The Avengers Joss Whedon leading on "Avengers" short list of directors

[DocHoliday]

He does when he has several issues or episodes to flesh them out. I'm sure he'll do a good job, I am just not jumping to conclusions since he isn't really proven on a cinematic scale. Love me some Whedon though. Just being cautiously optimistic.

 

[Nivek]

Whoever made the comment about Angel Season 5 is dead on.

 

[Abraham]

the peak of whedon awesomeness for me though (and proof that he can do more than just strong female leads) is angel season 5. if can balance the big 3 (and that other guy) as well as he balanced angel, spike, gunn and wesley (although not in a directorial capacity admitedly) then this movie will avoid the "(insert your choice of the big 3 here) and the avengers" feel that has loomed over the idea of an avengers movie for me since it's first mention.

Never watched the show but that all sounds fantastic, especially the bolded part. I have been legitimately worried this movie was going to basically be Iron Man 3: featuring Captain America, Thor, and Hulk.

 

[Saint]

I'd be happier with Leterrier, but this is awesome too.

And to everyone who's going to ask me why I like Leterrier: He really seems to want to get involved with the character's actions, the way they feel. He let Edward Norton show some ideas about how the Hulk could look, and Leterrier made absolutely sure everything was perfect. TIH was five kinds of badass.

Whedon's good too, but Leterrier would dig deeper.

Wait, what? You're arguing that Louis Leterrier would be more in touch with and "dig deeper" into the characters than Joss Whedon? If this is what you're saying (and please, correct me if I'm misreading you), then it's apparent that you know nothing of the man's work.

 

[kedrell]

Whedon?

 

[rashad]

Never watched the show but that all sounds fantastic, especially the bolded part. I have been legitimately worried this movie was going to basically be Iron Man 3: featuring Captain America, Thor, and Hulk.

General audiences will probably still see it as "Iron Man 3" regardless. I said something similar when Avengers was first announced.

 

[flickchick85]

You didn't come across offended, I was just letting you know I wasn't trying to bash anything.

Another key thing in regards to Buffy is that my gf said she caught a few episodes when it was on and said it was pretty good. My gf isn't into girly/romance stuff so that's also a good sign that I might like that show. She liked Angel more though but that's because she likes Boreanaz and she got me into the show Bones last year.

Aha. Well, like I said, the show matured with the character, so the early years were very much focused on the romance stuff, because it was centered around a high school girl. Joss always used the literal demons and monsters as metaphors for the ones we all face growing up, so that was kinda the point. But the later seasons after she left high school were mainly about her becoming an adult and embracing her destiny as a leader. Very little romance/teen-angst stuff there, and much more existential angst.

As for that show vs. Angel, my 2 cents are that Buffy had stronger/more memorable individual episodes, while Angel had better long-term character arcs. So they were both great in their own ways. But if anyone's looking to check either of them out, it's worth noting that they both had terrible 1st seasons - he always took a while to let his shows find their footing, and figure out what they wanted to be. The only one that had a good first season is sadly the only one that only got one season (Firefly).

That said, they've all proven that he's one of the best ensemble writer/directors in the business. He didn't just catch "lightning in a bottle" once, like most successful ensembles seem to be result of - he simply gets what makes a good group dynamic like almost no other.

 

[Deaths Head II]

Wait, what? You're arguing that Louis Leterrier would be more in touch with and "dig deeper" into the characters than Joss Whedon? If this is what you're saying (and please, correct me if I'm misreading you), then it's apparent that you know nothing of the man's work.

Yeah, I thought that was a weird comment as well. Whedon's strength has always been character, character development, and character interaction. Letterier's strength is just making big dumb action films. LL talks nice about the characters on paper but aside from TIH (which has script rewrites by Norton) his films usually don't have character as their strongest point. LL is like Joe Johnston in that he depends on the script to be good, IMO. He doesn't really elevate the material. And it's a Zak Penn script so things wouldn't look so good with him on board. Joss Whedon will rewrite the script so he will definitely elevate this film character-wise.

 

[louiebling$]

Seriously, looking at one of the best ensemble casts of the decade and one of the most prominent fantasy/sci-fi writers/directors of our time.

 

[craigdbfan]

The more I keep letting this sink in the better the pick seems.

Whedon knows his comics and especially those pertaining of the Marvel mythos.

While I've never been a Buffy fan, Whedon caught me by my feet with Firefly and Serenity.

