Captain Canuck
The poster formerly known as captaincanuck65
Fan made Wonder Woman trailer.
[video=vimeo;60594348]http://vimeo.com/60594348[/video]
[video=vimeo;60594348]http://vimeo.com/60594348[/video]
The All About Comic Book Movies Thread
- Thread starter Planet-man
- Start date
-
- Tags
- all about
Ice
Teh Sexy Monkey Queen
Captain Canuck
The poster formerly known as captaincanuck65
:lol:
Anybody else get the Phase One set?
Honestly, the extras made it worth it. End of story. If you're not a sucker for physical, in-universe memorabilia, then this probably isn't for you. The video extras aren't worth it, unless you don't own any of the films yet (and even then, just buying them individually would likely be cheaper). But all the physical artifacts made me literally drool.
Honestly, the extras made it worth it. End of story. If you're not a sucker for physical, in-universe memorabilia, then this probably isn't for you. The video extras aren't worth it, unless you don't own any of the films yet (and even then, just buying them individually would likely be cheaper). But all the physical artifacts made me literally drool.
Victor Von Doom
Fist of teh Internets.
I want it but 2 things are holding me back:
1. The price for all the films that I own digitally already.
2. The packaging. I showed Ice a do-it-yourself concept some guy did a while back that had all the discs in a giant SHIELD HELICARRIER case and was so in love with it that when I saw the COSMIC CUBE case that I felt cheated.
Ask Ice...he'll vouch for how awesome it was!!!
Ice
Teh Sexy Monkey Queen
It's true. The SHIELD HELICARRIER case is crazy awesome. I want one...
Ice
Teh Sexy Monkey Queen
Marvel officially states they have Ghost Rider film rights back, but in are no hurry to make a film (nor for Daredevil).
That makes all Marvel Knights characters back in Marvel, right?
That makes all Marvel Knights characters back in Marvel, right?
DIrishB
The Timeline Guy
This is interesting:
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=78817
Kevin Feige answers some questions about the Dr. Strange film he's been talking about for awhile now. Apparently they're just starting to examine how to approach it, and right now the plan is to release it as part of Phase 3, likely sometime around 2016-2017. Never been a big Doc Strange fan but I'll admit to being very interested to see how they approach the character in the MCU.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=78817
Kevin Feige answers some questions about the Dr. Strange film he's been talking about for awhile now. Apparently they're just starting to examine how to approach it, and right now the plan is to release it as part of Phase 3, likely sometime around 2016-2017. Never been a big Doc Strange fan but I'll admit to being very interested to see how they approach the character in the MCU.
TheManWithoutFear
#1 reason not to join UC
I agree. Not a huge fan and definitely going to be a tough sell into this movie-verse. But I have faith in them. It's going to be fun.
How do we feel about this? Should we be happy that the characters would be in better hands of someone else or miffed about the fact they aren't trying to incorporate them into the Marvel Movie-Verse?
Victor Von Doom
Fist of teh Internets.
While I'm glad that Marvel has retained the rights to THEIR property again...I can understand their hesitancy to remake the properties again. They have to look at the whole picture.
It true---having a Disney Motion Picture logo flash before the image of a rapist being burned by hellfire by a guy with a flaming skull for his sins might not play out well with board directors and marketing execs. Same with pimp getting his fingers broken in a vice for info on a Romanian slave trade ring by a guy with a huge skull on his chest.
It just kinda goes against the company image.
Here's my 2 cents on the whole thing from a few perspectives...
AS A FAN:
**** that Marvel!!!! Gimme my fanboy propers and make more Punisher! Get off your asses and cast a new Matt Murdock and Foggy (maybe Jonah Hill???) into all sorts of soul crushing drama! And leave Ghost Rider and Moon Knight in creative hell where they belong.
AS A DISNEY EXEC:
Let's take a look at the past financial situation of each of these properties and do a cost comparison and risk analysis of whether or not it's financially equitable to remake these properties. If it cost $110 million to make Ghost Rider and the film only does $78million at the box office and DVD sales are projected barely break even---why should we bother? That's a lot of money thrown at a "hope" that doesn't really even fit our family friendly image.
AS A FAN OF THE SCREEN MEDIA:
The Marcel Knights line might be a little too violent for our widespread movie audience. However, to get the most out of our property while giving fans a faithful take on their beloved characters---perhaps taking a cue from the bigger networks, we adapt the line for TV with hope/expectations that the DVD sales and marketing products that go with will be our real money makers.
A big push for a Punisher TV series based on Ennis MAX run on FX in the likes of The Shield or Sons of Anarchy could work wonders for a long term multi-season concept. And not overtly broadcasting that its a Disney product upfront could deter iffy naysayers.
If FX really wanted to capitalize on the Marvel Knights brand, they could opt to do a Daredevil series as well. If the CW can squeeze 10yrs outa Smallville and then follow it up with Arrow, how hard is it for FX to do a show about a blind ninja lawyer who has nothing but drama going on and fights a crapload of other ninjas when not punching a fat albino Jolly Green Giant?
