MCU General 3: Infinity War
So another trailer for Age of Ultron is supposed to hit this afternoon. Also it looks like Hulk/Black Widow is now a thing, to the delight of seemingly just about nobody.
Heads up. New trailer comin’ through.
Looks a lot more interesting than the first two, but I'm not really digging the sepia filter than seems to be over everything. It worked better for Captain America 1.
Noticed Quicksilver wasn't in the final battle around the big circle. I've heard some rumbling about how Whedon's going to have him killed off to subvert the whole Stuffed in the Fridge cliche but I'd have hoped someone like him was mature enough to realize that fridging in general is usually a bad idea to begin with and frequently a sign of bad writing, even if it was more equal-opportunity.
No idea how true it is but Joss Whedon just isn't nearly as good of a writer as his fans hype him up to be. Hell, for all the acclaim he gets about writing female characters, I don't think the way he wrote Black Widow in Avengers 1 was interesting at all so some of the praise she got (and subsequent bashing of others like Peggy for supposedly "stealing her thunder") really baffles me.
Sure, Whedon's Black Widow avoided common pitfalls of female character writing by being a competent fighter and spy, wasn't defined by romance/sex, wasn't a total block of wood (but then again everyone in Avengers is some kind of snarky so her being a snarker hardly counts), and had some degree of angst over her generic dark past so she's not a Mary Sue or flawless goddess to be held on a pedestal. However, that alone doesn't make a good character, and Widow is pretty damn vanilla. One could argue that female representation really is so poor that we should rally around her because she's the best we can get in, but is that really so? I feel like it's a bad strawman and people just aren't looking hard enough for other better female characters.
Now the Widow we saw in The Winter Soldier, her I would like to see a film about. There she was flirty and underhanded, but also lonely and self-doubting beneath her veneer of overconfidence, and so on. A female "strong character", as the goal should be, not the bland archetype in Avengers 1.
It was cool in the 90s and 00s because back then he was doing something novel. More capable writers have emerged since then, but a lot of people grew up on his stuff like Buffy and Firefly so they still have residual fondness for him. Simple as that.
I'm pretty sure more people saw the Avengers than saw Buffy and Firefly combined, even counting the people who saw both twice.
Part of the issue with Avengers!Widow is that Whedon had to balance what amounted to four starring roles (Cap, Iron Man, Thor, and Hulk) with the main antagonist (Loki) and three major supporting characters (Widow, Hawkeye, and Fury) within a two-hour film. There just wasn't enough time for Whedon to have given Widow any major characterization beyond what he did. Winter Soldier could afford the time for Widow, and as you said, it did a damn good job in developing her character.
And yes, Whedon is pretty hit-and-miss when it comes to female characters. But let's not pretend that Avengers had the room necessary to give Black Widow any meaningful characterization. He did the best he could within the limits of a two-hour flick where...well, no one but Tony Stark and Bruce Banner got any sort of meaningful characterization, really.
Avengers was fun but Whedon dropped the ball on nearly everyone in that film. Cap and Thor became hollow shells of themselves. Tony gets away with the snark because it's already in his nature as a wisecracker plus RDJ had a lot of leeway in adlibbing, but his arc was extremely cookiecutter. Banner is the only character I was really impressed with, and even then a lot of it comes from Ruffalo's performance. Fucking Loki who the fangirls praise to high heavens threw away all his characterization in Thor 1 to become a completely charmless generic villain spouting generic villain lines like he was quoting from a handbook. It took TDW to undo the damage and give him back some sense of nuance.
I'm kind of glad Whedon isn't directing any more Avengers films after this. He's not terrible, but he's better off just sticking to writing duties while someone else like the Russo brothers oversee the whole thing. I have faith in them that TWS wasn't just a fluke.
I don't think it was really clear the degree to which characterization was lacking in the Avengers until Guardians of the Galaxy came along and managed to develop and make the audience care about every member of the team in a single movie, without needing lead in solo movies first.
I'd have to disagree about whether Guardians of the Galaxy did a good job in that regard, but Avengers' problem was that everyone felt less like proper characters and more like vehicles for action and Whedon's snark. Even if I thought Avengers was the funnier movie, at least the GotG cast felt like actual people.
Honestly, most of my gripes with Whedon veer more towards the visual angle.
Like, hell - if the whole movie had looked this good maybe I'd focus on the writing, but so far I'm good:
What was so bad about it? It's been a while since I last watched it but I don't remember anything particularly wrong with it.
That video there was a collection of every good shot in the movie, and even then, they didn't last more than two seconds. And the movie didn't even fill out the video so they had to use Cap 1.
Whedon is not good with visuals, or cinematography, or effective lighting. He's the anti-Fincher.
This is the greatest scene ever.
Is that thing actually worth watching or is it as good as we'll get?
Never seen it myself, but Patton Oswalt is a vocal supporter of the film.
I am fully expecting that this whole Widow/Banner thing will be a red herring, and she is just jokingly teasing with Banner to mess him up a bit.
That or it's a one-sided thing and Bruce fell for her since she's the first person to bring him out of isolation. He doesn't really seem like her type and wouldn't have known her long enough to get through to her.
Judging by the original trailer summary, Black Widow is interested in Bruce, but he doesn't want to commit because of the Hulk.
>Well, in the party scene at Avengers Tower, we discover that Banner and Black Widow kinda have a thing for each other. Banner is afraid to consummate anything with her for fear of hulking out and hurting her. He doesn't trust himself.
>Banner and Black Widow are definitely into each other. Very Buffy and Angel stuff. Very Joss Whedon.
Second Daredevil trailer is out. Too early to call but fights look pretty brutal, nice.
>Banner is afraid to consummate anything with her for fear of hulking out
Its like theyre acknowledging the porn...
Indeed. I think Whedon is like the one person on the planet who ships those two together. I knew it wasn't going to be popular but the amount of negativity towards it by just about everybody on every site is mindblowing. Even the "wait and see" reactions tend to be "hopefully it's a brief fling and nothing comes of it in the end".
There's a strong contingent on the internet lately that is categorically opposed to any acknowledgement in fiction that romance and attraction is a thing that exists and that drives people.
Oh no they like that, they just don't like Widow getting specifically with Banner and vice versa. The prevailing sentiment is people would rather the two get with just about anyone else except for each other.
Actually yeah. Bruce/Hawkeye is pretty fucking huge. They even call it Hulkeye. And Natasha/Thor has a lot of fans even though I don't think they ever talked one-on-one.
Did Dum-Dum smoke in either of the Cap movies? I can't remember.
There was a lot of hooch for his appearances in Agent Carter, but I don't recall him smoking during that. Can't remember in the Cap movies.
