem like we're getting a sequel for Dr. Banner...which could be good or bad depending on how you feel about it. I can see why it won't work and why it would work but...yeah. we'll see wtf happens from here.

[KillerCannibal]

Doesn't your post answer your question?

[Solid Snake PAC]

if you're talking about Thanos...I don't know. Maybe GotG will have the character spill over into Earth..i could happen. i don't know. We don't know that yet.

And yes....you're correct. Somehow..I forgot that part. edit away I will. I meant seasons not year.

[KillerCannibal]

I doubt they'd set up Thanos in the first film only to knock him off in a related project. I'll bet if anything this will be a platform for him to fuck up a lot of shit in preparation for Avengers 2.

[Hokeyboy]

A Guardians of the Galaxy movie is going to reach theaters before a Wonder Woman film will.

Marvel 8 BAZILLION, DC zero :lol:

[devilshalo]

A Guardians of the Galaxy movie is going to reach theaters before a Wonder Woman film will.

Marvel 8 BAZILLION, DC zero :lol:

If were talking characters that haven't made it to the big screen...

[kstublen]

That's pretty cool they're going to do a Guardians movie. Never thought I'd see the day.

[Hokeyboy]

If were talking characters that haven't made it to the big screen...
Uhh... yeah. Made that clear. ;)

And look, me and Giantrobo are two biggest (and darkest!) DC fans in this forum, but man oh man Marvel is destroying them at the box office and there's just no denying that.

[kgrogers1979]

And look, me and Giantrobo are two biggest (and darkest!) DC fans in this forum

I feel left out, like Superboy Prime retcon-punched me out of existence or something. :(

[majorjoe23]

I feel left out, like Superboy Prime retcon-punched me out of existence or something. :(

Are you darker than Hokeyboy and Giantrobo?

[kgrogers1979]

Are you darker than Hokeyboy and Giantrobo?

I'm not sure what they means really unless it means they are big fans of the darker storyarcs from DC like The Killing Joke or Identity Crisis.

While I do like the darker DC stories, the post Frank Miller "grimdark" era of Batman is my favorite era of Batman and I consider Alan Grant and Norm Breyfogle to be the best run of Batman ever, I overall prefer the lighter side of DC. Giffen and DeMattis' Justice League International is my favorite era of the Justice League. I really loved Peter David's Young Justice. Stephanie Brown's Batgirl series was awesome, and I really hate that she has apparently been erased by the DCnU.

[majorjoe23]

More of a skin tone reference. I thought that might have been what Hokeyboy was referring to.

[Tom Creo]

:thumbsup: for Giffen and DeMatiss" JLI.

[Hokeyboy]

Dark as in PURE EVIL. 99 44/100 pure... or a brother... ;)

Yeah I should include kgrogers in our DC Trinity. If you remember the DC Challenge maxiseries, you're in.

[Draven]

Like Loki was set up in Thor, it sounds like Thanos will be set up in Guardians of the Galaxy - that makes sense to me.

Though I am completely unfamiliar with that book (aside from being aware of Rocket Racoon) and I'm definitely on the "I know comic books" side of the general population. This seems like a bit of a weird move but at this point I trust Marvel to handle it correctly.

[kgrogers1979]

If you remember the DC Challenge maxiseries, you're in.

So you discriminate against younger people, huh? :)

I'm too young to remember it. I didn't start reading until 1988 when I was 9 years old. I still have >20 longboxes of DC comics from COIE to present day.

I only have a handful of pre-COIE comics which consists mostly of Denny O'Neil and Neil Adams on Batman, Steve Englehart's "Strange Apparitions" Batman storyarc, Marv Wolfman and George Perez on New Teen Titans, and some of DC Archives that reprint the old Golden Age stuff.

[kgrogers1979]

http://spinoff.comicbookresources.com/2012/06/29/edgar-wright-shot-test-reel-for-marvels-ant-man-movie/

Edgar Wright has apparently completed the test reel for the Ant-Man movie. I know it probably won't happen, but I would love for this to come out before Avengers II so that we could have Ant-Man and Wasp in the next Avengers movie.

[Tom Creo]

Yep, Ant-Man and Wasp are a must for the Avengers against Thanos.-rolleyes- The only thing they would bring to the table is domestic violence.

[TallGuyMe]

^ :lol:

and I wouldn't mind a funny tongue in cheek Antman movie, not one that could be tied into the exiting Marval Feature Film universe.

[kgrogers1979]

Yep, Ant-Man and Wasp are a must for the Avengers against Thanos.-rolleyes-

As if Hawkeye and Black Widow are any better... :lol:

Who knows, maybe Hank Pym will just be Ant-Man in his solo movie, and then switch to his Giant Man persona in the Avengers.

[Solid Snake PAC]

They make more sense to be around overall in the MCU than Hank and Janet. THOUGH...I do wonder how Wright will make not embarrassingly bad when a man goes to "ant" size. Giant size is fine, that's powerful and visually cool but..I do believe Wright kind of wanted the humor to be sarcastic from a while back.

[Graftenberg]

http://www.newsarama.com/film/marvel-studios-jeremey-Latcham-talks-Avengers-sequel.html


Marvel Studios Exec Talks AVENGERS Sequels, Spin-offs

By Jim McLauchlin, Special to Newsarama
posted: 02 July 2012 02:11 pm ET


Earth’s Mightiest Heroes, indeed. When it comes to movies, 2012 has proven that it’s the Avengers’ world, and we just live in it.

Marvels’ The Avengers has raked in more than $606 million in the U.S., and $1.45 billion worldwide. Each of those marks place Avengers as the third-highest grossing movie of all time, trailing only Avatar and Titanic.

One man along for the ride has been Jeremy Latcham, senior vice president of production and development at Marvel Studios. Latcham was also an executive producer on Avengers, and as inevitable discussion about Avengers sequels and spinoffs bubble up, he took time to chat with Newsarama to discuss the future...and living in a post-Avengers world.



Newsarama: Jeremy, how tough was it just doing Avengers from a scheduling standpoint? You've got Robert Downey Jr. in three Iron Man flicks, and he does Sherlock Holmes and God-knows-what-else, to say nothing of the rest of a large cast. Was scheduling talent into Avengers tough? Surprisingly easy? What?

Jeremy Latcham: Well, the schedule was tough. But Lars Winther, who was our first assistant director, did an amazing job of trying to board the movie in such a way that made it easy as you can make it for the actors. Now on Avengers, we had the added complication that Thor was opening on day five of Avengers production. So [Thor actor] Chris Hemsworth was going to be busy going around the world on a press tour, and had to fly back to L.A. for the premiere. So, since that movie was opening on day five of production for the new movie, there’s just no way you can use him until after that.

And Chris Evans’ movie, Captain America, was slated to open right in the middle of production in July. So we had to block out about a month for him to go around the world on a press tour. And then...you have to schedule everyone else around those events, and invariably, you can only schedule this actor on this day and that actor on that day for whatever other commitments might exist. So yeah, you start to look at the schedule and say, “We never have anybody when we need them to actually make a movie!”

And you really have to schedule a movie in a such a way that allows the director, in this case Joss Whedon, to build the performances and work up to the key, pivotal moments. I mean, you don’t want to shoot the first scene and the last scene together just because everyone happens to be in them. You need time to allow that build-up, for all the real, very human, parties involved.

So it’s complicated, and a big, moving mess of madness. But a good A.D., which we had in Lars, can usually sort out the traffic.

Nrama: It usually is the first A.D. who’s the unsung hero of any flick, isn’t it?

