View Single Post
Old 03-22-2013, 03:52 PM   #535
spideymouse's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,523
Default Re: MCU Phase 3: Have it your way

Originally Posted by InternetPeople View Post
No one said you can't disagree, but just disagreeing to disagree without offering some sort of alternative is unnecessary. I hope you understand what I am driving at and aren't taking anything personally as this is not meant to be any sort of attack.
I'll try not to take it as such. I still think that you can express disagreement without necessarily explaining it right away, especially in a thread that specifically allows people to post their opinions without having to back up their ideas with any explanation. Gotham's Knight eventually gave his reasoning, and I eventually gave mine. And look, it turned into a discussion.

Originally Posted by InternetPeople View Post
That said, I agree with you about your initial dislike, Spideymouse. I don't think two films for the same franchise will happen in a single phase for any character. In fact, I think Ultron could be developed through several films before becoming a super villain that demands his own film.

Speaking of Iron Man, was the second film planned to help jump start Avengers and the MCU or was it something that was quickly made because of the positive reception of Iron Man? As I don't actually know the answer to that question I will speak from my perception, it seems that the general idea behind Iron Man 2 was planned. It seems to me that another film, not Iron Man, would have had to be made that had some obvious Easter Eggs to help tie the films into the same universe. Ignore this if I am wrong.
I don't know if that question has ever been specifically asked and answered, but my perception is that it was partly in response to the positive buzz around the first Iron Man movie. It was the Monday right after Iron Man was released that Marvel announced its full Phase I schedule, so at some point Marvel must have known the kind of gold mine they had with Iron Man and RDJ and green lit Iron Man 2. I don't know if it was at that point that they were intending it to be a "bridge-to-the-Avengers" movie, but it sure turned out that way to a degree, didn't it? That said, I don't think Marvel was outright trying to make a movie whose sole purpose was to tie the films into the same universe--all five were supposed to do that in a limited capacity. And I definitely disagree with you that a movie like Iron Man 2 was necessary in setting up Avengers. I really think they just wanted more Iron Man (aka money).

The way that Iron Man 2 at times failed to focus on its central Tony-and-Ivan conflict is the very reason why I think that a second Ant-Man movie solely meant to set up Ultron for Avengers 3 would be a mistake.

spideymouse is offline