Thor 2 Coming July 26, 2013

[R_Hythlodeus]

Wait, how many writers wrote Thor?
five, counting Protosevich and JMS who basically just have story credits

[Bubonic]

Well, there are legitimate reasons:

1. Iron Man 2's story suffered from a 2 year schedule
2. It's going to be 3 straight years of Thor in a movie
3. The script is going to be written by the same guy who wrote Fantastic Four 2. This one I'm iffy about being a legit reason but I can see why people think this is a legit reason to worry.

I don't like Marvel releasing 2 sequels in one year. I really don't. I don't think it's a good idea.

1.Hopefully they've learned from their mistakes and can manage their time better.
2.Since Avengers is an ensemble movie I don't think that'll matter, especially if it is as epic as it should be.
3.Certainly has me feeling pessimistic, but I'm sure the others are right and they'll add on a few more writers as the project develops.

I don't mind 2 sequels in one year although I'll be disappointed if they don't expand their universe further than the Avengers characters.

[Thor_Odinson]

There's basically no information about the sequel, except for Kenneth not returning, and people already have bad feelings about it... Geez!

Also, Chris Hemsworth will be back.

I don't have a "bad" feeling about it..............yet. I'm more in the "wait and see" stage at the moment.

Another thing folks haven't mention is that this will be a Marvel/Disney film. I'm real curious to see if the next time I go to Disneyland, I'll see Avengers merchandise sold in the Park.......................

[ElMariachi]

Since when do people think Iron Man 2 and TDK are going for the same thing?

Since TDK came out and got all kinds of praise that was never showered upon a superhero movie. People expected the same for Iron Man 2.



What is the Spider-Man 2 equivalent of the shoehorned SHIELD subplot? Or the lame 'secret from beyond the grave' resolution?

Every single one of Spider-Man 2's action scenes is amazing, can't say that for Iron Man 2.

I cared about Peter's struggle between the responsibilities of two lives, was never invested in the palladium poisoning, or Tony's issues with his dad.


The equivalent is the hokey, overdone, angsty romance between Peter and Mary Jane. The SHIELD angle in Iron Man 2 never became that annoying or grating because SHIELD was barely in Iron Man 2. And if you want a dead man with words of advice---look no further than Uncle Ben appearing in a dream sequence. The Howard scene was well done, so I fail to see the issue with it.

And that's good that the action sequences in SM2 were great, it's too bad we had to suffer through Twilight-esque angst. Give me Tony Stark eating donuts over Peter eating chocolate cake in one of the most pointless scenes in comic book movie history. Give me Tony vs. Rhodey over Peter getting b----h slapped by Harry.

IM2> SM2

[Vartha]

Also, Chris Hemsworth will be back.

I don't have a "bad" feeling about it..............yet. I'm more in the "wait and see" stage at the moment.

Another thing folks haven't mention is that this will be a Marvel/Disney film. I'm real curious to see if the next time I go to Disneyland, I'll see Avengers merchandise sold in the Park.......................
I've been wondering about stuff like that since Disney bought Marvel. I mean what's happening with Universal Fl.?

[Bubonic]

Also, Chris Hemsworth will be back.

I don't have a "bad" feeling about it..............yet. I'm more in the "wait and see" stage at the moment.

Another thing folks haven't mention is that this will be a Marvel/Disney film. I'm real curious to see if the next time I go to Disneyland, I'll see Avengers merchandise sold in the Park.......................


Didn't Universal Studios theme park have a bunch of Marvel stuff, that mean they'll have to deconstruct some of their attractions?

I need to have a kid so I can go to disneyworld again, especially if they Marvel it up a bit.

As for Disney's influence on Marvel movies I hope they're just a silent observer.

[Vartha]

...the thought of Asgard being in a theme park is just AWESOME. :D

[WildcatNC]

Well, there are legitimate reasons:

1. Iron Man 2's story suffered from a 2 year schedule
2. It's going to be 3 straight years of Thor in a movie
3. The script is going to be written by the same guy who wrote Fantastic Four 2. This one I'm iffy about being a legit reason but I can see why people think this is a legit reason to worry.

I don't like Marvel releasing 2 sequels in one year. I really don't. I don't think it's a good idea.



1. I don't think that was it at all. It had more to do with having to fit the MMU characters in the story. If Favs had been left alone I think he could have got it done in the time frame just fine.

2. I'm not really crazy about that either but we know (I think) that Thor only gets back to earth halfway in or later. Its the origins movie for the team so it might play better than we think since it not all about Thor.

3. He has a good feel from the first movie and what worked and Branagh is supposedly sticking around as a producer (ala Favs). So both will be working with a new director and having input, especially on the script.


I don't like the news of Branagh not directing, but i'm still very optimistic about Marvels movies.

[Parker Wayne]

I really don't believe that the problem is too many characters. That could have been Iron'd out more with time.

And where did the rumor that Thor gets back to earth halfway start?

[04nbod]

If Natalie Portman doesn't return, they need to just go the Thor/Sif route
no recasting such an important character at this point

And destroy Sif too? They would have to severely rewrite Sif's character from the comics into something stronger rather than the insecure, lovesick welp she becomes around Thor in a relationship. They would have to explain why Jane isn't there and why Thor doesn't care. Then there is the fact that all the female cast except his maternal figure would be lusting after the leading man, overkill.

Even if we ignore all that. What would the love story be? Thor/Sif has never been one for the drama beyond Sif's justified doubt that he actually loves her and her distaste for living on Earth (which wouldn't matter if everything happened on Asgard). Its boring, it always has been but we are always subjected to it for some reason.

[WildcatNC]

Didn't Universal Studios theme park have a bunch of Marvel stuff, that mean they'll have to deconstruct some of their attractions?

I need to have a kid so I can go to disneyworld again, especially if they Marvel it up a bit.

As for Disney's influence on Marvel movies I hope they're just a silent observer.



My understanding it that Universal gets to keep their Marvel stuff up to a certain year and then Disney is putting them in their parks, even taking some of the Universal rides and moving them straight to a Disney Park, and surely build a few more.

[Bubonic]

I resent the resistance directors seem to have concerning Marvel's Universe.
I don't see why they should feel it is a burden creating movies that have a broader scope than what they are individually bringing to the table.
I understand that directors are all artist in their on right and don't want to feel constraints, but if that is the case don't take on these kinds of projects and do something independent instead.
Plus I can't wrap my mind around how these elements are considered shackles or forced, if they embrace it and get over themselves the audiences will be rewarded, and them in return.

[Bubonic]

...the thought of Asgard being in a theme park is just AWESOME. :D

Verily, I might not even have to have a kid if that happens... Just some money and a plane ticket!

My understanding it that Universal gets to keep their Marvel stuff up to a certain year and then Disney is putting them in their parks, even taking some of the Universal rides and moving them straight to a Disney Park, and surely build a few more.

The potential here is awesome... Goodness, they'd even have a Marvel parade once a week!

Okay now, I'm off to find a wife, brb.

[Spider-Vader]

Well, look at FF: RotSS. I just don't want that happening here.

Well there's two big differences there. The first FF sucked, while the first Thor was awesome & Marvel actually cares about it's characters unlike Fox.

[Carlo Comicus]

Payne is not bad, but I prefer another writer with him on the script.

[WildcatNC]

I really don't believe that the problem is too many characters. That could have been Iron'd out more with time.

And where did the rumor that Thor gets back to earth halfway start?



I didn't really mean to many characters as much as fitting them prominently in the storyline as an Avengers setup. I meant more the Avengers setup stuff than # of characters. I think it cramped Favreau's style a little so he couldn't spend as much time developing the Stark stuff.


I remember hearing it in one of the Avengers leaks with some other stuff that seemed legit so we'll see. It could be just a rumor. It would make since sort of though seeing as he has to find a way to get back or Shield has to find a way to get him back. I'm sure he will be in it sooner but actually getting back to Midgard may be halfway or so.

[Sebastos]

I'll reserve judgement until we get more news in the months ahead, to early now imo. Ok Branagh isn't coming back, Marvel's been ace when it comes to choosing directors that fit their characters, so i'm sure they'll find a suitable replacement.

[ElMariachi]

Well, there are legitimate reasons:

1. Iron Man 2's story suffered from a 2 year schedule
2. It's going to be 3 straight years of Thor in a movie
3. The script is going to be written by the same guy who wrote Fantastic Four 2. This one I'm iffy about being a legit reason but I can see why people think this is a legit reason to worry.

I don't like Marvel releasing 2 sequels in one year. I really don't. I don't think it's a good idea.

1) Was it really the schedule that hurt the IM2 script/story? Most likely it was them caving into RDJ and hiring Justin Theroux to write IM2. I don't think Justin Theroux did a bad job with it but he may not have been the right guy to write the movie. Do a few extra months/year allow him to make the IM2 script into a masterpiece? I doubt it. They should have just stuck with the writers of IM1 if it was possible.

2) This hasn't been a problem for Harry Potter, Twilight, or Lord of the Rings. If the movie is good, people won't care or get sick of the character. A year is a long time.

3)He wrote Thor and that was good. Not concerned. David Goyer wrote the lame Hasselhoff Nick Fury AND the Nolan Batman movies.

[sgaana]

And where did the rumor that Thor gets back to earth halfway start?

I feel like it was... from some interview with Hemsworth, around the time Thor was coming out and Avengers started filming. I remember it as just a few short remarks from him. I just remember that the gist of it was, "He doesn't join up with the others until about halfway through the film, but we get a couple of look at him back in Asgard before that".

I wish I could find where that was from, again. :csad: (New Motto: Bookmark Everything.)

[ElMariachi]

apart of me wouldn't mind seeing Sam Raimi get a shot at this. I think Thor would be his style and he could do a fun sequel. They could even get Bruce Cambell to play Balder.

[Bubonic]

Writing is a talent, you either have it or you don't.
And it isn't like these guys are writing something from scratch, they've got characters with decades of history, they must get an outline of where Marvel wants it to go, and they also build from pre-existing stories established in the Marvel Studios movieverse.

If you're a good writer and you've got all this I can't see how you couldn't write a great draft in less than a month, and then work from there. No one is asking them to reinvent the wheel or rival War and Peace.

[Thor_Odinson]

...the thought of Asgard being in a theme park is just AWESOME. :D

Asgard in Disneyland..............I'm so there! Of course, any excuse to go to Disneyland works for me! :woot:

[SuperSAINT]

RIM won't be happy. Don Payne is the guy who created Darcy ;)

[Parker Wayne]

I didn't really mean to many characters as much as fitting them prominently in the storyline as an Avengers setup. I meant more the Avengers setup stuff than # of characters. I think it cramped Favreau's style a little so he couldn't spend as much time developing the Stark stuff.


I don't buy it being an Avengers setup. SHIELD have long been important in the Iron Man mythos, and I don't think Favreau works on the screenplays anyway. A lot of the characters I felt were well served in the movie, except for Vanko. The only problem I have are the course of action some take and decisions too.

[Gamma Burst]

apart of me wouldn't mind seeing Sam Raimi get a shot at this. I think Thor would be his style and he could do a fun sequel. They could even get Bruce Cambell to play Balder.

No raimi, please.

[Flint Marko]

To me, marvel studios has already proven themselves more than capable of handling their own properties well and making dang good movies. Yes we're only 4 (almost 5) movies in, but so far they've all been fairly successful and for the most part, I think we an all agree the good outweighs the bad in each film.
So, I'm greatly looking forward to Thor 2. It's a shame Branagh isn't returning but I'm confident that Marvel will find the right person for the job.

[Carlo Comicus]

I hope, Flint, I hope.

[Gamma Burst]

To me, marvel studios has already proven themselves more than capable of handling their own properties well and making dang good movies. Yes we're only 4 (almost 5) movies in, but so far they've all been fairly successful and for the most part, I think we an all agree the good outweighs the bad in each film.
So, I'm greatly looking forward to Thor 2. It's a shame Branagh isn't returning but I'm confident that Marvel will find the right person for the job.

Yeah, they have been very careful with the way they handle their properties.

[Moridin]

This news doesn't exactly fill me with confidence.

1.Hopefully they've learned from their mistakes and can manage their time better.

Creativity isn't about time management. You can't put a time limit on it.
Sure, it could happen that a great story/script comes together in a short period of time, but it could just as easily not. Then you're going into production with a half baked idea and a lot of pressure to sort things out fast.

Would it not be prudent to give them the extra year to work everything out? At worst it isn't any better, no loss. At best it's fantastic, massive gain.

2) This hasn't been a problem for Harry Potter, Twilight, or Lord of the Rings. If the movie is good, people won't care or get sick of the character.

All of which are based on novels, the story is already there.

Jackson & his team started working on LOTR in 1997, 4 years before FOTR was released. And I wouldn't put any of the HP movies (let alone Twilight) anywhere near LOTR in terms of quality.

A year is a long time.

Not in the movie business.

3)He wrote Thor and that was good. Not concerned. David Goyer wrote the lame Hasselhoff Nick Fury AND the Nolan Batman movies.

That's not a compelling argument when you consider Payne didn't write Thor on his own nor did Goyer write BB & TDK on his own.

if Avengers turns out to be big hit, it will only help both Thor 2 and IM 3.

The Avengers being a hit has no impact what-so-ever on the quality of Thor2 or IM3. It would help them at the box office though.

[Gamma Burst]

This news doesn't exactly fill me with confidence.



Creativity isn't about time management. You can't put a time limit on it.
Sure, it could happen that a great story/script comes together in a short period of time, but it could just as easily not. Then you're going into production with a half baked idea and a lot of pressure to sort things out fast.

Would it not be prudent to give them the extra year to work everything out? At worst it isn't any better, no loss. At best it's fantastic, massive gain.



All of which are based on novels, the story is already there.

Jackson & his team started working on LOTR in 1997, 4 years before FOTR was released. And I wouldn't put any of the HP movies (let alone Twilight) anywhere near LOTR in terms of quality.



Not in the movie business.



That's not a compelling argument when you consider Payne didn't write Thor on his own nor did Goyer write BB & TDK on his own.



The Avengers being a hit has no impact what-so-ever on the quality of Thor2 or IM3. It would help them at the box office though.

And that's my point.

[Vartha]

Asgard in Disneyland..............I'm so there! Of course, any excuse to go to Disneyland works for me! :woot:
Never been to Disneyland, tho been to Disney world three times. Last time Epcot wasn't open yet. lol

[Spider-Fan]

Well, there are legitimate reasons:

1. Iron Man 2's story suffered from a 2 year schedule


It wasn't the 2 year schedule, it was the amount of plotlines/muddled vision. Vanko's plotline didn't get the attention it needed because IM2 had too much to cover. Characters like Black Widow offered nothing to the movie, but got tons of screentime. The film, I think, got too bogged down in growing the Marvel U and not enough on growing the IM franchise. Thor toned down that a lot, and went more with how IM1 did it. Hopefully, Marvel has learned from the mistake with IM2.

2. It's going to be 3 straight years of Thor in a movie

Thor is a new character to audiences, so how can they get sick of him this early? Especially when one of those 3 movies is The Avengers, in which he is a piece of the puzzle, but not the main piece like he was in Thor.

3. The script is going to be written by the same guy who wrote Fantastic Four 2. This one I'm iffy about being a legit reason but I can see why people think this is a legit reason to worry.

He did work on Thor, so I am more optimistic than I would have been had he just been hired with no Marvel Studios experience, and Super-Ex and FF2 were his only writing credits. But, he had strong material to work off of from earlier Thor scripts (I read the Mark P script, and it was a similar movie in many ways to what we got). I think the new director ultimately is more important than who writes it.

I don't like Marvel releasing 2 sequels in one year. I really don't. I don't think it's a good idea.

This would be more of a concern, but the big 3 are bigger properties for Marvel Studios. It makes sense to build off them before expanding. Cap 2 will prob come out in 2014, and we'll likely get a new character that summer to be paired with him. But, for 2013...IM3 is far along, and I guess Thor 2 is far along. So, why not go with another project you have faith in and is further along than maybe the newer characters are? It makes sense to me.

[eeffos]

This news doesn't exactly fill me with confidence.



Creativity isn't about time management. You can't put a time limit on it.
Sure, it could happen that a great story/script comes together in a short period of time, but it could just as easily not. Then you're going into production with a half baked idea and a lot of pressure to sort things out fast.

Would it not be prudent to give them the extra year to work everything out? At worst it isn't any better, no loss. At best it's fantastic, massive gain.



All of which are based on novels, the story is already there.

Jackson & his team started working on LOTR in 1997, 4 years before FOTR was released. And I wouldn't put any of the HP movies (let alone Twilight) anywhere near LOTR in terms of quality.



Not in the movie business.



That's not a compelling argument when you consider Payne didn't write Thor on his own nor did Goyer write BB & TDK on his own.



The Avengers being a hit has no impact what-so-ever on the quality of Thor2 or IM3. It would help them at the box office though.


You guys are looking at only the negatives! How about some of the possibilities that are positives -

1. The CGI software for Thor is already setup (timesaver).
2. The props and sets for Asgard have already been made and stored (timesaver).
3. MOST important....they were talking about two to three Thor films before the first film hit the theaters...this tells me that they already had some type of storyline already setup.....they just needed the script writers to finalize the respective scripts for each film. Whose to say they won't get others involved like JMS, etc (just like they did with the first Thor film. The first film had writers added throughout the process.
4. Finally, I too will miss Ken as the director, but Marvel very rarely has misfired with their directors, and if you think for a second that Fiege will not be watching over the production every step of the way you don't know Marvel. They were all over every step of the 1st Thor movie. Thor 2 will be in good hands.

So be happy this is happening.....it wasn't that long ago the Thor comic was cancelled, no sign of a Thor movie ever being made.
Now look.....THREE straight summers of Thor movies!!! It is the golden age of Thor happening right now.....enjoy.....jeez!

[ElMariachi]

No raimi, please.

I don't think he would be that bad for a movie like Thor. The guy has proven he can do superhero movies and is connected to some good fantasy stuff (Xena, Hercules). I don't think he would be a bad hire at all to be quite honest. Spider-Man 3 kind of put a bad taste in everyones mouth.

[ElMariachi]

All of which are based on novels, the story is already there.


The story is there for Thor too. Decades of Thor stories and established characters/worlds. Branagh's Thor already set the bar and a mold for a sequel to follow. I don't think it should be too challenging. Nobody is expecting this movie to be a classic like Lord of the Rings. All we really need is a good, fun adventure movie like the first was but with more emphasis on the other realms.



Jackson & his team started working on LOTR in 1997, 4 years before FOTR was released. And I wouldn't put any of the HP movies (let alone Twilight) anywhere near LOTR in terms of quality.


I brought up LOTR somebody said that people would tire of Thor after 3 years of him being in movies. Lord of the Rings came out every year from 01-03' and nobody was fatigued by it. Same goes with HP and Twilight.



Not in the movie business.


I wasn't talking about production rather people's views towards characters/movies. Nobody is going to whine about too much Thor when the next movie after Avengers doesn't come out for a year plus. Infact, it may get them more pumped for Thor 2 if Avengers turns out to be as good as we all hope.





That's not a compelling argument when you consider Payne didn't write Thor on his own nor did Goyer write BB & TDK on his own.


Why? Goyer had a major role in writing TDK. Same goes with Payne for Thor. Both wrote for some bad movies. Regarding TDK, it's not like Jonah Nolan was some master writer either.

I doubt that he is going to be writing this movie without any input from the director and Marvel. There is nothing to worry about in my opinion. Marvel is not going to allow a major franchise to be garbage or have a writer ruin their movie. At worst, Thor 2 will be good not great IMO.

[Spider-Fan]

Also, Thor will be MIA in film until Avengers 2 or Thor 3 likely. So, we could not see Thor for 3 years after this 3 year period. Plus, I think a Thor sequel on the heels of Avengers can only boost BO. If anyone tires of Thor after Thor 2, then fret not...you can take a break after Thor 2 until Avengers 2 (which I imagine would be no sooner than 2015...maybe even 2016 if Marvel wants to build some other heroes up first).

[ElMariachi]

So be happy this is happening.....it wasn't that long ago the Thor comic was cancelled, no sign of a Thor movie ever being made.
Now look.....THREE straight summers of Thor movies!!! It is the golden age of Thor happening right now.....enjoy.....jeez!

good post. Until Marvel lays an egg like Green Lantern, I have full confidence in them as a studio.

I read an article about the new director and some ideas on who should direct----how about Peter Weir? A great Aussie director paired with an up and coming Aussie star.

[Crimson King]

Just a thought: what if SHIELD uses Jane to get Thor back from Asgard in Avengers and she ends up staying there while Thor takes care of things on Earth. Then you can pick up in Thor 2 with her already there. Throw in the Enchantress and you've got half your story without breaking a sweat.

[Excelsior.]

goyer had a major role in writing TDK He outlined the story.

Sorry, he co-outlined the story.

Your definition of major is in question.

[Spider-Fan]

I assume the Enchantress will be involved in the sequel, no matter what they do with the film. I'm just curious to see how/which realms they'll decide to include in Thor 2.

[DarkSovereignty]

how about neil marshall as a replacement director? idk why, but the idea just came to me.

[Doctor Jones]

I know this guy wrote Thor, but he was just one of the writers. We don't know how much of what he wrote stayed in. HIs FF2 credit doesn't give me much confidence. I really hope they're not getting ahead of themselves.

[Gamma Burst]

good post. Until Marvel lays an egg like Green Lantern, I have full confidence in them as a studio.



Same here.:word:

[Gamma Burst]

I don't think he would be that bad for a movie like Thor. The guy has proven he can do superhero movies and is connected to some good fantasy stuff (Xena, Hercules). I don't think he would be a bad hire at all to be quite honest. Spider-Man 3 kind of put a bad taste in everyones mouth.

I don't know... His stuff is very campy.

[Spider-Fan]

I know this guy wrote Thor, but he was just one of the writers. We don't know how much of what he wrote stayed in. HIs FF2 credit doesn't give me much confidence. I really hope they're not getting ahead of themselves.

But, Marvel has opted to keep him around for some reason. Also, while X3 is a meh movie, Zak Penn wrote the early drafts of the screenplay for TIH. TIH got touched up later and turned into a good movie. So, if they can take Zak Penn's writing and make a good movie, they can do the same for Don Payne. Marvel actually has access to talented writers for touch up work.

I don't know... His stuff is very campy.

Say what you will about Raimi, but Spider-Man 2 is still regarded as one of the best in the genre (and is my personal favorite).

[Vartha]

I don't know... His stuff is very campy.
Yeah but I loved his take on Asgard. It wasn't all that bad really from the Herc point of view. STILL looking for the dvd of that season.

Still tho, I don't know if this style would fit This Thor.

[Gamma Burst]

Yeah but I loved his take on Asgard. It wasn't all that bad really from the Herc point of view. STILL looking for the dvd of that season.

Still tho, I don't know if this style would fit This Thor.

Hercules had an episode in Asgard?:huh:

[Vartha]

Hercules had an episode in Asgard?:huh:
Yup two shows Season 5 I believe. Herc was searching for his bud's soul in different realms

http://www.tv.com/hercules-the-legendary-journeys/norse-by-norsevest-1/episode/39012/summary.html

I don't recall the name of the second episode, it had something to do with Bifrost

[Gamma Burst]

Yup two shows Season 5 I believe. Herc was searching for his bud's soul in different realms

http://www.tv.com/hercules-the-legendary-journeys/norse-by-norsevest-1/episode/39012/summary.html

I don't recall the name of the second episode, it had something to do with Bifrost

Nice! Gotta watch them.:word:

[Tony Stark]

I am not too surprised. Branagh is not a sequel kind of guy. He is constantly looking for new challenges as a film maker, and he's never directed a sequel before. I think he's opening the door for a new guy to come in, but still have some creative controll.

This is really not a bad thing. I know this are the prime examples but look at Empire Strikes Back and Aliens. Two sequels with different directors at the helm, that took the films in new directions applying a fresh approach. Both were highly successful.

[Vartha]

Found the name of the second episode. "Over the Rainbow Bridge"

[Vartha]

I am not too surprised. Branagh is not a sequel kind of guy. He is constantly looking for new challenges as a film maker, and he's never directed a sequel before. I think he's opening the door for a new guy to come in, but still have some creative controll.

This is really not a bad thing. I know this are the prime examples but look at Empire Strikes Back and Aliens. Two sequels with different directors at the helm, that took the films in new directions applying a fresh approach. Both were highly successful.
I swear Kenneth said some about THREE movies in a Spanish interview.

[Vartha]

Nice! Gotta watch them.:word:
I loved the over all look but not Thor's. He had Ram horns on his helmet. lol

[samsnee]

What about Edward Zwick for director? He did Legends of the Fall, Last Samurai, and Glory.

[Alientraveller]

I loved the over all look but not Thor's. He had Ram horns on his helmet. lol

1) Thanks for letting me know other pantheons appeared in Hercules: TLJ and 2) I think ram's horns are appropriate for Thor given his two pet goats and his position as fertility god in the Norse pantheon.

What about Edward Zwick for director? He did Legends of the Fall, Last Samurai, and Glory.

He'd be great. I imagine Marvel has a list of awesome directors they want to work with and he'd be one.

[Chewy]

They should let Chris Evans direct it

[Vartha]

1) Thanks for letting me know other pantheons appeared in Hercules: TLJ and 2) I think ram's horns are appropriate for Thor given his two pet goats and his position as fertility god in the Norse pantheon.



He'd be great. I imagine Marvel has a list of awesome directors they want to work with and he'd be one.
heh I realize what the horns were for, I just thought they were a bit gaudy along with the size of Mjolnir. lol
I thought those episodes were great! Like I said season 5 I would love to have in my library.

[Blader5489]

But, for 2013...IM3 is far along, and I guess Thor 2 is far along.

I don't think Thor 2 is any further along than Cap 2 or the other properties they're working on. I think the reason Thor 2 got the greenlight for summer 2013 is: a) to strike while the iron is hot, and b) Hemsworth is probably more willing to do back-to-back Thor work than Evans is to do back-to-back Cap work.

[rashad]

It has more to do with Marvel Studios wanting to have at least 2 films a given year.

[hame4479]

While I am getting a little scared that marvel isn't going out of its way to keep directors attached to franchises, I have hope that they will deliver a quality film. Their biggest problem seems to be that they can always deliver decent films, but really have yet to deliver an amazing film that stands above and beyond all other comic films. I am really hoping that the avengers does just that.

[Spider-Fan]

I don't think Thor 2 is any further along than Cap 2 or the other properties they're working on. I think the reason Thor 2 got the greenlight for summer 2013 is: a) to strike while the iron is hot, and b) Hemsworth is probably more willing to do back-to-back Thor work than Evans is to do back-to-back Cap work.

Thor was also released first, so it is probably further along. Marvel was in a position to have a Thor 2 commissioned to a writer far before Cap was. Also, Cap 2 first means rushing Cap's sequel a lot more than it would Thor's because Cap's first movie (other than not having any BO numbers to gage a $$$ range), the team on this first Cap film finished production on it way later than the Thor crew did. It just makes more sense to do Thor first, and that Thor is further along.

[RealIrOnMaN]

http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/2979/21313.jpg

Balder the Brave & More = http://www.warrenmanser.com/WarrenManser.com/PORTFOLIO_M/Pages/THOR.html

[jmc]

I've gotta say I'm genuinely surprised how nonchalant the attitude is in here to Branagah not returning considering he's the main reason the film is what it is. Why on earth Marvel would let him get away is beyond me considering I read somewhere he was up for a sequel. Genuinely baffling how easily some think it is to replace him.

[Doctor Jones]

Edward Zwick? Now there's a fine choice. He'd make a great director of a Wolverine film as well.

[Vartha]

Nice finds RIM!!
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/2979/21313.jpg

Balder the Brave & More = http://www.warrenmanser.com/WarrenManser.com/PORTFOLIO_M/Pages/THOR.html

[marcvader]

I've gotta say I'm genuinely surprised how nonchalant the attitude is in here to Branagah not returning considering he's the main reason the film is what it is. Why on earth Marvel would let him get away is beyond me considering I read somewhere he was up for a sequel. Genuinely baffling how easily some think it is to replace him.
As am I, but it could maybe be attributed to the overall maturity and cool displayed in the Thor forum since day 1.

[Vartha]

I've gotta say I'm genuinely surprised how nonchalant the attitude is in here to Branagah not returning considering he's the main reason the film is what it is. Why on earth Marvel would let him get away is beyond me considering I read somewhere he was up for a sequel. Genuinely baffling how easily some think it is to replace him.
Wish we knew JMC, all we can do is speculate right now.
At least he's still on board to help.

[sgaana]

I keep hearing someone mention that Branagh "already has a film for 2013"? But I can't find confirmation of what it is Branagh is supposed to be working on. Does anyone have any idea?

That would make the most sense to me. And it also kind of says to me that Marvel is feels it's more important to have Thor come out in 2013, than to have Branagh directing; i.e. they wouldn't put Thor off another year to wait for Branagh to be able to do it. (If that is indeed the problem.)

I guess this goes along with Marvel's willingness to replace anyone if they feel it's necessary. So, as much as I want to see Thor 2, I'd probably have preferred they wait for Branagh. But if it was a straight up "dueling schedules" thing, I can see why they did it. And it's the only thing that makes sense to me.

Crossing my fingers that Branagh does produce.

[jmc]

If Marvel was unwilling to wait for Branagh that says a lot right there.

[ddddeeee]

Here's Branagh's 2013 movie. He's not listed for it on IMDB despite loads of credible sources confirming it.

http://www.totalfilm.com/news/kenneth-branagh-to-direct-30s-rowing-tale-the-boys-in-the-boat

[Gamma Burst]

Wish we knew JMC, all we can do is speculate right now.
At least he's still on board to help.

True that, Vartha.

[chiefchirpa]

The Warriors 3 might be cut to save money. The important roles are: Jane Foster, Sif, Odin, Loki, Heimdall. They can add Balder now.

I think it's going to be the alliance of Malekith (magic) and Ulik (brute) invading Earth. Can't leave Earth because of the Jane Foster factor.

[Gamma Burst]

I would love to see Ulik in the big scnreen. However, I think we'll see Enchantress and Skurge.

[Spider-Vader]

Marvel could always change their mind & delay the film until Branagh is available. Remember that Thor was originally supposed to come out last year & they delayed it to make it a better movie.

[chiefchirpa]

I would love to see Ulik in the big scnreen. However, I think we'll see Enchantress and Skurge.

There are too many female leads/love interest. Also Skurge is nothing special to someone who could beat the Destroyer easily. Ulik being a troll might look otherwordly.

If they go for the cheap route, yeah Enchantress and Skurge could work.

[Gamma Burst]

There are too many female leads/love interest. Also Skurge is nothing special to someone who could beat the Destroyer easily. Ulik being a troll might look otherwordly.

If they go for the cheap route, yeah Enchantress and Skurge could work.

The problem with the Destroyer comparison is that just about every enemy would look weak, Ulik included.
They'd have to go to a higher level threat, like Mangog,Ymir,Surtur, etc...

[jmc]

Marvel could always change their mind ''delay the film until Branagh is available. Remember that Thor was originally supposed to come out last year '' they delayed it to make it a better movie.

If they've got some 'two films a year' mandate it's hard to see them doing that. To me anyway this would be like WB saying to Nolan after Batman Begins 'Thanks but we're going on without you', what happens if he doesn't return? You don't get TDK. I mean seriously, Branagh's directing is what made the film work, I don't know why any studio would want to move ahead without the guy who was the reason for it's success and from all accounts was up for a sequel, unless it's a money issue which given the studio's history is not out of the realms of possibility. I really hope Marvel doesn't consider the talent they hire as being easily expendable, it's poor business sense and will ultimately come back to bite them in the arse.

[Gamma Burst]

We don't know if he was 'up for a sequel'.
So far, there's only speculation.

[jmc]

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/entertainment/news/branagh-toying-with-thor-sequel-15153815.html

Seems pretty cut and dry to me that he was up for it.

[Gamma Burst]

Like the interview with Kevin Feige, it says He possibly could return for a sequel.

[Vartha]

Yeah I wish we'd get a yes or no already! lol

[04nbod]

There are too many female leads/love interest. Also Skurge is nothing special to someone who could beat the Destroyer easily. Ulik being a troll might look otherwordly.

If they go for the cheap route, yeah Enchantress and Skurge could work.

Too many female leads? Natalie is the only female lead in the first movie. Kat, Jaime and Rene were supporting characters. Compare that to Chris, Tom, Anthony as leads with Stellan, Idris, Ray, Clark, Colm, Josh and Tadanobo supporting. 4/14 listed roles is too many? Are you a Hollywood exec?

I do agree with the too many love interests thing though. However, if they keep Sif in an independant role I think they could get away with Jane vs Enchantress. If they give Amora some of Lorelai's motives for wanting Thor it would be even better. Thor becomes a tool in her ambition.

[jmc]

Like the interview with Kevin Feige, it says He possibly could return for a sequel.

Does it not seem like he was willing and even looking forward to continuing? Does to me and if that's the case then something must have happened for his services to no longer be required.

[sgaana]

Thanks for that link, ddddeeee!

If Marvel was unwilling to wait for Branagh that says a lot right there.

Well, it says something. At the moment, however, we're just guessing about what exactly it says.

It may just be that Marvel's timetable for the various films and their sequels is more important to them than the director. Obviously, a lot of us feel like the director is pretty important, and we'd rather Thor 2 was pushed back another year to wait for KB to direct again. But we aren't privy to Marvel Studios' thinking about everything they have in the pipeline and why they want certain movies to come out at certain times.

So it looks strange to us, and it looks like a misstep, perhaps. Because to us, it doesn't seem like there is a huge difference between "Thor 2 in 2013" and "Thor 2 in 2014". There may just be something that Marvel knows that we don't (shocking!) that makes it seem to them like there is a big difference and they feel, for some reason, that they "need" Thor 2 to come out in summer 2013.

It would be really nice to get confirmation that KB will produce. Right now, that isn't confirmed. If it is confirmed, that will also tell us something about how KB feels and how Marvel feels about the property.


Here's a question: why does it seem like Marvel isn't willing to put any of its superhero films out in the Thanksgiving/Christmas time period?

Do winter films really make that much less than summer films? I mean, I get the concept of the summer blockbuster/tentpole. But it just seems like a winter film can sometimes do quite well, and that it's up against less competition.

Not, I imagine, that anyone wants to go up against The Hobbit 2 in December of 2013. But, Sherlock Holmes made quite a respectable amount of money ($524m worldwide) even though it was released during the same time that the Avatar juggernaut was in theaters.

I guess I just feel like... bring out IM3 and some new property in summer of 2013. Bring out Thor 2 either around Tgiving or Christmas of 2013. And maybe that extra 6 months allows KB to direct.

But what do I know, I'm not a Marvel exec, I can't see the entire playing field.

[ladyloki]

As for Thor 2, Kenneth Branagh did a great job but I think the man knows his limitations. The family angst and Shakespearian elements won't be in play in the sequel. It's be a straight up adventure film and that really isn't his strength. I'm glad he's contributing as a producer but him stepping aside shows what a class act he is and a man that knows his own limitations.



I agree while I am kind of dissapointed because the reason I loved the first movie so much was because of the characters, and when you have good character development and storyline it makes everything else including the action better because you care about the people involved. He picked the perfect cast for that movie, I cant see anyone else playing those characters.

I am relieved that he will be at least contributing to the movie and while I have a feeling the movie will have more action fast paced storyline, ken will at least be able to add some insite on the character development and the let the director take it from there...

marvel has done great so far ... so we will just have to wait and see. :yay:

[jmc]

I gotta say some of the reaction in here is downright baffling. 'The man knows his limitations'? WTF does that even mean? A lot of excuse making going on here.

[Son of Coul]

I thought it was settled that the guy has a movie already coming out in 2013 to direct, and that's just when Marvel wanted Thor 2 out. Don't really see the confusion.

[Vartha]

Well If marvel wants to wait I'd be more than happy to wait too. I mean it's not like we'd be Thorless for a long time after two years of Thor in the Theaters.