Not sure, though I don't think this no smoking rule is going to change things in any way.
Just be smart about it. Like Constantine does for most the time with smoking interrupts. Either the cig gets soaked,crushed etc.
Yeah but there's not much point in showing characters smoking in the first place anyway. Even in the case of villains or antiheroes there are usually better ways to convey that kind of characterization without needing cigarettes.
You know, I am not completely against the whole Widow/Banner thing. I mean, it is interesting that in a team of hunks she would be attracted to the brainy guy. Or perhaps she is actually attracted to the Hulk, who knows!
On the other hand, it is cool to have a female action hero whose entire point wasn't getting involved into a romantic relationship with one of the heroes. Her broing up (sis-ing up?) with Hawkeye and Cap without any awkward romantic tension was a great thing to watch.
Looks like they're having Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver do the accent thing. This could be a cool touch, or it could be the most annoying fucking thing ever. We'll just have to see.
I would assume they're some form of magnets, with the corresponding halves placed on the back of his shield.
Cap actually had something similar in the comics and called them "transistors". Iirc they're mocked by pretty much everyone as having been a bad idea so I wonder why they included them in AoU
So he's already popped up in Cartoons, do you think he could appear in television?
Who, Deadpool? I think Marvel still has the rights to X-Men for TV series, which is why people want Fox and Marvel to reach a compromise over it. Maybe not necessarily bringing the X-Men back to the MCU because I think that's just an all-around bad idea for the lore the MCU is trying to build, but a halfway solution that lets them crossover a bit and Marvel can use the word "mutants" again.
Honestly, while I would like to see Marvel handle X-Men, I don't want the mutants and the rest of the Marvel Universe to be the same universe. Even in comics. Maybe it's fine for situations like Marvel vs. Capcom or the occasional rare universe-hopping crossover event, but the whole store of the X-Men works better in a world without people who are effectively mutants other than by arbitrary distinctions, like Spider-Man or the Fantastic Four. Those characters not facing the same sort of racism that mutants face sort of hamstrings the central conceit of the X-books, and puts the non-X heroes in an awkward position of being obligated to have strains of anti-mutant bigotry that make no real sense when the only difference between mutants and them is whether they were born with their mutations or mutated due to outside influence.
And the Inhumans fall under a weird mix of both categories, in that their "mutations" already exist in their DNA but require an outside "trigger" to manifest.
I'd like to see him in AoS just for the reason they've got HYDRA in the mix and they could have a cameo adventure with him. HYDRA tried to ambush him to get the Healing Factor secrets from his body. He kidnapped one of theirs instead and is riding around with Bob in tow. Ends with Coulson getting a postcard from Deadpool he just shakes his head and drops it in a drawer filled with them. Maybe ending with the comment "Should have never given him that badge."
So Hugh Jackman's planning on retiring as Wolverine soon. He's had a good run while it's lasted, and it'll finally be the chance for other, more interesting characters to get the chance to shine.
I just hope we see him reprise his role 30 years from now for Old Man Logan...
Now you gotta wonder which film will be his last: X-Men: Apocalypse or another Wolverine.
If it’s the former, they can always use Apocalypse’s bullshit to sorta ‘reset’ Wolverine and get a younger(/cheaper) actor to play him from there on out. If it’s the latter, they could grey up his hair and do a film adaptation of Old Man Logan.
>it'll finally be the chance for other, more interesting characters to get the chance to shine.
I have a hard time believing anyone would think that they wouldn't just recast Marvel's Batman. Because, y'know, Wolverine is Marvel's Batman, and the money draw, Huge Ackman or not.
Probably Wolverine 2, since he's apparently finishing up in 2017 or so and Apocalype is coming out in 2016.
I'll admit the CG and photo made me a bit worried, but it looks much nicer here. And I guess the suit looking a little awkward in real life would just add to the charm.
Some comments "Who's Slater/Jessie?"
Thanks for making me feel old.
Ryan Reynolds 6.2 Canadian
Wade Wilson 6.2 Canadian
I think someone found their synchronicity point.
Also that was him in the suit. They are gonna mocap to animate his facial area. Should be sweet.
Apparently the Daredevil miniseries is getting a lot of pretty good reviews, especially for the fights. I feel like comparing it to Nolan Bats isn't as high of a bar as people think it is, considering how terrible TDKR was and how bad the fight scenes were.
The fight scenes are one of the few things I agree were bad about Nolan Batman films.
In comparison to other superhero online shows, Daredevil doesn't have much to prove against the awfulness that is Powers.
Marvel seems to have learned much from the lackluster Agents of Shield, with Agent Carter and now Daredevil getting praised.
Hell even Agents of SHIELD is a lot better these days. Arguable whether it's as good as Flash or the Arrow (before it went to shit), but Season 2 has been consistently solid so I guess they either learned or were just hamstrung out of their potential by executive mandate in the beginning.
I think it's because Season 1 was far more about internal, non-superhuman people. Lots of character building, not a whole lot of powers. If they had someone with even a minor power on the team constantly from the start (like Pete Lattimer's "bad feeling" in Warehouse 13) it would have helped immensely.
Season 2 has a lot more focus on superpowers, especially with Skye in play now. Of course, Agent Carter had little in the way of super powers, but I think they wrote the intrigue much better and threw in enough Stark inventions to keep it interesting. Of course, Season 2 would not have happened without the world building done in Season 1, so even if it was a bit boring Season 1 was still useful.
The mo-cap eyes is an interesting addition. I hope the eye expressions are done subtly, as it could potentially stick out horribly. Really need to see it in motion.
They tested something like with the first Spider-Man movie, but abandoned it for being really creepy looking. Hopefully the last decade and a half of technology has fixed that.
Ward is as bland and uncompelling as an antagonist as he was when he was a good guy, and I wish the show could just concentrate on Hyde and on Almos's totally not arming himself up power play.
Also, I was really disappointed that Coulson's mystery backup wasn't Hawkeye. Because Hunter is basically just Hawkeye without a bow in terms of his role on the show, but I was still holding out hope that some element of Clint/Bobbie would make it to the show.
(Or more of Bobbie's comic book as hell story to make it to the show)
Probably contractual or scheduling stuff is keeping Renner out. I know they had to scrap a cameo for him in Winter Soldier because of that.
Well this may still be as its starting to ravage his system before he gets the healing factor implanted. And before he has his heart ripped from his chest and the dives into the deep end of the pool.
Really if his heart is torn from his chest and this doesn't start playing, there is a problem. //youtube.com/watch?v=CmXWkMlKFkI
Too eyecancer-res to tell if it's any good but so far it seems on par with Flash's.
