Dr.Strangefate
He Sees You When You're Sleeping. He Knows When Yo
I am absolutely pro-Mark Ruffalo.
Avengers movie discussion (news/etc.)
- Thread starter Hellsbuttmonkey
- Start date
DARKKNIGHT
Well-Known Member
They should have Joaquin Phoenix play Bruce Banner and let Mel Gibson play the Hulk. It would be like a little Signs reunion.
Planet-man
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,645
- City & State/Province
- Toronto, Ontario(by way of the Kepler Verge)
I think Ruffalo's one of the most enjoyable actors to watch currently out there. This situation, however, sucks.
I'm not sure about him as Banner in general either.
I'm not sure about him as Banner in general either.
Langsta
Well-Known Member
YES! I'd rather see him take the role than Nathan Fillion.
Planet-man
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,645
- City & State/Province
- Toronto, Ontario(by way of the Kepler Verge)
Last edited:
Captain Canuck
The poster formerly known as captaincanuck65
Apparently Joss Whedon just confirmed that he's directing the Avengers today at SDCC.
No Way!
the watcher
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2005
- Messages
- 6,530
Whedon confirms Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/MarvelFreshman/news/?a=20497
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/MarvelFreshman/news/?a=20497
Dr.Strangefate
He Sees You When You're Sleeping. He Knows When Yo
And Nikki Finke is reporting that Ruffalo has been signed onto the project just in time to appear at tomorrow's panel... Noah, Cohlie and I are going to do our best to brave the lines and get into the Marvel Studios panel.
Bass
Nexus of the World
Joss Whedon is very funny in that clip.
Ultimate Houde
UC's Resident Genetic Recombinator
I think he was drunk on life in that clip.
Bass
Nexus of the World
DIrishB
The Timeline Guy
- Joined
- May 27, 2004
- Messages
- 17,832
- City & State/Province
- You are all just obstacles on my path to Nirvana.
I am very happy with this.
nigma
Well-Known Member
Dr.Strangefate
He Sees You When You're Sleeping. He Knows When Yo
Oh hey, what? Who was at that panel? Was it me?
(It was me)
(It was me)
Iceshadow
Well-Known Member
Starfox.
Gothamite
Well-Known Member
From SuperheroHype!
Would someone care to do a left-to-right on this picture? I know who RDJ, Jackson, Evans, Johannsen and the guy playing Coleson is, but I don't recognise anyone else in the photo.
Would someone care to do a left-to-right on this picture? I know who RDJ, Jackson, Evans, Johannsen and the guy playing Coleson is, but I don't recognise anyone else in the photo.
Last edited:
Planet-man
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,645
- City & State/Province
- Toronto, Ontario(by way of the Kepler Verge)
The tall guy is playing Thor, the guy to the right of Jackson is Jeremy Renner of The Hurt Locker(Hawkeye), next to him is Mark Ruffalo, next to him is Joss Whedon.
The Overlord
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2005
- Messages
- 2,464
So how much should this movie borrow from the Ultimates and the 616 universe?
Random
Didn't **** any of those *****es
Wow, I can't remember the last time you've ask a question just like that, Where you been?
The Overlord
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2005
- Messages
- 2,464
Oh don't ruin my fun, I haven't asked that in quite a while.
Dr.Strangefate
He Sees You When You're Sleeping. He Knows When Yo
From SuperheroHype!
Would someone care to do a left-to-right on this picture? I know who RDJ, Jackson, Evans, Johannsen and the guy playing Coleson is, but I don't recognise anyone else in the photo.
RDjr, Agent Coleson, Scarlett Johannson, Chris Helmsworth (Thor), Chris Evans (Cap), Samuel L. Jackson, Jeremey Renner (Hawkeye), Mark Ruffalo (Hulk), Joss Whedon, and Kevin Feige (President of Marvel Studios).
Bass
Nexus of the World
Heheheheheheh.
Anyhow, in regards to your question, I wonder how long it would take to film THE ULTIMATES page for page. I'm going to read it tonight and take a guess.
What I'd want them to take from it are three things;
1) PEOPLE AS WEAPONS; It's a fantastic image system that Millar and Hitch came up with and really sold a very unique element to the Ultimate reboot (which is now completely gone).
2) SAVING THE WORLD IS RARE; I loved that in THE ULTIMATES it took five issues before we had a proper fight, and it was born out of the fact that there was no one to fight. It really sold this as something extra-ordinary. I'd like to see that preserved.
3) ORIGINALITY; I want the movie to be as big a breath of fresh air as THE ULTIMATES was. Something so completely self-contained and whole, completely recognisable as an old franchise and yet completely different and new.
The Overlord
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2005
- Messages
- 2,464
But one has to keep in mind in terms of personality these characters will not be exactly like the Ultimates, movie Nick Fury perhaps will, but movie Cap seems to be based on 616 version, except in terms of costume and 616 Cap wouldn't be the type of blindly follow orders and just be used a government weapon.
Except for the fact that wouldn't work in terms of movie pacing, with a movie you have to get to the point somewhat quickly you 2 hours to tell a 3 act story with a climax, so the whole movie cannot be just them chit chatting and you can't have a 4 hour movie with 2 hours of them chit chatting and then fight something in the last 2 hours.