Having Favreau, Marvel and Kenneth Branagh, Joe Johnston (meh) giving input should be good too.

I think in the end though Marvel will let Whedon draw out an Avengers film that will end the Marvel/Paramount era of adaptations to a dazzling and brilliant end (assuming Whedon gives it his all on all targets).

"The Avengers" now has easily become one of my most anticipated movie of 2012.

While I never digged Buffy, Angel, and Dollhouse I really enjoyed Firefly/Serenity a whole lot.

Even then I recognize the high level of fun and easy to enjoy interactions he achieved in Buffy.

Whedon's sensibilities along with his good eye for sci fi and a deep love for these characters (Astonishing X-Men) and working with the resources that Marvel will hand to him (over $200 million dollars to work with).

I also expect Whedon introducing Ant-Man and another character in this movie (complete speculation on my part) for another director to continue only with Disney distributing (as Paramounts distribution contracted only included IM, IM2, Thor, CA, and TA).

Assembling 2012.

 

[kedrell]

All I can hope is that Favs excercises massive control over Whedon so we don't get contrivance after contrivance(Whedon's specialty, IMO).

 

[Deaths Head II]

I agree that Whedon will probably give the less well known Avengers some love. If it was someone like LL he would probably stick with the main 4 because they're the coolest or whatever.

Seriously, looking at one of the best ensemble casts of the decade and one of the most prominent fantasy/sci-fi writers/directors of our time.

Not to mention said director is great with ensemble casts. This is going to be so awesome.

I actually wasn't that excited for Avengers before this. Sure, it was Cap, IM, Thor, and Hulk together on screen but up until now I thought it would be just a good smashathon film. But now I'm certain it will be a strong standalone film in it's own right.

 

[Deaths Head II]

I agree that Deaths Head II will probably double post.

 

[WillardNation]

Whedon?

http://www.nooooooooooooooo.com/

That being said, I'm all for Whedon.

 

[bullets]

Whedon is a good choice. I don't think people are going to be blown away with this but at least we know beneath the overwhelming hype will be a solid film.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

my excitement level for this movie just dropped

 

[Ace of Knaves]

^Solid isn't good enough.

I really am not a fan of Whedon. They shoulda just got Favs to do Avengers.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Seriously, looking at one of the best ensemble casts of the decade and one of the most prominent fantasy/sci-fi writers/directors of our time.

lolwut?

One of the most prominent fantasy/sci fi directors? Errr... lolwut?

He's done one movie, and some crappy tv shows... GREAT!

 

[kedrell]

I frankly don't see much to be positive about with this choice. I didn't want LL for it but I'd choose even him over Whedon. Whedon is niche'. He hasn't demonstrated the ability to connect to the general public(which means going beyond his own cult following). Serenity was a bomb and that is the lone film that he has directed. This is a mighty big gamble on Marvel's part. At least Favs/LL/Johnston & Branagh have all demonstrated the ability to make a hit before they directed a Marvel movie. Joss is kinda like the odd man out in this grouping.

 

[flickchick85]

Yet LL hasn't demonstrated the ability to tell a good story. Whedon has.

 

[kedrell]

TIH & Unleashed beg to differ.

 

[flickchick85]

Except those were mediocre with not a single memorable character. Whedon excels at character work and group dynamics, which is what this project needs.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Exactly. That's why i am completely baffled by LouiBlings statement.

No one outside of us of Whedon's little following knows who the **** he is.

He hasn't done anything worth writing home about in years. Well IMO ever. I mean i did liike Buffy... when i was 8. Dollhouse is typical Whedon crap. Angel is the master of cheese.

Serenity? The only people who like it are Whedon fans. It was crap and it deserved to bomb.

I think some people are thinking "Oh Whedon is a comic book fan! He even wrote some comic books! This is so brilliant!"

Errr... no.

 

[kedrell]

I'd say Banner, Sterns and the character played by Bob Hoskins in Unleashed were pretty memorable. Granted, they were all played by really good actors.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Except those were mediocre with not a single memorable character. Whedon excels at character work and group dynamics, which is what this project needs.

Hmmm the majority beg to differ about TIH. Personally i preferred Ang Lee's Hulk, but i admit i'm in the minority there.

Whedon has worked with nobodies before. Not stars like RDJ or Sam L Jackson.

Whedon has made ONE crappy movie and a few girl power or just crappy TV shows.