The aesthetics look Synder-esque but not in the good way.
Coloration issues aside I'm really happy with the way Vision's design turned out for this movie. It hits the right balance between pragmatism and accuracy to the comics, and between artificial android and dude wearing a suit.
They're not even trying to make the new Fantastic Four movie feel anything like the comics. If Trank wants to make Chronicle 2 then Fox should've let him make Chronicle 2 instead of shoehorning the FF copyright in since it's going to turn off both anyone who actually likes the Fantastic Four or knows what they're about, and the people who wanted more Chronicle, since they now have to deal with FF brand impurities being dumped into it.
I mean, not all comic films necessarily lose out by being loose adaptations and it worked out fine with Big Hero 6 but that's because the source material sucked. FF has a lot of perfectly good stories none of which the film seems to want to touch with a ten-foot-pole.
>If Trank wants to make Chronicle 2 then Fox should've let him make Chronicle 2
Nothing about the new Fantastic Four film resembles Chronicles in any way.
So advance screenings of Age of Ultron are pretty positive. Key point so far is it's manages to assemble the clusterfuck of plot, characters and HAPPENING together in spite of it all, and most importantly Whedon's really made up for shafting Hawkeye in the first one.
Whedon has nothing to do with this one, also whether intentional or not good pun.
Haven't watched Daredevil yet, but I'm hearing comparisons to Batman Begins, which is good. Also Sin City for its noir presentation and 300 for its over-the-top violence.
"DAREDEVIL- It's like other things that were also based on Frank Miller comics"
Really? From what I heard Whedon's had way more control over Age of Ultron compared to the first film which had a lot of executive mandates and the like.
I too started watching Daredevil.
First impressions? (half way in ep.02)
I like it!
Also the red glasses light effect on his face is fucking cool.
And the fights are even better.
Finished episode one of Daredevil. It's everything Powers tried to be but failed miserably at.
It's a compelling superhero crime drama set in a gritty and believable world. The cinematography even puts some of Marvel Studios' most popular films to shame. Really love how the first episode subtly introduces Matt Murdock's powers, without explicitly explaining it. The ending was a nice upbeat closure that quickly soured by the harsh reality of life. Great note to end the pilot on, as it demonstrated Murdock's job as a lawyer and hero has only just begun.
After watching three episodes, the only major problem I'm seeing is that the show is deliberately avoiding the use of guns against DD. Sans the cold opening in episode one. It could be excused in a kids show, but it sticks out as a regular program. As cool as the fight scene at the end of episode two, it was unbelievable that none of the thugs were armed.
So in addition to the Russos directing Infinty War, the writers for both Cap films and Agent Carter will also be doing them as well. I'm pretty happy about that since I always thought both Cap films had pretty good writing and Agent Carter showed they're also good with snappy dialogue as well.
TV rights are a bit of a foggy area. He's already showed up in the other Marvel Animated series (Disk Wars and Ult.Spiderman series).
They had an article a couple months back about a possible X-men show, but Fox has to negotiate with Marvel over who owns rights to what.
Probably end up with "Mutants but no Mansion" Though Cartoon Networks Tower Prep had a good vibe that could be used for a Mutant Academy focused show.
Needs promotion (that being AoS), Deadpool is pretty much universally loved by all (least one version of him). Seems like a deal they could all get behind on this one.
>As cool as the fight scene at the end of episode two, it was unbelievable that none of the thugs were armed.
I literally just watched that episode, and two thugs had pistols, and another was armed with a shotgun. Matt even used their guns as improvised melee weapons.
Alright, there were guns in this scene. Not sure how I missed it.
I'm very impressed that this is the introduction of Marvel Streets essentially.
I like that they're keeping it separate from the films. The idea of superhero secret identities is kind of a tired one especially when dealing with movies which only have two hours to tell their story, so imagine how fucking jazzed I was at the ending of the first Iron Man.
People really do not like what they did with the Kingpin.
I've only seen a glimpse of Kingpin, but from what I'm hearing, he's actually a three-dimensional character. A bad guy that doesn't believe he's a bad guy. He wants to protect his city and the woman in his life. Has self-doubts, along with a traumatic background.
From this alone, this sounds like the most fascinating villain from Marvel Studios, outside of Loki who only had charisma.
How so? Most people say he's the greatest villain in the MCU yet.
Spoilers in this link.
The point about the superheroes and supervillians not really being super needs to be emphasized, as Marvel tried to play off complaints about Agent of Shield as people whining about no super-powered beings in the show. You don't need anyone shooting lasers out of their eyes; just compelling and authentic characters. Something the first season of Agent of Shield lacked.
How much does it cost to watch all of the Daredevil episodes btw?
Netflix subscription is $8.99 a month. There's a free trial month for first time subscribers.
>People really do not like what they did with the Kingpin.
I've yet to see anything but praise for what D'Onofrio did with the character. Hell, most people put him as the strongest performance in a show full of great acting.
Racism? But both Fisk and Vanessa are white, I think I am missing something.
Is it possible to cancel and renew your subscription on and off? Such as if I want to watch one show, hold off for the next six months until something worthwhile comes up, then marathon everything after that? Or would I have to create a new account each time?
Explaining that would take a REALLY long time and involve a lot of guesswork, so my advice is to wait for the Netflix Ironfist show they are setting up.
The short answer is it's something Ironfist based that no one is clear on yet.
Ooooh I did not know that. Since it's tied with Iron Fist, I guess the kid had something supernatural going on.
Seems too much like Guardians of the Galaxy aside from the train bit which is actually kind of funny.
Its got that whole strength thing going saw him punching and stuff tiny size. Looks pretty awesome.
The Costume is a little too much black and complication but for a first iteration it's pretty good.
Considering what's coming up and Winter Soldier, I was guessing Inhuman or something.
Damn, never noticed until now how similar Spader and RDJ's voices sound to each other. I can really see how Ultron is his MCU father's son in multiple ways.
Also, "evil plan"? I know he's just trying to be snarky but it comes off as a little tryhard since the entire premise of the Maximoff twins working with him is because they think he's in the right.
So Olivia Munn is going to be Psylocke in the new X-Men movie.
I know she's part Asian but this still smacks of Keanu in the 47 Ronin. Why didn't they cast an actual Japanese woman if they're going the Kanon route? The only way this would be excusable is if they're trying to put forth a compromise by making Betsy (and Brian if they remember him) were always half-Asian to begin with.
What the fuck? How can you know about Kwannon and still have a problem with this? She was born white, Olivia Munn is a fine choice, there is enough horrendous casting choices in this world that you don't have to take issue with one that has done absolutely nothing wrong.
