Advanced Dark
Avenger
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 17,587
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 31
I can just imagine a very cool scene opening up an Avengers film with The Hulk. 

Thor Strikes Hollywood
by Natalie Finn
Fri, 10 Aug 2007 07:27:17 PM PDT
COMMENTS (0)
var startSz = 1;var tgs = new Array();tgs[0] = "article-text-block-1";TEXT SIZE + A | -A
Lightning doesn't strike the same place twice unless Thor's around, that is.
The hammer-tossing superhero is the latest star from the comic-book vault to get in line for big-screen treatment, with Marvel Studios lining up British auteur Matthew Vaughn to direct Thor, based on the Stan Lee-created character.
Marvel is hoping to get production in progress by this winter. Mark Protosevich, whose latest project was the apocalyptic Will Smith thriller I Am Legend, will pen the screenplay.
As laid out in the 1962 comics franchise The Mighty Thor, the Norse god of thunder and war is sent by his father Odin to inhabit the body of mere mortal Dr. Donald Blake, in order to teach the arrogant lad some humility. Once Odin is satisfied that his son has learned his lesson, Thor no longer requires a regular-guy alter ego and can be counted on to save the world from the inevitable variety of humanity-threatening evil-doers.
Describing the thought process that went into creating Thor 40-some years ago, Lee wrote in his 2002 autobiography Excelsior! The Amazing Life of Stan Lee:
"I wanted to come up with something totally different. I thought it would fun to invent someone as powerful as, or perhaps even more powerful than, the Incredible Hulk. But how do you make someone stronger than the strongest human? It finally came to me: Don't make him humanmake him a god."
There's no word yet on who might be asked to wear the winged helmet, but as is the case when Hollywood utters the words "superhero" or "sci-fi," the blogs are already atwitter with suggestions.
"This pretty much has Josh Holloway written all over it," wrote IceTruckDexter on cinematical.com, while others suggested Matthew McConaughey, Jason Mewes (must be a hair thing), New Zealand-born actor Karl Urban (lately an assassin in The Bourne Supremacy) and, of course, Vincent D'Onofrio, who memorably played a beefy mechanic who was mistaken for Thor in Adventures in Babysitting in 1987.
Hopes are high, especially considering the sleight of hand Marvel Studios displayed in casting its other upcoming additions to the comic-book-film canon, The Incredible Hulk, due out June 13, 2008,and Iron Man, slated for a May 2 release.
Edward Norton is suiting up as the volatile Dr. Bruce Banner for the not-quite-a-sequel to Ang Lee's Hulk, and Liv Tyler plays love interest Betty Ross. Tim Roth, William Hurt and Tim Blake Nelson are also on hand to up the action flick's dramatic pedigree.
Former Swinger Jon Favreau's take on Iron Man stars Robert Downey Jr. as the metallically-enhanced hero, with Gwyneth Paltrow, Terrence Howard, Jeff Bridges, Samuel L. Jackson and Hilary Swank rounding out the supporting cast.
Thor will be only the third trip behind the camera for Vaughn, who made his directing debut with 2004's heist romp Layer Cake, and whose second film, the fantasy-adventure Stardust, starring Claire Danes, Michelle Pfeiffer and Robert De Niro, comes out Friday.
The London native also produced the Guy Ritchie-directed films Snatch, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Swept Away, with an emphasis on the first two.
SpiderMan;12368973 said:Well, probably not as much as Holy Ji-had-Man, but i digress.
Yes, I've read a few Thor comics (mostly the old Lee/Kirby stuff) but as I said, he isn't one of my favorites. So are you saying Thor has never lost? Are you saying that it would be illogical to ever have Thor lose? I think your prejudice for the character is showing. No greater way to build 'strength of character' (as you mention below) than to have them lose. You want to make the heroes victory even greater, have him lose first. As I said, that just seems to be outside your comfort zone. Nothing more boring than a hero who can't lose. Can't wait to see how the series does when you take over.![]()
And you base this on SR, the 'failure' of which you seem to be attributing to him 'losing'??? You haven't a clue. And let's not forget all those cinematic triumphs that support your position on the issue such as Ghost Rider, Elektra, FF1...oh wait, you probably liked those.
So doing something other than the 'same old thing' is throwing common sense out the window?
I was being facetious with the use of the word illogical, hence the quotations. I was saying if Stan Lee thought like you do, the FF would all have had secret identities and probably worn capes, and Spider-man would have had a younger sidekick, he'd never have been beaten, and he would never have had any problems.
Well, if he wasn't then his appearence in JLA would most CERTAINLY seem out of place!
Hmm, I must've missed that particular rule in the 'model for translating a comic to film' handbook...
Ah, so the Stone men from Saturn (who bear more than a passing resemblance to the Thing) would not look realistic enough to be included in a film with a hero who is a Norse god in a red, blue, and yellow costume whose main mode of transport is to swing a hammer and throw it, then grab the handle at the last second so that it yanks him along for the ride while crying "For Asgard and honor eternal, fell beastie I sayeth thee, NAY!!"
Well, if what I described above is nothing else, it is certainly visual spectacle.
So what happens to your logic when Hulk whips Thor's ass?
In his hubris, huh? I don't know how I could've missed seeing you when I was in Fantasyland last year! I guess 'in his hubris' he just let Supes knock him the freak out, too, huh?![]()
Let's see...Hulk lifts 150 billion tons - Thor lifts 10 billion tons/several billion tons. Yup sounds about equal to me. You must be using some of that new 'logical' math.![]()
As opposed to being able to have a giant green man who's strong enough to bust said asteroid with his hurtling body. These are comics we're talking about. You need to possess the ability to suspend your disbelief just a little. Now a god of thunder being dragged thru the sky behind a hammer? I just saw one yesterday.![]()
I say the Hulk is AT LEAST = to the Avengers. Check out FF # 26 as the Hulk takes on the Avengers AND the FF!
Well, if you can go further, then you're not presenting the 'MOST POWERFUL' threat. That's what my logic tells me, anyway.
Something else Stan Lee came up with, a 'universe' of heroes whose stories carried over into each others' from time to time. Issues ending in cliff-hangers and even being continued in another character's comic from the one in which it began. Until now, with franchise rights being held by different studios, we the fans have been denied this. Now it is possible and you are decrying against it?! Again, I guess this sort of 'outside the box' thinking is just too 'illogical' to be within your comfort zone.
Again, your opinion.
Ok, I should've been more clear. X2 WON in the voting for best superhero movie ever, an honor that will NEVER be bestowed on X3.
Uh, like saying the comics should be adhered to as closely as possible while hoping for a cinematic Avengers intro that is far different from the comic book version? Is that the kind of obfuscation you hate?![]()
I love that. "Seemingly". Well, when the Hulk is slapping Thor and the rest back and forth across the big screen, I'm sure he will seem "seemingly" beyond their power to defeat!
Nonsense.
So the stronger the villains get, the stronger the heroes become. So when Cap is fighting the Red Skull he is much weaker than when fighting, say...well, the Hulk? Another rule I missed in the handbook...
Oh, so since in this case the comic supports what you want, it is ok to use it as a valid template for a film version? I'm seeing more of how your whole 'logic' thing works.
You wouldn't be supporting your favorite character. You'd be supporting a film that you were totally opposed to the idea of no matter how you try to twist the 'logic' of it.
I have every intention of seeing it. I just haven't had a chance yet and therefore cannot comment on it. I've heard it's awesome!
Again, I'll wait and see.
Oh, I don't know...
Scott getting killed
Prof X getting killed
Logan killing Jean in a scene that completely failed to stir any emotion in me other than annoyance
Magneto totally abandonning Mystique just because she was no longer a mutant. How's that for 'logical'?
"I'm tha Jugganaut, *****!"
Bobby icing up for a headbutt. Whoopee.
I could go on but you probably liked those things too so what's the point? There's just no accounting for bad taste.
Well, once again, what you call entertaining I call crap. No one would ever mistake a Schumacher film for any work of Burton's (except you, apparently).
I see, so in your opinion, a movie will have no influence on the success (or lack thereof) of any of its sequels? POTC 2 and 3 were actually better movies than the first because they made more money than it did? I could site many more examples but what's the point? Your mind is completely closed to anything other than what you already believe.
Again, > BO = the majority of people liked it? I would think that since they paid their money BEFORE they went in, a truer indicator of their enjoyment would've been how they felt about it AFTERWARD.
Hey, even a broken clock is right twice a day!
Well, good luck with that! Maybe you can get Joel Schumacher to direct. Just lower the color contrast and no one will ever notice the neon Mjolnir in Thor's (played by Ahnold!) hand! "Ah'll be back, Loki!!!"
Again, entertainment POV is subjective. I'd be much more entertained seeing them fight the Hulk. And in terms of doing them justice, I'd say you can't do them much greater justice than staying true to the comic...which has them fighting the Hulk!
"This pretty much has Josh Holloway written all over it," wrote IceTruckDexter on cinematical.com, while others suggested Matthew McConaughey, Jason Mewes (must be a hair thing), New Zealand-born actor Karl Urban (lately an assassin in The Bourne Supremacy) and, of course, Vincent D'Onofrio, who memorably played a beefy mechanic who was mistaken for Thor in Adventures in Babysitting in 1987.
