The Avengers 2! The Official News and Speculation Thread - Part 1

[Iceman]

This Hulk stuff is like Civil War to me. The kind of story you tell in a mature fully established universe maybe 7 or 8 films down the line. Way too early to have the impact those stories had in the comics.

[catintheengine]

Originally Posted by Mr. Dent

Guess you're going to be disappointed then, although I'm sure you're not actually thinking about why a PH movie can work and are just going off of gut reaction to Hulk being in space and seemingly portrayed as a villain in A3 (which wouldn't be the case anyway).


Planet Hulk is one of the best ways to make a Hulk movie and specifically offers the opportunity for Marvel to capitalize on what made Hulk so popular in the Avengers.

I have to respectfully disagree.

You claim that others are not considering why a Planet Hulk movie would work. I've love to hear an explanation, because I don't see any realistic way that it could.

From a story standpoint, you're looking at a vast departure from anything that has been done thus far. You're taking a character that has, traditionally, not done particularly well in solo films and putting him into a solo film in a setting that not one audience member can relate to. Unless there is going to be a lot of Bruce Banner character study, your audience isn't going to be able to relate to your main character for most of the movie.

That brings me to the logistics angle: For a Planet Hulk movie to work appropriately, you're going to be racking up the bill on the CGI department. You're looking at a HUGE financial risk on Marvel's part, considering that the Hulk has yet to have a solo film perform to the level that they want to see.

[MLSkinner]

It's called DRAMA! only bad storytelling will bring down the marvel cinematic universe and it won't happen with Fiege, Whedon, and Favreau's input. I agree it's too soon for the Planet Hulk plot but alot can happen between now and avengers 3. I mean phase 2 hasn't even started yet. I know at some point marvel/disney will have to go and try to make a deal with Fox to get to use the surfer or galactus at some point.

Originally Posted by Dark Raven

Hulk as the villain in Avengers 3 would be where the Avengers franchise starts going downhill for the 3rd movie. Just because Marvel has had success before with Hulk in the Avengers doesn't mean that they can just do anything they like with the characters and still expect the audience to respond in the same positive way.

[Spider-Vader]

People in the Hulk thread in the generic 'Marvel Films' section were saying that the WWH part maybe BS, but the Planet Hulk stuff could happen.

Their idea was that Thanos will, behind the scenes, send Hulk out into space at the end of Avengers 2. Thus, Planet Hulk gets to happen. And then they said that Thanos would be the one behind the destruction of the planet that Hulk grows attached too, thus leading for an unstoppable force to stop Thanos in Avengers 3. Sounds pretty cool to me. Much better than turning either Hulk or the members of the Illuminati into villains.

If Planet Hulk DOES happen, I wonder if Beta Ray Bill will be in it like he was in the animated movie. If so, I assume that means Thor 3 would come out before Planet Hulk to introduce the character. That would be incredible, Thor & Beta Ray fighting Surtur? Yes please!

[cherokeesam]

I doubt you'd see some of the most crucial characters in PH/WWH in the MCU, purely for cross-studio logistics. No Surfer, for instance, or Brood.

I think, in general, for Planet Hulk to work on film, GOTG has to be successful first. Because both (prospective) movies do essentially the same thing --- transport a human earthling to an interstellar world/universe and introduce a buttload of brand new alien characters that nobody has ever heard of, and that are still too "young" in comic years to have actually developed a real fanbase (except for GOTG's Rocket Raccoon). If, god forbid, GOTG bombs miserably, it will severely reduce the likelihood of a Planet Hulk movie from succeeding, either.

[I'm Venom]

If they aren't saving Thanos for the third film, I think that they'd keep things simple.

[Mr. Dent]

Originally Posted by catintheengine

I have to respectfully disagree.

You claim that others are not considering why a Planet Hulk movie would work. I've love to hear an explanation, because I don't see any realistic way that it could.

From a story standpoint, you're looking at a vast departure from anything that has been done thus far. You're taking a character that has, traditionally, not done particularly well in solo films and putting him into a solo film in a setting that not one audience member can relate to. Unless there is going to be a lot of Bruce Banner character study, your audience isn't going to be able to relate to your main character for most of the movie.

That brings me to the logistics angle: For a Planet Hulk movie to work appropriately, you're going to be racking up the bill on the CGI department. You're looking at a HUGE financial risk on Marvel's part, considering that the Hulk has yet to have a solo film perform to the level that they want to see.

Originally Posted by Mr. Dent

Alright had time to think about this and it makes perfect sense with a few conditions:

1. The MCU version of the Illuminati is the World Council
2. They use the Ultimates 2 plot thread and have them ship him off because he's being accused of killing hundreds of people
3. WWH is only an element of A3 and not the entire focus.

Given that, I think it's a great route to go with the character. The reason everyone loved Hulk in the Avengers was because it was fun watching him kick Chitauri ass and hit Loki and Thor around. With a Planet Hulk movie, instead of having him chased around by the military, we can watch him pound on aliens and conquer a planet. It creates the opportunity to have a movie that plays on the comedic and high action value of the Hulk, something we haven't had in a Hulk movie yet. It would be like Kratos from GoW. Has the potential to be gold if done correctly. Zach Snyder for director!

Post I made in another thread summing up why I think it's a good idea and natural progression of the character. Also I don't think that second caveat I mentioned has to be strictly followed, though the other two do. I just mentioned that because it would be a nice way to tie the 616 and Ultimate universe plots together, like they did in the first Avengers movie.

You're right that this movie would require a hefty budget, but I'm willing to bet that Marvel is willing to bet on the Hulk. I think a large reason general audiences have such fond memories of the movie is due in part to the Hulk's scenes and Marvel realizes that.

[Hawkingbird]

I agree. Although they could simplify it.

[Mr. Dent]

Originally Posted by I'm Venom

If they aren't saving Thanos for the third film, I think that they'd keep things simple.

Yes, I think the battle against Thanos will be handled in A2 and it will be on a smaller scale than everyone is thinking. The Infinity Gauntlet will still be involved but Thanos will not kill half the universe and the battle will not involve dozens of heroes. It will be the current Avengers + Falcon + the Guardians and maybe Nova/Warlock. That's enough characters for a satisfying adaptation of the fight against Thanos while keeping it suitable for the big screen.

EDIT: Actually, now that I think about it, a pure Soul Gem arc might be what they'll use rather than the Infinity Gauntlet.

[I'm Venom]

Originally Posted by Mr. Dent

Yes, I think the battle against Thanos will be handled in A2 and it will be on a smaller scale than everyone is thinking. The Infinity Gauntlet will still be involved but Thanos will not kill half the universe and the battle will not involve dozens of heroes. It will be the current Avengers + Falcon + the Guardians and maybe Nova/Warlock. That's enough characters for a satisfying adaptation of the fight against Thanos while keeping it suitable for the big screen.

No, you don't want another X-Men 3.

[Spider-Vader]

If the cosmic heroes come into play, it'd most likely be during the third act of the movie & they'll just show up to fight. The Avengers would still be the focus of the movie.

[Mr. Dent]

Thanos is directly related to Drax and Gamora. The Guardians wouldn't just show up, they'd be intimately involved.

[Spider-Vader]

There can be easy explanations for why they're not in the whole movie. Like the fact that they could be light years away from Earth while Thanos wrecks the place.

[Mr. Dent]

Why would they even do that? It's a silly excuse at best and for this plot to work there needs to be a couple cosmic heroes in it as well as the Avengers. It wouldn't be a fun adaptation of the comic if only 6-7 people are fighting Thanos not to mention seeing the Guardians and Avengers interact would be great theatre and off new dynamics for the movie.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by Mr. Dent

Why would they even do that? It's a silly excuse at best and for this plot to work there needs to be a couple cosmic heroes in it as well as the Avengers. It wouldn't be a fun adaptation of the comic if only 6-7 people are fighting Thanos not to mention seeing the Guardians and Avengers interact would be great theatre and off new dynamics for the movie.

Drax and Gamora are almost a necessity to a fight against Thanos, due to insider information about him; and if they're both there, there's no reason that the whole Guardians team wouldn't be there, too.

I'd say it's a reasonably safe bet that the Guardians will at least cameo in TA2.

[I'm Venom]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

Drax and Gamora are almost a necessity to a fight against Thanos, due to insider information about him; and if they're both there, there's no reason that the whole Guardians team wouldn't be there, too.

I'd say it's a reasonably safe bet that the Guardians will at least cameo in TA2.

There are so many characters that it's kind of a problem. Not every character can appear in the Avengers because then the film ends up being unfocused and risks not being as good.

[Mr. Dent]

I'm sure Joss can handle it. Some characters like Groot and Rocket Racoon don't need any development in the movie or much screen time besides comic relief once or twice. Drax and Gamora only need to be explicitly focused on in the Thanos fight, same with Adam Warlock if he is in the film. The only cosmic character that really needs to be focused on throughout the film if the Guardians are a major part in it is Star Lord...and maybe Nova if he is in the film (as he should be).

As for the Avengers themselves, we've already seen them assemble so that part is out of the way. Now comes the testing of the team. At first you would think this would mean that the team needs even heavier focus, but not necessarily. It's possible Whedon found a way to torture the team that doesn't require the need to be sparked by one event and doesn't need the team to be in one area like in the Avengers, and would naturally involve the Guardians as well. Not to mention the ultimate culmination will probably not come until the tail end of the movie anyway.

[metaphysician]

Or, I could be right, and the villain simply isn't Thanos.

[Mr. Dent]

It can't be anyone but Thanos. It's not going to be Ultron. All the other villains being introduced in Phase 2 aren't worthy and I doubt they're going to do a Loki redux. The only thing I can see being even slightly viable besides Thanos is if Baron Zemo is in Cap 2 and he gets a Masters of Evil together, which is far less likely than Thanos just being the villain.

[Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Mr. Dent

It can't be anyone but Thanos. It's not going to be Ultron. All the other villains being introduced in Phase 2 aren't worthy and I doubt they're going to do a Loki redux. The only thing I can see being even slightly viable besides Thanos is if Baron Zemo is in Cap 2 and he gets a Masters of Evil together, which is far less likely than Thanos just being the villain.

Mandarin would be worthy. No?

[Mr. Dent]

He's an Iron Man villain, not an Avengers villain. Loki worked for the novelty that in the comics he really was the first villain the Avengers fought. Pulling a villain like the Mandarin to fight against the Avengers isn't going to work every film.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by metaphysician

Or, I could be right, and the villain simply isn't Thanos.

Let me put it this way:

One does not simply...
a) show Thanos at the end of the Avengers;
b) have Thanos be the "head gangster of the Nine Realms" lurking offscreen in the shadows throughout the entirety of the Avengers movie;
c) have Thanos promise to hunt Loki down like a dog if he fails to deliver the Tesseract....and then have Loki fail to deliver the Tesseract;
d) show the frickin' Infinity Gauntlet in Odin's Treasury in the first Thor movie;
e) introduce a major character in GOTG who is the bodyguard of Thanos;
f) introduce a major character in GOTG whose sole purpose in life is to assassinate Thanos;

and then not have Thanos be the main villain.

[herolee10]

Whoever came up with the idea that they should do a Planet Hulk film for the MCU but have Thanos being responsible for sending him up there instead and avoid having a World War Hulk film where Hulk goes into battle with all of the other heroes; I applaud and fully support that route.

Honestly, I’m tired of seeing the Hulk as either a misunderstood character or a neutral form of chaos where he’s placed in convenient situations that aims his anger at the enemy as opposed to the good guys.

I want to see the Hulk portrayed as somewhat more intelligent and more of a prominent force for good and how he overcomes the whole obstacle of getting the majority to eventually see that he his a force for good and not the monster that they keep making him out to be just because of his appearance and temper at times.

[Crimson King]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

Let me put it this way:

One does not simply...
a) show Thanos at the end of the Avengers;
b) have Thanos be the "head gangster of the Nine Realms" lurking offscreen in the shadows throughout the entirety of the Avengers movie;
c) have Thanos promise to hunt Loki down like a dog if he fails to deliver the Tesseract....and then have Loki fail to deliver the Tesseract;
d) show the frickin' Infinity Gauntlet in Odin's Treasury in the first Thor movie;
e) introduce a major character in GOTG who is the bodyguard of Thanos;
f) introduce a major character in GOTG whose sole purpose in life is to assassinate Thanos;

and then not have Thanos be the main villain.

Couldn't agree more. At this point, he's all but 100% confirmed to be the main villain.

[herolee10]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

Let me put it this way:

One does not simply...
a) show Thanos at the end of the Avengers;
b) have Thanos be the "head gangster of the Nine Realms" lurking offscreen in the shadows throughout the entirety of the Avengers movie;
c) have Thanos promise to hunt Loki down like a dog if he fails to deliver the Tesseract....and then have Loki fail to deliver the Tesseract;
d) show the frickin' Infinity Gauntlet in Odin's Treasury in the first Thor movie;
e) introduce a major character in GOTG who is the bodyguard of Thanos;
f) introduce a major character in GOTG whose sole purpose in life is to assassinate Thanos;

and then not have Thanos be the main villain.

Where's a meme of Sean bean as Boromir when you need one for posts like these.lol