So, what do you think Marvel has in store for Phase Three?
Also you can talk about Agents of SHIELD in this thread because it's technically part of the MCU and all.
Was Ghost Rider Marvel studios? I'm pretty sure it wasn't, I'd like to see Ghost Rider sans Nicholas Cage.
Speaking of MAoS:
Nope. After Spirit of Vengeance fell flat, Sony let it go.
The illiest, I hope we get Robbie, throw a little diversity into the movies.
>Sony should sell Spider-Man back to Marvel Studios so it can earn more money and my fan fics can be real
>The lukewarm reception to The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is the exception to the franchise norm, not the rule, and seems to indicate that Sony is content with churning out a Spider-Man film because no matter what, they’re making money.
How is that honestly different from what Marvel Studios is doing? Especially after the shitfest that was Iron Man 2, Iron Man 3, Thor, Thor 2, and the Hulk movies. Hell, throw in The Avengers too, although I'm the only one in this world who feels that way. It's only with Captain America: the Winter Soldier that Marvel Studios decided to break away from their formulated commercial storytelling and actually create something worth watching. And Guardians of the Galaxy looks like it will go back to that mold created way back with the first Iron Man.
I don't care if Spider-Man doesn't get to join the Avengers are be unable to partake in meaningless cameos for fanboys to wank off. I only want good Spider-Man movies. And with the way Marvel has treated Spidey in the comics, cartoons, and games, I don't think they should get the film rights back.
Semi-related rant, trying to build a DC cinematic universe was one of the worst decisions WB has made. Should have told fanboys to fuck off and stick with solo superhero movies with their own worlds, tone, style. Like what Nolan did with his Batman films. Instead, they're just trying to emulate Nolan's Batman inappropriately with other characters, without understanding why those films worked.
>formulated commercial storytelling
But that's exactly what Sony's doing with Spider-Man. What few improvements it has over Raimi's trilogy can't shake the feeling that I'm watching a film primarily intended to keep the studio afloat.
For me, the Raimi films don't hold up very well. The first Amazing Spider-Man movie improved a great deal from those films in tone, cast, and writing. Even with all the flaws, there's still a lot I like about ASM2. Peter and Gwen's chemistry leaps miles ahead of the bland romance of Peter and MJ in the Raimi films.
But the main point about my above rant is that for some fans (not all), they don't really care about the quality of the Spider-Man films by Sony. They just want Spider-Man to go back to Marvel, so they can have their pointless team-ups. The article I posted cares more about Spider-Man making money than actually improving the movie franchise. It doesn't build an argument that Sony is holding back the Spider-Man franchise, nor does it give a good one that bringing it back to Marvel will make it better. It plays down the low critical success Marvel Studios has had with some of its film, like the Iron Man and Thor sequels, and only looks at its financials.
Don't mistake this post as me saying ASM2 is flawless; it's not. However, any positive change in direction for the movie franchise can be made within Sony. New directors; new writers; things like that. Giving Marvel Studios the rights back won't make everything better. Marvel Studios isn't the Pixar of the 90s and early 00s.
I just think Sony doesn't do a very good job with the Marvel stuff they've got so I am aces with them losing all of it, especially happy about Ghost Rider and Punisher.
On the discussion of Marvel movies outside of Marvel, I have to say Fox is doing a much better job now with the X-Men franchise after X3 and Origins. First Class was a soft reboot done right and The Wolverine was a fun film. The X-Men world works better when it's not connected with the rest of the Marvel heroes.
Still early to pass judgement on the next Fantastic Four film. The mixed race casting doesn't bother me, but as a Hispanic, it does bother me Hollywood only sees two races. Need a minority? Just cast an African-American actor. Problem solved.
Michael B. Jordan looks like he can pull off the Human Torch. I'm only worried about Jamie Bell as the Thing. Cinemablend suggest he was picked for his motion-capture performance.
>The X-Men world works better when it's not connected with the rest of the Marvel heroes.
THIS THIS THIS. The X-Men franchise as a whole works so much better as its own thing than in the typical "interconnected" Marvel Universe (Cinematic or otherwise).
I won’t argue that notion. I still hope we get a Punisher flick from Marvel sooner or later so we can see if Marvel can do the character justice.
Also if Marvel get spidy back I hope they push Miles Morales for summer slam.
The movie every two years essentially ruins any chances of Sony giving a Spider-Man film the time, talent or quality it should deserve. Marvel has just as much of a chance at fucking things up, but at least it's not a certainty. At this point though, the only way Sony is giving up the rights to Spider-Man is if the well gets so poisoned that neither studio would think they could wrangle a profit out. So, really what'd be best right now is to let the franchise die for a while.
They want a Spidey movie EVERY year.
Both them and Warner Bros, Trying to play catchup with Marvel/Disney in very Dangerous Ways.
>Especially after the shitfest that was Iron Man 2, Iron Man 3, Thor, Thor 2, and the Hulk movies. Hell, throw in The Avengers too, although I'm the only one in this world who feels that way.
What an incredibly terrible opinion.
Wait a second... overly defensive of a mediocre Sony movies, constantly posting Playstation 4 sales... Jumpman, I hate to ask this, but ARE you a Sony employee?
Yes. I'm a Sony employee. That's exactly it. It cant be that I have a different opinion than you. No. I'm a employee of Sony. Your swift observation--which is in no way stupid shit--easily undoes my earlier arguments. Way to go, detective!
I knew it. By the ancient laws of the internet, by revealing your true form I have stripped you of all your posting powers. You must now crawl back to your corporate hole until you fashion a new identity that lets you walk the world of mortals once more.
>Hell, throw in The Avengers too, although I'm the only one in this world who feels that way.
I felt that The Avengers was super formulaic, too. Just putting it out there
Formulaic doesn't equal a "shitfest" though.
You know, it's good of you to admit it, and now we can work on rebuilding our relationship on the basis of honesty and trust.
