Rotating the Roster?

[FaT_tONle]

Assuming the original lineup includes:

Iron Man, Hulk, Captain America, Thor, Ant-Man, Wasp

What characters would you add to that lineup? How would your roster change if at all in the sequels... keeping in mind the actors may not return for an entire trilogy/franchise? I'd go:


Avengers 1: Original lineup + Black Widow

Avengers 2: Captain America, Thor, Hawkeye, Black Widow, Giant Man, Wasp

Avengers 3: Giant Man, Hawkeye, Black Panther, Vision, Scarlet Witch, Quick Silver.


How would you do it?

[cerealkiller182]

I'd agree with yours except

Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch? They are probably packaged into the X-Men rights the Fox currently has right?

I'd put in Ms Marvel/Warbird and Namor

[FaT_tONle]

By Avengers 3... it could be as far as 2017 if they go three years between each film... if not longer. Marvel may have the rights by then. Plus, Namor isn't an Avenger member. I'd add Ms. Marvel if they still can't use SW or QS... but I'd like to see the mutant characters introduced before those you mentioned because they are iconic members.

[cerealkiller182]

By Avengers 3... it could be as far as 2017 if they go three years between each film... if not longer. Marvel may have the rights by then. Plus, Namor isn't an Avenger member. I'd add Ms. Marvel if they still can't use SW or QS... but I'd like to see the mutant characters introduced before those I mentioned because they are iconic members.

Its been noted in past contracts and probably why Fox talked about a Daredevil reboot a while back, that as long as the studio is making projects then they keep the rights. And they'll milk X-Men for all it has.

Obviously they would be go to members, I dont deny that, but I doubt their availability.

[FaT_tONle]

Elecktra was what??? 2005? It's back to Marvel by the next new year. Marvel also did re-acquire Hulk the fifth year with a distribution deal. Obviously Fox is going to want more than a distribution deal. I just do not believe these spinoffs will keep Fox afloat. A Wolverine trilogy??? I doubt the first film will be much of a success... Deadpool??? Nothing much there outside the fanbase IMO. X-Men: First Class seems to be their only film on the horizon worth looking out for. Even then... how successful will it be if it they end up casting it with a bunch of teenage actors? I am not saying they won't consider making X-4... I am saying what is the likelyhood they will go through with X-4 if they are making marginal profits in the meantime? If Fox doesn't have X-4 ready by 2013 then that's the time Marvel should proceed to buy them out... go through with X-4 themselves... use the appropriate mutants for Avengers movies and other mutant crossovers if need be.

[CaptainStacy]

Im curious where the rights to The Black Panther lie...i mean, he was originally a Fantastic Four character, so do Fox have the rights?

Anyway; for a three picture deal, my choices are:

Avengers #1 - Cap, Thor, Iron Man, Hulk, Ant-Man, Wasp

Avengers #2 Cap, Hawkeye, Widow, Goliath, Wasp, Hercules (if Pietro and Wanda can be used, then i'd put them in place of Widow and Herc)

Avengers #3 - Any variation of the above, plus Vision.

[Spider-ManHero12]

^^ Good choices!

[[A]]

2017? that's.. a long time

[kedrell]

I'd love to see She-Hulk and Wonder Man in there at some point.

[Spider-Vader]

I think Fox has the rights to Silver & Witch right now. But if Fox &/or Sony to cross-over, I'd like to see them along with Spidey &/or Wolverine in future movies. Maybe start getting New Avengers characters around the third movie. The first two should be strictly classic Avengers.

[FaT_tONle]

Vader... I don't know why you keep begging for New Avengers in every thread... it will never happen. Stick with the comics for now. BUT... if and when Marvel re-acquires the rights to their other major characters... I don't need to want to see them watered down immediately in a New Avengers franchise with all do respect. If you milk it like that, where "Oh we already used IM, Cap, and Thor in the same film... now we need Spidey/Wolverine together..." it won't be successful. I think you honestly have to start over. X4-X6... maybe some more Spiderman films, do another PROPER Wolverine movie since that concept of quality seems to have gone over Fox's head once again. Then proceed with New Avengers, Civil War... whatever. I just think you have to either reboot, or follow up on the previous incarnations of those characters in future SOLO films before you move ahead with another crossover. Otherwise the cross over concept will be watered down and it will lose its appeal just a few years after Avengers.

[Spider-Vader]

Yeah, I guess that makes sense. But, I wish we could atleast see Quicksilver & Scarlet Witch. I really doubt Fox will move ahead with Magneto, so what use are they to Fox?

[FaT_tONle]

I don't know how you tie in that mutant universe in all honesty, but it's not like mutants are in every other Marvel comic. The point being... who is to say mutants can't exist in the developing Avengers universe? In a perfect world you want to see Marvel do X-Men films of their own before putting characters like SW and QS in Avengers films. But I really do think you could acknowledge the existence of mutants in the Avengers universe without it being a major problem. So I can live with it if they take a couple of characters out of that universe. The only problem is the rights. If you guys want it out of Fox's hands... boycott their X-Men films. Simple as that.

[Spider-Vader]

If Quick & Witch are owned by Marvel, maybe there can be sly little hints to their past like someone saying to Quick "You look alot like Ian McKellen". :D

Did I spell his name right?

[kedrell]

Yeah, I always wondered if FOX owns the rights to the concept of Marvel universe mutants or whether they just own the rights to X-Men related characters. Cause the entire mutant phenominon is one of the biggest plot devices in the MU, having threads of it that go everywhere.

[AnorexicBatman]

Tobey Maguire as Whiny-Man.... I mean Spider-Man....
oh and wolverine....

[Iceburgeruk]

I`d say have a trilogy with the classic line-up and then have Iron Man and Thor (and hulk if he`s still around) leave and I`d say keep ant-man, captain america and wasp on the team. Bring in black panther, hercules, hawkeye, scarlet witch and quicksilver gradually over the next trilogy.

[Spiderine]

Im curious where the rights to The Black Panther lie...i mean, he was originally a Fantastic Four character, so do Fox have the rights?

Anyway; for a three picture deal, my choices are:

Avengers #1 - Cap, Thor, Iron Man, Hulk, Ant-Man, Wasp

Avengers #2 Cap, Hawkeye, Widow, Goliath, Wasp, Hercules (if Pietro and Wanda can be used, then i'd put them in place of Widow and Herc)

Avengers #3 - Any variation of the above, plus Vision.

I like that line up

[FaT_tONle]

Wonder how they'd explain Hercules without the public rolling an eye. Some characters work IMO... others don't... at all...

[lixdexia]

Wonder how they'd explain Hercules without the public rolling an eye. Some characters work IMO... others don't... at all...
herc could work as well as thor would imo, maybe even better so

[Changeling]

1: Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Hulk, Wasp, Ant Man
2: Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Wasp, Ant Man, Hawkeye, Black Widow
3: Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Wasp, Ant Man, Hawkeye, Black Widow, Vision

[Hypestyle]

they should have at least one new character each film..

[sabetoonth]

1)cap, thor, im, antman, wasp, hulk
2)cap, thor, im, giantman,wasp, black panther, banner
3)all of above+beast

[Artistsean]

I say keep the same cast from Avengers 1 through Avengers 3, with some cameos of other characters in 3.
As the original cast members leave after the 3rd film, if some decide to move on after their contracts are up, bring in new characters. First introduce them in the 3rd film though.
For example, introduce Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver in the 3rd film as side characters, but then make them bigger stars of the 4rth Avengers film.
They can keep the Avengers film franchise going by doing this. Like with a James Bond movie keep it going for as long as the audience will watch.

