|
Post by spiderwasp on Apr 28, 2012 16:37:59 GMT -5
Ignore the other poll that looks the same. I failed to click the option for choosing 3 instead of 1 but then couldn't change it. While most of us still have no idea who is hinted at after the credits, I thought it would be good to see who we would like to see. I threw in a couple of choices that will make me scream if they win though. lol. ;D
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Apr 28, 2012 17:58:05 GMT -5
The big danger with adding more Avengers (much as we love and want them) is falling into the "double the characters for the 2nd film" trap. Just so easy for it to turn into a kitchen-sink mess.
In a perfect world, we'd be able to see films like this as television shows-- while maintaining the feature-film trappings that they thrive on. The one, major drawback (and I think it may be a considerable one) is literally how many years it takes to simply produce one installment of a continuing saga. Story and character development tend to get mightily compressed (it kinda clobbered the Harry Potter films, in some instances), and the aging of the actors themselves will certainly come into play eventually. Heck, look how much Brent Spiner aged in a mere seven years playing the theoretically-unchanging Data in ST:NG. I worry mostly about Robert Downey Jr, as he's more our age, and I could easily see him being asked to play Tony Stark for another 8 years or so. Maybe 10.
Live in the now, HB-- live in the now---
HB
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Apr 28, 2012 19:37:39 GMT -5
I voted for Vision, Wasp and Scarlet Witch, because they would each add a new and different power set and personality POV.
However, I agree with HB in that it would be risky to add so many new characters, unless they take away someone from the cast of the first film. With Iron Man, Cap, Thor and Hulk more or less unmovable, the sacrifices would have to be Black Widow and/or Hawkeye. And yet, the Widow is amazing in this film, and Clint is cool in his own way. Tough tough call...
I felt this was the problem in the X-Men movies. Cyclops became unnecessary by X2, and was disposed of in X3, while Colossus was relegated to the background and Nightcrawler was only in X2. The Avengers film works so well because everyone has their proper place, I'm not sure how much tinkering could be added without ruining everything.
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Apr 28, 2012 20:04:03 GMT -5
You're right, Shir-- the X-Men films are a perfect example of what I was thinking of. Spiderman 3, also (a plethora of villains where one would suffice). Now, Joss is good at juggling characters and keeping them all "alive" for us-- but I'm also remembering how BuffytVS tended to err in over-expanding its core cast, which definitely cost it in charm and sense of intimacy.
Say, I'm not sure the Scarlet Witch would be available for the Avengers franchise-- isn't she part of the X-Men's stable? Rights still owned by. . . Fox, is it? (I've lost track-). Somewhere out there (lost among the links) was a site that listed which studios still had the rights for different Marvel properties, and which characters came with that package. The lists were surprisingly extensive. I wonder if that link came from here, in fact. . . ?
HB
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Apr 28, 2012 20:18:01 GMT -5
I very recently read an interview about that very topic. Apparently, Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver are "up for grabs" by both franchises because neither has used them yet. However, when they appear in one, they can't appear in the other anymore, so it all depends on who, if anyone, picks them.
And, HB, you are spot on about the ever expanding cast of BTVS. Over there, it happened gradually, over 7 seasons and I don't know how many episodes, but in Avengers it would be almost sudden. Having said that, a counter argument would be: new characters would help Joss explore new themes and different interactions, to avoid the risk of replaying what has been already done and argued in Avengers. Boy, talk about tricky...
You know, I wouldn't be surprised if Whedon declines to direct Avengers 2. With the current one being so good on so many levels, A2 seems already destined to do worse.
|
|
|
Post by spiderwasp on Apr 28, 2012 22:00:29 GMT -5
One thing that could help significantly would be to add characters through the other films which I why I did pose the question as "Avengers related films." For example, if Antman and the Wasp were introduced through Ironman, Hercules through Thor, and the Falcon or Black Panther through Captain America then not everyone would have to be in the next Avengers film itself but we'd still get to see them. I'd love to see Hank and Jan introduced that way and then brought into the Avengers movie which could easily create a logical opening for Ultron and ultimately the Vision. I think Pietro and Wanda might be trickier even though I'd love to see them.
