Sequels The Avengers 2! The Official News and Speculation Thread - Part 2

[smashmode]

Glad joss is not wavering. Tease them before they are cast in Thor, have them show up in tv after they are cast then maybe in winter soldier

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

I'll give it some time and see what happens... Otherwise, it's going to be interesting seeing two different interpretations of Quicksilver and his abilities.

This is the first time in cbm history for something like this to happen for a character.

 

[GRangerPrimeNYC]

Is this Fox the same fox as Fox News?

 

[Dark Raven]

They do, but with many restrictions. There was a lawsuit filed by FOX back in 2001 against Marvel due to their involvement in the launch of the Mutant X tv show. FOX's contention was that Marvel and Tribune Entertainment intentionally attempted to link the series to FOX's X-Men films - which is probably why Singer quickly changed his Quicksilver tweet when he appeared to be doing the same thing. Mutant X went so far as to use X Men movie footage in its original promo spots - a clear violation. Though FOX and Marvel reached a settlement a decade ago, it appears to be a very murky area in which Marvel would have to prove they weren't negatively impacting their film licenses by including characters in a tv show. Disney would likely want to avoid legal action on this matter.

But with the Mutant X TV show, it appears they could still use the word "mutant" since they had it in the title. I don't know if, as part of the settlement, they were allowed to use the title, or if that word was allowed anyway regardless of settlement.

The lawsuit was also because of similarity with characters like a Professor X equivalent (in the form of John Shea) and another character who was rather feral like Wolverine (but I'm not sure is she had claws).

But SHIELD would be a good place to show the origins of Wanda and Pietro, not just because of XMOFP, but irrespective of it, even if there were never an issue with QS and SW. With any character they plan to debut in Avengers or another Marvel movie, SHIELD would be a definite place to develop the character which they couldn't in an ensemble movie, unless they planned to have a solo movie dedicated to QS and SW, which they aren't. That way, when they do appear in Avengers 2, they aren't just cyphers but actual characters with an already-existing and developed backstory.

 

[Chewy]

I'll give it some time and see what happens... Otherwise, it's going to be interesting seeing two different interpretations of Quicksilver and his abilities.

This is the first time in cbm history for something like this to happen for a character.

Sabretooth? Beast? Emma? Kitty?

This has to be like the twelfth time it's happened just with the X-Men franchise, lol

This is only a big drama because of the Marvel vs Fox fanwars

 

[Eddie]

Sabretooth? Beast? Emma? Kitty?

This has to be like the twelfth time it's happened just with the X-Men franchise, lol

This is only a big drama because of the Marvel vs Fox fanwars

Those are recasts/plot holes. There's a big difference between those examples and the Quicksilver situation.

 

[Chewy]

A director used the character. A different director came along and decided they wanted to use an entirely different version of the character, and did.

Seems similar to me. And no one really cares

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Sabretooth? Beast? Emma? Kitty?

This has to be like the twelfth time it's happened just with the X-Men franchise, lol

This is only a big drama because of the Marvel vs Fox fanwars

Two different movie studios using the same character but different interpretations? Hasn't been done.

 

[Chewy]

Right, like I said it's only a big deal to fans because of the Marvel vs Fox aspect of it. The actual use of two different versions of the same character isn't going to matter

 

[Eddie]

Two different movie studios using the same character but different interpretations? Hasn't been done.

To add, it hasn't really been done in contemporary superhero films. We have seen different studios present different interpretations of some characters, like Captain America, but they were of different times. There was no competition going on.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Right, like I said it's only a big deal to fans because of the Marvel vs Fox aspect of it. The actual use of two different versions of the same character isn't going to matter

I'm not sure what you mean.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

To add, it hasn't really been done in contemporary superhero films. We have seen different studios present different interpretations of some characters, like Captain America, but they were of different times. There was no competition going on.

Yeah, this is direct competition between the studios in two blockbusters playing year after year. And both studios actually own the rights to the character. Crazy.

 

[Eddie]

I would argue that this matters a great deal. The general audience will be confused by this. I'm pretty sure that there's a Kevin Feige interview where he mentions that many people don't even understand why DC characters (he may have used a specific one, like Batman, but I can't remember) can't show up in an Avengers film. The general audience will see two Quicksilver appearances as being some sort of connection that isn't intended.

 

[Chewy]

I'm not sure what you mean.

People are acting like one version of the character is going to invalidate the other, or influence public perception of the other, or that audiences are going to be confused by contradictions between the two.

Most people aren't even going to realize it's the same character, and those who do aren't going to care

 

[Crimson King]

I'm not worried about it. With the sheer number of people already in DoFP, it's not like Quicksilver is going to be some main focus, whereas in Avengers he'll likely get more screentime to let his character breathe a bit more. I seriously doubt anyone besides us and the trades will give a crap.

