The under performance of WATCHMEN is proof why Marvel should not do THE ULTIMATES

[Blade X]

Let's be honest, it is very unlikely that Marvel will do a completely faithful adaption of the first 6 issues of THE ULTIMATES comic for the live action AVENGERS movie, since THE ULTIMATES (as written in the comics) would not appeal to the non comic book reading all ages general audience. This is one of the reasons why the 2 ULTIMATE AVENGERS movies were an amalgamated version of the original 616 AVENGERS and THE ULTIMATES. If the under performance of the WATCHMEN movie has taught us anything, it's that MOST (NOT ALL) non comic book readers/moviegoers DO NOT have any interest in superhero movies where the MAIN heroes in the movie are either (a) full blown insane or (b) morally corrupt to down right evil. I believe that MOST people want heroes who have (a) have easilly forgivable and/or redeemable flaws (b) who actually act like heroes and (c) who they would want to be (or would like to imagine themselves being). I also think that MOST (NOT ALL) people want (and expect) superhero movies to be more fantasy with a touch of realism as opposed to being ultra realistic with elements of fantasy.

[mjdiddy1]

Did the Watchmen under perform?

[Crook]

All Watchmen showed us is that it's story wasn't mainstream-friendly. That was quite obvious from anyone who has read the book.

Whereas Snyder stuck close to a narrative that wasn't mass-appealing in the first place, you don't have this tight spot with Avengers. You can create your own. X-Men is more comparable in this situation.

[WeaponXProject]

This is a terrible comparison in my mind. Not only did Watchmen do well, AS A "R" RATED FILM, but it is nothing like the Avengers.

The material is never gonna be completely faithful. Its film dude. Get used to it. I still think Avengers will be sweet if they have the budget and actors of great quality. Not to mention we don't even know what Avengers will have in store yet.

[CaptainStacy]

All Watchmen showed us is that it's story wasn't mainstream-friendly. That was quite obvious from anyone who has read the book.

Whereas Snyder stuck close to a narrative that wasn't mass-appealing in the first place, you don't have this tight spot with Avengers. You can create your own. X-Men is more comparable in this situation.

Agreed.

[Blader5489]

Given the source material and R-rating, Watchmen is doing pretty well for itself.

[Shifty]

Given the source material and R-rating, Watchmen is doing pretty well for itself.

And runtime.

[hippie_hunter]

I doubt that Marvel will be doing a straight up adaptation with the Ultimates. I think they'll end up doing an Ultimate/616 hybird with the Avengers being operatives of the government, but they'll still be their traditional superheroic selves.

And based on how Iron Man was, I'd say that it'll feel more 616 than Ultimate.

[marcvader]

No comparison what so ever in my mind.

[Octoberist]

Let's be honest, it is very unlikely that Marvel will do a completely faithful adaption of the first 6 issues of THE ULTIMATES comic for the live action AVENGERS movie, since THE ULTIMATES (as written in the comics) would not appeal to the non comic book reading all ages general audience. This is one of the reasons why the 2 ULTIMATE AVENGERS movies were an amalgamated version of the original 616 AVENGERS and THE ULTIMATES. If the under performance of the WATCHMEN movie has taught us anything, it's that MOST (NOT ALL) non comic book readers/moviegoers DO NOT have any interest in superhero movies where the MAIN heroes in the movie are either (a) full blown insane or (b) morally corrupt to down right evil. I believe that MOST people want heroes who have (a) have easilly forgivable and/or redeemable flaws (b) who actually act like heroes and (c) who they would want to be (or would like to imagine themselves being). I also think that MOST (NOT ALL) people want (and expect) superhero movies to be more fantasy with a touch of realism as opposed to being ultra realistic with elements of fantasy.

There isn't a whole lot of weight here.

Again, Watchmen is one of a kind and it's a hard book to adapt.

[roach]

i wouldnt say its underperforming unless you were expecting TDK numbers and then if you were then you have issues

[Shivsguy616]

...Watchmen didn't underperform. So, no, marvel should do Avengers.

[Blade X]

Did the Watchmen under perform?

Yes. Despite being the #1 movie in it's opening weekend and making $55 million, the studios were expecting the movie to make slightly more money then it did (they were expecting the movie to make $60+ million in it's opening weekend). Also, the word of mouth from mainstream non comic book readers/moviegoers has been mostly negative. There's a reason why one of the screenwriters of the movie has recently sent out an open letter to fans who have seen and enjoyed the movie, to go back and watch the movie in it's 2nd weekend.

[Raiden]

The Ultimates isn't like the Watchmen, and Marvel can loosely adapt Mark Miller's story along with the 616 Avengers. I think Ultimates' greatest achievement was making Avengers into a real-world superhero team, whereas Avengers feels like sci-fi and fantasy intertwined. I'm sure they will have the right combination of realism and fantasy in this movie, like they did with Iron Man.

[Blade X]

This is a terrible comparison in my mind. Not only did Watchmen do well, AS A "R" RATED FILM, but it is nothing like the Avengers.

The material is never gonna be completely faithful. Its film dude. Get used to it. I still think Avengers will be sweet if they have the budget and actors of great quality. Not to mention we don't even know what Avengers will have in store yet.

I see that you and others have missed my entire point. My point was/is that if Marvel is going to make a live action AVENGERS movie, they should go with the ORIGINAL HEROIC 616 versions of the characters and NOT the deconstructed LESS HEROIC and cynical Ultimate version of the characters and concept.

[Blade X]

The Ultimates isn't like the Watchmen, and Marvel can loosely adapt Mark Miller's story along with the 616 Avengers. I think Ultimates' greatest achievement was making Avengers into a real-world superhero team, whereas Avengers feels like sci-fi and fantasy intertwined. I'm sure they will have the right combination of realism and fantasy in this movie, like they did with Iron Man.

Millar making THE ULTIMATES into a "real world" superhero team is pretty much obvious that the book was trying to be a WATCHMEN 2.0. And IMO, making THE ULTIMATES into a "real world" superhero team was less of an achievement and was nothing more then yet another tired dark "grim and gritty" superhero comic. Hell, even the whole idea about the Ultimates working for the government was done twice before back in the late 90's with the crappy HEROES REBORN AVENGERS comic and the equally crappy AVENGERS: UNITED THEY STAND cartoon.

[sdc10]

Millar making THE ULTIMATES into a "real world" superhero team is pretty much obvious that the book was trying to be a WATCHMEN 2.0. And IMO, making THE ULTIMATES into a "real world" superhero team was less of an achievement and was nothing more then yet another tired dark "grim and gritty" superhero comic. Hell, even the whole idea about the Ultimates working for the government was done twice before back in the late 90's with the crappy HEROES REBORN AVENGERS comic and the equally crappy AVENGERS: UNITED THEY STAND cartoon.

Saying Millar was trying to make the Ultimates into another Watchmen is a pretty ridiculous and unfounded statement. There are plenty of comics which go for a more "real world" feel. I for one hope they go for a more Ultimates tone to the movie just based on the fact the movies so far have had a real world feel to them, also i think it would be kinda ridiculous seeing Hawkeye in the purple if he is included in the movie.

[Raiden]

Millar making THE ULTIMATES into a "real world" superhero team is pretty much obvious that the book was trying to be a WATCHMEN 2.0. And IMO, making THE ULTIMATES into a "real world" superhero team was less of an achievement and was nothing more then yet another tired dark "grim and gritty" superhero comic. Hell, even the whole idea about the Ultimates working for the government was done twice before back in the late 90's with the crappy HEROES REBORN AVENGERS comic and the equally crappy AVENGERS: UNITED THEY STAND cartoon.

I read both Watchmen and The Ultimates, and I didn't get the sense that Miller was trying to turn Avengers into Watchmen, but he just wanted to recreate Avengers into a modern-day superhero team that works with the government. Like it or not, because of the realism in Iron Man (and probably the upcoming Cap America movie), this Avengers movie will be steered toward realism, which means it will probably resemble Ultimates moreso than Avengers. Even Thor will undergo some changes to modernize him quite a bit, otherwise he'd look way too out-of-place in the Avengers movie. It will have elements of 616 but it will have a style that is closer to the IM movie than the comic book.

