Recasting vs legacy characters?

[CaptainWagner]

I'd rather them not recast unless absolutely nesecary. Revert the current stars to supporting status and let new franchises like GOTG, Antman, Black Panther, Dr. Strange, etc. get the focus. Maybe kill off or power-drain Cap. Stark would be a supporting character, in the same vein as Nick Fury. Thor, I don't really know where he would fit.

 

[Destructus86]

Recasting would be really hard...especially if the new actor puts a bit of his own spin on the character and then interacts with the current actors. The chemistry wouldn't be the same.

 

[BoredGuy]

I say recasting can be done, but only if the Character has sat out a few movies/years.
If RDJ doesn't do an IM4, for instance, then Stark's last appearance will be in 2018/19; so wait till like 2026 to recast, and by then people will be more willing to accept a new Stark talking to the old... Hawkeye, or whoever's left at that point

retire the old, move on with the new, and then when people inevitably start hollerin' for the old characters, that's when you can recast

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

The Infinity Gauntlet literally has the power to reboot the MCU. They could use it to recast the major Avengers after Avengers 3.

 

[cherokeesam]

I disagree. Marvel is definitely approaching critical mass with the amount of franchises. I'd like to see them shift focus to other characters than just ignore them completely. Plus, I can't pass up the chance for a superhero to actually become a martyr and stay that way. For once.

And I still think you might be downplaying the amount of criticism that came with recasting the role. Maybe it was just the perceived "loudness" of the few negative voices (the ones that are always louder than any others) but either way it wasn't something that changed without a peep.

Then how is adding *more*/different franchises any less of an instance of "approaching critical mass," as you call it?

And, theoretical Marvel Studios boardroom meeting: "Now that RDJ has resigned, should we recast and keep alive a franchise that's worth over $3 billion solo, or gamble on a brand new character?"

Dance with the partner who brought you to the party.

 

[SlamAdams]

Then how is adding *more*/different franchises any less of an instance of "approaching critical mass," as you call it?

And, theoretical Marvel Studios boardroom meeting: "Now that RDJ has resigned, should we recast and keep alive a franchise that's worth over $3 billion solo, or gamble on a brand new character?"

Dance with the partner who brought you to the party.

Approaching critical mass I mean they'll have way more franchises in the works than they might be able to handle. If Iron Man goes away and they have a new franchise to take its place in the schedule, they would have stopped themselves from getting any more top heavy.

I didn't say it would necessarily be a good business decision, its just what I would like to see them do. Make some room for the other characters.

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

Then how is adding *more*/different franchises any less of an instance of "approaching critical mass," as you call it?

And, theoretical Marvel Studios boardroom meeting: "Now that RDJ has resigned, should we recast and keep alive a franchise that's worth over $3 billion solo, or gamble on a brand new character?"

Dance with the partner who brought you to the party.

Problem is, the partner that brought them to the party isn't Iron Man, it's Robert Downey Jr. Without him, Iron Man as a franchise isn't making $400+ million a pop domestically. It's brought down to Cap and Thor levels, and Guardians of the Galaxy trouncing Cap 2 and Thor 2 at the box office shows that fresh-and-new might be a smarter investment than "more of the same".

The only way continuing Iron Man (which doesn't exactly have a wealth of stories to mine for future films as it is) without RDJ and expecting it to continue as Marvel's blue chip property is if they can pluck someone out of nowhere with anywhere near the same level of raw charisma. As successful as Marvel has been at casting overall, that isn't likely to happen. The closest they've come to casting someone with that level of sheer, old-school-movie-star-level screen presence and charm is Chris Pratt, and he is the goofy, lovable leader of a great ensemble cast, not someone you ask to carry a movie on their back.

 

[CaptainWagner]

Problem is, the partner that brought them to the party isn't Iron Man, it's Robert Downey Jr. Without him, Iron Man as a franchise isn't making $400+ million a pop domestically. It's brought down to Cap and Thor levels, and Guardians of the Galaxy trouncing Cap 2 and Thor 2 at the box office shows that fresh-and-new might be a smarter investment than "more of the same".