 

[Eddie]

I'm not worried about it. With the sheer number of people already in DoFP, it's not like Quicksilver is going to be some main focus, whereas in Avengers he'll likely get more screentime to let his character breathe a bit more. I seriously doubt anyone besides us and the trades will give a crap.

Entertainment Weekly recently had a blurb about Ant-Man that was advertised on the cover. You know magazines like that will be all over the Quicksilver controversy when we get closer to one of the movies, if not both. The general audience will be made aware of this confusion by the time A2 rolls out. Superhero films have gotten so big that even magazines geared less to comic fans cover them a great deal.

EDIT: Here's a link to that Feige comment about the general audience not knowing DC characters can't show up in Avengers I referenced earlier.

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2012/05/03/kevin-feige-captain-america-2-spider-man/#more-63640

 

[Crimson King]

Entertainment Weekly recently had a blurb about Ant-Man that was advertised on the cover. You know magazines like that will be all over the Quicksilver controversy when we get closer to one of the movies, if not both. The general audience will be made aware of this confusion by the time A2 rolls out. Superhero films have gotten so big that even magazines geared less to comic fans cover them a great deal.

I consider EW to be a superhero-centric for at least half the year. They're forever putting them on the cover. That being said...so what if they do? Isn't the worry here supposedly that the GA will be confused? If magazines like this EXPLAIN the situation, then there's no confusion.

If there is a ton of publicity, it's only going to work in Marvel's favor. Like I said, he has a much better chance of getting a good showing in Avengers than he does in DoFP.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

People are acting like one version of the character is going to invalidate the other, or influence public perception of the other, or that audiences are going to be confused by contradictions between the two.

Most people aren't even going to realize it's the same character, and those who do aren't going to care

EXACTLY. This really isn't a big deal at all, and I doubt that it affects anything at all.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Entertainment Weekly recently had a blurb about Ant-Man that was advertised on the cover. You know magazines like that will be all over the Quicksilver controversy when we get closer to one of the movies, if not both. The general audience will be made aware of this confusion by the time A2 rolls out. Superhero films have gotten so big that even magazines geared less to comic fans cover them a great deal.

EDIT: Here's a link to that Feige comment about the general audience not knowing DC characters can't show up in Avengers I referenced earlier.

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2012/05/03/kevin-feige-captain-america-2-spider-man/#more-63640

This is all panic for nothing. The GA will not care. It's not like Quiksilver will be a huge character in DOFP, nor will be the only character in Avengers 2.

In a few years we're all going to laugh at how people were worried.

 

[Dark Raven]

I don't think the general public will really care anyway, even if they are made aware of the confusion. They'll just think the issue is one for comic geeks, because all they care about is an entertaining movie.

I don't recall anyone really caring when there were two Bond movies out in the same year. It was just more for them to watch. A lot of people don't even know the difference between an official and non-official Bond movie, with the water muddied further because Sean Connery (whom many consider the true Bond anyway) was in the non-official one.

 

[Hyde]

http://www.**************.com/fansites/MarvelFreshman/news/?a=80274

Sorry for linking but for some reason copy+paste wasn't working on this article for the quote.

Anyway Joss specifically refers to the villain as a 'him' hear instead of 'multiple villains' like last time.

Back to the drawing board

 

[cherokeesam]

SHH doesn't allow linking to CBM....long-standing haterade going on there.

Joss' interview comes from the new Empire issue, and the quote:

"I'm very excited about the villain, and I have a lot to say about him."

So thank GOD we can ditch the Masters of Evil discussion until at least TA3.

Time to restore some normalcy to all this and revert to the obvious: Thanos is still the bad guy for TA2, same as he's always been. So decrees Thanos.

 

[Silvermoth]

Yeah I was really surprised with that villain slip. There was a part of me that was expecting a prison breakout (which would explain the twins) but a scenario like that would be unlikely o have any single villain.

I wonder if there's still a chance for Ultron?

 

[MadVillainy]

Yeah I was really surprised with that villain slip. There was a part of me that was expecting a prison breakout (which would explain the twins) but a scenario like that would be unlikely o have any single villain.

I wonder if there's still a chance for Ultron?

There's a chance but I feel that Ultron would work best with Hank Pym involved and to my knowledge he's not in A2. Nor do I think he should be at this point.

 

[Mjölnir]

It was nice to hear Whedon say that sequels often become all about the villain and that he wasn't about to do that because he was still very interested in exploring the Avengers and how their relationships evolve when they already are a group.