Latcham: It really is. It’s one of the hardest jobs on any movie. You have to keep the energy high and keep everyone motivated for what turned out to be 92 days of first-unit photography. You have to keep the set running, and make sure you have the actors there for what you need and make sure every department has what it needs. It’s really a Herculean task. And those guys usually do not get recognition like they deserve.

The scheduling was tough. There were days where Lars would come into my office and shut the door and say, “I don’t know what we’re going to do. I’m gonna sit down and figure it out...but right now, I’m worried.” And sooner or later, he sorted it all out.

You know, the hardest part was the shawarma scene! We actually shot that after the movie was done. We shot that the day after the premiere, eight weeks out from the end of shooting. We were in the editing room and Joss said, “I have this idea for a scene. It would be so funny if they were all just sitting around eating shawarma after the movie. Just sitting there quietly, not saying anything—just eating shawarma.” And we laughed and said, “Joss, that’s amazing. We have to do that!” But it was impossible. The cast will never be together again. And we thought, well...they will be together at the premiere. Maybe we can shoot it the day after.

And that was crazy, convincing all the actors that it would be totally worthwhile after doing days of premiere press to get back into makeup and shoot one more scene. But at the end of the day, they all did it and they all loved it.

Nrama: Now in addition to your “solo movie guys” such as Thor, Iron Man or Cap, you have a couple of pretty big stars playing Black Widow [Scarlett Johansson] and Nick Fury [Samuel L. Jackson] and a rising one as Hawkeye [Jeremy Renner]. Can you handicap the odds of seeing solo features for these actors or characters?

Latcham: In the near, near future...we kind of know the movies we’re going to make, and it’s not those characters on the radar. But we love those characters, and we’re all deeply, deeply interested in doing that one day. Again, a lot is time and place, and other circumstances. Is it solo movies, or is there a pairing? How would you play it? Obviously, Joss did an amazing job of giving a lot of really meaningful backstory to Widow and Hawkeye in the Avengers film. I mean, I want to know what happened in Budapest! I want to know why one of them thinks it’s “just like what happened in Budapest,” and the other has no idea what she’s talking about. I want to see Hawkeye making that different call. I think that would be cool. So in terms of the stories, there’s no doubt there are stories to tell. It’s just a matter of when and where, and how it fits into the bigger picture.

Nrama: Speaking of the bigger picture, has Avengers now changed your dynamic? In that, I mean it was the solo films that seeded it, but now, given the response, it's the brand name. Will Avengers sequels spawn new solo films? Has your template been flipped 180 degrees?


Latcham: Well, the idea was always that you have these big special events that happen, which is where you have this Avengers movie, and then the characters spin back into their own solo movies. Iron Man 3 is now being shot in North Carolina with Thor 2 shooting soon in the U.K., so the idea is that these characters are always having their solo adventures, but when there’s an event that’s big enough to have to bring them all together, that it would happen in an Avengers film. And that’s still very much the idea. In the middle, these characters’ lives will change and evolve, and it will be interesting to see what the changes are and how these guys’ lives are different next time we bring them together for a big event.

Nrama: That’s a good segue. There’s a bit of a comic book reader necessity, something that readers just accept out of decades of precedent that allows them to dismiss the idea of “Well, if there’s a problem too big for Iron Man to handle, why doesn’t he just call on Thor to beat it into submission with his hammer?” Comic readers accept that can’t always happen, or you wouldn’t have that comic. But in a general sense, how do you coach a screenwriter or craft a story that can’t be easily solved by just assembling the Avengers at any drop of a hat?

Latcham: Well, I think it all comes down to the approach of what’s happening in the story. Without getting into what’s happening in Iron Man 3, Thor 2 or Captain America2 , making the story happen on a timeline where maybe it’s not possible to get everyone together is a possibility. Or maybe having it in a place that everyone can’t get to might be germane.

But really, creating solo stories where that solo character gets to shine is really the mandate. That’s the way we have to approach it. You don’t want the audience to be sitting there saying, “Just call the Hulk!” because...well, it’s a Thor 2 movie! So it’s a lot of craft, in trying to come up with that story that’s uniquely “Thor,” you know, and doing it in a manner that’s every bit as suspenseful and every bit as exhilarating as the big team adventure. If you make it exciting, and character-based on that character, people won’t be wondering where “the other guys” are ’cause they’ll be just wrapped up in it, having too much of a good time.

Nrama: One of the keys on the publishing side right now in Avengers, which has led to Avengers, New Avengers, Secret Avengers and so on, is the inclusion of Spider-Man and Wolverine on the team. Without going too much into the intricacies of studio rights, do comic fans have any hope of ever seen a big-screen Spider-Man or Wolverine in an Avengers movie?



Latcham: I don’t know. I really don’t have a good answer to that one. In this moment, right at this moment...not really. Not much of a chance. But with the success of Avengers, and fingers crossed, maybe great response to the new Amazing Spider-Man, well...maybe people start getting excited about that idea. So who knows? But right now, my gut says it’s not really possible.

Nrama: You have Iron Man 3 shooting in North Carolina right now. How long can Iron Man "run?" Three is kind of a magic number for movie sequels. Will this end? Or is it James Bond?

Latcham: We like to think that these characters can live forever. I mean, they’ve lived in publishing for 60 years and are still going strong, with thousands upon thousand of stories told. I think in the same way, these characters can live in film for a long, long time. Right now, we’re just the stewards of these characters in film, which is a great, great job, but I really feel that someday, another generation will be able to take them to play with and plan out that next generation of stories. I think these characters can go on for a really, really long time.

Nrama: Are you a big nedrlinger? You have a personal fave, a close-to-the-heart, perhaps obscure character you'd love to do. Woodgod? Fin Fang Foom? Ka-Zar? Anyone?

Latcham: You know, there’s not a particularly obscure character I’d like to make a movie out of, because I think there are still a lot of the more well-known characters we can do that we haven’t got to yet. I’d really like to do a Dr. Strange movie. I’d really like to make a movie out of Luke Cage. There are a bunch of characters who, to me, are on that “bigger” roster I’d still like to do. I’m not thinking, “Yeah, I’d really like to make a movie out of The Hood or Hit-Monkey” or something.

But, you know what the strangest one maybe is? You might laugh, and it might look like I have a really soft sensibility—and I do—but I’d really like to do a Power Pack movie. I’d really love to do that someday. I just love the characters, and I think it could be so much fun. But I really don’t think it will happen. The world’s not calling out for a Power Pack movie right at this moment, but I love them. I really just like the idea of making a movie about kids, and I think we could capture that same sense of wonder that was in those old Amblin movies, you know? To get to that same sense of fun...I think Power Pack could be that Goonies movie, you know? I’m a huge, huge Goonies fan! And it totally holds up! I just showed it to my nephew, who was 13 at the time, and I had no idea if he was going to like it. And he was enraptured. It still holds up. It’s the best!

Nrama: Now you mentioned Dr. Strange and Luke Cage. In a publishing sense, those are Avengers characters. Could we see Dr. Strange or Luke Cage in Avengers sequels, perhaps even with the hope of spinning them into their own solo flicks?

Latcham: Well, anything’s possible with the characters we have the rights to, and that’s the fun part. So I feel like it’s going to come down to what serves the story. So when we sit down and start going through “what’s the next Avengers adventure?” if there’s an opportunity for one of those characters to serve that adventure, and we have the rights to that character, they’re in.

I mean, Maria Hill, right? There’s a character that’s not an obvious choice to have in Avengers, but we felt like we needed her there, and she became an integral part of the experience, the ride. She was a great foil to Fury, and really accomplished a lot of things that we wanted to accomplish from a story standpoint. It was really fun to bring in this character that people know, not just “generic S.H.I.E.L.D. agent number 27.” It’s fun to bring in Maria Hill, and keep her true to the character she is in the books.

