RE: The Avengers

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

RE: The Avengers

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Future Films >> RE: The Avengers

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Avengers - 23/7/2010 2:09:16 PM

needa bigger boat

Posts: 61
Joined: 4/1/2006
From: out there like pluto

I think Whedon will do a great job on the character scenes given his work on Buffy/Angel etc but I'm a lot less sure about how he will manage the action set pieces! I'd like to hope that Marvel will get an experienced 2nd unit guy and a good SFX team together to handle the rough and tumble stuff for JW.

Quietly optimistic at the minute!

(in reply to Marwood)

Post #: 91

RE: The Avengers - 24/7/2010 7:39:37 AM

Dirty Hartigan

Posts: 5890
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Manchester

I'm slightly baffled by all the worrying over the action scenes - Whedon's TV shows have involved plenty of action. Certainly he's had more experience than Chris Nolan did before the Batman pictures. He knows the characters well enough to write them a good solid story and direct an ensemble cast - those are the major priorities, personally speaking.

< Message edited by Dirty Hartigan -- 24/7/2010 7:40:51 AM >

(in reply to needa bigger boat)

Post #: 92

RE: The Avengers - 24/7/2010 12:17:12 PM

needa bigger boat

Posts: 61
Joined: 4/1/2006
From: out there like pluto

Its the action from Whedon's TV shows that cause me to worry! Maybe its just me but every time I watch Buffy/Angel/Whatever as soon as any action kicks off its pulls me out of the show, they seem to be "staged" really badly. Haven't watched much of his recent output so potentially things have improved a lot since then. Hope so!

(in reply to Dirty Hartigan)

Post #: 93

RE: The Avengers - 24/7/2010 1:01:19 PM

Marwood

Posts: 2615
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dirty Hartigan

I'm slightly baffled by all the worrying over the action scenes - Whedon's TV shows have involved plenty of action. Certainly he's had more experience than Chris Nolan did before the Batman pictures. He knows the characters well enough to write them a good solid story and direct an ensemble cast - those are the major priorities, personally speaking.

Come on Hartigan, this is Marvel's big push and really needs large scale action. I too hope with Whedon on board that the characters will be at the forefront but make no mistake that following from the solo films this needs to up the stakes in terms of how the action plays out and Whedon has little experience on a convas this size.

His TV shows can't really be used to show his credentials because (on Buffy and Angel at least) he didn't direct much of them - just the important episodes really. You're right that other directors with a lack of action experience can step up to the plate but even then I wouldn't say Chris Nolan is really a good parallel because neither of his Batman films really had large scale scenes with superpowered characters slugging it out.

As I said before I think how well the scale of the film is shot is as much dependent on the production team (asst. director, 2nd unit director, dp etc.) so Whedon should be fine.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to Dirty Hartigan)

Post #: 94

RE: The Avengers - 24/7/2010 4:39:28 PM

Dirty Hartigan

Posts: 5890
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Manchester

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood

As I said before I think how well the scale of the film is shot is as much dependent on the production team (asst. director, 2nd unit director, dp etc.) so Whedon should be fine.

Yes, absolutely. That's why I don't consider it a concern - it's a big budget Disney funded production, it's going to look fine!

(in reply to Marwood)

Post #: 95

RE: The Avengers - 25/7/2010 9:29:15 AM

Marwood

Posts: 2615
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows

Well Aintitcoolnews has a quick breakdown of The Avengers panel at Comicon yesterday, the full line up were there:

Samuel L Jackson as Nick Fury
Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow
Robert Downey Jnr as Iron Man
Chris Hensworth as Thor
Chris Evans as Captain America
Clark Gregg as Agent Coulson

and then two surprises:

Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye
Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner

and then Joss Whedon took the stage

There's some nice group shots of the lineup and I'm sure all throughout today the other sites will start throwing details up alongside coverage of the Thor and Cap panels. Despite the Edward Norton controversy I think Ruffalo is a solid choice for Banner so will be interested to see how he works out, great to see Renner officially officially announced now. Interesting that there's no Ant Man/Giant Man or Wasp (yet?) so perhaps they are going to be cameos to tie in with Edgar Wright's Ant Man film...anyway, geekgasm - the Avengers assembled for the first time on stage.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to Dirty Hartigan)

Post #: 96

RE: The Avengers - 25/7/2010 9:04:37 PM

darth silas

Posts: 4949
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: My living room

Norton should have been part of that line up dammit!