I'm only confused as to if Ken wants to stay with that other project, and direct Thor, or just help the Director out and stay with his other film.

[Son of Coul]

I'm totally up for waiting for Ken too, as 3 years of Thor in a row is cool but not super necessary and I don't want a potential rush job when they can take their time and let Ken back to do his thing.

Even though the release date's there, nothing's set in stone anyway. I remember when Thor was set for 2010 and Avengers for 2011 after all.

[hatebox]

I, too, am baffled at how blase most are being about Branagh's departure. It's hard for me to imagine how bad Thor could have been without his self-aware direction.

[jmc]

^ It's not just here either, I've read it all over the net and am surprised just how ok people are with him leaving. Thor is what it is because of him, he took a fairly rudimentary story, and one that could easily have fallen apart with a lesser director, and somehow made it work. And what about the performances he got out of the actors? That was the best part of the whole movie. Anyone who thinks he's going to be easily replaced is kidding themselves.

[Crimson King]

But isn't crying that the sky is falling an equally baffling reaction?

The fact is we don't know what happened. I'm sure we'll learn soon enough.

[ElMariachi]

But isn't crying that the sky is falling an equally baffling reaction?

The fact is we don't know what happened. I'm sure we'll learn soon enough.

To quote the Green Lantern, "I know, right!".


I don't see the point in freaking about losing a director. It is what it is. The movie will most likely be good and they will hire somebody good to replace him.

examples?

Edward Norton-Mark Ruffalo
Terrence Howard-Don Cheadle
Jon Favreau-Shane Black

[Spider-ManHero12]

Well If marvel wants to wait I'd be more than happy to wait too. I mean it's not like we'd be Thorless for a long time after two years of Thor in the Theaters. Ageed. Speaking of that, didn't Hemsworth say he'd like to take a short break after Avengers?

[Flemm]

But isn't crying that the sky is falling an equally baffling reaction?

The fact is we don't know what happened. I'm sure we'll learn soon enough.

Agreed. I guess we are so used to seeing fans freak out over the slightest thing that we tend to perceive that as the norm.

A "wait and see" attitude strikes me as perfectly appropriate.

[marcvader]

Agreed. I guess we are so used to seeing fans freak out over the slightest thing that we tend to perceive that as the norm.

A "wait and see" attitude strikes me as perfectly appropriate.

Yes, appropriate but totally uncharacteristic of CBM boards..

[Vartha]

Ageed. Speaking of that, didn't Hemsworth say he'd like to take a short break after Avengers?
I think he did but that just might mean a couple months. I mean he almost went from Thor, touring for the movie, then Avengers filming. Bet bet it's been non-stop for him for awhile.

[sgaana]

I, too, am baffled at how blase most are being about Branagh's departure. It's hard for me to imagine how bad Thor could have been without his self-aware direction.

I'm not blase about Branagh's departure, but I'm trying not to freak out, either.

Two reasons:

First, because I DO think that starting the Thor franchise with the first film was the biggest hurdle. I remain glad that KB was in the driver's seat for that one, because he set the tone and the baseline for everything. He established the model. Now the model exists.

I don't want to downplay the importance of getting another director who can handle this character, world, material, actors, etc. But at least everybody involved has that first film under their belt, they have a model to go on. To me, that is a big advantage.

(Of course, it's not like subsequent directors haven't messed up the model created by first films before. So I've just got to cross my fingers and hope that there's enough people -- actors, Marvel studios, etc. -- who are trying to match the first movie's model that it will go smoothly.)

Second: I love KB's work. Seriously, I have been a huge fan of his since Henry V came out. I even admit in public that I really enjoyed Mary Shelley's Frankenstein! But, all that being said, I do have to kind of agree with people who observe that KB has strengths as a director, and then he has things he's weaker at. I think he did okay with the big action/battle sequences in Thor 1. But I'm not sure that someone else might not do better with that stuff in a Thor 2.

Everybody noticed that Thor 1 had some extremely "Shakespearean" tones to it, what with the Dramatic Royal Family Infighting and so on. Absolutely, Branagh is your man for that. It may just be that the story they're planning for Thor 2 will depend less on that kind of dynamic, in which case, another director may be able to handle it equally well (if differently) than KB would.

Don't think I'm not... concerned. Or that I wouldn't rather see KB directing Thor 2 than not. But I'm trying to stay positive/hopeful.

(Also, if I have to look on the bright side -- still love KB as a director, but good lord, I won't miss the Dutch angles. :oldrazz: )

[Iron_Stark]

To quote the Green Lantern, "I know, right!".


I don't see the point in freaking about losing a director. It is what it is. The movie will most likely be good and they will hire somebody good to replace him.

examples?

Edward Norton-Mark Ruffalo
Terrence Howard-Don Cheadle
Jon Favreau-Shane Black

"I know, right!" :cwink:

There's no real reason to freak out, or to start thinking Marvel is this evil entity that doesn't care about people. :funny:

Look at Favreau, he was all in for part 3, saying Mandarin was a must, explore more on Tony Stark's journey, he was going to get back to it after Cowboys and Aliens yadda yadda yadda, then decides to do that Disney movie.

Seems to me the only ones freaking out about it and want to make a big deal about it are the ones that want to make a big deal about it.

[jmc]

To quote the Green Lantern, "I know, right!".


I don't see the point in freaking about losing a director. It is what it is. The movie will most likely be good and they will hire somebody good to replace him.

examples?

Edward Norton-Mark Ruffalo
Terrence Howard-Don Cheadle
Jon Favreau-Shane Black

What do those three changes have in common? Studio mismanagement.

[Iron_Stark]

What do those three changes have in common? Studio mismanagement.

Norton, yes.

But the others? Do you even know the story? Or just trying to get a rise from people?

[Parker Wayne]

^ It's not just here either, I've read it all over the net and am surprised just how ok people are with him leaving. Thor is what it is because of him, he took a fairly rudimentary story, and one that could easily have fallen apart with a lesser director, and somehow made it work. And what about the performances he got out of the actors? That was the best part of the whole movie. Anyone who thinks he's going to be easily replaced is kidding themselves.

It happens. We know it's big deal that he's not coming back, but just because we're not freaking doesn't mean we don't care. I'm sure Marvel's going to find a suitable replacement, especially considering that Thor 2 could've been a pretty different story from the first film even if Branagh stayed on.

[Parker Wayne]

Norton, yes.

But the others? Do you even know the story? Or just trying to get a rise from people?

If it was my guess I'd choose the latter considering how successful Marvel has been with their movies.

[Gamma Burst]

Some people here just love to speculate on something they have no idea about, and what's funny is that they want us to freak out about it.

I'd rather wait and see.

[jmc]

Norton, yes.

But the others? Do you even know the story? Or just trying to get a rise from people?

One was financial the other was creative differences. I'm sorry your so sensitive about someone questioning the all mighty Marvel Studios poor handling of the creative talent, continuation of such actions will come back to bite them in the arse.

[Parker Wayne]

^ Or it could be because Branagh's not a franchise director. It's probably the same situation with Martin Campbell and James Bond movies. They've shown they can get the right talent for their movies.

[Gamma Burst]

It happens. We know it's big deal that he's not coming back, but just because we're not freaking doesn't mean we don't care. I'm sure Marvel's going to find a suitable replacement, especially considering that Thor 2 could've been a pretty different story from the first film even if Branagh stayed on.

That's it.