After Avengers 3, Avengers 4 and on, can rotate the cast as the actors come and go. This would be Marvel's chance to get in characters like She-Hulk, Quick Silver, Scarlet Witch, Vision, Hercules, Falcon, Beast, and so on.

Maybe even spin some of them off into their own franchise.

[WH0311]

Assuming the original lineup includes:

Iron Man, Hulk, Captain America, Thor, Ant-Man, Wasp

What characters would you add to that lineup? How would your roster change if at all in the sequels... keeping in mind the actors may not return for an entire trilogy/franchise? I'd go:

I'd go with original line-up plus Vision, a good female other than Scarlet Witch (only because she is a mutant and mutants are a FOX property), or Tigra, I guess that leaves me with She-Hulk as my next fav.

[Shaolin Kenobi]

Before everybody jumps on me...
I know it's impossible...
But... for a time.. Spidey was an Avenger...
That would be awesome.

[QWoods]

Avengers 1: Cap. Thor Hulk Iron Man Black Widow Ant-Man Was

Avengers 2:Cap. Thor Iron Man Wasp Giant Man Tigra Hawkeye

Avengers 3:Cap. Thor Iron Man Wasp Giant Man Tigra Hawkeye Ms.Marvel Vision

[bullets]

Avengers : Captain America , Iron Man , Black Widow , Thor , Hulk , Ant-man , Wasp

Avengers 2 : Captain America , Iron Man , Hawkeye , Black Widow , Ant-man , Wasp ,Panther , Vision ......Thor and Hulks absence could be explained by Thor 2 and TIH 2.

Avengers 3: Captain America , Iron Man , Hawkeye , Ant-Man , Wasp , Panther , Vision , Luke Cage , Scarlet Witch (if possible), Thor

[Deaths Head II]

I say have Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Black Widow, Ant-Man, Wasp, and maybe Hawkeye in the first film and after that just bring in a new member whenever an old actor decides not to come back. I would bring in Wonder Man, Black Panther, The Vision, She-Hulk, Hercules, War Machine, and Ms. Marvel. Maybe Hercules and War Machine could be the replacements for Iron Man and Thor when they leave.

[Madelow]

Hello all: I believe that Bullets' suggestions are closest to my desires for the line-up. First film should be the original five, plus Captain America. Other favorite Avengers I would enjoy in future films are: Hawkeye, Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, Vision, Black Panther, Black Widow, and Black Knight. Many possibilities, however. Best regards, Madelow.

[tnr105]

FOX as the rights to Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch. They're names were on a list in X-2 and Pietro had a cameo in Wolverine. Anywhos, introduce:

1.Ant-Man
2.Wasp
3.Black Panther
4.Ms Marvel
5.Falcon
6.Vision (Especially if Ultron is a villain)

[Squidboy]

Maybe Thor, Cap, and Iron Man will only be major players in the first film and maybe the sequel, and then branch off to let the Avengers become its own franchise to open the doors for characters like Luke Cage, Ms Marvel, Wonderman, Vision, etc. Considering that the big three have their own franchises already, having them juggle their own movies and the Avengers would be hard, so give them some breathing room so that we can get Iron Man 3 and 4, without worrying too much about RDJ being sick of the character because of overuse. That way the fans can get introduced to new characters with each installment, and the Avengers brand can branch out and grow into its own spin-offs as well.

[DomiNYcanKnyght]

Black Panther
Ms Marvel
Vision
Wonder Man

[bigscore]

I think Vision would come across gret on screen!! Like a "cooler" Nightcrawler..

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/avengers/57-2.jpg

[Ultra Lantern]

Just think of the special effects they can use for Vision.

[Hypestyle]

Panther, Blade, Power Man, Pulsar, I'd be glad if any of them had a role in the next film..

[Silvermoth]

Well as of yet the Avengers are Steve, Tony, Thor, Natasha, Nick, Clint and Bruce so I can see Bruce leaving definetly to keep that 'lonely man' part of his character intact as remain faithful to the comics and I can see Nick leaving because he serves his own purposes.

So if they sub in Black Panther and Ms Marvel that would be awesome! Maybe add She-Hulk because she's awesome.

[WildcatNC]

Panther, Vision, Ms. Marvel, Captain Marvel, Mockingbird, War Machine, Quasar, and Maria Hill are the Pool that I think any new members will come from. Those would make the most sense with what they are currently doing IMO. They could surprise me though. Luke Cage would be a good one too, but they are looking at giving him his own movie.

Thats assuming that the team in the first movie is: Cap, Thor, Iron Man, Hulk, Widow, and Hawkeye.

I can also assume they will add Pym and Janet after the Ant-Man solo movie introduces them before Avengers II is made. If that movie doesn't get done by then they may not make it in the Avengers movies until the third one.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch can only be used if FOX agrees not to use them in the X-Men movies. Marvel simply can't reference them as mutants or X-Men in the film. Although "born with powers" could still be how they acquired super-speed and reality manipulation respectively, you simply couldn't refer to them as mutants.

You could have someone make an off the cuff remark though. Like have Captain America say "You think Kang is bad, you should meet Quicksilver's father".

[Ariakas]

If Ant-Man and Wasp (in future films), and eventually Vision are included I'm quite content. Mockingbird would also be great if they take the character of Hawkeye in the right direction. But I can smell a romantic relationship between him and Black Widow.

Black Panther, Wonder Man, Doctor Druid, Nova, Black Knight, Ms Marvel and others would be huge bonuses but not at all necessary. I say rather keep the core team and give them room to develop properly. She-Hulk, Swordsman, Gilgamesh/Forgotten One and Hercules I do not think would work. I doubt we will see Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch because I think they are too closely related to the X-men-continuity.

But one thing.. I do not get Tigra. I have nothing against her but I do not understand the reasons for wanting her above other characters

[Pink Ranger]

#2: Cap, Thor, Wasp, Ant-Man, Hulk, War Machine, Black Panther, Hawkeye, Carol Danvers or Monica Rambeau (at first as a normal human)

#3: Cap, Thor, Wasp, Goliath/Yellowjacket, Black Panther, Captain Marvel (either Carol of Monica; I think Carol deserves the full name, Ms. Marvel comes across as patronizing to me).

RDJ as Iron Man is welcome in any of these cast lists, but I am operating under the assumption that he and Scarjo are going to be too expensive to keep putting in these movies.

[psylockolussus]

The Avengers
Captain America, Hulk, Iron Man, Thor, Black Widow, Hawkeye
with Nick Fury and Wasp as supporting character

The Avengers 2
Captain America, Hulk, Iron Man, Thor, Black Widow, Hawkeye, Antman
with Nick Fury and Wasp as supporting character

The Avengers 3
Captain America, Hulk, Iron Man, Thor, Black Widow, Hawkeye, Ant Man, Black Panther
with Nick Fury and Wasp as supporting character

[DrCosmic]

The Avengers:
Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Black Widow, Hawkeye, Nick Fury
Maria Hill, Agent Coulson as supporting character

The Avengers 2:
Add Giant-Man, Wasp, Black Panther as mains, introduce Ms. Marvel as a main
move Nick Fury, Hawkeye, Black Widow, and Hulk down to supporting

The Avengers 3:
Add Luke Cage as main, introduce Vision as main
move Wasp, Giant Man, Black Panther down to supporting
End with all characters, including supporting in a massive 17-man offensive.