A supernatural bounty hunter who rides a flaming bike could work as a TV series for Starz now that their Spartacus series is over. Not being hindered by network/cable standards would allow for more risqué subject without feeling watered down.
Over at AMC, a Moon Knight show about a schizophrenic vigilante who models himself after Batman would work well. Zachary Quinto looking for a quick job in between Star Trek films? Quinto as Spector is a win.
TheManWithoutFear
#1 reason not to join UC
Good ****. I don't know why I'm finding myself agreeing with Jonah Hill but yeah, good ****.
TheManWithoutFear
#1 reason not to join UC
Ms. Marvel, Power Man, and Blade Reboot possibly. So maybe they won't toss Blade to someone else. Also some of their other projects.
Cast members threaten to drop out due to salary disputes. Is this the beginning of the end for the Marvel-Movie Universe project?
Cast members threaten to drop out due to salary disputes. Is this the beginning of the end for the Marvel-Movie Universe project?
Maybe they will realize that they can't approach their movie stars like they do their fans.
That is, with immense greed.
Zombipanda
My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
I'm not sure how sustainable these franchises are beyond two or three more years anyway. They'll be smart ot start spinning out other new characters to keep their film slate full.
DARKKNIGHT
Well-Known Member
Why's that? Based off of how much money these movies are making, I don't think anything's going to stop Marvel from making Iron Man movies well into the future. Probably the same thing for Captain America and Thor, although they are a bit less of a box office draw than Iron Man. It'll be interesting to see what they do with this cast situation. On one hand, I don't think they necessarily need the original cast members for their films to be hits. On the other hand, having the original players in their roles certainly adds something to the experience, and to the box office as well. As long as the cast doesn't want outrageous salaries, I bet Marvel will end up signing them just so they don't rock the boat while they have a good thing going. If Marvel/Disney thinks they want too much, I bet they just recast and proceed as they would.
Zombipanda
My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
I mean, I'd be pretty surprised if we saw any more Iron Man solo movies with RDJ and while he's the golden goose in Marvel's stable, I also wonder how much juice Evans and Hemsworth have in their tank. How many years do they keep wanting to play the same part over and over again, especially with the physical regimen required for the roles? And how much willl Marvel be willing to pay to keep them in contract when Avengers 2 wraps up? For that matter, how much legs do these characters really have as franchises?
As for paying them too much? DOwney's salary is ridiculous, at something like 50 million, but the Chrises receive an equally ridiculous 200,000. They got these actors in the roles because they could get them on the cheap. I suspect they won't be able to get a deal like that when they're sitting around a negotiation table following a billion dollar plus pull from Avengers 2.
They could recast, but really? Does that seem like a smart idea? It strikes me that these movies were successful largely because of how the actors in question occupied the roles. Recasting is a pretty big risk.
Last edited:
DARKKNIGHT
Well-Known Member
That's a good point about how much longer they'll want to play the same characters. After a while, regardless of the money they stand to make, I'm sure the actors would just want to move on to new things. In terms of how much legs the characters have, I don't really think it matters. These movies are at an all time high in terms of popularity. At a time when studios seem focused on big franchises, I just can't envision Disney or Marvel halting the Avengers, Iron Man, Captain America or Thor for any reason.
They're definitely not going to be able to get them on the cheap after the success of the Avengers. When push comes to shove, I expect Disney and Marvel will pay them whatever they want. It all comes down to what amount Marvel thinks is too much to pay them, and would be more beneficial to look to recast.
Whether or not it's a smart idea seems beside the point. So far Iron Man 3 has already made close to $200 million in the US alone. Regardless of how contract negotiations with RDJ go, I can't see them moving on from the franchise. If hollywood history has told us anything, it's that the studios will keep on making sequels until the franchise starts to lose money. These movies are more popular than ever, thanks in part to the Avengers. Yes, recasting is a risk, but I'd be willing to bet they take the risk due to the amount of money they stand to make. Regardless, an Iron Man movie without RDJ would probably still make more, and be less of a risk, than an Ant Man, Dr. Strange or Iron Fist movie. They've already rebooted Spider-man, and WB seems to have plans to reboot Batman in a few years.
On a somewhat related note, speaking of box office, I'm a little concerned about the chances of Marvel properties outside of the main core of the Avengers (Iron Man, Thor, Cap, Hulk and maybe Black Widow if they did that). I can easily see Guardians of the Galaxy and/or Ant Man sputtering at the box office. I'm sure comic fans will see them, but these blockbuster films have to have general audience support. I just don't know how the general audience will respond to movies based on a guy who gets really small and a group that includes a tree and raccoon.
DIrishB
The Timeline Guy
While I believe Marvel obviously would rather not recast the roles, I also believe that at a certain point it becomes financially logical for them to do so. They've shown they're willing to recast with Terrance Howard and Edward Norton, and have reiterated that point in countless interviews with Feige. And given Marvel's somewhat cutthroat tactics and obvious greed (much as I love their films the approach they take with their actors is shameful--RDJ being the exception...for the time being), its inevitable that once the contracts for the current actors are up they'll recast. Granted, they're willing to work with RDJ due to the IM franchise's huge numbers, but that'll only go so far for so long.