It could eventually mean that some of the principals involved here are not in one or more of the films as well. Does Hulk have to be there? Does Nick Fury have to stay active? Same with Hawkeye and Black Widow. They may have a lot to add to this film, but I'm not sure they are essential to the franchise. I will concede, however, that even though I have no problem with a comic book Avengers line-up that doesn't include Thor, Ironman, or Cap, I can't see the future movies not including all three. To me, everyone else can be rotated in and out. I also enjoy cameos but I know those can be treacherous due to actor's egos. For example, that brief moment with Hugh Jackman in X-Men First Class was awesome. It was all that was needed.
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Apr 29, 2012 8:04:32 GMT -5
The problem with films is that there is so much that has to be taken into account. You may get rid of the Widow and replace her with Wasp, but she needs to be casted right, appeal to the public, appeal to the director, have some sort of unique role that makes her necessary, and so on. Get one thing wrong, and the entire product may crumble.
Take Natasha, she was pretty much unnecessary in IM 2, but she really comes on her own here because Whedon likes strong-willed female characters with little or no powers. A different director and she would only be a pretty body in the background.
In my mind, Avengers 2 should either add only one new character and confirm the entire cast of Avengers, or replace Hawkeye and possibly Natasha with someone else, but at the risk of losing the human perspective these two offer. Iron Man, Thor, Cap and Hulk are probably untouchable.
|
|
|
Post by ultron69 on Apr 29, 2012 12:51:04 GMT -5
I love She-Hulk, and would have voted for her, but I don't really want both Hulk and She-Hulk on the same team, so instead I voted for Ant-Man, Wasp, and Black Panther. Actually, I'd probably have voted for Vision, but I didn't notice his name until after I voted. I thought it was odd that Vision wasn't on the list! I love the Black Panther, so he's on, and I love the Wasp, as she adds fun to the team, and if you have her, you have to have Hank.
|
|
|
Post by pulpcitizen on Apr 29, 2012 15:47:42 GMT -5
My 3 picks are:
1. Vision; if realised right (and ideal with Ultron if he was the villain) 2. Giant-man/Ant-man - maybe for dropping Hulk, even though Hulk is brilliant in Avengers. 3. Captain Marvel/Photon/Monica Rambeau; she would have a fairly unique power set and would therefore stand out well from the crowd. And she has always been one of my favourites.
|
|
|
Post by ultron69 on Apr 30, 2012 9:51:41 GMT -5
Captain Marvel/Photon/Monica Rambeau would be an interesting and surprise choice. I liked her when she was written by Roger Stern, though of course he created her so he was always pumping her up. I also agree that Ultron should be the villain if the Vision is introduced. And please, not the John Byrne version of the Vision!
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Apr 30, 2012 10:06:18 GMT -5
Wow, yeah-- it would be great to see Monica on this team, although she's almost too well-adjusted to fit in with this gang. But IMO the team is hurting for powerful female members. I suspect we'd be more likely to see "sexy" choices like Wanda or Warbird first, or the more historically significant Wasp. As much as I've always liked She-Hulk, I doubt she'd be well-regarded by the movie-going public, and would be deemed redundant or exploitative.
I'd be delighted to see any of these members added, though, make no mistake. Honestly, Black Widow would have been just about my last choice.
HB
|
|
|
Post by ultron69 on Apr 30, 2012 14:31:24 GMT -5
Black Widow does seem like an odd choice. I suspect they felt it was easier to stick her in there than most of the others, who'd require a longer origin explanation.
|
|
|
Post by spiderwasp on Apr 30, 2012 15:14:42 GMT -5
I'm glad to hear that I'm not alone in thinking the Widow was an odd choice. Don't get me wrong. I did enjoy her in Ironman 2, more than I expected too, but still... She's never been a particularly valuable Avenger or even interesting character IMO. She is, by far, the most expendable member of the cast. I know others disagree but I think Hulk is the next most expendable. I kind of like that he's in the first movie. It really ties in with Avengers history but I don't seem him as very important as far as longevity goes.