But, seriously, I agree about Iron Man 2, I'm on the other side of Iron Man 3 (Not by much), disagree about Thor, and completely disagree on Thor 2. I feel like the Captain America Movies, especially 2, have been the best Marvel movies put out.
I initially really liked Avengers, and then the more I thought about it, the more I disliked it and remembered what I don't like about Joss Whedon. I'm ambivalent about the new Avengers movie and wary of Antman, but I want to like Antman so badly.
Also, this problem with DC trying to be like Mavel is just another symptom of DC's ongoing problem they've been suffering from since the sixties: DC trying to be like Marvel without really understanding what makes Marvel successful or what people actually want from DC.
I also think the Nolan movies are pretty terrible and that Goyer is the true monster in this scenario.
Welcome to the internet, where everything is 100x worse than it actually is. "Mediocre" is "worse than the holocaust," and "merely above average" is pronounced "unbelievably shitty," when on the internet.
We no longer have words for things that are actually bad, because we have used them all up to describe anything that doesn't give us a blowjob and pay us for the privilege.
Oh no, that part I don't agree with. I just agree that I felt like I had seen it all already so I didn't enjoy it but that doesn't make it terrible, only pretty average.
I have this notion that people who complain about the appearance of Asgard in the Thor movies have either never seen the old source material, or they have and just hate it. They're the gods of Asgard, why would they consign themselves to dusty old castles akin to those of Midgard?
>“The Avengers is a mash-up of massive single character franchises of incredibly familiar characters and Iron Man. And did I mention Iron Man? Oh, and by the way – Iron Man.
Funny, back when all of this started, the X-Men were immensely more popular and recognizable than the Avengers. Marvel had to work their ass off to generate public recognition for the individual characters before putting all the eggs on the Avengers, whereas he already had a solid performer on his hands. If the tables have turned nowadyas, well, perhaps it is because the people handling the X-Men movie franchise have not done a terrific job.
And hey, after forcing yourself upon other people's asses, it's just karma to experience a bit of butthurt.
I'm not gonna defend Singer for his comment, but I do find it amazing how fast and eager Marvel fans are in throwing anyone not involved with Marvel Studios under the bus. X-Men is more recognizable franchise than any of the individual Avengers (or were, not sure of who's more popular the who right now), but those films weren't critical and commercial success based on name alone. They were successful because they had a team of people who understood the source material and film-making.
Marvel Studios itself didn't just become a success story out of nowhere. It came from experience. Everything they've done until now has been a result of the success and failures they've had with other studios in bringing their characters to the big screen. And like it or not, Avi Arad also played a crucial role in Marvel Studios being the success it is now. So while I don't agree with Singer's snark, I'm not gonna pretend he or anyone behind the X-Men films didn't do jack. It's even sillier to say that now, with Days of Future Past getting critical acclaimed.
Even for the Sam Raimi Spider-Man films--which I've gotten tired of--I'll still admit their worth in the evolution of superhero movies.
Look, Jumpman, I know you aren't a fan of marvel studios but my hatred of Singer comes from Superman Returns which is actually worse than Man of Steel and that's no easy feat.
> but I do find it amazing how fast and eager Marvel fans are in throwing anyone not involved with Marvel Studios under the bus
NOPE. I am throwing Snyder under the bus because he made an incredibly petty and dumb comment, don't read more into it.
Does he deserve credit for making the X-Men movies back when nobody seriously considered comic book adaptations seriously? Of course he does. But by his own admission Avengers got that big because the build up of several other films, and it is not like those films spontaneously generated from thin air, right? He yells IRONMAN IRONMAN IRONMAN but ten years ago Ironman was a nobody
Also, the fact that he is complaining about geeks comparing movie is... I don't even know how to properly define it. Two superhero team movies based on Marvel comics, exactly how it is surprising that they are being compared? If There are people comparing Godzilla to Man of Steel for chrissake. If his movie is good (and it seems it is!) then let it stand for it own merits, complaining like that is absurd.
He snarks about Iron Man's heavy presence in the MCU while most of the X-Men movie universe (the first two chapters of which he is responsible for, along with the latest) centers around Wolverine, who for a long time dwarfed the vast majority of Marvel characters in popularity, Stark included.
Also, it's kind of disrespectful of him to say that they can't compete with the MCU without RDJ in a robot suit, yet they have talent like Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellan, Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence, Ellen Page, and so many others.
Apparently, DOFP isn't just "Wolverine and Friends" again. So that's a step in the right direction.
>Director Edgar Wright has reportedly left his Marvel Studios film Ant-Man.
>Variety reports that Marvel already has a new director, but they're not revealing the name just yet. The studio and Wright split up "due to differences in their vision of the film," Marvel and the director said in a statement.
Don't get me wrong, I like Edgar Wright, but Marvel films could benefit a LOT by dialing down the humor.
Days of Future Past was fucking good. Wonderful story and strong performances all around. Even with the extremely heavy atmosphere, there' still plenty of humorous moments in the film that never feel forced. And yes, the reviewers aren't lying when they say Quicksilver steal the show.
The Sentinels truly came off as unstoppable killing machines. Each Mutant kill performed by the Sentinels was brutal, but succeeded in keeping tensions high upon their arrival. Personally, most shocking scene in the film was was seeing the dead mutant bodies piled up on the streets like the Jews in the Holocaust. The X-Men films have always done a great job at paralleling the discrimination of Mutants to Jews in WWII, but Days of Future Past takes it the furthest. Really sends the message home on what this type of thinking leads to.
There's bound to be complaints of Wolverine one again being the focus point of an X-Men movie--and I understand that, given past films and Kitty's pivotal role in the original Days of Future Past story being taken by him--but Days of Future Past puts up a believable argument for sending Wolverine back to the past. Kitty is also still significant in her new role in the movie. In fact, everybody gets the right amount of screentime in Days of Future Past, so it's not "Wolverine and friends" like some feared it would be. Xavier's character arc in the film was the most powerful to watch, with the confrontation between past and future versions being the standout scene. Watching Young Xavier getting close to breaking apart and Old Xavier telling him to hang in there was incredibly moving.
