Avengers/death of all hero's

[Hmarrs]

AVENGERS DEATH OF ALL HERO'S​

While I love the prospect of an Avenger movie.I was wondering could the Avengers Movie actually hurt the Marvel Hero's instead of helping them.
For instance will it be burnt out.
Can it be overkill.While the build up of the individual films,Hulk,Iron man,Captain America,Thor and a possible Antman is exciting as the play up to the Avengers will they have served their purpose to a point where they reach their climax in the Avengers.To a point where their solo films no longer matter?
In other words is it downhill from there????
By no means is that anything I want.However would this and can this be the pinnacle of no return?

Is it all downhill from there?Will people be interested in seeing them in solo films again?

Could the Avengers Movie be the death of all hero's???!!!​

 

[El Payaso]

I'm more convinced than ever that more will be less. Too many important characters will just turn any movie into a CGI crap fest. BAM BAM BRAKA BRAKA and in the end no possible substance.

Iron Man 2 started a very good movie, but when all those iron men and SHIELD people started to appear the movie become unnecessarily complicated and ended average action-saturated film.

 

[SuperFerret]

 

[david icke]

No, in terms of superhero spectacle the Avengers will be the pinnacle, or should be, but the solo movies will always have the advantage of more in depth characterisation, the whole movie dealing with one hero. The Avengers will be great in that department too in it's own way, seeing how these guys all bounce off each other, but when it comes to more personal stories, the solo movies will have the edge.
So, they will never be made irrelevant by the team up movies that have the bigger spectacle.
The Avengers will just make people want to see more of these guys anyway, whether solo or team up, and audiences will want to spend more time with one character at a time, to get the full picture of the hero.
It's just like the books, when the Avengers came out in the 60s I imagine it only helped the character's solo book sales, not hindered them.

 

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

I think that the Avengers movie should be their big "party" movie. It definitely can't be topped and it's why I'm against an Avengers sequel, what's the point? I'd rather see them continue Thor, Cap, Iron Man, and Hulk in their own separate movies. It'll surely be "downhill" after the big 2012 mash up, but as long as we get good movies from Marvel Studios, it doesn't matter to me.

 

[UnkillableMick]

AVENGERS DEATH OF ALL HERO'S​

Aren't you the gimmer who kept saying Wolverine would be in The Avengers?

I agree with this about as much as I agreed with that...

 

[Hmarrs]

Aren't you the gimmer who kept saying Wolverine would be in The Avengers?

I agree with this about as much as I agreed with that...

Ha,ha your a funny guy.An Avenger movie causing more harm then good is still somthing to consider!!!!So please stay on topic!!!!

OH AND ON YOUR PREVIOUS STATEMENT YES HE IZ!!!!!

 

[david icke]

Aren't you the gimmer who kept saying Wolverine would be in The Avengers?

dude, you're just proving yourself to being a troll by coming into a thread just to personally insult someone.
At least he's starting up a thread that has a bit a bit more thought behind it than the 100000,0000000th thread on 'What are ur favoorite Marvel moovies? Plz list them all so we can see your list and then we can hav a big list of them.'

 

[Hmarrs]

dude, you're just proving yourself to being a troll by coming into a thread just to personally insult someone.
At least he's starting up a thread that has a bit a bit more thought behind it than the 100000,0000000th thread on 'What are ur favoorite Marvel moovies?'

Thanks DAVE!!!!! YAY FOR DAVE!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[david icke]

Some people just can't read between the lines...

this thread is basically....'Where can the superhero movie go after the Avengers? Will we have seen it all?'
and the Wolverine one was ...'Will the studios ever negotiate terms to swap over characters?'
at least that's how they read to me.

 

[UnkillableMick]

dude, you're just proving yourself to being a troll by coming into a thread just to personally insult someone.
At least he's starting up a thread that has a bit a bit more thought behind it than the 100000,0000000th thread on 'What are ur favoorite Marvel moovies? Plz list them all so we can see your list and then we can hav a big list of them.'

