Avengers movie discussion (news/etc.)

The Overlord said:
As for villain team ups, that worked really well in Spidey 3.
Click to expand...



This is diffrent though. Not going to debate if spider-man 3 was good or not just say this. Because this is a team movie it would be closer to Magneto , toad , Sabertooth and mystique teaming up. As it's not 3 vs 1 it's like 4 on 4 AND with the advantage of previous movies.

Imagine X-men 1 if it had a back story already shown on a film. You see the possibilities?

A villain team up could work.
 
SSJmole said:
This is diffrent though. Not going to debate if spider-man 3 was good or not just say this. Because this is a team movie it would be closer to Magneto , toad , Sabertooth and mystique teaming up. As it's not 3 vs 1 it's like 4 on 4 AND with the advantage of previous movies.

Imagine X-men 1 if it had a back story already shown on a film. You see the possibilities?

A villain team up could work.
Click to expand...

The problem is the brotherhood only had two members with sort personality in the first two movies, Magneto and Mystique had any real personality (Pyro wasn't a member till the end of the movie) Toad and Sabertooth were just one dimensional thugs and most of the teams purposed now are made up of total megalomaniacs (Red skull, Mandarin, Loki,etc) who demand the spot light and don't work well together.

The avengers themselves take a lot of focus, so one villain is better in terms of dividing up screen time.

Venom Melendez said:
Except for the fact that this is a team movie so a team of villains banding together to even the odds would make perfect sense. If some of them are already established they don't really need to spend too much time on them anyway.

Also, Spidy 3 still made millions so what's your point exactly? Besides, it has worked before.

It can worke if done right.
Click to expand...

Except there is not enough screen time to focus on a team of heroes and team in villains, especially when the first movie has to do a lot of set up in terms of the team origins.

A movie has two hours to tell a story, so getting bogged down in lots and lots of characters isn't helpful.
 
Last edited:
A single villain with ties to the major Avengers characters will work better than multiple villains (or villain team). The best choice as far as I can tell is Ultron. I like the ideas of tying Ultron's origin into Tony's Iron Tech and the Super Soldier serum that created Hulk and Cap. This makes Ultron personally tied to at least three of the big four. I'm sure a suitable Thor link could be included, possibly even Loki as a villainous puppet master, manipulating things from the sidelines...perhaps even manipulating Ultron into existence, or as said using Hulk to tie up the heroes.

Also, has it been revealed if other Avengers beyond the big four (Cap, Iron Man, Hulk, Thor) will be in this movie? I ask mainly in regards of Giant Man and the Wasp, two original members. I personally don't know if they could properly flesh them out in only two hours (in addition to establishing the villain, the team dynamics, the action, etc), but if they are in the movie I hope to see a melding of the Ultimate and 616 versions. I'd still like them to bicker incessantly (like a married Odd Couple), even downright shouting matches, but I don't think the spousal abuse storyline from the Ultimates needs to be included. It would only likely increase the rating level (from PG 13 to R depending on how graphic it is, and possible even from the subject matter itself), and I don't think is necessary in this movie. It'd be extraneous characterization at best on supporting characters. I'd like them to appear, but won't be broken up about it if they don't appear either.
 
The Overlord said:
The problem is the brotherhood only had two members with sort personality in the first two movies, Magneto and Mystique had any real personality (Pyro wasn't a member till the end of the movie) Toad and Sabertooth were just one dimensional thugs and most of the teams purposed now are made up of total megalomaniacs (Red skull, Mandarin, Loki,etc) who demand the spot light and don't work well together.

The avengers themselves take a lot of focus, so one villain is better in terms of dividing up screen time.



Except there is not enough screen time to focus on a team of heroes and team in villains, especially when the first movie has to do a lot of set up in terms of the team origins.

A movie has two hours to tell a story, so getting bogged down in lots and lots of characters isn't helpful.
Click to expand...



Doesn't mean it can't be done and they don't have to do it in the first one anyway. It can easily be done right and well.

I also don't see the team forming simply to fight Ultron since Hulk and Thor could easily beat him by themselves.

If it's only one villain then it has to be someone that can take them all on Like Loki, Kang,etc.

Or go the Ultimates route(witch they are doing already) and have an alien Invasion with the Kree or Skrulls.

The whole reason the banded together was to fight foes they couldn't fight on their own.

Something must be going down for Fury to start gathering up a team.
 
Venom Melendez said:
Doesn't mean it can't be done and they don't have to do it in the first one anyway. It can easily be done right and well.

