Age of Ultron The Avengers 2! The Official News and Speculation Thread - Upgrade section 5 - Part 7

[ctsketch]

Even if they were never actually gone, you can't keep playing that same card (whether it be for 2 seconds or 2 movies) and think that it will be fresh or get the desired response. We already have seen Stark "die" twice. In 2 straight films no less. Doing it again won't be original. Nor do I feel it is necessary either. People only are discussing this or wanting this because of Whedon's rep as a writer, not for an legitimate story related reason. These discussions are just funny to me, given I have followed Whedon for years, and in all those years, he hasn't been nearly as kill happy to main characters as people think he is.

If people want characters to die, wait for Avengers 3. The film that will feel more like a finale (and will be in many ways). Don't waste your best cards at the mid-point of the story. You want a tear jerker? Kill Fury, Hawkeye, etc. That will get the desired effect. We don't need one of the major Avengers to "die."

NO......Don't kill Hawk Guy

 

[Loki882]

Killing Hawkeye would be the cheapest and laziest move that they could make. "The Avengers who's appeared the least, had the least amount of screentime when he has appeared, and has gotten the least amount of characterization, let's just kill him off." Lazy, lazy, lazy. If they really wanted to do that, killing of Tony or Thor would be more shocking and more effective, provided that it's done well of course.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Doing something purely for shock is the wrong reason to kill someone. There must be a STORY reason for it. Otherwise, that too is lazy.

 

[Son of Coul]

^ Word.

 

[TRM]

I'm more worried about BlackWidow, how many more movies is Johansson on contract for?

I'd say Widow has a good chance of dying. As good as others when you think about it. That might affect Hawkeye a lot if it happens during the end or middle, and would have more of an impact on the audience.

Whedon loves to tug heart strings, so it may affect Cap and Hawkeye, and maybe even Bucky in some way. Widow had her fair share of screentime in Avengers, and we might not need to see much more of her past after CA2.
She'll have a lot of screen time to herself in CA2.
If it's true that Hawkeye is getting a lot of screentime, then i can see them cutting hers...

Hawkeye needs the screentime/development.
New characters need screentime. Two new Avengers are coming in. The main four and Ultron need their screentime too... I just feel that CA2 will be the last time Black Widow really shines, and then her character doesn't need as much development. A death might actually be more probable for her. Hawkeye still needs time to shine, and it would shake the team up in a way that is even more shocking than Coulson's death. It could make it more personal between Hawkeye and Ultron, whereas others would be regretting their hand in making Ultron. Hawkeye might need more to tie him to Ultron... Especially if Widow was falsely labelled a traitor along with Cap, fury and Falcon after CA2 in Shield's files, and then Ultron takes it upon himself to kill those who are still rogue/mia from Shield. Hawkeye starts looking into how Cap, Fury, Widow, and Falcon were not in the wrong, and how Shield was infiltrated.

 

[chamber-music]

They could kill off a whole bunch of Shield agents.

 

[Dark Raven]

They could kill off a whole bunch of Shield agents.

Starting with Agent Ward.

 

[DrCosmic]

Widow as the only strong woman has almost no chance of dying. Not only is it out of Whedon's character to kill off his only female, but it invites a whole lot of Women in Refrigerators talk if used to fuel the development of males. You can actually lose fans if you do this on that kind of level.

Doing something purely for shock is the wrong reason to kill someone. There must be a STORY reason for it. Otherwise, that too is lazy.

True... so what do you think about killing in order to make it dark or change the tone of the story? Is that shock or is that story?

 

[Hawkingbird]

I'd much prefer them to kill a load of SHIELD agents than other Avengers (especially Hawkeye).

 

[Spider-Fan]

True... so what do you think about killing in order to make it dark or change the tone of the story? Is that shock or is that story?

