Should Avengers be a trilogy, 4 movie set, or continuous

[MessiahDecoy123]

Which grouping would you prefer?

[MessiahDecoy123]

I'd prefer a 4 movie set, all directed by Whedon with the current cast.

movie 1 - Loki
movie 2 - Ultron
movie 3 - Kang
movie 4 - Thanos

Then reboot a few years later with a new cast.

[psylockolussus]

I hope there's at least 5 The Avengers movies!

[Bruce Malone]

How is marvel not going to run into overkill with these characters? I say 3 movies spaced out at most.

If marvel were smart they'd wait another 4 years for the sequel. I mean you'll be seeing iron man again, thor again, cap again the last 2 you might actually see 2x again assuming they form trilogies themselves.

With all that you expect to fit in another 3 avengers movie?

[MessiahDecoy123]

We won't have these actors forever.

They should hurry and complete a trilogy or four movie set before any of the actors lose interest and try to ditch the franchise.

Avengers 2 (2015)
Avengers 3 (2017)
Avengers 4 (2019)

That's a five or seven year commitment from all these actors. That's alot to ask unless your willing to pay a kings ransom to keep the current cast.

But I love the current cast so I hope they can stay together for seven years for a four movies then reboot with a new cast after another 5 years.

[Bruce Malone]

Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123

We won't have these actors forever.

They should hurry and complete a trilogy or four movie set before any of the actors lose interest and try to ditch the franchise.

Avengers 2 (2015)
Avengers 3 (2017)
Avengers 4 (2019)

That's a five or seven year commitment from all these actors. That's alot to ask unless your willing to pay a kings ransom to keep the current cast.

But I love the current cast so I hope they can stay together for seven years for a four movies then reboot with a new cast after another 5 years.

Your scenario for the avengers is probably the most they could expect to stretch out with the current actors. By 2019 which would probably be an early estimate for the 3rd avengers movie rdj would have been playing iron for over a decade and will be into his 50's as well. I can't see him sticking around longer than that.

Not to mention the younger guys hemsworth and evans that is a huge chunk of their acting prime to be devoted to these films. Were not talking harry potter here where they were 12.

I also can't see them doing back to back fast-tracking in releasing an avengers film every 2 years. There is little way i envision more than 3 avengers films in total with the current cast.

[L0ngsh0t]

Originally Posted by Bruce Malone

Your scenario for the avengers is probably the most they could expect to stretch out with the current actors. By 2019 which would probably be an early estimate for the 3rd avengers movie rdj would have been playing iron for over a decade and will be into his 50's as well. I can't see him sticking around longer than that.

Not to mention the younger guys hemsworth and evans that is a huge chunk of their acting prime to be devoted to these films. Were not talking harry potter here where they were 12.

I also can't see them doing back to back fast-tracking in releasing an avengers film every 2 years. There is little way i envision more than 3 avengers films in total with the current cast.

Tom Cruise is killing it as Ethan Hunt well into his 50's, RDJ needs to be even less physical to be Iron Man...a little hair color and make up and he'll look just fine.

With Chris and Chris....I don't think you need to worry about the "acting prime" thing....they've basically hit the jackpot with this...they now can have the power to pick and choose whatever roles they want because they know they have the paycheck right around the corner playing their respective characters....Hemsworth especially but they both seem to be into their characters to an almost Hugh Jackman/Depp way (i.e. Jackman is playing the guy he loves even though the movies have gone completely stale by now) it seems like the reverse might be true....actors tend to fall in more in love with a character the more they play him or her it almost seems to be (or maybe it's the pay check) either way I don't think we are in a hurry with this.

I say continous and just get new actors. I dispise what is happneing with this Batman series, it seems a bit presumptuous to think that you (Nolan/Bale) are the only ones who can do justice to the character and thus the story has to end when you say so.....if you put as much resources into finding the next set of guys to make the same project you should be fine, there are a ton of talented people in hollywood

[RockSP]

Originally Posted by L0ngsh0t

Tom Cruise is killing it as Ethan Hunt well into his 50's, RDJ needs to be even less physical to be Iron Man...a little hair color and make up and he'll look just fine.

Cruise isn't in his 50's

[MarvelKnight]

Originally Posted by RockSP

Cruise isn't in his 50's

ya, 49 to be exact, 50 in July

Regardless Ethan Hunt is a lot more physical of a part than Stark, so its conceivable RDJ should be able to go a bit longer with a less physical role. Who knows. I hope he is Stark til the end of time.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by L0ngsh0t

Tom Cruise is killing it as Ethan Hunt well into his 50's, RDJ needs to be even less physical to be Iron Man...a little hair color and make up and he'll look just fine.

With Chris and Chris....I don't think you need to worry about the "acting prime" thing....they've basically hit the jackpot with this...they now can have the power to pick and choose whatever roles they want because they know they have the paycheck right around the corner playing their respective characters....Hemsworth especially but they both seem to be into their characters to an almost Hugh Jackman/Depp way (i.e. Jackman is playing the guy he loves even though the movies have gone completely stale by now) it seems like the reverse might be true....actors tend to fall in more in love with a character the more they play him or her it almost seems to be (or maybe it's the pay check) either way I don't think we are in a hurry with this.

I say continous and just get new actors. I dispise what is happneing with this Batman series, it seems a bit presumptuous to think that you (Nolan/Bale) are the only ones who can do justice to the character and thus the story has to end when you say so.....if you put as much resources into finding the next set of guys to make the same project you should be fine, there are a ton of talented people in hollywood

Originally Posted by L0ngsh0t

I agree. Even if we have a bad movie here or there....don't freak out just do better the next go around.

Let's take note from the other franchises that have left us scratching our heads like x-men and spider-man. SM for example freaked out cause they had one bad movie....boo hoo, put your big boy pants on an just make another good one.

X-men killed off way too many essential characters and left a prosperous franchise in ruin

I agree 110% with everything you've posted here. Nice post to wake up to....well done, sir.

Originally Posted by Bruce Malone

It's not that rdj will be too old its just that as a veteran actor already i doubt he'd want to do one role for that long.

RDJ is a great actor if he feels the franchise has grown stale i don't think he'll want to stick around for iron man 5 or avengers 4.

Recasting without rebooting is hard and has only really been done succesfully in the bond series. Funny enough the first time connery was replaced by a different actor the uproar from the public was so bad they brought him back.

It would be very jarring for the audience for avengers 3 to have rdj and in the next installment he looks totally different with no mention.

Actors taking over roles without rebooting or screwing up continuity happens more often than you realize. Hell, Doctor Who made a cottage industry of it, and that's one of the pinnacles of geekdom --- if geeks have no trouble with ten thousand different Doctor Whos, they're not going to get bent out of shape with multiple actors playing a single character in the Avengers series.

.....which is already being done, anyway. Bruce Banner springs instantly to mind. (After GDT's TV show debuts next year, we'll probably see *yet another* actor in Bruce's role.)

Also, on the subject of 50-somethings still playing the same physical role a decade or more later: Roger Moore. Since James Bond keeps coming up.

[ЯɘvlveR]

I'd imagine they're continuous otherwise, what is marvel studios gonna do after TA 3? close up shop?

[sauronthegreat]

Four film saga!
And if it turns out to be successful as it is now they can continue it with civil War or Annihilation.. and on

If Ant Man film is made before Avengers 2, they can go with Ultron story for the sequel and use Baron Zemo and his Masters of Evil as side villains (most members that were featured in previous Marvel films, Zemo from Cap2, Enchantress from Thor2, Abomination from Inc.Hulk..)

Part III and IV can be filmed back to back and spam the Kree/Scrull war, but it won't just be a battle like it was with Loki and the Chitauri, there will be espionage tactics, infiltration, hostile takeovers of areas.. with Kang the main villain in part III that comes to the past to rewrite history in hope to save his timeline, but at what cost. And as full invasion takes over in part IV even greater threat rises in the far galaxies as Thanos gathers all the gems on his Infinity Gauntlet and threatens the whole universe.

Avengers I (IronMan, Cap, Thor, Hulk, BlackWidow, Hawkeye) - Loki and the Chitauri

Avengers II (IronMan, Cap, Thor, Hulk, AntMan & Wasp; BlackWidow and Hawkeye part of SHIELD) Ultron and the Masters of Evil (Baron Zemo, Enchantress, Abomination, Living Laser) and Vision (becomes an Avenger by the end of the film.

Avengers III (Cap, IronMan, Thor, Hulk, Vision, Miss Marvel, GiantMan & Wasp) - Kang, and the start of Kree/Scrull war

Avengers IV (Cap, IronMan, Thor, Hulk, Wasp, Vision, Miss Marvel, Dr Strange) - Kree/Scrull war continues, Thanos and the Infinity Gauntlet

[fixxxer1022]

Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123

Avengers 2 (2015)

i don't think it will be that long of a wait for the avengers 2.

[jaqua99]

Originally Posted by fixxxer1022

i don't think it will be that long of a wait for the avengers 2.

....2015 is too long? So you think we will get avengers 2, the same year as captain america 2?

Nope.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by jaqua99

....2015 is too long? So you think we will get avengers 2, the same year as captain america 2?

Nope.

