Iron Man Sequels Iron Man Sequels or Avengers?

[Infinity9999x]

Most of you know the spoiler at the end of the Iron Man credits, with Sam Jackson appearing as Fury, it got me thinking about the Avengers movie and future Iron Man projects.

It looks like Iron Man is going to be a smash hit, and if it makes a ton of money, then will Marvel plan on doing a sequel, and if it does how does this effect the Avengers movie? We already know they're planning on making a solo Thor and Captain America. And even if they got started on both of those movies right now, we'd still have at least a two year wait until both were released. Add the Iron Man movie on to that, then we could be waiting 3 to four years until they start an Avengers movie, unless they decide to make some of the movies at the same time.

It poses a bit of a problem. If Marvel chooses to wait on the Avengers movie, then we'll probably get at least one IM sequel, but then we run the risk of RDJ being tired of the character once Avengers rolls around. On the other hand, Marvel could try to get the Avengers movie out quick, but that could have bad results too. If Hulk tanks and Iron Man ends up being the most popular Avengers character, then the fans could get annoyed that Iron Man is reduced to a supporting character in the Avengers, and that wouldn't be good either.

Then there is the option of filming an Iron Man sequel and Avengers movie at roughly the same time and have the Iron Man movie be set before or after the Avengers, but then Marvel would risk overexposure on the character, especially if the movies are released within a few months of each other.

It seems like it's a tricky thing to decide. What would you guys do?

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

Iron Man sequel in 2010...Avengers in 2012.

That's plenty of time for Marvel to get Thor and Ant-Man out....and Cap can be the focus of an Avengers movie, like in the first Ultimate Avengers DVD...

 

[Gamma Ra]

Both

 

[Infinity9999x]

Iron Man sequel in 2010...Avengers in 2012.

That's plenty of time for Marvel to get Thor and Ant-Man out....and Cap can be the focus of an Avengers movie, like in the first Ultimate Avengers DVD...

That would work, but with a four year wait we run the risk of some actors not wanting to reprise their roles. And also, how will marvel feel if some of the solo movies tank? Hulk could easily be a bust, especially with the non-existent marketing they've been doing, and I really don't know why Marvel wants to make an Ant-Man movie. He's just never been a very interesting character to me personally. If both of those fail, then will Marvel still want to green light Avengers?

 

[The Caped Knight]

Both

 

[RickO'Connell]

Hulk & Iron Man cross over movie & then Avengers

 

[samsnee]

If I had to choose, just Iron Man 2.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

That would work, but with a four year wait we run the risk of some actors not wanting to reprise their roles. And also, how will marvel feel if some of the solo movies tank? Hulk could easily be a bust, especially with the non-existent marketing they've been doing, and I really don't know why Marvel wants to make an Ant-Man movie. He's just never been a very interesting character to me personally. If both of those fail, then will Marvel still want to green light Avengers?

I believe RDJ signed a contract to appear in two more films...not sure about Norton.

Sure, there's a possibility one of the other character's movies might tank. Does that mean Marvel shouldnt even bother to try?

Marvel wants to make an Ant-Man movie because they have a very talented writer/director interested in the character, and because the character is one of Marvel's oldest. Blade wasnt a very well-known character either, but the right people got involved and turned that into a three film franchise...

 

[Devon_Farmer]

Robert Downey Jr. has said many times that he is a huge fan of Iron Man, and would do 20 or more films about the character, I don't think you have to worry about him growing tired.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I believe RDJ signed a contract to appear in two more films...not sure about Norton.

Yeah, I had heard that, and I was wondering if that meant that he was signed on for only Iron Man sequels, or if an Avengers movie would count as part of his contract.

Sure, there's a possibility one of the other character's movies might tank. Does that mean Marvel shouldnt even bother to try?

Marvel wants to make an Ant-Man movie because they have a very talented writer/director interested in the character, and because the character is one of Marvel's oldest. Blade wasnt a very well-known character either, but the right people got involved and turned that into a three film franchise...