So if there’s a character that comes up who could serve the narrative in a big way, yeah. There’s no corporate mandate of “We have to introduce these three characters in the next movie.” We just want to tell the best story, and it comes down to what characters will serve the story in the best way. We want to be careful to never say, “We need to jam these five characters into a movie, Mr. Director and Mr. Screenwriter, and you just figure it out.” We just want to figure out what makes the story good, and hopefully get agreement on that. So if there’s an opportunity to introduce someone new in an Avengers movie and it works, we’re totally open to that.

[Solid Snake PAC]

jesus, TL;DR.

I'll read it though....*sigh*

[devilshalo]

I keep wanting a Power Pack animated series.

[kgrogers1979]

I keep wanting a Power Pack animated series.

And include the scene where Peter Parker reveals he was sexually molested as a child.

[cruzness]

Too much cape crisis for you

[mcfly]

Can anyone give me the cliff notes of that long interview?

[Tom Creo]

And include the scene where Peter Parker reveals he was sexually molested as a child.

:lol: Skip and "Einstein". Maybe this'll be in the next reboot of SM.

[Xander]

Cool interview. I'm excited that the people running the show at Marvel Studios seem to be excited about these projects and interested in doing them the right way. :thumbsup:

[Solid Snake PAC]

FIRST LOOK: Marvel unveils top-secret 'Avengers' short film 'Item 47' -- EXCLUSIVE

The existence of Marvel’s latest short film has been stirring speculation for weeks, though no one knew for sure exactly what it was, who stars in it, or what the title means.

What is Item 47? Now, finally, some answers.

The film is the latest in the company’s series of shorts dubbed “One-Shots,” a comic book term for stories that wrap up in one issue. Lizzy Caplan (Party Down, pictured) and Jesse Bradford (Flags of Our Fathers) star as a down-on-their-luck couple who find one of the discarded alien guns from the finale to The Avengers — and proceed to make some incredibly bad decisions.

Marvel’s One-Shots have been used as bonus features on home-video releases for Thor and Captain America, and this one will be available Sept. 25 on The Avengers Blu-ray, with a special screening planned for San Diego next week during Comic-Con.

This is the longest, most elaborate of the Marvel shorts so far, and could be a first step toward using short-subject films to dive deeper into the Marvel universe and introduce beloved but less-familiar superheroes to the mainstream.

Item 47 refers to the gun itself, which S.H.I.E.L.D. would like very much to retrieve from the hapless young troublemakers. “The world is topsy-turvy now. There’s been an alien invasion, and things are crazy,” explains Marvel Studios co-president Louis D’Esposito, who directed the film himself. “So when this gun *literally fell into their lap, this is a sign: We’re going to rob a few banks, we’re going to buy a boat, we’re going to the Caribbean, and all our problems will be solved.”

Two S.H.I.E.L.D. agents (Maximiliano Hernández, returning from Thor and The Avengers, and Lost’s Man in Black Titus Welliver, making his Marvel debut) are given the job of cleaning up the mess and stopping this modern Bonnie and Clyde (not coincidentally named Benny and Claire.)

http://img2-1.timeinc.net/ew/i/2012/07/02/Lizzy-Caplan_810.jpg

The goal was to show some non-superpowered people reacting to the aftermath of The Avengers. “Anything that expands the world and shows you the more human elements of it, that just makes the world more colorful and fun for the average viewer,” says Eric Pearson, who wrote the screenplay for Item 47, as well as the previous two One-Shots: A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Thor’s Hammer and The Consultant.

Each starred Clark Gregg as S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent Coulson, but those films were much shorter — no more than 4 minutes, compared to Item 47‘s 12 minute run-time — and they were single scenes with few visual effects or action. Item 47, in contrast, goes on a much bigger ride.

Marvel is exploring whether short films like this could now go even further. The goal is to have a short accompany the home-video for each feature film, and they’re currently devising scripts for companion pieces to Iron Man 3, Thor 2, and Captain America 2.

The question is whether the One-Shots can expand to not just tell not just inconsequential side-stories, but also experiment with longtime heroes who may not yet be ready to carry their own features. A short could be a good test for a Black Panther or Iron Fist or Wasp, for example — characters who are beloved by die-hard fans but less known in the broader culture.

D’Esposito says the company “wrestles” with that idea. “There’s always a potential to introduce a character. We have 8,000 of them, and they can’t all be at the same level. So maybe there are some that are not so popular, and we introduce them [with a short] – and they take off. I could see that happening.”

The risk is establishing the potential movie too much, and then trying to retroactively recruit a feature filmmaker with those creative elements already in place. “Let’s say we wanted to introduce Ant-Man [in a short], and that would mean we have to cast him prior to having a filmmaker. That’s difficult and something we wouldn’t want to do,” D’Esposito says.

But in that case, Marvel’s Ant-Man project has had a filmmaker on board for a long time – co-writer and director Edgar Wright (Hot Fuzz, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World). Sources say he recently did shoot test footage for an Ant-Man film.

That’s not quite the same thing as a stand-alone short, but previewing those scenes publicly – say, at Comic-Con next week, or before any of the Marvel features heading to theaters in the next two years – could still be a way to pump up enthusiasm among fans.

Last year at Comic-Con, producer Joe Roth had 6,000 people cheering for a test reel of Snow White and the Huntsman, which featured samples of trippy visual effects and set pieces director Rupert Sanders intended to create – although it featured none of the actual stars. Still, it led to heightened anticipation for the final product, well before a single frame of the movie was shot.

A Marvel superhero short that stands on its own two legs (or more) would undoubtedly have an even greater impact.

Even if Marvel chooses not to show any Ant-Man teases (no one from the studio will confirm what’s in their showcase), they will be at a theater in San Diego next week to show off Item 47 in its entirety.

A real-life scavenger hunt starts with The Avengers Second Screen app, which will become available as a free download at the iTunes store this Friday. Those who can’t go to San Diego can still use the app to gain access to a clip, but for Comic-Con attendees, it will offer the first clue to finding the trail through the city that ends with a screening on the evening of July 12

[superdeluxe]

Very interesting!

[Solid Snake PAC]

Good god.

I'm looking at the cash flow for the MCU. The budget for all their films released is pretty much at a clean $1 billion. The total combined box office for all the films? $3,737,868,085. Fuck. I'd love to be a producer on those films for sure.

Also...I'd totally be agreeable w/ some 10-15 minute short films be a further introduction into the diverse world of the MCU.

[superdeluxe]

Whedon back to direct and write Avengers 2:

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/22268/confirmed-joss-whedon-will-return-for-avengers-2

[The Bus]

Whedon back to direct and write Avengers 2:

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/22268/confirmed-joss-whedon-will-return-for-avengers-2

:up:

[Supermallet]

Yessssss

[WeylandYutani]

Good news. I just hope he's back because he truly wants to be and not because the studio cut him a deal to fund whatever other future project he wants to make(the way Nolan decided to go forth with TDKR once Warner's decided to fully-fund his script for Inception).

[redrum]

hey if it means we get a Serenity sequel out of it, i'm all for it

[WeylandYutani]

hey if it means we get a Serenity sequel out of it, i'm all for it


huh? How would this success of The Avengers lead to a sequel to Serenity? That show was a flop. That movie was a flop. You browncoats are like wet-brain alcoholics at this point.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Good news. I just hope he's back because he truly wants to be and not because the studio cut him a deal to fund whatever other future project he wants to make(the way Nolan decided to go forth with TDKR once Warner's decided to fully-fund his script for Inception).