Days of Future Past takes care of problems I had with First Class, like focusing more on the core cast and literally doing away with the underdeveloped students. Along with that terrible actress that played Emma Frost. And everything that captures the spirit of the 70s was injected casually into the film's storyline. However, the 70s songs playing over certain scenes to bluntly remind you that it's the 70s breaks the subtlety it once had going. It's a common annoyance period films tend to do (The Incredible somehow managed to avoid it), but it never comes close to killing or cheapening the mood like what the movie version of Watchmen did. So, it's more of a pet peeve than a deal breaker.
After soiling the X-Men movie franchise with X3 and Origins, Fox has worked hard to put the franchise back on track. If First Class and The Wolverine were effective baby steps in bringing respect back to the X-Men movie series, than Days of Future Past is one giant leap forward. I am now contempt with X-Men staying with Fox and seeing where this franchise goes. And judging by the after-credits, it's only going to get better.
>And to round out the responses, Edgar Wright broke his silence last night for the first time since Marvel made the split official, tweeting an edited photo along with the message “selfie” which speaks volumes towards his feelings and thoughts on the situation. [Update: He deleted the tweet but below is the photo]
>As CBM points out, the edited photo is of actor Buster Keaton (featuring a Cornetto ice cream cone) who in 1928 made the self-described “worst mistake of [his] career” by leaving independent film to join MGM. Wright is essentially comparing this to joining Marvel, implying that forfeiting his creative freedom to join big studio Marvel could have been equally as bad for him. And so, back to more original works for Wright.
>Edgar Wright leaves Antman due to creative differences
>Drew Goddard withdrew from showrunning on the upcoming Daredevil show and will remain as an executive producer
>BAAAAWWWWWW MAHVEL IS FUCKING UP, CINEMATIC UNIVERSE IS RUINED
Geez, way to overreact people!
Overreacting is the only way the Internet knows how to react.
>Wright, 40, is an irreverent British filmmaker, and sources say Marvel had been unhappy with his take on Ant-Man for weeks. Originally set to begin shooting June 2, the production had been put on hiatus while Feige ordered revisions of the script that was co-written by Wright and Joe Cornish. According to sources, Wright had been willing to make revisions earlier in the process. But the new rewrites took place without Wright's input, and when he received Marvel's new version early during the week of May 19, he walked, prompting a joint statement announcing his exit "due to differences in their visions of the film."
. . .
>The company "Marvel-izes" its projects, as a source with ties to the company puts it. That sometimes leads to clashes with filmmakers who have strong points of view, as Kenneth Branagh found during the making of Thor. He did not return for the sequel, nor did Joe Johnston for Captain America. Patty Jenkins, who directed the 2003 Charlize Theron hit Monster, was hired for Thor 2 then fired. Edward Norton clashed with Marvel during post on The Incredible Hulk and was replaced by Mark Ruffalo for the character's return in The Avengers. Terrence Howard similarly was replaced by Don Cheadle in the Iron Man sequels. And on May 24, Drew Goddard was replaced as showrunner by Steven S. DeKnight on Marvel's upcoming Netflix series Daredevil (though Goddard is working on Sony's Marvel movie Sinister Six).
From these reports, it sounds like the Ant-Man rewrite by Marvel Studios is one big dud.
>Wright and Cornish were taken off the script, and an in-house Marvel screenwriter dutifully destroyed much of what they'd carefully crafted. For instance, a high premium was placed on current cultural references. Think it'd be funny if Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) were a Lyft driver and had to, at one point, reluctantly turn in his mustache? If so, this just might be the ANT-MAN for you!
>I was told that McKay's camp was well aware of Marvel's frugal reputation, but maybe they got low-balled to an insulting degree. It's also possible McKay got a look at the screenplay, which, after Marvel's in-house rewrite (i.e. the draft that chased Wright off the film), is currently in awful shape (several sources have called it "unsalvageable"). Prep time will be minimal (Marvel is sticking to its July 15, 2015 release date), so there's only so much patch-up work that can be done prior to the commencement of principal photography.
No wonder Wright left.
>a high premium was placed on current cultural references
>Antman is in the shit
>Along with the Wasp aka my fav marvel female hero
NO GOD! PLEASE NO!!! NOOOOOOOOOO
>The fine folks over at This Is Infamous (via Jeff Sneider) say that Marshall Thurber has indeed passed on the offer to direct Marvel’s Ant-Man. There’s no reason given for his decision, though maybe he’s decided to move forward with the planned sequel to We’re the Millers, or his Choose Your Own Adventure adaptation. Or perhaps it’s more of an ego thing considering McKay was the first to receive an offer from Marvel. One could also speculate that this property has become toxic, even with Marvel’s current spot atop the list of most-anticipated films.
The only person who wanted to direct an Ant-Man movie was Edgar Wright, but now he's gone.
And he wasn't even a fan of THE Antman.
Wright really pushed for Scott Lang when it's clear Marvel wanted Pym.
You can scratch Duncan Jones off the list of potential Marvel directors.
Vincent D’onofrio will play Kingpin in Netflix’s upcoming Daredevil series.
Oh, and a link to spoiler details for the first ten minutes of Avengers 2 – http://badassdigest.com/2014/06/10/age-of-ultron-spoilers-reveal-parties-and-romances/
I don't know why it makes me happy that MCU Avengers hold huge parties, but it does. It really really does.
Those are literally the last two people I would've thought to pair together, unless it's a joke or they actually subscribe to the "they had a moment of serious hostility=they love each other!" fanfic idea of old.
What, you expected Bruce and Tony instead?
Well, I remember them having more screentime together to allow for chemistry.
Ehhhh I guess I can see it maybe? She saw him at his worst and accepts it, he knows all about her sketchy past and accepts it. I dunno. I'm biased though because I want Widow and Falcon to be a thing
I want the Widow to not be in a "thing" with anyone. I want her to kick ass and take names, not to waste her character in some trite romantic subplot. We have enough of that shit in movies.
Agreed. Any romance (and/or optional skimpy outfits) with her should be part of a mission. We don't need yet another strong, female character who falls in love with a male lead and suddenly becomes some sort of damsel in distress as a reward for doing so.
Reminds me that there's hardly any happily married main characters anywhere. I mean, they can hook up after the big conflict, but they can't go through it with their relationship already stablised, possibly saving each other a couple times and keeping a tally and whoever wins gets treated to dinner/a back rub/doesn't have to give the dog a bath.
Oh this is usefull, thanks tumblr!
>no Gurihiru-helmed animated series yet
MARVEL, WHY AREN'T YOU FUNDING THIS?!
Sounds like a whole load of bullshit, IMO.
And all of those question, but not something as simple as asking if Cap is finally going to say AVENGERS ASSEMBLE in the sequel?
How exactly are Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch shared like that?
Probably their identity as Magneto-descended mutants and members/former members of the Brotherhood has been granted as part of the X-Men license, and their identities as members of the Avengers as part of the Avengers license. The best I can figure is that they've split the two characters into four.
If I had to guess, they might even give them different origins in the Avengers movies.
Marvel can’t use them as mutants – Fox actually owns the rights to mutants re: the Marvel universe by virtue of owning the X-Men license (yes, that sounds as stupid as you think it does). I’ve heard Marvel will make them Inhumans for the MCU to get around that specific issue (and raise the profile of Inhumans for further expansion of the MCU).
I mean it makes sense in a way that "mutants" in the Marvel Universe belong to the X-Men franchise. Off the top of my head, the only mutant characters I can think of who aren't either in an X-Team or a former ally/enemy of the X-Men are Molly Hayes and Squirrel Girl.
I'm not up on MCU; what are inhumans vs. mutants? Just rebranding to get around that issue with Fox?
Aren't they called Gifted in the movieverse?
Or is that just Agent of SHEILD?
You know, come to think of it, is there any REAL advantage story-wise to having the "X-Men Universe" and the regular Marvel Universe be the same universe even in the comics? I mean yeah, the Avengers fight the X-Men from time to time but when was the last time something like that was actually entertaining?
The existence of supers who aren't treated with disdain by the majority of the population has always been at odds with what is one of the most important themes of the X-books. In a lot of ways, the X-Men being part of the Marvel Universe is more of a bug than a feature.
In the early days of the MCU, loads of people wanted Marvel to get X-Men back so the X-Men (read: Wolverine) would be part of the whole shebang. After the past couple of X-Men movies, however, more and more people have come around to thinking that would fuck everything up.
(Spider-Man’s kinda hit or miss in this regard. I could see him working in the MCU, but to fit in, he'd pretty much need a whole new origin story just to account for why he didn’t do shit during any major MCU battles set in New York.)
I am perfectly fine with Marvel not having the film rights to Spidey and the X-men, because I doubt they would have tried to build the shared universe and instead would have just stuck making movies with those popular franchises, ignoring everything else. As potentially good as a Spidey flick made by Marvel could have been, I am more than grateful from having a friggin' GotG movie less than a month away.
Chitauri Invasion killed his parents, making him much younger than the rest of the heroes. The 'new blood' so to speak.
What about the fairly sizable number of mutants in the various New Warriors teams, most notably Justice?
Not familiar with that line other than having heard of it once or twice, sorry. I'll take your word for it then.
If the Thor movies never do something like this I will be SO pissed.
Michael B. Jordan on the Fantastic Four movie.
>One of the good things about the Fantastic Four is that everybody is different. And it’s like, sometimes family doesn’t always consist of your relatives or by blood. Sometimes your best friends can feel more like family than your cousins.
>I think everybody kind of has that same feeling. When you go through an accident together, when you go through a traumatic event, sometimes that brings you closer together. Yeah, everybody takes their time out to kind of deal with their own stuff, but at the end of the day, you shared a common experience together that you’re able to relate to.
>The people, the public, the fans that are watching this can all relate to that because everybody has had to overcome an obstacle in their life before.
Michael B. Jordan is spot on about FF and its unconventional family, but from the way he's talking this movie's a mess.
It's a movie made by a studio that wants to hold onto the Fan4 license as long as said studio thinks it can wring a profit out of the license admist Marvel’s successes.
No shit the movie’s a mess. It might end up worse than the Amazing Spider-Man movies.
>Marvel Was Not “Scared” of Edgar Wright’s ‘Ant-Man’ Vision, Insists Kevin Feige
>“It would have to be really out there to be too out there for us,” he insisted. Instead, he blames personality issues and an out-of-sync vision for the split. Hit the jump to read his comments.
Biggest mistake Feige makes is confusing weird content as unconventional movie making. As a commentator pointed out, GOTG is shot and directed like a traditional film about a "rag tag team of rebels" (with marketing desperately trying to convey it as the next Star Wars). Where as something like Scott Pilgrim has a style that's so unlike any Marvel Studios film.
>[But] the notion that Marvel was scared, the vision was too good, too far out for Marvel is not true. And I don’t want to talk too much about that because I think our movies speak to that. Go look at Iron Man 3
No thank you, Feige.
Yeah, I gotta call bullshit on this, too. Marvel would have never let Wright go if they didn't "fear" Wright's vision for Ant-Man. They wanted to play it too safe, and now it cost them. This reeks of damage control.
So depending on how much of this is true, could Disney use this as leverage to get the rights back?
Wooooooooooow. Anyone who didn’t think this F4 reboot wouldn’t somehow turn out shitty just had their hopes dashed.
Nothing was flying high before and this just looks stupid with the Director using the name just to make another Chronicle movie. Reaction at Comic Con if this remains all true should be fun.
Marvel Studios still mum on if it will ever make a superhero film with a female or minority lead.
>When J.J. Abrams released the first cast photo from ‘Star Wars: Episode 7,’ there was some backlash surrounding the lack of women characters, which they’ve announced many more since then. ‘Captain Marvel’ has been a rumored movie, but if a woman-driven movie isn’t announced soon, that backlash could happen here, too?
>Well, yes. I don’t think J.J. Abrams or the ‘Star Wars’ people — I have no idea — but my guess is that they were not swayed by any backlash. We’re not going to be swayed by the backlash. We’re going to keep bringing the movies out the way we envision it and the way we believe in it — and that includes diversity in all of the active films. And certainly, on our development slate of many of the characters — some of which you just named — and always being conscious of that. The great thing for us is the comics have been conscious of that through the decades and have been rather pioneering in that over the years.
So, essentially, Marvel Studios is telling us an Ant-Man movie is more important than a Captain Marvel and Black Panther film.
Feige answer about if female Thor and Captain Falcon will ever appear on the big screen sounds like he knows those portrayals won't last long.
>Do you look at that and think, down the line, when current contracts expire, maybe that’s something the movies can do?
>Well, look, listen, as you know, that’s happened before in the comics. It’s getting a lot of attention because they’ve just done it, but both of those things have happened in the past. So, it’s always that’s part of the fun. There’s always that chance to surprise people or to switch up — a number of people have worn the Cap’ costume. A number of people have lifted Mjölnir. So, that’s all fodder for future storytelling.
This really is just Chronicle 2 in everything but name. Watch Doom shout out "I'M AN APEX PREDATOR!"
>Marvel Studios is telling us an Ant-Man movie is more important than a Captain Marvel and Black Panther film.
What's wrong with that? I hope you are not actually arguing that Carol and T'challa should appear first just because they are a woman and a black person. The three characters are historically important in the comics.
I liked Chronicle a lot.
The F4 shouldn't be Chronicle.
no it shouldn't, shame that Runaways could fit a lot better. Bet fox could have cut a deal for that if they weren't so stuck in it.
Why even call it Fantastic Four then?
Was the old movies REALLY that bad?
I liked them...
>Was the old movies REALLY that bad?
They are not the bottom of the barrel of superhero flicks, but they are pretty bad themselves. The only decent parts about those movies were Jhonny and Ben.
And that's because Chris Evans is awesome (see: the Captain America films/The Avengers) and the casting of Michael Chiklis was so dead-on perfect that anyone else playing that role just doesn’t seem right.
Dang Skippy, nobody else can carry the grumpy nature that is Ben Grimm as well as he did. CG Thing going to suck amongst the rest of this pile of fail.
I never realized he was Johnny in F4. I wonder what other roles he's...
>Played Lucas Lee (the big film star) in Scott Pilgrim vs. the World
Holy shit he has range. Granted, it's "tough guy", but he seems to run the gamut.
It's a shame that he plans to quit acting after Avengers 3. Look for him as a director after that.
Has he ever done any directing jobs before?
He just did "Before We Go" Came out about a day or two ago.
Wow really? I had no idea. I'm not that surprised considering he's talked about his anxiety problems in the past, but still a shame
His first movie, Before We Go, will premier in September at the Toronto Film Festival..
If Evans quits being Cap, it is safe to guess that in the movies he will pass the mantle to Bucky?
Oh they could pull a Marvel Comics and give the Cap mantle to Falcon.
But yeah, Bucky sounds like a "safer" bet.
They could also recast the character. The Hulk/Bruce Banner was recast three times, so it's not out of the question. I believe there were rumors of Marvel Studios planning to do just that, if RDJ decided not to renew. While I think it could work in Chris Evans' case, it would be hard to execute with RDJ, since he really made Tony Stark his own.
I don't know if an audience would welcome a James Bond-like recasting, since it's really only done with James Bond.
>since it's really only done with James Bond
What about Keaton, Kilmer, and Clooney playing Batman in the same series of movies? Forever and B&R have tons ofproblems, but I have never heard complains about the change of actora
Oh hell that ain’t good.
I completely forgotten about that. That's a good point.
Atlest the poster looks fucking boss...
The same with all of the other SDCC stuff.
Wow. Fucking hell. I just got caught up with the Age of Ultron leaks. What was the point of Thor 2, if him and Jane were just gonna break up offscreen in the Avengers 2? The party scene from the leak just got confirmed at the Comic Con panel today.
As if I needed another reason to loathe Thor 2 even more.
Your Thanos, ladies and gentlemen.
Leaked test footage of the proposed Deadpool movie. Get it before it's gone (again).
Oh go just jump off the tip into a meat grinder.
Isn't all that bickering the reason the game was stripped from digital services?
Hurts any Deadpool movie would end up the same way.
FOLLOW @SuperheroReport ON TWITTER!
Now in high resolution.
If they made a Deadpool movie like this with a full R rating, I'd pay to see it.
If it turned out good, I'd pay to see it again.
Looks like Fox said fuck it and let sites post the Deadpool trailer.
Good on them.
Also it reminds me of the The Mask cartoon with the "hero" not giving a single fuck and acting like a IRL toon.
And I love that show so thats good.
The Guardians of the Galaxy post-credits stinger may have leaked.
I say ‘may’ because the footage didn’t show up on press screenings and Marvel may have ‘faked’ the footage (and intentionally leaked it) to screw with people’s heads. You never know these days.
That possibly-real stinger, though? It features Howard the Duck.
>Actor Chris Pratt beamed down to our sector of the universe Monday night to surprise an auditorium full of deserving kids in a special New York Daily News and Disney Studios sponsored charity screening of the superheroes-in-space flick.
>And the 35-year-old actor who plays the hero Star-Lord in the Marvel movie stayed in the theater until every last one of them who wanted to take a picture with him got their selfie.
That's sweet. Reminds me when RDJ invited a bunch of kids to watch Captain America: The Winter Soldier with him on his birthday.
Maybe the scene was shot later, like the Shawarma scene in The Avengers.
Quasi-related to that Chris Pratt story – http://imgur.com/gallery/vX6u4
And yeeeeeeep, that Guardian stinger’s legit.
I'M HIGH ON BELIEVIN'
Soundtrack order forces one to make their own mix tape, GENIUS!!!
Japanese Dub Cast
>Junichi Suwabe - Star Lord
>Manami Numakura - Gamora
>Tomokazu Sugita - Rocket
>Vin Diesel - Groot
>Tomokazu Seki - Drax
>Mamoru Miyano - Ronan The Accuser
>Ami Koshimizu - Nebula
The movie rocked. HARD. From the title screen to the credits I loved everything about it. In all honest, this is the most fun I've had watching a superhero film.
Also, Nebula is best MCU grill.
>Also, Nebula is best MCU grill.
I love the fact that Diesel actually recorded all of his ‘I AM GROOT’ lines in multiple languages. That’s fucking dedication to the craft.
This is racism to an impressive degree, like this is literally awe inspiring levels of offensive.
Slashfilm did a magnificent job calling Kevin Feige out on his bullshit regarding Marvel Studios someday making a female superhero film.
>If Feige (and the rest of Marvel) thought it was important to kickstart a female superhero franchise, they’d find a way to make it happen. They apparently don’t. And sure, to be fair, it’s not like their rivals at Warner Bros., Fox, or Sony have been much better on that front. It’s just frustrating to get fed the same nonsense again and again.
>It’s nice to hear Feige understands women can lead big-budget franchises, and it’s nice to hear him say he “hopes” Marvel will get to launch one soon. (As if he has no say in the matter.) But it’s not enough. I’d rather see him stop talking about it, and start putting his money where his mouth is.
Vin Diesel is one of Us. He just managed to break our fold-out-table ceiling.
WITH HIS BEAR HAND!
And should I tell Tiki that Exsodus isn't a marvel movie?
I dont want to embarrass him.
And Space Dandy is going to be Star Lord. Can't wait for the Guardians Disk Wars arc.
Everyone fucks up.
Mostly me around here but still.
Also did the movie say anything about Lylla aka rocket raccoon's girlfriend?
Just curious, if its a big deal just use spoiler text.
So, will Fantastic Four get back into the MCU after this strange shambles of a Not Fantastic in any way Four film crashes through a store window in a whimpering pile. I'd really like to see Annihilation arc as part of a Guardians movie, and we'll need Super Skrull and Annihilus
The only way it happens is if whoever owns the rights decides to let them lapse or sell them back to Marvel.
I don't see either one happening if this new film makes back its costs on the overseas releases (US releases don't matter as much as they used to for blockbusters) - and even if it does bomb overseas, I think they'll just do what the Spider-Man people did and make shitty sequels anyway.
Thing is this is like a Three Month Production with barely the thinnest connection to the Fantastic Four. No costumes only thing we've seen is The Thing and that is just a Bust in front of green screen. I think the rights were set to expire in the fall and this film was made just to keep them. Though yea I cannot see this movie not making back what it cost since its such a quickie production.
>three month production
It would've been better for the production to have disintegrated under the pressure. Now we've got to wait til 2020 for the rights to revert.
The thing is, a Spider-Man movie will make money no matter how crappy it is, because it's Spider-Man. Not sure the same applies to Fantastic Four.
Fox is just damn greedy waiting for more money or something. They were offered a generous buyout a little while back so I've heard and they turned their noises up at it.
Course it apparently being nothing more than Chronicle 2 with the Names and attributes vaguely copy pasted in. Maybe they can pull some legal magic and force Fox out.
To be quite honest, right now I am actually curious to watch how much of a clusterfuck the Fantastic Four flick wil be. It will be like watching a plane crashing or a train derrailing, horrible but yet oddly fascinating.
Also, I seriously doubt that even if the movie flops like no other movie has flopped before and Fox outright sold the rights back to Marvel, they would be in a hurry to make a Fantastic Four movie of their own. The Incredible Hulk left a lesson, that movie (the Studios' lowest performer, even if it wasn't a box office bomb) clearly was hurt by audiences still having the spectre of Ang Lee's film haunting their minds. At most they would use the characters and make them appear first in other movies.
>The Incredible Hulk left a lesson, that movie (the Studios' lowest performer, even if it wasn't a box office bomb) clearly was hurt by audiences still having the spectre of Ang Lee's film haunting their minds.
I never got that feeling at all. If anything, the failures of both film may point to Marvel overestimating the widespread appeal the character actually has. Living up to the tired old phrase of "the third time's the charm," Hulk didn't become a hit in theaters until The Avengers. Maybe it because of Mark Ruffalo's performance or Joss Whedon seeing something in the character that nobody else could. Most likely, the audience only wanted see "Hulk Smash!" and nothing more.
I don't want the Fantastic Four after the shambles its been. I just want Super Skrull and the Negative Zone for the Annihilation Arc of the Guardians series.
>I never got that feeling at all.
I don't know, I know quite a few people who skipped TIH because they thought it was a sequel to Ang Lee's film.
What really, really surprised me, is how much I enjoyed Drax in the movie. Shows that a good director can work miracles with not-so great actors.
OTOH, man Gamora was a bummer, she had a couple of good moments but all in all she was the least enjoyable of the major characters. And it isn't because LOL FEMALE because holy crap, Nebula rocked.
Every review I've read of Guardians makes a point of picking out Batista’s performance as the movie’s biggest surprise.
Now if he could just translate that performance into the wrestling world, we’d all be better off.
It's a little bit LOL FEMALE, her writing is easily the most cliched and flat mandatory-female-character in the film. Her actress isn't bad at all, but her role is mostly just to play Star Lord's love interest.
Best Standalone movie easily (excluding Cap2 which I still haven't seen), might have liked it more than Avengers.
i am groot
Sony to make a superhero movie with a female lead before Marvel Studios even considers the thought.
Does Spider-Woman count as a Spider-Man property? Black Cat could be the best guess. Just do an origin story and introduce her in the next Amazing Spider-Man movie like Catwoman was introduced in The Dark Knight Rises.
oh man how progressive wow sony sure is showing up Marvel Studios give yourselves a pat on the back there
I mean how can you expect anything but the best from the same company that gave us Sex Tape, Heaven Is for Real, The Amazing Spider-Man 2, and Think like a Man Too
Your right. I don't know why any movie studio would even try to make a comic book movie, after Marvel Studios redefined filmmaking with the Thor films and Iron Man sequels.
They're still better than everything Mindwipe mentioned.
This reminded me of an essay from DCWKA about why father-daughter relationships in comic are so dominant and why mother-daughter relationships are so rare. Reason being the majority of comics are written by males and only write based on their experience.
The same could be said for father-son relationships being strongly represented, while the mother is often left out.
With GOTG having the first female screenwriter (or, at least the first to credit one), we got Star Lord having a bond with his mother who isn't murdered like she typically is in the comics.
Oh, yeah. Nicole Perlman is only the first female screenwriter for a Marvel movie at Marvel Studios. Before that. Jane Goldman wrote X-Men: First Class and Days of Future Past for Fox.
She also did Kick Ass and Secret Service, which is published by Marvel under the Icon's imprint.
Uhh wasn't the Sphynx already missing half its face to begin with? Also given that the the ancient Egyptian people, while not European white either, have been characterized as similar in makeup to the modern native Egyptians of today, that profile actually wouldn't be that off feature wise. Given that, an authentic Sphynx wouldn't have been expected to look black anyway like I think the tweeter is implying it should, unless it was meant to represent a pharaoh like Taharqa from the Nubian dynasties which I don't think happened until long after the movie takes place.
Basically I doubt this is an genuine example of racism in the way that casting whites as the main characters and blacks as the servants (if that is actually the case) would be.
I don't think that thing is even supposed to be the Sphinx, but the very statue of Ramses II. Since Ramses is a major character in the film, it makes sense that his statue would bear a resemblance to the actor.
Of course, one could make the valid complain about Ramses being played by an Aussie, but no, better bitch about madeup crap.
Okay, I have to ask, who is this Jumpman guy? What's his deal?
I've seen him copypasting the same stuff on 4Chan's /co/.
Nothing too big deleted, but that's good. Deleted scenes should just be things a movie doesn't need and The Winter Soldier was fucking good as is.
A man that yells at cloud. Admittedly, I'm coming off too negative here here than intended. So I'll back off from that for now.
I once said that Agents of s.h.i.e.l.d would get better after a some season and having seen the finally am starting to feel it.
How nice of him.
>As I write this, there are scores of critics, schooled in storytelling, who are swallowing what they know to be true, burying their criticisms in parentheticals and sentences that appear to be modifying generally positive reviews, simply because these critics are also intelligent enough to recognize that our culture is awash in a sea of stupid, in which the grossest of infractions of basic narrative logic are routinely forgiven because computer-animated anthropomorphic raccoons flying out of explosions look cool. No one, least of all an intellectual, wants to be seen as a party-pooper – or as an elitist, lecturing others on the basic rules of how stories work, while people obviously seem to be enjoying these “stories.” So in order to fit in and not rock the fanboy boat, we grade these movies on a heavy curve, praising a little humor or use of 1970s songs as if that’s oh-so-different. And so you’ll read about how “brave” it was to mount a summer blockbuster starring D-list characters in outer space, as if this “off-beat” story wasn’t sanitized and pasteurized in every way imaginable – and as if Marvel Studios wasn’t created based on the success of B-list and C-list characters who Hollywood considered unworthy of licensing.
Between this and the "It's Ok to criticize Guardians" article I don't know what the fuck is going on.
Hope he is forced to watch the new turtles movie.
I see some actual criticisms in the column – lots of telling instead of showing, paper-thin motivations for numerous characters – but they end up buried underneath a lot of ‘superhero movies are dumb’-type bullshit.
>We heard that you had a childhood crush on Michelangelo. What was it like to work with that character?
>Megan Fox: During shooting we sort of played around with that where there was kind of a Raphael and April connection, and then it turned into Michelangelo… That’s totally up his alley. He’s always sort of been girl crazy. Mikey, that’s his personality. I’m happy that it turned out that way but also Noel Fisher, the kid who plays him, is a really talented actor. He steals the movie. In my opinion it’s Mikey’s movie.
Ah, so that explains Mickey's crush on April in the movie.
>The same could be said for father-son relationships being strongly represented, while the mother is often left out.
No, I honestly expected a lot of mamma's boys to be in writing.
OH FUCK! THAT WAS SOMEBODY!
>Rocket Raccoon didn't do his own stunts
Yeah I just thought that was a reference to Laika, not an actual character.
Director Josh Trank confirmed this is The Thing.
Man, those eyes are a bit murdery for good ol'Blue Eyed Ben Grimm.
More info on the new Fantastic Four movie.
>Can you give a quick description of the suits? :)
Josh Trank: They're not tight. I'll tell you that.
>Is Fantastic 4 found-footage? When should we expect an official "First Look"? Are you attached to direct the 2017 sequel? ;-)
Josh Trank: Found footage, no. First look, late this year. Sequel, too soon to tell.
>are Johnny and Sue brother and sister or was that changed?
Josh Trank: Minor change, they're still siblings.
>how similar is FF to Chronicle? Same type of origin or what?
Josh Trank: This isn't a Chronicle sequel or reboot. It's a Fantastic Four origin. Same feel, maybe.
>why did you ultimately choose to make human torch/Johnny storm black
Josh Trank: I didn't choose to make Johnny black. I chose to make Michael Johnny.
Sue and Johnny are blood related? I know it's a superhero flick but, you know, unless they explicitly live in a world with scifi genetics some things are still a little too unbelievable for me.
Considering the line "minor change", I'm betting they're half-siblings now. Share a parent, likely white, and Johnny's non-shared parent is black.
For a moment I figured him being white before the accident, and the cosmic rays making him black along the fire powers.
First thing I thought of when I read your post was this.
Stepsiblings hopefully. Don't think it would really affect their brother sister dynamic too much if their parents married early on.
Not technically MCU-related, but Donald Glover will be the voice of Miles Morales in the Ultimate Spider-Man cartoon.
So hey, maybe now we can have Miles as a live-action Spidey someday.