Also, all the articles that cropped up as IM3 hit theaters talking about if RDJ would come back or not (with Downey saying he wanted to try other things), were a pretty obvious tactic to get more money or a higher backend percentage out of Marvel for any future movies he reprises the role of IM in. Lets be honest, the IM films are certainly not preventing RDJ from doing other films, in fact they've completely revived his career and made him one of the highest paid actors in the business, opening up a wealth of new and different roles with nice, big paychecks attached.
Granted, from an artistic point of view I can understand him wanting to try new things, but again, he can do both. Make another couple IM movies over the next 5-6 years interspersed with other roles he finds appealing, rake in huge amounts of money and continue to cement himself in Hollywood history as a modern day James Bond type role. And like Bond, eventually Downey will be too old (he's already coming up on 50) and both he and the studio will realize they should recast. I do think it'd be a good idea not to recast until after Avengers 3, which might preclude him from doing any more solo IM films.
As for the two Chris' in terms of Cap and Thor, while they obviously deserve a prominent pay raise for their solo film sequels and Avengers appearances, I'm quite sure Marvel would be much more willing to recast them over RDJ, though their star-power is decidedly also on the rise, it's not in the same stratospheric level RDJ's is in, and likely never will be.
But yeah, it's all going to come down to money and greed. And eventually both will give way to requiring recasting.
Also, all the articles that cropped up as IM3 hit theaters talking about if RDJ would come back or not (with Downey saying he wanted to try other things), were a pretty obvious tactic to get more money or a higher backend percentage out of Marvel for any future movies he reprises the role of IM in. Lets be honest, the IM films are certainly not preventing RDJ from doing other films, in fact they've completely revived his career and made him one of the highest paid actors in the business, opening up a wealth of new and different roles with nice, big paychecks attached.
Granted, from an artistic point of view I can understand him wanting to try new things, but again, he can do both. Make another couple IM movies over the next 5-6 years interspersed with other roles he finds appealing, rake in huge amounts of money and continue to cement himself in Hollywood history as a modern day James Bond type role. And like Bond, eventually Downey will be too old (he's already coming up on 50) and both he and the studio will realize they should recast. I do think it'd be a good idea not to recast until after Avengers 3, which might preclude him from doing any more solo IM films.
As for the two Chris' in terms of Cap and Thor, while they obviously deserve a prominent pay raise for their solo film sequels and Avengers appearances, I'm quite sure Marvel would be much more willing to recast them over RDJ, though their star-power is decidedly also on the rise, it's not in the same stratospheric level RDJ's is in, and likely never will be.
But yeah, it's all going to come down to money and greed. And eventually both will give way to requiring recasting.
Bass
Nexus of the World
What's interesting in that article (really, who knows how much of it is accurate - there are no sources or citations, its only gossip and rumour) is that the author seriously thinks the Marvel franchises could continue without Thor, Cap, and Iron Man. Note: not the absence of the actors, but of the characters. It reminds me of Marvel's failure with the ultimate line: people think the well of creativity in the Marvel universe is deep. It really isn't. They have, maybe, half a dozen titles that can hold their own. Same with DC. Most of the ideas in those universes simply don't have the depth. They've only survived in the comics industry due to interia.
Zombipanda
My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
I'm not suggesting Marvel's going to stop making IM/CA/Thor movies while they're still making them money. I'm just questinoing how long they can be sustained before the audience loses interest. IM is the golden goose but it could be argued that's almost all Downey's doing. I'm skeptical of how well the franchise will do without him. As for Cap and Thor, I guess we'll see, but I don't exactly expect their numbers to soar. I just don't think these movies can be sustained into perpetuity. Sooner or later that revenue boom is going to slow down and they're going to need other franchises to fall back on.
I think they can have success outside of those three as long as they're carefully about waiting for solid scripts and loosen up their purse strings a little. It's not like Cap/Thor/Iron Man were these hugely successful pop icons before the movies. I don't think GotG is going to turn into a major franchise, because, well, they have STAR WARS now but they have a fairly robust library to work with. I'm not sure if Ant-Man will be successful, but I think it certainly can. It's got Edgar Wright behind it and that test footage looked fantastic. If Blade can be a successful franchise then I don't see why Doc Strange, Runaways, Black Panther, Punisher, Daredevil, etc. can't as well.
I think they can have success outside of those three as long as they're carefully about waiting for solid scripts and loosen up their purse strings a little. It's not like Cap/Thor/Iron Man were these hugely successful pop icons before the movies. I don't think GotG is going to turn into a major franchise, because, well, they have STAR WARS now but they have a fairly robust library to work with. I'm not sure if Ant-Man will be successful, but I think it certainly can. It's got Edgar Wright behind it and that test footage looked fantastic. If Blade can be a successful franchise then I don't see why Doc Strange, Runaways, Black Panther, Punisher, Daredevil, etc. can't as well.
Last edited:
