MCU Phase 3: Have it your way

[MessiahDecoy123]

You guys do realize Marvel Studios planned three phases leading up to Avengers 3, a full decade in advance.

[KangConquers]

Originally Posted by DrCosmic

So... does that transfer into more money than a B-list Avenger? Or Marvel doesn't care about money, they're more concerned with giving character priority based on their level in comics?



Thaaaat makes such a mind-numbing amount of sense it's not funny. Perfect crime/law procedural with a unique hook doable on a TV-scale. Law and Order: MCU, basically.

I'd say Daredevil is more famous than any B-list Avenger.

[Saitou Hajime]

Originally Posted by Edguy

What I was questioning wasn't really if street level heroes like DD or The Punisher would have anything to do in the MCU, but rather if they'd feel as serious and menacing as they should, when there are so many way more powerful heroes and villains around..

I just don't see it fitting together.

Uh, that's the point. They're street level, they're not supposed to fit in with the big time heroes and villains.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by DrCosmic

So... does that transfer into more money than a B-list Avenger? Or Marvel doesn't care about money, they're more concerned with giving character priority based on their level in comics?



Thaaaat makes such a mind-numbing amount of sense it's not funny. Perfect crime/law procedural with a unique hook doable on a TV-scale. Law and Order: MCU, basically.

Affleck's Daredevil made significantly more b.o. than Blade, Punisher, Hellboy, Kick-Ass or Chronicle, and some or all of those usually make fanboys' Top 10 lists. A Marvel Studios-backed DD set against the backdrop of the MCU stands a great chance of making far more than, say, Ant-Man, Dr. Strange, Ms. Marvel and possibly even Black Panther.

[MessiahDecoy123]

It's really hard for a street level superhero to make over 125 m domestic.

Even Hulk barely crossed that number after two attempts.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123

It's really hard for a street level superhero to make over 125 m domestic.

Even Hulk barely crossed that number after two attempts.

If your budget is 30 million, and you make 125 mill domestic, I'd say that's a big enough incentive to greenlight.

Some folks around here tend to forget that when Marvel Studios first hung out their shingle, they said that in addition to those two $150 million(ish) tentpoles they planned to produce annually, they would put out smaller films with budgets around 30 million. So far, that hasn't materialized yet, but it *was* in the original business plan, and now they've got the backing of Uncle Mickey as well. I can't see Marvel just sitting on a whole subculture of street level "Marvel Knights" heroes that can be produced on the cheap.

[KangConquers]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

If your budget is 30 million, and you make 125 mill domestic, I'd say that's a big enough incentive to greenlight.

Some folks around here tend to forget that when Marvel Studios first hung out their shingle, they said that in addition to those two $150 million(ish) tentpoles they planned to produce annually, they would put out smaller films with budgets around 30 million. So far, that hasn't materialized yet, but it *was* in the original business plan, and now they've got the backing of Uncle Mickey as well. I can't see Marvel just sitting on a whole subculture of street level "Marvel Knights" heroes that can be produced on the cheap.

I think we'll start to see smaller films by the beginning of next decade, but I think the current focus is Avengers, and using 4-5 tent poles to inform a new Avengers movie for each of the 3 phases.

[DrCosmic]

Originally Posted by KangConquers

I'd say Daredevil is more famous than any B-list Avenger.

You quoted a question about money, just fyi. Or are you saying that Marvel Studios prioritizes movies based on famous-ness?

Originally Posted by Dr Tactics

Its always about money bottom line..

Daredevil is like Batman, the Sopranos & Law & Order in one shot. That'll translate well with the general audience if done faithfully. It's one of the few Non-Avengers that can hold its own in a solo film set within the MCU but independent of the Avengers so maybe not more money but I think as much as any B-List Avenger (If translated faithfully) and as was said before the gap between Fox's DD and the reboot would be decent

They can go either way and win with DD

I think that if the primary reference for DD's success is TV shows, then he should be a TV show, and not a film. I agree it would make money, perhaps as much money as anyone else, it's hard to tell without any of the movies being made, but I'm not sure where the priority comes from.

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

Affleck's Daredevil made significantly more b.o. than Blade, Punisher, Hellboy, Kick-Ass or Chronicle, and some or all of those usually make fanboys' Top 10 lists. A Marvel Studios-backed DD set against the backdrop of the MCU stands a great chance of making far more than, say, Ant-Man, Dr. Strange, Ms. Marvel and possibly even Black Panther.

Hmmm... Keep in mind all those films were made for pennies compared to Daredevil, and none of them had 'The Avengers push.' If having the MCU in the background would boost DD's financials, wouldn't having the MCU in the foreground (becoming an Avenger) boost Strange/Marvel/Panther even more?

I mean, we've argued about the pitfalls of reboots enough, none of them (at least those within twenty years of each other) ever seem to do much better than the original, from Hulk to Batman, to Spider-Man. Pretty much the same box office or less. And let's face it, 100M for an MCU film would be really bad.

[metaphysician]

Originally Posted by Edguy

What is with all you people suggesting Planet Hulk as a part of the MCU? Isn't that kind of obviously NEVER going to happen? Anyone with half a brain should see something like that never working for live action..

And characters like DD, The Punisher etc., wouldn't they kind of loose their weight in a universe with characters like Thor and Hulk flying around?

Um, you mean like they lose their weight in the Marvel comics?

[metaphysician]

Anyway, I think one likely angle they could use is introducing characters as centerpieces for different portions of the MCU. Then, use that intro as an anchor to spread further out.

So, they make a Dr Strange movie. Its largely its own thing, unconnected to the Avengers or SHIELD. However, it introduces the supernatural world, and provides anchoring for if they do future movies, like Nightstalkers or a rebooted Ghost Rider or such. Or they take the returned Daredevil rights, and make a movie, showing some of the street level stuff... which then makes it easier to do future movies involving other vigilantes, or people like Heroes for Hire.

Basically, the concept of connectedness doesn't always have to mean connections back to the Avengers.

[MarvelKnight]

Originally Posted by metaphysician

Basically, the concept of connectedness doesn't always have to mean connections back to the Avengers.

[KangConquers]

Originally Posted by DrCosmic

You quoted a question about money, just fyi. Or are you saying that Marvel Studios prioritizes movies based on famous-ness?

I think with the exception of the rare overachieving movie like Iron Man, and the rare underachiever like the Hulk, comic book movie performance is connected to popularity.

That said Marvel's goal seems to be tying things to the Avengers, something Daredevil has very little affiliation with (I don't consider the Luke Cage team that only has two classic Avengers an "Avenger" team.) Daredevil's relevance to the MCU is questionable, even though I have no doubt he could outperform any Avenger in BO outside of the Big 4.

Originally Posted by DrCosmic

...And let's face it, 100M for an MCU film would be really bad.

The key to making a profit on movies that make less is to give them smaller budgets. problem solved.

[Chewy]

Comic book popularity really means nothing when it comes to box office. I have every doubt that he could outperform other Avengers. People automatically relate the character to the awful Affleck movie, and there's nothing to differentiate the film on a visual level.

Doctor Strange, Guardians of the Galaxy, Inhumans, Namor, Nova, etc. There are opportunities to make large-scale movies that directly relate to Avengers with them. Which means a hell of a lot more than how long their solo comic properties lasted. Daredevil is what he is, and at this point even a fantastic Daredevil movie is fighting an uphill battle to find an audience.

If you want to talk about a smaller budget movie, which is what I'd picture Ant-Man and Black Panther movies as, too, then it could do fine for itself. There just isn't much potential to make a really big Daredevil blockbuster.