_____________________________

Star Wars:Episodes 1,2,3,4,5,6.Taken together they are one giant movie and it is the greatest movie EVER.

(in reply to Marwood)

Post #: 97

RE: The Avengers - 25/7/2010 9:33:41 PM

Dirty Hartigan

Posts: 5890
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Manchester

quote:

ORIGINAL: darth silas

Norton should have been part of that line up dammit!

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day...

(in reply to darth silas)

Post #: 98

RE: The Avengers - 25/7/2010 10:27:27 PM

Marwood

Posts: 2615
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dirty Hartigan

quote:

ORIGINAL: darth silas

Norton should have been part of that line up dammit!

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day...

Well he wasn't and I'm of the opinion that it's now officially time to move on; it would have been great to see Norton on the team but at least he left with dignity, will make more great films and his replacement is a very fine actor.

Don't threaten me with a dead fish.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to Dirty Hartigan)

Post #: 99

RE: The Avengers - 26/7/2010 8:44:44 PM

Ghidorah

Posts: 2627
Joined: 6/10/2005

This is speculation but I think it comes down to screen time vs cost. Norton's role in the Avengers movie is going to be very limited simply because he doesn't have the body to play as a 12 foot giant. We also don't know how much Bruce Banner will appear in the film and of course the beginning is about Tony Stark being 'fit' to wear the Ironman suite.

I watched Incredible Hulk for the first time since Ironman 2 and it does appear The Leader is the villian for the Avengers movie. It does sound like Genral Ross carried on the super soldier program after the climax and things goes bad. I guess the Avengers minus stark at the time suspect the Hulk for the attacks and goes after him.

(in reply to Marwood)

Post #: 100

RE: The Avengers - 27/7/2010 12:27:02 AM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

Feige did specifically address the money question and said it had nothing to do with that. I personally think that although money almost certainly was a factor, it was either screen time and/or some degree of creative control - either at script stage or the edit stage or both - that really scuppered the deal. I figure that while they might think it's fine for the star actor in their own individual franchises to have a big input (as RDJ had with Iron Man and Norton had with Hulk), they want (rightly) to retain ultimate control over their movies themselves and what Norton (through his agent) was demanding was more than they were willing to give.

I also think that because of the appeal Norton made to the fans about pressuring Marvel to bring him back (which he got), his agent figured he was in a stronger bargaining position than they really were - and at some point Marvel thought "fuck this" and decided "to go in another direction".

Obviously I can't say any of this with any certainty, but, especially after reading the agents response to Feige's statement (which if you read between the lines heavily implies some of this), this is imho the most likely explanation.

< Message edited by KeithM -- 27/7/2010 12:28:37 AM >

(in reply to Ghidorah)

Post #: 101

RE: The Avengers - 27/7/2010 5:01:50 AM

Dirty Hartigan

Posts: 5890
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Manchester

quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM

Feige did specifically address the money question and said it had nothing to do with that.

Well, he would say that, wouldn't he?

I think there's been too many disputes over Marvel Studios' attempts to underpay big actors now (Jackson, Rourke) to take his statements seriously. I have to respect Norton for showing a bit of class in his own public statement on the affair, leaving the franchise with dignity. Certainly Ruffalo is a fine actor and will do a good job in his place.

< Message edited by Dirty Hartigan -- 27/7/2010 5:02:54 AM >

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 102

RE: The Avengers - 27/7/2010 8:12:51 AM

Marwood

Posts: 2615
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dirty Hartigan

quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM

Feige did specifically address the money question and said it had nothing to do with that.

