Rotating the Roster?

Discussion in 'The Avengers Sequels' started by FaT_tONle, Mar 3, 2009.

  1. Dark Raven The Gal from Themyscira

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    53,177
    Likes Received:
    3,210
    Yeah, the X-Men movies weren't really origin movies whereas the Avengers is (an origin of the team if not origin of each character). So I think people would like to see the same team in the next film, but just adding a few new people, not an entire roster change.
     
  2. BigThor God of Thunder

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2010
    Messages:
    18,718
    Likes Received:
    369
    Yep, people are so anxious to see new heroes that they forget that these characters need time to gain familiarity with audiences and become an efficient team before any major roster changes.
     
  3. cherokeesam SHIELD Director Coulson

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    12,044
    Likes Received:
    0
    I understand what you're saying, and I love character development and arcs as much as the next guy, but I think it's the nature of an ensemble film that you throw all that out the window. Instead, an ensemble film is about a group of "stock characters," as you call them, and the film dynamic comes from their interactions with each other. You see that in team action films (Dirty Dozen, Wild Bunch, Ocean's Eleven), disaster movies (The Poseidon Adventure, 2012), anywhere there's an ensemble. Hell, I'm sure we'll see that in The Avengers, too --- everything I've seen and heard so far tells me that Widow and Hawkeye are marginalized in favor of face time for the "Big Three" (or Big Four, depending on how much they're giving to RuffaloHulk).

    Even without knowing the characters at all, general audiences are savvy enough to buy into stock descriptions in an ensemble cast. Okay, this guy is the brick, this guy is the brainiac, this guy is the goody two-shoes, etc. They get that without having to spend a lot of time developing each character.


    Not to belabor a point, though, but I'm still thinking that you and I saw different X-Men movies....I still don't understand why you don't consider Rogue, Iceman, Prof X, etc. to be X-Men....:huh:
     
  4. Dark Raven The Gal from Themyscira

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    53,177
    Likes Received:
    3,210
    All the examples you've cited are films where none of the characters existed in movies of their own beforehand. They were ensemble movies where these people came together for the first time and didn't have a life prior to that. We didn't know the names or background of any of these characters from The Poseidon Adventure, The Dirty Dozen, Oceans 11 etc. Did anyone care about the exploits of characters like Danny Ocean, Linus Caldwell, the Malloy brothers or "The Amazing" Yen before they assembled for Ocean's 11?

    They are decidely different from something like The Avengers, which is a first for this type of crossover event where everyone has either had their own movie or already appeared in a previous movie.

    So your idea to throw all character develoment out the window doesn't quite apply in this case. The Avengers aren't stock characters but people that the audiences are already familiar with and care about.
     
  5. DrCosmic Professor of Power

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Messages:
    8,744
    Likes Received:
    45
    They didn't wear suits, they didn't go on missions. Why do you consider them X-Men in the first film?

    Whedon says it's a full ensemble. (Meaning not the Ensemble in Name only of Oceans 11/Expendables). So, even though BW and Hawkeye are marginalized to a degree, even in the previews, we see that they have real character arcs. There are no stock characters on the Avengers. If Avengers 2 is a smaller more character-centric movie, what makes you think that would change?

    It's never an issue of savvyness. It's not about the audience 'understanding' comic book psuedoscience, it's about them caring about characters when you rapidly remove them from human experience and audience investment.
     
  6. cherokeesam SHIELD Director Coulson

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    12,044
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not necessarily. We've already discussed ad infinitum the highest/lowest-common-denominator factor in Avengers on these boards --- in other words, you can't assume that Avengers audiences saw all the prequels....or *any* of them, in fact. Whedon and Marvel are counting on the fact that there's going to be lots of people in the audience who never saw the lead-ins....otherwise, you go back to the argument that this movie can't have a bigger b.o. than its highest common denominator (i.e., Iron Man).
     
  7. DrCosmic Professor of Power

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Messages:
    8,744
    Likes Received:
    45
    And again, audiences are put off by super powered characters that they don't care about. People not seeing the lead ins is part of why Avengers has character arcs for all the Avengers, and Nick Fury too. So they can care instead of feeling like some random plot device has been thrown in to destroy the tension and add a bunch of 'yeah, but...' quesitons. This is why they'll continue to have character arcs for all characters, and not just assume, like Green Lantern did, that the audiences already care, or that if they can understand it, they'll like it.
     
  8. cherokeesam SHIELD Director Coulson

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    12,044
    Likes Received:
    0

    I certainly understand (and agree with) the need for character arcs in the initial Avengers film, because you might as well consider that an origins film. Even though at least 4 of the characters have already had their origin stories told, this is the first time they come together as a team, so you pretty much *have* to introduce and re-introduce the characters, and give them a story arc that brings them together as a team by movie's end.

    But I *don't* agree that Avengers 2 and future sequels needs to go back through that again and again, nor does it need to establish story arcs for Cap, Iron Man, Hulk, Thor and the other Founders (at least, the MCU version of the Founders). Reason being: franchise characters do *not* work well with story arcs. Audiences *want* to see franchise characters retain their same attitude and persona from beginning to end, because that's what they bought into. In other words, nobody wants to see James Bond or Indiana Jones or Spider-Man be anyone else but James Bond, Indiana Jones or Spider-Man. You start trying to throw an arc in there and give them a personality "growth" or change, and your audiences will revolt against the franchise. Same goes for Avengers sequels.
     
  9. Dark Raven The Gal from Themyscira

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    53,177
    Likes Received:
    3,210
    All three Spider-Man films had character arcs and Peter went through a journey in them in which he wasn't the same person exactly as he was when he started that journey. Sam Raimi even said that he based the villains on who best fit those character arcs. I didn't see any audiences revolting against this.

    I'm sure the same approach is taken by Marc Webb for The Amazing Spider-Man.

    And as for James Bond, since the reboot with Casino Royale, he's been given a character arc where he is allowed to grow and change. They got tired of doing the static Bond who never develops and is basically a cardboard superhero. Far from revolting, audiences seem to like Daniel Craig and this new approach.

    So apart from Indiana Jones, the characters you list don't fit with your argument.
     
  10. cherokeesam SHIELD Director Coulson

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    12,044
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm sure Marc Webb will give Parker a great story arc, just like Raimi did in Spidey 1, because both of those are origin films, and origin films necessarily create a story arc.

    I do *not* agree that Parker followed any arc at all in Spidey 2; and the "arc" in Spidey 3 was entirely contrived by artifice, i.e., the black suit. Personality-wise, Parker remains Parker, beginning to end.

    And I haven't seen *any* story arc for Craig as Bond. He's a different version of the character, with more ice in his veins than previous incarnations, but what kind of arc have you seen where he changes and grows and becomes a different person....? I didn't see any of that in CR or QOS.
     
  11. DrCosmic Professor of Power

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Messages:
    8,744
    Likes Received:
    45
    A character arc is just the character learning something and becoming better, from the film's terms, than they were before. It's not their persona or attitude changing. You put quotations around growth like you don't believe in it or something, that's really odd to me.

    I think what you're seeing is that origin stories usually have much more dramatic character arcs than sequels. Usually the arc picks back up strong for the third one though, and there's always an arc, and it is hard to do, because you have to figure out how to add to the character without taking away what people like about them. But they do it all the time.

    You may just not notice, but it certainly happened. In Spider-Man 2, Peter had to face and overcome his self confidence issues, and become the guy who would give up everything he wanted to save others. In Iron Man 2 Tony had to deal with daddy issues, and became capable of being in a real relationship. Craig's James Bond went from an ambitious agent to a romantic man in love to a heartless rage-fueled killer in Casino Royale. We'll not even touch Aragorn and Frodos immense arcs. Some people just go for the action, and to see comics brought to life, some people go for the story, characters and emotion. Big blockbusters, especially successful franchises, appeal to both, or they don't make bank. Even the mindless Transformers had Sam grow up in TF2 and learn humility in TF3.

    Some films, like, Crank, or Predators, don't have character arcs, and they usually have much lower budgets, cuz they know they're basically only going to get the young men demo.
     
    #111 DrCosmic, Mar 15, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2012
  12. Dark Raven The Gal from Themyscira

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    53,177
    Likes Received:
    3,210

    I missed this thread yesterday so didn't reply to it, but yeah, pretty much all that Dr Cosmic said above outlines the character arcs. Also, in Spider-Man 2, there was this theme of growing up and taking responsibility, even when the right thing meant giving certain things up. Peter thought he was growing up and putting away childish things by giving up his Spider-Man identity (while he was losing his powers), but in the end it turned out that it wasn't the case. Yes, he's still Peter and hasn't turned into someone completely different by the end, but he has matured, gained a new perspective and is a somewhat different person to the one he started off with at the beginning of the movie.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"