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Apr 30, 2012 18:31:41 GMT -5
I know others disagree but I think Hulk is the next most expendable. . . I don't seem him as very important as far as longevity goes. *GASP* ...ggnnnrghhhh.. . . *gurgle* . . . can't. . . breathe. . . room. . . spinning. . . . . . world . . . crashing. . . around me. . . . . . HB
|
|
|
Post by ultron69 on May 3, 2012 13:34:17 GMT -5
The other reason they stuck in the Widow is that they needed a female, obviously, and again it goes back to not needing a separate movie for her to explain her origin.
Normally I'd agree 100% with spiderwasp that the Hulk is the second most expendable Avengers (obviously a mindless brute isn't the best choice for a team), but since I've been hearing how he stole the show in this movie, I'll wait until I see it until I make a judgement on that.
|
|
|
Post by betaraybill on May 28, 2012 13:33:04 GMT -5
One thing that could help significantly would be to add characters through the other films which I why I did pose the question as "Avengers related films." Excellent point. By the time A2 is ready to be scripted, we'll have another Iron Man, Thor and Cap advancing the overall story and shaping what is to come. Any word on a Hulk sequel? I'd think with the buzz around him now it'd be a logical move by the movie makers. If he is expendable, as some of you fools(!) claim (and by "fools" i mean "cretins", and by "cretins" I mean "I'm KIDDING, don't hurt me!"), then in THAT particular movie the Avengers could have a pretty bitchin' fight scene with a rampaging Hulk (as directed by the Leader). The thought of a Black Widow/Hawkeye spin off scares me like the Elektra movie did. I don't think they can carry a feature film. In any case, I'd love to see Black Panther helping Iron Man against Mandarin, and the Falcon helping Cap against Arnim Zola (trying to bring back Red Skull), in their next movies. As for Thor... I don't know what to expect. It's likely to involve the tesseract, and the One who's willing to court death to have it.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Cowl on Jun 10, 2012 16:36:30 GMT -5
I went with The Wasp, The Scarlet Witch and The Vision as they're the characters I think would bring the most to it. Realistically you can't have Jan without Hank and Pietro would be almost a given with Wanda so its not exactly likely...
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jun 10, 2012 19:40:10 GMT -5
I went with The Wasp, The Scarlet Witch and The Vision as they're the characters I think would bring the most to it. Realistically you can't have Jan without Hank and Pietro would be almost a given with Wanda so its not exactly likely... I wonder. . . I wonder if it would be possible to have Jan w/out Hank or Wanda w/out Pietro? Or possibly w/ a very minimal early contribution by either of the two entangled gentlemen? Hank's there as a character (scientist, getting the Ulton ball rolling, and all that), and is debilitated early on- or even in IM3?- by an ill-advised foray into Giant-Manism. The result is a shrinking experiment (perhaps Jan does it to herself?), and we now have a much more stable Wasp. . . and several viable reasons for Hank to remain a less than stable personality, even as he remains in the picture. Pietro could certainly show up w/ Wanda, and then quit in a(n almost predictable) fit of pique. Tell me that wouldn't be in character? Perhaps runs off to emerge in the future as more of a bad-guy? In a later film? A big question I'd have is, where does the 2nd film go? The internal conflicts that pretty much every character in the first film is experiencing is a huge, huge part of what makes it compelling. Assuming the same characters and cast for the 2nd-- what would be the driving internal crises for each of them, now that they've come together as a team? Granted, the stand-alone films happily provide a lot of opportunity for that to be set up for the big three-- but boy, it would HAVE to be crafted very carefully. . . HB
|
|
|
Post by starfoxxx on Jun 11, 2012 16:03:00 GMT -5
I went with Quicksilver and the Scarlet Witch. Siblings would be easy to introduce (I remember thinking one of the many downfalls of Spider-man 3 was the origins of Sandman AND Venom being crammed into one movie), their parent(s) would be a cool tease, and their powers are different enough from the exisgting Avengers to make them stand out. I think the creators should also simply assume the audience knows about mutants, rather than make a big thing about the source of their powers.
But I WOULD want a set-up for the introduction of the VISION in Avengers 3.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Cowl on Jun 14, 2012 8:52:53 GMT -5
I think it'd be easy enough to do Wanda without Pietro, but Jan without Hank would really necessitate a whole new origin which doesn't sound like a very good idea.
|
|