I for one dislike Marvel Studios' approach to their movies

[Norrin Radd]

Why don't they just concentrate on making good movies about their characters?

I keep hearing things about all these new movies "culminating" into a new Avengers film. I hear about the signing of Samuel L. Jackson to a huge deal to appear in a bunch of films. I see unwieldy film titles such as "The First Avenger: Captain America".

I say no...stop...this effort to build a huge cinematic equivalent to the Marvel Universe is too risky and is not necessary. These characters can stand on their own. They don't need each other. You can have a series of great Captain America films that don't even mention the Avengers. Same with Iron Man. Same with Hulk. Same with Thor. It's hard enough to do this "shared universe" thing in comics, which are extremely cheap to produce, relatively. I don't see how they'll be successful at this approach in an entire series of risky multi-millionaire dollar movies.

And why put all of the eggs in one basket? If they come out with Avengers and it completely sucks, you're basically spoiling much of the potential of these characters. And the chances of getting all these actors into one Avengers movie is pretty slim anyway. They couldn't even keep Howard for the Iron Man sequel and hasn't Norton basically ran away in disgust already? So who cares if Jackson is there or not?

If after all these characters have been introduced and popularized in a myriad of sequels and (maybe) prequels, then you can talk about getting them all together...maybe in fifteen years with a whole new set of actors. Not now. Not even in a few years. It's too damn soon. We haven't even got a Batman/Superman film yet. Note to Marvel: Don't you think there's a reason for that?

Anyway, I think Marvel should make one or two films a year...some big budget, some small. Keep the quality high without getting too ambitious. That's all I really want: smart, faithful, nicely made comic book adaptations.

 

[captcalhoun]

you need to get an Avengers movie together quick whilst a) the stars' pay-cheques aren't astronomical, b) superhero movies are still hot and c) the actors aren't all too old, or too busy to do other stuff

and yeah, there's a reason why we haven't had a Superman/Batman pic yet. WB/DC fucking suck at making movies of their properties. the only successes they've had in the last 20 years are four outta 6 Batman flicks and a couple of movies based on comics that weren't hugely well known - one of which was actually a British comic they reprinted! (V for Vendetta).

 

[Yassim]

Why don't they just concentrate on making good movies about their characters? ... These characters can stand on their own. They don't need each other. .. And why put all of the eggs in one basket?

Isn't that what they're doing? They're introducing each character separately. If Thor is a huge hit, they can have Thor movies for ages, and putting him in the Avengers helps out the Avengers movie. If Thor is panned and flops, I'm guessing he won't be in any Avengers movie. While "Avenger" might be in the title of the Captain America movie, if the movie sucks, I'm sure they won't be putting him on the Avengers poster.

If they come out with Avengers and it completely sucks, you're basically spoiling much of the potential of these characters.

That's why the Avengers movie comes last.

And the chances of getting all these actors into one Avengers movie is pretty slim anyway.

They just signed SLJ for 9 movies. I think they'll get decent people, on the condition that they sign up to do whatever Marvel tells them to do. So no Brad Pitt for Thor, because Pitt doesn't need to sign up for 9 movies, sight unseen. But someone will. Favreau would. I'm guessing Downey Jr. would. I can live with that level of talent in my superhero films. =)

They couldn't even keep Howard for the Iron Man sequel and hasn't Norton basically ran away in disgust already? So who cares if Jackson is there or not?

I won't miss Howard. I'll miss Norton, but that movie was mediocre at best - I'm not sure how much potential the Hulk really has. (he sure doesn't make any sense as an Avenger, anyway)

If after all these characters have been introduced and popularized in a myriad of sequels and (maybe) prequels, then you can talk about getting them all together...

That's their plan. Except that they're planning one or two movies each before the Avengers. Movies take a long time to make. If you wait until each of the characters has made 3 solo movies, everyone will be ten years older, and the audience will be gone.

 

[QuasarVM]

Aside from the Spiderman films, I have not been overly impressed by the Marvel films.

However, compared to the TV attempts during the 70's (Nicholas Hammond's Spiderman, Lou Ferrigno as The Hulk, and Reb Brown (?) as Captain America), and later Howard The Duck and the Roger Corman Fantastic Four disaster -- these are all masterpieces.

Ironically, the TV version of Doctor Strange...that I LIKED! And for some...uh..."strange" reason, that one has never been released on video to my knowledge.

 

[sidious618]

I am impressed at how well the Marvel films do and they just may be able to pull of this merging of characters. That said, I won't be seeing it as the movies aren't to my taste.

 

[chardman]

They couldn't even keep Howard for the Iron Man sequel and hasn't Norton basically ran away in disgust already?

Don't know about Norton, but your characterizing the situation with Howard as their in-ability to hold onto him is just plain wrong. From what Howard has said in interviews, he wanted to be in the sequel... was stoked about it, and felt utterly betrayed when he learned that Marvel had opted, without warning, to replace him with Don Cheadle.

It wasn't that Marvel couldn't hold onto him, but that they didn't want to hold onto him in the first place. Cheadle had, apparently, been their first choice, and was now available to them, so they opted to recast.

I love Cheadle, and while I think he'd be slightly better in the role than Howard , I would have preferred it if they'd stuck with Howard if only for the sake of consistency. (If it's not broke, don't fix it!)

 

[Temis the Vorta]

So far, I'm happy enough with Marvel's approach. They botched the FF, and something about X-Men has been off, but Spidey has been ok, they got Hulk on track after a misstep, and Iron Man is hot out of the gate. Thor, can't say I give a shit about him as a character, but if they get Cap right, that will make up for everything else.

But where's Sub-Mariner and Doctor Strange?!?

But if Norton has bailed on Hulk, then forget I said anything positive about it. And why anyone wouldn't fight like hell to hang onto Howard is beyond me. He is the perfect Rhodey.

 

[Praetor]

Hey, Temis, the Odinson has heard of your heresy, and is not pleased.

Dwayne 'the Rock' Johnson would be a fine Namor for me.

I wonder if Jared Padalecki is too young to be Cap? He's tall enough, built right, and has the approximate jaw shape. Plus 'Friday the 13th' proved, among other things, that I don't hate him anymore.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Hey, Temis, the Odinson has heard of your heresy, and is not pleased.

I just find it hard to relate to that particular guy. I'm curious to see how he works out in a movie.

Dwayne 'the Rock' Johnson would be a fine Namor for me.

If Wentworth Miller hits the gym, he could be good. But you're on the right track, we don't want some straight-up "white" looking guy.

I wonder if Jared Padalecki is too young to be Cap?

The story starts with him in his early 20s, right? So we need to find someone very young. Ryan McPartlin from Chuck is another option. The combo of leading-man looks, youth, and acting ability is a toughie...

As for Doctor Strange, if Joaquin Phoenix would stop being weird, the role is waiting for him.

 

[Praetor]

Hey, Temis, the Odinson has heard of your heresy, and is not pleased.

I just find it hard to relate to that particular guy. I'm curious to see how he works out in a movie.

I actually understand. He has the Superman problem. If he's written as the Marvel Superman, just with mythological overtones, I think it can work.

Dwayne 'the Rock' Johnson would be a fine Namor for me.

If Wentworth Miller hits the gym, he could be good. But you're on the right track, we don't want some straight-up "white" looking guy.

Wentworth is good too, and personality-wise might fit more. The Rock is such a nice guy, and Namor, well, is not.

I wonder if Jared Padalecki is too young to be Cap?

The story starts with him in his early 20s, right? So we need to find someone very young. Ryan McPartlin from Chuck is another option. The combo of leading-man looks, youth, and acting ability is a toughie...

Agreed entirely. And it must be someone who'll be able to stand up to Tony Stark if they go Civil War later on.

As for Doctor Strange, if Joaquin Phoenix would stop being weird, the role is waiting for him.

Yeah, good luck on that one. I wish they'd get Hugh Laurie.

The more I think about this, the more I understand the OP. This multi-movie universe deal is a big house of cards that one big epic fail could easily topple.

 

[Icemizer]

Yes marvel does need to be careful with these movies being all interconnected, but the idea could always drop or future movies rewritten if a movie bombs at the box office. If Ant Man sucks well then he is out or written into oblivion. Same for Thor.

If Cap is not a WWII movie with a German Red Skull I am out.

I liked the last Hulk movie but not for anything Norton did. Anyone could have played that part the way it was written. Lets be honest he was channeling Bill Bixby anyway, dufflebag and all. The movie had a good story and so it worked.

I look forward to an Avengers Movie but Cap better get to say Avengers Assemble before anyone else does especially Sam Jackson.

 

[TIN_MAN]

Ironically, the TV version of Doctor Strange...that I LIKED! And for some...uh..."strange" reason, that one has never been released on video to my knowledge.

Not DVD, but VHS yes, I have a copy. I like it, too bad it never made to a series.