Man, the reaction to the Purple Man doing his thing is going to be something to behold. I doubt Netfilix is going to downgrade what a vile asshole he can be.
He might turn actually purple down the line, although more likely he's just going to dress it.
I just don't like her because she was terrible and not funny at all on The Daily Show.
The avengers are a whole group of men in silly costumes, plus one of them is a god and the other is a big green monster.
We finally get a proper glimpse of Doctor Doom.
From that trailer, it seems that Ben never wears pants after the transformation.
I'll be honest, kinda impressed because my standards were lower than rock bottom. there is promise here especially from the actors, and hey, at least it understands these movies need charm unlike what DC shits out.
Only problem I've gotten is at the end. Ben is doing a air drop and not one utterance of "Its Clobbering Time" Just a gag on how Reed missing the timing.
It's not really giving me any hope but at the same time there's nothing particularly cringeworthy from it either. It might be a decent film, even if all things are continuing to point to it being bad as a Fantastic Four adaptation.
I thought it was a guy speaking through a robot filter until he actually showed up on screen.
Ol Freddy from the rib joint? Hell yeah.
Also, I'm actually really looking forward to this since I started seeing Miles Teller in other spots.
Dear Fox, please stop trying to make the Fantastic 4 a thing, love Rodyle.
Fantastic Four has always been a thing, one of the biggest things in all of comics, Fox just fucks up every single time they touch them.
Fox owns X-Men, too, right?
Because while there have been a few stinkers in the X-films, even the worst of that franchise is still a damn sight better than any of Fox's Fantastic Four efforts. I'd legit rather watch The Last Stand or The Wolverine than any of the F4 movies.
Age of Ultron reviews are slowly pouring in. I enjoyed reading these two:
Daredevil season two is a-go.
Why, schadenfreude? As much as you're probably salivating over the negativity I highly doubt the DC films are going to be any better.
I will say, that from the few reviews I've read, Age of Ultron does open the possibility of more character-driven, political stories. Which isn't a huge surprise, considering the Civil War build up. But it's understandable why the Russo brothers are taking over directing duties for the third film, as they demonstrated they can merge blockbuster and politics beautifully in The Winter Soldier.
I'm don't even care about Marvel/DC wars so I don't need their shitty fanboy circlejerks to tell me your opinions are worthless. The Steven Universe threads already took care of that.
Those reviews basically confirm the film will suffer from the exact problems I've been complaining about for a while now. No surprise or disappointment here. But when you're the only person who's still genuinely excited for the DCCU here and aside from FF even your positive posts about competitors sound so begrudged it makes you sound a little fanboyish yourself. And I'm the one telling everyone else to give the DCCU a chance before the new BvS trailer sapped what was left of my excitement. I'm still hoping they'll turn out good after all, but if they suck I'm not going to enjoy reading people complain about it because I'm not an asshole.
From what I'm hearing of other people the big standouts for the film are Hawkeye, Vision (no surprise), and Ultron. And apparently Natasha and Bruce's romance is pulled off better than people expected, though I'm still super wary on that.
You say that as if it's only limited to Marvel fans. Nolanbats fans are just as bad, maybe even worse considering Rotten Tomatoes had to turn off comments for The Dark Knight Rises because of them.
>But when you're the only person who's still genuinely excited for the DCCU
"Excited" is too strong of a word. I am well aware of the faults with WB/DC and none of my posts has ever hid that. I don't see why I need to state disappointment with Man of Steel or Batman v Superman, when criticizing a Marvel Studios film. Or, linking to criticism. Especially when far more cynical things have been said here about non-Marvel Studios film without anyone batting an eye.
Jumpman, buddy, I don't really have anything against you, but you are certainly the last who should be talking about being cynical and biased. It's one of the cons of identifying yourself with a name on a largerly anonymous board, you have to carry on your shoulders all the stuff you have said. It is a fact that most of your posts on the matter seem to be highly negative towards Marvel, and even when you were positive on the Daredevil show, you HAD to invent something against the show. If it was involuntary on your side, it shows that you are overly critical to the point of your mind playing trickls on you. And look, you were practically saying "I am happy because these two Avengers reviews say it is no good". It is a noticeable trend on your part, sorry but it is.
>even when you were positive on the Daredevil show, you HAD to invent something against the show.
I made a mistake. I acknowledged that and posted proof that I made a mistake. Believe it or not, people can make honest mistakes.
And even if it was legit, how does ONE complaint that take away from my overall enjoyment of Daredevil?
>And look, you were practically saying "I am happy because these two Avengers reviews say it is no good"
Try actually reading my posts, instead of putting words in my mouth. I shared two reviews I enjoyed reading and that's all. Didn't even make any comment on the film itself, based on those reviews. Nor did I say those two reviews defined the general reception of the new film.
>"I am happy because these two Avengers reviews say it is no good"
Considering there's at least two or three of us who got that same impression from you, it might be you who has the communication problem.
For what's worth I've never seen Jumpman as being a DC fanboy, just very negative (to the point of being a bit obsessed) at everything Marvel for whatever reason.
Whedon said the Edgar Wright script of Ant-Man was one of the best scripts Marvel has ever had.
>“Only that I don’t get it,” he said with a sigh. “I thought the script was not only the best script that Marvel had ever had, but the most Marvel script I’d read. I had no interest in Ant-Man. [Then] I read the script, and was like, Of course! This is so good! It reminded me of the books when I read them. Irreverent and funny and could make what was small large, and vice versa. I don’t know where things went wrong. But I was very sad. Because I thought, This is a no-brainer. This is Marvel getting it exactly right. Whatever dissonance that came, whatever it was, I don’t understand why it was bigger than a marriage that seemed so right. But I’m not going to say it was definitely all Marvel, or Edgar’s gone mad! I felt like they would complement each other by the ways that they were different. And, uh, somethin’ happened.”
I don't doubt it would be a cool film, perhaps much better than the one we are getting, but the fact that Wrigth accomodated so many things about the character to fit his vision, makes me wonder how it could be said that it was going to be the "most marvel" ever. It's like the NolanBats trilogy, prettty damn good films, but I would not call them the "most DC" either.
Wasn't part of it that he dragged his feet for so long that it was disrupting the whole MCU. Its he reason we didn't have Hank and Janet in the Avengers.
Yes, although in fairness his friend was dying of cancer so he kind of had to sideline it. I'm still upset about Hank and Janet (mostly Janet) getting sidelined though. That part is entirely his doing.