[Iron_Stark]

If it was my guess I'd choose the latter considering how successful Marvel has been with their movies.

:cwink:

For people that don't know *cough*jmc*cough*

With Favreau, he was going to get the time he needed to make part three, apparently he was all for it, judging from his comments about it, then Disney offers him Magic Kingdom, and it's "Well, see you later!"

With Terrance Howard, WAAAAAY back when Marvel Studios was formed and when Avi Arad was running things, HE hired Howard, yes Avi Arad hired Terrance Howard, before Favreau got hired and before Robert Downey Jr. got cast (I still remember the debates about whether Tony Stark should be black or not) Arad gave him "X" amount of money. Well that amount turned out to be even more than RDJ. Fast forward to 2008, Iron Man is a success part 2 is green lit and then comes the negotiations. Howard still wanted a pay raise and to still make more than RDJ, if you can believe that, so on the advice of Will Smith, he walks.

Now, if anyone thinks Marvel Studios should've bowed down to Howard's demands and made more than Robert Donwey Jr again, well, they're delusional.

One was financial the other was creative differences. I'm sorry your so sensitive about someone questioning the all mighty Marvel Studios poor handling of the creative talent, continuation of such actions will come back to bite them in the arse.

Who's being sensitive, I'm just not Mr. "Doom and gloom" with every news story.

As far as Favreau's creative differences, after all the sh- part 2 got (I'm sure it wasn't the studio's idea to give Happy a bigger part and a fight scene), maybe they want to go a different direction. I mean, sooner or later they're going to have to use Mandarin and from Favreau's interviews he didn't get the character judging from his "He's a magical villain" to "Maybe he won't use rings at all" comments.

[Parker Wayne]

I mean the first film probably appealed to Branagh because of the Shakespearean elements with the relationship between Thor, Loki, and Odin. I doubt their relationship will again be the central theme again.

[jmc]

^ Or it could be because Branagh's not a franchise director. It's probably the same situation with Martin Campbell and James Bond movies. They've shown they can get the right talent for their movies.

Who says he's not a franchise director? He said he was up for a sequel.

[Parker Wayne]

:cwink:

For people that don't know *cough*jmc*cough*

With Favreau, he was going to get the time he needed to make part three, apparently he was all for it, judging from his comments about it, then Disney offers him Magic Kingdom, and it's "Well, see you later!"

With Terrance Howard, WAAAAAY back when Marvel Studios was formed and when Avi Arad was running things, HE hired Howard, yes Avi Arad hired Terrance Howard, before Favreau got hired and before Robert Downey Jr. got cast (I still remember the debates about whether Tony Stark should be black or not) Arad gave him "X" amount of money. Well that amount turned out to be even more than RDJ. Fast forward to 2008, Iron Man is a success part 2 is green lit and then comes the negotiations. Howard still wanted a pay raise and to still make more than RDJ, if you can believe that, so on the advice of Will Smith, he walks.

Now, if anyone thinks Marvel Studios should've bowed down to Howard's demands and made more than Robert Donwey Jr, again, well they're delusional.

I agree, but I do admit that Marvel rushed Iron Man 2 and should have given more time to develop a script. And it may have been for the better for Favreau to leave as his comments hinted that he had no idea what to do with Iron Man 3. Though this could be in part due to Marvel's handling of Iron Man 2.

And with Howard, I would've gotten rid of him because he was making more than RDJ and was overpaid.

[Parker Wayne]

Who says he's not a franchise director? He said he was up for a sequel.

Source?

[jmc]

:cwink:

For people that don't know *cough*jmc*cough*

With Favreau, he was going to get the time he needed to make part three, apparently he was all for it, judging from his comments about it, then Disney offers him Magic Kingdom, and it's ''Well, see you later!''

With Terrance Howard, WAAAAAY back when Marvel Studios was formed and when Avi Arad was running things, HE hired Howard, yes Avi Arad hired Terrance Howard, before Favreau got hired and before Robert Downey Jr. got cast (I still remember the debates about whether Tony Stark should be black or not) Arad gave him ''X''; amount of money. Well that amount turned out to be even more than RDJ. Fast forward to 2008, Iron Man is a success part 2 is green lit and then comes the negotiations. Howard still wanted a pay raise and to still make more than RDJ, if you can believe that, so on the advice of Will Smith, he walks.

Now, if anyone thinks Marvel Studios should've bowed down to Howard's demands and made more than Robert Donwey Jr, again, well they're delusional.

An actor who's in a successful film deserves a raise in the sequel, if Marvel mismanaged the actors pay in the first film that is on them, Howard as well as everyone else in the cast deserved a pay raise. As for Favreau, it was clearly a creative issue that led to him moving on, he didn't just up and leave.

[jmc]

Source?

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/entertainment/news/branagh-toying-with-thor-sequel-15153815.html

[Parker Wayne]

That's interesting. Something must've went wrong with Marvel and Branagh, but we don't know enough to call it mismanagement.

[Iron_Stark]

An actor who's in a successful film deserves a raise in the sequel, if Marvel mismanaged the actors pay in the first film that is on them, Howard as well as everyone else in the cast deserved a pay raise. As for Favreau, it was clearly a creative issue that led to him moving on, he didn't just up and leave.


LOl, what are you their accountant now? You seriously think he deserved more than RDJ?

Yeah, maybe Marvel didn't like they way he was handling the villains, maybe Favreau didn't agree with them, unless you were there, I wouldn't be making accusations.

[jmc]

LOl, what are you their accountant now? You seriously think he deserved more than RDJ?

Yeah, maybe Marvel didn't like they way he was handling the villains, maybe Favreau didn't agree with them, unless you were there, I wouldn't be making accusations.

Whether he deserved more than RDJ is not the issue, the issue is he deserved a pay raise like everyone else in the cast, Howard had every right to demand a bump in pay, again if he ended up getting payed more in film one than RDJ then that is on Marvel for screwing up, that's not his problem.

[Parker Wayne]

The guy that screwed up, Avi Arad, was gone.

And, despite the way he said it, Iron Stark is right. Howard was already getting paid more than RDJ. Marvel didn't want to give him a pay raise if he was already the highest paid actor in the cast.

[Flemm]

I don't think anyone is suggesting he had no right to demand more pay, just that Marvel made the right call in recasting the part.

It didn't hurt the movie imo. If anything, Don Cheadle fits the part better, though Terence Howard is certainly an excellent actor.

[jmc]

The guy that screwed up, Avi Arad, was gone.

And, despite the way he said it, Iron Stark is right. Howard was already getting paid more than RDJ. Marvel didn't want to give him a pay raise if he was already the highest paid actor in the cast.

But it's not Howard's problem though if Marvel screwed up is it?

[Parker Wayne]

No, it's not. It's not really anyone's fault. This is business. They didn't see him as a big enough asset to the success of Iron Man to give him a pay raise. This is how it works. RDJ was the most popular part of the movie therefore he deserved a raise. This isn't a knock to Howard, but he was getting paid highly already.

[Spider-Fan]

Directors leave franchises all the time. It doesn't mean anything. Bond has changed directors MANY times, and often times, the Bond sequels improved with a new director. This may happen here, or the opposite may happen. Who knows? Let's wait til we find out who is replacing him before we freak out.

[Gamma Burst]

Well said, Spider-Fan.