[Chewy]

Anyway, if I'm trying to leave my personal preferences out of it, this is how I'd see Phase 3:

Mortal locks:
Ant-Man (Edgar Wright wants to make, so shall it be)
Avengers 3
Captain America 3
Thor 3

Good bets:
Iron Man 4 (Depends on how Iron Man 3 does, and the stipulations of Downey's new contract)
Guardians of the Galaxy 2 (Depends on how the first does)
Doctor Strange (Feige has a serious boner for the good doctor)
Black Widow (Feige wants to make, ScarJo wants to make, potential low risk/high reward scenario)
Black Panther (appeals to an audience other movies may not, another potential low risk/high reward film)

Possibilities, wouldn't put money on it:
Hulk 2 (expensive)
Namor (expensive)
Daredevil (no real hook)
Captain Marvel (depends on the overarching storyline they're going with for Phase 3)
Inhumans (again, depends where they want to go)

[Dr Tactics]

Originally Posted by Chewy

Anyway, if I'm trying to leave my personal preferences out of it, this is how I'd see Phase 3:

Mortal locks:
Ant-Man (Edgar Wright wants to make, so shall it be)
Avengers 3
Captain America 3
Thor 3

Agree with the locks

Good bets:
Iron Man 4 (Depends on how Iron Man 3 does, and the stipulations of Downey's new contract)
Guardians of the Galaxy 2 (Depends on how the first does)
Doctor Strange (Feige has a serious boner for the good doctor)
Black Widow (Feige wants to make, ScarJo wants to make, potential low risk/high reward scenario)
Black Panther (appeals to an audience other movies may not, another potential low risk/high reward film)

I don't know about a GoG2 cause without the threat of Thanos what are they? I actually think this Movie is just a setup for the Thanos threat present. They may make GoG 1 and done

If Downey Wasn't Iron Man they could Make Don Chedle Iron Man for Iron Man 4. I worked for the comics it can work on film. There just wouldn't be a Iron Man 5 if they couldn't get Downey back for that.

Black Widow solo movie may never get made over Dr Strange and Panther IMO though I'd love a good, ol fashioned spy/espionage film.

Possibilities, wouldn't put money on it:
Hulk 2 (expensive)
Namor (expensive)
Daredevil (no real hook)
Captain Marvel (depends on the overarching storyline they're going with for Phase 3)
Inhumans (again, depends where they want to go)

Hulk 2 (or 3 technically) will happen in phase 3 Locked
Namor on film depends on the working relationship between Fox and Marvel in respect to the FF. It's hard to introduce him without them I think
Daredevil, If they would make a movie could be low budget/high reward. by the time they get to DD the Affleck version will be a distant memory
and Captain Marvel as you've insinuated, has to introduced along with one of the Avenger movies Kree storylines.

[Chewy]

Originally Posted by Dr Tactics

I don't know about a GoG2 cause without the threat of Thanos what are they?

The guys who fight to keep the Galaxy safe? Annihilation, War of Kings, Infinity Watch. There's plenty of stuff to pull from that would make big, grand space epics. The Guardians are bigger than Thanos, even if Thanos is the thing that got them through the front door.

If Downey Wasn't Iron Man they could Make Don Chedle Iron Man for Iron Man 4. I worked for the comics it can work on film.

lolno. Would be a gargantuan disaster. No one on the planet wants to see that, not even Don Cheadle.

Hulk 2 (or 3 technically) will happen in phase 3 Locked

Not really. There's not much to pull from. I like Leader but he's a pretty cliche supervillain.

Hulk is expensive to render and another Hulk movie would be 90% Banner 10% Hulk again. He works best in a team setting on film.

[Captain Marvel]

I don't know about a GoG2 cause without the threat of Thanos what are they?

Universal Church of Truth
Kree/Skrull War
Annihilation Wave
Phalanx Invasion
War of Kings
Cancerverse

A trilogy of movies barely scratches the surface of the epic stories that can be told with the Guardians of the Galaxy.

[Chewy]

Originally Posted by Captain Marvel

Cancerverse

The Revengers would be a ton of fun

[Dr Tactics]

Originally Posted by Chewy

The guys who fight to keep the Galaxy safe? Annihilation, War of Kings, Infinity Watch. There's plenty of stuff to pull from that would make big, grand space epics. The Guardians are bigger than Thanos, even if Thanos is the thing that got them through the front door.

There's the answer to that question. LOL!! I submit to those points

lolno. Would be a gargantuan disaster. No one on the planet wants to see that, not even Don Cheadle.

Though I'm LOLing with you. I'd like it. I'm a Chedle fan so shoot me LMAO!!!

Not really. There's not much to pull from. I like Leader but he's a pretty cliche supervillain.

Hulk is expensive to render and another Hulk movie would be 90% Banner 10% Hulk again. He works best in a team setting on film.

If they were to really think about the Planet Hulk move I'd be for it. Say in Avengers 2 he loses control and deemed too dangerous to stay on earth cause he's to powerful of a loose cannon. and CGI is not as expensive as it used to be as computers process info faster and faster these days and The CGI takes the place of a whole actor.

I dunno.. Maybe

[Captain Marvel]

If they were to really think about the Planet Hulk move I'd be for it. Say in Avengers 2 he loses control and deemed too dangerous to stay on earth cause he's to powerful of a loose cannon. and CGI is not as expensive as it used to be as computers process info faster and faster these days and The CGI takes the place of a whole actor.

I dunno.. Maybe

Planet Hulk would be good, but ONLY if the Avengers and SHIELD aren't the ones to shoot Hulk into space. There's no reason at all they need to **** all over the heroes in the MCU to make that story work, and having it go down that way WOULD **** all over them, just as it did in the comics. Audiences would be thinking that the rest of the Avengers are complete douchebags for betraying the Hulk like that instead of helping him, or they wouldn't care about what happens to the Hulk if he did something so terrible that justified their doing that to him. It's a crap set-up no matter which way you slice it.

The only reasonable way to set it up in the films would be A) He ends up on Sakaar by accident. Iron Man almost ended up stranded in space in Avengers, so there's no reason that the same can't happen to the Hulk. Or B) A villain is the one who exiles him into space. The Leader would be a great choice for that. The important thing wouldn't be how Hulk gets to Sakaar, but what he does when he gets there.

Although as previously pointed out, the CGI for the Hulk was horrifically expensive. Planet Hulk would only work if he was the Hulk for 99% of the film, and there's no way they'd be able to afford to CGI the Hulk for the majority of the whole movie, nevermind all the other special effects which would be necessary.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Originally Posted by Captain Marvel

Universal Church of Truth
Kree/Skrull War
Annihilation Wave
Phalanx Invasion
War of Kings
Cancerverse

A trilogy of movies barely scratches the surface of the epic stories that can be told with the Guardians of the Galaxy.

Agreed, Annihilation alone would make 3 amazing movies and the GOTG would have to be involved as they all were in the comics except Groot and RR, but it wouldnt be a problem to incorporate them.

[Dr Tactics]

Originally Posted by Captain Marvel

Planet Hulk would be good, but ONLY if the Avengers and SHIELD aren't the ones to shoot Hulk into space. There's no reason at all they need to **** all over the heroes in the MCU to make that story work, and having it go down that way WOULD **** all over them, just as it did in the comics. Audiences would be thinking that the rest of the Avengers are complete douchebags for betraying the Hulk like that instead of helping him, or they wouldn't care about what happens to the Hulk if he did something so terrible that justified their doing that to him. It's a crap set-up no matter which way you slice it.

The only reasonable way to set it up in the films would be A) He ends up on Sakaar by accident. Iron Man almost ended up stranded in space in Avengers, so there's no reason that the same can't happen to the Hulk. Or B) A villain is the one who exiles him into space. The Leader would be a great choice for that. The important thing wouldn't be how Hulk gets to Sakaar, but what he does when he gets there.

Although as previously pointed out, the CGI for the Hulk was horrifically expensive. Planet Hulk would only work if he was the Hulk for 99% of the film, and there's no way they'd be able to afford to CGI the Hulk for the majority of the whole movie, nevermind all the other special effects which would be necessary.

