The Avengers The Avengers: News and Speculation - Part 27A sub-se - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 26

[Alexei Belyakov]

Spider-Fan, the movie Feige cut was not the movie Norton & Leterrier agreed to do (and shot). That pretty much says it all. That's why Norton refused to do press & tried to disassociate himself from the film. TIH was just the beginning of Feige's crap though. He sabotaged IM2 during the shoot. He & Favreau argued constantly on-set & that meddling behavior is pretty much what drove Favreau away from the franchise.

 

[TheVileOne]

I just feel that Feige doesn't care for these characters as much as he should. There was one story I remember reading where Joe Johnston was originally going to call the Howling Commandos the Invaders in Captain America, until his son came on set one day while they were filming and pointed out that their name was incorrect. Just thinking that Feige would have let something even as small as that make it into the movie angers me. It seems like someone in his position would have caught that early on and had it changed so it could be faithful to the source material.

What's the big deal? Why should they be called the Invaders? Shouldn't they be called the Howling Commandoes, and also what does it even matter? It's a Captain America movie and those were minor characters. The name was irrelevant. Invaders was an old school comic superhero team that consisted of Cap, Bucky, Namor, and the original Human Torch. They weren't in the movie hence the name not being in there. For you to get angry over that seems silly.

It shouldn't have been "Why the hell not?", should have been "We need to change this right away! How did I allow this into the script?!". This guy's supposed to be a comic-book nerd and he almost let something like that slip?

Again, I don't see your point. Why does this name matter so much?

Feige also doesn't like making long movies because with shorter time frames, you can have more showings in a theater which equals more profit. Profit is a necessity, but he shouldn't be doing that to the movies for that sole purpose. Give people a great and full story without going crazy in the editing room trying to shorten it. Because frankly, IM2 and the MCU films after it have felt a little rushed. The guy's controlling, and he had truly great scenes edited from The Incredible Hulk as well. I really don't blame Norton for feeling the way he felt, the man was passionate about that movie and he saw most of the heart being pulled out of it.

OK the runtime issue. Not everything needs to be two and a half hour LOTR length. Longer run times didn't really help the sequels to the Pirates films which were much longer movies. Iron Man, Iron Man 2, and Cap were all over two hours.

Also I don't think the cut scenes in Hulk were all his call. I think David Maisel had something to do with that.

Here is the other thing. Hulk was made shorter for a reason. People found the first movie too long, boring, and self-involved. So they wanted the new one to be quicker and more audience friendly. It didn't work this time, but they did all that for a reason.

No idea who I'd want to replace Feige, but I'm not a big fan of him being in control. Feels like the MCU films are "small" in comparison to earlier Marvel films such as the Spider-Man movies and even Fantastic Four. Iron Man is really the only film that I can say had a pretty huge scope. I don't know if it's the budgets, the way these movies are being filmed, or what. I just hope it changes for The Avengers because I don't want it feeling like a small single-character movie but with multple superheroes in it(Ex: An Iron Man movie with the rest of the Avengers in it). This movie needs to be huge and Disney's involvement has given me hope. If it weren't for them I would be even more weary than I am now because I don't think Feige would deliver it on his own.

LOL seriously man? How were the FF movies that much bigger not to mention both those movies were way shorter than Hulk and Thor. To me those movies lacked quite a bit of scale not to mention making Galactus into a giant cloud.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Was everybody pleased with how Bucky died or the scene where Cap awakened in present day? Those scenes felt rushed and were lacking impact. The only part of his present-day scene I loved is when he looked around Times Square in awe and confusion. In the set videos, Fury gave Cap a firm handshake out of respect. Why was that scene edited out?! It would have been marvelous.

 

[TheVileOne]

Spider-Fan, the movie Feige cut was not the movie Norton & Leterrier agreed to do (and shot). That pretty much says it all. That's why Norton refused to do press & tried to dissasociate himself from the film. TIH was just the beginning of Feige's crap though. He sabotaged IM2 during the shoot. He & Favreau argued constantly on-set & that meddling behavior is pretty much what drove Favreau away from the franchise.

How do you know all of that was Feige's decision? Also, Norton should've been more professional and more of a team player and made more compromises. Norton is notorious on projects for wanting everything his way.

 

[The Infernal]

prolly did ur mom too

Make my baby Marvel ....wait, that's not how it goes.

 

[Xeno]

Yes, but something being shot doesn't necessarily make the final edit of a film. You'll discover when actually piecing it together that you can't just throw all your footage into the timeline and it works cause it does so in the script. The script is a blueprint for a visual art form, not a manner of seeing the movie before it is made. Don't make that mistake.

And as for the Invader vs Howling Commandoes thing...did it honestly matter what they were called? I didn't think so.

In CA:TFA, no one ever even said the name "Howling Commandos", so it's a moot point anyway.

 

[TheVileOne]

I can't believe that's a sticking point for the anti-Feige crowd. Who gives a ****ing ****?

Also shouldn't that be a reason we support Feige for a movie not getting something like that so blatantly wrong? Even Avi Arad suggested that MJ call Peter "Tiger" in the first Spider-Man movie. There was nothing wrong with that. Producers make suggestions like that all the time.

The Invaders weren't in the movie so that name shouldn't even be used. And Howling Commandoes was never said either so it doesn't matter. They were minor tertiary characters that barely had any lines to begin with.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

What's the big deal? Why should they be called the Invaders? Shouldn't they be called the Howling Commandoes, and also what does it even matter? It's a Captain America movie and those were minor characters. The name was irrelevant. Invaders was an old school comic superhero team that consisted of Cap, Bucky, Namor, and the original Human Torch. They weren't in the movie hence the name not being in there. For you to get angry over that seems silly.



Again, I don't see your point. Why does this name matter so much?



OK the runtime issue. Not everything needs to be two and a half hour LOTR length. Longer run times didn't really help the sequels to the Pirates films which were much longer movies. Iron Man, Iron Man 2, and Cap were all over two hours.

Also I don't think the cut scenes in Hulk were all his call. I think David Maisel had something to do with that.

Here is the other thing. Hulk was made shorter for a reason. People found the first movie too long, boring, and self-involved. So they wanted the new one to be quicker and more audience friendly. It didn't work this time, but they did all that for a reason.



LOL seriously man? How were the FF movies that much bigger not to mention both those movies were way shorter than Hulk and Thor. To me those movies lacked quite a bit of scale not to mention making Galactus into a giant cloud.

That's exactly my point, the Howling Commandos were almost called The Invaders in Cap's movie which would have been wrong. And they shouldn't have been 'minor' characters at all, but developing characters in a comic is a lot easier than doing it in a movie.

Like I said, a movie doesn't need to be long to be great. It just needs the right scenes and character development/moments which I feel some of the MCU movies haven't taken advantage of.

I also honestly think the action scenes in FF2 had a larger scope than the ones in Cap,Thor, and IM2; But I hated FF2 and liked the MCU movies. That's just one guy's opinion, though. I just want to leave a Marvel movie feeling content like I used to, not feeling like the movie was lacking something. I want to love these films, not like them.

 

[Suzanne78]

Was everybody pleased with how Bucky died or the scene where Cap awakened in present day? Those scenes felt rushed and were lacking impact. The only part of his present-day scene I loved is when he looked around Times Square in awe and confusion. In the set videos, Fury gave Cap a firm handshake out of respect. Why was that scene edited out?! It would have been marvelous.

I loved the ending to TFA personally because it was so bittersweet. Bucky's fate could've been done better, but that was pretty much my only major nitpick with TFA, which I loved, probably as much as IM.

 

[The Infernal]

I loved the ending to TFA personally because it was so bittersweet. Bucky's fate could've been done better, but that was pretty much my only major nitpick with TFA, which I loved, probably as much as IM.

I gotta agree here with both points. I saw some whining over the ending of Cap, but when I saw the movie it seemed like a great ending. The only downside that I saw was that we wouldn't be seeing them explore how Cap dealing with being in the modern world, but then most of us here probably knew that already going into the film.

 

[TheVileOne]

That's exactly my point, the Howling Commandos were almost called The Invaders in Cap's movie. And they shouldn't have been 'minor' characters at all, but developing characters in a comic is a lot easier than doing it in a movie.

No they should be minor characters in a Captain America movie. I don't think it is Feige's fault if they were almost called Invaders. Argument diffused. Captain America was the main character and star that needs to get the most development.

Like I said, a movie doesn't need to be long to be great. It just needs the right scenes and character development/moments which I feel some of the MCU movies haven't taken advantage of.

Eh whatever. I think in Cap it was enough between Cap, Bucky, the Red Skull and the romance with Peggy. In a two hour film I couldn't ask for much more. If the Commandos weren't even there I probably wouldn't mind either.

I also honestly think the action scenes in FF2 had a larger scope than the ones in Thor, but I hated FF2 and liked Thor. That's just one guy's opinon. though.

LET'S GO FOR A SPIN!!!

 

[Spider-Fan]

Spider-Fan, the movie Feige cut was not the movie Norton & Leterrier agreed to do (and shot). That pretty much says it all. That's why Norton refused to do press & tried to disassociate himself from the film. TIH was just the beginning of Feige's crap though. He sabotaged IM2 during the shoot. He & Favreau argued constantly on-set & that meddling behavior is pretty much what drove Favreau away from the franchise.

If Norton and LL didn't have final cut in their contract, no...Feige is not obligated to release their cut. That's how the industry works, like it or not. Also, directors and producers fight all the time, and egos clashing have made some of the best masterpieces of film. Being involved in your projects is not necessarily a bad thing. Also, it was never confirmed that is why Favs left. Meddling is not always bad, just like total control is not always good. Look at Superman Returns as a great example of a poor movie where the director had free reign. Nothing is black/white.

 

[TheVileOne]

Not like Favreau isn't involved with the Avengers movie. Also, Favreau isn't perfect either. He also made mistakes. Just saying .

 

[Spider-Fan]

Was everybody pleased with how Bucky died or the scene where Cap awakened in present day? Those scenes felt rushed and were lacking impact. The only part of his present-day scene I loved is when he looked around Times Square in awe and confusion. In the set videos, Fury gave Cap a firm handshake out of respect. Why was that scene edited out?! It would have been marvelous.

I was pleased how both turned out, personally. Cap had a ton of material to cover and I was never once bored or looked at my watch anytime I saw it. That says how good it was, and both those scenes worked.

 

[Alexei Belyakov]

How do you know all of that was Feige's decision? Also, Norton should've been more professional and more of a team player and made more compromises. Norton is notorious on projects for wanting everything his way.

Feige is notorious for not respecting the talent. That's what Norton was. It took the studio a long time to convince Norton to come out & play & then instead of cherishing the fact that this brilliant actor had agreed to do their Hulk film, they (Feige) tore it to pieces in post. When Darren Aronofsky is on set, you leave him alone. Why? Because in 6 months he'll turn in a brilliant movie that will make you as a producer - infamous for being behind said film. Same goes for David O. Russell, Nick Refn, Terry Malick, etc... Feige just can't let the talent be. He HAS to jump in & throw in his two useless cents, compromising the material & undermining the visionary's vision. Iron Man was the only MCU film that was really allowed to be the director's vision.

 

[Suzanne78]

I gotta agree here with both points. I saw some whining over the ending of Cap, but when I saw the movie it seemed like a great ending. The only downside that I saw was that we wouldn't be seeing them explore how Cap dealing with being in the modern world, but then most of us here probably knew that already going into the film.

From the looks of where Cap is in Avengers, that ending will be a perfect bridge between TFA and Avengers too.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

No they should be minor characters in a Captain America movie. I don't think it is Feige's fault if they were almost called Invaders. Argument diffused. Captain America was the main character and star that needs to get the most development.



Eh whatever. I think in Cap it was enough between Cap, Bucky, the Red Skull and the romance with Peggy. In a two hour film I couldn't ask for much more. If the Commandos weren't even there I probably wouldn't mind either.



LET'S GO FOR A SPIN!!!

I disagree, I don't think they should be minor characters just because it's a Captain America movie. If you want the audience to care about what these characters go through, then you should have some development and exploration to get them to care. And yeah, if the Howling Commandos weren't in there I wouldn't have minded but since they were it's another story. Argument diffused? I was never arguing to begin with.

I'm guessing the "Let's go for a spin!" is a quote from the FF movie? Not sure where you're going with that...

 

[The Infernal]

From the looks of where Cap is in Avengers, that ending will be a perfect bridge between TFA and Avengers too.

True. I'm really keen on seeing how Whedon tackles Cap being a man out of time alongside the Avengers, but I'm also wanting to see how it's explored in Cap 2 without since they'll have a Cap-centric story to really get into it.

 

[Wade Garrett]

So based on the footage and what we've seen set wise, I figured I'd do a little speculating

Spoiler

and say that at some point CA and IM head to Germany to stop Loki. During the battle they disagree on battle strategy, probably IM not willing to take orders from CA. For whatever reason Loki is taken captive, except we know its willingly probably to get to the cosmic cube. This leads us up to the shot of him being escorted and then the shot of CA and IM arguing with the staff behind them. Thor kinda heads over to it, as if he knows what it is. Then we have the scene of Fury talking to Loki with everyone in the next room. The group plans there next move, maybe his "gangster aliens" are still reaking havok or something. I want to say that at this point Loki gets into the head of either BW or Hulk, or both. I'm basing this solely on the look BW gives Loki, and also in the shot of Banner transforming, he looks secluded and almost in pain, as if Loki is getting into his head somewhere in the depths of the Helicarrier and he is attempting to fight him off and gain control. During the battle that ensues between Hulk and crew I feel like this is where maybe BW some how sneaks Loki his staff, and he uses it to free himself and steal the cube. After that I'm really not sure.

Anyway like I said, just speculating probably none of that is actually how it plays out.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

I will say that the romance between Cap and Peggy was well done, though. Hugo Weaving as the Red Skull kind of let me down. All right, I'm done nitpicking for the night.

