|
|
Post by Marvel Boy on Apr 4, 2016 19:01:24 GMT -5
In a recent interview, Tom Hiddleston teases that his upcoming role as Loki in the 'Thor:Ragnarok' film may be his last.
That got me wondering. There's been hints over the years of Downey Jr. leaving too. With these actors SO closely associated with these characters and beloved by fans (even I think Evans and Hemsworth by now), should they leave for whatever reason, should Marvel be bold and brash enough to recast those roles or perhaps retire the character(s) from the MCU in some way instead?
|
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Apr 5, 2016 8:44:12 GMT -5
In a recent interview, Tom Hiddleston teases that his upcoming role as Loki in the 'Thor:Ragnarok' film may be his last. That got me wondering. There's been hints over the years of Downey Jr. leaving too. With these actors SO closely associated with these characters and beloved by fans (even I think Evans and Hemsworth by now), should they leave for whatever reason, should Marvel be bold and brash enough to recast those roles or perhaps retire the character(s) from the MCU in some way instead? Wellllll, it's really that age-old Hollywood problem, isn't it? It takes more time to make a movie in a feature series like this than the in-context elapsed time wants to be. The lead actors age faster than their characters. Heck, even the THIN MAN series (1934-1946) doesn't hold up under chronological scrutiny, since it's quickly anchored by a pregnancy and then an offspring. It takes 12 years to tell a story that, at the very stretchiest, elapsed over maybe 6 or 7. . . all set smack in their present day. But this isn't exactly new ground for superhero films, and hopefully some lessons have been learned from the comically rotating Bruce Waynes from the first Batman franchise. That was, frankly, just dreadful and to me was the heart of that franchise's downward death-spiral. However, Disney/Marvel would never in kazillion years even remotely consider retiring Iron Man or Cap or Thor as entities (when there's perpetual gold to be mined from them), so they need to look to smarter long-view franchises to see how they handled aging/departing lead (and major supporting) actors from the stable. James Bond, say-- and Dr Who. Although Dr Who hit upon its unique conceit at the first juncture-- so that would be a tough example to follow. With Hiddleston? Man, I do think I'd retire Loki. They will never, ever replace Hiddleston's portrayal with someone that won't suffer in comparison. And interestingly. . . if they wanted to somehow revive the character in a few years, he could come back in female form! There's a precedent! HB |
|
|
|
Post by Marvel Boy on Apr 16, 2016 16:58:52 GMT -5
With Hiddleston? Man, I do think I'd retire Loki. They will never, ever replace Hiddleston's portrayal with someone that won't suffer in comparison. And interestingly. . . if they wanted to somehow revive the character in a few years, he could come back in female form! There's a precedent! HB They could get quite creative if they so choose. A female Loki would be daring (and fun). Steve could lose the serum and age to an old man. Thor may be a slight problem since he's basically immortal (or at least ages slower). Just as long as they don't bring in Teen Tony. There's no denying the actors' portrayals influencing the books though. The current young Loki running around Aaron's Thor title looks remarkably similar to Hiddleston. Read Bendis' current Iron Man title with Downey Jr's 'voice' as Tony and it's a near spot-on adaptation. |
|