I'm pretty sure he's back cuz he wants to be. I mean..it's Whedon..the guy LOVES comics. He's a fanboy at heart...so it's a no brainer for him.

is there a source for that bit on Nolan? I was under the impression that he hadn't signed w/ TDKR on till Inception was near the end of it's production if not in the middle of it.

[Why So Blu?]

Good news. I just hope he's back because he truly wants to be and not because the studio cut him a deal to fund whatever other future project he wants to make(the way Nolan decided to go forth with TDKR once Warner's decided to fully-fund his script for Inception).

Yeah, because Nolan would not have continued with TDKR if the studio hadn't cut him a deal.


Condescending much?

[WeylandYutani]

Yeah, because Nolan would not have continued with TDKR if the studio hadn't cut him a deal.


Condescending much?


Sorry if I offended you but I thought this was common knowledge, especially amongst "movie-geeks" like us. Nolan was always going to be involved with this "Batman trilogy" but whether he would actually direct the third film with Bale was always up in the air, especially after the death of Ledger. It was never a guarantee. At around the release of TDK Nolan was still intending to only produce and work on the eventual story for the third, final Batman film. Taking on the same exact duties that he's now doing with Man of Steel. It wasn't until Warner's decided to fully-fund and give Nolan the budget he needed to make Inception, a film that he'd been working on and wanting to make for well over a decade at that point, that Nolan decided that he would go ahead and actually finish the trilogy with himself at the directorial helm. Yes, it was a pseudo-deal that he and the studio made.

[redrum]

huh? How would this success of The Avengers lead to a sequel to Serenity? That show was a flop. That movie was a flop. You browncoats are like wet-brain alcoholics at this point.

because the movie he directed for Paramount made them over a billion dollars

[WeylandYutani]

because the movie he directed for Paramount made them over a billion dollars



A movie with a decades-long name and commercial property attached that millions of people and children everywhere already knew for ages

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-VyM_luQ47yE/T8TY1I-ZyeI/AAAAAAAACCI/OqbnCvTvNUI/s1600/avengers_movie_haut.jpg



Who the hell knows about Han Solo-wannabe Mal and his ragtag crew besides us internet geeks? No one.

[DaveyJoe]

Sorry if I offended you but I thought this was common knowledge, especially amongst "movie-geeks" like us. Nolan was always going to be involved with this "Batman trilogy" but whether he would actually direct the third film with Bale was always up in the air, especially after the death of Ledger. It was never a guarantee. At around the release of TDK Nolan was still intending to only produce and work on the eventual story for the third, final Batman film. Taking on the same exact duties that he's now doing with Man of Steel. It wasn't until Warner's decided to fully-fund and give Nolan the budget he needed to make Inception, a film that he'd been working on and wanting to make for well over a decade at that point, that Nolan decided that he would go ahead and actually finish the trilogy with himself at the directorial helm. Yes, it was a pseudo-deal that he and the studio made.

I don't think so. I'm a movie geek and I've been following the production of Nolan's films since I saw Batman Begins, and this is nothing but a rumor. Nolan didn't make TDKR because WB funded Inception. He made it once Jonathon Nolan and David Goyer came up with a good enough story to follow-up TDK with. Inception was more of a thank you rather than a dangling carrot. Chris had just made them a billion dollars with TDK. Nolan always plays coy and claims he never plans sequels, but that's most likely for better bargaining. The man just keeps things close to his chest.

[Obi-Wan Jabroni]

because the movie he directed for Paramount made them over a billion dollars

He didn't direct the movie for Paramount, he directed it for Disney. Paramount had next to zero involvment in Avengers other than a deal to keep their logo on it.

[Matthew Chmiel]

Good news. I just hope he's back because he truly wants to be and not because the studio cut him a deal to fund whatever other future project he wants to make(the way Nolan decided to go forth with TDKR once Warner's decided to fully-fund his script for Inception).
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Disney & Marvel need Whedon a lot more than Whedon needs Disney & Marvel.

I'm sure the specifics of the deal will make itself known sooner rather than later. Whedon has a whole year or two before fully jumping into the deep end on The Avengers 2.

[mcfly]

I thought it was common knowledge that WB fully backed Inception after TDK blew up. I didn't think there was some catch-22 that he wouldn't do TDKR without Inception being produced.

[Matthew Chmiel]

I thought it was common knowledge that WB fully backed Inception after TDK blew up. I didn't think there was some catch-22 that he wouldn't do TDKR without Inception being produced.
Warner gave Nolan carte blanche for Inception in agreement to do The Dark Knight Rises. Warner and Nolan made the deal in February 2009, seven months after the release of The Dark Knight.

Inception wouldn't exist if Nolan didn't agree to do a third Batman.

[Dragon Tattoo]

The best thing Disney/Marvel could do for this series is replace Whedon with a director who knows what a movie should look like.

But they'll probably keep him because he's cheap.

[pinata242]

The best thing Disney/Marvel could do for this series is replace Whedon with a director who knows what a movie should look like.

But they'll probably keep him because he's cheap.

:lol: Yeah, he clearly failed them. I'm sure your $9 will be sorely missed from the $800M domestic run they have with the sequel and Whedon's terrible eye.

[Matthew Chmiel]

:lol: Yeah, he clearly failed them. I'm sure your $9 will be sorely missed from the $800M domestic run they have with the sequel and Whedon's terrible eye.
<s>My wife and I</s> MoviePass gave Disney and Marvel $100 during its theatrical run. I'll give it another $20 for the 3D Blu-ray. :)

If Dragon Tattoo doesn't see The Avengers 2: Electric Boogaloo, <s>I'll</s> MoviePass will contribute a minimum of $200 to its theatrical run. ;)

[SuckaMC]

Whedon's return is great news.

[Dragon Tattoo]

<s>My wife and I</s> MoviePass gave Disney and Marvel $100 during its theatrical run. I'll give it another $20 for the 3D Blu-ray. :)

If Dragon Tattoo doesn't see The Avengers 2: Electric Boogaloo, <s>I'll</s> MoviePass will contribute a minimum of $200 to its theatrical run. ;)

Prepare to pay up, then.

[Draven]

It's one thing to hate a movie. That's fine. I hate plenty of movies.

It's another to claim that the director behind one of the most successful movies of all time doesn't know what a movie should look like. All I can say is thank god Dragon Tattoo isn't in charge of anything, because I'm sure the result would be a whole lot worse than, again, one of the most successful movies of all time.

So glad Whedon is back because his influence is all over the movie and I couldn't have been happier with the result. This news gets a big thumbs up from me.

[Hokeyboy]

I was never much of a Whedon fan (mostly because of rabidly inane Whedonites) but you'd have to be insanely myopic to think he didn't totally knock it out of the park with Avengers, commercially or critically -- even if you didn't like the movie, the glowing reviews and hugely commercial success speak for themselves.

Me, I loved the movie. Bringing Whedon back was the smartest move Disney could have done.

[Dragon Tattoo]

It's one thing to hate a movie. That's fine. I hate plenty of movies.

It's another to claim that the director behind one of the most successful movies of all time doesn't know what a movie should look like. All I can say is thank god Dragon Tattoo isn't in charge of anything, because I'm sure the result would be a whole lot worse than, again, one of the most successful movies of all time.

So glad Whedon is back because his influence is all over the movie and I couldn't have been happier with the result. This news gets a big thumbs up from me.

Just about anyone could've directed The Avengers and it would've made money. To say that Whedon's directorial abilities were in any way responsible for the success of that movie is ridiculous at best. One of the main complaints pointed out in reviews was that this movie was shot like a TV show, but suddenly you all take offense when I say it, as if it's a shocking new criticism that hasn't been pointed out numerous times before.