Not mention considering in this movie universe Iron Man already saved the day twice and Thor would have once, so already its not completely rare for this to happen, but still it doesn't happen as much as it does in the comics.
Now this depends on how you define originality, the fact in terms of comic book movies the whole Avengers project is kinda original,, no one has ever introduced heroes in other movies and then have them come together in one movie to for a team.
Now I ask this question, again is it seems that some people think the Avengers movie should just be an adaption if the Ultimates, which suggests the idea that there are no elements from the 616 Avengers worth adapting, which I disagree with. What other original element would you want to see, it be hard to call an adaption of Ultimates original, because it would just be an adaption and the themes that were original at the time are almost a decade old now. Even in terms of political message, Ultimates seems to be something more relevant in the early paranoid post 9-11 era then now. I think it important to ask the same question say a year later because circumstances around the movie can change in that time.
I think 616 Ultron for example is a way better villain then Klesier and the Skrulls, who they don't even have the rights to. I would much rather have Ultron then the Skrulls as the villain for a sequel, Ultron is more iconic as an Avengers villain and with the Red skull as Cap's movie war time nemesis. I even kinda like Kang the Conqueror, I don't love him, but I like him well enough, though I'm not positive he would work in a movie. I do think those two villains have gotten some epic stories like Ultron Unleashed for Ultron and Avengers Forever and Kang War for Kang, so I do think it be easy to translate some 616 Avenger villains as the villain for an avengers movie.
Last edited:
Bass
Nexus of the World
We don't know that for certain, and I don't agree that is what Cap was in THE ULTIMATES.
Saved the day, not the world. Also, I'm certain that the first four issues of THE ULTIMATES would take no more than 30 minutes. You'd have a, at most, ten-minute opening sequence of WW2, followed by 20 minutes of slow build and then the Hulk. I think the first six issues could probably be done in an hour. Now, if the movie is 90 minutes, it's not going to work, but if it's about 150 minutes (2 1/2 hours), then it probably would work absolutely fine.
It's wholly unoriginal. You're describing THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN here. And OCEAN'S ELEVEN. The biggest Hollywood stars teaming up for a movie has been done before, and while yes, Danny Ocean didn't get his own prequel, the point of casting someone like Clooney is because he brings expectations of previous movies with him. The Avengers as a team is not original, the marketing for it is, but the originality of the build-up has nothing to do with the final product.
When I say original, I consider THE DARK KNIGHT to be original, in that it gave us Batman, Two-Face, Joker, and Gotham in ways we'd never seen before, as opposed to say the 'faithful adaptation' we saw in X-MEN or SPIDER-MAN which was desperately predictable even if you hadn't read the comics.
It seems Pym isn't even in the movie, so what's the point?
I think the best Avengers villain is Doctor Doom and Marvel doesn't even have access to the movie rights. Same for Galactus, and probably the Skrulls, and Thanos. Which leaves us with Red Skull (taken), Loki (taken), Ultron (ugh), Kang (I love him, but weird), Korvac (blegh), Mandarin (taken), Baron Zemo (maybe), Magneto (taken), Apocalypse (taken), Green Goblin (taken), and Dark Phoenix (taken).
So really, I can't think of a good villain they could use. Maybe we'll get a new one, or maybe it'll be Red Skull and Loki and Mandarin in a team-up, but I doubt it.
And it seems that Joss Whedon is focusing on why these guys need to get together in the first place, so hopefully it'll be something with real gravitas.
The Overlord
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2005
- Messages
- 2,464
I don't find Ultimate cap to be that likable frankly. For example: 616 Cap talked about the contributions the French resistance made during WWII, while Ultimate Cap just mocks the French with insults that make him seem kinda like a petty, reactionary dolt, that was funny mind you, but not endearing. Not to mention in Ultimate Avengers where Ultimate Cap used a kinder garden class as a human shield to protect himself from War Machine, he went from from a jerk to a psychopath.
616 Cap comes off as being able to reflect on himself, well Ultimate Cap does not. In terms of having a likable character that the audience can relate too, I would pick 616 Cap over Ultimate cap. Plus 616 Cap seems represent a deeper value system then Ultimate cap does.
I liked some of the characterization Millar gave to say Thor and Iron Man, but at the end of the day I would say 616 Cap is far more well rounded and likable then Ultimate cap and he likely wouldn't consent to just being a weapon. I like the themes of the Ultimates, but sometimes the characterization of certain characters wasn't as good as their 616 counterparts.
In terms of characterization I wouldn't go strictly with either the 616 Avengers or the Ultimates for the entire cast, I would mix it up a bit.
Except I think the build up in of itself is original, I have never heard of characters being given their own separate movies to introduce them and then putting them all in the same movie.
And frankly a compete shot for shot retelling of Ultimates vol.1 wouldn't be original either, I think a blend of the Ultimates and 616 Avengers would be more of story we never saw before, then just trying to retell Ultimates with no surprises. Plus frankly I have heard accusations that the themes done in Ultimates were done first by the Authority. Also blending the Ultimate and 616 versions of characters worked well in the first Iron Man movie.