It honestly depends on what you needed to achieve in the story in killing that character. Let me look at Buffy for a second. In season 2, the love interest for Giles (Ms. Calender) was killed by Angelus. Many were shocked when this happened. But, why did Joss kill her? It was to show that Angelus wasn't a typical good guy gone evil character who had something inside him that could be redeemed. This also served to drive a wedge between Angel and the rest of the Scoobys later on. So, while it was shocking Ms. Calender was killed off, it wasn't done simply for shock. This is my point in killing off characters. There needs to be a goal and an end game. To this point, people are suggesting characters to kill off for the sake of shocking the audience in AoU. If you're going to stop all future stories involving a character, there needs to be a REASON for it beyond people won't see it coming. So, instead of saying "Let's kill Iron Man," you need to find a good reason for it.

 

[ctsketch]

I'm more worried about BlackWidow, how many more movies is Johansson on contract for?

I'd say Widow has a good chance of dying. As good as others when you think about it. That might affect Hawkeye a lot if it happens during the end or middle, and would have more of an impact on the audience.

Whedon loves to tug heart strings, so it may affect Cap and Hawkeye, and maybe even Bucky in some way. Widow had her fair share of screentime in Avengers, and we might not need to see much more of her past after CA2.
She'll have a lot of screen time to herself in CA2.
If it's true that Hawkeye is getting a lot of screentime, then i can see them cutting hers...

Hawkeye needs the screentime/development.
New characters need screentime. Two new Avengers are coming in. The main four and Ultron need their screentime too... I just feel that CA2 will be the last time Black Widow really shines, and then her character doesn't need as much development. A death might actually be more probable for her. Hawkeye still needs time to shine, and it would shake the team up in a way that is even more shocking than Coulson's death. It could make it more personal between Hawkeye and Ultron, whereas others would be regretting their hand in making Ultron. Hawkeye might need more to tie him to Ultron... Especially if Widow was falsely labelled a traitor along with Cap, fury and Falcon after CA2 in Shield's files, and then Ultron takes it upon himself to kill those who are still rogue/mia from Shield. Hawkeye starts looking into how Cap, Fury, Widow, and Falcon were not in the wrong, and how Shield was infiltrated.

And we'll be back to ONE female avenger, lol

 

[Dr. Evil]

So what are the odds we see Vision in this movie?

 

[Scarecrow_King]

With the addition of Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, I'm not sure we'll see Vision added into the Avengers roster during the movie. I wouldn't be surprised if an after credits scene revealed him though.

 

[Gamma Goliath]

That would make a great mid credits scene.

 

[Loki882]

Doing something purely for shock is the wrong reason to kill someone. There must be a STORY reason for it. Otherwise, that too is lazy.

That was my point, hence the "provided that it's done well" part of my post.

 

[TeeKay]

do you guys think they will go back to the red and gold for iron man in AoU?

I doubt it. He'll probably have the black and gold one I think.t: That would be cool if he wears that armour.

With the addition of Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, I'm not sure we'll see Vision added into the Avengers roster during the movie. I wouldn't be surprised if an after credits scene revealed him though.

After credits scene will probably for Ant-man, I'm sure of that.

 

[cherokeesam]

It honestly depends on what you needed to achieve in the story in killing that character. Let me look at Buffy for a second. In season 2, the love interest for Giles (Ms. Calender) was killed by Angelus. Many were shocked when this happened. But, why did Joss kill her? It was to show that Angelus wasn't a typical good guy gone evil character who had something inside him that could be redeemed. This also served to drive a wedge between Angel and the rest of the Scoobys later on. So, while it was shocking Ms. Calender was killed off, it wasn't done simply for shock. This is my point in killing off characters. There needs to be a goal and an end game. To this point, people are suggesting characters to kill off for the sake of shocking the audience in AoU. If you're going to stop all future stories involving a character, there needs to be a REASON for it beyond people won't see it coming. So, instead of saying "Let's kill Iron Man," you need to find a good reason for it.