I also don't see the team forming simply to fight Ultron since Hulk and Thor could easily beat him by themselves.

If it's only one villain then it has to be someone that can take them all on Like Loki, Kang,etc.

Or go the Ultimates route(witch they are doing already) and have an alien Invasion with the Kree or Skrulls.

The whole reason the banded together was to fight foes they couldn't fight on their own.

Something must be going down for Fury to start gathering up a team.
Click to expand...

Thor had problems with Ultron in the comics, being impervious and all means Thor can't just bash Ultron.

The problem with an alien invasion is there no central villain, I mean who is the leader of the Skrulls? Some random Emperor. It would be the avengers vs. an army of mooks.

Also expalin how a team that would all demand screen time works better than one villain who demands less. How is Abomination supposed to be in the Liberators, when was in the hulk movie as a crazed ex American solider?

Plus do we really want to recycle villains, like Loki who would be a Thor movie, is giving the audience a new villain would be better than just recycling the same fights from a previous movie.

Also, how is Kang supposed to work in a realistic movie universe?
 
Ultron steals the Destroyer armour and upgrades himself to match it's qualities

there is your Thor link, instead of Thorbuster Iron Man, you'd have Thorbuster Ultron

really I think they'll have Ultron come into existence in Ant-Man, why else would they be making it?
 
Gemini said:
Ultron steals the Destroyer armour and upgrades himself to match it's qualities

there is your Thor link, instead of Thorbuster Iron Man, you'd have Thorbuster Ultron

really I think they'll have Ultron come into existence in Ant-Man, why else would they be making it?
Click to expand...



Yeah, but it's Scott Lang remember? and their making so it can branch into the Avengers film.

Of course Pym will be there as a mentor so who knows?
 
Venom Melendez said:
Yeah, but it's Scott Lang remember? and their making so it can branch into the Avengers film.

Of course Pym will be there as a mentor so who knows?
Click to expand...

Pym makes the Ant-Man tech, Scott steals it, cause's curffufle, Pym makes Ultron, Ultron goes haywire, Pym/Lang team up too defeat him, Lang get's killed, Pym barely gets out with his life. SHIELD become's aware of Ultron, sends Tony Stark too investigate, he talks with Pym, Pym joins up, Avengers go after Ultron
 
It's a shame about the licensing because i think if they had rights to fantastic 4 and spider-man , Having Spider-man on the team would be good and Doom with Doombots could have made a great villain since he's a global threat (or use to be)
 
Gemini said:
Pym makes the Ant-Man tech, Scott steals it, cause's curffufle, Pym makes Ultron, Ultron goes haywire, Pym/Lang team up too defeat him, Lang get's killed, Pym barely gets out with his life. SHIELD become's aware of Ultron, sends Tony Stark too investigate, he talks with Pym, Pym joins up, Avengers go after Ultron
Click to expand...


Why would he steal it if pym is going to his mentor?

And why built Ultron because someone stole the Ant-man tech?
 
That's all assuming Ant-Man even comes out before Avengers. I don't remember seeing a possible release date/time for the movie, only that they got someone to write and direct.
 
The Overlord said:
Have you learned nothing from Spidey 3, too many villains hogging the spot light is what killed that movie. There should only be one villain, otherwise it will become a mess, because you have to divided your focus in a million different directions. The Avengers and one villain is enough characters to focus on for one movie.
Click to expand...

Because if Spider-Man 3 can't do it right, obviously any superhero movie with multiple villains is going to suck?

I don't buy it. Look at Batman Begins, which was the first movie in a franchise and included three Batman villains.

All that Spider-Man 3 proved is that bad movies are bad. If you're really looking for a deeper revelation, maybe you could say that studio mandate can ruin a movie, but just because it did the multiple villains thing wrong doesn't mean that it can't be done right. There's got to be a dozen possibilities to make a good multi-villain Avengers movie. The only obstacle is finding the right script and the right director. After all, this is a movie that has a half dozen linked lead-ins. If six prequels isn't a good enough pretext to establish a multi-villain movie, I don't know what is.
 
The Overlord said:
Have you learned nothing from Spidey 3, too many villains hogging the spot light is what killed that movie. There should only be one villain, otherwise it will become a mess, because you have to divided your focus in a million different directions. The Avengers and one villain is enough characters to focus on for one movie.
Click to expand...

Because if Spider-Man 3 can't do it right, obviously any superhero movie with multiple villains is going to suck?

I don't buy it. Look at Batman Begins, which was the first movie in a franchise and included three Batman villains.