[roach]

the movie made 83.2 mil opening weekend

[JackIvyGB]

So basically, the original post says "Don't do the Ultimates because audience won't like a hero as the villain'?


So don't make Hulk or Black widow a villain. Zing! Skip the first book and go to the alien invasion story.

Seriously, it's not that hard. And if you don't like the way the heroes personalities are presented in the Ultimates, just use the 616 personalities. Zing!

None of that means that you can't use the storyline from the Ultimates:

Government agency SHIELD and their leader Nick Fury recruit superheroes to defend the country against a rising extra-terrestrial and supervillain threat. They take on an invading alien force that has ties to Captain America's past, and defend the city against a united front comprised of the teams most powerful enemies. (Obviously not in the same film, but aliens in the first, something else for #2, and all the villains for the sequel)

Even better, we could still have the team fight the hulk without turning him into the bad guy. The leader was set-up at the end of TIH, right? There's no reason he couldn't be a part of the villain team and mind control Hulk to act against the avengers. They fight. Hulk would eventually break his hold somehow and rejoin the good guys for the big final fight.

At the end, have them disconnect from SHIELD so they can help the world without making it seem like govt. intervention, and then that frees you up to bring in more 616 elements (ie, other heroes, villains, Avengers based in Stark Towers, etc.) Don't follow Ultimates 3, cause I think even fans of the ultimates can all agree that it SUCKED.

Just because it's the Ultimates story doesn't mean they have to use every detail. Just delete the Black Widow kills Hawkeye's family subplot and keep her a good guy, lose all the giant man beats wasp shenanigans, the defenders, Hulk trial, all that. Just have Giant man upset that he spends more time in the lab than in the field, he gets in a fight with jan (not physical, just a common verbal fight like couples get in), but he has a chance to redeem himself when he is the one swatting UFOs out of the air like flies.

The Ultimates is too tailor made for the cinema to completely ignore. You just have to ADAPT it, like any other comic book movie. I'm sure other avengers stories will influence the movie too.

And the point about people wanting their comic movies to be more fantasy than reality? Let's see...someone help me out here...what was that one movie that came out a little while back about the bat dude and the guy with the face paint? Over rated or not, ask people what they liked the most about it, and other than Heath's awesome Joker, they'll say "I like that it was real" (even if real isn't neccessarily the best word for it). Obviously, with Thor and a giant green monster, that level of plausibility (I like that word) may not be as reachable, but if the Ultimates was able to get it down to a level where people were calling it "realistic", you can bet that it's something that the writers/director/actors/crew/whoever will be looking at in the making of this film, as RDJ has already mentioned that trying to cement all these characers together in a "realistic" way was something they were looking at and were concerned about getting right.

That's my 2 cents anyway.:woot:

PS
I DO hope they use the scene when Hawkeye is captured and escapes. That is the epitome of awesome. Maybe not fingernails (which would be a little grusome for the kids), but loose screws or something. He takes out one guy, the guy falls on his lap, uses stuff from him, etc.

[roach]

I want realism but not to the point that you eliminate classic Avenger elements in the name of realism

[Blade X]

the movie made 83.2 mil opening weekend

That's including worldwide box office ticket sales. Domestic, the movie made $55 million in it's opening weekend.

[Blade X]

I want realism but not to the point that you eliminate classic Avenger elements in the name of realism

My feelings exactly.

[roach]

My feelings exactly.

this was my issues with Nolan's Batman

[Blade X]

So basically, the original post says "Don't do the Ultimates because audience won't like a hero as the villain'?


So don't make Hulk or Black widow a villain. Zing! Skip the first book and go to the alien invasion story.

Seriously, it's not that hard. And if you don't like the way the heroes personalities are presented in the Ultimates, just use the 616 personalities. Zing!

None of that means that you can't use the storyline from the Ultimates:

Government agency SHIELD and their leader Nick Fury recruit superheroes to defend the country against a rising extra-terrestrial and supervillain threat. They take on an invading alien force that has ties to Captain America's past, and defend the city against a united front comprised of the teams most powerful enemies. (Obviously not in the same film, but aliens in the first, something else for #2, and all the villains for the sequel)

Even better, we could still have the team fight the hulk without turning him into the bad guy. The leader was set-up at the end of TIH, right? There's no reason he couldn't be a part of the villain team and mind control Hulk to act against the avengers. They fight. Hulk would eventually break his hold somehow and rejoin the good guys for the big final fight.

At the end, have them disconnect from SHIELD so they can help the world without making it seem like govt. intervention, and then that frees you up to bring in more 616 elements (ie, other heroes, villains, Avengers based in Stark Towers, etc.) Don't follow Ultimates 3, cause I think even fans of the ultimates can all agree that it SUCKED.

Just because it's the Ultimates story doesn't mean they have to use every detail. Just delete the Black Widow kills Hawkeye's family subplot and keep her a good guy, lose all the giant man beats wasp shenanigans, the defenders, Hulk trial, all that. Just have Giant man upset that he spends more time in the lab than in the field, he gets in a fight with jan (not physical, just a common verbal fight like couples get in), but he has a chance to redeem himself when he is the one swatting UFOs out of the air like flies.

The Ultimates is too tailor made for the cinema to completely ignore. You just have to ADAPT it, like any other comic book movie. I'm sure other avengers stories will influence the movie too.

And the point about people wanting their comic movies to be more fantasy than reality? Let's see...someone help me out here...what was that one movie that came out a little while back about the bat dude and the guy with the face paint? Over rated or not, ask people what they liked the most about it, and other than Heath's awesome Joker, they'll say "I like that it was real" (even if real isn't neccessarily the best word for it). Obviously, with Thor and a giant green monster, that level of plausibility (I like that word) may not be as reachable, but if the Ultimates was able to get it down to a level where people were calling it "realistic", you can bet that it's something that the writers/director/actors/crew/whoever will be looking at in the making of this film, as RDJ has already mentioned that trying to cement all these characers together in a "realistic" way was something they were looking at and were concerned about getting right.

That's my 2 cents anyway.:woot:

PS
I DO hope they use the scene when Hawkeye is captured and escapes. That is the epitome of awesome. Maybe not fingernails (which would be a little grusome for the kids), but loose screws or something. He takes out one guy, the guy falls on his lap, uses stuff from him, etc.

Again, you're missing my point. The type of realism I don't want to see in this movie is the heroes acting like psychos or unheroic. I also want to see the characters in their classic 616 colorful costumes and not dressed in played out black leather or realistic uniforms.

[bunk]

Let's be honest, it is very unlikely that Marvel will do a completely faithful adaption of the first 6 issues of THE ULTIMATES comic for the live action AVENGERS movie, since THE ULTIMATES (as written in the comics) would not appeal to the non comic book reading all ages general audience. This is one of the reasons why the 2 ULTIMATE AVENGERS movies were an amalgamated version of the original 616 AVENGERS and THE ULTIMATES. If the under performance of the WATCHMEN movie has taught us anything, it's that MOST (NOT ALL) non comic book readers/moviegoers DO NOT have any interest in superhero movies where the MAIN heroes in the movie are either (a) full blown insane or (b) morally corrupt to down right evil. I believe that MOST people want heroes who have (a) have easilly forgivable and/or redeemable flaws (b) who actually act like heroes and (c) who they would want to be (or would like to imagine themselves being). I also think that MOST (NOT ALL) people want (and expect) superhero movies to be more fantasy with a touch of realism as opposed to being ultra realistic with elements of fantasy.

Who the hell cares, they have their hands full with the real Avengers.

I'd rather watch a "The Authority" movie anyway.