Pretty sure everybody who's advocating for "killing off" Iron Man, or Hawkeye, or any other Avenger in this thread, is doing so with the hope/understanding that there'll be a reason for it that's organic and emotional to the story. I haven't heard anybody talking about killing off a major character just for the lulz.

 

[chamber-music]

They will probably have a mid-credits and after credits scene like the first movie.

 

[Scarecrow_King]

ugh, that black and gold armor is ass ugly. My guess is his new armor will look like the Bleeding Edge.

 

[Crimson King]

I like the black and gold armor (minus a few of the Bendis glowing circles), but I also like Bleeding Edge, so either one is good with me.

 

[TeeKay]

Yeah I don't think we're getting the Bleeding Edge armour. We might get a much better improved version of the Mark 42.

 

[DrCosmic]

It honestly depends on what you needed to achieve in the story in killing that character. Let me look at Buffy for a second. In season 2, the love interest for Giles (Ms. Calender) was killed by Angelus. Many were shocked when this happened. But, why did Joss kill her? It was to show that Angelus wasn't a typical good guy gone evil character who had something inside him that could be redeemed. This also served to drive a wedge between Angel and the rest of the Scoobys later on. So, while it was shocking Ms. Calender was killed off, it wasn't done simply for shock. This is my point in killing off characters. There needs to be a goal and an end game. To this point, people are suggesting characters to kill off for the sake of shocking the audience in AoU. If you're going to stop all future stories involving a character, there needs to be a REASON for it beyond people won't see it coming. So, instead of saying "Let's kill Iron Man," you need to find a good reason for it.

Challenge Accepted!

So, Iron Man is at fault for the creation of Ultron, not only that, but he has been taken over by Ultron, not unlike Rhodey was a hostage of Whiplash in IM2, Tony is a hostage of Ultron, like in the Mighty Avengers comic, though without the random female body. He is the one who talks back and forth with Ultron for dialogue and such, not unlike his dialogue with Loki, but more of it. In the end, it is Tony who, from the inside, manages to make an opening for the team to get to Ultron, and when Ultron's final form is revealed as the new casing for the suit Tony is currently in, the team has the hard work of not only taking Ultron down, but Tony down with him. So when Avengers 2 ends, the note is super down, because they've gained their victory with the noble self sacrifice of Tony Stark "A hero among heroes" Cap might say.

Except Cap would be dead too by then.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Pretty sure everybody who's advocating for "killing off" Iron Man, or Hawkeye, or any other Avenger in this thread, is doing so with the hope/understanding that there'll be a reason for it that's organic and emotional to the story. I haven't heard anybody talking about killing off a major character just for the lulz.

But in response to naming people like Fury, Hawkeye, etc, the most common defense against them and killing someone more major is "it would be more shocking" as opposed to offering better reasons.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Challenge Accepted!

So, Iron Man is at fault for the creation of Ultron, not only that, but he has been taken over by Ultron, not unlike Rhodey was a hostage of Whiplash in IM2, Tony is a hostage of Ultron, like in the Mighty Avengers comic, though without the random female body. He is the one who talks back and forth with Ultron for dialogue and such, not unlike his dialogue with Loki, but more of it. In the end, it is Tony who, from the inside, manages to make an opening for the team to get to Ultron, and when Ultron's final form is revealed as the new casing for the suit Tony is currently in, the team has the hard work of not only taking Ultron down, but Tony down with him. So when Avengers 2 ends, the note is super down, because they've gained their victory with the noble self sacrifice of Tony Stark "A hero among heroes" Cap might say.

Except Cap would be dead too by then.

But once again, we had that exact scene in Avengers when Iron Man went into the wormhole (remember "Stark, you know that is a one way trip?"). Having Stark do this again treads the same ground we already covered, regardless if they actually leave him dead this time.

 

[DyeLorean]

I expect to see a more classic look for Iron Man, but I would also like love to see some of those great designs from the third act of Iron Man Three. I remember watching a lot of awesome Mark armours that weren't even shown at that battle.