The only way continuing Iron Man (which doesn't exactly have a wealth of stories to mine for future films as it is) without RDJ and expecting it to continue as Marvel's blue chip property is if they can pluck someone out of nowhere with anywhere near the same level of raw charisma. As successful as Marvel has been at casting overall, that isn't likely to happen. The closest they've come to casting someone with that level of sheer, old-school-movie-star-level screen presence and charm is Chris Pratt, and he is the goofy, lovable leader of a great ensemble cast, not someone you ask to carry a movie on their back.

-Yeah, the choice for Marvel is

A) Take a gamble on recasting our current stars and hope we find someone good enough to live up to the legacy, or

B) Introduce a new character with a new star who will have no one to be compared to, coming off a smah hit with GOTG kickstarting what looks to be a very profitable franchise.

-My guess is they'll go with option B.

 

[Marvelocity]

James Bond has done it many times.

Ex. Compare Moonraker (outerspace adventure against a genocidal madman who is trying to wipe out humanity) and For Your Eyes Only (a small scale cold war thriller over possession of a British coding machine).

Heck, the Bond franchise went smaller TWO straight films in the 80s with AVTAK (Nazi superman wants to destroy California with an Earthquake machine) to TLD (secret communist plot to smuggle arms into Afghanistan and control the drug trade) to LTK (Bond goes after a drug lord in revenge for maiming his best friend).

Heck, THIS franchise has done it. Iron Man 3 was a much smaller scale plot from Tony's previous adventure in The Avengers.

You're comparing Avengers to a solo film. That's not the same at all. More heroes = need a bigger threat. If every hero was available for Iron Man 3, that movie is over in 10 minutes.

As for Bond, yes, they've done it and I'm pretty sure the Living Daylights and License to Kill were among the worst reviewed of all the films in the franchise. I actually enjoyed License to Kill, but I know a lot of people thought it was pretty trivial compared to previous adventures.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

You're comparing Avengers to a solo film. That's not the same at all. More heroes = need a bigger threat. If every hero was available for Iron Man 3, that movie is over in 10 minutes.

You are still asking the audience to accept a smaller film than their big team up. Why would the audience want to see Iron Man by himself after seeing him with a bunch of other popular heroes? And the audience was fine with it.

As for Bond, yes, they've done it and I'm pretty sure the Living Daylights and License to Kill were among the worst reviewed of all the films in the franchise. I actually enjoyed License to Kill, but I know a lot of people thought it was pretty trivial compared to previous adventures.

No. A View to a Kill is the one that is poorly received. In fact, very often in the Bond series the smaller film is regarded as the better one of the pair when the series has gone that direction. LALD is better than DAF. FYEO is regarded as being much better than Moonraker. TLD is better than AVTAK. Casino Royale is much more popular than DAD. Skyfall is more popular than QoS.

 

[Kurne]

Problem with recasting is that these characters are aging too. You can't just recast Tony Stark in 2035 (MCU time)-- who'll be 65, with a 26 year-old actor.

 

[Kurne]

That is unless, of course, they decide to halt time/aging. Marvel-style.

 

[Raiden]

Marvel set up MCU to be an ongoing universe, which means no reboot, and without reboot they will have to recast. If fans think that they will just retire Stark, Thor, and Rogers once their respective actor leaves Marvel for good, then they should have another thought coming. Yes, currently in the comics Marvel has made Thor a female and replaces Steve with Sam as the new Cap, but that doesn't mean MCU will follow. I think recasting is the only option on the table, unless Marvel Studios decides to reboot the entire MCU, which they will probably never do.

 

[Kurne]

They'll reboot if it mean't the best way to mesh the X-Men, Spidey, Avengers, etc. (if/when they return of course).

 

[Kurne]

And yes, I believe they would do that. If those rights returned 10 years from now would they reboot the MCU for accommodation? Nah. 20 years? Reasonable.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

They'll reboot if it mean't the best way to mesh the X-Men, Spidey, Avengers, etc. (if/when they return of course).

errr... no. what will reboot are X-Men, Spidey, FF. the MCU as it is will thankfully stay unaltered except for major players that will be recast.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

recasts!

also gradually changing the actors makes the transition way easier for me than introducing all of the new faces at the same time but I know mileages vary. I think it gives the new actor a little more legitimacy when he's surrounded by the veterans and accepted as the face this or that character always had

I agree with this totally. Intermittent recasts would actually help preserve continuity better than completely bringing in a new batch of faces once the contracts expire. The X-Men films have kind of struggled with this IMO which is why First Class did not do as well as hoped and it seems DOFP was used to help bolster their new cast.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

I would like them to avoid recasting whenever possible, just let certain characters finish their story and move on to new characters.