Lmao whoever suggested Mewes needs to be beaten with bricks.
In "What IF," Thor killed a totally enraged Hulk with ease! And X3>X1 &X2. I know Ratner has made his share of garbage, but the hate he gets for X3 is unfounded. The movie had better action than the previous two, Wolverine finally knew how to fight, and the movie took alot of chances that for the most part paid off. I just personally wouldn't have killed of Cyclops and would have had Juggernaut way more powerful.
Negro, OUT!~
In "What IF," Thor killed a totally enraged Hulk with ease! And X3>X1 &X2. I know Ratner has made his share of garbage, but the hate he gets for X3 is unfounded. The movie had better action than the previous two, Wolverine finally knew how to fight, and the movie took alot of chances that for the most part paid off. I just personally wouldn't have killed of Cyclops and would have had Juggernaut way more powerful.
Negro, OUT!~
Whay If?'s never count. The whole point of What If? is to not be confined by the pre-existing rules of the Marvel U.
Why wouldn't it just happen in the 616 then, rather than needing a What If? And I'm not saying every What If? has to break the rules, but they end up doing that most of the time since they aren't as confined story-wise. I wouldn't consider anything in What If? as canon.
And I've already addressed the term 'best'. If you look at all of these movies as one big story, then tying them all together IS what is 'best' (your definition).
I could use your argument against you and what you would like to see by saying "Well, your idea is underwhelming compared to throwing in (fill in blank with super-powerful villain) to boot!"
Again I won't argue opinion. I think that it could be done dynamically enough that it would be anything but weak!
Well, i'd think this would make it perfect for you as then, the remaining team would 'seemingly be unable to stop' the Hulk! Isn't that what you said was most important a few posts back? This would take Thor out of the equation thus making it easier for you to accept!
Well, the Hulk isn't going to keep running when super powered beings are attacking him. His rage will grow and so will his desire to smash! He's not going to be rationally trying to figure out why they're attacking him. He is pretty much a reactionary character!
In closing, we're not really getting anywhere except making more than clear each of our personal preferences. Any further discussion will just be circular. As I said, what either of us wants won't have any effect on what we'll get in the end. So I'm moving on. I'll reply when I've had a chance to look at your Thor synopses.
You still haven't explained WHY each story MUST BE self contained. Ok, if this makes it easier for you, how about the Avengers film is essentially the sequel to each of the first solo movies? That's more or less what I've been saying anyway.
And to make my idea fit more into your mold, any of the devices you've mentioned could be employed with respect to Loki.
Ok, how do you view a 9' tall monster who destroys NY city while on a rage-fueled rampage?
When did I say he should be the villain other than in the first Avengers movie? He will be a hero in TIH against A-bomb.
No, it should be what is best for the fans! The characters aren't really real! What's best for 'them' isn't an issue!
And that's fine. I never said your ideas wouldn't work. YOU are the only one who has been trying to pigeonhole everything and saying nothing but YOUR ideas would work.
Do you think Raimi's Spider-man was the only way Spidey could've been presented?
Do you think his way was the 'best' that could've been?
No and no.
Something doesn't have to be 'the best' to still be awesome!
No, you are condescending by inferring that the majority of the public don't have sense enough to watch a Thor movie and then figure out that the Avengers movie is the next chapter in that story.
By saying it would confuse them, you're essentially calling them stupid!
It has nothing to do with their knowledge of superheroes!
With media, the internet, up to the second entertainment news, they would EASILY know what was going on, especially if the solo movies blow up!
Not a Hulk 'fanboy'. The way I arrive at my view is backed by dozens of years of stories that support my view. FF# 25 and #26 for starters. If you have any proof that The Hulk IS NOT (or at least doesn't APPEAR to be thru a drawn out battle) a match for the Avengers please show it.
If you have an example of Thor easily beating the Hulk, please show it.
I mean, taking each other at our word notwithstanding, let's be reasonable: you can't just say 'Thor can destroy the Hulk with ease' without actually pointing to some example and expect anyone to take you seriously.
Your view is backed by your preference for thor. Mine is backed by recorded recognized canon.
My point was you shouldn't ask a question to which you already have the answer. If you already know an answer, just give it!
Again, I just see this remark as silly and in complete contradiction with your claim to know what constitutes a good story. Did you see Die Hard, arguably the mother of action films? Did it have moments of quiet introspection? Of course! Al telling John about how he accidentally shot the kid! John telling Al about how he'd never told his wife he was sorry! This ENHANCES the scenes with the action! Sounds to me like you just want a 2 hours battle royale! There's good story telling for yuh! I never said I wanted long, drawn-out scenes like that!
You asked what else could fill up 110 minutes and it seemed you really had no clue!
Ok, let me see if I can think of some possible action scenes:
Cap training
Thor maybe having a run-in with the law in his first experience with modern civilization
IM in the middle of some high-tech criminal take-down when he gets the call from Fury about putting together the team
Thor's initial run-in with the others and a short skirmish
the Hulk rampaging thru a city being hounded by the army
Those are just off the top of my head but again I would think as a writer, you would know that action is the easiest thing to add more of.
It's characterization that takes skill and surprisingly seems the least important to you.
That would be about like saying that it would pale in comparison to the end of ROTK which IMO it wouldn't.
Look, I'll just be blunt, I read Avengers #1 when I was a kid and always wanted to see it brought to life.
To me, there are few things it would pale in comparison to and I can't really think of one of those at the moment. So again, it's down to opinion.
Don't know the story.
Like I said, have Loki/Hulk in #1, Ultron in #2, and Kang and his army in #3 and it meets both our criteria for a good trilogy!
SpiderMan said:Hey Krust,
I just finished reading you synopsis for a first Thor movie (http://www.immortalshandbook.com/shrine2.htm).
I thought there were synopses for all 12 movies but less is the better as I really dont have time to read that much!
First, Ill say that I commend you on your obvious love for the character of Thor. I will also commend you on trying to stick close to the Lee-Kirby origin of Thor.
Now for the critical stuff:
First of all, I cant believe that, after so vehemently blasting my notion that the first Thor film be set in Asgard (your words: Asgard is more spectacular than Earth, therefore you build UP to Asgard - talking about building from Asgard to Earth - thats simply idiotic), you start your movie off with a huge BATTLE in ASGARD! And then proceed to Earth!
Next, the way you set everything up looks like youre reading a step-by-step book on How to write the PERFECT Treatment as you were writing this thing. I mean, you have this whole list of criteria that has to be filled schemer, brawler, ally, love interest its like youre filling in the blanks.
And the notes at the end of each act Things to be resolved: Lokis treachery, Tyrs jealosy (when is THIS resolved?) it all just seems like you are yet again filling in the blanks for a standard treatment/screenplay template.
I mean, yes, anyone can take a hit story, deconstruct it to figure out the individual elements, and then do another story that satisfies each of these points, but that boots creativity and originality out the window!
Now on to the story itself:
I like the opening battle, but we never learn what Odin does to his sons (though I guess we can assume he imprisoned Loki in a tree!) nor how Thors actions (and what they were) led to the fighting.
Next, Blake has his pride wounded by failing to defend Jane from some louts so he takes a trip to Norway?!! Seems a little contrived but ok, if you say so. I mean, I guess you have to get him to Norway to find the hammer, huh?
As I said, I like that the next part sticks closely to the comic origins.
Ok, next you have a battle in the park between Thor and Loki. Why the sudden flashback in the middle for no disclosed reason?! Battle, battle flashback to Thor and Lokis youth battle, battle! I dont get it! Again, it almost appears that the guidelines said insert flashback here!
Ok moving on, next is the scene in the bank which raises a question: seems to me Thor is out of contact with his hammer for more than 1 minute yet remains Thor. How so?
Next question: why does Loki need to distract Thor while hes looking for the Destroyer? And it seems even in your draft he doesnt use the Wrecker for that anyway because Thor doesnt even fight the Wrecker until after Loki has found the Destroyer.
The scene that cuts back to Norway just to apparently introduce Paul Duval and then cut back to the main story without mentioning him again seems terribly out of place in the context of the story. Its a literary brick wall.
Next, why does Loki have the Wrecker kidnap Jane and take her to a construction site? He doesnt even know she has anything to do with Thor (via Don Blake).
In light of this, it seems to be a huge coincidence. It also seems to directly rip off Spider-Man 3!
Next, why would Loki want to attack Thor with the Wrecking Crew while simultaneously using the Destroyer to attack the UN? Id think hed throw everything he had at Thor (especially when you already stated he figured Thor would beat the Wrecker) and THEN try to take over the world. I mean, Lokis NOT an idiot!
And finally, the point that bends me out of shape worse than any other: one of the things you were most vocal about in our earlier discussions was that there was no way Thor could lose in his first movie. Well, in your treatment, THOR LOSES! Destroyer wouldve killed him if ODIN hadnt stepped in and beaten it!
Im sorry, but I just cant take you seriously. I dont really believe YOU know what you believe. I dont mean that to insult you but with inconsistencies and contradictions like the ones uncovered just in this treatment (not to mention the ones I saw earlier today in other threads where you basically use the same criteria I used to defend my position against you to defend your own position against others - http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=12440274#post12440274 and http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=278017 ), I realize that a rational discussion unencumbered by bias and double-talk is something you seem incapable of having. Good luck and good day.