The Avengers Where they have gone wrong with the avengers project so far

[Spider-Fan]

wobbly,

The problem with your examples is that they were all a single franchise. Bond and Batman. There were no crossover films within the continuity.

We're going from Iron Man to Iron Man 2 to the Incredible Hulk to Thor to Captain America, then to Avengers.

If it was from the Incredible Hulk to Incredible Hulk 2, I wouldn't care. This is wholly different. The general audience will get confused unless they specifically reference the events of the Incredible Hulk in the film, out in the open. It can't be like a situation with the news cast in Iron Man 2. Only hardcore fans caught that.

All these films are in the same continuity, and thus 1 franchise in a way. So, you're wrong. This is just like recasting a character within their own franchise, ala Batman. Everyone else is going to be in it except 1 person. As opposed to focusing on that 1 person who won't be in it, just enjoy the crossover. His character is in it, and TIH is in the film's continuity. Just sit back and enjoy

 

[BigThor]

All these films are in the same continuity, and thus 1 franchise in a way. So, you're wrong. This is just like recasting a character within their own franchise, ala Batman. Everyone else is going to be in it except 1 person. As opposed to focusing on that 1 person who won't be in it, just enjoy the crossover. His character is in it, and TIH is in the film's continuity. Just sit back and enjoy

Very true indeed

 

[UltimateJustin]

I would have liked it for at least one character other than Iron Man to have had two movies out before The Avengers was released. That way it would feel even more like multiple heavy hitters who stand on their own converging in this new movie. Instead it feels more like Iron Man its own solid established franchise, and there's three other guys' movies that are basically preludes to The Avengers.

 

[BigThor]

I would have liked it for at least one character other than Iron Man to have had two movies out before The Avengers was released. That way it would feel even more like multiple heavy hitters who stand on their own converging in this new movie. Instead it feels more like Iron Man its own solid established franchise, and there's three other guys' movies that are basically preludes to The Avengers.

I was thinking the same thing, but you never know Thor and Cap might do even better than the Iron Man films (It's not likely but it is possible).

 

[Lord]

I hope Thor and CA: TFA are good enough to stand on their oun, then there will be more people watching Avengers. But i think that even not being successful everybody knows the Hulk.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

All these films are in the same continuity, and thus 1 franchise in a way

Except with wholly different creative teams.

 

[BigThor]

@Lord - True, Hulk's still a popular character even though he's movies aren't that successful.

I'm also positive that Thor and Cap are going to atleast be more successful at the box office than TIH.

 

[Iron_Stark]

Hulk got a raw deal by Marvel and Universal. The movie should've come out in 2009 when there was absolutly nothing in the theaters. Plus it should've had some trailers months to a year before the movie. And the first trailer should've been the trailer from that Best Buy dvd they gave away which established it wasn't a sequel to the '03 version.

I'm glad Cap and Thor aren't getting screwed over by Marvel and actually have a fighting chance to be successful.

 

[jadejaws]

Hulk got a raw deal by Marvel and Universal. The movie should've come out in 2009 when there was absolutly nothing in the theaters. Plus it should've had some trailers months to a year before the movie. And the first trailer should've been the trailer from that Best Buy dvd they gave away which established it wasn't a sequel to the '03 version.

I'm glad Cap and Thor aren't getting screwed over by Marvel and actually have a fighting chance to be successful.

This.

I can already see that Cap and Thor are getting twice as much exposure as TIH got. I still find it fascinating that Hulk even managed to bring in what it did considering the minimal effort Marvel and Universal put into it.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

People need to understand that Marvel wasn't in charge of marketing for TIH. It was mostly Universal's fault, but Universal's marketing has been horrid the past few years.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I would have liked it for at least one character other than Iron Man to have had two movies out before The Avengers was released. That way it would feel even more like multiple heavy hitters who stand on their own converging in this new movie. Instead it feels more like Iron Man its own solid established franchise, and there's three other guys' movies that are basically preludes to The Avengers.