I know this is completely antithetical to Marvel's business model, which is to just keep making these movies until eventually they aren't good anymore and stop making money, but I would like it if there was actually a planned end-point for certain characters, and they could let them retire with dignity (at least for now), instead of milking them totally dry.

I agree somewhat with this statement too. But not completely. Some characters are sacred cows that are intrinsic to the Marvel brand (especially in the absence of characters like X-Men and Spider-man) and should stay around as long as there are good stories to be told with them.

Ultimately I think Marvel should do what makes for the best stories. If a character's death/retirement/whatever works to serve the story - then don't be scared - do it. If there are more stories to come and the actor can't be persuaded to return well then go ahead and recast.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

Marvel set up MCU to be an ongoing universe, which means no reboot, and without reboot they will have to recast. If fans think that they will just retire Stark, Thor, and Rogers once their respective actor leaves Marvel for good, then they should have another thought coming. Yes, currently in the comics Marvel has made Thor a female and replaces Steve with Sam as the new Cap, but that doesn't mean MCU will follow. I think recasting is the only option on the table, unless Marvel Studios decides to reboot the entire MCU, which they will probably never do.

The comics have been going for 50+ years. Captain America since World War II. It's understandable that they have to try and shake things up to keep things fresh. The MCU is brand spanking new. They don't need to leapfrog decades of material to implement the latest gimmick.

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

I agree somewhat with this statement too. But not completely. Some characters are sacred cows that are intrinsic to the Marvel brand (especially in the absence of characters like X-Men and Spider-man) and should stay around as long as there are good stories to be told with them.

Ultimately I think Marvel should do what makes for the best stories. If a character's death/retirement/whatever works to serve the story - then don't be scared - do it. If there are more stories to come and the actor can't be persuaded to return well then go ahead and recast.

I think that is fair. It is my personal best guess that letting certain characters retire for a while is the best way to GET the best stores, but if they have a better plan that will result in more good movies, I won't complain.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

With Thor, we have to get Enchantress and Executioner, Surtur and finish the deal with Loki. After that, what more do you need from Thor?

Hela, Beta Ray Bill, Balder and Karnilla, Hercules and Ares, Mangog, High Evolutionary, Rigellians, Ego, Celestials, the Reigning, Ragnarok, Seige, God Butcher, Absorbing Man, the Wrecking Crew, the Dark Gods, the Midgard Serpent. Seriously dude. They haven't even scraped the surface for Thor.

 

[Comicbookguy339]

Ooh, Beta Ray Bill taking over the Thor franchise would be pretty sweet as well. If people went to see Rocket and Groot then they would go and see him as well.

 

[SlamAdams]

Hela, Beta Ray Bill, Balder and Karnilla, Hercules and Ares, Mangog, High Evolutionary, Rigellians, Ego, Celestials, the Reigning, Ragnarok, Seige, God Butcher, Absorbing Man, the Wrecking Crew, the Dark Gods, the Midgard Serpent. Seriously dude. They haven't even scraped the surface for Thor.

The Serpent from Fear Itself. Ulik.The Roxxon Minotaur is pretty cool.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

The Serpent from Fear Itself. Ulik.The Roxxon Minotaur is pretty cool.

Can't believe I forgot Ulik! Yeah the ones I mentioned are just some of my favorites.

I'm dying to see Thor and Hercules together on screen someday. Pure gold moment right there waiting to happen.

 

[CaptainWagner]

Ooh, Beta Ray Bill taking over the Thor franchise would be pretty sweet as well. If people went to see Rocket and Groot then they would go and see him as well.

Yeah, that would be great! They may want to change the title, though. I think Stormbreaker would be good.