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

[jaqua99]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

Hemsworth is not Thor, nor Chris Evans Cap, nor Jeremy Renner Hawkeye, any more than Edward Norton "is" Hulk. A lot of people *****ed about the Ruffalo recast; and now I hear nary a word about it. The same people who hated on Ruffalo now love him, it seems. And they'll love whoever replaces him. Or Hemsworth. Or Evans.

Nobody's advocating recasting these guys right now. Least of all me. And when their contracts expire, I firmly believe very few (if any) of them are going to go quietly into that good night. RDJ just got FIFTY FREAKIN' MILLION DOLLARS for his role in Avengers. RDJ didn't create Iron Man; Iron Man created *him*. The role literally saved his life, resurrected his career, and made him the superstar he is today. When his contract expires, HE WILL NOT WALK. Trust me. Contracts are made to be renegotiated, and RDJ will do his goddamnedest to renegotiate and stay in the role.

These guys are fine actors, one and all. They've done a great job in defining their roles. But if you think they *created* these roles, you're off your rocker. These roles were created fifty years ago. Before most of these guys were even born. And these roles will live on long after these actors are gone.

I'm in awe, seriously. It's just sad; it doesn't make sense; and I really don't understand how you or anyone else could think that these ICONIC CHARACTERS who make up the very heart of the Marvel Universe should cease to exist as soon as their respective actors end their contracts.

Avengers without Iron Man? Without Cap? Without Thor? The Marvel Universe without these icons?
Holy ****. Just.....wow.
Really?

Please read it again. I never, NEVER said anything about avengers without ironman, cap, and thor. You tell me when I said that. I agree on that part. When did I say that?

All I said was that the avengers should END when these actors are done. These are the actors we have gotten used to playing the characters. Thats why I think it should be a 3 movie series, or 4. Not ongoing. Thats all I said. Hell, I want it this way so the avengers will ALWAYS have cap, thor, and ironman. And Banner.

And yes they are. We are getting used to seeing these guys play these heroes. To the point, when you think of Thor in the movie verse, you think of Hemsworth, etc. More so than Norton as Banner. So yes, seeing different actors playing them after 4 or 5 years, and probably 6 different films, to me, that will be a little tough. We are used to seeing these actors play the characters Sam. You are telling me, it won't feel just a LITTLE off, seeing different actors playing the heroes we are used to seeing?


Sam, I never said anything about removing Ironman, Thor, or Cap. That would be stupid. Please stop putting words in my mouth.

I NEVER said that. Which can lead me to think you actually didn't read my post.

Holy ****. Just..Wow. I can count atleast one other time you have done this to me in the past week or so. Granted, putting words in my mouth, that just so happens to be my pet peeve.

Idk, I mean, my opinion could just be because of my personal issues with change.




AND, do you really think RDJ will be back?? that'd be nice

[jaqua99]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

I know. And I was overexaggerating with my reply to jaqua, but it's just that he was so *flabbergasted* that anyone could think it's okay to recast these roles (eventually); so I'm telling him that I'm *flabbergasted* that anyone could think it's *not* okay to recast.

I see. I was overexaggerating as well lol. But, in my opinion, I mean, I have always been a person who has struggled with change, so maybe that could be it as well. I agree with never taking out Ironman, Cap, and Thor. I never said that Sam haha.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by jaqua99

Please read it again. I never, NEVER said anything about avengers without ironman, cap, and thor. You tell me when I said that. I agree on that part. When did I say that?

All I said was that the avengers should END when these actors are done. These are the actors we have gotten used to playing the characters. Thats why I think it should be a 3 movie series, or 4. Not ongoing. Thats all I said. Hell, I want it this way so the avengers will ALWAYS have cap, thor, and ironman. And Banner.

See, this is where I'm getting confused in what you're trying to say. In one breath, you say "I never, NEVER said anything about avengers without ironman, cap, and thor"; but then you say "All I said was that the avengers should END when these actors are done."

Are you implying, then, that there should be NO Avengers at all after Avengers 3....? Just three movies and then kiss the franchise goodbye...? Because that's even more awful than having an Avengers without the Big Three.

[jaqua99]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

See, this is where I'm getting confused in what you're trying to say. In one breath, you say "I never, NEVER said anything about avengers without ironman, cap, and thor"; but then you say "All I said was that the avengers should END when these actors are done."

Are you implying, then, that there should be NO Avengers at all after Avengers 3....? Just three movies and then kiss the franchise goodbye...? Because that's even more awful than having an Avengers without the Big Three.

However many it is, whenever The current actors won't be coming back, I think it should end then. There shouldn't be any avengers without the big three, and I don't think there should be any avengers with the big 3 re casted, Hulk also.

How is 3 movies a horrible idea? 3 Movies is horrible? I don't understand how??? I really don't. Unless people are fixed on the continuity thing. I mean, I see the whole, where else to go with marvel movies after, but not really.

But more or less, yes, this is what I am implying, I really don't see anything wrong with that. Keeping it a trilogy, or a series of 4 films, really doesn't seem that bad to me at all haha.

I really don't get how everyone thinks everything but an ongoing franchise is an awful idea. I know what fiege said, but still.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Ongoing continuity ruined the potential of the X-men franchise.

You couldn't do most of the original team for the prequel and it ruined the prospects of X-men 4 because crucial characters were dead and the realistic tone didn't fit some of the most popular villains.

[jaqua99]

Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123

Ongoing continuity ruined the potential of the X-men franchise.

You couldn't do most of the original team for the prequel and it ruined the prospects of X-men 4 because crucial characters were dead and the realistic tone didn't fit some of the most popular villains.

Exactly. I think people just don't want to see the avengers end. They want something big to look forward to always. I see nothing wrong with it being just a trilogy. Personally in my opinion you can't recast the big three in like ten years. You just can't. I think having it as even a trilogy is an fine idea. And the best way to go.

[R_Hythlodeus]

Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123

Ongoing continuity ruined the potential of the X-men franchise.

You couldn't do most of the original team for the prequel and it ruined the prospects of X-men 4 because crucial characters were dead and the realistic tone didn't fit some of the most popular villains.

WTF? No! Bad writing, worse acting/casting, mismanagement from the studio and one of the worst working directors killed the franchise

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123

Ongoing continuity ruined the potential of the X-men franchise.

You couldn't do most of the original team for the prequel and it ruined the prospects of X-men 4 because crucial characters were dead and the realistic tone didn't fit some of the most popular villains.

And you just pointed exactly why a trilogy is a horrible, horrible idea for the Avengers.

Fox made the X-Men into a trilogy movie series. Now they've painted themselves into a corner at both ends --- future and past. They can't go forward, because most of the principals are dead. When they go backward, they can't use most of the principals because you're too far into the past.

That's why Fox made an imbecile mistake, and Marvel Studios does *not* need to repeat that with the Avengers franchise. Leave the series open-ended, like God and Stan Lee intended, and you won't run into that problem.

[MessiahDecoy123]

LOL, a simple reboot would solve all the continuity problems Fox currently has with X-men.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Reboots get a bad rap but for the most part the major ones are successes (Batman Begins, Star Trek, Casino Royale).

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123

Reboots get a bad rap but for the most part the major ones are successes (Batman Begins, Star Trek, Casino Royale).

Yep, reboots get a bad rap for a reason. They water down the franchise. They make the studio look entirely inept, and show that they have no faith in their own product.

[MessiahDecoy123]

If reboots "water down" franchises...

ongoing franchises squeeze all the storytelling possibility out of them be creating endless continuity issues.

(see X-men 3, Wolverine and First Class)

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123

If reboots "water down" franchises...

ongoing franchises squeeze all the storytelling possibility out of them be creating endless continuity issues.

(see X-men 3, Wolverine and First Class)

um....what?

Ongoing franchises *establish* continuity; they don't create continuity issues. Feige has already said that even if/when they start recasting, they're not rebooting, so the continuity remains intact.

You're trying to insinuate that prequels set decades prior to X-Men create continuity issues. (I don't recall that at all --- maybe you can list whatever points of contention you have where XMOW and XMFC conflict with the continuity of Singer.) The Avengers franchise, however, has no reason whatsoever to go back to the past to prequel the story, because the team doesn't exist until 2012.

[Ramsay Bolton]

I would like to see this iteration of the Avengers as a story with a beginning, middle and end, personally. That doesn't necessarily mean a trilogy (I'd probably prefer a 4-5 film series, if only because the trilogy as a story structure is a bit overdone at the moment), but I would like to eventually reach a satisfying conclusion. Let the Marvel Movieverse stand as its own complete, dense story for future generations to come. If there were only 15-20 movies in total, I think we could all be happy (by "we all" I mean "I", thinking more about it).

[MessiahDecoy123]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

um....what?

Ongoing franchises *establish* continuity; they don't create continuity issues. Feige has already said that even if/when they start recasting, they're not rebooting, so the continuity remains intact.

You're trying to insinuate that prequels set decades prior to X-Men create continuity issues. (I don't recall that at all --- maybe you can list whatever points of contention you have where XMOW and XMFC conflict with the continuity of Singer.) The Avengers franchise, however, has no reason whatsoever to go back to the past to prequel the story, because the team doesn't exist until 2012.

Ongoing do create continuity issues by:

- introducing characters in the wrong order

- killing characters off prematurely

- introducing conflicting concepts/ideas

- establishing the wrong tone/themes/characterizations

- doing a piss poor version of a classic story arc ruining any chance at fixing it, etc.

All these things are impossible to fix with an ongoing continuity and can be cleared easily with a single reboot.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123

Ongoing do create continuity issues by:

- introducing characters in the wrong order

- killing characters off prematurely

- introducing conflicting concepts/ideas

- establishing the wrong tone/themes/characterizations

- doing a piss poor version of a classic story arc ruining any chance at fixing it, etc.

All these things are impossible to fix with an ongoing continuity and can be cleared easily with a single reboot.

The X-Men problems you're describing have nothing to do with the fact that it's an ongoing franchise; they have everything to do with directors and writers given free rein to make their own "stamp" on the movies, without input from Marvel at all.

With Marvel Studios overseeing the writing and directing, they're going to make damn sure that nobody screws over comic-book canon royally unless it's got the blessing of Feige.

[Tony Stark]

I'm so freaking sick of trilogies. Why does every freaking movie franchise have to be a trilogy. I think they should make all the Marvel properties like James Bond. Open ended with loose threads connecting the material. There is not need for a trilogy. I find that some films force the trilogy mold even when it doesn't fit. TDK is the perfect example, there's no need for that to be a trilogy. Why does it have to be a conclusion? There's no need for it.

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

And you just pointed exactly why a trilogy is a horrible, horrible idea for the Avengers.

Fox made the X-Men into a trilogy movie series. Now they've painted themselves into a corner at both ends --- future and past. They can't go forward, because most of the principals are dead. When they go backward, they can't use most of the principals because you're too far into the past.

That's why Fox made an imbecile mistake, and Marvel Studios does *not* need to repeat that with the Avengers franchise. Leave the series open-ended, like God and Stan Lee intended, and you won't run into that problem.

Feige has mentioned that if RDJ ever hangs up for good as Tony Stark, they'd continue the character like it were James Bond ie letting another actor play the role like he owns it from day one. I think after The Avengers' trilogy is over, and most of the principle actors decided to leave the franchise, Marvel can recast those roles with other actors instead of deep-six the entire franchise. I think it will be consistent with their decision re: Bruce Banner, because after Edward Norton failed to reach a deal with them, they did not take Hulk out of the movie, but cast Mark Raffalo as the new Dr. Banner instead. I won't be surprised if they will stick to this philosophy if they are forced to do the same with IM, Thor, Cap, etc.

[KangConquers]

Originally Posted by Artistsean

All you would need to keep the franchise going from the roster perspective is one or two members to stick around. If they add Ant Man and Wasp in Avegners 2 (which I think they should, once Wright has made Ant Man) then their contracts will have them signed up for 3 Avengers films. Which means that they will be signed up for Avengers 4 and 5. Then you can bring in more characters, a mythical character maybe to fill the void of Thor like Valkyrie or a Hulk type to fill the void of Hulk like She-Hulk. They can also bring in popular characters fans want to see like Scarlet Witch and Wonder Man, etc. So just to help I list some random Avengers to fill the roster.
You have Ant Man and Wasp, Valkyrie, She-Hulk, Black Panther, Wonder Man. And those actors would be signed up for Avengers 4, 5, and 6.
But Ant Man and Wasp would only be there till Avengers 5. So they leave the films and two or three more members are brought in.
Lets say that Vision, Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver are added to replace Ant Man and Wasp. And those new actors are signed up for three Avengers films too, Avengers 6, 7, and 8. (So now the roster is Valkyrie, She-Hulk, Black Panther, Wonder Man, Scarlet Witch, Vision, and Quicksilver.)
But the actors playing Valkyrie, She-Hulk, Black Panther, Wonder Man leave around 6 because their contracts are up. and the studio bring in four members to fill the void.
So lets say its Luke Cage, Swordsman, Spider-Woman, Ms. Marvel. And those actors are signed up for 3 Avengers films. Meaning there are signed for Avengers 7, 8, and 9. (Now the roster is Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, Vision, Luke Cage, Swordsman, Spider-Woman, and Ms. Marvel.)
But Scarlet Witch, Vision, and Quicksilver are only around till 8, so they leave because their contract is up and three other actors are brought in playing other Avengers. Lets just say Bucky Cap, Namor, and Firestar are signed up for Avengers 9, 10, and 11. (my math might be breaking down). But the idea goes on and on. You can keep filling the space left by actors leaving with new Avengers without ever recasting someone. You would never have to recast Captain America because there are enough Avengers in the comics to use.