But yes, Draven, I'm sure I would be worse, considering the fact that I am neither a writer nor a director. Thanks for pointing out that completely superfluous and ad hominem piece of information. If those are your standards, then yes, Whedon is your guy.

Is it any surprise that Whedon is back for this, though? Marvel prides itself on hiring the cheapest directors they can find. Whedon returning just means more money in their pocket. It's not exactly a groundbreaking turn of events.

Blah Blah, I'm a troll, Avengers is the best movie ever made (It should be in the Criterion collection!), Joss Whedon is an uncriticizable God. Blah Blah.

[Hokeyboy]

^Yes, The Avengers would have made money with anyone directing it. That's no question. With all the hype and the string of hit movies leading up to it, it was a foregon conclusion that the movie would be a blockbuster. Even if it was terrible, it would have coasted to several hundred million when all was said and done.

But it never would have made $1.4B worldwide if it wasn't a great movie. No other Marvel Studios film has even come close. The international grosses of Thor, Captain America, and Iron Man 2 combined don't reach that figure.

[Dragon Tattoo]

^Yes, The Avengers would have made money with anyone directing it. That's no question. With all the hype and the string of hit movies leading up to it, it was a foregon conclusion that the movie would be a blockbuster. Even if it was terrible, it would have coasted to several hundred million when all was said and done.

But it never would have made $1.4B worldwide if it wasn't a great movie. No other Marvel Studios film has even come close. The international gtossesof Thor, Captain America, and Iron Man 2 combined don't reach that figure.

At no point did I criticize the quality of the movie. It's probably the best Marvel movie made, and the script is pretty much perfect for a comic book movie. I've even praised Whedon's writing many times before. I just think the movie was shot like a big budget TV show.

And this is a complaint that's been leveled against it many times by a multitude of different critics, so I don't see why everyone loses their minds whenever it's mentioned.

The best thing Marvel could do would be to keep Whedon on script duties and get an actual director to shoot this thing. But that would cost more.

[Hokeyboy]

I disagree, but I get where you're coming from.

If anything, Avengers needed some tightening up of its midsection and some more meat on the narrative (the plot was enjoyable but largely simplistic), but I had no problem with the overall direction.

[Artman]

I've never been a big Whedon fan regarding his own creations...but he certainly added a spark to the dialogue and fun factor to The Avengers...which certainly helped it's longevity at the BO. Glad to see him sign on for the sequel (and overseeing other things Marvel). Best of both worlds imo... if they were to hire a more old school, classic type of director...he/she wouldn't necessarily be able to add anything to the dialogue and character interactions. Whedon has the fan factor as well as credentials to at least make a good looking, big budget film.

[resinrats]

I don't know the financial side of Avengers 2 but I think its pretty safe to say Whedon will get paid more then he did for Avengers 1. So if Disney does go for cheap directors, they sure screwed up getting Whedon back. Or they see that Whedon delivered an enormously popular film and they want to see it repeated with the next movie. So they figure Whedon had something to do with it and went with him again.

I just don't see the 'shot like a TV episode' complaint. If so, please point me to the TV series that is just like Avengers.

[MasterofDVD]

I almost would say that until the teasers and trailers came out for the first film I wasn't even sure that Whedon could pull off this film...and I'm a huge fan of his. ( My son is named after a Buffy character and a Marvel hero :) As much as I disliked the standalone Thor and Captain America movies it took a few jokes and remakes from those characters in The Avengers and I was back on board with them in no time.

With that said I am excited about his return but I'm not too sure about the TV show idea. I'm all for a show that isn't a reality show so I hope it does better than stuff like Dollhouse. *shudder*

[Supermallet]

Yeah, I'd watch the hell out of a TV show made like The Avengers. With this Whedon-supervised Marvel universe TV show I might get my wish on that.

[gmanca]

I bet Whedon is the writer that Del Toro mentioned for the Hulk tv series.

[TallGuyMe]

The best thing Disney/Marvel could do for this series is replace Whedon with a director who knows what a movie should look like.

But they'll probably keep him because he's cheap.

Congratulations. You've just posted the most retarded thing ever written on the interwebs.

[Draven]

Just about anyone could've directed The Avengers and it would've made money. To say that Whedon's directorial abilities were in any way responsible for the success of that movie is ridiculous at best. One of the main complaints pointed out in reviews was that this movie was shot like a TV show, but suddenly you all take offense when I say it, as if it's a shocking new criticism that hasn't been pointed out numerous times before.

But yes, Draven, I'm sure I would be worse, considering the fact that I am neither a writer nor a director. Thanks for pointing out that completely superfluous and ad hominem piece of information. If those are your standards, then yes, Whedon is your guy.

Is it any surprise that Whedon is back for this, though? Marvel prides itself on hiring the cheapest directors they can find. Whedon returning just means more money in their pocket. It's not exactly a groundbreaking turn of events.

Blah Blah, I'm a troll, Avengers is the best movie ever made (It should be in the Criterion collection!), Joss Whedon is an uncriticizable God. Blah Blah.

I never said you should write or direct - I just said I was glad you weren't in charge of anything to do with this movie, since you obviously don't know what you're talking about. You do know there are more than writers and directors involved in movie production, right?

I'm sure if I walked into the TKDR thread and said that the movie would have been better if they'd gotten someone besides Nolan to do it, you'd probably have a reaction to that.

No one said The Avengers was the best movie ever made. It's my favorite movie of all time but even I realize it's not the best movie ever made. No one said it should be in the Criterion. No one said Whedon was an uncriticizable God. You've called out a bigger fake reaction than what actually happened.

You came in and made a sweeping and negative statement about the movie that is clearly in the minority, then act like people shouldn't respond to it.

And no one "lost their minds" when you said what you said. Many of us just think you are wrong.

[B.A.]

The Lizzy Caplan pic caught my eye - first I have ever heard about these short films. Interesting.

[Xander]

I thought Whedon did a fantastic job with the Avengers and I am very excited to see what he'll do with the next one! :banana:

[Roybq]

I'm excited that Whedon is back on board as director of the sequel. I enjoyed the first film many times and probably would've seen it more if I had the chance. Heck, my wife and I took a Disney cruise to Alaska last month and one of the onboard movies was The Avengers in 3D. She couldn't understand why I wanted to see a movie, that I've already seen, on a cruise ship when there was so much else to do on board.

[RoboDad]

Congratulations. You've just posted the most retarded thing ever written on the interwebs.

Oh, he excels at that, sir.

[stvn1974]

Avengers is probably the most fun I have ever had a theater. As a huge Whedon fan this is great news.

[DaveyJoe]

I thought Whedon did a fantastic job with the Avengers and I am very excited to see what he'll do with the next one! :banana:

*Reads post, checks username, re-reads post, re-reads username..* Whedon fan, perhaps? ;)

[Jules Winfield]

Forget Avengers 2, the movie. I'm looking forward to Avengers 2, the future of this thread when we've all seen it and are arguing over the quality of the movie for 100 pages!:banana:

[Solid Snake PAC]

Yeah. The movie wouldn't be what it is w/o Whedon. I'm not a Whedon fan, so I can't say wtf his visual style really is from watching Firefly and Serenity, both of which I enjoyed very much for the story, but that script's story is Whedon. I don't give a damn if someone else did it before him on the script..but..once he got on there...it was nerd orgasm on screen just seeing everything play out.

And if you're a Marvel fan? The movie was fucking awesome cuz it was just a shit ton of references here and there that just made you smile.

[Dragon Tattoo]

Congratulations. You've just posted the most retarded thing ever written on the interwebs.