Agreed with the first part it's too early to say that Thor and Captain America' films won't be as good as Iron Man's. Hell, even people before Iron Man were very unsure of how that movie would do.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Except with wholly different creative teams.

And major franchises change creative teams ALL the time. Back in the old days of Bond films, it was rare to get the same writers and director.

 

[UltimateJustin]

Agreed with the first part it's too early to say that Thor and Captain America' films won't be as good as Iron Man's. Hell, even people before Iron Man were very unsure of how that movie would do.

I'm not saying that Thor and Captain America won't be good, they both look like they will be as good as Iron Man to me. I only mean they will not have more than one film each once all these characters unite in the Avengers. It WOULD HAVE been cooler imo to many characters who had supported multiple films uniting into one Avengers film, or at least that the Thor and Captain America film debuts were longer than a year apart from The Avengers.

It's possibly Thor and Captain America will get sequels, but if they do they will come out after The Avengers, which could be seen as underwhelming, though not necessarily.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I'm not saying that Thor and Captain America won't be good, they both look like they will be as good as Iron Man to me. I only mean they will not have more than one film each once all these characters unite in the Avengers. It WOULD HAVE been cooler imo to many characters who had supported multiple films uniting into one Avengers film, or at least that the Thor and Captain America film debuts were longer than a year apart from The Avengers.

It's possibly Thor and Captain America will get sequels, but if they do they will come out after The Avengers, which could be seen as underwhelming, though not necessarily.

But, Cap only makes sense to have 1 film prior to Avengers. He gets unfrozen in Avengers, so why give him a second solo film? It works better for him to have just 1 film. Thor, I am indifferent on having a second film prior to Avengers. I don't feel he needed it. I don't think Iron Man truly needed one either, but it was a safe film for Marvel to make so why not.

 

[BigThor]

But, Cap only makes sense to have 1 film prior to Avengers. He gets unfrozen in Avengers, so why give him a second solo film? It works better for him to have just 1 film. Thor, I am indifferent on having a second film prior to Avengers. I don't feel he needed it. I don't think Iron Man truly needed one either, but it was a safe film for Marvel to make so why not.

Agreed

 

[Iron_Stark]

This.

I can already see that Cap and Thor are getting twice as much exposure as TIH got. I still find it fascinating that Hulk even managed to bring in what it did considering the minimal effort Marvel and Universal put into it.

Yep, I too am amazed it made as much money as it did given it's circumstances, it could've easily bombed hard. That's why I don't listen to anyone who want to write this movie off as a failure, it could've been a lot worse. But I take solace in the fact that it made some good money off the dvd/blu ray sales and we'll be seeing him again in the big screen again.

Imagine if TIH came out the same weekend one year later, it could've easily brought in 160-190 domestically.

In '08 it was dealing with Kung Fu Panda, Indiana Jones, Zohan, and the Happening, all of whom made a good chunk of change that weekend. Panda and Happening made +30 million dom that weekend.

Move it one year later on that same weekend it's competition was The Taking of Pellam 1-2-3 (tanked), Hangover(2nd weekend) and UP(3rd weekend), the rest made under 10 million that weekend.

Then the next weekend was the Proposal and Year One, a chick flick and a movie that bombed. The Proposal ended up making 163 domestically that year. Can you believe that, a f'n chick flick in the middle of the summer making that kind of money.

You know 2009 was dead when Paul Blart: Mall Cop, GI Joe, 2012, Wolverine, the Proposal, the 10th Ice Age movie, Night at the Museum 2, Fast and Furious, etc. are all making more money than TIH.

TIH could've easily been at #1 for two weekends in a row until Transformers 2 debut.

Another missed opportunity by Marvel and Universal.

 

[Mercurius]

Thor will be a success for sure: the scenes shown so far are impressive, and it has Anthony Hopkins and Natalie Portman (who's in the spotlight because of the impeccable Black Swan).

No way it's gonna be less than a success. The fanbase is hyped, the cast is all perfect, and Branagh's heavy shakespearean background is simply exact for the nature of this tale.

Captain America is a doubt, in the least: the choices so far are disputable, Johnston is really uneven, Evans recently said things trying to diminish the mask and the shield (calling attention to Rogers), and out of the US the marketing dep. knows it is a tough sell.

That's why I think Captain America is directly linked to the Avengers movie, as the First Avenger: they know CA can have a modest BO, but it can also attract to itself the hype that is going to the ensemble movie.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Yep, I too am amazed it made as much money as it did given it's circumstances, it could've easily bombed hard. That's why I don't listen to anyone who want to write this movie off as a failure, it could've been a lot worse. But I take solace in the fact that it made some good money off the dvd/blu ray sales and we'll be seeing him again in the big screen again.

Imagine if TIH came out the same weekend one year later, it could've easily brought in 160-190 domestically.

In '08 it was dealing with Kung Fu Panda, Indiana Jones, Zohan, and the Happening, all of whom made a good chunk of change that weekend. Panda and Happening made +30 million dom that weekend.

Move it one year later on that same weekend it's competition was The Taking of Pellam 1-2-3 (tanked), Hangover(2nd weekend) and UP(3rd weekend), the rest made under 10 million that weekend.

Then the next weekend was the Proposal and Year One, a chick flick and a movie that bombed. The Proposal ended up making 163 domestically that year. Can you believe that, a f'n chick flick in the middle of the summer making that kind of money.

You know 2009 was dead when Paul Blart: Mall Cop, GI Joe, 2012, Wolverine, the Proposal, the 10th Ice Age movie, Night at the Museum 2, Fast and Furious, etc. are all making more money than TIH.

TIH could've easily been at #1 for two weekends in a row until Transformers 2 debut.

Another missed opportunity by Marvel and Universal.

I wouldn't call that as much a missed opportunity than just the age-old lesson of "Hindsight's a b***h".

But yeah, it would've been a better decision to release it in 09' so you have a Marvel film in 2009.

 

[UltimateJustin]

But, Cap only makes sense to have 1 film prior to Avengers. He gets unfrozen in Avengers, so why give him a second solo film? It works better for him to have just 1 film. Thor, I am indifferent on having a second film prior to Avengers. I don't feel he needed it. I don't think Iron Man truly needed one either, but it was a safe film for Marvel to make so why not.

You're right, it doesn't make sense for Cap to have more than one prior to the Avengers. And it would probably be hard to keep Thor outside of the Avengers for two movies. So maybe if TIH had done better they would have gotten another one out before Avengers and then Iron Man and Hulk could have been the two established hombres in the Avengers. But oh well, doesn't matter anyways.

What I really mean is, say the 2006 Superman movie lead to a trilogy and that finished up in 2013 a year after Batman's trilogy, and THEN they cashed out with a Batman/Superman movie or Justice League. Something like that, but obviously the Avengers situation is different because they aren't exactly cashing out, just creating cohesiveness.

 

[Aztec]

I can't believe a thread was started to complain about the re-casting of Hulk. That happened months ago. This is the most exciting CBM ever to be filmed and people are still complaining about this?

 

[BigThor]

I can't believe a thread was started to complain about the re-casting of Hulk. That happened months ago. This is the most exciting CBM ever to be filmed and people are still complaining about this?

^ This

 

[WildcatNC]

I can't believe a thread was started to complain about the re-casting of Hulk. That happened months ago. This is the most exciting CBM ever to be filmed and people are still complaining about this?

Its just a fanboy thing. Some would complain no matter what happened.

 

[UltimateJustin]

People are understandably disappointed. A recasting does nothing to actually HARM the potential quality of the movie, but surely for a project like this where some of the appeal IS the continuity, it would have been visually better to see Norton again reprising his role.

Some people are going to take it way out of proportion and say it ruins everything, but it's also not fair to say it doesn't detract anything, either, vato.

 

[Avengers-Report]

When does filming start for the Avengers?

 

[BigThor]

Its just a fanboy thing. Some would complain no matter what happened.

Yep...(Hank Hill voice)