Marvel Cinematic Universe News, Rumors, and Discussion

[Ice]

This needs to happen.

 

[Mattimeo84]

I'd love that!

 

[Ice]

That would've been perfect for Age of Ultron...

 

[thee great one]

No....just no.

 

[Beige Lantern]

I clicked on this expecting to roll my eyes, but it actually makes some profoundly insightful points: https://www.wired.com/2015/05/marvel-killing-the-popcorn-movie/

I had expected it to complain that Marvel is trying to go the way of DC by trying to wiggle in some social relevance, but it's more about what happens when you're not making movies any more, but a movie universe.

When you look at the formal requirements imposed on Whedon's script by Marvel, it's clear that AoU actually couldn't have been good—that Marvel, not knowing or caring how good movies work, mandated that Whedon make a bad one. To name just a few of those requirements:

•Too many characters. This is standard Marvel strategy — they go by the premise that all it takes to gratify their base is dropping a name that's familiar from the comics, and so far, it's paid off — but the never-ending quest to "improve" each movie by adding a sidekick, and another sidekick, and three villains this time, plus that other superhero you might know about if you read every Avengers comic from 1971 through 1973, has resulted in a movie with, by my count, fourteen central characters. The movie is only 141 minutes long; that might seem lengthy, but if you were to somehow divide it up so as to give each character an equal amount of uninterrupted focus, you'd only have around 10 minutes for each character. In practice, you get less than 10, because…

•No matter what, Marvel's structure mandates at least one fight scene every 20 minutes, and most of the time, those characters aren't having in-depth discussions while they fight. This has to happen even though we almost always know how those fights will end, because

•The movie also has a pre-determined narrative, which we know because it's the same narrative every Marvel movie adheres to, which is, roughly: There's a thing and a bad guy and the bad guy steals the thing, so they fight. They lose one fight and then they lose another fight and then they win the last fight. The end.

•We also need to end the movie in such a way that all of the characters with ongoing franchises can go back to those franchises, alive and more or less unchanged.

•So, once Marvel's formula has deprived the movie of (a) time for the characters, (b) the potential for the story to unfold in a surprising way, and (c) meaningful consequences, we then get each character's maximum 10 minutes of focus (which is now more like five or six) cut down even further, with ads for other Marvel products. In Age of Ultron, we lose several minutes of valuable time that could be spent developing our characters to visit Wakanda and establish Andy Serkis as a villain, not because he's important to the plot—he'll totally disappear after this one scene—but because there's going to be a Black Panther movie. Thor has to be taken out of the action for a while so that his scientist friend can help him hallucinate the premise of Infinity War. Captain America gets a flashback that doesn't relate to the plot, but does remind you that he used to date Peggy Carter, who you can catch every week on ABC's own Agent Carter! Etcetera.

With all these requirements eating up the screen time, there's practically no room left to make a movie. There's definitely no room to make a Joss Whedon movie, because Joss Whedon movies are about two things: Character development and dialogue. I don't have a particular stake in whether Joss Whedon is a great feminist or not. (Again: please don't watch In Your Eyes.) What I know he can do is people talking.

 

[E]

Interesting, but those don't really ruin the movies for me. I think a lot of those things are bound to happen the moment you decide to adapt comic books to movies. Not individual stories, but the way the stories are told. I don't agree that those things have somehow ruined something about movies.

I do become concerned about the cramming of characters into new movies. It's a vice used to deal with a lack of ideas, and it NEVER works.

 

[DARKKNIGHT]

I agree with some of what he's saying regarding Marvel meddling too much with the movie, but some of it is a bit silly. He writes:

So there's your other interpretation, the thing I think is at the core of Marvel's contempt for people: Punching is better than talking. Doing is better than thinking. Instinct is better than intellect; big is better than smart. We don't need to understand the Stormtroopers; we don't need to talk to them. That's thinking, which is boring. We just need to kill: They don't have names or histories or families or feelings, and by slaughtering them, thousands of them, we prove that we can do.