I mean what would you want to see in terms of originality?
There are no bad characters, only bad writers, in the right hands almost any character can be interesting. You haven't really provided a reason why Ultron is not a good villain. Have you ever read Ultron Unleashed? That story line did a pretty good job of making Ultron into a massive threat, so what's wrong with making Ultron the villain?
Even the protests that Kang is too weird doesn't work for me, a time travelling conqueror is too outlandish, but a shape shifting alien who dresses up like a Nazi isn't. They seem equally weird to me.
Considering that Obadiah Stane was able to present a threat to Iron man in the Iron Man movie, I think it shows the movie makers can be a bit creative in terms of making a hero's rogues gallery work for the movie, rather then resorting to stealing other villains from other rogues galleries. Dr. Doom and the skrulls are FF villains they belong to that property, Doom is far more iconic as a FF villain then a Avengers villain, so using him in a Avengers movie seems like cheap drama to me, the fact the Skrulls and Doom are more associated with the FF then the Avengers is why Fox has the rights to them. I would rather them find a clever way to use an existing Avenger villain and I think most of them have been used well in the best to make it doable.
Last edited:
Zombipanda
My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
I think Ultimate Cap is kind of a prick. If he existed in real life, I wouldn't like him very much. He honestly represents plenty of qualities I hate in a human being. But there's a difference between a good character and a person you like. And while I felt like he was the least interesting of the Ultimates cast, he was still a fun character. That said, I doubt they'll do a point by point recreation of Ultimate Cap in the movie because, honestly, it would be hard to make him likable in a two hour picture. But then, who knows?
The Overlord said:
You know what I want to see? Film Cap. Not Ultimate Cap or 616 Cap. I want a character tailored to match the script.
The Overlord said:
Hah! Except, well, that's what Captain America is. He's a living weapon. He volunteered to become a living weapon. He's a peak condition soldier brought in to win the war, an analogy for the A-Bomb. That's what he's always been. That's what he consented to be by taking the serum.
But I don't think that's what Bass is talking about when he talks about the weapons metaphor in Ultimates. He's talking about the perspective that, if superheroes were introduced in a universe, regardless of intent, that it would effectively change the face of politics and warfare. He's talking about the idea of a superhuman arms race that served as an undercurrent throughout the Ultimate Universe (even though it was generally not all that well executed). It's not a wholly original idea, but it was incorporated more explicitly in the UU than most. If you introduce a super soldier serum, people with varying intentions will try to replicate it, because it's a potential game changer. If you introduce power armor, there will be profiteers and copycats. And that's something we've already seen introduced in the Iron Man movie. The problem, in general, with continuous publication comic universes is they can't dramatically change the status quo. Their world needs to resemble our world to a pretty high degree, and we can't see most of the big picture implications that would really spin out of a universe where demi-gods existed. A film series can go hog wild with those kinds of ideas.
The Overlord said:
Except that's purely marketing. It doesn't have a bearing on the structure of the film itself.
The Overlord said:
I don't think anyone's suggesting a shot-for-shot remake of Ultimates. The fact of the matter is, on a superficial level, anything Whedon creates will be something new. We haven't seen a big comic book super-team mash-up like this before. But what I want to see is a film that undermines this established and tired structure of the superhero flick, which is something I'll address a couple quotes down.
The Overlord said:
It is. The Authority is the Ultimates done better and more dramatically. The subversion is that the Ultimates uses versions of established, fan favorite characters.
The Overlord said:
My worry is that the superhero genre is falling rapidly into stock tropes. To a large extent, we've seen Raimi's Spider-Man remade again and again with new characters. "Superhero gets powers, uses those powers irresponsibly, reconsiders how he's been living his life, dovetails into a messy final battle that's not all that well built to". In the sequels, the heroes seem to forget the trite lessons and relearn them again and again. The Dark Knight undermined a lot of these ideas in a handful of ways. It filtered the superhero archetype through a crime thriller archetype rather than the typical superhero journey. It showed a setting that was dramatically altered by the appearance of the hero. It tried (sometimes clumsily) to show the hard kind of decisions a character in that situation would have to make in a way other superhero films really haven't. And it provided a fundamentally different threat particularly tailored to that character. Don't get me wrong. It stumbled in places. Some of the lectures were heavy handed, non-sensical, and rooted in genuinely unsettling logic that bordered on the fascist. But it showed hard decisions and hard consequences and the script swerved in directions that surprised the audience. Iron Man 2 made a smart choice by doing something similar. Make the origin of Iron Man's powers the source of his threats. He's a weapons manufacturer. In the same way that an atomic bomb both ended World War II and led to sixty years of Cold War and the threat of nuclear annihilation that looms over us today, Stark's creation is something that can literally change the face of the modern world in as fundamental a way.
And I think that's the approach they should take. They should expand on what was lightly established in Iron Man 2. All these characters can essentially change the status quo of the modern world just by their very being. Follow up on the implications of what a world with superhumans would look like, and you've got a good basis for an Avengers film.
Last edited:
