2014

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by Blackman

I know it's not Hulk, but am I the only one who thinks a new Hulk film would be the best logical step?
No he's not a new property, but with Hulk/Banner's reception with critics and audiences being as high as ever wouldnt it be best to strike while the iron is hot when it comes to Hulk?

Theoretically, they are. With Guillermo del Toro's Hulk TV show next year on ABC. I know most of the fanboys here hate that idea and just wish they'd kick the Hulk movie franchise back into gear, but I think the TV show might prove to be every bit as popular as Bixby's was back in the 70s and 80s.

[Blackman]

But that wont have Ruffalo in it right? Part of the character's positive reception was from Ruffalo

and Im still skeptical of a TV show. I'll wait and see though

[DrCosmic]

Originally Posted by L0ngsh0t

Even if it's not super accurate I think I would prefer a lot of these heroes to be strictly team up movies

I don't think we need a solo black widow movie and a solo hawkeye movie and a solo Ant-Man movie....I really think the best idea would be a SHIELD movie where they are the main characters in an espionage/bourne style thriler

Luke Cage, Black Panther, Ant-Man, Human Torch, and other could comprise a Heores for Hire film in the style of the A-Team or something

I was with you til you said Black Panther as a Heroes for Hire. The themes and concepts simply aren't compatible, unless you gut Black Panther, basically.

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

I'd love for Ant-Man to shoot later this year, but I think a 2013 shoot is a lot more realistic, given that Wright still has World's End and Night Stalker on his immediate horizon this year. Which would point towards the 2014 release date.

Hmmm, I know one of those is also rumored to be shooting this year, but not both, so I'm not sure they're both on the immediate horizon.

Originally Posted by L0ngsh0t

But when you talk about Ultron it's pretty clear you have fanboy goggles on.

Ultron is a concept that can work, but not as Avengers 2 or 3....They've established a universe bigger than Earth and a threat(s) larger than a sentient robot

All great movies and movie series are based off the same concept: set up and pay off......Ultron would not be adequate pay-off for the promise of what the Avengers has set up at this point.

I think what a likely and very succesfull scenario might be is that this crew of Avengers battles the comsmic stuff and instead of rebooting MCU in 3 films maybe they take a little break from this crew while they recast and regroup and they have an Avengers team of maybe Ant-Man, Cap, Thor, Panther, Wasp and Iron Fist or something to give RDJ and Ruffy a break as they will be well in their 50's by then and may need to be recast

and that group is pulled together when Hank Pym is building Ultron as a way for the Avengers to not be needed as much in defending earth but it malfunctions and turns into an unstoppable force

I'm pretty confident we will not get Ultron for a few movies in the Avengers Universe so I'm not too worried about it....but it's not a smart idea if they hypothetically were to do it in A2. Marvel seems to be too savy to do this imo and it already appears like they won't be doing it

I'm not much of an Ultron fanboy, but he really seems like an ideal second-act villain if Thanos isn't going to be the main villain of TA2, especially if they're trying to get smaller and more personal. Nothing cosmic or even extraterrestrial fits that bill, does it?

The Avengers' explicitly stated theme is the fight threats no one else can, and to be there when needed. They are not an alien/cosmic team based on the film, even though they are facing extraterrestrial villains.

So, while they may not do it, in case Pym isn't as disconnected from the MCU as previously and repeatedly stated, so that Pym can come in and do something in Avengers 4 or whatever. Outside of that though, the story for Ultron, combining the concepts of Fury's Phase II, Super Adaptoid and so forth seems very doable.

[L0ngsh0t]

Originally Posted by DrCosmic

I was with you til you said Black Panther as a Heroes for Hire. The themes and concepts simply aren't compatible, unless you gut Black Panther, basically.




Hmmm, I know one of those is also rumored to be shooting this year, but not both, so I'm not sure they're both on the immediate horizon.



I'm not much of an Ultron fanboy, but he really seems like an ideal second-act villain if Thanos isn't going to be the main villain of TA2, especially if they're trying to get smaller and more personal. Nothing cosmic or even extraterrestrial fits that bill, does it?

The Avengers' explicitly stated theme is the fight threats no one else can, and to be there when needed. They are not an alien/cosmic team based on the film, even though they are facing extraterrestrial villains.

So, while they may not do it, in case Pym isn't as disconnected from the MCU as previously and repeatedly stated, so that Pym can come in and do something in Avengers 4 or whatever. Outside of that though, the story for Ultron, combining the concepts of Fury's Phase II, Super Adaptoid and so forth seems very doable.

I don't know that Smaller and more Personal has anything to do with scale though.

I think it could be argued Empire Strikes Back is both a smaller and more personal movie interms of character and theme but the universe and scope of the movie is twice as large as Star Wars.


Ah and my ideas for smaller hero team up movies: Panther doesn't have to be in HFH like I suggested I was just spit balling smaller super heroes to put in team up flicks

[actionavenue]

Originally Posted by Blackman

I know it's not Hulk, but am I the only one who thinks a new Hulk film would be the best logical step?
No he's not a new property, but with Hulk/Banner's reception with critics and audiences being as high as ever wouldnt it be best to strike while the iron is hot when it comes to Hulk?

I agree with you. It would be a good idea to right the perceived wrongs from the previous Hulk solo movies. I know that both of the previous Hulk movies were not really well received. I personally liked the last one with Ed Norton, but the one with Bana was mess. Anyway, strike while the iron is hot, like you said. Put Ruffalo in as Banner in his own Hulk movie.
__________________________________________________ _____________
Check out my zombie blog http://freakindeadjed.blogspot.com.
View my artwork http://zazzle.com/actionave.

[Chewy]

May 3, 2013 - Iron Man: Extremis

Nov 15, 2013 - The Mighty Thor

Apr 4, 2014 - Captain America

Nov 21, 2014 - Captain Marvel (also starring Ms Marvel)

May 1, 2015 - The Avengers 2

[L0ngsh0t]

Originally Posted by Chewy

May 3, 2013 - Iron Man: Extremis

Nov 15, 2013 - The Mighty Thor

Apr 4, 2014 - Captain America

Nov 21, 2014 - Captain Marvel (also starring Ms Marvel)

May 1, 2015 - The Avengers 2

What's the May movie? Guardians?

[Chewy]

The May movie is nothing. They aren't going to open a movie two weeks after Spider-Man.

[Blackman]

Originally Posted by actionavenue

I agree with you. It would be a good idea to right the perceived wrongs from the previous Hulk solo movies. I know that both of the previous Hulk movies were not really well received. I personally liked the last one with Ed Norton, but the one with Bana was mess. Anyway, strike while the iron is hot, like you said. Put Ruffalo in as Banner in his own Hulk movie.

Exactly.

The problem is, if Marvel only wants to do 2 films a year, they wont have any room to put out a new character

[DrCosmic]

Originally Posted by L0ngsh0t

I don't know that Smaller and more Personal has anything to do with scale though.

I think it could be argued Empire Strikes Back is both a smaller and more personal movie interms of character and theme but the universe and scope of the movie is twice as large as Star Wars.


Ah and my ideas for smaller hero team up movies: Panther doesn't have to be in HFH like I suggested I was just spit balling smaller super heroes to put in team up flicks

ESB is definitely what I'm thinking about 'smaller.' I'm not sure what you mean by scope and universe. Are you talking about locations? I think that's very doable in Avengers 2, without having an extraterrestrial or 'cosmic' villain. And having an ET villain makes the limited character and theme pretty much impossible, right? I can see SHIELD, and Heroes for Hire as team up movies. More than that though, I'd like to see new heroes introduced in the solo sequels the way Black Widow was introduced in Iron Man 2. For instance, I'd love to see Carol Danvers in Cap 2 for instance. Too bad I can't think of anyone that would fit in Thor 2, and IM 3 is already shooting.

[L0ngsh0t]

Originally Posted by DrCosmic

ESB is definitely what I'm thinking about 'smaller.' I'm not sure what you mean by scope and universe. Are you talking about locations? I think that's very doable in Avengers 2, without having an extraterrestrial or 'cosmic' villain. And having an ET villain makes the limited character and theme pretty much impossible, right? I can see SHIELD, and Heroes for Hire as team up movies. More than that though, I'd like to see new heroes introduced in the solo sequels the way Black Widow was introduced in Iron Man 2. For instance, I'd love to see Carol Danvers in Cap 2 for instance. Too bad I can't think of anyone that would fit in Thor 2, and IM 3 is already shooting.

The stakes were raised and the vastness of the Empire was explored in pretty good detail with the armada of ships and the races through the galaxy and the ending on cloud city---this is all big concept stuff that is packed in a movie that is pretty character centric on our heroes

I would bet a lot and a lot of money what they are going to do is have Thanos be this present threat but not the main antagonist....however he plays a part in why the Avengers are together again and we are all aware of him as the guy doing the work.

Just because the destruction of the Universe is at stake does not mean we have to see it happen in A2....the threat would be enough.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Chewy, then one could argue the November 2013 is nothing either since Hunger Games 2 will most definitely shatter all its chances at a decent BO return. Not to mention, SONY's new Spider Man franchise is still unproven, while Hunger Games is certifiable. It'd be smarter to move Thor II than GOTG (which is most probably the May 2014 film).

[Chewy]

That doesn't really make sense. Movies face competition all the time. 2 movies can coexist in November just fine. It's a big boy month.

They aren't going to compete with themselves, though. 3 Marvel movies in 7 weeks is not going to happen, even if one is a Sony production.

And I don't know why you'd just assume GotG is the movie they originally had slotted for May.

[L0ngsh0t]

Originally Posted by Chewy

That doesn't really make sense. Movies face competition all the time. 2 movies can coexist in November just fine. It's a big boy month.

They aren't going to compete with themselves, though. 3 Marvel movies in 7 weeks is not going to happen, even if one is a Sony production.

And I don't know why you'd just assume GotG is the movie they originally had slotted for May.

if November is a big boy month than May is a man's man month....it's literally the single biggest month for movies.....maybe July is the only one that can rival it.

Marvel Studios can only benifit by having an awesome movie in May that may take away competition from Amazing Spider-man (assuming ASM2 actually gets made)

GotG seems like a fairly safe bet if it is a new property. It's a big enough to movie to have a huge trailer and get people in the theaters

[Chewy]

Originally Posted by L0ngsh0t

Marvel Studios can only benifit by having an awesome movie in May that may take away competition from Amazing Spider-man (assuming ASM2 actually gets made)

No... Marvel/Disney owns the merchandising rights for Spidey and get a sizable chunk of the box office take. They stand to gain nothing by hindering its success

TASM2 will happen. TASM will do at least ok when overseas profits come into play and Sony will turn a profit. And they aren't going to let the property lapse back to Marvel.

GotG seems like a fairly safe bet if it is a new property. It's a big enough to movie to have a huge trailer and get people in the theaters

Guardians of the Galaxy is the exact opposite of a safe bet. And the middle of May is incredibly volatile, more bombs are released in the middle of May than successes. Not an ideal release date for a lesser known property on its own terms. Terrible release date for a lesser known property two weeks after Spider-Man.

[L0ngsh0t]

Originally Posted by Chewy

No... Marvel/Disney owns the merchandising rights for Spidey and get a sizable chunk of the box office take. They stand to gain nothing by hindering its success

TASM2 will happen. TASM will do at least ok when overseas profits come into play and Sony will turn a profit. And they aren't going to let the property lapse back to Marvel.

Guardians of the Galaxy is the exact opposite of a safe bet. And the middle of May is incredibly volatile, more bombs are released in the middle of May than successes. Not an ideal release date for a lesser known property on its own terms. Terrible release date for a lesser known property two weeks after Spider-Man.

A space epic set in the same universe as the Avengers isn't a safe bet? Disagree strongly assuming the movie is up to the same standards we've come to expect from Marvel

[Chewy]

Yes a space epic set in the same universe as the Avengers with none of the characters from the Avengers is not a safe bet.

[L0ngsh0t]

Originally Posted by Chewy

Yes a space epic set in the same universe as the Avengers with none of the characters from the Avengers is not a safe bet.

Prometheus seems like it's gonna do just fine and that's rated r and no one would have any clue it's connected to alien if they didn't read the internet.

Gotg with trailers as strong ans prometheus could do some serious box office numbers

[Chewy]

Of course it could. It could also not.

I'm not saying it is going to fail. I'm saying Marvel is going to make sure they give it every opportunity to not fail.

[Ash Talon]

I had a giant post explaining why GotG can succeed and how Ultron could work for Avengers 2 or 3, and it all disappeared. I've had that happen way too many times on this site.

I think the post-credits scenes in IM3, Thor 2, and Cap 2 are key. They can either introduce the GotG and/or feature Thanos causing havoc. GotG could deal with the team forming, defeating some menace, and then getting trashed by Thanos. This would all lead to Avengers 2. They can market it as a set-up for Avengers 2, and it'll do fairly well at the box-office. GotG doesn't need to do IM numbers, but it can do Cap numbers.