[roach]

Again, you're missing my point. The type of realism I don't want to see in this movie is the heroes acting like psychos or unheroic. I also want to see the characters in their classic 616 colorful costumes and not dressed in played out black leather or realistic uniforms.

i dont see that happening. Iron Man is in the 616 armor so it stands to reason that the rest of the team will be in their 616 costumes.

[JackIvyGB]

I don't think that's an entirely accurate parallel. Current 616 Iron Man's suit has just as realistic a look as Ultimate Iron Man. Now, I prefer the current movie design, but my point is that the only difference is the design/look of the armor, not how plausible one is over the other. The difference between for example 616 Hawkeye and Ultimate Hawkeye is more like the difference between current 616/movie Iron Man and these:
http://i459.photobucket.com/albums/qq320/JackIvyGB/ARMUR12.gifhttp://i459.photobucket.com/albums/qq320/JackIvyGB/REMOTE.gifhttp://i459.photobucket.com/albums/qq320/JackIvyGB/iron-man-90s-animated.jpg

In the pictures above, it's not as believable when it's a robotic suit of armor where you are seeing rippling muscles and such and it's not explained that it's made of somesort of ever flexible alloy. With the Iron Man film, I don't think realism/plausibility was ever a concern with the suit, especially when the current comics armor was already so believable (especially under the artistic skill of Adi Granov).

I definitely think there will be some 616 influences in the movie suits, but I think it'll be more Ultimate with a dash of 616, as opposed to the other way around (ie, if it were Hawkeye, Ultimate suit as a starting point, maybe purple or blue instead of red on his chest, maybe some sort of mask instead of only shades, but no points on the mask, no pirate boots, no loin cloth).

Then again, on the subject of masks, you have to wonder why they'd need them as a government agency. After they leave SHIELD (if that's the story they use) I could see more of the newer members start to wear masks, but as long as they are with the govt., their families and such would have protection and it wouldn't be as much of a concern. Tony already went public, which is how it is in the Ultimates.

[Gamma Goliath]

i think the movie will have a 616 feel with ultimates style look for some heroes(cap, fury, thor, giantman & wasp)

[sdc10]

i dont see that happening. Iron Man is in the 616 armor so it stands to reason that the rest of the team will be in their 616 costumes.

Well thats because everyone knew what the basic look of what Iron Man is however they did make pretty obvious changes to the suit. You also have to consider how well something will translate into real life, for example I cant see how you can take Hawkeye's purple outfit and translate it into real life without having it look silly.

[JackIvyGB]

That's what I said 2 posts up :cwink:

[MilkmanDan]

Again, you're missing my point. The type of realism I don't want to see in this movie is the heroes acting like psychos or unheroic. I don't feel like he missed your point:

So basically, the original post says "Don't do the Ultimates because audience won't like a hero as the villain'?
---
Just because it's the Ultimates story doesn't mean they have to use every detail. Just delete the Black Widow kills Hawkeye's family subplot and keep her a good guy, lose all the giant man beats wasp shenanigans, the defenders, Hulk trial, all that. Just have Giant man upset that he spends more time in the lab than in the field, he gets in a fight with jan (not physical, just a common verbal fight like couples get in), but he has a chance to redeem himself when he is the one swatting UFOs out of the air like flies.

I agree. If you take away Banner's deliberate choice to turn Hulk, Pym's various shenanigans and Black Widow being a traitor, the heroes in Ultimates aren't psychos or particularly unheroic. Cap isn't quite as saintly as he is in 616 but he's hardly an unlikeable character either. Stark is pretty much as seen in Iron Man. And while Thor's questionable mental health was an important sub-plot in the comic (making him a potential "psycho", but still not an unpleasant character) it will probably won't be in the movie, since Avengers will be released after his solo movie.

[roach]

Well thats because everyone knew what the basic look of what Iron Man is however they did make pretty obvious changes to the suit. You also have to consider how well something will translate into real life, for example I cant see how you can take Hawkeye's purple outfit and translate it into real life without having it look silly.

well considering how he will be on a team with Thor and Captain America i dont see the need for a realistic suit.

[November Rain]

i'm not sure about an avengers film as it's somewhat very gimmicky to do individual films and expect everyone to still be interested by the time avengers comes out.

big risk, the supehero angle may not last, post tdk numbers may show a lack of interest for it in its current guise.

[roach]

as long as the films are good and they tease it at the end of each i dont see anyone not going to see it

[weezerspider]

Watchmen has been loved by most of the general public. Who cares if the critics don't like it.....

[November Rain]

so far marvel has put out one good film, one mediocre and one poor one.

not the world's greatest record.

[Chewy]

So far Marvel has put out two good films.

I have no idea what you think Marvel's third film is :huh:

[Daredevil_2003]

...Comparing Watchmen to The Ultimates?

:whatever:

[roach]

so far marvel has put out one good film, one mediocre and one poor one.

not the world's greatest record.

Marvel Studios put out TIH and IM...and i didnt think TIH was mediocre

[Daredevil_2003]

Me either, I liked TIH a lot, actually...

[Chewy]

Yeah, lots of people did.

[Sawyer]

Let's be honest, it is very unlikely that Marvel will do a completely faithful adaption of the first 6 issues of THE ULTIMATES comic for the live action AVENGERS movie, since THE ULTIMATES (as written in the comics) would not appeal to the non comic book reading all ages general audience. This is one of the reasons why the 2 ULTIMATE AVENGERS movies were an amalgamated version of the original 616 AVENGERS and THE ULTIMATES. If the under performance of the WATCHMEN movie has taught us anything, it's that MOST (NOT ALL) non comic book readers/moviegoers DO NOT have any interest in superhero movies where the MAIN heroes in the movie are either (a) full blown insane or (b) morally corrupt to down right evil. I believe that MOST people want heroes who have (a) have easilly forgivable and/or redeemable flaws (b) who actually act like heroes and (c) who they would want to be (or would like to imagine themselves being). I also think that MOST (NOT ALL) people want (and expect) superhero movies to be more fantasy with a touch of realism as opposed to being ultra realistic with elements of fantasy.

:whatever:

[marcvader]

so far marvel has put out one good film, one mediocre and one poor one. not the world's greatest record. Which is the poor one?

[topdog1]

I doubt that Marvel will be doing a straight up adaptation with the Ultimates. I think they'll end up doing an Ultimate/616 hybird with the Avengers being operatives of the government, but they'll still be their traditional superheroic selves.

And based on how Iron Man was, I'd say that it'll feel more 616 than Ultimate.

Thank God for that. Ultimates is severely overrated. If they use aliens at all, Avengers would be doomed.

Watchmen has been loved by most of the general public. Who cares if the critics don't like it.....

It's general audiences that are hating on the film. Word of mouth has been dismal among those that never read the source material. I never read Watchmen and I was underwhelmed by the movie.

[marcvader]

And others I know that have not read the book loved it.

[Blade X]

I don't feel like he missed your point:



I agree. If you take away Banner's deliberate choice to turn Hulk, Pym's various shenanigans and Black Widow being a traitor, the heroes in Ultimates aren't psychos or particularly unheroic. Cap isn't quite as saintly as he is in 616 but he's hardly an unlikeable character either. Stark is pretty much as seen in Iron Man. And while Thor's questionable mental health was an important sub-plot in the comic (making him a potential "psycho", but still not an unpleasant character) it will probably won't be in the movie, since Avengers will be released after his solo movie.

Actually, he did miss my point since I was talking about a completely FAITHFUL (Or as faithful as a movie version of a comic can be) adaption of THE ULTIMATES vs a completely faithful adaption of the 616 AVENGERS. I'm not just talking about the basic story of THE ULTIMATES, I'm also talking about keeping all of the negative and unlikable traits about the characters.

[JackIvyGB]

No superhero film has ever done COMPLETELY FAITHFUL adaptation of any one single comic story. They've always taken the best elements of some of the best stories and most powerful and well known moments/scenes/imagery/narrative, woven them together to form a coherent tale, while still putting their own spin on the material. Sometimes it comes out spectacularly (Dark Knight, a mix of Long Halloween, elements of Killing Joke, other stories, and it's own narrative glue), sometimes not so spectacular (X-men 3, a mix of the Dark Phoenix and Whedon stories, and Spider-man 3, with Harry becoming a goblin and the venom story). Heck, look at Hulk! It has elements of the 616 and Ultimate books (hulking by helicopter drop), but at the end of the day, what it most felt like resembled was a big budget, modern extended episode of the old TV series! Complete with Lonely Man theme! The closest there has ever been to a completely faithful adaptation of a single book/story has been Watchmen, and even that wasn't 100% faithful to the book.

Comic book movies are all about looking at whatever versions of the character have been successful and, if I may use an analogy, putting them on a pallette and letting the artist(s) pick and choose which paints they need to make their masterpiece. As long as you're not doing something like "Dark Knight Returns" or any other one off tale/ well known single volume graphic novel, a completely faithful adaptation of any one story from the pages of an ongoing comic will not happen. A COMPLETELY FAITHFUL adaptation of the Ultimates was never and will not be an issue.

And how would the use of aliens doom the Avengers? It's a plausible threat. And it's mentioned in the books that the Chitauri go by many names, one of which I remember being skrulls, which makes them bascially the ultimate version of skrulls, which also exist in the 616 universe the ultimate haters seem to be so fond of. Last time I checked, they were fighting them in "Secret Invasion".

(deep breath, exhale) Anyway, I love both universes, though I am partial to Ultimate which is probably obvious. Let the discussion Continue! :yay:


Sorry, I have no idea why the question smiley popped up by the thread title...

[topdog1]

And how would the use of aliens doom the Avengers? It's a plausible threat. And it's mentioned in the books that the Chitauri go by many names, one of which I remember being skrulls, which makes them bascially the ultimate version of skrulls, which also exist in the 616 universe the ultimate haters seem to be so fond of. Last time I checked, they were fighting them in "Secret Invasion".

I'm sure fans would love it but even done right, little green men invading earth would open the door for critical disapproval and would turn off the general movie fans that made Iron Man a mega hit. Headline: Iron Man brings his friends along as he "jumps the shark"

Artificial Intelligence run wild (Ultron), The Hulk, or other super villains are an amazing sci-fi stretch but grounded in the same type reality that made Iron Man or TDK great. Indiana Jones tried to run in to alien-land and even Spielberg himself couldn't deliver nothing but a crazy crap film. Indy made money but only because of the anticipation and previous trilogy.

NO ALIENS!

[JackIvyGB]

Ahhh, gotcha. Hmmm, that is a good point. I don't know, I think there is definitely a fine line, but if Ultron were to be the main villain...I don't know. Thinking film structure wise and in terms of well put together fight scenes, I just think that Ultron wouldn't work as the only villain against an entire team of the world's greatest super folk. It's the same reason that a Justice League movie with only Darkseid as the villain wouldn't quite work when it came to fight scenes. As an enemy for one hero or the leader of an evil force of some sort, it works. But here you'd have one singular entity around the size of a human being attack by 6 or 7 other humanoids. It's hard to create an interesting fight dynamic on screen with that set up. It even bends logic to a degree. If you have half the team with projectile based attacks (Black Widow, Hawkeye, Iron Man, sometimes Cap when he throws his shield), Thor in close with his hammer, and 2 guys who could just pound him into scrap (Giant man and Hulk), and one who could get in him and screw up his wiring (wasp), it doesn't seem like he provide not only enough fights, but none that would be especially "epic" outside of effects. In a movie like this, audiences are going to come in banking that a movie featuring a collection of heroes like this is going to be packing the fisticuffs like no other.

Ultron as a mastermind with some sort of force behind him would work. As I recall, Pym was working on the Ultron robots for SHIELD as expendable soldiers. Maybe when we meet him in the Avengers film, he is already employed by SHIELD and working on them as an alternative if the super soldier project falls through. It works and Cap is revived and they start working on a new formula to give to more soldiers. The Ultrons are effectively no longer needed, but they decide that they will serve a purpose regardless of what their master wishes...

Maybe? I don't know, I think it would work, but past the premise, it starts to sound like Marvel's version of "I Robot", replacing Will Smith's character with the Avengers. I think either way you go (aliens or Ultron), you walk a fine line. With the talent onboard so far, whether in front of or behind the camera, I have faith in the direction they'll take. You're right though. The concept of technology gone wrong does serve for an easier transition for an audience.

The other choice could be to jump staright to an Ultimates 2 type of scenario, with all the hero's respective major villains conspiring to attack the city (minus the black widow traitor aspect. I'd like her to stay hero)...

PS
Sorry for the long posts. I have alot of ideas. :woot:

[Sub-Zero]

Watchmen has been loved by most of the general public. Who cares if the critics don't like it.....

actually a lot of critics loved it. roger ebert actually got the message, and even elaborated on it. the general public is what hurt the movie. i think it dropped in box office revenue b/c people don't want to go to the movies and think.paul blart and medea were movies that you really don't have to think about to enjoy, and they both hit #1 two weeks in a row. the general public hasn't really heard of watchmen outside of what's been shoved down their throats since last july. i saw it twice and i thought it was awesome. i think to really appreciate it you need to read the comic, and almost none of the general public has.

avengers should do ok. no tdk numbers but with a great story it could have iron man numbers.

[sdc10]

actually a lot of critics loved it. roger ebert actually got the message, and even elaborated on it. the general public is what hurt the movie. i think it dropped in box office revenue b/c people don't want to go to the movies and think.paul blart and medea were movies that you really don't have to think about to enjoy, and they both hit #1 two weeks in a row. the general public hasn't really heard of watchmen outside of what's been shoved down their throats since last july. i saw it twice and i thought it was awesome. i think to really appreciate it you need to read the comic, and almost none of the general public has.

avengers should do ok. no tdk numbers but with a great story it could have iron man numbers.

I think the problem was that the movie may have been TOO much like the graphic novel. As a result it was much easier for the comic fans to identify the flaws with the movie, while at the same time alienating members of the general public who may have been turned off by word of mouth.

[November Rain]

Which is the poor one?
punisher

[Chewy]

Punisher was made by Lionsgate

[Daredevil_2003]

Indeed. Marvel Studios is so far 2 for 2.

[Sub-Zero]

Punisher was made by Lionsgate

really? i thought the first one with tom jane was, but the other one, that apparently no one saw, was made by marvel. i guess that's 0 for 2 for lionsgate. haha.

[Hectorminator]

Marvel's not gonna do a full-blown adaptation of The Ultimates Volume 1 because Iron Man and the Incredible Hulk were not full-blown adaptations of Ultimate Hulk or Ultimate Iron Man and those need to fit in with the upcoming Avengers movie. Duh.

[Docker2.0]

I think the problem was that the movie may have been TOO much like the graphic novel. As a result it was much easier for the comic fans to identify the flaws with the movie, while at the same time alienating members of the general public who may have been turned off by word of mouth.

Agreed! And whether people want to admit it or not, Watchmen did underperform at the BO. It was R rated but how many of us thought it would make $200M easily? Yeah I was one of those people. :cmad: I think with minor editing, the movie could have made that much, given itself a pg rating, and made more......like giving Manhattan a pair of draws to wear instead of walking around............like that. Anyway, the thing that separates Watchmen from Avengers is 1)the Marvel name tag(which is big right now) and 2)more well known characters. Before Watchmen came out, if you asked who Silk Spectre was on the street and they would say some porn star. Avengers will do great at the BO.

[Daredevil_2003]

Agreed, and who is that lovely specimen of female anatomy in your avy, Dock? Wowza. :hehe:

[GregComicFan]

All Watchmen showed us is that it's story wasn't mainstream-friendly. That was quite obvious from anyone who has read the book.

I agree.

[Docker2.0]

Agreed, and who is that lovely specimen of female anatomy in your avy, Dock? Wowza. :hehe:

Silk Spectre. :hehe:


Seriously, a porn star named with the last name Jolie..... :word:

[bubbadoom]

I think it is fair to say WATCHMEN underperformed with a $107 million b.o. against a $150 million budget.

[TheVileOne]

Ultimates isn't mainstream friendly either if they want this movie to play to the little kids and action figure crowd like Iron Man.

Just saying, if the movie was a celluloid copy of the Ultimates, it would probably bomb.

[Docker2.0]

Dude if you think a movie with Cap, IM and the Hulk together would bomb, I got some dead hookers in my closet that want to have sex with you. :o

[TheVileOne]

It would bomb because no one would go to see a movie if for instance that Hank/Jan scene from the comics was filmed exactly as is.

Just remember folks. The crossover audience between comics and mainstream moviegoers for these types of movies is miniscule. So catering to the Ultimates crowd is a foolish idea.

No one is going to like Cap if he does douche-ish things so Cap can be *flawed*. Iron Man is our flawed hero.

[kedrell]

Ultimates isn't mainstream friendly either if they want this movie to play to the little kids and action figure crowd like Iron Man.

Just saying, if the movie was a celluloid copy of the Ultimates, it would probably bomb.

Funny how TDK(being darker than dark and all) WAS mainstream friendly.

[TheVileOne]

TDK is still more mainstream friendly than The Ultimates.

[kedrell]

Well TDK-ish is about how dark(or serious, yeah that's a better word) an adaption of the Ultimates would have to be.

[TheVileOne]

Nope. And that's Batman. Batman is different. Batman is not Ultimates. There is no NURSE EATING HULK in The Dark Knight.

[kedrell]

A nurse eating Hulk? Boy will she get fat.:cwink::woot:

[Infinity9999x]

Let's be honest, it is very unlikely that Marvel will do a completely faithful adaption of the first 6 issues of THE ULTIMATES comic for the live action AVENGERS movie, since THE ULTIMATES (as written in the comics) would not appeal to the non comic book reading all ages general audience. This is one of the reasons why the 2 ULTIMATE AVENGERS movies were an amalgamated version of the original 616 AVENGERS and THE ULTIMATES. If the under performance of the WATCHMEN movie has taught us anything, it's that MOST (NOT ALL) non comic book readers/moviegoers DO NOT have any interest in superhero movies where the MAIN heroes in the movie are either (a) full blown insane or (b) morally corrupt to down right evil. I believe that MOST people want heroes who have (a) have easilly forgivable and/or redeemable flaws (b) who actually act like heroes and (c) who they would want to be (or would like to imagine themselves being). I also think that MOST (NOT ALL) people want (and expect) superhero movies to be more fantasy with a touch of realism as opposed to being ultra realistic with elements of fantasy.


Faulty logic for a few reasons.

1.) Watchmen didn't under-perform. It did quite well for an R-rated movie, especially one based on a cult comic book that 99% of the general audience has never heard of before. The only reason it's considered a "flop" is because it cost so much to make, but it still made it's budget back in world wide totals. Add in the $ that's going to be made off the multiple DVD releases, and it's going to be doing quite well.

2.) The Ultimates isn't close to being as dark, or having characters as f*&cked up as the people in Watchmen. It was much more family-friendly. Yes, it was still adult, but if you made a straight adaptation of the first volume of the Ultimates, there's nothing in there that would push it over a Pg-13 rating.

3.) We're not going to be getting a straight adaptation of the Ultimates. We know this for a fact just by watching The Incredible Hulk. Betty Ross isn't a publicity mongol, Banner wasn't knowingly working on the super-solider serum, and Hulk isn't a crazy monster that wants to screw the crap out of Betty and eat people. The characterizations of Betty/Bruce were very much in line with the 616 interpretation.

So, all that aside, it's basically confirmed that we won't be getting a straight Ultimates adaptation.

[TheVileOne]

Ultimates isn't ****ing family friendly. The heroes are stuck up douche-nozzles and downright sadistic at times.

[Infinity9999x]

Ultimates isn't ****ing family friendly. The heroes are stuck up douche-nozzles and downright sadistic at times.

I said more family friendly than Watchmen, not family friendly.

Though, while it is very adult, if you translated the first volume of the Ultimates directly to screen, there's nothing in it that would bumb it over a Pg-13 rating. It's not close to as f*&cked up as Watchmen is.

[TheVileOne]

That's like saying Basic Instinct is more family friendly than Showgirls. One rating lower.

Also its not just about what it would rate. Its about that these are not how these heroes should be represented onscreen to a mainstream moviegoing audience for the first time ever.

Just remember, the crossover appeal between moviegoers and comic readers is miniscule at best. Watchmen proves.

Avengers should not be a movie that caters to the Ultimates fanbase. It should be a movie most everyone can enjoy.

[Infinity9999x]

That's like saying Basic Instinct is more family friendly than Showgirls. One rating lower.

Also its not just about what it would rate. Its about that these are not how these heroes should be represented onscreen to a mainstream moviegoing audience for the first time ever.

Just remember, the crossover appeal between moviegoers and comic readers is miniscule at best. Watchmen proves.

Avengers should not be a movie that caters to the Ultimates fanbase. It should be a movie most everyone can enjoy.

Exactly, which was my point. I said it's more family friendly than Watchman, I wasn't saying it's the same as Lion King.

And I really don't see much that would upset the mainstream audience besides the way the Hulk was portrayed, and as I said above, we already know we won't be getting that Hulk. Thor, Iron Man, Cap, Hawkeye, and Black Widow don't do anything too drastic at all, and the only other theme that would be fairly intense is the Pyms relationship. Though I really don't see that as being that "dark." Yeah, it's adult, but spouse abuse has been a theme the general public has seen for years. It's been portrayed in just about every teen drama since the 80's, and the Lifetime channel releases a new movie about it pretty much every other minute. Nothing the Gen. Audience is going to find too disturbing.

However, I'm not saying we should get a straight Ultimate adaptation. I would like the movies to use Elements from both. I think the things the Ultimates did best was the formation of team, and the whole plot of Cap trying to get used to being frozen for 60 years. I'm on the fence about the whole Thor/God subplot thing, I really don't care either way if they include it or not.

And then, I loved the way they handled the Skrulls, however, I would definitely replace Klieser with Red Skull.

[TheVileOne]

Cap wouldn't kick Banner in the face. He's not a dick.

[kedrell]

He would if Banner purposefully became the Hulk and killed over 800 people, destroyed half of downtown New York, then beat the crap out all the Ultimates who barely managed to take him down while sustaining tons of painful injuries themselves. Yeah, I could imagine Cap kicking Banner in the face. Cap shouldn't be a goody two-shoes like Superman. Is he an honorable man and usually a rather nice guy? Yes. But he's been through the hell of war and goody two-shoes don't survive in that enviroment.

[Shivsguy616]

Cap wouldn't kick Banner in the face. He's not a dick.

Have you not read Civil War? Yes, Cap IS a dick.

[TheVileOne]

That wasn't Cap. That was a Skrull. And Civil War is not what I consider to be the definitive Cap with all the OOC writing.

[Infinity9999x]

Again, we know that we're not going to have to worry about all the Hulk related stuff in the Ultimates, because the Hulk that Marvel is portraying is one much more similar to 616. The only real thing it had in common with the Ultimate-verse is that the Hulk's creation is related to trying to recreate the Super-soldier serum.

We won't have the people eating Hulk in the Ultimates, so that won't be a problem.

[Blade X]

Ultimates isn't mainstream friendly either if they want this movie to play to the little kids and action figure crowd like Iron Man.

Just saying, if the movie was a celluloid copy of the Ultimates, it would probably bomb.

It would bomb because no one would go to see a movie if for instance that Hank/Jan scene from the comics was filmed exactly as is.

Just remember folks. The crossover audience between comics and mainstream moviegoers for these types of movies is miniscule. So catering to the Ultimates crowd is a foolish idea.

No one is going to like Cap if he does douche-ish things so Cap can be *flawed*. Iron Man is our flawed hero.

TDK is still more mainstream friendly than The Ultimates.

Nope. And that's Batman. Batman is different. Batman is not Ultimates. There is no NURSE EATING HULK in The Dark Knight.

Ultimates isn't ****ing family friendly. The heroes are stuck up douche-nozzles and downright sadistic at times.

That's like saying Basic Instinct is more family friendly than Showgirls. One rating lower.

Also its not just about what it would rate. Its about that these are not how these heroes should be represented onscreen to a mainstream moviegoing audience for the first time ever.

Just remember, the crossover appeal between moviegoers and comic readers is miniscule at best. Watchmen proves.

Avengers should not be a movie that caters to the Ultimates fanbase. It should be a movie most everyone can enjoy.

Well said. I agree with everything you said. Heck, you even did a much better job of explaining why a faithful adaption of THE ULTIMATES would under perform at the box office then I did.

[Blade X]

Faulty logic for a few reasons.

1.) Watchmen didn't under-perform. It did quite well for an R-rated movie, especially one based on a cult comic book that 99% of the general audience has never heard of before. The only reason it's considered a "flop" is because it cost so much to make, but it still made it's budget back in world wide totals. Add in the $ that's going to be made off the multiple DVD releases, and it's going to be doing quite well.

2.) The Ultimates isn't close to being as dark, or having characters as f*&cked up as the people in Watchmen. It was much more family-friendly. Yes, it was still adult, but if you made a straight adaptation of the first volume of the Ultimates, there's nothing in there that would push it over a Pg-13 rating.

3.) We're not going to be getting a straight adaptation of the Ultimates. We know this for a fact just by watching The Incredible Hulk. Betty Ross isn't a publicity mongol, Banner wasn't knowingly working on the super-solider serum, and Hulk isn't a crazy monster that wants to screw the crap out of Betty and eat people. The characterizations of Betty/Bruce were very much in line with the 616 interpretation.

So, all that aside, it's basically confirmed that we won't be getting a straight Ultimates adaptation.

1. WATCHMEN did under performed at the box office. It's pretty much been confirmed by various news sources.

2. True, however a horney Hulk who willingly kills and eats people,Iron Man acting like a selfish jackass and making anti gay insults towards Jarvis,Thor being an enviromental terrorist,and Hank beating (and trying to murder) Jan would MOST LIKELY turn off MAINSTREAM non comic book moviegoers. There's no way in hell you can market that type of movie to kids. This is one of the reasons why the heroes in the ULTIMATE AVENGERS animated movies DID NOT have any of the negative unheroic characteristics of the ULTIMATES and were more similar in personality to their original MU versions.

3. I know we're not going to get a straight faithful adaption of THE ULTIMATES. Hell, I NEVER said we were going to get a faithful adaption of THE ULTIMATES. MY point was/is that a straight up faithful adaption of THE ULTIMATES would NOT go over well with the MAINSTREAM non comic book reading movie going audience and would MOST LIKELY under perform at the box office.

[Blade X]

Funny how TDK(being darker than dark and all) WAS mainstream friendly.

The major difference is that despite it's darkness, Batman was still a LIKABLE HERO in TDK. The same thing cannot be said about MOST of the Ultimates.

[Infinity9999x]

1. WATCHMEN did under performed at the box office. It's pretty much been confirmed by various news sources.

2. True, however a horney Hulk who willingly kills and eats people,Iron Man acting like a selfish jackass and making anti gay insults towards Jarvis,Thor being an enviromental terrorist,and Hank beating (and trying to murder) Jan would MOST LIKELY turn off MAINSTREAM non comic book moviegoers. There's no way in hell you can market that type of movie to kids. This is one of the reasons why the heroes in the ULTIMATE AVENGERS animated movies DID NOT have any of the negative unheroic characteristics of the ULTIMATES and were more similar in personality to their original MU versions.

3. I know we're not going to get a straight faithful adaption of THE ULTIMATES. Hell, I NEVER said we were going to get a faithful adaption of THE ULTIMATES. MY point was/is that a straight up faithful adaption of THE ULTIMATES would NOT go over well with the MAINSTREAM non comic book reading movie going audience and would MOST LIKELY under perform at the box office.

I'm going to have to disagree on Watchmen. How the heck did people expect it to perform? It's an R-rated movie based on a cult comic book that 99% of the general audience has never heard of, and it's not an action story like 300, but much more cerebral. It did fine for an R-rated movie. People who expected it to put up 300 numbers were stupid.


And I think we've already seen Iron Man be a selfish jackass, however he did end up changing, which definitely helped. But he was still arrogant and chippy, and I really found the Ultimate Iron Man to be pretty likable in the first two volumes. I don't remember the anti-gay remarks though, it's been a while since I've read the volumes. However, I will agree that a straight up adaptation of the Ultimates may be harder for people to swallow. I think the Hulk part is what would turn people off the most, because besides that, the rest of the team reminds me a lot of the way the first season of Heroes was (you know, back when it was actually good.) A lot of the characters in Heroes were pretty messed up, and in some cases not very likeable at all, and people loved that.

I was reacting to your post more as a statement to not use the Ultimates at all in the Avengers movie, which, in my opinion, would be a mistake, because there are some things that the Ultimates did beautifully. The Cap stuff in the first volume springs to mind. Everything with him trying to cope with being suddenly in the 21st century was great, and the scenes with him visiting Bucky and trying to see his old girlfriend, and in the graveyard with Fury, that was great stuff. That, and the way the Skrulls and the whole invasion was handled in Vol. 2 was also done very well, and I think keeping that would be great (except replacing Kliesier with Red Skull).

But I suppose I misunderstood, as I said above, I thought you were lobbying for no inclusion of the Ultimate-verse in the Avengers movie. But I agree, while I like Ultimates, I wouldn't want a straight adaptation of them, because there are many things from 616 I like more, and if Iron Man and Hulk are any indication, we're going to be getting a nice blend.

[TheVileOne]

Warner Bros. expected it to perform like 300 and they pushed a ton of money into it with that expectation. Same director, same release date.

[Infinity9999x]

Warner Bros. expected it to perform like 300 and they pushed a ton of money into it with that expectation. Same director, same release date.


Then they were stupid. Look at the subject material. It's not an action movie like 300. It really doesn't have that much action at all. It's long, and it's essentially an odd mystery story that features heroes that are all f*&cked up to various degrees. Not only that, it's based on a cult comic that most of the general public has never even heard of.

Expecting it to perform like 300 was unrealistic.

[TheVileOne]

They put a lot of action INTO Watchmen to appease WB execs who thought they would satisfy the 300 and male adolescent with perverse need for martial arts demographics.

There was a lot of fighting and action inserted into the movie that was never in the comics.

Regardless of it being unrealistic or not, it had a ton of buzz and hype going up to last March. Because of 300, WB put a ton of money into the movie and gave Snyder a lot of leeway. And studios do this because they expect a big return on their investment.

[Infinity9999x]

They put a lot of action INTO Watchmen to appease WB execs who thought they would satisfy the 300 and male adolescent with perverse need for martial arts demographics.

There was a lot of fighting and action inserted into the movie that was never in the comics.

Regardless of it being unrealistic or not, it had a ton of buzz and hype going up to last March. Because of 300, WB put a ton of money into the movie and gave Snyder a lot of leeway. And studios do this because they expect a big return on their investment.

They definitely did add quite a bit more action, which I was a bit iffy on (especially when it made people like Dan and Luarie look superhuman).

I get that WB wanted it to do as well as 300, I just think it was an unrealistic goal. Watchmen the comic was popular, but it was a cult hit. Just the nature of the material pretty much guarantees that it's not going to be as big as 300.

However, I see your and Blade X's point. As I said above, I automatically went into the mindset that you were both saying we should have absolutely no influence from the Ultimates in the Avengers movie, which I think would be a mistake. A mesh of the two is the best idea in my opinion.

[Shivsguy616]

That wasn't Cap. That was a Skrull.

You think that was already decided at the time of writing? They were writing Cap.

[Blade X]

But I suppose I misunderstood, as I said above, I thought you were lobbying for no inclusion of the Ultimate-verse in the Avengers movie. But I agree, while I like Ultimates, I wouldn't want a straight adaptation of them, because there are many things from 616 I like more, and if Iron Man and Hulk are any indication, we're going to be getting a nice blend.

Well I HATE THE ULTIMATES and would be happy as hell if all elements of the Ultimates were completely left out of the Avengers movie (I'm old school). That being said, some of the things that the Ultimates are often given credit for creating/adding to the mythos of the Avengers were actually done several years earlier in previous comics and cartoons. So I'm not oppose to SOME of those same things being used in the Avengers movie. Heck, the IRON MAN movie was more heavily influenced by the MU and 90's animated version of the character then it was the Ultimate version of the character (which was very little if any at all).

[TheVileOne]

Yup.

Yes, except for Ultimate Nick Fury who I know Blade X isn't a fan of even though Blade X is black :D .

I'd be really annoyed if there's a scene of Fury talking about Samuel L. Jackson playing him in a movie.

[Infinity9999x]

Yup.

Yes, except for Ultimate Nick Fury who I know Blade X isn't a fan of even though Blade X is black :D .

I'd be really annoyed if there's a scene of Fury talking about Samuel L. Jackson playing him in a movie.

Ah, I really don't care about that stuff. But like I said above, the things I want to see most in the Avengers movie that takes from the Ultimates is the Cap-related stuff.

I also liked that fact that they made Cap stronger in the Ultimates. Because with Cap, I've always felt more or less the same I have with Batman. Yes, they're both peak human, but in all fairness, somebody like Spider-man should be able to waste them in a fight. I don't care how smart or trained you are, somebody who can doge bullets and pick up a car is going to be able to beat you.

Which is why I liked the fact that they beefed him up in the Ultimates, but I was also glad they didn't go too far. I don't want Superman Cap, just a superhuman Cap with slightly super-human speed and strength.

Besides that, I loved the way the Skrulls were handled in Vol. 2, and I liked the portrayal of Hawkeye.

[Hmarrs]

I doubt that Marvel will be doing a straight up adaptation with the Ultimates. I think they'll end up doing an Ultimate/616 hybird with the Avengers being operatives of the government, but they'll still be their traditional superheroic selves.

And based on how Iron Man was, I'd say that it'll feel more 616 than Ultimate.
Thank Goodness!!!!!!

[The Ace of Knaves]

How much did Watchmen cost to make? A lot of money wasn't it? So yea, you could say it definitely under-performed.

[kedrell]

They spent too much money on it. They only should've had a 75-100M budget for it rather than 150M. Then it would be a modest success.

[The Ace of Knaves]

I wouldn't be surprised if it was quite a bit more than 150 mill.

[TheVileOne]

It depends. Studios have very shady bookkeeping sometimes, "Hollywood accounting" and what not. Stuff like the Producers actually happens.

BOM reports it as $150 million. Watchmen had HUGE P&A which is not cheap. Big worldwide distribution is not cheap.

[The Ace of Knaves]

Ya, I'd put it closer to 200 Mill personally.

But I don't care if it under-performed, I liked it.

[kedrell]

And it's not like we ever were expecting a sequel for it.

[TheVileOne]

That's great guys. Glad you liked Watchmen. Knew there wasn't a sequel. It sort of did underperform

bloddy bloddy blah

The point is that Avengers shouldn't be made like Watchmen or The Ultimates. That's how myself and Blade X feel.

Something more akin to classic Avengers is what can be adapted to play to the masses.

[The Ace of Knaves]

Yea. Ultimate Cap would never get on film. Well not in these films anyway. Stylistically it will be more like Ultimate but the characters personalities will be more 616 obviously. They are just more traditionally heroic.

[TheVileOne]

Stylistically . . . sucks to Ultimates.

They didn't go with an Ultimate look for Iron Man, but they did go with it for Nick Fury.

Besides Fury though, it was pretty much as close to 616 as possible.

Ultimate Marvel is only rated.

[Infinity9999x]

Yea. Ultimate Cap would never get on film. Well not in these films anyway. Stylistically it will be more like Ultimate but the characters personalities will be more 616 obviously. They are just more traditionally heroic.

I think Ultimate Cap in Volume 1 and 2 would be fine. It's around Volume 3 where he starts acting like a big jerk off.

Really though, as I said before, the biggest thing I want them to take from Ultimates is Cap's acclimation to the 21st century. I thought that Volume 1 had some great scenes dealing with the emotional trauma Cap had to go through after being re-awoken.

And I wouldn't mind a more ultimate-design style costume for Cap. Both the one designed for him in WWII and present time.

[Superhero 101]

First off Watchmen had superheroes nobody has heard of unlike Iron Man Hulk Captain America Thor
and second the film was Rated R. i doubt that Avengers will be Rated R

[TheVileOne]

No, Cap was a pretty big jerkoff in volume 1 as well.

[Infinity9999x]

No, Cap was a pretty big jerkoff in volume 1 as well.

How so? It has been a while since I read it, but I don't really remember anything major.

[Anubis]

Kicking Banner in the face, and that whole France bit.

[Infinity9999x]

Kicking Banner in the face, and that whole France bit.

Ehh, Banner had intentionally injected himself and killed hundreds of people and beat the crap out of Cap. It didn't seem too out of character for even 616 Cap to do, because let's face it, Banner in the Ultimates was a selfish prick, and his selfishness killed hundreds. (Banner is definitely my biggest gripe with the Ultimate-verse.)

The France comment was...well, it did kind of fit with the bias of the era. So that didn't bother me either. Cap is a 1940's solider after all.

However, I really didn't like it when you have him become just a government lacky who supports the powers that be no matter what like he was in Vol. 3.

Really though, if you take away those two instances, Cap didn't act bad at all. And I'm sure they're going to take out at least one, being the Banner incident, since Banner isn't the selfish prick in the movie-verse that he is in the comics. And I doubt the France comment would be in there, just for PR reasons.

[Anubis]

Yeah, but you can't take away those instances because they were douche bag things to do. Banner did bring it upon himself, but, that's just bad form to kick a guy when he's down.

And Cap actually fought in WWII. He fought alongside the French Resistance. In the regular MU, he said that the government might have given up, but the people fought to the last man during the nazi occupation. That's the way Cap is. That crap he said was funny, but not something Captain America should be saying. USAgent maybe, but certainly not Cap.

Some people tend to bring up the whole whipping the ass of Pym too, but, eh, he had it coming and I could see regular Cap doing the same thing.

[Infinity9999x]

Yeah, but you can't take away those instances because they were douche bag things to do. Banner did bring it upon himself, but, that's just bad form to kick a guy when he's down.

And Cap actually fought in WWII. He fought alongside the French Resistance. In the regular MU, he said that the government might have given up, but the people fought to the last man during the nazi occupation. That's the way Cap is. That crap he said was funny, but not something Captain America should be saying. USAgent maybe, but certainly not Cap.

Some people tend to bring up the whole whipping the ass of Pym too, but, eh, he had it coming and I could see regular Cap doing the same thing.

I agree on the Pym thing, I'm still on the fence about Banner though.

However, I really don't mind these being not included in the movie, and they probably won't, which isn't a bad thing.

Really, the biggest aspect I want them to include from the Ultimate Cap is how hard the adjustment to living now was. The scene with Bucky and his old girlfriend was great, I'd love to see that on film. It could be very emotional.

[Brian2887]

Really, the biggest aspect I want them to include from the Ultimate Cap is how hard the adjustment to living now was. The scene with Bucky and his old girlfriend was great, I'd love to see that on film. It could be very emotional.

Ditto. Add in the scene from Arlington, the attempted escape from base because no black man is ranked as high as Fury, etc. Cap's adjustment to the 21st century could strike a major emotional cord.

[MilkmanDan]

Yeah, but you can't take away those instances because they were douche bag things to do.Still, it seems like an exaggeration to describe UltimateCap as a jerkoff based on just two brief moments of ungentleman-like behavior. Only reason those moments got people's notice was because Cap is such a paragon of virtue in 616 that it's shocking to see him behave even in a slightly improper . UltimateCap was generally speaking portrayed as a good, heroic and likable man. Only real exceptions seem to be a harmless if inpolite joke and kicking a mad-scientist right after he caused the death of hundreds of people ( and possibly before he was completely secured, I can't remember exactly).

[Anubis]

There was also in volume 2 his treatment of Thor. He was a total douche to him. forget the fact that he just fought along side him to save the world.

[Artistsean]

I'm not sure why Watchmen didn't do so well, perhaps it was its rating, its unfamiliar characters and story (to the general audience), or the darkness of the story that people didn't feel like seeing over and over again,
I feel like it had a lot to do with the tone of the story (my opinion)
but
Avengers wont be patterned after the Ultimates I think, if Marvel is smart,
I think their best bet would be to pattern the Avengers after 616 Marvel like Iron Man did.
Its not just his design, its the overall tone of the story. It was true to the origin, it was fun, not so dark or heavy, it was like the classic comic brought to life.
If they used the 616 Marvel Avengers for the movie they would also be able to appeal their movie to a much wider audience, young children, families, elderly people, teenagers.
Its just my opinion though.

[Blade X]

Ah, I really don't care about that stuff. But like I said above, the things I want to see most in the Avengers movie that takes from the Ultimates is the Cap-related stuff.

I also liked that fact that they made Cap stronger in the Ultimates. Because with Cap, I've always felt more or less the same I have with Batman. Yes, they're both peak human, but in all fairness, somebody like Spider-man should be able to waste them in a fight. I don't care how smart or trained you are, somebody who can doge bullets and pick up a car is going to be able to beat you.

Which is why I liked the fact that they beefed him up in the Ultimates, but I was also glad they didn't go too far. I don't want Superman Cap, just a superhuman Cap with slightly super-human speed and strength.

Besides that, I loved the way the Skrulls were handled in Vol. 2, and I liked the portrayal of Hawkeye.

Unlike Cap, Batman is not peak human. Batman is just a normal well trained human being.

According to John Byrne (on how he see's Cap and/or would handle him), when he's standing still, Cap is peak human. However, when he starts moving and fighting, adrenaline kicks in and he becomes superhuman.

OMT, Cap being superhuman was done at least 3 times before THE ULTIMATES. The first time (I think) was in the 70's, when cap was exposed to some kind of chemicals that tempoarily gave him superhuman strength. The 2nd time was in the 70's CAPTAIN AMERICA TV movies. The 3rd time was (I think) in the HEROES REBORN Cap series, but I could be wrong about that one.

[Anubis]

Yup, you got it right.

[Infinity9999x]

Unlike Cap, Batman is not peak human. Batman is just a normal well trained human being.

According to John Byrne (on how he see's Cap and/or would handle him), when he's standing still, Cap is peak human. However, when he starts moving and fighting, adrenaline kicks in and he becomes superhuman.

OMT, Cap being superhuman was done at least 3 times before THE ULTIMATES. The first time (I think) was in the 70's, when cap was exposed to some kind of chemicals that tempoarily gave him superhuman strength. The 2nd time was in the 70's CAPTAIN AMERICA TV movies. The 3rd time was (I think) in the HEROES REBORN Cap series, but I could be wrong about that one.

Batman is basically peak human. No human being can bench 500+ pounds, have the abilities of an Olympic level gymnast, and be one of the top 5 martial artists in the world. It's simply impossible. However, I've always ignored those stats, even though it's "canon" according to DC.

But yeah, it makes more sense when you make Cap peak human, who goes superhuman in times of adrenaline, but even then, he would still be a low level Superhuman. I just liked the mid-level Superhuman Cap was shown to be in the Ultimates (benching 1000+ pounds it looked to be, which actually is still "peak human" if you want to be technical, I believe the world record for bench is around 1000lbs.)

[roach]

I think of Cap and Batman like this...Batman is at the peak that his body can take him. He is as strong as his body will let him. Cap has been scientifically taken to an area that we will never achieve on our own. He is the peak human. You get anymore faster or stronger and you are superhuman. The abilities that Neo had in the first Matrix minus the flying is what Cap should be doing

[Hmarrs]

I think the unfamiliarity of it's context.

See alot of parents were like 'Oh cool another superhero movie".As the movie began to unfold.I think there were in for a surprise. regardless of it's rating.It was not Marketed correctly.
You see Superhero's on screen regardless of the rating which I'm sure they thought "oh I'm sure the rating is just the violence"Boy were they in for a shocker.
If your familar with the material you probably won't bring a child.Those who were unfamilar probably did bring a child and were disapointed.Everyone else is just going to be confused.So who do you appeal to.There is no mass market(The Family Market).Unless if there had been watered down version (which probably would have upset alot of people).However if you water it down just enough to get by while still implying for the fan you have a winner,somehow you play it on both sides of the fence(Don't say it can't be done TDK did it).Sort of like Wolverine.Wolverine was not as deep as Watchmen but it was a little Darker then the previous X-men versions of Wolverine.It worked.Batman TDK took a little more chances and kind of took it as far as it it can be taken and yet still apealed to mass audiances.Punisher War Zone had the same problem as Watchmen.Parents are "hey my kid wantc to go see the Punisher but when he takes his 10 year old he what the heck all the gore and stuff.Tell me who is he going to recomend it to?
On top of it all the Watchmen was a story that should have been told in 2 films and even still could have easily done in three.
Ultimates Avengers won't,won't work.Parents will be freaked out for the kids and it won't be the Avengers the parents grew up with it will fail if done that way.

You will some fans and some teens but let's face it that is not enough to make a successful film.

[Hmarrs]

Repeat.

[Sawyer]

Kicking Banner in the face, and that whole France bit.

Oh, that was hilarious and everyone knows it.

Anyway, characterization... definitely 616. But in terms of look, I want the Ultimates costume.

[TheVileOne]

Hilariously stupid IMHO. Once again, Cap would never do or say those things. Because that's what douchebags do. Cap is not a douchebag.

[Infinity9999x]

I think of Cap and Batman like this...Batman is at the peak that his body can take him. He is as strong as his body will let him. Cap has been scientifically taken to an area that we will never achieve on our own. He is the peak human. You get anymore faster or stronger and you are superhuman. The abilities that Neo had in the first Matrix minus the flying is what Cap should be doing

Well, like I said, if we go by the "official" stats for DC, Batman basically is peak human, because he can do things that no person, no matter how much training they have, could do. A human body can't bench 800lbs and still be a world-class gymnast. It's just not physically possible.

However, they don't portray Bats in the movies like that, so I'm fine with it.

And I would agree about the neo statement for Cap. I was actually pretty happy with them showing what Blonsky could do with a knock off Super-soldier serum. If they show Cap doing stuff like that I would be fine.

[LexCorp]

This is a terrible comparison in my mind. Not only did Watchmen do well, AS A "R" RATED FILM, but it is nothing like the Avengers.

This thread is illogical.

[TheVileOne]

It didn't do that well. Critics generally disliked it, and it didn't do as successful as the marketing machine pushed it.

[Infinity9999x]

It didn't do that well. Critics generally disliked it, and it didn't do as successful as the marketing machine pushed it.

I wouldn't say generally disliked. It's got a 64% on RT, so I'd put that about lukewarm. It was more than 50/50 on like and dislike.

However, going back to my earlier sentiments, I think we can all agree that Marvel will not do an straight adaptation of The Ultimates, but I do think that it would be a very good idea to draw upon some of the ideas that the Ultimates put into play. Mostly it's in terms of stylistic choices, but I thought a few story ideas were done very well, particularly the Skrulls.