>A lot of people come back in The Winter Soldier. It’s a grand Marvel tradition. Bucky was supposed to die. And the Coulson thing was, I think, a little anomalous just because that really came from the television division, which is sort of considered to be its own subsection of the Marvel universe. As far as the fiction of the movies, Coulson is dead.
And this illustrate some of the problems in creating a shared universe. In an earlier interview I posted, Whedon talked about how he planned to get more involved with AOS, but backed off when Marvel decided to integrate it more with the movie universe. Specifically, with The Winter Soldier and the SHIELD breakup. It's likely one of the reasons why Whedon is ready to leave the Marvel Universe (for now, at least) and have more creative control on his own projects. In fairness, he did say he enjoyed his time at Marvel.
This isn't just a Marvel thing, though. It's happening with WB/DC too. With Deadshot getting the ax on Arrow, so WB can promote the movie version.
Generally the WB has a way worse issues with this sort of thing because their notion of branding is so draconian, they have no faith in people's ability to distinguish one series from another, not just with DC but just about everything they've touched, if one plan exists they tear everything else apart.
Such as? I can't remember any other series with such an expanded universe off the top of my head.
I wish WB and all the other guys would hold off on trying to rush themselves into a Cinematic Universe deal and just focus on making strong solo films first. I want them to do well (it's something Marvel fans should want too, because proper competition keeps everyone in shape) but they have their priorities on ass-backwards.
WSJ article about Marvel's success with The Avengers and its focus on character over celebrities.
>But no company has eschewed A-list talent as consistently and effectively in the modern age as Marvel. All but one of its 10 films released so far have been hits, a record rivaled only by Pixar Animation Studios. And none have featured a major star or established action director.
>Money is a key reason, say people who have done business with Marvel. The Disney subsidiary’s chief executive, Ike Perlmutter, is notoriously frugal and doesn’t believe that the millions rivals like Warner Bros. spend to get big-name stars like Ben Affleck and Will Smith are worth it.
>“They are in the business of hiring the guy who hasn’t had a big success, because they don’t have to pay that guy very much,” said Mr. Whedon, adding that he made more money on his self-produced Internet series “Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog” than he did directing the first “Avengers,” which cost $230 million to produce and grossed $1.5 billion world-wide.
Hulk is truly alone in the Cinematic Universe and Box Office performance.
I think it actually works to their advantage from a storytelling perspective, because with less famous actors audiences' perceptions of a character aren't going to be as colored by their past roles in the way American Psycho viewers might be laughing their asses off over Batdubs, or any Depp role and Edward Scissorhands/Jack Sparrow.
I'm already having this issue with Deadshot and Fresh Prince/WELCOME TO URF/Goddomit Fronk, and a little bit with Hank Pym as Gordon Gecko (but that's because I'm old). But depending on who it is that's not always a bad thing either. It worked for Robert Redford as Alexander Pierce.
The problem with The Hulk is that they are afraid of him being the Hulk, so he can't actually hurt anyone and therefore his otherside doesn't really do anything wrong and instead has the "Gentile giant" PG side going on.
It works kinda okay in The Avengers but with no real tension from what is the central flaw of his character his movies are doomed to fail and fail and fail until they finally give his stories some teeth.
The problem is Hulk isn't a very interesting character by nature once his novelty wears off. Even in the comics he usually did his best in ensemble series because he has someone to bounce off of. There is the actually pretty good Peter David run, but I don't really see that getting adapted. And while Planet/WW Hulk have done a lot to save his character we aren't going to see those arcs either for blatantly obvious practicality reasons.
How is RDJ not a major star? Or, wait, was he a very minor star when he did Iron Man after the rehab and that catapulted his career? Anyway, as long as they continue picking up talent for cheap, that's great. If they start using poor actors to save money, that's a problem. Starring in such highly-anticipated films for cheap also works great for the actors; Chris Pratt was extremely minor (I only knew him from Parks & Rec) until GotG, and now he's in freaking everything. (And he seems like a pretty awesome guy, so I'm glad it worked out so well.) The Lego Movie probably helped, too, but he was only a voice actor there.
Yeah. I don't think that Will Smith will be bad in the role, but it's going to be hard seeing him as just the character rather than something building off his past roles.
He was a highly acclaimed actor back in the day but his drug history made him a toxic asset at the time Iron Man came out. It took a lot of convincing on Jon Favreau's part before he was considered. And unlike a certain person who tried to spin it off this way last thread I don't see this as yet another sign of how insidious Disney or Marvel are, it's completely understandable if a little close-minded why the higher-ups were so hesitant against casting him from a business perspective.
I've heard it has quite a decent chance of getting renewed.
Which is cool for something that I heard was just a short series to start with. Maybe we'll see where the whole HYDRA bit started within SHIELD.
Saw Age of Ultron today.
Kicked ass but dont have the wow factor from the first one.
>Brühl has just been cast in the new Captain America, as the villain, Baron Helmut Zemo – “I think I can tell you that without being thrown into Marvel prison…” – and starts shooting at the end of April. “For the first few days I’ll walk around like a little boy, just amazed by the megalomania of it. It’s such a huge project. We could do 20 films with the budget.”
So Tony isn't the bad guy then? I'm confused. Also I'm not sure how they'll pull off the mask without it looking super dumb unless it's a "symbolic" thing like David Tennant as the Purple Man.
I am really happy with that casting, and I really hope that they pull off Zemo well. Like pull off the Jerk with a heart of Jerk that does good for bad reasons that Busiek and Nicieza really set him up as.
But I continue to be really antsy about Cap 3 being Civil War because Civil War was complete garbage. And I don't know how they'll turn that mess into something worthwhile.
Also, losing Evans as Captain America will be a huge blow.
Evans has said he's willing to continue appearing in films past Infinity War so they might not.
Also it's likely that most of the superheroes outside of Cap's own crew will only appear for 5-10 minutes tops, and they'll just focus on the philosophical conflict between Tony and Steve (without turning Tony into a Nazi.
Right now I'm more worried that they might waste Zemo or turn him into a one-off figure like they did with Malekith and Ronan. I've heard good things about Ultron though so they might be learning.
>I wanted an African-American Nick Fury to be director of SHIELD because the closest thing in the real world to this job title was held by Colin Powell at the time. I also thought Nick Fury sounded like one of those great, 1970s Blaxploitation names and so the whole thing coalesced for me into a very specific character, an update of the cool American super-spy Jim Steranko had done in the 70s and based on the Rat Pack, which seemed very nineteen sixties and due for some kind of upgrade. Sam is famously the coolest man alive and both myself an artist Bryan Hitch just liberally used him without asking any kind of permission. You have to remember this was 2001 when we were putting this together. The idea that this might become a movie seemed preposterous as Marvel was just climbing out of bankruptcy at the time.
>What we didn’t know was that Sam was an avid comic fan and knew all about it. One of my books was adapted recently as Kingsman: The Secret Service, where Sam played the bad guy, and we finally got to hang out on the set. The first thing I said was I hope you don’t mind me completely exploiting your appearance in my book thirteen years back and he said ‘fuck, no, man. Thanks for the 9 picture deal’. He’s fantastic.
That is probably the most accurate costume I've seen in X-men so far. She's just missing the shades.
Do we have any idea of what the plot is going to be yet, beyond Mutants vs. Mutants, Big Powerful Bad Guy comes around and turns some of the heroic mutants evil and it's up to the heroes to stop him? First Class and DOFP were good because they were primarily character studies as opposed to focusing on action or fights (even if some of the "emotional" moments in DOFP were a bit cheeseball) but it's going to be trickier to pull that off with Apocalypse.
Just watched Avengers Part Deux.
Movie kicked ass, but that's not why I am posting this.
There was a mid-credits scene, but nothing post-credits. Did my theater screw up or that's how it really is?
Yes, there is no post-credits scene for this movie. They were saying this for like a month but apparently a lot of people are still really confused or forget about that so they must not have done a good job communicating that.
Whedon himself said he didn’t want to try topping the shawarma bit from Avengers 1, so they stuck with the mid-credits stinger.
I'm hearing some mixed opinions about Age of Ultron from people compared to the first. Hearing a lot of anger from Winter Soldier fans but I honestly think a lot of it boils down to buttdevastated Steve/Bucky shippers mad that Bucky didn't appear or that the film has more Steve/Tony "teases" for mindnumbingly-obvious reasons rather than legitimate complaints (of which I'm sure there are plenty).
Am I the only one who didn't think it was that great? It could've easily been beaten by a more plot-meaty scene. Go for the Winter Soldier post-credits scene, rather than the Guardians of the Galaxy one.
Loki really isn't all that great even. In either looks or in writing. He was OK in Thor 1 and pretty decent in Thor 2 (we don't talk about the abomination that was Avengers Loki) but most of the supposedly "interesting" aspects of him come from meta and 90% of that is literally pulled out of the fangirls' asses, or another orifice of theirs.
Cap was like that because Chris Evans grew his beard out for another film, I think Snowpiercer? He had to wear a face prosthetic to hide it and hold still.
Kenneth Branagh brought more of his background with Shakespeare to Thor than I realized, beyond just Odin being Space King Lear. Thor and Loki are two halves of Coriolanus.
Makes sense. Tom Hiddleston is a classically trained actor and apparently there were some nasty incidents where he got mobbed by psychotic fangirls after a performance specifically as Coriolanus.
Looks like those Sony Emails are cleaning the slate for everyone.
>The Social Network, to my mind, is the Citizen Kane of the 21st Century, a film that social historians hundreds of years from now will point to as one of the most emblematic of our era.
Calm down there, Kaz.
Eh, Kaz wasn’t the only one saying such things. He just got paid the most for saying them.
This is old news, isn't it? He got invited to personally 'hang out' with a big sony guy, and he refused at the last second.
Pissed a lot of guys off.
"You know I've always supported your Avenging" is right up there with "You know what happens when a toad gets struck by lightning?" in bad movie lines. Unsurprisingly, both came from Joss Whedon. For a man that writes characters in a singular snarky voice, I'm surprised that line was delivered with a straight face.
I feel like Whedon thinks he's a lot more clever than he really is. The first film's dialogue was OK aside from a few really terrible lines but there's so much of it this time around that the script comes off as tryhard. Still a solid movie, but I'm glad the Captain America guys are taking over from him.
>"You know I've always supported your Avenging"
Because that line wasn't tongue in cheek.
>I'm glad the Captain America guys are taking over from him.
Cap 2 hit the right balance of Snark and Everything Else (the running gag with Nat trying to play matchmaker for Steve was great). I'll take the Russos over Snarkmaster Whedon any day.
Looking at Marvel someone on their team has a grasp of their approximate levels
Daredevil is doing Street level fantastically. Though I'd love to see a Late twenties early thirties Spidey on the Streaming Screen. His stuff really is made more for this hour long series than movies.
>"You know I've always supported your Avenging" is right up there with "You know what happens when a toad gets struck by lightning?" in bad movie lines.
Completely different circumstances and meanings behind those lines, I have no idea why are you making such comparision.
Honestly? With maybe the exception of The Hulk, most of Marvel's film properties to date would probably work better as hour-long miniseries shows than movies.
I'll even give you an example: Iron Man 1. It runs about two hours, right? And the average run-time of a cable drama with commercials is 45 minutes. Let's go with that as an episode run time (which also gives us a chance to break each episode up into five acts). So let's split Iron Man I up into six separate episodes:
* Episode 1: Pretty much the first half of the first act - Tony shows off the Jericho missile system, gets caught by the terrorists, builds the first Iron Man suit. You end the episode with Tony putting the finishing touches on what will become the "Mark I" suit.
* Episode 2: The second half of the first act goes here - Tony escapes by using the Iron Man suit, announces the end of Stark Industries's weapon-making days, yadda yadda yadda. End the episode on the terrorists scouring the desert for the remnants of the Mark I.
* Episode 3: Now things can get interesting. Most of this episode would be Tony building and testing the Mark II, but a subplot could give Pepper, Rhodey, and maybe even Obadiah Stane some more time to have their characters fleshed out by letting them talk about Tony's post-capture issues and the direction of Stark Industries. The episode ends with Tony's first flight in the Mark II.
* Episode 4: Tony finds out about how Stark Industries is still making/selling weapons, uses the Iron Man suit to go overseas and wallop a few terrorists, and encounters the US Air Force. Flesh this out with more Rhodey/Pepper subplotting that gives you a better look at their relationships with Tony, especially after he reveals the suit to them. The episode ends with the big twist of Stane being behind the terrorists (and recovering the remnants of the Mark I).
* Episode 5: Tony gets Pepper to infiltrate Stane's office and discover what's going on in Stark Industries, Pepper learns the truth about Stane, and goes to SHIELD/Coulson with her findings. Stane steals Tony's mini-Arc Reactor, leaving Tony on the verge of death. The episode ends with Stane fitting the Iron Monger with the Arc Reactor while Tony struggles to get his first "power source" in his chest.
* Episode 6: The rest of the film - Tony gets the power source in, fights Stane, yadda yadda yadda. You can even have the post-credits stinger with Fury take place before the credits this time.