What's the big connection between Donald Glover and Spiderman anyway? Is he a big self-confessed fan for everybody to want him in particular to be Peter Parker in USM?
It was something random and which grew for no real reason, like many things on the internet. Back when ASM was announced, somebody, somewhere, said "hey wouldn't it cool if this Glover dude was Spidey", and it quickly evolved into a full social media campaign, which grew even larger when both Glover and Stan Lee endorsed it. Bendis also claims that he was the inspiration for Miles Morales.
We might have our Sorcerer Supreme.
Surprisingly honest response Andrew Garfield about the problems with Amazing Spider-Man 2.
>I think what happened was, through the pre-production, production, and post-production, when you have something that works as a whole, and then you start removing portions of it - because there was even more of it than was in the final cut, and everything was related. Once you start removing things and saying, ‘No, that doesn’t work,’ then the thread is broken, and it’s hard to go with the flow of the story.
. . .
>It’s a discernment thing. What are the people actually saying? What’s underneath the complaint, and how can we learn from that? We can’t go, “Oh God, we fucked up because all these people are saying all these things. It’s shit.” We have to ask ourselves, “What do we believe to be true?” Is it that this is the fifth Spider-Man movie in however many years, and there’s a bit of fatigue? Is it that there was too much in there? Is it that it didn’t link? If it linked seamlessly, would that be too much? Were there tonal issues? What is it? I think all that is valuable. Constructive criticism is different from people just being dicks, and I love constructive criticism. Hopefully, we can get underneath what the criticism was about, and if we missed anything.
No, I'm pretty sure there would still have been too many threads, broken or non. The movie was trying to establish way too many things at once, meanwhile they took out MJ's cameo (to my understanding.)
Not to mention that they spent most of the ad slots touting the fight with Rhino when it was actually the last fucking scene; the commercials even ended on the manhole swing like the movie does.
>"Heavy is the Head" managed a 1.7 rating in the 18-49 demo and scored only 4.54 milion viewers, an all-time series low for Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. Though DVR numbers will help, the series just isn't attracting viewers for its live broadcasts...are people just not interested enough to watch live or is it that they just can't stand literally the most annoying live Tweet-along ever from Marvel and the cast? Regardless, what's notable about these numbers is that the show suffered a huge drop from the 5.98 million viewers who tuned in last week and this is the first time the show has attracted less than 5 million for any episode. Is cancellation beckoning? Not necessarily, but season three seems unlikely!
Read more at http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=108526#JBjj57LFIDHCoAAm.99
So the first ep of S2 had tweet overlay bullshit? No wonder people turned away. I bet a lot went to watch it on Hulu or similar where we don't have to deal with that horrible stuff. I hope they don't can it simply on live viewership; they really need to start incorporating first-week views online, which can get much more fine-grained metrics as well.
There's nothing more to read. That's it.
Its Working for Nick although that is a fucking slog for the handful that actually are into digital versus the dinosaurs they want to stick with just a channel. How many Marvel series are being done right now anyway?
They seem to be the opposite of DC right now with weak Television vs Theatrical plans.
What franchise could they use as a network springboard. And not let Whedon near it to turn it into his OC nonsense again.
Something not Mainstream but not utterly obscure.
Damn shame because AoS could have worked, if it had faces people knew in it. I'd have had The Hoff as Scorpio be the Team Leader for the First couple of seasons before does the heel.
>Something not Mainstream but not utterly obscure.
>What franchise could they use as a network springboard.
The Defenders, featuring Daredevil, Luke Cage, Iron Fist, and the shitty Spider-Woman.
You DO remember they are pooping out 5 Netflix series in the near future, right?
Wondering how the MCU will handle Dr Strange, considering how they've emphasised over and over again that "magic isn't real, it's just science!".
C'mon, Disney's been begging to have a superhero cartoon.
Plus, with BH6 coming out, they'll want more super-team stuff.
Actually I do forget that. Best luck to them on those. I'd love a She-hulk Law Show. Put Howard in as her Investigator.
They already de-emphazised that. In Thor 2 Loki learned magic from Frigga, and in no point of the movie (or in Loki's case, in both Thor and Avengers) it is mentioned that what they do is thorough tech means. Plus, from what I understand there will be a point made in Avengers that the spell in Thor's hammer is an actual spell and not some sort of biometric measure.
Was it ever really canon to begin with though? I know in Thor he said that "In our world, [technology and magic] are one in the same," but that doesn't necessarily mean "magic is just science." Like I can see it being interpreted as an application of Clarke's Law ("Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic,") but it could also just be an application of Niven's Law ("Sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from technology.")
MCU Asgard is a society of space wizards. I interpreted their civilization and technology as being built on magic and it's as commonplace to them as our science is to us. It would take a practitioner of incredible power and skill (like Odin, for example) to really "wow" them. The Dark Elves leaned a little too far into the realm of sci-fi, but even they had those rocks that turned their soldiers into monsters just from crushing them.
Speaking of magic, here's what Feige had to say about Dr. Strange.
>Are you watching the Cosmos series? That’s magic, [the quantum physics]. It’s unbelievable. If somebody knew how to tap into that stuff, what’s the difference between that and magic?
>You don’t get into it in Harry Potter, but if a scientist went to Hogwarts he’d find out how some of that stuff is happening! We’re not going to spend a lot of time on that, but there will be some of that. And particularly for a character like Strange, who goes from a man of science to a man of faith and who traverses both worlds. And sometimes there won’t be an answer! Sometimes he’ll want an answer - “How is this happening?!” - and nothing.
Which sounds pretty similar to what magic is like in the comics. I hope they draw heavily from Eastern mysticism.
I hope I'm not the only one who really digs the way the MCU is integrating the MacGuffins and the Infinity Gems together.
Asgard = Magitek
That's how Kirby envisioned it, a place with both magic and sci-fi tech.
An interesting theory.
Is Sony willing to play nice with Marvel Studios?
Concept art of the Daredevil show.
I doubt any of this shit is real. Grain of salt and all that.