Well, he would say that, wouldn't he? I think there's been too many disputes over Marvel Studios' attempts to underpay big actors now (Jackson, Rourke) to take his statements seriously. I have to respect Norton for showing a bit of class in his own public statement on the affair, leaving the franchise with dignity. Certainly Ruffalo is a fine actor and will do a good job in his place.

Yeah but for every pay story there's been ten instances of the actors not complaining; has anyone ever thought it could just be Jackson and Rourke bitching? Not to call them bitches as such because they're both terrific actors and could snap me like a twig (love you guys) but considering how much actors in these productions get paid even if it's on the "low" side I think it's debatable whether Marvel were being "cheap" or the actors were stroking their egos and just asking for more because....well why not? It's worth a shot right? Considering how little Rourke had to do in Iron Man 2 I imagine that what Marvel were offering originally probably wasn't actually an insultingly low sum but he just wanted more.

And yes I know Rourke and Jackson are big stars compared to say Hemsworth or Evans but has anyone read stories where Anthony Hopkins has been moaning about money? Or Tommy Lee Jones? Or Natalie Portman? No?

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to Dirty Hartigan)

Post #: 103

RE: The Avengers - 27/7/2010 4:54:03 PM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dirty Hartigan
Well, he would say that, wouldn't he?

Even if it were true...

Marvel have seen their characters being butchered in other movies, so I don't blame them at all for wanting to retain control over them now they're producing movies themselves.

They've also experienced bankruptcy in the past, and have to manage a large returning cast of characters over a number of movies and franchises - and in the current financial climate it only makes sense to keep costs under control - especially when it comes to what you're paying your actors (which can eat up a huge chunk of the budget if you're not careful). Jackson and Rourke only bitched because they weren't offered their usual over-inflated, pre-financial crisis rates. So, they were a little pissed Marvel refused to be a part of that particular gravy train. Boo hoo for them, good on Marvel for not giving in to prima-donna demands.

Jackson did end up signing a 9 movie deal, so it's not like they low-balled him to the degree where it wasn't good enough in the end...

And as Marwood said, the vast majority of the actors on board - including stars every bit as big as SLJ, MR & EN, if not bigger - seem perfectly happy and downright enthusiastic about working for them.

It's very easy to paint the "corporation" as the bad guy over the poor little actor guys, paid a pittance for the gruelling work they do, I know. But it ain't always as black and white as it seems.

Marvel are just making it clear who's in charge here - it's taken them a long, long time to get into this position, so, while I was disappointed to lose Norton, I find it difficult not to see - and even support - their position inna final analysis.

< Message edited by KeithM -- 27/7/2010 4:55:02 PM >

(in reply to Dirty Hartigan)

Post #: 104

RE: The Avengers - 27/7/2010 5:03:01 PM

Beno

Posts: 8078
Joined: 15/2/2007
From: Sheffield

So whos gonna be the big BAD in this movie ?

In the last Hulk movie we saw the birth of Leader .... any chance ?

Talking of Hulk i hope its not just a case of chasing him down and taming him ..... we need a proper Super Villain .

Loki was an early foe in the comics and could feature as he's already in Thor .

Ideas anyone .............. ??

_____________________________

"The one about the space hairdresser and the cowboy. He's got a tinfoil pal and a pedalbin. His Father's a robot and he's fucking fucked his Sister. Lego ... They're all made of fucking Lego!!"

(in reply to Marwood)

Post #: 105

RE: The Avengers - 27/7/2010 5:11:59 PM

bobatim

Posts: 5608
Joined: 8/4/2006
From: The Killbot Factory!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Beno

So whos gonna be the big BAD in this movie ?

In the last Hulk movie we saw the birth of Leader .... any chance ?

Talking of Hulk i hope its not just a case of chasing him down and taming him ..... we need a proper Super Villain .

Loki was an early foe in the comics and could feature as he's already in Thor .

Ideas anyone .............. ??

I think that could be a good way to open the film, with the team tracking him and confronting him, but would make a weak plot to carry the whole movie on. I hope we get one big bad, who provides a real threat to the avengers and not a tacked on taking over the world scheme.

_____________________________

Is he died?

www.penultimateuniverse.blogspot.com

(in reply to Beno)

Post #: 106

RE: The Avengers - 27/7/2010 5:52:07 PM

lukeyboy

Posts: 1638
Joined: 11/10/2005
From: Saaaaf Laaandaan you slaaag!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Beno

So whos gonna be the big BAD in this movie ?

In the last Hulk movie we saw the birth of Leader .... any chance ?

Talking of Hulk i hope its not just a case of chasing him down and taming him ..... we need a proper Super Villain .

Loki was an early foe in the comics and could feature as he's already in Thor .

Ideas anyone .............. ??

Leader would be great especially if Tim Blake Nelson reprises his role. But I think they should stick with The Hulk going all apeshit n'that (perhaps manipulated by Loki), but also have Black Widow turn on The Avengers as well - she could be the nastiest villain of all if done properly (like in The Ultimates where she meets a very nasty but also very cool end at the hands of Tony Stark)

_____________________________

I feel like i'm Han Solo, your Chewie and she's Ben Kenobi - and we're in that FUCKED UP bar!!

(in reply to Beno)

Post #: 107

RE: The Avengers - 27/7/2010 5:58:59 PM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

I think the big bad will be Loki manipulating the Hulk to initially seem the bad guy. (possibly with ties to other individual antagonists - Leader, Mandarin, Red Skull) and the plot a variation on the first Avengers issues (with a mix of Ultimates thrown in for realism and a unique movie spin for surprises)

I think basically that'll be it for the plot. Before you think "that's a bit thin", think about it - most of the movie will be about how the team gets together, introducing members not introduced yet (Hawkeye for sure, possibly the Pyms), going after and taking down Hulk (which could easily make a whole movie in itself if you think about it), but then having the reveal of Loki being behind it all - and I'm going to assume it'll be a little more than just "oh it's Loki - chase Loki -stop Loki".

There'll be the laying of the groundwork, foreshadowing (we know the cosmic cube and infinity gauntlet have been revealed, so perhaps one of the infinity gems might be a macguffin or lead in to a sequel or even another character - Warlock?), easter eggs galore, epic battles - but also a lot of character interaction - which is where the 'meat' of the movie will come from, I suspect.

They could lay the groundwork or foreshadow other greater things in the MU - Celestials, Kree-Skrull war (I don't think this will be the plot - there's too much to be part of the "origin" story imo), Cosmic Entities... the possibilities are endless.

So, while a plot summary of "Earth's Mightiest Heroes unite to take down Earth's Mightiest Mortal" might look a bit thin, I think there's more than enough there to fill out a movie.

(in reply to bobatim)

Post #: 108

RE: The Avengers - 28/7/2010 3:59:29 AM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

According to an unofficial and unconfirmed "scoop" on comicbookmovie.com:

quote:

If all goes according to the current plan, The Avengers will feature minor (MINOR) appearances by key cosmic beings from the Marvel Universe. The Easter Eggs won't just be pleasing to fans, but an easy way to pique interest from general audiences.

The characters being considered for inclusion are: Captain Marvel (an amalgam of Mar-Vell and Noh-Varr), Adam Worlock, Black Bolt and Nova. Several of these roles are already being written into the current film treatment, and actors are already being pursued to portray them.

Other characters that may find a way into the film(s): Drax the Destroyer, Moondragon, the Guardians of the Galaxy and Eternity

The guy claiming the scoop is fairly reliable and is known to have insider contacts that have given him good info in the past, but as I said, it is unofficial and unconfirmed, so take it as you will.

Full article: http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/Poniverse/news/?a=20758

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 109

RE: The Avengers - 28/7/2010 8:18:36 AM

grucl

Posts: 2434
Joined: 11/2/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood
but has anyone read stories where Anthony Hopkins has been moaning about money?

Hopkins once said (I think in an EMPIRE interview) that when they asked him to appear in M�ssion:Impossible 2 he thought "Ok, why not. Fly down to Australia, work for 2 days, collect a small paycheck and go sightseeing".

(in reply to Marwood)

Post #: 110

RE: The Avengers - 28/7/2010 8:50:59 AM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

Marvel didn't make MI 2, so your point is...?

(in reply to grucl)

Post #: 111

RE: The Avengers - 5/8/2010 5:53:54 PM

lukeyboy

Posts: 1638
Joined: 11/10/2005
From: Saaaaf Laaandaan you slaaag!

Ok, in the teaser trailer with 'ol Sam doing the voiceover he says:

"..and there came a day, a day unlike anyother, when Earth's mightiest heroes found themselves united against a common threat. To fight the foes no single superhero could withstand. On that day,...... The Avengers were born!"

This would suggest to me that most people (myself included) may well have been wrong about the villain(s) of the piece. I among others figured it would be The Hulk gone apeshit perhaps manipulated by Loki (like The Ultimates), but the tone of language used (common threat & foes plural) suggests to me that we may well be looking at The Skrull - it just has that kinda feel to it.

Am i just completely mental or does anyone else get that feeling from the teaser?

_____________________________

I feel like i'm Han Solo, your Chewie and she's Ben Kenobi - and we're in that FUCKED UP bar!!

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 112

RE: The Avengers - 5/8/2010 7:23:19 PM

The Hooded Man

Posts: 2721
Joined: 12/7/2006

Dark Horizons ran a snippet a few weeks ago saying that the Skrulls were the villains.
I also found this

http://dailypop.wordpress.com/2010/05/23/skrulls-name-dropped-as-enemy-in-avengers-film/

< Message edited by The Hooded Man -- 5/8/2010 7:27:05 PM >

_____________________________

Counting the minutes until the over zealous mods lock this thread too.

(in reply to lukeyboy)

Post #: 113

RE: The Avengers - 5/8/2010 7:54:29 PM

Marwood

Posts: 2615
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows

The Skrulls have been mentioned before as possibles and I think that's sprung from comments that The Ultimates vol 1 was being used as inspiration for this film - seeing as the Skrulls were the big threat in that series it's not unthinkable that they'll be adapted for the screen here. And before any Ultimates fans say "Aha but the Skrulls weren't in Ultimates, they were different shape changing aliens" Mark Millar had said in interview before that they are Ultimate Skrulls but he gave them a different name - there's a bit of script in the story where their leader is talking about various names they've been given over the years by different cultures and Skrull is one of them. Sorry to get too geeky there but I'm sure someone was going to point out the gap in my statement

Anyway, I would have said no to an extraterrestrial threat because I'm personally not keen on seeing the cosmic Marvel U on screen yet. I know Thor is opening the door to otherworldly stuff though so it's entirely feasible that The Avengers will be saving the world from aliens.

However I like the Loki idea and I think Tom Hiddleston has stated that he'd like to be involved with the film so maybe as others have speculated Loki will be in there - he was responsible for bringing the heroes together back in the 60s stories after all.

Still, if there is going to be an earth based threat then why not something like Hydra? It looks like they'll be featured in Captain America and have a long history as Shield's opposite agency after all. Or perhaps this will be The Mandarin's entrance at last and Iron Man 3 could act as a sequel story in some respects?

As for the Hulk chase - I say that's got to be the team's first mission together. Fury knows something is coming and gets them together and also wants to tie up the Hulk problem. Better he's in their custody than with the enemy sort of thing. After a massive struggle in the Canadian wilderness (to follow Incredible Hulk's ending) Cap, Iron Man, Thor and the Shield agents subdue Hulk who is held and then released to fight alongside them against the big bad in the finale - again, close to how The Ultimates used Hulk. I would love to see that.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to The Hooded Man)

Post #: 114

RE: The Avengers - 6/8/2010 4:57:05 AM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood
...And before any Ultimates fans say...

