AVENGERS - movie Discussion, News, Interviews, Pics till release 2012

[Hermiod]

^No, it's lazy.

You give a character superpowers and the only way you can tell an interesting story is to take them away ? What was the point of giving them to that person in the first place ?

Heroes jumped the shark when it started doing that over and over again, so I would hope that nobody would be dumb enough to do it here.

[Pauln6]

Hermiod wrote:

---

^No, it's lazy.

You give a character superpowers and the only way you can tell an interesting story is to take them away ? What was the point of giving them to that person in the first place ?

Heroes jumped the shark when it started doing that over and over again, so I would hope that nobody would be dumb enough to do it here.

Don't be silly, it isn't the only way you can tell an interesting story but it is one way.

Heroes had various problems with its stories, much as I enjoyed them, including a tendency to use the reset button, and rehashing themes that should have been done and dusted. Plus, it isn't really Carol's story, it's Rogue's - Carol becomes a vegetable after losing her mind (in the comics Professor X actually restored most of her memories but none of the emotions attached to them - there was also a great scene where she chewed out the Avengers for abandoning her). In Heroes, Nicky's split personality was an interesting twist on the alter ego theme and giving some of that to Rogue could be interesting too. Carol can sit in a coma for a movie for all I care.

[Hermiod]

^Well, as someone who sits fairly high up in the Ms. Marvel's Biggest Fan rankings I most definitely would care if she spent an entire movie in a coma!

I'm not being 'silly'. Practically every superhero with powers to lose I can think of has been depowered at some point.

[Shazam!]

Hermiod wrote:

---

I'm not being 'silly'. Practically every superhero with powers to lose I can think of has been depowered at some point.

That's not why you were being called silly. You were being called silly because you said that depowering a hero was the 'only' way to tell an interesting story. Which is silly.

[Captain Craig]

One of, if not THE, driving forces of Hulk stories is that Banner wants to be "de-powered" and not be Hulk.

Granted other heroes don't have Banners problem, just saying its not necessarily a bad story telling device.

[Hermiod]

Shazam! wrote:

---

That's not why you were being called silly. You were being called silly because you said that depowering a hero was the 'only' way to tell an interesting story. Which is silly.

Did people miss the question mark ?

Hermiod wrote:

---

^No, it's lazy.
You give a character superpowers and the only way you can tell an interesting story is to take them away >>>> ? <<<< What was the point of giving them to that person in the first place ?

[CaptainCanada]

Shazam! wrote:

---

Positive discrimination!

How is asking for representation discrimination?

Particularly when it assumes that the status quo would otherwise be discrimination-free, when clearly it isn't?

[Pauln6]

Captain Craig wrote:

---

One of, if not THE, driving forces of Hulk stories is that Banner wants to be "de-powered" and not be Hulk.

Granted other heroes don't have Banners problem, just saying its not necessarily a bad story telling device.

It does depend on how the stories are handled. The Thing's moaning did get a bit old but Storm had her powers wiped by Forge in the 90s and it led to a very interesting story arc. Wolvie lost his powers nad started to die (since his bones couldn't make enough red blood cells).

It is true though that most long term heroes have lost their powers at least once! In terms of a movie franchise, I think they will only do it if they want to resolve a character's story to introduce some new characters. Since it is part of any character's comic history, nobody is safe!

Plus fans of Ms Marvel need not worry if she is in a coma for an Xmen movie as long as she's awake again for the next Avengers flick. Ms Marvel and Wasp do seem the most likely candidates for the future but the line up may well depend on who they think they can sell as a solo franchise. Maybe Hawkeye is up for his own flick and Mockingbird will feature there...?

[Hartzilla2007]

Pauln6 wrote:

---

Oh no, not in Avengers 2 - in X-men 4 or 5 but they would need to introduce Carol in Avengers first obviously for the mind wipe to have any real meaning. I loved Rogue in X-men 1 but she was a bit superfluous in 2 and 3. She needs super strength and flight and somebody else's personality in her head to make her interesting again. There were even a few comics where Carol's consciousness took complete control of her body. I don't think that would be lazy story-telling though - it's a classic part of the characters' history with quite a lot of potential.

One problem the X-Men movies and the Avengers film are not in the same continuity becuase Fox has the film rights to X-Men.

[Pauln6]

Hartzilla2007 wrote:

---

One problem the X-Men movies and the Avengers film are not in the same continuity becuase Fox has the film rights to X-Men.

That's a pretty big problem! Looks like Carol is safe. Still, it could be 10 years before they make X-men 4, who knows how the land will lie by then...

Where does that leave Quicksilver and the Scarlet Witch then? And by association, the Vision!

[Nerys Myk]

Hermiod wrote:

---

^No, it's lazy.

You give a character superpowers and the only way you can tell an interesting story is to take them away ? What was the point of giving them to that person in the first place ?

Heroes jumped the shark when it started doing that over and over again, so I would hope that nobody would be dumb enough to do it here.

Nah, the only good Ms Marvel story is to have her give birth to her own boyfriend.

[Hermiod]

^Be very careful!

[stj]

I'm told this is the place to come re Avengers movie?

Not only will the rumor that Nathan Fillion will be Ant-Man not die, it's got a mate: Eva Longoria-Parker for The Wasp.
The Wasp would be unrecognizable without Ant-Man/Giant-Man/Goliath/Yellowjacket. Or would she be unrecognizable period?

What would a dangerous housewife bring to the mix?

[Hermiod]

^As I said, keep Longoria well away from this movie.

[Captain Craig]

stj wrote:

---

Eva Longoria-Parker for The Wasp.
The Wasp would be unrecognizable without Ant-Man/Giant-Man/Goliath/Yellowjacket. Or would she be unrecognizable period?

Eva Longoria has not been approached to be Wasp.

"I keep hearing about that," "I think it’s a fantastic rumor!" she added with a laugh. "We're just going to go with it. Maybe it'll get me hired!"

So, while she is saying she will not be Wasp the second part of her statement is what perks me up.

"I had taken a meeting about a different movie at Marvel, and that’s where the rumor started,"

So she was at the Marvel Studio offices and did meet with them for a part, just not for Avengers and not Wasp.
That causes me to be curious which of the announced 'smaller budgeted' films that Marvel is looking to do might she be up for? Runaways perhaps? Is there a main adult role in that saga she could play? A role in the Punisher film?