The Avengers What Would Happen if Thor and Cap Bomb?

[donko]

I wouldn't be surprised if both Chris Hemsworth and Chris Evans are both recast by the time Avengers starts filming. We just might see Don Cheadle as Captain America and Terrence Howard as Thor at the rate Marvel is going.

 

[Mace Dolex]

Even if the Avengers gets cancelled at least I hope they go ahead with Iron Man 3 to end the trilogy.

 

[jaymes_e06]

I think the even more important question is what if Thor/ Cap bomb and Avengers does really well.

I just blew your mind with a paradox didn't I?

 

[jmc]

If they work they work. I kinda wanna know what happens after Avengers, go back to solo films? Surely Avengers is meant to be the pinnacle, if this one big threat brings all these characters together then really there will never be a threat in a solo film they can't handle, although I guess IM2 didn't worry about that to begin with. I've have the same issue with proposed JL movies, it's a case of 'well we've had the team up, now what?'.

 

[Evil Twin]

I think the even more important question is what if Thor/ Cap bomb and Avengers does really well.

I just blew your mind with a paradox didn't I?

Related to that, what if The Avengers only does about as well as Iron Man?

 

[Spider-Vader]

Market Cap as a war film, plain & simple. Show Cap with a Thompson gunning down Nazis (he did this during WW2, it was a freakin' war) & throwing his shield at the Nazis. Show Bucky being an assassin & taking out top leaders. It'd sell it self.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I think the even more important question is what if Thor/ Cap bomb and Avengers does really well.

I just blew your mind with a paradox didn't I?

That would definitely put Marvel in an awkward position. I guess what would happen is that they would slow up on solo films, push up a sequel for the Avengers and pray that ones good.

 

[Webhead38]

After seeing new shots of Thor and Odin today I can only say one thing - "FLASH! OH OOOOH! King of the impossible!" And it will make about the same amount of money as Flash Gordon too. Omigod. What a complete miss...

 

[misjuevos]

i wouldnt worry. i mean its not like its a normal studio making these things. its marvel studios. all they do is superhero stuff. so if they bomb they will still push forward with more projects. all they do are super heroes.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Related to that, what if The Avengers only does about as well as Iron Man?

Is there some reason to be unhappy with that? I know I'm hoping Avengers does that well.

An Avengers that makes 600+ million is going to be a good thing.

 

[misjuevos]

the real question for marvel studios is "what is next". they really need to get back their other franchises to be able to put together some bigger stories. silver surfer, ff, x-men, these titles alone have so many characters that have either been a story arc in the avengers or just have huge possibilities. alot of the huge marvel events cannot be realized without the inclusion of one of the aforementioned franchises. the superhero genre will suffer greatly if all we get are sequels and reboots. marvel needs to be able to make movies with the full range of their characters.

 

[FaT_tONle]

If you get too cross over happy then that will be overdone and people will be less interested. Avengers is a start, but that should be it for a while. I do agree that it would be highly advantageous to them to reacquire FF among others because their second tier characters after Avengers are weak to say the least. Even notables like Strange, Namor, and BP, could use FF as well as Avengers characters. Still hoping the FF reboot gets shelved unless Marvel has an active role, REALLY active at that.

 

[Spider-Vader]

Stop getting my hopes up for Iron Man vs Dr. Doom or Avngers vs Dr. Doom. >:-C

 

[misjuevos]

i was thinking more of a galactus vs avengers and ff, or course silver surfer would be there. that would be the only crossover heavy one. i like the one inhuman story about the kree coming to take back the inhumans as their weapons and leaving earth. not crossover heavy, it would introduce the kree and inhumans.

 

[Spider-Vader]

Galactus would also be cool. But I'd kill for Dr. Doom to be the next Darth Vader (coincidentally, Vader was inspired by Doom & Mark Hamill thought Vader's concept art was Dr. Doom) in the movies, except even better (or worse?) since he'd be in multiple movies messing with multiple characters. I love Doom.

 

[Dark Raven]

If Marvel owned Doom, I think it would be great to have an Iron Man vs Dr Doom movie set in the time of Camelot, based on Iron Man #149-150. That would make an unusual comic book movie since not only would it be a comic crossover, but a genre crossover (with King Arthur and Morgan Le Fay). It would also have a historical setting and time travel.

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

don't even know what to think at this point

 

[dark_b]

Is there some reason to be unhappy with that? I know I'm hoping Avengers does that well.

An Avengers that makes 600+ million is going to be a good thing.

there is a difference if you movie costs 150 millions and 300 millions.

the more expensive movie needs to make more money. so Avengers can not do JUST IM numbers.
ohhh and Avengers will cost a lot more then 200. a lot more.

 

[topdog1]

After seeing new shots of Thor and Odin today I can only say one thing - "FLASH! OH OOOOH! King of the impossible!" And it will make about the same amount of money as Flash Gordon too. Omigod. What a complete miss...

I didn't see that but apparently a lot of other non-fanboys are already bashing Thor. The Rotten Tomatoes general movie forums are lambasting those Thor photos. Is this a Clash of the Titans backlash or just bashers being bashers? I'm worried about Thor's box office.

Cap on he other hand will hit big enough IMO. I think Thor might struggle and Green Lantern is going to tank. The pressure will REALLY be on Cap next year at this time.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Thor is a great a date slot with no actual competition for 2 weeks, especially if Priest disappoints. Thor will have to rely on good word of mouth a hell of a lot more than Cap does .

I'm really hoping the they screw up the lighting in Thor because that going to be extremely important as we saw from the photos.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

there is a difference if you movie costs 150 millions and 300 millions.

the more expensive movie needs to make more money. so Avengers can not do JUST IM numbers.
ohhh and Avengers will cost a lot more then 200. a lot more.

That's one to remember the next time some Edward Norton fan complains that Marvel got rid of him to save money. That is probably a wise move on their part.

edit: I seriously think it's a mistake to make a movie that is required to top 300 million to make money. (or as you suggest here...more than that?) Usually only 2 or 3 movies a year do that. If Avengers makes 300 million it will be in the elite for that year. It's absurd to create a situation where that isn't enough.

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

That's one to remember the next time some Edward Norton fan complains that Marvel got rid of him to save money. That is probably a wise move on their part.

there's too many factors that come into play to make that judgement call

after all, there is the saying "You've got to spend money to make money"

cutting corners like getting rid of Norton to "save money" could in the end cost/hurt them

 

[JeetKuneDo]

there's too many factors that come into play to make that judgement call

after all, there is the saying "You've got to spend money to make money"

cutting corners like getting rid of Norton to "save money" could in the end cost/hurt them

But if Avengers doesn't cover its costs, Marvel will be criticized (as seen above). I don't see how they have a choice. They can't go around throwing money at actors. There are too many good ones in Hollywood that could easily do what Norton does. Let's not forget that his performance isn't remembered as anything special...unlike RDJ's Stark.

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

^the thing about that is they already casted norton, back in 2008

recasting "to save money" makes them out to look like they're "backpeddling" on their original plan

if these actors cost too much to put into 1 movie, why cast them in the solo films in the first place? Why not cast cheaper actors for the build up and use those same actors in The Avengers

rather then using expensive actors for the solo films just to cheap out on the climax??? doesn't make much sense does it?

no it doesn't, not in the slightest. And this in turn is giving them a bad image which is causing fans to second guess even watching the film all together, which will, in the long run, hurt them rather than help

bottom line, "cutting corners" is NEVER under any circumstance, a "good thing"

 

[knucklebrain43]

Great discussion going on in here guys! After thinking about it some more, I believe that Thor has a much better shot at doing well than Cap. Thor is the first major movie of the summer and it will get some good time to itself. Captain America has several things against it:

1) It is coming at the end of a crowded summer that features perhaps the grandest array of big budget blockbusters: Thor, Pirates 4, The Hangover 2, Kung Fu Panda 2, X-Men First Class, Fast Five, Green Lantern, Rise of the Apes, Cars 2, Transformers 3, Harry Potter 7.2, Winnie the Pooh and Cowboys and Aliens.

Not every one of those movies is destined to be a gigantic success, but it is enough major competition to shroud Captain America.

2) Poor release date. Since Transformers 3 stole July 4th weekend, Captain America can't capitalize on it's patriotic themes. Also, releasing it the week after the final Harry Potter makes me wonder if it will be overshadowed by that behemoth. By the time HP dies down a bit, Cowboys and Aliens will be the newer release and might garner more attention due it to its hollywood-friendly premise and star-studded cast. Captain America might simply get lost in the wind.

On the other hand, if Thor comes out of the gate swinging, perhaps there will be enough positive buzz to carry over to Cap. I guess we will find out next year!