I'm not a troll, I just don't like what this fellow is selling.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Well I like the idea of this thread. It promotes discussion of what Marvel would or could do post Avengers. I don't want another Avengers film until not even 3 years later. I think 4 or 5 years would be better. The Avengers films itself should be an event, not a franchise that should be rushed.

I believe that if the Avengers are successful thats when you start to get risker. Introduce more B-list and C-list characters (they all don't need solo films). Show that there are many heroes and villains in this MCU.

Also, Feige did want to introduce Cosmic characters. The scope of the Marvel MCU can be expanded to space. That adds more to the MCU.

Overall, if Marvel Studios can pull it The Avengers off right, the opportunites are endless instead of being the end.

In addition to their live action films, Marvel should also look to maybe create live-action tv shows and maybe animated movies along with Photorealistic CGI films.

btw I like the dancing bananas Hmarrs

 

[david icke]

I'm not a troll, I just don't like what this fellow is selling.

So, if you don't like the idea of someone's thread, you come in and personally insult them and tell them you're not interested? and that's *not* being a troll?
Hmarrs pov was quite clear in his OP, if you feel you don't have anything to contribute, don't post.

anyway...I have not yet seen Iron-man 2 , so was interested by what EP said about the second half, how a good solo sh movie degenerated into a sfx frenzy once more heroes came on the scene.
This is why Whedon is a good choice for Avengers I think, he'll keep the story balanced alongside the inevitable spectacle, it will be no mean feat to do this, but i think he can pull it off.

They will have to watch out for that kind of thing happening, Marvel should have gave Faverau the 3yrs he requested for IM2, but they did not want it to crowd out Cap and Thor the following year. So, already there has been creative compromise with the shared universe concept. IM2 could have been Fav's TDK if he had the three years, and maybe he would have had room to solve any MU overcrowding problems.

and PW made a good point about the cosmic movies etc, other types of Marvel movies that can surprise us still, even after we may feel we have seen it all with the Avengers.

 

[Hmarrs]

Some people just can't read between the lines...

this thread is basically....'Where can the superhero movie go after the Avengers? Will we have seen it all?'
and the Wolverine one was ...'Will the studios ever negotiate terms to swap over characters?'
at least that's how they read to me.

Thank you Dave that's exactly my point!!!
There Ideas and proposals that make for intelligent conversation.I don't undersatnd how people take things as personnel attacks.

I'm not a troll, I just don't like what this fellow is selling.

Well since you seem to know me so well why don't you tell me what it is exactly that I'm selling????

Well I like the idea of this thread. It promotes discussion of what Marvel would or could do post Avengers.

Parker Thank you!!!That's what these threads are for.

I believe that if the Avengers are successful thats when you start to get risker. Introduce more B-list and C-list characters (they all don't need solo films). Show that there are many heroes and villains in this MCU.

I thought the same,maybe have the original group disband or be loosley connected making guest appearances and fill the team roster with other Avengers:Hawkeye,Black Night,Black Panther Vision etc.etc.

Overall, if Marvel Studios can pull it The Avengers off right, the opportunites are endless instead of being the end.

I hope so.It will either be that or the pinnacle of Marvel films for a while.

btw I like the dancing bananas Hmarrs

Alright well thanks Parker!!!:

 

[SuperFerret]

What the hell's a "gimmer"?

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I think it means an antisocial person.

 

[Iron_Stark]

I'm more convinced than ever that more will be less. Too many important characters will just turn any movie into a CGI crap fest. BAM BAM BRAKA BRAKA and in the end no possible substance.

Iron Man 2 started a very good movie, but when all those iron men and SHIELD people started to appear the movie become unnecessarily complicated and ended average action-saturated film.

What? SHIELD people? You do know from very early on Iron Man has worked with Nick Fury and SHIELD. Fury was the one that recruited Iron Man to track down Mandarin in Madarin's first encounter with Iron Man.