I doubt you even read it. Better make sure Ebert didn't write this one, too, right? :lol:

[Xander]

*Reads post, checks username, re-reads post, re-reads username..* Whedon fan, perhaps? ;)

I am, but not a blind one. I am the first to criticize his stuff if I think it sucks. I.E. - season 4 of Angel and also Dollhouse (though I heard it gets better). :)

[Deftones]

Sounds like Jeremy Renner wants a better role for Hawkeye: http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/24629/jeremy-renner-unhappy-with-hawkeye

[devilshalo]

:lol: keep bitching and he'll get a West Coast Avengers movie.

[Double_Oh_7]

Sounds like Jeremy Renner wants a better role for Hawkeye: http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/24629/jeremy-renner-unhappy-with-hawkeye

He better be careful. Marvel has shown they're not afraid to replace actors *cough* Eric Bana *cough* Ed Norton *cough* Terence Howard *cough*

[Double_Oh_7]

Whedon's return is great news.

Isn't this what was said about Jon Favreau and IM2? We all know how THAT turned out...

[Solid Snake PAC]

He better be careful. Marvel has shown they're not afraid to replace actors *cough* Eric Bana *cough* Ed Norton *cough* Terence Howard *cough*

The Hulk was Universal not Marvel.

Isn't this what was said about Jon Favreau and IM2? We all know how THAT turned out...


Sarcasm aside...the difference in that is Whedon has a very good track record in a critical fashion and at times financially as well depending on the project. He's rather well appreciated from those that have had him. Also....he directed and wrote The Avengers. A fucking huge movie that banked oh so much. To add a bit more..he's pretty much the biggest comic book nerd out there in those involved w/ making comic book movies. I think he'll be alright.

[Mike86]

Isn't this what was said about Jon Favreau and IM2? We all know how THAT turned out...
Iron Man 2 wasn't that bad. In some ways I enjoyed aspects of it more than the first to be honest. I am glad that Whedon is back on board for the next Avengers film though. He gave us a really fun film the first go round and I have enough faith in him to make an enjoyable sequel.

I do wonder if the second film will be able to capture the same magic as the first one though since I think a lot of what made The Avengers so great was it was finally the culmination of all the heroes being brought together and it was done in a way that brought a great story to life. I just hope it's done in way that doesn't feel like a retread of the first film.

[DaveyJoe]

I am, but not a blind one. I am the first to criticize his stuff if I think it sucks. I.E. - season 4 of Angel and also Dollhouse (though I heard it gets better). :)

Fair enough, I'm just giving you a hard time because I assumed the name was a reference to Xander from Buffy. :) I enjoyed Buffy as well but in retrospect I think the final season was pretty weak, aside from Nathan Fillion's character.

[Matthew Chmiel]

Isn't this what was said about Jon Favreau and IM2? We all know how THAT turned out...
I will be willing to assume Whedon has full creative control on what he touches based upon his Marvel contract.

Whedon has Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, Firefly, Serenity, Dr. Horrible and The Cabin in the Woods (amongst others) under his belt. Jon Favreau (and IM2's writer Justin Theroux) wish they could have such a track record.

[DaveyJoe]

^He also wrote the first draft of The X-Men. Unfortunately the only that made it into the movie was the line about a toad being struck by lightning. :sad:

[Double_Oh_7]

The Hulk was Universal not Marvel.






Fair enough, but they did tell Ed Norton to take a hike.

[Solid Snake PAC]

They did. I still would've loved to see some of those cut scenes in the film. That would've been the Norton cut..which he was to have but Marvel fucked him over on it. Some of them actually add into the positive for it. That alt intro was fucking great. Alas...

[Dr. DVD]

Glad Whedon's back on board. :thumbsup:

I know that the huge opening of the first movie was due to the years of build-up , but I attribute its critical success and staying power to Whedon's ability to finely craft the characters and story into something above average. I am quite happy that after so much time of only having a "cult" following, he finally got something that could showcase his talents to a larger audience.

[Boba Fett]

Norton was told to take a hike more likely he's a notorious control freak. Whedon didn't need that battle on top of having to indulge Downey Jr's brilliant but still egotistical desire to rewrite dialogue on the fly.

[JumpCutz]

Norton was told to take a hike more likely he's a notorious control freak. Whedon didn't need that battle on top of having to indulge Downey Jr's brilliant but still egotistical desire to rewrite dialogue on the fly.

Yeah, nothing you wrote can be disputed. Handling those two egos would be a herculean task.


On a side note, although Downey is an excellent actor (Chaplin, Tropic Thunder, etc), Norton is superior (Primal Fear, Fight Club, American History X, 25th Hour, The Painted Veil)... but he just doesn't register like Downey can in big budget comic book movies.

But that debate is best left for another thread. :D

[Xander]

Fair enough, I'm just giving you a hard time because I assumed the name was a reference to Xander from Buffy. :) I enjoyed Buffy as well but in retrospect I think the final season was pretty weak, aside from Nathan Fillion's character.

Oh it is. I was an even bigger Buffy nerd back in 2000 when I joined. :) And I think most seasons of Buffy have their flaws (except maybe for Season 3), but overall it's still my favorite show.

Oh, and something something about the new Avengers movie too. ;)

[Solid Snake PAC]

New Avengers?! Can we get Iron Fist, Luke Cage, Spidey (Sony), Dr. Strange, and etc here too?!

[Solid Snake PAC]

Norton was told to take a hike more likely he's a notorious control freak. Whedon didn't need that battle on top of having to indulge Downey Jr's brilliant but still egotistical desire to rewrite dialogue on the fly.

Very true. He wanted the film to be more IM centric. Whedon gave it a try and then Downey saw it wasn't jiving well so we got what's a damn fine balance for the most part. What Downey did convince Whedon was to have Pepper in it. To show off how Tony's matured and evolved in a way. I do like Pepper being in the film.

Also...he's so fucking awesome, an egotistical fucker...w/ charm:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/c4OHn77YNZI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[cleaver]

Sounds like Jeremy Renner wants a better role for Hawkeye: http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/24629/jeremy-renner-unhappy-with-hawkeye
Hawkeye does have a much bigger role in Ultimates 2 than Ultimates. (Though Avengers is based more on Simonson Thor and Avengers 2 on Infinity Gauntlet so I guess it doesn't really matter, I just wanted to reminisce about Hawkeye in Ultimates 2)

[Michael Corvin]

I didn't understand a word of that post.

[DthRdrX]

May 1, 2015 was just announced by Disney.

Joss Whedon has signed an exclusive deal with Marvel Studios for film and television through the end of June 2015. As part of that deal, Whedon will write and direct Marvel’s The Avengers 2 as well as help develop a new live action series for Marvel Television at ABC. He will also contribute creatively to the next phase of Marvel’s cinematic universe.

The Walt Disney Studios has announced a release date for Marvel Studios’ sequel to the biggest Super Hero blockbuster and third highest grossing film of all time, Marvel’s The Avengers. Joss Whedon returns to write and direct the UNTITLED MARVEL’S AVENGERS SEQUEL set for release May 1, 2015.

[Solid Snake PAC]

..wait..new live action series..is that The Hulk that Del Toro's working on? Or something new?

[majorjoe23]

Different from the Hulk show. They just haven't said what yet.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Ah. Interesting...

[Supermallet]

The Avengers gag reel has shown up online... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0TZcBjZSNM&feature=youtu.be

[benedict]

New Avengers?! Can we get Iron Fist, Luke Cage, Spidey (Sony), Dr. Strange, and etc here too?!I half-wish they'd make a Defenders film. Way back when I was a teenager, they were pretty much my favourite "team"...

[fumanstan]

The Avengers gag reel has shown up online... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0TZcBjZSNM&feature=youtu.be

And taken down :(

[KillerCannibal]

There's a great interview with Whedon here (http://www.vulture.com/2012/08/joss-whedon-talks-all-things-marvel-with-vulture.html).