I mean, these are comic book movies. Of course punching is going to be presented more than talking. Did the author want the Avengers to sit down and have a chat with the invading Chitauri? This isn't a criticism that is unique to Marvel anyway. Star Wars had literal Stormtroopers, and the Lord of the Rings had orcs. I just don't understand what he was getting at there. Are these depictions of evil simplistic? Yes, but so what? I love more complex stories such as Game of Thrones, but simple good guys vs. bad guys stories certainly have their place.

Anyway, I do think that the pace at which the Marvel universe is expanding is ultimately going to be it's undoing. At some point it's going to be unmanageable, either for the people in charge of plotting these movies or for the audience that is supposed to follow all of these plot lines from separate movies and TV shows. Part of that is the fans' fault for wanting new characters and villains in every movie. I don't think Age of Ultron was quite the mess that the author made it out to be, but it was weighed down by too many characters. It might become a real issue as Marvel adds more and more characters as it progresses towards their Infinity Wars movie.

 

[Captain Canuck]

Anyway, I do think that the pace at which the Marvel universe is expanding is ultimately going to be it's undoing. At some point it's going to be unmanageable, either for the people in charge of plotting these movies or for the audience that is supposed to follow all of these plot lines from separate movies and TV shows. Part of that is the fans' fault for wanting new characters and villains in every movie. I don't think Age of Ultron was quite the mess that the author made it out to be, but it was weighed down by too many characters. It might become a real issue as Marvel adds more and more characters as it progresses towards their Infinity Wars movie.

I've said before that each Avengers movie should be the one where all the plot threads get pulled together. The solo movies need to tell their own solid stories with elements from them leading into the next Avengers move. But the Avengers movies shouldn't tease the next Avengers movie. That's too much. Thanos didn't need to be in Avengers, Guardians, or Avengers 2. Avengers 2 doesn't need to be setting up for Cap 3. Cap 3 can build on stuff from Avengers 2, but it shouldn't be up to Avengers 2 to set up for Civil War, it had enough going on.

 

[Ice]

I've said before that each Avengers movie should be the one where all the plot threads get pulled together. The solo movies need to tell their own solid stories with elements from them leading into the next Avengers move. But the Avengers movies shouldn't tease the next Avengers movie. That's too much. Thanos didn't need to be in Avengers, Guardians, or Avengers 2. Avengers 2 doesn't need to be setting up for Cap 3. Cap 3 can build on stuff from Avengers 2, but it shouldn't be up to Avengers 2 to set up for Civil War, it had enough going on.

Thanos wasn't in the actual movies for both Avengers films. He was in the post credits. That isn't part of the movie, only something extra. If those scenes had been in them, then I'd see what you're saying.


That said, I disagree with the o , although I completely understand your point. Besides the Thor waters scene in AoU, the rest worked fine as both the narrative of the film as well as set up. And if Thanos didn't need to be in any of those films, where should he have been? He needs to be somewhere; he just can't pop up in Infinity War and be all "Oh yeah, it was me behind the scenes the whole time. Surprise!"

 

[Captain Canuck]

Thanos wasn't in the actual movies for both Avengers films. He was in the post credits. That isn't part of the movie, only something extra. If those scenes had been in them, then I'd see what you're saying.


That said, I disagree with the o , although I completely understand your point. Besides the Thor waters scene in AoU, the rest worked fine as both the narrative of the film as well as set up. And if Thanos didn't need to be in any of those films, where should he have been? He needs to be somewhere; he just can't pop up in Infinity War and be all "Oh yeah, it was me behind the scenes the whole time. Surprise!"

I guess you have a point about Thanos' appearances mostly being post-credits and not taking away from the movies. But AoU had more than that. I didn't mind the mind gem being in AoU or that it was the basis for the AI in Ultron and the Vision. They could have had that much mind gem in it and ended the movie with a tease of Thanos realizing that the sceptre that he leant to Loki had an infinity stone in it (otherwise, why would he have given it away in the first place?) But the whole "this is an infinity stone" subplot in the second half of the movie was weird and didn't fit well. Ultron breaking open the sceptre so he could put the gem on Vision's forehead, Thor's vision quest and realization that someone was pulling the strings (by the way, how was he pulling any strings in AoU?), the conversation about the infinity stones and if they should let Vision take care of the mind gem. All of that was an unnecessary and messy extra layer in an already full movie.