Iron Man isn't going to pull a Batman and sneak into the local police commissioner's office to talk about the city's crimes, he's going to talk to Nick Fury about the world's problems. And part 2 was them getting to know each other.

Nick Fury and SHIELD is to Iron Man what Gordon and the GPD is to Batman.

 

[roach]

I dont think it will be the death of the superhero. Avengers is the start.

 

[Hmarrs]

What the hell's a "gimmer"?

What is a Gimmer?Heck if I know.Hey Ferret I love you Avatar animation.
Did you do it yourself?Also what's your take on the topic?

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

What? SHIELD people? You do know from very early on Iron Man has worked with Nick Fury and SHIELD. Fury was the one that recruited Iron Man to track down Mandarin in Madarin's first encounter with Iron Man.

Iron Man isn't going to pull a Batman and sneak into the local police commissioner's office to talk about the city's crimes, he's going to talk to Nick Fury about the world's problems. And part 2 was them getting to know each other.

Nick Fury and SHIELD is to Iron Man what Gordon and the GPD is to Batman.

Agreed. I don't understand why comic book fans of all people are the only ones with problems having Nick Fury and SHIELD in the film. We all wanted more Nick Fury and SHIELD and when we got it, people are angry about it. I definitely believe that if Nick Fury got less screentime or didn't appear in the movie at all, people would be even more pissed.

I dont think it will be the death of the superhero. Avengers is the start.

Exactly. If the Avengers is huge success, I can see many more characters introduced which means more $$$ for Marvel, more popular characters, and (possibly) more fans of comics.

I mean, Iron Man went from a B-list superhero to an A-list superhero with one good film. Imagine that Thor's as big a success (I won't say Cap since he is already a pretty popular character). Who's to say that no other Marvel superhero can end up as popular as Iron Man with a great film?

 

[SuperFerret]

My take on the topic is that this is all doomsaying, hence the video I posted. I doubt the Avengers movie itself will have a negative effect on the superhero movie genre.

 

[El Payaso]

Nick Fury and SHIELD is to Iron Man what Gordon and the GPD is to Batman.

You mean that in Batman Gordon appeared from nowhere in the middle of the movie and then disasapeared?

 

[Figs]

You mean that in Batman Gordon appeared from nowhere in the middle of the movie and then disasapeared?

Hahaha!

What he means is that SHIELD/Fury are in fact a fairly big part of IM's world as well as The Avengers. It's just in IM2 they didn't exactly introduce him that well since the real introduction was done as an end of credits scene in the first film.

They could have done it in a better fashion in IM2 but I guarantee that the relationship/friendship will be shown better in The Avengers film.

As for Hmarrs question. It's kind of hard to say what the outcome will be but I think The Avengers film will only help with Marvel's plans for one film universe. What it really comes down to is if the general audience gets sick of comic films overall and not just Marvel's films. As long as these films look entertaining(especially action wise)they will get the asses in the seats. Just look at how many similar non-comic book summer action films bring in the crowds time after time. Jerry Bruckheimer and Michael Bay come to mind. If TF3 makes a lot of money after the ****** sequel, that proves my point.

 

[Iron_Stark]

You mean that in Batman Gordon appeared from nowhere in the middle of the movie and then disasapeared?

Yeah kinda like Dent appearing out of nowhere and becoming the new DA or Werts and Ramirez just coming out of nowhere and giving us sob stories about sick mothers.

If those SHIELD people were unnecessary to Iron Man was it really necessary to have Gotham's detectives all over TDK?

And where did Nick Fury disappear to? He comes in the middle of the movie, talks to him in the donut shop, then his house and then in the second to last scene of the movie.

I don't get these complaints the Nick Fury just disappeared, either people forgot that he showed up at the end, didn't see the movie or just want something to complain about.

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

it's really too hard to say at this point. I think it's plausible, but I also believe huge success can continue post Avengers as well.

we'll see