You're probably right plus they signed Mark for 6 films so doing a Planet Hulk movie without him is illogical. But Maybe they can featured Sakaar in the second act. Plus, IMO by the time they make Hulk sequel I don't feel CGI will be as expensive to do as CGI isn't as expensive now as it was even 4-5 years ago. Just something to consider. Technology advancement makes Computer Graphics more efficient and cost effective. The actors cost as much as CGI these days in 3 to 10 mill per film. But considering they couldn't get a Cowboy Bebop movie off the ground cause of cost (I'm still mad about that too) A good Hulk solo movie may indeed not happen as suggested.

Hulk really isn't a team player and it's off to me that for all that I know of him in the comics that he's a such team character on the Cartoon and the direction seemingly in the movies. But I guess that the cheapest way to feature him cause nobody feels he can hold his own vs the cost

[KangConquers]

Originally Posted by Chewy

The guys who fight to keep the Galaxy safe? Annihilation, War of Kings, Infinity Watch. There's plenty of stuff to pull from that would make big, grand space epics. The Guardians are bigger than Thanos, even if Thanos is the thing that got them through the front door.

Every cosmic franchise in Marvel history has simply built on the previous ones, which means that Guardians can use elements of Mar-Vell, Adam Warlock, Quasar, Silver Surfer (the parts Fox doesn't have the rights to), and Infinity Watch books.

Originally Posted by Chewy

Not really. There's not much to pull from. I like Leader but he's a pretty cliche supervillain.

Hulk is expensive to render and another Hulk movie would be 90% Banner 10% Hulk again. He works best in a team setting on film.

Leader is obviously next in line, but I'm not really dying to see him the way I am other characters. I agree that he is kind of a cliche, and his place in Hulk's canon is much smaller than people make it out to be.

So many issues of the Hulk comic are "Hulk vs whatever we can throw at him" vs. "Hulk and his supervillains." It makes a Hulk solo movie of value really hard to do. He really has one of the strangest, least adaptable comic runs of any A-list character.

[KangConquers]

Originally Posted by Chewy

Anyway, if I'm trying to leave my personal preferences out of it, this is how I'd see Phase 3:

Mortal locks:
Ant-Man (Edgar Wright wants to make, so shall it be)
Avengers 3
Captain America 3
Thor 3

Good bets:
Iron Man 4 (Depends on how Iron Man 3 does, and the stipulations of Downey's new contract)
Guardians of the Galaxy 2 (Depends on how the first does)
Doctor Strange (Feige has a serious boner for the good doctor)
Black Widow (Feige wants to make, ScarJo wants to make, potential low risk/high reward scenario)
Black Panther (appeals to an audience other movies may not, another potential low risk/high reward film)

Possibilities, wouldn't put money on it:
Hulk 2 (expensive)
Namor (expensive)
Daredevil (no real hook)
Captain Marvel (depends on the overarching storyline they're going with for Phase 3)
Inhumans (again, depends where they want to go)

Chewy, how would you feel about a Defenders film? Not for phase 3, but maybe for phase 4? Hulk is a really difficult character to do solo, but with Ruffalo set to outlast his fellow Avengers (he will leave Phase 3 with 2-3 films left on his contract) maybe a team-up with Hulk, Strange and Namor can sub for Hulk solo films?

[tnr105]

Incredible Hulk 2- Leader as the main villain, Ross as Red Hulk to provide a physical threat. Maybe even introduce She-Hulk...at the end, they set differences aside. Team up to prevail. All that jazz.

Black Widow: Not a prequel. You can have her past coming back to haunt her and do her origin through that. Ivan Petrovitch. Alexei Shostakov. Yelena Belova. Since it'll be after Cap 2, have Bucky in there as the male lead/love interest. Since he ties into her past, and I prefer Natasha with him, and would like to see Mockingbird introduced for Hawkeye.

-Ant-Man. We know it's coming, but rumors are it may be pushed back until after Avengers 2. Hank Pym. Scott Lang. Safe to assume Janet would be in it?

-Doctor Strange: if the rumors about him being in Thor 2 are true...why not?

You get a sequel, 2 spinoffs, and introducing a new character? Not bad for phase 3.