Sequels Who should be the villain in an Avengers sequel? (Poll)

HgatV.jpg

You've raised the bar lately.
 
I think I'm good, I'm only 20 :p

I could personally do with out Kang though. Out of all the avengers villains that we are hoping for, he's probbably my least favorite. Wouldn't bother me if we never see him

Kang is basically their arch-enemy. An Avengers franchise without Kang is as incomplete as Iron Man without the Mandarin.
 
See, for me, that character is Ultron

I'd suggest reading up on the Eternity War, one of the major Avenger story arcs. Check out "Avengers Forever" as a great TPB on the subject. Truly epic time-spanning war with Kang/Immortus.
 
Speaking of Avengers Forever, it's been (?)15(?) years now and no one's made Songbird an Avenger yet. What the hell
 
See, for me, that character is Ultron

Ultron has crossed over into a lot more multi-media and into the mainstream more, but in terms of what has occurred between the covers of the Avengers comics, Kang has had more major stories, with higher stakes.

Ultron to me has a lot of filler appearances, with only maybe two or three good stories, and is too focused on two or three members of the team to really be called the arch-enemy. Kang's focus is on all/ any Avengers, and every time he appears, it's a huge event.

Kang vs. The Grandmaster, The Celestial Madonna Saga, Avengers Forever, the Kang Dynasty, and the First Young Avengers arc are all brilliant. I suggest you check those out before writing off one of the major characters in the MU.
 
Speaking of Avengers Forever, it's been (?)15(?) years now and no one's made Songbird an Avenger yet. What the hell

Hickman hates the character, so don't expect it any time soon.
 
Ultron has crossed over into a lot more multi-media and into the mainstream more, but in terms of what has occurred between the covers of the Avengers comics, Kang has had more major stories, with higher stakes.

Ultron to me has a lot of filler appearances, with only maybe two or three good stories, and is too focused on two or three members of the team to really be called the arch-enemy. Kang's focus is on all/ any Avengers, and every time he appears, it's a huge event.

Kang vs. The Grandmaster, The Celestial Madonna Saga, Avengers Forever, the Kang Dynasty, and the First Young Avengers arc are all brilliant. I suggest you check those out before writing off one of the major characters in the MU.

Ok yeah. I mean. it's personal. I never was a HUGE fan of Kang. To be flat out honest with you guys (I'm about to receive flack probably lol) but I would probably sigh at the confirmation of Kang being the villain in one of the avengers movies.

But I guess I am weird like that
 
Ok yeah. I mean. it's personal. I never was a HUGE fan of Kang. To be flat out honest with you guys (I'm about to receive flack probably lol) but I would probably sigh at the confirmation of Kang being the villain in one of the avengers movies.

But I guess I am weird like that

I agree with Jaqua^^.... Kang to me is not merely as interesting as Ultron. Ultron has great potenital for a MOVIE whereas Kang I feel it would be difficult to incorporate him into a movie storyline seeing as people are excited for Thanos and they both bring similar ideas to the table. Invading earth. Idk about you guys but the first movie with the invasion was good and I plan to enjoy Thanos's invasion on earth with perhaps another army in the 3rd movie, but I cant do 3 movies all revolving around earth invasions.... I say no to Kang for this reason... Bring on Ultron
 
I've never read him in the comics but he's been a real turn off for me on EMH. Every time I see those episodes I always cringe and hope they don't use him in the movies. However with that said though I think the character is really cool, I think it's the actors voice more than anything that makes him unappealing to me.
 
Last edited:
If Kang's as brutal and awesome in the movies as he's in the Ultimate Comics (There Ultimate Reed Richards has basically become the Ultimate Marvel version of Kang.) then a movie with him could have the potencial to beat the Thanos storyline
 
If Kang's as brutal and awesome in the movies as he's in the Ultimate Comics (There Ultimate Reed Richards has basically become the Ultimate Marvel version of Kang.) then a movie with him could have the potencial to beat the Thanos storyline

Kang blew up Washington D.C. in the 616 comics. I'd say he's plenty brutal.
 
haven't read Kang Dynasty yet. Waiting for vol 5 of Busieks run to come out.
 
I put Thanos because it would be silly to build up to him and then show him in another film. However, I'd sooner like Kang or Ultron.
 
At this point, Ultron would be preferable given that between Loki's invasion and Thanos's purple faced cosmic villainy, Kang's shtick is kind of taken.

They probably won't use him until a recast.
 
How about the Hood? He seems like a swell villain.
 
Thanos destroyed the marvel universe lol, in terms of being brutal, Thanos takes the cake lol

Nah, that's just supremely evil. "Brutal" is a level of violence that is jaw-droppingly vicious and animalistic. Sentry ripping Ares in half is brutal; Joker murdering a child in "Death in the Family" is brutal; Dr. Light raping Ralph Dibney's wife is brutal; Hank Pym backhanding Janet Van Dyne across the room is brutal. Idly waving your hand and causing a gazillion aliens that you never see, let alone have even a smidgen of a vested emotional interest in, to suddenly vanish from existence isn't brutal.
 
Nah, that's just supremely evil. "Brutal" is a level of violence that is jaw-droppingly vicious and animalistic. Sentry ripping Ares in half is brutal; Joker murdering a child in "Death in the Family" is brutal; Dr. Light raping Ralph Dibney's wife is brutal; Hank Pym backhanding Janet Van Dyne across the room is brutal. Idly waving your hand and causing a gazillion aliens that you never see, let alone have even a smidgen of a vested emotional interest in, to suddenly vanish from existence isn't brutal.

.....true
 
Nah, that's just supremely evil. "Brutal" is a level of violence that is jaw-droppingly vicious and animalistic. Sentry ripping Ares in half is brutal; Joker murdering a child in "Death in the Family" is brutal; Dr. Light raping Ralph Dibney's wife is brutal; Hank Pym backhanding Janet Van Dyne across the room is brutal. Idly waving your hand and causing a gazillion aliens that you never see, let alone have even a smidgen of a vested emotional interest in, to suddenly vanish from existence isn't brutal.

True.... Tho I was referring to the heart when he absorbed the entire universe..... Not the if but I guess it doesn't matter
 
Nah, that's just supremely evil. "Brutal" is a level of violence that is jaw-droppingly vicious and animalistic. Sentry ripping Ares in half is brutal; Joker murdering a child in "Death in the Family" is brutal; Dr. Light raping Ralph Dibney's wife is brutal; Hank Pym backhanding Janet Van Dyne across the room is brutal. Idly waving your hand and causing a gazillion aliens that you never see, let alone have even a smidgen of a vested emotional interest in, to suddenly vanish from existence isn't brutal.

Exactly.
 
How about the Hood? He seems like a swell villain.

I actually think Hood works as a great side/undervillain, sort of representing the traditional criminal element when in contact with whatever macguffin is involved in the current story. He could very easily be involved in Avengers 2 as the new frontman for Thanos for instance.
 
What if Thanos is after the Heart of the Universe in the MCU instead of the Infinity Gauntlet?

:hehe:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"