Any 'real' fans wouldn't argue the point. The Chitauri were clearly just the Skrulls by another name.

quote:

Anyway, I would have said no to an extraterrestrial threat because I'm personally not keen on seeing the cosmic Marvel U on screen yet.

I agree and as Marvel have said that they'll be introducing (briefly) some cosmic heroes and elements in Avengers - emphasis on 'briefly' - that would indicate a 'down the line' thing more than the main threat immediately.

quote:

However I like the Loki idea and I think Tom Hiddleston has stated that he'd like to be involved with the film so maybe as others have speculated Loki will be in there - he was responsible for bringing the heroes together back in the 60s stories after all.

He actually said "I don't think I can talk about that" when asked if he was going to be in the Avengers - which to all intents and purposes amounts to a confirmation that he probably will be.

I too think this is the most likely 'plot' for the Avengers. Thor's solo movie will mainly deal with his banishment and redemption and possibly end with him regaining his throne - which then gives Loki the perfect motive to hit his dear brother where it hurts - Earth and us humans. Very much like the Ultimates/original Avengers plot as you mention.

I think the Skrulls will require too much time to develop properly when there's been no build-up to them at all so far, while we already know the 'Tesseract' (Cosmic Cube to you and me) connects both Thor and Cap and hints that Loki might have some sort of connection with the Red Skull (Loki is seen with the Cube briefly in the comic-con footage and we know the Skull gets his hands on it from the Cap comic-con footage, so they're clearly linked somehow).

I think the Skrulls may be foreshadowed in the Avengers though, as a set-up for a sequel at least, where I think they'd be better served.

quote:

Still, if there is going to be an earth based threat then why not something like Hydra? It looks like they'll be featured in Captain America and have a long history as Shield's opposite agency after all.

I think they'll be around exactly as you suggest - as the 'evil' counterpart to SHIELD (perhaps even the reason why shield is formed), but I don't think they'll require Earth's Mightiest Heroes to unite in and of themselves. They'll just be Marvel's SPECTRE basically - multi-purpose bad guys and henchmen factory rolled into one..

quote:

Or perhaps this will be The Mandarin's entrance at last and Iron Man 3 could act as a sequel story in some respects?

Can't see this. I think Favreau will be given pretty much free reign on Iron Man 3 without being tied too closely to the Avengers after having 'taken one for the team' on Iron Man 2.

quote:

As for the Hulk chase - I say that's got to be the team's first mission together. Fury knows something is coming and gets them together and also wants to tie up the Hulk problem. Better he's in their custody than with the enemy sort of thing. After a massive struggle in the Canadian wilderness (to follow Incredible Hulk's ending) Cap, Iron Man, Thor and the Shield agents subdue Hulk who is held and then released to fight alongside them against the big bad in the finale - again, close to how The Ultimates used Hulk. I would love to see that.

As I said above, I think that's pretty much how it'll go too. I can see this 'fitting' in a 2 hour+ movie as most of the elements and set up has already been/is being established., whereas getting the team together and introducing a whole new threat will require so much set-up that I just can't see how they'd fit it in.

Skrulls for Avengers 2 I reckon.

< Message edited by KeithM -- 6/8/2010 4:59:13 AM >

(in reply to Marwood)

Post #: 115

RE: The Avengers - 6/8/2010 9:50:14 AM

The Hooded Man

Posts: 2721
Joined: 12/7/2006

I don't think a film of The Avengers tracking the Hulk will be enough frankly. Especially after 4 years of build-up. The stakes will have to be higher than ever before, by all means having them track The Hulk would work well maybe as a pre-credits sequence and then have him join them for the final battle, you could even set it up so the Hulk chase was like the Jabba sections of Return of the Jedi. it's clear from the teaser that the threat is bigger than ever before and frankly while the Hulk on the loose rampaging would be fun it doesn't fit the Earth's heroes uniting for one last stand vibe.

_____________________________

Counting the minutes until the over zealous mods lock this thread too.