For me, Age of Ultron had the same feeling that Iron Man 2 and Thor had: that Marvel was more concerned with setting up what comes next than they were with telling a tight story. Don't get me wrong, I liked it, but I am disappointed with it.

 

[DARKKNIGHT]

Ultron breaking open the sceptre so he could put the gem on Vision's forehead, Thor's vision quest and realization that someone was pulling the strings (by the way, how was he pulling any strings in AoU?),

I didn't get the impression that Thanos was supposed to be pulling the strings in AoU. I'm not sure if Thor's visions related to the Infinity War or Ragnarok (I think probably the latter), but I just got the impression that he was concerned that these stones were being found. The yellow stone in this movie was essentially a hold over from Avengers 1 (it being inside of Loki's scepter), but it's not like it required Thanos to do anything else.

 

[Captain Canuck]

I didn't get the impression that Thanos was supposed to be pulling the strings in AoU. I'm not sure if Thor's visions related to the Infinity War or Ragnarok (I think probably the latter), but I just got the impression that he was concerned that these stones were being found. The yellow stone in this movie was essentially a hold over from Avengers 1 (it being inside of Loki's scepter), but it's not like it required Thanos to do anything else.

Thor specifically said something along the lines of "someone is pulling the strings"and leaves at the end of the movie to find out who it is. And then in the mid credits scene, Thanos said, "Fine, I'll do it myself" referring to collecting the infinity gems.

 

[Ice]

Thor specifically said something along the lines of "someone is pulling the strings"and leaves at the end of the movie to find out who it is. And then in the mid credits scene, Thanos said, "Fine, I'll do it myself" referring to collecting the infinity gems.

I wouldn't say that means Thanos was pulling them in AoU. Thor's words were meant overall and not just specifically for the Avengers movie.



EDIT:

In other news: Asa Butterfield reportedly cast as Spider-Man

 

[SSJmole]

So in what seems like yet another petty **** you fox , Marvel are making the Quicksilver Scarlet witch origins match their film *face palm* http://uk.ign.com/articles/2015/02/26/quicksilver-and-scarlet-witchs-new-comic-book-origin-revealed

 

[DARKKNIGHT]

So in what seems like yet another petty **** you fox , Marvel are making the Quicksilver Scarlet witch origins match their film *face palm* http://uk.ign.com/articles/2015/02/26/quicksilver-and-scarlet-witchs-new-comic-book-origin-revealed

how juvenile. just think, if it wasn't for the work of Fox, Sony and other studios for initially financing Spider-Man, X-Men, Fantastic Four, etc movies, Marvel would never be able to establish their own movie universe. it seems pretty ridiculous to me.

I wouldn't say that means Thanos was pulling them in AoU. Thor's words were meant overall and just specifically for the Avengers movie.

My thoughts exactly. If they did intent for Thanos to be pulling the strings in AoU, there isn't anything in the film to indicate that. Who knows though, maybe that was the intention and it was left on the cutting room floor with a ton of other things.

 

[SSJmole]

how juvenile. just think, if it wasn't for the work of Fox, Sony and other studios for initially financing Spider-Man, X-Men, Fantastic Four, etc movies, Marvel would never be able to establish their own movie universe. it seems pretty ridiculous to me.

Exactly and every time Disney/Marvel try to screw fox like cancelling FF (It seems way too obvious this was why) i think it's not Fox but it's the fans that suffer.

 

[E]

Exactly and every time Disney/Marvel try to screw fox like cancelling FF (It seems way too obvious this was why) i think it's not Fox but it's the fans that suffer.

Who is suffering, exactly?

How is it different from any other retcon they do?

 

[Captain Canuck]

I wouldn't say that means Thanos was pulling them in AoU. Thor's words were meant overall and not just specifically for the Avengers movie.

My thoughts exactly. If they didn't intent for Thanos to be pulling the strings in AoU, there isn't anything in the film to indicate that. Who knows though, maybe that was the intention and it was left on the cutting room floor with a ton of other things.