I particularly liked this quote regarding the film:

"I don’t think it’s a perfect movie. I don’t even think it’s a great movie. I think it’s a great time, and I’m proud of it, but for me, what was exciting is that people don’t go to see a movie that many times unless it’s pulling on something from within, unless there’s a need there. That’s very gratifying.”

[stingermck]

Jean Claude Van Damme wants to be in 'The Avengers 2'

"I read that Chris Hemsworth (star of Thor and brother of Liam Hemsworth, The Expendables 2) would like me to costar in The Avengers movie!

Well, it would be fun to play one of these types of amazing comic book characters again. By the way, I am a big fan of Marvels superhero Silver Surfer and also another heroic fictional character known as Doc Savage the Man of Bronze!"


Get this man a contract now! Iron Fist?

[devilshalo]

I thought for years that Ray Park was to be Rand? Well, before Marvel took it back from Artisan. JCVD would be too old to play Iron Fist.

Though I think it would be funny if he were Wonder Man, who would fit within the new film universe.

[Solid Snake PAC]

He would be a good Wonder Man. Wow. I'd see that.

[Jason]

He would be a good Wonder Man. Wow. I'd see that.

you know, that just might work.

http://images.starpulse.com/news/resize_image.php?source_image_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.starpulse.com%2Fpictures%2F2012%2F08%2F09%2Fpr eviews%2FJean-Claude%20Van%20Damme-SPX-055388.jpg&fp=0x0&target_height=300&target_width=300

He's not exactly young anymore, but if that isn't a comic book face, nothing is :lol:

[devilshalo]

Neither was Wonder Man, which is why I suggested that casting. Like how RDJ mirrors Tony Stark in ways. JCVD has similarities with Simon Williams (as an actor that keeps getting resurrected.) :p

Especially if he dresses like this!

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/1736/271pxwonderman001.jpg

[JasonF]

If they can make the CGI work, I'd love to see Wonder Man the way George Perez drew him in the late 90s.

[devilshalo]

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/1889/scan0054p.jpg

[dex14]

EXCLUSIVE: The Avengers 2 is scheduled to shoot at Pinewood-Shepperton in early 2014.

Marvel’s The Avengers 2 is due to begin shoot at Pinewood-Shepperton in early 2014, with production due to get underway later this year.

Slated for a spring 2015 release through Disney, Screen understands that the film is scheduled to shoot at Shepperton Studios, marking the latest collaboration between Marvel and the Buckinghamshire hub, with the US juggernaut recently wrapping shoot at the studios on Thor: The Dark World and gearing up for shoot on Guardians of the Galaxy this summer.

While plot and cast details have been kept under wraps, Joss Whedon is returning to write and direct the sequel, whose original cast included Chris Hemsworth as Thor, Robert Downey Jr as Iron Man, Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow, Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye and Chris Evans as Captain America.

Marvel’s decision to continue its collaboration with Pinewood-Shepperton will be music to the ears of local crew, VFX houses, the BFI and the UK government in particular, which are all keen to see levels of inward investment restored to their 2011 high of more than $1.5bn.

Recent major productions to shoot at the studios include Maleficent, Jack Ryan and The Muppets sequel while Disney’s live-action version of Cinderella is also due to get underway soon.

The Avengers (aka Marvel’s Avengers Assemble in the UK), which shot entirely in the US, grossed more than $1.5bn worldwide, making it the biggest film of 2012 and the third biggest film to date (based on unadjusted grosses) behind Avatar and Titanic.

The plot saw Nick Fury of S.H.I.E.L.D. bring together a team of superheroes to form the Avengers and help save the Earth from Loki and his army.

Whedon recently wrapped TV pilot S.H.I.E.L.D., also set in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

[superdeluxe]

Quick Silver and Scarlett Witch :bow:

http://screenrant.com/the-avengers-2-quicksilver-scarlet-witch/

“I’ve done enough shows and movies to be comfortable with that. You do come to a point where we all agree. ‘Okay. Oh, I’ve got these two characters, two of my favorite characters from the comic book; a brother-sister act. They’re in the movie. That’s exciting.’ You know, you lock certain things in”

[Solid Snake PAC]

...that'd be pretty cool. Please make Quicksilver a prick.

[fumanstan]

I like Quick Silver and Scarlet Witch better then some of the other characters like Wasp. Although I still want to see Vision.

[Deftones]

weird how 2 different companies can have rights to the same characters.

[Dr. DVD]

I wonder if they will have to ignore their lineage to Magneto, since he belongs to a different studio technically speaking?

Since she had to drop out of her role in Iron Man 3, I hope that Jessica Chastain plays Scarlet Witch. Only problem is she might skew a bit older than they want to portray the character, but she still looks young.

[Solid Snake PAC]

I don't think she's right for Wanda. Doesn't look right at all.

[JumpCutz]

I like Quick Silver and Scarlet Witch better then some of the other characters like Wasp. Although I still want to see Vision.

This is my fondest wish. :thumbsup:

[Deftones]

Looks like Thanos may not be in this and held to Avengers 3: http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/26943/thanos-held-back-until-avengers-3

In a surprising reveal, Joss Whedon tells Desde Hollywood that despite the hint of him during the end credits of "The Avengers," don't expect Thanos to serve as the villain for at least the first sequel anyway. Whedon says:

"Thanos is more powerful. He is so powerful; he is not someone you can just trot out and punch him. Like he did in the comics, you want him threading through the universe and to save the big finale for the big finale.

He is definitely a part of what I have got going on. The thing about The Avengers is that they are very powerful but not very stable. So, there will definitely be some people that will shake them up in the next installment.

This essentially indicates Thanos might not arrive on the scene until Marvel's Phase Three plans - "The Avengers 3" in 2018 then?

[Solid Snake PAC]

Oh shit.

[JumpCutz]

Darn it.

[redrum]

wonder how many Phases they plan on doing

i think ending the whole thing with Avengers 3 would be wise

[cruzness]

Why do they need to end it? Why not in a comic book style bring on a new story arc. Like when a comic changes artists / writers.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Yeah. Plus there are other characters they can do. Iron Fist, DD, etc.

[CharlieK]

I get the feeling that there may be some misinterpretation of what Whedon said. If you watch the video of this interview, no one even mentions or alludes to Avengers 3. The question posed was: “The Avengers are very, very powerful. Why should they be concerned about someone like Thanos?” and then there's the answer posted above. Right now, Whedon is focusing on Pt.2 and who knows if he'll do another one beyond that. So when he talks about saving the "big finale for the big finale" and "He is definitely a part of what I have got going on", I take Whedon to mean Thanos is threading through Phase 2 and ending with the last contracted movie I have with Marvel (as of now), the big finale.

[redrum]

nobody thinks they are gonna be sick of Marvel movies?

i'll be watching the phase two flicks but besides Avengers 2 i'm not dying to see them

[superdeluxe]

nobody thinks they are gonna be sick of Marvel movies?

i'll be watching the phase two flicks but besides Avengers 2 i'm not dying to see them

I guess we shall see, Marvel keeps on chugging along

[Solid Snake PAC]

nobody thinks they are gonna be sick of Marvel movies?

i'll be watching the phase two flicks but besides Avengers 2 i'm not dying to see them

Are you not tired of horror films, romantic comedies, etc? Marvel, DC, or the genre itself. I don't care what movies they are, I just want them to be good. And for the most part Marvel has done that for me.

[devilshalo]

Disney is going to keep ramming Marvel and Star Wars down audiences throats just to recoup what they spent for the franchises.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Disney is going to keep ramming Marvel and Star Wars down audiences throats just to recoup what they spent for the franchises.

Which shouldn't take long for $4 Billion, Marvel's pricetag. Toys, Movies, etc. It'll make it steadily and make more as a steady income after it as well.

[Hokeyboy]

Mila Kunis would make a fine Scarlet Witch. She has that Slavic look and given her heritage could easily pull off an Eastern European accent.

[Solid Snake PAC]

.....Too short.

[clappj]

.....Too short.

Tell that to Tom Cruise.

[Obi-Wan Jabroni]

Mila Kunis would make a fine Scarlet Witch. She has that Slavic look and given her heritage could easily pull off an Eastern European accent.

Who says they would even want her to do an accent? Black Widow already doesn't have one.

[fumanstan]

Looking up their heights, Mila is 5'4". Scarlett Johansson for comparison is 5'3". Seems ok to me.

[Hokeyboy]

With Anton Yelchin as Quicksilver.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Looking up their heights, Mila is 5'4". Scarlett Johansson for comparison is 5'3". Seems ok to me.

I dunno. Images I remember her being slightly shorter than Cap.

[Jules Winfield]

Tell that to Tom Cruise.

Does Tom Cruise even care about who plays Scarlet Witch? It would be a waste to tell him that if he doesn't even care.

[Jules Winfield]

I dunno. Images I remember her being slightly shorter than Cap.

Maybe we shouldn't be calling them Earth's Mightiest Heroes but Earth's Shortest Heroes instead.

[superdeluxe]

Mila Kunis would make a fine Scarlet Witch. She has that Slavic look and given her heritage could easily pull off an Eastern European accent.

Emily Blunt IS Scarlet Witch

[Solid Snake PAC]

She would be a good one. And depending on how they go with her...she could get it done. Especially the stressed moments. That gal knows how to act like she's having a breakdown.

I'd be game for her to be Wanda. Also she's very affordable. Marvel loves that.

[Supermallet]

Emily Blunt or Rooney Mara.

[superdeluxe]

Or Olga Kuryelinko

[Hokeyboy]

Emily Blunt IS Scarlet Witch
She IS not! Does she taste like a penny?? :confused:

[gmanca]

I say Lena Headey. I do like Mila Kunis as her too though.

[Supermallet]

Please not Lena Headey. I can't stand her.

[Solid Snake PAC]

I liked her in Dredd and 300, as much as I hate her character's subplot, but I don't think she'd fit well.

[Supermallet]

She's an actress I love to hate, which is why she worked perfectly for Dredd and Game of Thrones.

[Guru Askew]

wonder how many Phases they plan on doing

i think ending the whole thing with Avengers 3 would be wise

Why? What evidence is there that cinematic trilogies are the ideal format when adapting comic series that run indefinitely?

Maybe film series shouldn't always end. Maybe they should worry about consistently releasing good movies instead of arbitrarily wrapping it up with #3 when so many film series fail to resolve anything to anyone's satisfaction.

That's actually causing problems for Warner now because their Batman for nearly the last decade is now unable to convincingly appear as part of the Justice League because he's happily married sipping espresso in an Italian cafe rather than devoting his life to fighting crime like, um, Batman.

[nando820]

^I rather have had a damn convincing serious Batman for nearly 10 years than a half ass comedic Batman that could work for Justice League if it ever came the need for...

[Terrell]

Mila Kunis would make a fine Scarlet Witch. She has that Slavic look and given her heritage could easily pull off an Eastern European accent.

Mila Kunis? Did you not see Oz?

[DaveyJoe]

Mila Kunis? Did you not see Oz?

http://images4.fanpop.com/image/photos/20000000/Chris-and-Tobias-oz-hbo-20095525-642-482.jpg

[Ranger]

Wow, Mila is only 5'4"? She always looked tall to me. Guess it's the personality.

I loved Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver in the X-Men Evolution cartoon.

Doesn't evil stupid Fox own those characters?

[superdeluxe]

Wow, Mila is only 5'4"? She always looked tall to me. Guess it's the personality.

I loved Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver in the X-Men Evolution cartoon.

Doesn't evil stupid Fox own those characters?

No, they are free to be used by either company

[gmanca]

I liked her in Dredd and 300, as much as I hate her character's subplot, but I don't think she'd fit well.

My thoughts about Headey is that she looks most like Scarlet Witch from her 80's incarnation, when she was fairly important in various comic arcs. She's got the Byrne's look down to a t

For size:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_tW3g8zCM6c0/ScPgSXYVL4I/AAAAAAAAABU/OAhge88Ou9Q/s1600/wanda+angry.jpg

I think she can play that stoic yet girly character well.

[superdeluxe]

Looks like EW has 'confirmed' it:

Some online rumors turn out to be true, however. A source confirms to EW that the twin characters Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch will be joining The Avengers 2, which Whedon hinted at recently when he said he was writing a brother-sister duo into the movie. Feige maintains a poker face on that scoop, saying only: “I’m not confirming or denying. The draft could change six months from now.”

[Hokeyboy]

Mila Kunis? Did you not see Oz?
Good God, no. Why would anyone? I have enough aggravation.

[superdeluxe]

Someone suggested Ben Foster for Quicksilver.

[Dr. DVD]

How about Lynne Collins from John Carter?

[Solid Snake PAC]

Foster could pull off the jerk moments. I like him as an actor. Dunno how I'd feel about it if he was Pietro.

[Tom Creo]

Does anybody think that there are too many super heroes in these Marvel films? I hope the introduction of Pietro and Wanda is fresh and exciting and not stifling like Batman & Robin or Blade III.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Whedon is pretty good at handling big casts so it should be fine.

[Hokeyboy]

I'm almost entirely sure Singer is going to botch the multiple characters in the next X-Men disaster, but Whedon can pull it off.

[RocShemp]

I'm almost entirely sure Singer is going to botch the multiple characters in the next X-Men disaster, but Whedon can pull it off.

Whedon can definitely do it better but, even with him at the helm, this is reeking of cameo laden disaster.

Singer, on the other hand, doesn't stand a chance unless that new X-Men flick is re-imagined as a mini-series.

[Artman]

They also won't need to spend half the movie assembling the main team either. A handful of new, supporting characters should be fine.

[Timber]

Was watching The Avengers I last night and it just reminded me how much I loved that movie. 2 has to be a let down.

It'll never happen but I want a Hawkeye/Black Widow movie.

[Paul_SD]

They also won't need to spend half the movie assembling the main team either. A handful of new, supporting characters should be fine.

The major exposition is all out of the way.
And because Whedon knows, understands, and respects conventional dramatic structure- he knows to save a big bombastic (read; Thanos) event for the third film.
The second act is good for exploring character development and complications.

I would be just fine with a slimmed down, character-centric second movie with a few modest, well paced/placed set pieces. The thirteen year olds in the audience would be pissing and moaning about how boring it is, but just like what happened with ESB they'll eventually mature and realize that a film where character relationships progress and emotional stakes deepen can be just as satisfying as 50 minutes of bombastic spectacle breaking up the parade of one liners.

I enjoyed Avengers and acknowledge that Whedon did a herculean job keeping the reins tight on the project- but both times I've watched it now I've walked away with the same feeling. It's like meringue. It tickled my eyeballs and was an entirely amiable enough diversion- but I felt absolutely no feeling of emotional investment in the characters. The whole thing with Coulson was big fat dud to me and one of the rare times in a Whedon project where it came across as a gimmick.
If he goes 180 in the opposite direction with the sequel and dials back the spectacle and focuses more on interesting character development (not just Silver Age style bickering), I won't see that as a bad thing.

And Kunis seems like an inspired choice for Wanda. Never pictured her for the character before, but she absolutely fits.