All that Spider-Man 3 proved is that bad movies are bad. If you're really looking for a deeper revelation, maybe you could say that studio mandate can ruin a movie, but just because it did the multiple villains thing wrong doesn't mean that it can't be done right. There's got to be a dozen possibilities to make a good multi-villain Avengers movie. The only obstacle is finding the right script and the right director. After all, this is a movie that has a half dozen linked lead-ins. If six prequels isn't a good enough pretext to establish a multi-villain movie, I don't know what is.

Venom Melendez said:
That's a bad line up.


There no way they can work together especially with The Red Skull.

Most villains hate working with The skull because he's a Nazi.
Also, The Mandrin rarely teams up with anyone. Loki could be a challenge all by himself though.
Click to expand...

It depends on how you built the characters. I'd argue that the Red Skull can't just be a simple, vanilla blood-and-fire nazi anymore than the Mandarin can be a Fu Manchu stereotype. Give the character an interesting, modernized spin and there's plenty of possibilities for these characters to work together.


As for Ant-Man, I'd like to see it tie in to Avengers, but not necessarily as "Ant-Man's on the team". I feel like the four central characters are a good enough line-up for the team. It would be cool if Ant-Man showed us the inner workings of S.H.I.E.L.D. since Nick Fury's going to be the force that brings all these characters together.
 
Last edited:
Because one movie fails with multiple villains doesn't mean all will. But the difference with Batman Begins (and Spider-Man) and Avengers is one key thing:

It's just one hero.

It's one person and three villains to use. Avengers you're going to have multiple heroes you have to focus on besides who you have for a bad guy. So you have to make sure you get good screen time on all the heroes besides the villain. So imagine having multiple villains and multiple heroes. There's just way too many people to try and focus on.
 
Ice said:
Because one movie fails with multiple villains doesn't mean all will. But the difference with Batman Begins (and Spider-Man) and Avengers is one key thing:

It's just one hero.

It's one person and three villains to use. Avengers you're going to have multiple heroes you have to focus on besides who you have for a bad guy. So you have to make sure you get good screen time on all the heroes besides the villain. So imagine having multiple villains and multiple heroes. There's just way too many people to try and focus on.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but they're two entirely different types of movies. With Batman, you have to pretend that the audience knows nothing about the character, and build him up from scratch. With a team movie, the basics of the characters are already implied. You don't have to build the villains or the heroes from scratch. You can imply so much more.

Instead of having to focus on every single hero and every single villain, you focus on the relationships between every hero and every villain. So instead of a "Thor" arc and an "Iron Man" arc. You have a "Thor vs. Loki" arc and an "Iron Man vs. Mandarin" arc.
 
Zombipanda said:
Yeah, but they're two entirely different types of movies. With Batman, you have to pretend that the audience knows nothing about the character, and build him up from scratch. With a team movie, the basics of the characters are already implied. You don't have to build the villains or the heroes from scratch. You can imply so much more.

Instead of having to focus on every single hero and every single villain, you focus on the relationships between every hero and every villain. So instead of a "Thor" arc and an "Iron Man" arc. You have a "Thor vs. Loki" arc and an "Iron Man vs. Mandarin" arc.
Click to expand...
I know. But for a first Avengers movie, I think it would be best to avoid this. Because even though the basics of characters may be implied, you still have to treat it (as best you can) as if it's not. I would save something like the "Vs" stories or whatever for a future installment.
 
Ice said:
I know. But for a first Avengers movie, I think it would be best to avoid this. Because even though the basics of characters may be implied, you still have to treat it (as best you can) as if it's not. I would save something like the "Vs" stories or whatever for a future installment.
Click to expand...

I'd run under the assumption that it's going to be the only Avengers movie that's going to be made. A number of the suggested actors are getting up there in age, and the possibility of getting that many big name actors together for just one film are pretty herculean.

The thing is, the basics of the characters can be implied in a way that allows accessibility for new viewers. Tony Stark is a struggling alcoholic who's trying his best to make up for the sins of his business. Steve Rogers is a soldier pulled out of his time. Thor is a god who's doing his best to accept a human way of life. Bruce Banner is a man with a raging beast on the inside, struggling to be a hero. These aren't things that need to be super-developed in the film, and if they are, they'd probably only detract from the team aspect of the movie. I have no doubt it can be done, and since it may be the only chance they get to tell it, the story should do its best to hit on the character beats. I'm just not entirely sure that "all these heroes vs. robots" is going to be particularly fulfilling for the individual character beats.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top