Oh, I'm not saying Marvel shouldn't do an Avengers movie if one of the movies tank, but I'm only wondering that Marvel, being a company, might decide to scrap Avengers if two movies about two characters in the Avengers fail. They might get cold feet.

And I agree, Ant Man could turn out to be great, but I just don't see a huge market for him. Blade was an unknown yes, but Blade already had a few things going for him. People have always been interested in Vampires, and Blade had a bit of the theme of using a more scientific approach to explain and kill them, not just crosses and stakes, and that's been popular since I am Legend was written. And I know (for me personally) Blade is a more interesting character. A half man/half Vampire who hunts Vampires because he hates what they do to people.

Ant Man on the other hand, is a superhero who can be a real prick and beat his wife, and whose superpower really isn't that interesting. He can get big or really small. Now, I know a good writer can change everything, and I certainly hope I'm wrong, because I'd love to be surprised by Ant Man, but I just think Marvel's taking a risk in making him into a movie.

 

[DACrowe]

Iron Man 2 for 2011 and then wrap up that story against maybe Mandarin as the third installment with The Avengers in 2013, with Hulk (and no sequels), Cap and Thor (each with a solo movie) in there. Then add Scarlet Witch and maybe one other without origin movies and run with it.

Of course I could just settle for an Iron Man trilogy first (which Favreau wants) and it's not our call so....

 

[TheVileOne]

There are a couple good points to be made that Blade had a few things going for it that made it a sleeper hit. However look where Blade ended up. The disappointing third movie before a BOMB of a crappy TV series. The franchise ended on a sour note and died.

But we'll see with Ant Man.

I mean with the end of Iron Man you have a heavy expectation that The Avengers is on the horizon. But how will that work? What comes first? Do they launch Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, etc. and make sequels first? Or do they make 1 Iron Man, 1 Hulk, 1 Thor, and 1 Cap movie where they all tie into 1 Avengers movie? It'd be nice if we didn't have to wait 5-6 years to see Avengers.

I think it would be cool if they basically started writing outlines out and maybe film early stuff for the Avengers to use for the movie later on. So when Avengers comes out, its basically like all the movies converging together into Avengers.

 

[smooth3006]

Hulk could easily be a bust

why does everyone say that ? hulk will not be a bust, ang lee's was. i feel it will do numbers close to iron mans.

 

[Infinity9999x]

There are a couple good points to be made that Blade had a few things going for it that made it a sleeper hit. However look where Blade ended up. The disappointing third movie before a BOMB of a crappy TV series. The franchise ended on a sour note and died.

But we'll see with Ant Man.

I mean with the end of Iron Man you have a heavy expectation that The Avengers is on the horizon. But how will that work? What comes first? Do they launch Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, etc. and make sequels first? Or do they make 1 Iron Man, 1 Hulk, 1 Thor, and 1 Cap movie where they all tie into 1 Avengers movie? It'd be nice if we didn't have to wait 5-6 years to see Avengers.

I think it would be cool if they basically started writing outlines out and maybe film early stuff for the Avengers to use for the movie later on. So when Avengers comes out, its basically like all the movies converging together into Avengers.

That's what I was thinking. Iron Man leaves you expecting to see Avengers soon, but it would be kind of a let down if it takes 5 years to come out, and it will have pretty much faded from public consciousness if the other solo movies do bad.

I like the idea of all the movies converging in the Avengers, and it does seem that Marvel wants to take this route.

 

[SBrooks1]

I think it's real simple....

Iron Man 2 - Tony's alcoholism is explored in depth. Rhodes takes over for Stark in the Mark II suit. Rhodes experiences issues with the suit making him overly aggressive. Tony beats the alcoholism. Rhodes and Tony fight and then become friends in the end. Add in a appearance or a mention of Mandarin leading to....

Iron Man 3 - Full on battle with Mandarin with Tony defeating him at the end. Fury shows up at the end (with possibly other Marvel superheros who would be Avengers) and Stark agrees to join them. Which leads to....