Obviously this is a barebones outline and all, but it's proof that—with some extra padding for characterization purposes and some changes to account for the smaller effects budget—Iron Man could work as a miniseries suitable for TV/streaming. And really, what are the Marvel movies if not two-hour action-fests leading up to "series finalés" that are the Avengers movies?
(If Fox had any sense and the budget to account for it, they'd make a fucking X-Men TV/Netflix series.)
Really Daredevil has the best pieces for Fisk from the Daredevil and Punisher comics. Really add Frank to this mix and you'd have the entire lower rung of Marvel New York.
Nah, Fox only has film rights to X-Men. If they want to make a TV series they'd have to renegotiate with Marvel over that because of the nature of the license. It was the same thing with Spider-Man.
Still, X-Men would work better as a series than as films. More time to spend with individual mutants/smaller groups of mutants and flesh out characterization before, say, a mid-season/end-of-season finalé setpiece battle.
Then Marvel should step that into the light. X-Force series. Cable and Deadpool back in the saddle. After the movie from the other guys of course.
If they do make a deal, they'd better keep the X-Men out of the MCU continuity. I've always thought the 616 double standard between superheroes and mutants was mega dumb.
The Toad/Lightning line was the payoff for a running gag that was in an earlier draft of the script and got cut. While Whedon did pen the line in question, looking at it without the context of the setup that was actually supposed to make it funny is a little disingenuous. It's like looking at a single episode of Arrested Development divorced of the context that lead up to it.
Let me rephrase that--looking at that line without the context of the setup that was actually supposed to make it funny as an indication of Whedon's abilities as a writer is a little disingenuous. The version we saw on screen is not the version Whedon wrote. It is entirely fair to consider the line in the movie we saw to be terrible and stupid. But you can't blame the writer for bad decisions made by the director or the producers.
Having now seen Age of Ultron, Civil War being a thing that happens just gets more and more confusing.
Is Tony Stark really incapable of learning anything? I mean, Iron Man 3 and AoU taken together SHOULD feed into "Hey, maybe I need to stop trying to control everything"
The answer is pretty clear, he is not. I mean, against all logic and reason he went on with the plan to put Jarvis on the synthetic body. Even Cap wanted to slap his shit for it.
Plus, you have to factor in that Zemo will be around, most likely manipulating things so both Steve and Tony will be at each others throats.
Good movie. Not without its flaws (bloat due to too many characters, imo), but I thought Ultron really stole the show, which was nice after Loki stole the show in Avengers 1. The villains have been doing a bang-up job in these movies.
I thought Loki was pretty terrible in Avengers 1, though I admit he was entertaining in a trainwreck kind of way.
Both of the Cap films had pretty good villains though, in different ways. I'm hoping Zemo is just as good in his own.
Well that's okay to have terrible opinions, Anon. I mean I personally wouldn't flaunt them so boldly, but you do what you feel is right.
Just because you disagree with his opinion doesn’t make it “terrible“. Stop that.
A fair amount of people, especially Thor fans, didn't like Loki in Avengers. The most common complaint being that his behavior was way OOC and nonsensical compared to Thor 1, and subsequently Thor 2. Actually Avengers and Whedon get a lot of this in general. People who like Cap tend to hate how he was portrayed in Avengers, and lately a lot of people are complaining that AoU ignored most of Tony's character development in Iron Man 3.
Joss Whedon has been cyberbullied off of Twitter by Widow/Hulk anti-shippers and people who took issue with him having Iron Man make a rape joke.
Yeah, nah. There's zero proof it was directly the result of complaints about Black Widow and such as opposed to complaining about the film in general. Going by his interviews right before the film came out he was all about ready to quit anyway.
Not even close.
Yeah, it makes as much sense as declaring he'd bring back the guillotine or crucifixion something.
Forgot to add the blood eagle, which is way more appropriate for a place like Asgard, but I can't delete posts even right after making them.
what're ya gonna do about it Sage, call the anti-bully rangers?
I’m going to keep telling you to stop being an asshole and calling people names for having an opinion which you don’t like. It won’t change their opinion, and it won't make you anything but irrationally pissed off at someone for daring to “question” or contradict your opinion. I’ve been there, I don’t like being there, and I’ll gladly try and stop someone else from being there.
So please, stop implying that someone with a minority/fringe opinion about pop culture is a terrible person—or has a terrible opinion—if that opinion doesn’t actively harm any one/that person can back up their conclusion. If they can do the work required to hold an opinion, you shouldn't be mocking them for it.
Saw Age of Ultron yesterday with my brother. Ultron somehow lifting chunks of the ground in the truck chase scene was entirely out of nowhere, in that I'm pretty sure he's not telekinetic, but whatever. Other than that, one thing that surprised me was that the mysterious helper fighting Ultron wasn't Arnim Zola. What with him being a computer program tying to reshape humanity in a way that might keep it from falling into the hands of Hydra and the "enemy of our enemy" talk I was expecting him pretty hard for a minute there.
Also, clips of Ultron need to be put together set to this: //youtube.com/watch?v=_3H18bkKyG8
IIRC, there is another instance of Ultron using that ability, during the fight in Klaw's ship, he uses it to pull Stark and then shoot him with his finger beams. I don't think it's "telekinesis" but something derived from the magentic reactor that Hydra had in their base, which he adapted into his own robot body.
Noooo. Marvel fandom is bad enough already with Cumberbatch and Hiddleston already, we don't need the Marvel fandom becoming infected with Sherlock and Hobbit cancer like this.
It does appear his account is closed, at the very least: https://twitter.com/josswhedon
>Feminism not even once
People always conveniently forget that assholes comes in all flavors. Yes, there are feminist that give the label a bad name. But the same can be said for Christians, Democrats, and etc. Why should a few assholes be allowed to defile the belief that women should treated equal? When the male-oriented culture is allowed unlimited forgiveness for equal or worser crimes. Such as the video game and comic book fandom. Especially the former with its history of death threats made to game developers, particularly women.
Whether those tweets motivated Whedon to leave Twitter, I doubt he would want anyone to use them as an excuse to knock down feminism.
James Gunn weighed in on Facebook.
>A couple months ago someone on Twitter wrote me that something one of my characters said in my movie hurt him. I've gotten hundreds of tweets from people angry about moments in my films over the years, and I just ignore them, or get angry in return. But that one tweet affected me profoundly. The last thing I want to do with my work is hurt someone, especially someone who already feels disenfranchised. That made me think about what I write and what I put in my films, and I will be more thoughtful about situations like it in the future. That is, one honest and vulnerable tweet affected more change in me than hundreds of angry ones.