[Pinky021]

I will do the same concept:

The Avengers 1, we already know:
Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Black Widow, Hawkeye & Nick Fury
With Maria Hill & Agent Coulson as supporting characters

The Avengers 2:
Cap, IM, Thor, BW, Hawkeye & Nick Fury
Plus Hank Pym and Wasp

The Avengers 3:
Cap, IM, Thor, BW, Hank Pym, Wasp & Nick Fury
Plus Black Panther, Spider-Man & Wolverine

Assuming Marvel has the rights to those characters...

[KangConquers]

Captain America, Iron Man and Thor need to be in every movie...every other character can be rotated out.

[DACrowe]

The only one that I assume can be guaranteed for three Avengers movies are: Captain America, Thor and Nick Fury. Iron Man, Black Widow and Hawkeye will likely be in AV2, but RDJ, ScarJo and possibly even Renner (depending how successful his next few projects are) will be too expensive to keep around. Hulk is a CGI and budgetary burden. I don't expect him to be in any of the Avengers movies except the first one. I think War Machine could very likely replace Iron Man in one of the sequels and Giant Man and Wasp will obviously find their way into one of them.

[Hawkingbird]

Assuming the original lineup includes:

Iron Man, Hulk, Captain America, Thor, Ant-Man, Wasp

What characters would you add to that lineup? How would your roster change if at all in the sequels... keeping in mind the actors may not return for an entire trilogy/franchise? I'd go:


Avengers 1: Original lineup + Black Widow

Avengers 2: Captain America, Thor, Hawkeye, Black Widow, Giant Man, Wasp

Avengers 3: Giant Man, Hawkeye, Black Panther, Vision, Scarlet Witch, Quick Silver.


How would you do it? Problem with Scarlet Witch and Quick Silver is that they would have to incorperate the whole X Men series with it, which seeing as they're all in different contracts I can't see it happening. In the latest Captain America film, the producers considered a Magneto/ Wolverine cameo, which was stopped dead by contract complecations.:wolverine

[Hypestyle]

I'd like to slowly add on to the roster..
get a good lawyer to pore over contract considerations with X-Men/Fox, to see if they can extricate Quicksilver & Scarlet Witch.. they can ignore Magneto as the dad for now.. they can just say they were orphans as far as they know..

Others:
Wasp, though I don't know if she would be part of the Ant-Man project..
Black Panther, great spinoff possibilities.
Vision-- though, it would be odd without Wanda as a love-interest plot..
Wonder Man-- use him as a villain at first, then he turns good at the end..
Hercules-- perhaps better introduced in Thor, but would be a great addition..
Sub-Mariner-- pending contract extrication from Universal, he would be a great to be introduced as a villain (like the comics), then turn to an ally by the end..
Pulsar-- her origin can be dealt with or not, but more women are the team should be explored..

The main villain can be Baron Zemo, with multiple henchmen from the comics.. they can pull from the ranks of the Masters of Evil, others..

[Scar Predator]

The Avengers
Captain America, Hulk, Iron Man, Thor, Black Widow, Hawkeye
with Nick Fury and Wasp as supporting character

The Avengers 2
Captain America, Hulk, Iron Man, Thor, Black Widow, Hawkeye, Antman
with Nick Fury and Wasp as supporting character

The Avengers 3
Captain America, Hulk, Iron Man, Thor, Black Widow, Hawkeye, Ant Man, Black Panther
with Nick Fury and Wasp as supporting character

I really don't see them keeping Hulk in the group for 3 films. I think he's in this one primarily for name recognition with the general population.

[cherokeesam]

I really don't see them keeping Hulk in the group for 3 films. I think he's in this one primarily for name recognition with the general population.


TBH, I'm really interested to see if they *will* try to bring Hulk back for Avengers 2, or instead be true to the comics and make him only an "honorary founder" for the first movie.

I suspect that you're right, and after the first Avengers movie, they'll relegate Hulk to his upcoming TV show and keep him off the big screen (at least for awhile).

[StreetWarrior]

How it SHOULD have been:

Avengers I:
Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Wasp, Giant-Man (Pym) vs. HULK

Avengers II:
Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Wasp, Hawkeye, Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver (if Fox doesn't own the rights) vs. ?

Avengers III:
Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Wasp, Hawkeye, Ant-Man (Lang), Ms. Marvel, Vision, and Hulk vs. ?

Basically, the films should have followed the first two Ultimates arcs in plot and roster, but with 616 characterizations and history. I know Black Widow was an Avengers at some point, but I wouldn't have made her an actual member until the third film (at earliest).

[Lord]

How it SHOULD have been:

Avengers I:
Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Wasp, Giant-Man (Pym) vs. HULK


What about no?
There should be more to do than only fight hulk

[DrCosmic]

How it SHOULD have been:

Avengers I:
Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Wasp, Giant-Man (Pym) vs. HULK

Avengers II:
Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Wasp, Hawkeye, Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver (if Fox doesn't own the rights) vs. ?

Avengers III:
Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Wasp, Hawkeye, Ant-Man (Lang), Ms. Marvel, Vision, and Hulk vs. ?

Basically, the films should have followed the first two Ultimates arcs in plot and roster, but with 616 characterizations and history. I know Black Widow was an Avengers at some point, but I wouldn't have made her an actual member until the third film (at earliest).

Interesting. A couple thoughts:
1) The first Ultimates arc, dealing with the Hulk, simply isn't big enough to fill up a two hour movie. Maybe, if you stretch it, a little 84 minute thing. You need to have a full scale invasion to really justify the team being there. That said, it is pretty clear they're going to have to fight Hulk, since they are prepared to imprison him.
2) Fox will own the rights to Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch until they stop making successful X-Men films. It doesn't seem like that will happen in the next decade.

[Lord]

Actually i think that if you want to adapt The Ultimates comics then Ultimates 1 with Hulk and the invasion could be done in a 150 mins movie.
The same about The Ultimates 2

[WarBlade]

Given the nature of an ensemble cast, I'd say that the most likely scenario for a changing roster is simply unavailability of particular cast members. In light of that, maybe the best option is to simply get the script together with the existing characters in mind and if one or more of them happen to be unavailable, then worry about exchanging them for newer blood.

As an example, keep Black Panther in reserve and if Chris Evans is unable to return then bring in the T'Challa character. Banner to Pym, etc.

[marcvader]

Avengers I:
Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Wasp, Ant-Man, Hulk vs. Loki

Avengers II:

Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Wasp, Giant-Man, Hawkeye, Black Widow, Black Panther vs. Kang

Avengers III:

Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Wasp, Yellowjacket, Hawkeye, Black Widow, Vision vs Ultron

[Savage]

I can honestly see Hulk and Black Widow not making it into a sequel. If The Avengers goes independent Widow may stick with SHIELD and Banner might go off on his own for whatever reasons (probably considering himself a danger to the team). Hawkeye may very well tell SHIELD to shove it and join The Avengers permanently but he could be out as well (though I'd be disappointed, personally).

That opens up perfectly for Ant-man/Giant-man and Wasp, really. Especially if their own movie is made by then. Hank Pym would be great as the muscle and brains that Banner would leave vacant and Wasp comes in to replace Black Widow as the woman on the team. I can see Vision being the character introduced in the movie (maybe both him and Ultron are set up or hinted at in the Ant-man movie). I'd like to see Vision and Ultron go at it kind of like brothers of sorts with the Pyms being responsible. Basically I want the sequel to have a heavy Pym influence. :)

Wonderman and Ms. Marvel or even She-Hulk are perfect for a third movie.

[MahvelBaby!]

