Would a ThunderBolts film work?

[Spider-ManHero12]

Now, hear me out for a second. The ThunderBolts comic series is great and very interesting, so I wonder if it can make it into the film universe. Personally, I don't think it will, but hey, it might. They could bring back Willem Dafoe as Norman, but this film would probably happen sometime after the Spidey films and all that if it actually did happen, but as I said, I'm not sure if it will.

 

[OsGom]

Hmmm. Maybe down the road when many of the other villians are more flushed out.

Personally I would prefer a Runaways adaptation.

 

[WillardNation]

If they were to do a Thunderbolts movie it would have to be the original incarnation. To have the current team/storyline you would first have to go through the whole civil war and everything and that's just way too much to fit into a movie.

 

[cerealkiller182]

Yes. The idea of supervillains recruited by the government for good could work very nicely. I think you would have to stick with the original team members instead of the post-Civil War team where many of the characters are more closely tied to other franchises (Penance, Venom, Green Goblin, Bullseye)

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

^^ Good point.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Well, even though I already voted "not sure", I officially feel that the film can work, tbh.

 

[Spider-Vader]

I think when it should happen when Marvel reboots their franchises. Though, I do think they should keep some newer characters like Gobbie, Bullseye & Venom to bring in fans of those characters.

 

[Hypestyle]

sure why not.. hmm.. based on the current team or the originals, though? If the originals, when should the "reveal" take place?

 

[TwilightPro101]

I think when it should happen when Marvel reboots their franchises. Though, I do think they should keep some newer characters like Gobbie, Bullseye & Venom to bring in fans of those characters.

Definitely agree.

 

[Spider-Vader]

I don't a movie like this selling unless it has recognizable characters.

 

[cerealkiller182]

its an interesting premise done before but with superpowers. I dont think the popularity of the members used mean much, I doubt they would use the versions of Venom, Bullseye, and Green Goblin that people recognized anyway. I think the premise itself would fit just fine. Realistically it in general sounds like a modest budget movie with a chance at moderate success and future cult status even if they do decide to use Bullseye or Venom.

 

[Spider-Vader]

I just don't see the current Marvel movie universe being as bad as it will be in a re-boot series. I don't think we'll see a 'Thunderbolts' movie anytime soon.

 

[The Overlord]

The problem is in the comics the thunderbolts were villains who were established for years, so they them reforming was a genuine surprise and a pivotal moment for them, in a movie they won't be established characters, so there won't be any drama in them acting as heroes or even "heroes" in the case of the recent thunderbolts.

 

[Chris Wallace]

Here's the problem as I see it-or rather problems;
1-marketing the film with villains that audiences are not familiar with is a difficult proposition at best. Remember, it has to not only appeal to us, but also the uninitiated. In order to redeem the bad guy, they have to be seen as doing bad.
2-can't use established movie villains b/c Hollywood has a tendency of killing them off.

And the ones that are alive just wouldn't fit.
3-the rights to the villains, like the heroes, are too scattered for it to even be feasible.

 

[Artistsean]

It might upset fans, but they could make the film like a solo (unrelated) marvel movie. Maybe have generic like characters who used to be bad guys,
If the studio was worried about tie ins and what not.

 

[Chris Wallace]

Animated would probably be the best-if not only-way to go.

 

[cerealkiller182]

Here's the problem as I see it-or rather problems;
1-marketing the film with villains that audiences are not familiar with is a difficult proposition at best. Remember, it has to not only appeal to us, but also the uninitiated. In order to redeem the bad guy, they have to be seen as doing bad.

how do u account for the hundreds of movies that have come out with original premises and characters? Familiarity has nothing to do with it. Its a perk not a necessity

 

[Chris Wallace]

So you want a movie that's basically "TINO"?

 

[GNR]

Convicted supervillains under pay of the government as a black ops unit taking on suicide missions with lots of espionage and action to boot?

Hell yes.

 

[Hypestyle]

Ali Larter for Moonstone!

 

[The Overlord]

how do u account for the hundreds of movies that have come out with original premises and characters? Familiarity has nothing to do with it. Its a perk not a necessity

Thunderbots was about a bunch of established villains who decided to redeem themselves as villains, considering there is no movie to establish them as villains in the first place, the whole thing doesn't work.

 

[Chris Wallace]

For once you & I agree, Overlord.

 

[cerealkiller182]

So you want a movie that's basically "TINO"?

No, not TINO. I was talking about the fact that original character have been created for film and the audience have been interested thus the familiarity of the characters are moot. You still use the original T-bolts and adapt them appropriately but because they arnt recognizable by the general audience like say Venom and Bullseye (only because they have already appeared on film) just means that like an original film character they would be introduced to the audience through the movie despite have years of development in comics. The original T-bolts were more like Marvel U villains. They moved around more than being nemesis to a specific character, and would be easier to use than Venom and Bullseye after Marvel tries to hunt down and buy backt he rights or sell the rights to Fox so those characters could appear. I didnt even really like the movie-verse Venom (Bullseye could work though, he wasnt fantastic but he could work). And would rather see a whole new group than prior movie run-off appearing in another movie.

Familiarity is a perk, Superman is a bankable name, but if the characters are unknown than they have the same risk factors as an original made for film character which the studios arnt that shy about doing.

Thunderbots was about a bunch of established villains who decided to redeem themselves as villains, considering there is no movie to establish them as villains in the first place, the whole thing doesn't work.

There have been plenty of movies where characters start guilt ridden, with skeletons in their closets, at the brink of suicide, with severe emotional problems, etc. all relating to events prior to the events of the movie. Why would that not work now?

 

[The Overlord]

No, not TINO. I was talking about the fact that original character have been created for film and the audience have been interested thus the familiarity of the characters are moot. You still use the original T-bolts and adapt them appropriately but because they arnt recognizable by the general audience like say Venom and Bullseye (only because they have already appeared on film) just means that like an original film character they would be introduced to the audience through the movie despite have years of development in comics. The original T-bolts were more like Marvel U villains. They moved around more than being nemesis to a specific character, and would be easier to use than Venom and Bullseye after Marvel tries to hunt down and buy backt he rights or sell the rights to Fox so those characters could appear. I didnt even really like the movie-verse Venom (Bullseye could work though, he wasnt fantastic but he could work). And would rather see a whole new group than prior movie run-off appearing in another movie.

Familiarity is a perk, Superman is a bankable name, but if the characters are unknown than they have the same risk factors as an original made for film character which the studios arnt that shy about doing.



There have been plenty of movies where characters start guilt ridden, with skeletons in their closets, at the brink of suicide, with severe emotional problems, etc. all relating to events prior to the events of the movie. Why would that not work now?

Because that's not what the Thunderbolts are, in the comics they had a whole character arc of these characters becoming heroes and saw them as villains long before this happened. In the movie, why did they reform, what was the circumstances and the context of this change and why should I care?

 

[Chris Wallace]

Because that's not what the Thunderbolts are, in the comics they had a whole character arc of these characters becoming heroes and saw them as villains long before this happened. In the movie, why did they reform, what was the circumstances and the context of this change and why should I care?

You left out what villainous deeds are they redeeming.