I don't know about the Tweets, but a fair number of Tumblr users I follow for their funposting interrupt it semi-regularly to spew or reblog some pretty vile filth aimed towards him. Some go as far as to call him a closet neo-Nazi for what he did in changing the backgrounds of the Maximoff twins. So before anyone immediately accuses them of all being false flags or trolls fronted by people out to discredit social justice, no, no they're not, chances are a fair portion of them are totally legit, which is super depressing.
Anyway, didn't Whedon say he only had this account for a few months? And that this isn't even the first time he's opened a (temporary) Twitter account? But yeah for all the grievances I had with Black Widow in this film (along a whole slew of reasons, largely nonpolitical) I think it's ridiculous and hyperbole to call him an outright willful misogynist/racist/transphobe for it as opposed to acknowledging he just fucked up.
>what he did in changing the backgrounds of the Maximoff twins.
Friendly reminder that the first time they ever got a set of parents, they were THE WHIZZER AND MISS AMERICA.
It wasn't the femimisfits.
Not a fan of Sarkeesian's content (frankly, I think they're laughably terrible) but that's nice of her to check on him. Besides it's Jonathan McIntosh who's the most obnoxious twat.
Fucking knew it. He would hate hinted at abuse with his farewell tweet, if he were harassed off the site. Unfortunately, poor media reporting (the thing GamerGate claims to be against) made people believe in speculation, instead of actual fact.
I don't quite understand it, why is it so terrible that Natasha would want to pursue a relationship in the movies?
In and of itself, nothing. But it stands out in Avengers when the one girl on the team is involved in a Token Romance. Also while I get the point Whedon is trying to make by not having her hook up with Clint or Steve just because she's friends with them, a lot of people just dislike the pairing for being nonsensical, full of cringeworthy scenes, and not adding much to the story. Overall I think Whedon meant well, he just executed it in particularly poor fashion.
And part of the vitriol is they didn't want "his" voice for their class.
I think that's what made Winter Soldier so good. You've got two directors and two writers to divide the duties among and check with each other, whereas Age of Ultron sounds like it suffered from a case of "protection from editors" where having so much singular control meant nobody was there to reign in Whedon's worse tendencies.
God fucking damnit.
>I think that's what made Winter Soldier so good. You've got two directors and two writers to divide the duties among and check with each other, whereas Age of Ultron sounds like it suffered from a case of "protection from editors" where having so much singular control meant nobody was there to reign in Whedon's worse tendencies.
Except Whedon didn't have complete control over the film.
>Referring to dream sequences he included in the film, Whedon says, “The dreams were not an executive favorite either—the dreams, the farmhouse, these were things I fought to keep. With the cave, it really turned into: they pointed a gun at the farm’s head and said, ‘Give us the cave, or we’ll take out the farm,’—in a civilized way. I respect these guys, they’re artists, but that’s when it got really, really unpleasant.”
>Because threatening the writer and director of your film is always the best way to get results, Whedon says he eventually caved, even when—in a confusing turn—other studio notes temporarily led to the cave sequence being cut altogether, before of course being re-inserted. “I was so beaten down at that point that I was like, ‘Sure, OK—what movie is this?’,” says that man whose resume teems with bland, carbon-copy Hollywood product like Buffy The Vampire Slayer and Firefly. “And the editors were like, ‘No. You have to show the [events in the cave]. You can’t just say it.’” Thank God for those brave editors and executives, because now we have a movie that is less the result of one man’s megalomaniacal vision, and more the surefire formula for success that comes from the old saying, “Too many cooks always improve a meal.”
Not complete control, but according to various other websites he's still had more influence over this film than the previous one, and on several other films, such as requesting other films to avoid including Banner and Hawkeye too much. Also, he's in charge of both directing and writing, whereas most other movies split duties. The studios might dictate which scenes get included and maybe who dies, but generally don't seem as concerned with things like characterization and interactions, and that's where the film mostly falls flat. A lot of the problems I and other people have with the film are things that have plagued Whedon's works for years, such as incompetent romances and obnoxious dialogue.
You're perfectly free to have whatever opinion you want, but don't pretend you don't have some problems with confirmation bias. Most of the news you post in Marvel threads tends to be tinged with negativity or from people who have a bone to pick with them even though there's plenty of neutral stuff like announcements to also talk about, whereas apparently even total nothings are newsworthy over in DC-land. Most of the people here aren't calling you out because they're Marvel apologists or DC haters like you act like they are, they're calling you out because of your double standard.
Probably because normal people don't express their dislike for something by acting like a Tokyo Rose towards it. It's hardly the first time either. I remember people pointing this out about you in the Nintendo threads back on old +4Chan too.
Jesus even if the rumors didn't turn out to be true, the response isn't to double down on it.
Huh, so they're bringing that guy from The Incredible Hulk back. That makes the Widow/Banner romance even weirder, as I thought the lack of mention of Betty was due to TIH getting the Portable Ops treatment. Also it looks like the Thunderbolts are more and more likely.
This is sounding more like an Avengers sequel. Excited for Black Panther, though.
Warning: this link potentially has HUGE spoilers for the plot of Civil War (if the "leaks" turn out to be true). Thoughts, for anyone who dares to read it?
>This is sounding more like an Avengers sequel.
I doubt most of those characters will have anything beyond a short scene in the movie showing them being registered or resisting it.
We're talking a SHIELD Helicarrier-sized bag of salt, here. It sounds plausible, but 4chan is legendary for its bullshitting ability.
Same here. They all just say they'll be important because who wants to admit they're just a cameo? Most likely they'll contribute as much as Hawkeye was planned to in TWS (five minutes of chasing Cap, dueling him, telling him he's bugged, then fucking off for the rest of the film).
Didn't Iron Man destroy all his suits since the last Avengers? And Pepper Potts take Extremis, becoming powerful enough to join the team in her own right?
He's capable of automating suit production at this point and the old suits were low-quality and cheaply hashed out anyway. As for Pepper he said he cured her of it at the end due to how unstable it is. Don't think anything was mentioned about whether she lost the powers as a result or whether he fixed Hansen's formula like she wanted so Pepper could keep the powers.
Even in the first movie, it took him mere hours for the automated process to assemble an armor. By the time of Ironman 3 he probably could have one build and ready during breakfast. Dunno why so many thought Stark destroying all those armors meant he was renouncing being Ironman, it was simply a gesture to show Pepper that he had gotten over the personal issues that plaged him during the movie.
That makes sense. Incidentally, when previews for the movie first came out I was under the impression that Ultron would be an amalgamation of broken suit parts that Tony forgot to tell not to self-repair into some kind of monster while deep under the ocean. How he actually got made is actually a bit cooler, though.