|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on May 18, 2007 17:35:56 GMT -5
Hulk will most likely also appear in an ?Avengers? movie Penn is scripting, the screenwriter confessed.
"Avengers is definitely going to happen; the idea was always to do a crossover with multiple superheros," he revealed of the superhero tag team group, Marvel?s answer to DC?s Justice League. "I'm waiting to let ?Iron Man? and ?Hulk? come out because those are two characters that could appear in it. I used to think that movie would be impossible to make but now I feel like it?s not."
|
|
|
|
Post by balok on May 18, 2007 21:58:58 GMT -5
If they can make Fantastic Four, they can make Avengers. The key, as the studios may be learning slowly, is not to rely on leet special effects, but to let such effects support solid storytelling.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alchemist-X on May 18, 2007 22:45:59 GMT -5
If its going to be a crossover movie, its probably going to be all flash and no substance, but I can remain hopeful for now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase65 on May 24, 2007 16:23:36 GMT -5
after they did X-Men, I have been waiting for a shot at the Avengers
|
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on May 24, 2007 16:25:03 GMT -5
To be fair, since it's the studio that gave us the perfect Iron man armour first time out, I'll give em all the chances they need!
|
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase65 on May 24, 2007 18:24:42 GMT -5
Thor and Iron Man and Cap and Black Panther and Scarlet Witch and Vision and,.... oh my I'm giddy
|
|
fiero84
Probationary Avenger
Posts: 88
|
Post by fiero84 on May 24, 2007 21:50:29 GMT -5
This movie would be EXPENSIVE....but watt da hey? Its only money $$$  |
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase65 on May 26, 2007 6:39:19 GMT -5
I don't know that it would be any more expensive than the other comic book movies. They shoot it with 5 or 6 Avengers and 1 main badguy, it doesn't seem the special effects would be any harder to do than Xmen 3.
Either way, people are turning out for their Super movies, I think if Iron Man does well they can take a little gamble on Avengers.
|
|
fiero84
Probationary Avenger
Posts: 88
|
Post by fiero84 on May 26, 2007 21:46:16 GMT -5
I hope it's harder core action. My problem with X-men, was it seemed like a fashion show for Goth rockers.Shes' dead!...no wait, not really...because.. I dunno. That and the HULK movie. HULK tossed a tank 300 yards, later we see a guy whom exited from that same tank looking back. We all know every bone in his body would have been broken from the fall. ahhhh$##@!....guess marvel wanted the rating low enough so 'kids' would be able to go see it.  |
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Jan 5, 2008 23:48:26 GMT -5
Everyone can cool their jets (if they were still fired up...) about an Avengers movie. Below is a cut-and-paste from Saturday's www.superherotimes.com -- Fans hoping for an Avengers movie will have to wait for their favorite Marvel heroes to assemble, so long as Avi Arad and his Marvel Studios team have their way. According to MTV and Iron Man director Jon Favreau, the team-up will not happen until each character has their own introductory film. Favreau, who expressed interest in directing an Avenger's movie, stated that Marvel was "pretty clear on wanting to do it with the actors who’ve established the roles or to not do it at all." While such a wait would be difficult for die-hard Avengers fans, Favreau feels Marvel is making the right call. “I think it’s a good idea if you use the characters established in the other franchises that then come together for an event." Frankly, he may be right. If an Avengers movie compiled the central characters from four or five other successful comic book films, Marvel could have an historic event on their hands with a huge, built-in audience. |
|
|
|
Post by busterhawk on Jan 9, 2008 3:21:53 GMT -5
That'll be expensive !!  |
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Jan 10, 2008 7:36:07 GMT -5
Well, it makes sense after all, even though it means we have a long wait ahead. Thor movie is still without its main actor as far as I know, and Cap's is just a talk...
|
|
|
|
Post by visionwind on Feb 5, 2008 16:34:43 GMT -5
as long as vision is in it im happy
|
|
|
|
Post by midnight99 on Feb 20, 2008 14:02:20 GMT -5
I think Marvel's approach to a shared universe for most of its upcoming movies is very smart as is waiting to release solo movies for the core Avengers before doing the big group movie.
This way you have established the characters and the stars playing them for the audience and it will be a huge event to see them all together. Compare this to the shoddy planning by Warners for their JLA movie. Even though they spend millions of dollars in promoting Brandon Routh as the new Superman and Christian Bale as the new Batman, were they going to use either in a JLA movie. No, they decided that the JLA movie would be a unique entity and not be tied to the "universes" of the other two franchises. I'm glad the JLA movie was postponed. I liked Routh's portrayal of Superman and am "through the roof" excited by Bale's take on Batman. The ultimate fanboy moment was set for those two to act out the first live action pairing of Batman and Superman on screen and Warners screwed it up.
With people like Downey Jr. and Edward Norton starring in Marvel's upcoming projects, this sets the table very well for an Avengers movie to be bigger than big. And it might not be as much of a wait as you'd think. I have a feeling Captain America and Thor will get fast tracked if the response to Iron Man is huge and one, if not both, could be late summer of '09/early summer of '10. Then, you'll have the four big guns set up for the audience and then you can look for Avengers to bow in 2011. Is three years really too long to wait for an Avengers movie done right? Based on the Iron Man footage so far, I'll be more than happy to wait...
|
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Feb 20, 2008 18:20:06 GMT -5
I agree with your analysis Midnight -- and welcome here  |
|
|
|
Post by Van Plexico on Feb 20, 2008 22:30:28 GMT -5
If they do an AVENGERS movie the way DC is talking of doing a JLA movie-- different actors, lower budget, rush to get it out-- it will be a mediocre affair at best. Maybe 5 or 6 heroes including extremely uninspiring choices such as Nick Fury and Black Widow. BUT. If they do it RIGHT... if they have Downey as Iron Man and Norton as Hulk and the Cap and Thor solo-film actors... AND maybe the Pyms and/or Wanda/Vizh... THEN they would have something for the AGES. SPIDER-MAN 1 big, at least. LORD OF THE RINGS big, maybe, though I probably am getting a *tad* carried away...  |
|
|
|
Post by Van Plexico on Feb 20, 2008 22:33:33 GMT -5
And while I'm at it, here's how I might structure it:
3 movies.
Movie one: They come together after Pym accidentally creates Ultron. You can have one heck of a movie fight when the foe is an indestructible, diabolical robot! So you get the Big 3 plus the Pyms.
Movie two: Kang. Ultron's lurking around, too (like Harry in Spidey 2), so use this one to bring in the Vision. Maybe Wanda, too, if it doesn't over-complicate things.
Movie three: The Masters of Evil, in some form. Maybe the Mansion Siege. By this time, you can have seven or eight Avengers around, for the fans to see, and simply have a few of them taken out early in the action, so you can focus on just three or four (Cap, etc).
|
|
|
|
Post by midnight99 on Feb 21, 2008 0:27:41 GMT -5
Love the idea of the Masters of Evil storyline being a third movie...not that we should get ahead of ourselves. But, that is my all-time favorite Avengers story from back when they could tell a huge, epic story in three issues and didn't turn it into a mega-super-company wide crossover.
While I was running down my thinking for introducing the core Avengers in solo films, I failed to mention Ant-Man. Edgar Wright, who directed the extremely funny/scary Shaun of the Dead, still has this on his "to-do" list. He claims his take will not be a parody. So, you could have Hank and Jan introduced within the next year or two as well.
|
|