I agree that there wasn't anything in the movie that showed how he could have been pulling the strings, but the lines from Thor and Thanos seemed to be suggesting that. Maybe you're right and I'm reading into it. Maybe you're right and it's there and they cut out the details.

In other news: Asa Butterfield reportedly cast as Spider-Man

yay!

So in what seems like yet another petty **** you fox , Marvel are making the Quicksilver Scarlet witch origins match their film *face palm* http://uk.ign.com/articles/2015/02/26/quicksilver-and-scarlet-witchs-new-comic-book-origin-revealed

Why wouldn't they do this? I assume that one of the main points of Secret Wars is to change everything to reflect the MCU more. It only makes sense. I just think it's too bad that they can't seem to strike a similar deal with Fox to the one they struck with Sony.

 

[SSJmole]

Who is suffering, exactly?

How is it different from any other retcon they do?

It's the intention. Some retcons are done to improve characters or explain stuff like wolverine's bone claws. However this one is to say "Hahaha our movies are better than Your movies" that's not good. The intention changes things. Now when I see said change i just think "oh its to give fox the finger" not "Huh intresting I wonder where this is going" so it means say you read X-men you now in your mind will think "I can't enjoy this too much as soon they'll just try to hurt fox again" thus the fans loose out.


That's just my take

 

[DIrishB]

I just think it's too bad that they can't seem to strike a similar deal with Fox to the one they struck with Sony.

Given time I'm sure those bridges will be mended. Really the biggest culprit is Ike Perlmutter, who was personally offended that Fox wouldn't give up the Silver Surfer and Galactus film rights in exchange for getting to hold onto the Daredevil property (and I think a few D-list characters). It was Perlmutter (as Marvel's biggest shareholder and CEO) who mandated that the FF stop being printed by Marvel Comics, as well as no more X-Men/Fantastic Four related merchandise (thus there wasn't a toy line--or any other merchandise, really, for Days of Future Past, nor will their be for Fantastic Four).

It really is a case of Marvel (well, Perlmutter anyway, I think most of the Marvel execs probably realize it costs them a lot in merchandise profits) cutting off their nose to spite their face in the case of the X-Men/FF merchandise, since they own the merchandising rights outright and can legally profit off merchandise from the Fox films without Fox's consent, but Perlmutter refused to allow those Marvel properties owned by Fox to be merchandised or advertised not only for those films, but at all. And the FF comic even stopped as a result, presumably, though it has been said it'll restart after Secret Wars (though whether it'll be the Reed, Sue, Johnny, and Ben teams seems extremely doubtful given the previews of the new Inhumans book, and the rumors of the other FF characters joining other teams--I'm admittedly a bit sketchy on the details since I don't pay much attention to the 616 universe).

It really was a childish move by Perlmutter.

That said, they're all businessmen.

Assuming Spidey's new reboot movie set in the MCU does noticeably better in terms of box office than ASM or ASM2 (and related MCU films featuring Spidey see a noticeably rise in revenue compared to previous films in the series), it may cause both Perlmutter and Fox to reconsider and try to work out a similar deal to Sony and Marvel's sharing of Spidey and the rest of the MCU characters (to a degree in Sony's case).

Especially considering they're seriously considering a complete reboot for the X-Men franchise, likely within the next 4-5 years. Jackman has already confirmed the next Wolverine solo film will be his last turn as the character.

They still have Deadpool, Gambit, New Mutants, Wolverine 2, etc all coming out in the next few years. And if those are successful enough they'll likely get sequels and so on.

It's tough to say when or if they'll do the reboot, but I doubt we'll see a Wolverine-less X-Men film universe for long, so within five years of Wolverine 2's release (early 2020's sometime) they'll reboot the whole thing. Possibly even the Fantastic Four again at that point, depending on the box office take and reception of the new F4 film.

We'll see. It seems unlikely now, but a year ago it seemed unlikely we'd ever see Spidey in the MCU, despite the attempts of inserting Stark Tower into ASM's background... (Or was it Oscorp tower in Avengers background?), and now, he's there.

I think the studio heads will eventually put profits over bruised pride and work out an agreement to share the X-Men/FF characters. Eventually. It may be a decade off or more. It's certainly unlikely to happen anytime soon, anyway.