Avengers 1

(Cap,IM,Thor,Hulk) Hawkeye,BW

Avengers 2

(Cap,IM,Thor,Hulk) Ant Man, Wasp (Hawkeye & BW smaller roles) Introduce Vision make his joining of the Avengers culminate the finale of the film.

Villain:Ultron
Side Villain:Vision, Ultron army

Avengers 3

Cap,IM,Vision,Thor,Hawkeye(Smaller Role),AntMan,Wasp,BW(Smaller role),Hulk(Smaller role)

Introduce into team Black Panther

[GoldGoblin]

Why would Hulk not be in the sequel?

[GoldGoblin]

For Avengers 2:
Take out:
-Hawkeye
-Black Widow
-Hulk

Put in:
-Giant Man
-Tigra
-Dr.Strange

[cherokeesam]

Why would Hulk not be in the sequel?


a) He was never a true Avenger in the comics; just an honorary member in the first ish. The only real team Hulk ever belonged to was The Defenders. But that's another story.

b) Marvel seems content with relegating Hulk to the small screen with Del Toro's upcoming TV show. If that show bombs, then I could see Hulk returning to film in Avengers 2 and/or TIH 2.

[GoldGoblin]

So DelToro's show gonna be a guy in makeup,or is it gonna be CGI?

[BigThor]

So DelToro's show gonna be a guy in makeup,or is it gonna be CGI?

It's gonna be CGI, they're gonna be using the same Hulk model as the one in The Avengers film.

See here - http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/news/a346447/incredible-hulk-tv-series-to-use-avengers-cgi.html

[BigThor]

Here's how I think the team rosters should be for The Avengers films

Avengers I

Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Wasp, Giant Man
Vs. Loki & his army

Avengers II

Cap, IM, Thor, Giant Man, Wasp, Hawkeye, Black Widow, Black Panther
Vs. Ultron & his drones

Avengers III

Cap, IM, Thor, Black Panther, Vision, Hawkeye, Ms. Marvel
Vs. Kang and his forces Or Thanos and his forces


Although the Masters of Evil deserve an "Honorable Mention" in the villains department.

[MarvelKnight]

I'm pretty sure all principle members of the Avengers are going to be in these movies through A3. Adding Giant-Man and Wasp, even in a part time aspect at first as to not overcrowd the roster makes sense to me, then if they decide to write off some of the original members find a way to include Black Panther. I also think Luke Cage would be a good addition to the team in the future.

[marcvader]

I really hope we get an Ant Man movie made before Avengers 2.

[DrCosmic]

Hmm... Keep the core of Cap, Iron Man and Thor. They work as a core for several reasons, imho. They cover everything, they have the most appeal/strongest movie bases. It's just for the best.

Avengers 2: Cap, Iron Man, Thor, Black Panther, Ms. Marvel, Dr. Strange
Not Hulk (TV show going on)
Not Hawkeye or Black Widow (Unless they can carry their own film)
Not Ant-Man or Wasp (Stuck in the 60s with Edgar Wright)
Supporting: Vision (PymTech), Nick Fury, maybe BW, Hawkeye and Hulk
Vs Thanos and His Forces (Skrull/Kree)

Avengers 3: Cap, Thor, Ant-Man, Wasp, Luke Cage, Iron Fist
Not Iron Man, Black Panther, Dr. Strange, Ms. Marvel, Hulk, Vision, Black Widow or Hawkeye (Employed as 'evil versions' by Kang for Civil War effect - of course they all unite in the end)
vs Kang and His Forces (Altered Heroes)

Thanos is the natural set up after Loki, and Kang is the only one that trumps Thanos in scale, potentially, and needs the extra time in order to make the Time Travel thing believable/acceptable. Plus, he's the best way to bring in the Pyms from Edgar Wright's 60s world. They could just go with Lang, but I want Wasp too, y'know?

[BigThor]

^ I think Thanos trumps Kang in terms of scale and I can't imagine an Avengers trilogy without Ultron being a main villain in of the films.

I'd choose him as the villain for Avengers 2 with Thanos being the big bad in the 3rd Avengers film.

[DrCosmic]

You think so? Time travel seems to trump all to me. You can beat someone who's really powerful if you take their power source or outsmart them. You can't 'beat' a time traveler.

[MarvelKnight]

unless they have a flux capacitor and the capability of reaching 88 miles and hour you can't time travel. Didn't you know j/k

I'd like to see Hawkeye stick around in the films. He brings a bit of edge as far as his attitude goes to the team

Next Avengers Quote:

Hawkeye (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1468412/): Yeah, right. Help the guy who created Ultron, who got my dad killed? What do you think my father would have done, Stark?
Tony Stark (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0437454/): Clint? He would have punched me in the face, then he would have helped me.

[BigThor]

You think so? Time travel seems to trump all to me. You can beat someone who's really powerful if you take their power source or outsmart them. You can't 'beat' a time traveler.

Having the Infinity Gauntlet in your possession easily trumps being a time traveler in my opinion.

[DrCosmic]

Mine too, but I highly doubt that they'll have the Infinity Gauntlet in the MCU. It's a little dense, as far as exposition goes.

[BigThor]

Mine too, but I highly doubt that they'll have the Infinity Gauntlet in the MCU. It's a little dense, as far as exposition goes.

Why wouldn't he? It was already shown in Odin's weapons fault when the Frost Giants try to steal the Casket of Ancient Winters in Thor.

[Silvermoth]

I would like the Black Widow and Hulk to go off and do their own thing and bring in Ms Marvel, Wanda and Pietro (fingers still crossed!). If not Wanda and Pietro then the Black Panther and She Hulk would be cool.

[Dark Raven]

Although Joss Whedon doesn't want to include Wonder Man in any future movie, I think he should reconsider. As I've said in another thread, WM is tied into so many of the Avengers' character's histories: He supplies the brain patterns for Vision which were recorded by Tony Stark and then later hijacked by Ultron to create Vision. He's also associated with his brother Grim Reaper, Baron Zemo, Scarlet Witch, West Coast Avengers, Goliath/Atlas (Erik Josten) and a few others.

As for which actor to play him, how about Adam Baldwin?

http://www.topnews.in/files/images/Adam-Baldwin6.jpg

I know he's almost 50 but he still looks in great shape and younger than his age. Also, Wonder Man always had prematurely grey hair (until he began dyeing it) and came across as older anyway.

Baldwin looks like he'd have the build and personality for it, and should play a Superman-type character (he already did in the Superman: Doomsday animated movie). He's also worked with Joss Whedon before, so there should be no problem there.

What do people think?

[DrCosmic]

Where did whedon say he didn't want Wonder Man?

[BigThor]

Where did whedon say he didn't want Wonder Man?

He said it here in this interview a few days ago - http://www.theavengers2012-movie.com/2012/03/07/joss-whedon-man-talks-hulk/

[DrCosmic]

I see where he's coming from. Wonder Man does have potential though as a heel face turn, like in EMH. Of course, that means you need a Masters of Evil storyline, and I highly doubt that'll happen.

Why wouldn't he? It was already shown in Odin's weapons fault when the Frost Giants try to steal the Casket of Ancient Winters in Thor.

I see, you're right. I thought it would involve finding and explaining all the gems. It looks like the Gauntlet already has all the gems, so, no worries.

[MarvelKnight]

I got no problem after A1 taking her off the main roster for Avengers. I think they still want to make a SHIELD movie, and if that happens, I'm sure she'd have a supporting role, at the very least. Leave her to assist the Avengers in a SHIELD support role for A2 and/or A3

[BigThor]

Yeah I think it would make more sense for BW to return to being a shield agent after The Avengers, it would be faithful to her character while opening the doors to other members such as The Pyms or Black Panther.