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 116

RE: The Avengers - 6/8/2010 10:10:47 AM

lukeyboy

Posts: 1638
Joined: 11/10/2005
From: Saaaaf Laaandaan you slaaag!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood

As for the Hulk chase - I say that's got to be the team's first mission together. Fury knows something is coming and gets them together and also wants to tie up the Hulk problem. Better he's in their custody than with the enemy sort of thing. After a massive struggle in the Canadian wilderness (to follow Incredible Hulk's ending) Cap, Iron Man, Thor and the Shield agents subdue Hulk who is held and then released to fight alongside them against the big bad in the finale - again, close to how The Ultimates used Hulk. I would love to see that.

Yeah i agree, I would bet that The Avengers will start with S.H.I.E.L.D agents tracking down and capturing The Hulk with the help of Cap, Hawkeye and Iron Man which will all be done and dusted in the first 15-20 mins of the film. Then The Skrull will "reveal" themselves as the big-bad of the movie by blowing some shit up, followed by the recruitment of Thor (and maybe Ant Man & The Wasp we hope) to The Avengers, Nick Fury begging Bruce Banner to help out but being turned down because he's too much of a pussy - culminating with the big fight in which The Avengers get their asses kicked and just as all hope looks to be lost Bruce Banner finally grows a pair and decides to help out as The Hulk giving The Avengers the edge! The Skrull are defeated and they all live happily ever after until The Avengers 2!

......or something.......

_____________________________

I feel like i'm Han Solo, your Chewie and she's Ben Kenobi - and we're in that FUCKED UP bar!!

(in reply to Marwood)

Post #: 117

RE: The Avengers - 7/8/2010 11:03:50 AM

Marwood

Posts: 2615
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows

quote:

ORIGINAL: grucl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood
but has anyone read stories where Anthony Hopkins has been moaning about money?

Hopkins once said (I think in an EMPIRE interview) that when they asked him to appear in M�ssion:Impossible 2 he thought "Ok, why not. Fly down to Australia, work for 2 days, collect a small paycheck and go sightseeing".

I meant a Marvel production. My point was that the bigger stars of the Cap and Thor movies haven't been complaining about money like Rourke and Jackson have so is it really Marvel or the actors? Not saying both parties couldn't be at fault but Marvel keep coming under attack for being "frugal" and I don't think it's as one sided as people would like to believe.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to grucl)

Post #: 118

RE: The Avengers - 8/8/2010 4:36:43 PM

Ghidorah

Posts: 2627
Joined: 6/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: The Hooded Man

I don't think a film of The Avengers tracking the Hulk will be enough frankly. Especially after 4 years of build-up. The stakes will have to be higher than ever before, by all means having them track The Hulk would work well maybe as a pre-credits sequence and then have him join them for the final battle, you could even set it up so the Hulk chase was like the Jabba sections of Return of the Jedi. it's clear from the teaser that the threat is bigger than ever before and frankly while the Hulk on the loose rampaging would be fun it doesn't fit the Earth's heroes uniting for one last stand vibe.

I don't like the idea of the Hulk joining the Avengers so early on in the film and would be better to have the Avnegers seeking out Bana's help instead. There had to be a good reason for the Avengers to enlist the Hulk and that requires their asses to get kicked first. Show them getting defeated, show them being desperate and show them taking a great risk enlisting the Hulk with the 'Hulk chase'.

(in reply to The Hooded Man)

Post #: 119

RE: The Avengers - 23/8/2010 6:11:54 PM

agent13

Posts: 7
Joined: 25/2/2010

assumeing cap ends with steve rodges screaming 'nooooooobucky let go!'falling to his icey prison, id imageine it will start with shield finding and reviving cap,maybe seeking banner out as hes got the dodgey super soldier serum in him(i thinkhell help butan exciting incident will happen then the hulk will go on the rampage, come good and help them beat up loki and the red skull will appear at the end thus setting up the 2nd cap film? so itll be 2parts regualr marvel one part ultimtes, minus hulk eating 800people and hank pym beating the crap out of his missus.

(in reply to Ghidorah)

Post #: 120