The Avengers - quite possibly the biggest and most expensive Marvel (or overall) movie ever made for that matter

 

[TheVileOne]

It's not that simple because you have to take the other movies into account. AND these movies take a while to do. AND there's the looming threat of the SAG strike which is currently affecting how studios are doing business right now.

 

[Infinity9999x]

why does everyone say that ? hulk will not be a bust, ang lee's was. i feel it will do numbers close to iron mans.

That's exactly why everyone is saying it's going to be a bust. Hulk has lots of strikes against it.

1) Ang Lee's Hulk is still fairly fresh in the minds of the general public. We haven't had 8 years to forget it like we did with Batman and Robin to Batman Begins. When people hear a new Hulk movie is being made, their first reaction may be negative because of the last movie.

2) The advertising has been horrible for Hulk. I haven't seen a trailer on tv yet, and the general public is largely unaware that it's even coming out.

3) Because of the poor advertising people also don't know that Hulk is a reboot, not a sequel of Ang's film, and not connected to the old film in any way. They really need to emphasize that. Batman Begins did a better job advertising then Hulk has, and even then news stations were reporting it as a prequel and not a reboot.

Hulk could be in a lot of troubble unless Marvel gets their stuff together and starts marketing this thing better. Word of mouth is not going to work, especially this summer, there's too many other big name movies coming out that fans are talking about. The Dark Knight, Indiana Jones, and Narnia to name a few.

Hulk's getting overshadowed, and if Marvel doesn't do something, it could flop.

 

[TheVileOne]

Also Downey Jr. is already 43 years old. I mean that did add a lot to his performance because he wasn't some young stud. But it will be harder for him to keep playing this character for the next X amount of years.

 

[SBrooks1]

Also Downey Jr. is already 43 years old. I mean that did add a lot to his performance because he wasn't some young stud. But it will be harder for him to keep playing this character for the next X amount of years.

If Harrison Ford can do it, Robert Downey Jr. can too

 

[FaT_tONle]

IM 2 2010, IM3/Avengers 2013/2014... like POTC. Hulk will get a sequel hopfully. Thor and Ant Man And Captain for 2010/2011. It would be a four year gap max between Avengers and major characters.

 

[TheVileOne]

This is not one franchise guys. These are technically supposed to be multiple franchises converging together, plus trying to get all the actors together. So you can't just put a couple years on them and say get it done by then.

POTC, I mean the writers even said on the DVD that this was movie 101 on how not to do a movie. A lot of people were disappointed with how the sequels turned out.

Plus the SAG issue hasn't been resolved yet, that could keep things from happening right now.

 

[FaT_tONle]

That's beside the point... actors are going to have to be willing to go back to back with Avengers and their own movies if they go trhough with this. Maybe a two year gap max. That's what I meant. If Downey Jr need a year off and they decide to finish the IM trilogy first then Avengers moves to 2015... simple as that.

 

[DoomRulz]

Avengers won't happen for another three years at least. We need Captain America and Thor first. And we need some sort of introduction for Hawkeye, Quicksilver, the Black Panther (who probably won't get his own movie), Wasp, and Hank Pym.

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

Iron Man will probably have two sequels; The Incredible Hulk really should only have one; Thor, Ant-Man and Captain America don't need any sequels, I don't think, prior to the Avengers coming out.

I think it's reasonable to think that they could get out Iron Man 2 out in 2010, Iron Man 3 in 2012, Hulk 2 in 2010 or 2011, and get Thor, Captain America, and Ant-Man out sometime between now and 2012, so we can get The Avengers in, say, 2014.

 

[FaT_tONle]

Iron Man will probably have two sequels; The Incredible Hulk really should only have one; Thor, Ant-Man and Captain America don't need any sequels, I don't think, prior to the Avengers coming out.

I think it's reasonable to think that they could get out Iron Man 2 out in 2010, Iron Man 3 in 2012, Hulk 2 in 2010 or 2011, and get Thor, Captain America, and Ant-Man out sometime between now and 2012, so we can get The Avengers in, say, 2014.

Or that... same thing.