[Saitou Hajime]

I agree, but I do admit that Marvel rushed Iron Man 2 and should have given more time to develop a script. And it may have been for the better for Favreau to leave as his comments hinted that he had no idea what to do with Iron Man 3. Though this could be in part due to Marvel's handling of Iron Man 2.


Is there a particular reason why the Iron Man franchise doesn't operate much with a concrete transcript? It can't be all Marvel's doing, with their other films all scripted up just fine.

[Parker Wayne]

Directors leave franchises all the time. It doesn't mean anything. Bond has changed directors MANY times, and often times, the Bond sequels improved with a new director. This may happen here, or the opposite may happen. Who knows? Let's wait til we find out who is replacing him before we freak out.

No one's freaking out though, much to jmc's dismay.

[Spider-Fan]

And I am shocked people are not panicing, LOL! I am used to unorganized chaos when stuff like this happens. I'm lost when it doesn't happen :csad:

I'm very curious to see who they get. I would think they should have someone in place soon.

[Gamma Burst]

And I am shocked people are not panicing, LOL! I am used to unorganized chaos when stuff like this happens. I'm lost when it doesn't happen :csad:

I'm very curious to see who they get. I would think they should have someone in place soon.

You should've tould us before. Next time it happens, we'll freak out just fine.:woot:

[Parker Wayne]

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-

BRANAGH'S NOT COMING bACK! WHAT DO WE DO WITH OUR LIVES NOW!?

[Gamma Burst]

Damn you, marvel! The sequel is gonna suck and you ruined my life!




How's that? :D

[Flemm]

Damn it, Marvel studios! Why do you hate Thor so much to the point that you are deliberately sabotaging the franchise?!?!?!?!

I can't believe this crap! The sequel is doomed and will be the Green Lantern of 2013. WTF Marvel I expected better!!!!

There. I hope that gets the freakout quotient in this thread up to superherohype recommended levels :cwink:

[Gamma Burst]

Damn it, Marvel studios! Why do you hate Thor so much to the point that you are deliberately sabotaging the franchise?!?!?!?!

I can't believe this crap! The sequel is doomed and will be the Green Lantern of 2013. WTF Marvel I expected better :cwink:

Don't need to be so harsh.:woot:

[Vartha]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzhuh wha? Ken's not coming back? yeah ok.zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Vartha]

heh Don't get me wrong, but I would freak more if he WAS directing Thor 2 than not.
I feel safe knowing he'll still be there to help IF it's needed. Why would we freak?

[Iron_Stark]

Maaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhvvvvvvvvveeeeeeeelllllllllllll llllllll!!!!!!

Y u no liek our brah, Branaugh????

[Gamma Burst]

And now I present you my new username. :cool:

[Vartha]

hehehe Congrats!! Questions is WHICH Odinson? :D

[Vartha]

Maaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhvvvvvvvvveeeeeeeelllllllllllll llllllll!!!!!!

Y u no liek our brah, Branaugh????
lol

[Gamma Burst]

hehehe Congrats!! Questions is WHICH Odinson? :D

Good question!

[Thor_Odinson]

And now I present you my new username. :cool:

I like it! :yay:

[hatebox]

heh Don't get me wrong, but I would freak more if he WAS directing Thor 2 than not.

:huh:

[Vartha]

:huh:
I would freak because he WOULD be directing because he did such a great job on the first film. I'd be more depressed since it looks like he'd not but at least Thor is still getting a sequel.

[ElMariachi]

"I know, right!" :cwink:

There's no real reason to freak out, or to start thinking Marvel is this evil entity that doesn't care about people. :funny:

Look at Favreau, he was all in for part 3, saying Mandarin was a must, explore more on Tony Stark's journey, he was going to get back to it after Cowboys and Aliens yadda yadda yadda, then decides to do that Disney movie.

Seems to me the only ones freaking out about it and want to make a big deal about it are the ones that want to make a big deal about it.

It seems like Marvel bashing is common on these movie websites. I really don't know why they do it considering all Marvel Studio films have been good. People call them cheap, yet they continue to bring in top acting talent to their movies. They continue to hire good directors and make good movies yet, they are talked about as if they are Fox. Or WB, which as we all know is Nolan Batman top heavy.

[Gamma Burst]

I like it! :yay:

Yours is cooler!:word:

[Iron_Stark]

It seems like Marvel bashing is common on these movie websites. I really don't know why they do it considering all Marvel Studio films have been good. People call them cheap, yet they continue to bring in top acting talent to their movies. They continue to hire good directors and make good movies yet, they are talked about as if they are Fox. Or WB, which as we all know is Nolan Batman top heavy.

That's true.

I have no doubt that Marvel will hire the best possible person to direct Thor 2.

Look at the freakout with after Favreau left, and how they quieted everyone with Shane Black.

They're not going to go after the Rattners or Storys of the world.

I'm not worried.

[Gamma Burst]

That's true.

I have no doubt that Marvel will hire the best possible person to direct Thor 2.

Look at the freakout with after Favreau left, and how they quieted everyone with Shane Black.

They're not going to go after the Rattners or Storys of the world.

I'm not worried.

And that's exactly why I'm not worried about it.

[Thor_Odinson]

Yours is cooler!:word:

:woot:

[Thor_Odinson]

They're not going to go after the Rattners or Storys of the world.



I certainly hope not!

[S.A.A.D.]

I hope that Kenneth's replacement turns out to be good enough. Someone that I can trust based on their history.

[kevinrau]

It's too bad we're losing Ken, he did a fine job of presenting the fact that Thor is a diety in the comics in a manner that is palatable to the general populace.

I can't wait for the second movie.

[VoodooMagic]

And I am shocked people are not panicing, LOL! I am used to unorganized chaos when stuff like this happens. I'm lost when it doesn't happen :csad:

I'm very curious to see who they get. I would think they should have someone in place soon.

Well I think it's cause while Thor ruled it doesn't necessarily feel like it was "untoppable" at least for me. I could see someone else coming in and doing just as good or better.

Kinda feels like the Bourne series. BI was amazing but it was clear the franchise started when Greengrass took over.

[BigThor]

Well I think it's cause while Thor ruled it doesn't necessarily feel like it was "untoppable" at least for me. I could see someone else coming in and doing just as good or better.

Kinda feels like the Bourne series. BI was amazing but it was clear the franchise started when Greengrass took over.

I feel the exact same way. :woot:

[Weadazoid]

I feel the exact same way. :woot:



The fight sequences in the Bourne Identity are some of my favorites of all time

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Well I think it's cause while Thor ruled it doesn't necessarily feel like it was "untoppable" at least for me. I could see someone else coming in and doing just as good or better.

Kinda feels like the Bourne series. BI was amazing but it was clear the franchise started when Greengrass took over.

Funnily enough, I didnt think either sequel was as good as BI, the first is still the best in the series for me.

[Weadazoid]

Funnily enough, I didnt think either sequel was as good as BI, the first is still the best in the series for me.



I agree with this whole heartedly




There is no better sequence then when Bourne rides the dead body down the stair well shaft killing the guy who was running up the stairs with the machine gun.

Definition of brutality right there

[kedrell]

Funnily enough, I didnt think either sequel was as good as BI, the first is still the best in the series for me.


I agree as well. Greengrass and his shakey-cam just bothered the hell out of me(but he did get better with it as his 2nd Bourne movie was better than his first); but Doug Liman didn't employ shakey-cam nearly as much and the film was all the better for it.

Bourne1>Bourne3>Bourne2