[Dark Raven]

Well if BW goes, she has to be replaced with at least another female. It can't be BW substituted for Black Panther. I don't mind Panther joining but there needs to be other women. We don't need a sausage fest, and if Whedon is good at writing females, we should get that in these movies.

[BigThor]

Well if BW goes, she has to be replaced with at least another female. It can't be BW substituted for Black Panther. I don't mind Panther joining but there needs to be other women. We don't need a sausage fest, and if Whedon is good at writing females, we should get that in these movies.

Definately, I'd like for there to be atleast two females on the team so maybe they could keep her in 2nd film and the Pyms.

Then they could replace her entirely in Avengers 3 with Ms. Marvel and they could also add Black Panther although I'd like for him to be in A2 as well.

[DrCosmic]

I don't think they'll get rid of Black Widow. She's easy to explain (she's a secret agent), and she's the token female/sex appeal. She's also easy to slide in and out of other people's storylines (see Iron Man 2). She can also be used in romantic storylines. She has all plusses and no minuses. Even if they reduce her screen time, I just don't see them taking her out.

And while I love me some Ms. Marvel... she doesn't have a movie being prepped (and Jan's movie, afawk, is not in continuity), leaving Black Widow as the sole chick for Avengers 2 as well.

[MarvelKnight]

Well, I think they have time between A1 and A2 to get a Ms. Marvel movie done, plus if you could introduce Danvers as military in this movie, in the very least. Hell, maybe we see mar-vell in his human cloaked form and we don't even know it. I'm sure it's not likely, but not impossible either, imo

[Incredible Hans]

Avengers members I'd like to see in future films (order of preference):

- Henry Pym & Wasp
- Scarlet Witch & Quicksilver
- Hercules
- She-Hulk
- Vision
- Namor
- Black Panther
- Ares
- Black Knight

[DrCosmic]

Does anyone ever wonder if the films will get crowded, i mean... having six characters with equal screen time is rough as it is... seven or eight would be... perhaps undoable, or weak to the point that some people start to pale in comparison.

[Dark Raven]

Does anyone ever wonder if the films will get crowded, i mean... having six characters with equal screen time is rough as it is... seven or eight would be... perhaps undoable, or weak to the point that some people start to pale in comparison.

That's probably the reason why in the comics they limited the roster to 7 members. However, the films can have background characters who don't need development. It's sometimes nice to see cameos by people who are essentially extras.

[MarvelKnight]

Does anyone ever wonder if the films will get crowded, i mean... having six characters with equal screen time is rough as it is... seven or eight would be... perhaps undoable, or weak to the point that some people start to pale in comparison.

Yeah, I've always thought there could be supporting heroes (if the story warrants it and it makes sense) to assist the Avengers, but keep the principle team the same.

If they decide to stop using a character on the main team and want to substitute for a future film, so be it, but quality over quantity.

[Incredible Hans]

Yeah, I've always thought there could be supporting heroes (if the story warrants it and it makes sense) to assist the Avengers, but keep the principle team the same.

If they decide to stop using a character on the main team and want to substitute for a future film, so be it, but quality over quantity.

The X-Men films had a many supporting heroes who didn't get any background stories... nothing at all for Colossus, not very much for Storm...

[Dark Raven]

These old Hollywood movies like The Longest Day or Towering Inferno had stars in every frame even if they were just cameos. They could always do that with some characters, even if they didn't want to play a large role or weren't around to do any filming. At least they would get to make a small appearance.

[DrCosmic]

Interesting. I brought it up because I thought it was very interesting that all six Avengers were getting equal screen time, and I wondered how the transition would be if they decided not to do that for the next film... especially for a smaller movie, so to speak.

[cherokeesam]

That's probably the reason why in the comics they limited the roster to 7 members. However, the films can have background characters who don't need development. It's sometimes nice to see cameos by people who are essentially extras.


Um....what?
The Avengers have *never* been limited to seven members. They've had *hundreds* of metas on their roster --- and not just as a totality, but at *any given time.* Avengers comics have been famous for epic two-page "centerfold" frames featuring literally hundreds of superheroes warring against an army of baddies.

[Dark Raven]

Um....what?
The Avengers have *never* been limited to seven members. They've had *hundreds* of metas on their roster --- and not just as a totality, but at *any given time.* Avengers comics have been famous for epic two-page "centerfold" frames featuring literally hundreds of superheroes warring against an army of baddies.

Wrong. Especially that *never* bit.

Read this comic:

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/avengers/181-1.jpg

Until Avengers 181 they did have hundreds on their roster (eg in the whole Korvac saga). However, Henry Peter Gyrich instituted a new government rule that they were only allowed to have 7 in their active duty roster because they were getting out of hand. Their airspace was restricted and other measures put in place. Afterwards, Captain America kept to this seven-member format when their team roster rotated. The only time they called in all the reserve members was for these epic battles, but otherwise for any regular operation they stuck to a strict small number of 7 maximum.

Get your history straight. This is a well-known fact.

[cherokeesam]

Avengers Bylaws.
Section Two: Membership.

C. The Avengers shall select new members whenever the Chairbeing or two-thirds of the active membership determines that the ranks are not at optimal strength, or when there is a vacancy in the ranks.


1. It shall be the prerogative of the Chairbeing to limit the number of active members.

How many issues of Avengers did NOT feature the whole team, plus how many ever reserves, fighting raging hordes? I don't recall *any* in my collection that featured less than a dozen or so teaming up at any given time.

The whole Gyrich thing was a plot gimmick of the early 80s that proved to be very unpopular with Avengers fans, and led summarily to the creation of the West Coast Avengers to expand the roster even further, and further afield.

I see no reason that Marvel Studios would try to impose a 7-man limit on the MCU version of the Avengers. Especially when Fury has already mentioned the existence of many other superhumans out there. Just speculating on this, but I'd be very surprised if Marvel *doesn't* reveal that there are already other Avengers out there assigned to other projects, including training, who may or may not be referenced by name.

[BigThor]

Yeah the Avengers does have a notoriously large roster in the comics, but I think they should keep the roster relatively small in the first few films.

[Dark Raven]

Avengers Bylaws.
Section Two: Membership.

C. The Avengers shall select new members whenever the Chairbeing or two-thirds of the active membership determines that the ranks are not at optimal strength, or when there is a vacancy in the ranks.


1. It shall be the prerogative of the Chairbeing to limit the number of active members.
How many issues of Avengers did NOT feature the whole team, plus how many ever reserves, fighting raging hordes? I don't recall *any* in my collection that featured less than a dozen or so teaming up at any given time.

The whole Gyrich thing was a plot gimmick of the early 80s that proved to be very unpopular with Avengers fans, and led summarily to the creation of the West Coast Avengers to expand the roster even further, and further afield.

I see no reason that Marvel Studios would try to impose a 7-man limit on the MCU version of the Avengers. Especially when Fury has already mentioned the existence of many other superhumans out there. Just speculating on this, but I'd be very surprised if Marvel *doesn't* reveal that there are already other Avengers out there assigned to other projects, including training, who may or may not be referenced by name.

It would be for the sake of character development. It's just like an ensemble cast in a TV series. Think of something like Star Trek - any of their various series or even the current movies. You have about 7 or so members in the main cast but there are hundreds of crew members in the background serving on the ship.

I am sure that limiting the roster to 7 in the comics was for a similar reason so that Marvel could concentrate on key characters and their development more easily.

Even in A:EMH it's not hundreds on that team. It's still about 7 or so.

As for there not being less than a dozen on a team, does your collection only start in the last 20 years? What about

1) The original team: 5 members
2) Cap's kooky quartet: 5 (including Cap)
3) Avengers first meeting with Graviton: 10 members
4) The whole Pym saga that everyone keeps bringing up where he hits his wife: 7 members
5) Avengers 181 onwards: 7 members
6) The New Avengers (when Spider-Woman first joined the team): 8 members

I'm getting bored of listing because there are too many occasions and that would be like citing over half their stories.

[DrCosmic]

I see no reason that Marvel Studios would try to impose a 7-man limit on the MCU version of the Avengers. Especially when Fury has already mentioned the existence of many other superhumans out there. Just speculating on this, but I'd be very surprised if Marvel *doesn't* reveal that there are already other Avengers out there assigned to other projects, including training, who may or may not be referenced by name.

No reason? I guess this is what I was getting at, besides what works in comics where all the characters are well established and cared for, what about a film? Isn't there a reason we only got four X-Men instead of 7... or fourteen? I mean... why not have Toro and Union Jack and some other Golden Agers in the Captain America Movie?

I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't reveal that there was more than what we've seen. They've taken great care to bring the General Audience along for every step of the journey, give them a chance to care for the characters just like comics fans do. I don't think they would just scrap that to put in some easter eggs for fanboys.

Also, even for fanboys, what if your favorite character got short-sticked? They used to be a full avengers, and now they're just a cameo. It's not like in comics where you can just go see them in their own book... you may not see them again for another 2-3 years... or ever?

[cherokeesam]

No reason? I guess this is what I was getting at, besides what works in comics where all the characters are well established and cared for, what about a film? Isn't there a reason we only got four X-Men instead of 7... or fourteen? I mean... why not have Toro and Union Jack and some other Golden Agers in the Captain America Movie?

I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't reveal that there was more than what we've seen. They've taken great care to bring the General Audience along for every step of the journey, give them a chance to care for the characters just like comics fans do. I don't think they would just scrap that to put in some easter eggs for fanboys.

Also, even for fanboys, what if your favorite character got short-sticked? They used to be a full avengers, and now they're just a cameo. It's not like in comics where you can just go see them in their own book... you may not see them again for another 2-3 years... or ever?

What about Ocean's Eleven? Or Ocean's 12 or 13? Or The Dirty Dozen? None of those films was ever accused of short-changing any of the characters.....they all were equally interesting, and had enough personality established that you knew who they were by the end of the film. There's no reason an Avengers film couldn't expand out to that size, either.

Especially in a sequel. You won't even have to backstory any of the seven main characters you choose to recycle from the initial team film --- Cap, Thor, Hulk, IM, Hawkeye, Widow or Fury. Gives you more time to develop, say, Black Panther or Hank & Janet or whoever else.

Also, I'm a bit baffled at your head count for the X-Men movies.
X1: Wolverine, Iceman, Storm, Rogue, Cyclops, Jean Grey, The Professor.
X2: As above, with Nightcrawler and Pyro upping the roster to 9.
X3: *Everybody.*

[DrCosmic]

What about Ocean's Eleven? Or Ocean's 12 or 13? Or The Dirty Dozen? None of those films was ever accused of short-changing any of the characters.....they all were equally interesting, and had enough personality established that you knew who they were by the end of the film. There's no reason an Avengers film couldn't expand out to that size, either.

That's because most of the characters no one cared about. They were stock characters talked in group shots and did their job. There's no way Don Cheadle's character was as interesting as Clooney, Pitt or Damon's. He wasn't intended to be. He was a minor character. All the rest were.

Avengers is different. It knows the audience already cares about each of the characters (except Hawkeye, but that'll change once it comes out), and it respects all of them, so they all have arcs and time to shine and more or less equal screen time. If you have all these characters that people care about, and then you bringing them on screen just to shortchange them, it's gonna bring a lot different reaction than seeing a minor character in Oceans 11 and finding out he's still, obviously, a minor character in Oceans 12.

Especially in a sequel. You won't even have to backstory any of the seven main characters you choose to recycle from the initial team film --- Cap, Thor, Hulk, IM, Hawkeye, Widow or Fury. Gives you more time to develop, say, Black Panther or Hank & Janet or whoever else.

They still have to have an arc though, or become cameos with little to no screen time like the Oceans 13 characters. If you have a 'smaller' movie like is planned for Avengers, then you don't actually have any additional time if you keep the initial team, because they all have personal arcs you're going to get into.

Also, I'm a bit baffled at your head count for the X-Men movies.
X1: Wolverine, Iceman, Storm, Rogue, Cyclops, Jean Grey, The Professor.
X2: As above, with Nightcrawler and Pyro upping the roster to 9.
X3: *Everybody.*

Rogue, Iceman and The Professor are X-Men in the comics, but they were not in the films. By the time we got to Last Stand there were six X-Men, one of which didn't even have any lines in the film. The films were basically Wolverine movies, with a lot of cameos and a couple actual secondary characters who mattered. Like the Ocean's 11 movies, actually. Because Avengers is doing it right and starting as an actual ensemble, I don't think regressing to the Oceans 11 model (2-3 important heroes, and a number of one-dimensional ones) will work, particularly because attachment to the characters is what helps suspend disbelief at their incredible abilities.

[BigThor]

Another thing fans need to understand is that the Avengers won't become a full fledged team until the end of the film, I think they deserve atleast sequel where they're a team from start to finish before any major roster changes.

A couple of additional members and maybe one member leaving would be fine, but basically the same team as the first film.

[Dark Raven]

Another thing fans need to understand is that the Avengers won't become a full fledged team until the end of the film, I think they deserve atleast sequel where they're a team from start to finish before any major roster changes.

A couple of additional members and maybe one member leaving would be fine, but basically the same team as the first film.

Yeah, the X-Men movies weren't really origin movies whereas the Avengers is (an origin of the team if not origin of each character). So I think people would like to see the same team in the next film, but just adding a few new people, not an entire roster change.

[BigThor]

Yeah, the X-Men movies weren't really origin movies whereas the Avengers is (an origin of the team if not origin of each character). So I think people would like to see the same team in the next film, but just adding a few new people, not an entire roster change.

Yep, people are so anxious to see new heroes that they forget that these characters need time to gain familiarity with audiences and become an efficient team before any major roster changes.

[cherokeesam]

That's because most of the characters no one cared about. They were stock characters talked in group shots and did their job. There's no way Don Cheadle's character was as interesting as Clooney, Pitt or Damon's. He wasn't intended to be. He was a minor character. All the rest were.

Avengers is different. It knows the audience already cares about each of the characters (except Hawkeye, but that'll change once it comes out), and it respects all of them, so they all have arcs and time to shine and more or less equal screen time. If you have all these characters that people care about, and then you bringing them on screen just to shortchange them, it's gonna bring a lot different reaction than seeing a minor character in Oceans 11 and finding out he's still, obviously, a minor character in Oceans 12.



They still have to have an arc though, or become cameos with little to no screen time like the Oceans 13 characters. If you have a 'smaller' movie like is planned for Avengers, then you don't actually have any additional time if you keep the initial team, because they all have personal arcs you're going to get into.



Rogue, Iceman and The Professor are X-Men in the comics, but they were not in the films. By the time we got to Last Stand there were six X-Men, one of which didn't even have any lines in the film. The films were basically Wolverine movies, with a lot of cameos and a couple actual secondary characters who mattered. Like the Ocean's 11 movies, actually. Because Avengers is doing it right and starting as an actual ensemble, I don't think regressing to the Oceans 11 model (2-3 important heroes, and a number of one-dimensional ones) will work, particularly because attachment to the characters is what helps suspend disbelief at their incredible abilities.

I understand what you're saying, and I love character development and arcs as much as the next guy, but I think it's the nature of an ensemble film that you throw all that out the window. Instead, an ensemble film is about a group of "stock characters," as you call them, and the film dynamic comes from their interactions with each other. You see that in team action films (Dirty Dozen, Wild Bunch, Ocean's Eleven), disaster movies (The Poseidon Adventure, 2012), anywhere there's an ensemble. Hell, I'm sure we'll see that in The Avengers, too --- everything I've seen and heard so far tells me that Widow and Hawkeye are marginalized in favor of face time for the "Big Three" (or Big Four, depending on how much they're giving to RuffaloHulk).

Even without knowing the characters at all, general audiences are savvy enough to buy into stock descriptions in an ensemble cast. Okay, this guy is the brick, this guy is the brainiac, this guy is the goody two-shoes, etc. They get that without having to spend a lot of time developing each character.


Not to belabor a point, though, but I'm still thinking that you and I saw different X-Men movies....I still don't understand why you don't consider Rogue, Iceman, Prof X, etc. to be X-Men....:huh:

[Dark Raven]

I understand what you're saying, and I love character development and arcs as much as the next guy, but I think it's the nature of an ensemble film that you throw all that out the window. Instead, an ensemble film is about a group of "stock characters," as you call them, and the film dynamic comes from their interactions with each other. You see that in team action films (Dirty Dozen, Wild Bunch, Ocean's Eleven), disaster movies (The Poseidon Adventure, 2012), anywhere there's an ensemble. Hell, I'm sure we'll see that in The Avengers, too --- everything I've seen and heard so far tells me that Widow and Hawkeye are marginalized in favor of face time for the "Big Three" (or Big Four, depending on how much they're giving to RuffaloHulk).

Even without knowing the characters at all, general audiences are savvy enough to buy into stock descriptions in an ensemble cast. Okay, this guy is the brick, this guy is the brainiac, this guy is the goody two-shoes, etc. They get that without having to spend a lot of time developing each character.


Not to belabor a point, though, but I'm still thinking that you and I saw different X-Men movies....I still don't understand why you don't consider Rogue, Iceman, Prof X, etc. to be X-Men....:huh:

All the examples you've cited are films where none of the characters existed in movies of their own beforehand. They were ensemble movies where these people came together for the first time and didn't have a life prior to that. We didn't know the names or background of any of these characters from The Poseidon Adventure, The Dirty Dozen, Oceans 11 etc. Did anyone care about the exploits of characters like Danny Ocean, Linus Caldwell, the Malloy brothers or "The Amazing" Yen before they assembled for Ocean's 11?

They are decidely different from something like The Avengers, which is a first for this type of crossover event where everyone has either had their own movie or already appeared in a previous movie.

So your idea to throw all character develoment out the window doesn't quite apply in this case. The Avengers aren't stock characters but people that the audiences are already familiar with and care about.

[DrCosmic]

I understand what you're saying, and I love character development and arcs as much as the next guy, but I think it's the nature of an ensemble film that you throw all that out the window. Instead, an ensemble film is about a group of "stock characters," as you call them, and the film dynamic comes from their interactions with each other. You see that in team action films (Dirty Dozen, Wild Bunch, Ocean's Eleven), disaster movies (The Poseidon Adventure, 2012), anywhere there's an ensemble. Hell, I'm sure we'll see that in The Avengers, too --- everything I've seen and heard so far tells me that Widow and Hawkeye are marginalized in favor of face time for the "Big Three" (or Big Four, depending on how much they're giving to RuffaloHulk).

Even without knowing the characters at all, general audiences are savvy enough to buy into stock descriptions in an ensemble cast. Okay, this guy is the brick, this guy is the brainiac, this guy is the goody two-shoes, etc. They get that without having to spend a lot of time developing each character.


Not to belabor a point, though, but I'm still thinking that you and I saw different X-Men movies....I still don't understand why you don't consider Rogue, Iceman, Prof X, etc. to be X-Men....:huh:

They didn't wear suits, they didn't go on missions. Why do you consider them X-Men in the first film?

Whedon says it's a full ensemble. (http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/joss-whedon-talks-avengers-plus-a-look-at-some-new-products) (Meaning not the Ensemble in Name only of Oceans 11/Expendables). So, even though BW and Hawkeye are marginalized to a degree, even in the previews, we see that they have real character arcs. There are no stock characters on the Avengers. If Avengers 2 is a smaller more character-centric movie, what makes you think that would change?

It's never an issue of savvyness. It's not about the audience 'understanding' comic book psuedoscience, it's about them caring about characters when you rapidly remove them from human experience and audience investment.

[cherokeesam]

All the examples you've cited are films where none of the characters existed in movies of their own beforehand. They were ensemble movies where these people came together for the first time and didn't have a life prior to that. We didn't know the names or background of any of these characters from The Poseidon Adventure, The Dirty Dozen, Oceans 11 etc. Did anyone care about the exploits of characters like Danny Ocean, Linus Caldwell, the Malloy brothers or "The Amazing" Yen before they assembled for Ocean's 11?

They are decidely different from something like The Avengers, which is a first for this type of crossover event where everyone has either had their own movie or already appeared in a previous movie.

So your idea to throw all character develoment out the window doesn't quite apply in this case. The Avengers aren't stock characters but people that the audiences are already familiar with and care about.

Not necessarily. We've already discussed ad infinitum the highest/lowest-common-denominator factor in Avengers on these boards --- in other words, you can't assume that Avengers audiences saw all the prequels....or *any* of them, in fact. Whedon and Marvel are counting on the fact that there's going to be lots of people in the audience who never saw the lead-ins....otherwise, you go back to the argument that this movie can't have a bigger b.o. than its highest common denominator (i.e., Iron Man).

[DrCosmic]

And again, audiences are put off by super powered characters that they don't care about. People not seeing the lead ins is part of why Avengers has character arcs for all the Avengers, and Nick Fury too. So they can care instead of feeling like some random plot device has been thrown in to destroy the tension and add a bunch of 'yeah, but...' quesitons. This is why they'll continue to have character arcs for all characters, and not just assume, like Green Lantern did, that the audiences already care, or that if they can understand it, they'll like it.

[cherokeesam]

And again, audiences are put off by super powered characters that they don't care about. People not seeing the lead ins is part of why Avengers has character arcs for all the Avengers, and Nick Fury too. So they can care instead of feeling like some random plot device has been thrown in to destroy the tension and add a bunch of 'yeah, but...' quesitons. This is why they'll continue to have character arcs for all characters, and not just assume, like Green Lantern did, that the audiences already care, or that if they can understand it, they'll like it.


I certainly understand (and agree with) the need for character arcs in the initial Avengers film, because you might as well consider that an origins film. Even though at least 4 of the characters have already had their origin stories told, this is the first time they come together as a team, so you pretty much *have* to introduce and re-introduce the characters, and give them a story arc that brings them together as a team by movie's end.

But I *don't* agree that Avengers 2 and future sequels needs to go back through that again and again, nor does it need to establish story arcs for Cap, Iron Man, Hulk, Thor and the other Founders (at least, the MCU version of the Founders). Reason being: franchise characters do *not* work well with story arcs. Audiences *want* to see franchise characters retain their same attitude and persona from beginning to end, because that's what they bought into. In other words, nobody wants to see James Bond or Indiana Jones or Spider-Man be anyone else but James Bond, Indiana Jones or Spider-Man. You start trying to throw an arc in there and give them a personality "growth" or change, and your audiences will revolt against the franchise. Same goes for Avengers sequels.

[Dark Raven]

I certainly understand (and agree with) the need for character arcs in the initial Avengers film, because you might as well consider that an origins film. Even though at least 4 of the characters have already had their origin stories told, this is the first time they come together as a team, so you pretty much *have* to introduce and re-introduce the characters, and give them a story arc that brings them together as a team by movie's end.

But I *don't* agree that Avengers 2 and future sequels needs to go back through that again and again, nor does it need to establish story arcs for Cap, Iron Man, Hulk, Thor and the other Founders (at least, the MCU version of the Founders). Reason being: franchise characters do *not* work well with story arcs. Audiences *want* to see franchise characters retain their same attitude and persona from beginning to end, because that's what they bought into. In other words, nobody wants to see James Bond or Indiana Jones or Spider-Man be anyone else but James Bond, Indiana Jones or Spider-Man. You start trying to throw an arc in there and give them a personality "growth" or change, and your audiences will revolt against the franchise. Same goes for Avengers sequels.

All three Spider-Man films had character arcs and Peter went through a journey in them in which he wasn't the same person exactly as he was when he started that journey. Sam Raimi even said that he based the villains on who best fit those character arcs. I didn't see any audiences revolting against this.

I'm sure the same approach is taken by Marc Webb for The Amazing Spider-Man.

And as for James Bond, since the reboot with Casino Royale, he's been given a character arc where he is allowed to grow and change. They got tired of doing the static Bond who never develops and is basically a cardboard superhero. Far from revolting, audiences seem to like Daniel Craig and this new approach.

So apart from Indiana Jones, the characters you list don't fit with your argument.

[cherokeesam]

All three Spider-Man films had character arcs and Peter went through a journey in them in which he wasn't the same person exactly as he was when he started that journey. Sam Raimi even said that he based the villains on who best fit those character arcs. I didn't see any audiences revolting against this.

I'm sure the same approach is taken by Marc Webb for The Amazing Spider-Man.

And as for James Bond, since the reboot with Casino Royale, he's been given a character arc where he is allowed to grow and change. They got tired of doing the static Bond who never develops and is basically a cardboard superhero. Far from revolting, audiences seem to like Daniel Craig and this new approach.

So apart from Indiana Jones, the characters you list don't fit with your argument.

I'm sure Marc Webb will give Parker a great story arc, just like Raimi did in Spidey 1, because both of those are origin films, and origin films necessarily create a story arc.

I do *not* agree that Parker followed any arc at all in Spidey 2; and the "arc" in Spidey 3 was entirely contrived by artifice, i.e., the black suit. Personality-wise, Parker remains Parker, beginning to end.

And I haven't seen *any* story arc for Craig as Bond. He's a different version of the character, with more ice in his veins than previous incarnations, but what kind of arc have you seen where he changes and grows and becomes a different person....? I didn't see any of that in CR or QOS.

[DrCosmic]

I certainly understand (and agree with) the need for character arcs in the initial Avengers film, because you might as well consider that an origins film. Even though at least 4 of the characters have already had their origin stories told, this is the first time they come together as a team, so you pretty much *have* to introduce and re-introduce the characters, and give them a story arc that brings them together as a team by movie's end.

But I *don't* agree that Avengers 2 and future sequels needs to go back through that again and again, nor does it need to establish story arcs for Cap, Iron Man, Hulk, Thor and the other Founders (at least, the MCU version of the Founders). Reason being: franchise characters do *not* work well with story arcs. Audiences *want* to see franchise characters retain their same attitude and persona from beginning to end, because that's what they bought into. In other words, nobody wants to see James Bond or Indiana Jones or Spider-Man be anyone else but James Bond, Indiana Jones or Spider-Man. You start trying to throw an arc in there and give them a personality "growth" or change, and your audiences will revolt against the franchise. Same goes for Avengers sequels.

A character arc is just the character learning something and becoming better, from the film's terms, than they were before. It's not their persona or attitude changing. You put quotations around growth like you don't believe in it or something, that's really odd to me.

I think what you're seeing is that origin stories usually have much more dramatic character arcs than sequels. Usually the arc picks back up strong for the third one though, and there's always an arc, and it is hard to do, because you have to figure out how to add to the character without taking away what people like about them. But they do it all the time.

I'm sure Marc Webb will give Parker a great story arc, just like Raimi did in Spidey 1, because both of those are origin films, and origin films necessarily create a story arc.

I do *not* agree that Parker followed any arc at all in Spidey 2; and the "arc" in Spidey 3 was entirely contrived by artifice, i.e., the black suit. Personality-wise, Parker remains Parker, beginning to end.

And I haven't seen *any* story arc for Craig as Bond. He's a different version of the character, with more ice in his veins than previous incarnations, but what kind of arc have you seen where he changes and grows and becomes a different person....? I didn't see any of that in CR or QOS.

You may just not notice, but it certainly happened. In Spider-Man 2, Peter had to face and overcome his self confidence issues, and become the guy who would give up everything he wanted to save others. In Iron Man 2 Tony had to deal with daddy issues, and became capable of being in a real relationship. Craig's James Bond went from an ambitious agent to a romantic man in love to a heartless rage-fueled killer in Casino Royale. We'll not even touch Aragorn and Frodos immense arcs. Some people just go for the action, and to see comics brought to life, some people go for the story, characters and emotion. Big blockbusters, especially successful franchises, appeal to both, or they don't make bank. Even the mindless Transformers had Sam grow up in TF2 and learn humility in TF3.

Some films, like, Crank, or Predators, don't have character arcs, and they usually have much lower budgets, cuz they know they're basically only going to get the young men demo.

[Dark Raven]

A character arc is just the character learning something and becoming better, from the film's terms, than they were before. It's not their persona or attitude changing. You put quotations around growth like you don't believe in it or something, that's really odd to me.

I think what you're seeing is that origin stories usually have much more dramatic character arcs than sequels. Usually the arc picks back up strong for the third one though, and there's always an arc, and it is hard to do, because you have to figure out how to add to the character without taking away what people like about them. But they do it all the time.



You may just not notice, but it certainly happened. In Spider-Man 2, Peter had to face and overcome his self confidence issues, and become the guy who would give up everything he wanted to save others. In Iron Man 2 Tony had to deal with daddy issues, and became capable of being in a real relationship. Craig's James Bond went from an ambitious agent to a romantic man in love to a heartless rage-fueled killer in Casino Royale. We'll not even touch Aragorn and Frodos immense arcs. Some people just go for the action, and to see comics brought to life, some people go for the story, characters and emotion. Big blockbusters, especially successful franchises, appeal to both, or they don't make bank. Even the mindless Transformers had Sam grow up in TF2 and learn humility in TF3.

Some films, like, Crank, or Predators, don't have character arcs, and they usually have much lower budgets, cuz they know they're basically only going to get the young men demo.


I missed this thread yesterday so didn't reply to it, but yeah, pretty much all that Dr Cosmic said above outlines the character arcs. Also, in Spider-Man 2, there was this theme of growing up and taking responsibility, even when the right thing meant giving certain things up. Peter thought he was growing up and putting away childish things by giving up his Spider-Man identity (while he was losing his powers), but in the end it turned out that it wasn't the case. Yes, he's still Peter and hasn't turned into someone completely different by the end, but he has matured, gained a new perspective and is a somewhat different person to the one he started off with at the beginning of the movie.