Why wouldn't we? The first Avengers movie gets its own year, and is the only Marvel project on tap for 2012, simply because this is the big "event" that everything has been leading up to. Now that the cat is out of the bag and Marvel is counting the money, the same can't be said for Avengers 2 being an "event" movie. It will be another franchise installment, nothing more. So if Marvel sticks to the 2-per-year formula, Avengers 2 is a pretty safe bet to be the other movie besides CA2.

[natey2k4]

I'd try to get at least a Trilogy out of the current cast. If they want to do 5 films (they would have to produce them quicker like the Twilight or Lord of the Rings films, where it's like every 12-18 months), I'd be all for that too.

If they go 5 films, I'd introduce some new superheroes (they should try to sign Chris Evans to a 15-year-contract or something) in the last two films, so the series can continue.

[Punisher Rising]

Four or five would be nice but I'll be pleased with a trilogy if that's what they aim for.

[cherokeesam]

Look to the future. The *far* future. This franchise (and the comic book industry) has been around for more than half a century, and will be for another half-century or more. Even when the actors get old and/or tired and bored, the characters will still be viable and popular.

Open-ended, all the way. There's not going to be any overkill here, and trying to give this franchise an ending is dooming it to failure right at its moment of triumph.

Avengers proved once and for all that what works in the comics works onscreen as well. Avengers has fared just fine as a separate entity from all the individual solo titles for 50 years. What works in the comics works onscreen....that's Joss' gift to you. Cherish that.

[MessiahDecoy123]

I like the fact that Nolan has his own trilogy with its his personal stamp and vision. Then the next director will come along and craft another kind of Batman trilogy that isn't forced to operate under Nolan's rules or stick to Nolan's continuity.

Look at X-men First Class. You can't use Iceman, Angel, Cyclops, or Jean Grey because the previous films screwed up the timeline. A reboot would have so much more freedom and storytelling potential.

Plus trilogy sets are just so cool and collectable. Whedon fans are going to want one from him with a begining, middle, and powerful end.

[slim_summers]

Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123

I like the fact that Nolan has his own trilogy with its his personal stamp and vision. Then the next director will come along and craft another kind of Batman trilogy that isn't forced to operate under Nolan's rules or stick to Nolan's continuity.

Look at X-men First Class. You can't use Iceman, Angel, Cyclops, or Jean Grey because the previous films screwed up the timeline. A reboot would have so much more freedom and storytelling potential.

Plus trilogy sets are just so cool and collectable. Whedon fans are going to want one from him with a begining, middle, and powerful end.

this

[DrCosmic]

All of the above

Trilogy, then a sequel film that bridges into a continuous series.

The main actors have 6 film deals, which means many of them won't be around to do Avengers 4 unless they don't get a third film in their own series. So finish the trilogy strong, But don't rush it, give them at least three years space so that the build up films can make Avengers movies epic (Besides, the actors have 6 film deals, regardless of how long it takes). Tell a definite, memorable story that can go down in history with Star Wars, LOTR and Matrix.

Then, if the demand is still there, find the right blend of recasting and new heroes and keep it moving. Keep things fluid. Who knows, in 7-10 years RDJ might be up to return as SHIED Director Tony Stark, and maybe even suit up one more time like Rocky. Perhaps Chris or Chris' careers might fizzle like Vin Disel's and they'll be up for a new multi picture deal like Fast and Furious. But in the meantime, you've exposed all these great heroes from Black Panther, Dr. Strange and Ant-Man to Luke Cage, Quicksilver and Namor. To say nothing of newer characters like Ronin, Sentry and Red Hulk, or even Ms. Marvel, Spider-Woman or Hercules. Not all of them can support their own solo film, but those that can't can work into other people's films like Widow and Hawkeye

[R_Hythlodeus]

Open ended of course.
This has to go the Bond/Star Trek Route, the MCU is too big already to settle for just Trilogies.
I blame George Lucas for getting the GA to think everything has to be a trilogy.
Some stories are clearly larger than that.

[fixxxer1022]

i dunno i say one more then it will be rebooted. lets face it, ironman will eventually be recasted. you guys know hollywood loves to reboot these films often.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by fixxxer1022

i dunno i say one more then it will be rebooted. lets face it, ironman will eventually be recasted. you guys know hollywood loves to reboot these films often.

Feige has already said he has no intention of rebooting any of the titles once a role gets recast. The continuity will remain the same, just with a different actor playing the role. A la James Bond.

[MarvelKnight]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

Feige has already said he has no intention of rebooting any of the titles once a role gets recast. The continuity will remain the same, just with a different actor playing the role. A la James Bond.

Yeah, with that revelation, keep em comin' til the end of time.