 

[the Dagman]

So far, I'm happy enough with Marvel's approach. They botched the FF,

That was Fox, not Marvel.

and something about X-Men has been off,

Fox again, not Marvel.

but Spidey has been ok,

Sony, not Marvel.

they got Hulk on track after a misstep,

Universal did the first one. Marvel did the second one as their second film outing.

and Iron Man is hot out of the gate.

This was actually Marvel's first film. Live action anyway. They did have a couple of direct-to-DVD animated movies from early 2008.

Thor, can't say I give a shit about him as a character, but if they get Cap right, that will make up for everything else.

What about considering that you have actually liked ALL of their previous (2) outings?

But where's Sub-Mariner and Doctor Strange?!?

Still in the character vault. They are still a young and new start-up in the film industry. They cannot do it all at once. Plus, the bank they get their money from likely wouldn't wish to finance what they see as "second-stringers". We probably won't see Marvel do those characters until they have paid off the bank loan and are really on their own.

But if Norton has bailed on Hulk, then forget I said anything positive about it. And why anyone wouldn't fight like hell to hang onto Howard is beyond me. He is the perfect Rhodey.

As I understand it, Norton had creative differences with how TIH was cut. I haven't seen anything said by him in print about vowing never to do another. And really, given the story and long running Bill Bixby series, there isn't a lot left of the drama of his story to get on screen. We finally got "Hulk smash!", I can live with that. And there is always a chance to get him for a cameo in the Avengers when the time comes for that movie to go into production.

And, as I understand it, it was the director Favreau who had problems with Howard's performance. If you have the DVD, look at how many of his scenes were cut from the final film. Favreau didn't like Howard's performance and didn't feel like he could direct him to get what he wanted on film. But he was stuck with him on the first one, because Marvel had already paid him I suppose. And being their first film, likely didn't want word to get out that the movie was having problems. So Favreau worked with what he had, fixed what he could in the editing room, and I think he did a fine job given the finished product. Now that he has a chance to fix the problem he had in the first film, he jumped on it. You could say that Howard was the perfect Rhodey as you say. But it was Favreau's editing that made it seem that way, and he had to sacrifice a lot of story points to get it there.

 

[hyzmarca]

So far, I'm happy enough with Marvel's approach. They botched the FF, and something about X-Men has been off, but Spidey has been ok, they got Hulk on track after a misstep, and Iron Man is hot out of the gate. Thor, can't say I give a shit about him as a character, but if they get Cap right, that will make up for everything else.

Marvel Studios didn't actually do any of those movies except for the most recent Hulk and Iron Man, the rest were essentially licensed out to other studios.

They noticed some problems with having the rights to eight different franchises spread out between four different studios. Between the lack of creative control and the various legal issues, they figured that it would be better just to do their own movies. Universal let their Hulk rights lapse, which is why Marvel was about to do the The Incredible Hulk their way. But their other partners haven't bee so neglectful. Columbia is going to be doing Spider-Man for a while longer and 20th Century Fox is probably going to hang onto X-Men for as long as it can.

The big advantage of Marvel Studios current system is that it avoids the messy legal issues that often restrict the use of characters intended for other films, which is why the whole Avengers thing and the Fury cameos are even possible.
WB still hasn't worked this out completely, which leads to things like Bat-Embargoes and even Auqaman-Embargoes.

 

[Kelso]

1) Superheroes are fun.

2) More superheroes are more fun.

I don't see the problem.



Oh, and Terrance Howard was awful. Cheadle will be a significant improvement.

 

[Praetor]

At the risk of jinxing, I don't see how Cheadle could be worse.

 

[hyzmarca]

Don Cheadle was on ER.
George Clooney was on ER.

Do we really want any more ER vets making superhero movies?

 

[Praetor]

Crap, you've possibly proved me wrong already.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

How can anyone dislike the Marvel approach to moviemaking:
Namely, they're ACTUALLY MAKING THEM!

Look at the variety we have coming from their vault! Sure, it's all hit and miss, but, come on DC, you also have more than Superman and Batman! Try them out! Get going on Green Lantern! (Wonder if this will disappear like all their other failed attempts at movies NOT named Superman or Batman).

I'm lovin' this age we're in! No complaints from this Marvel zombie!

 

[Caliburn24]

Hit or miss it will be fun watching Marvel try to get their movies off the ground, and then it will be even more fun watching the movies themselves. Sure, eventually one or more of them will suck. But they'll be glorious failures, not weak anemic attempts to milk franchises like Superman Returns or X-Men 3.

Give us something new.