To further illustrate my idea, and to clear it up (or maybe to make it more confusing)
And again these are Avengers mostly picked at random:
Avengers 1 (2012): Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Hawkeye, Black Widow, Hulk.
Avengers 2 (2014): Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Hawkeye, Black Widow, Hulk, Ant Man and Wasp.
Avengers 3 (2016): Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Hawkeye, Black Widow, Hulk, Ant Man and Wasp.
Avengers 4 (2018): Ant Man and Wasp, Valkyrie, She-Hulk, Black Panther, Wonder Man Vision.
Avengers 5 (2020): Valkyrie, She-Hulk, Black Panther, Wonder Man, Vision, Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver.
Avengers 6 (2022): Valkyrie, She-Hulk, Black Panther, Wonder Man, Vision, Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver.
Avengers 7 (2024): Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, Luke Cage, Swordsman, Spider-Woman, and Ms. Marvel.
Avengers 8 (2026): Luke Cage, Swordsman, Spider-Woman, and Ms. Marvel, Namor, and Bucky Cap.
Avengers 9 (2028): Luke Cage, Swordsman, Spider-Woman, and Ms. Marvel, Namor, and Bucky Cap.
Avengers 10 (2030): Namor, Bucky Cap, Thunderstrike, Firestar, Falcon, Photon, and Hercules.
Avengers 11 (2032): Thunderstrike, Firestar, Falcon, Photon, Hercules, War Machine, Tigra, Moondragon.
Avengers 12 (2034): Thunderstrike, Firestar, Falcon, Photon, Hercules, War Machine, Tigra, Moondragon.
Avengers 13 (2038): War Machine, Tigra, Moondragon, 3D Man (Triathlon), Black Knight, Mokcingbird.
Avengers 14 (2040): 3D Man, Black Knight, Mockingbird, Goliath (Bill Foster), Mantis, Beta Ray Bill

Of coarse the plots would have to be king. You can't just make the show go on and on with terrible stories. You don't want it to turn into some B movie and take superhero movies back in time to the 80s and 90s where they aren't that good. But the Avengers have enough enemies and stories from the comics that they should never run low on inspiration. We could see all sorts of fan favorite bad guys from the comics in the movies. So as long as the plots are well done like Avengers 1, Iron Man 1, Captain America 1, and Thor 1, you can still keep the franchise going for years. I just set it for every 2 years since its rumored that Avengers 2 will be in 2014, so if they kept it going it could go past 2030 even.

Don't like this idea at all. You need to have the key characters in the franchise. I don't want to watch the franchise degrade to C-list hell.

[AvengeME]

There is actually a method to the madness in Artistsean's lineup. I am not going to toss around a schedule extending to 2040 like the one above, but you have to be selective in terms of using the main characters.

Firstly, a trilogy is a bad idea. I share the sentiments of most people who are against the same model. Nothing to add to that. But the franchise will require mixing and matching. You can't bring in new characters without getting rid of the old. This is applicable to even the core three. Some characters need to be featured where at times other main characters can take a back seat.

I honestly think Hulk needs to take a rest from the franchise, if not in Avengers 2 then Avengers 3. You can only play the fan favorite card for so long. He wasn't a long time Avenger and left the team early on. Give him another solo movie if anything.

Thor has 9 different realms. He doesn't need to be in every Avenger movie. If they cannot integrate him smoothly into the plot then don't use him just for the sake of having him there. Thor needs motivation, be it Jane Foster is involved, or Loki, but he can leave to fate of the Earth to the hands of other Avengers from time to time. He is also a God and some stuff is simply beneath him.

Iron Man is getting older. The technology is quickly becoming outdated. In this universe, a character like Iron Man can quickly become obsolete. Once RDJ leaves the role, I wouldn't bring back the character for a while. Not until the character can re-invent himself and outperform current technology (in the movieverse). Eventually, you will have to take a Batman Beyond approach, because if there are no reboots and we are 10-15 years into the timeline, you can't have a 60 year old Stark suit up. The character itself needs to come to some sort of conclusion, like Indiana Jones. Otherwise you have no choice but to reboot if you cannot accept the inevitable.