Or they can use the upcoming post-credits scenes to introduce Hank Pym. Have him working on a sentient computer system called Ultron for SHIELD . He's pulled off of the project to work on something else, maybe his shrinking formula for spy-based applications. Pym becomes Ant-Man and has adventures as him. I think Wasp needs to be in there, so they can be a romantic, investigative duo...maybe taking on AIM who is an evil splinter group of SHIELD. All the while, Ultron has been running on its own. It feels neglected by Pym which causes it to scorn its creator and his new love Wasp. In Avengers 2, Ultron takes control of SHIELD. It uses their resources to cause havoc which the Avengers have to stop. Eventually, Ultron builds its own body and takes on the team itself.

I also like the idea of having Ultron making the Vision as its own Avenger. A potential replacement for any and all team members, in case they don't want to part of the team anymore which would play off of Hill's concerns at the end of Avengers 1. Ultron has programming in Vision to take down the Avengers, but Vision fights his own programming and joins the Avengers against his creator.

Or the Ultron story could be built to for Avengers 3. Leave the pre-Avengers 2 post-credit scenes as build-up for Thanos. Avengers 2 deals with Thanos. The post-credits scenes for films after Avengers 2 could build up the Ultron storyline. Avengers 3 deals with Ultron.

The only real concern I would have for Ultron is the similarity to Skynet. However, as long as nuclear armageddon is avoided and Ultron isn't a robot skeleton, we should be okay. Having Ultron create Vision in the first act could work. The Vision works along with the team on some adventure. In the seond act, Vision starts taking out each member of the team, one-by-one. Ultron could be using technology to turn each of the Avengers against each other as well, maybe too similar to Borg but it would allow for hero vs hero action. Some time in the 3rd act, when it looks like the Avengers are at their lowest, Vision rebels against Ultron (maybe due to Pym being threatened, Pym is Vision's grandfather afterall) frees the Avengers and joins them against Ultron.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by Chewy

May 3, 2013 - Iron Man: Extremis

Nov 15, 2013 - The Mighty Thor

Apr 4, 2014 - Captain America

Nov 21, 2014 - Captain Marvel (also starring Ms Marvel)

May 1, 2015 - The Avengers 2

You're putting a lot of stock in a left-field rumor that has very, very little foundation. If there was any truth to the rumor, don't you think that a *lot* more sites would be reporting it, and would've got the scoop long before some obscure British fanchick? Until I start seeing some real backup on AICN, SHH, CBM, Latinoreview, IGN, slashfilm, THR, Variety....I'm not putting any stock in it.

In the meantime, you leave out films that have a LOT more tangibility to them in the next couple of years: Ant-Man and GoTG....?

[Chewy]

That's just my wishlist. Obvi

I have no idea what the second 2014 movie actually will be. None of them is really more "tangible" than the others at this point, however

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by Chewy

That's just my wishlist. Obvi

I have no idea what the second 2014 movie actually will be. None of them is really more "tangible" than the others at this point, however

I'll just say that there've been a lot more reports, including direct interviews with Kevin Feige, regarding Ant-Man and GOTG. Maybe even Black Panther, on the outside. But the *only* mention of Ms. Marvel comes via hearsay from Joe Q, who probably knows about as much about MS's plans as Stan Lee (i.e., next to nothing).

[DrCosmic]

Originally Posted by L0ngsh0t

The stakes were raised and the vastness of the Empire was explored in pretty good detail with the armada of ships and the races through the galaxy and the ending on cloud city---this is all big concept stuff that is packed in a movie that is pretty character centric on our heroes

I would bet a lot and a lot of money what they are going to do is have Thanos be this present threat but not the main antagonist....however he plays a part in why the Avengers are together again and we are all aware of him as the guy doing the work.

Just because the destruction of the Universe is at stake does not mean we have to see it happen in A2....the threat would be enough.

I mean, I guess we're saying the same thing. The threat/stakes of Thanos will increase. I'm thinking that doesn't really preclude use of an Earth-based foe as the main antagonist, so long as that's within Thanos' plan.

[Alexei Belyakov]

What Marvel Studios needs to do, ASAP, is move Thor II. Even if it can produce a strong opening weekend, it will COLLAPSE on its second week when CATCHING FIRE hits. They're looking at a Domestic BO return under $150 Million if they don't move that film. As far as 2014 goes, I've said it before: no matter where you place GOTG, its not going to make Iron Man numbers. Maybe Thor numbers, that's it.