 

[Suzanne78]

I feel like unless you're a true Marvel/Paramount/Universal studio insider, you're not going to have a whole lot of accurate insight into what happened behind the scenes with IM/TIH/Thor/TFA. We all have our biases, we all have strong opinions either way on the movie. But from what I'm reading here are mostly subjective interpretations of sketchy facts that we just don't have a full and accurate accounting for. And we may never get it until a book comes out or something.

 

[TheVileOne]

Feige is notorious for not respecting the talent. That's what Norton was. It took the studio a long time to convince Norton to come out & play & then instead of cherishing the fact that this brilliant actor had agreed to do their Hulk film, they (Feige) tore it to pieces in post. When Darren Aronofsky is on set, you leave him alone. Why? Because in 6 months he'll turn in a brilliant movie that will make you as a producer - infamous for being behind said film. Same goes for David O. Russell, Nick Refn, Terry Malick, etc... Feige just can't let the talent be. He HAS to jump in & throw in his two useless cents, compromising the material & undermining the visionary's vision. Iron Man was the only MCU film that was really allowed to be the director's vision.

Dude c'mon. Aronofsky made two indie films that became mainstream successes. The Fountain was his big studio film and it a hellish experience to work on for him and dealing with Fox. Aronofsky dropped out of The Wolverine because The Black Swan became a gigantic hit and he realized he didn't have to do The Wolverine and compromise his integrity and vision like Gavin Hood. Now Aronofsky has clout and will have a lot more creative control on whatever project he does next.

You've yet to supply any legitimate evidence except your perception of what happened with Hulk. Which wasn't only Feige. David Maisel played a part in that.

Without Feige these and an Avengers movie wouldn't even be happening. I've yet to see any legitimate example how he mistreats the talent or how he ruins a movie by getting his two scents in. How has he done that? The deleted scenes for Thor were not that great.

Nick Refn? Please. Let's see what happens when he actually has to work on something with an actual significant budget and a major international release. You act like Refn is at Chris Nolan and James Cameron's level. He is far from that. He's an up and comer sure, but he hasn't done a big, huge film of the level that Feige has produced.

 

[Alexei Belyakov]

Suzanne, I know people that worked on IM2. After hearing their experiences on-set, of how Feige terrorizingly micro-managed Favreau, I pretty much made up my mind about the guy. Not to mention, I was hearing about that behavior as the film was being made, so imagine my reaction after watching IM2 a year later. The decline in quality couldn't be more evident. It really wasn't Favreau's film, and I wasn't at all surprised when he walked away from his own franchise.

 

[Herolee10]

So based on the footage and what we've seen set wise, I figured I'd do a little speculating

Spoiler

and say that at some point CA and IM head to Germany to stop Loki. During the battle they disagree on battle strategy, probably IM not willing to take orders from CA. For whatever reason Loki is taken captive, except we know its willingly probably to get to the cosmic cube. This leads us up to the shot of him being escorted and then the shot of CA and IM arguing with the staff behind them. Thor kinda heads over to it, as if he knows what it is. Then we have the scene of Fury talking to Loki with everyone in the next room. The group plans there next move, maybe his "gangster aliens" are still reaking havok or something. I want to say that at this point Loki gets into the head of either BW or Hulk, or both. I'm basing this solely on the look BW gives Loki, and also in the shot of Banner transforming, he looks secluded and almost in pain, as if Loki is getting into his head somewhere in the depths of the Helicarrier and he is attempting to fight him off and gain control. During the battle that ensues between Hulk and crew I feel like this is where maybe BW some how sneaks Loki his staff, and he uses it to free himself and steal the cube. After that I'm really not sure.

Anyway like I said, just speculating probably none of that is actually how it plays out.

Good theory; though in Hulk's case, I think he transforms as a result of being blasted out of the window (alongside someone else) inside the Hellcarrier. The EW article states that it's due to Hulk's uncontrollable anger that results in the Avengers getting in a brawl with him, so I'm thinking that whatever Loki does as a way of escaping captivity leads to Hulk getting extremely pissed off to the point where he can't control his emotions like he'd normally be able to.

 

[MahvelBaby!]

If Norton and LL didn't have final cut in their contract, no...Feige is not obligated to release their cut. That's how the industry works, like it or not. Also, directors and producers fight all the time, and egos clashing have made some of the best masterpieces of film. Being involved in your projects is not necessarily a bad thing. Also, it was never confirmed that is why Favs left. Meddling is not always bad, just like total control is not always good. Look at Superman Returns as a great example of a poor movie where the director had free reign. Nothing is black/white.

Let's not forget the best example of total control gone wrong known to man.