Captain America will probably be killed off by the sixth movie (solo movies plus Avengers). Heroes/soldiers are born to pay the ultimate sacrifice. He's a pretty straight forward character anyway, so after six movies, I think the public will have more than had its fair share.

So if we get a trilogy, then every major character needs to be back. If not, then you can mix and match:

A2: Introduce Pyms, maybe Black Panther. Kill off or omit Black Widow/Hawkeye for a movie (I want to see a gritty prequel with those two eventually). Possibly relegate Banner to a limited role, or a cameo (if another solo movie is on the table).

A3: Thor gets a day off (as long as his solo movies are still relevant this won't be a problem). Cap, Giant Man, and maybe a handful of other characters get the brunt. This could be the swan song appearance for RDJ's Stark until he retires or decides to travel with the Kree into deep space in search of new technologies for the betterment of mankind. Whatever.

A4: Bring back Thor. Cap if he isn't already dead. The rest of the cast would be largely new.

A5: Return of the Hulk. Possibly Spiderman depending on what happens between now and then. This would be a good point for "New Avengers" while retaining iconic characters in the Marvel universe. At this point, it is hard to sell a franchise going on it's fifth or 6th film. I don't care how successful the first film is.

To avoid having a purely C-list roster or recasting iconic roles after such a quick turn around, you can nab the rights to your other A-list properties (Spidey/FF) and build a new team or franchise with that. Long ways away so no point discussing that.

I would try to extend the Avengers franchise for SIX movies. Three of those movies involve RDJ's Iron Man (probably A2 and A3). Cap and Thor hopefully make a fourth appearance (anywhere from A4 to A6). Hulk returns in some form much later in the franchise. Spidey is eventually introduced, or perhaps a cross over with the FF, to retain the epicness of the saga.

Realistically, a trilogy at the very least with the possibility of a fourth film with most of the core Avengers involved.

[Angamb]

I think its good that they wait 3 years for the sequel, to release sequels to main heroes and introduce a new one (or two)...

but after A2 they should shoot two sequels back to back.

That way, if some actors dont want to return, at least they would have 4 Epic Avengers movies.

Would be pretty fine, wouldnt it?

[AvengeME]

Eh... back to back is not gonna happen. You are looking at a budget of 500 million plus doing two films of that scale back to back. That would be lunacy even for todays standards, but who knows 5 years down the road depending on the economy. If Avengers 2 still manages to gross well over a billion and is critically well received then it may not be unrealistic. I can't see it, considering the budget and the commitment for everyone involved on a back to back production.

As much as we want to extend this franchise like Harry Potter, that can't happen either, unless you are continuously replacing characters and telling fresh stories that are loosely connected to one another. But that's what I want to see Marvel try to do. Rely on characters outside of the "Big 3". At the same time, these are event movies for a reason. They don't feature C-list characters batting at the bottom of the lineup. I think four films featuring at least 2/3 "Big 3" characters is the most we can ask for. RDJ does 2 more, Evans/Hemsworth do an additional film (4 total). At that point, you can re-cast Iron Man for IM4/A5/A6. Not that I would but if Phase II is as successful as Phase I, it will happen.

[Angamb]

everything is possible in this industry.

it wouldnt be the first studio to do two films back to back, and it would mean less costs.

So none should say "it wont happen", specially in movie industry.

[AvengeME]

There are also times when it should've happened but it didn't. It should've happened in Potter much earlier because they were concerned the kids would grow too old. They maintained a vigorous schedule nonetheless, but doing Azkaban/Goblet of Fire, or HP4/HP5 back to back was just amounting to be way too much. Either way each movie was a lock for close to a billion but it goes beyond budget concerns. It is just way too demanding on the people involved.

Raimi/Sony wanted to do Spiderman 3/4 back to back. Then again for 4/5. Didn't work out. Too much demand.

Now try doing Avengers 2/3 or 3/4 back to back. Good luck... The fact that Cameron is doing it is a miracle but even then, he is taking almost 5-6 years post Avatar. Even then, skeptics do not think he will be able to do both films and meet their target release dates. Look at all the hell the Hobbit had to go through, but at least Jackson was accustomed to it by then.

[OrangeCloud]

Marvel should figure a way to preserve the current actors at their current age and reuse them in a continuous Avengers series until I die. Afterwards, I couldn't care less about what happens to the property, nor the actors.

They've done it with Walt, they can do it with RDJ!