DVDizzy Forum

Warning: This feature contains specific plot details regarding Marvel’s The Avengers. If you haven’t seen the movie yet, then what in the name of Mephisto’s fiery Hell-realm are you doing? Seriously.

Stop what you’re doing right now and get your ass to the nearest movie theater. Just go. No one’s stopping you. This is America [unless you’re not in America]. You have rights and freedoms [unless you don't].

http://www.geeksofdoom.com/2012/05/07/w ... rs-sequel/

Regarding Black Panther, I heard that scripts for movies for both him and Luke Cage have been finished and are awaiting approval, so they may very well join the team for the next Avengers movie.

Ok, so now that the first wave or story arc to "the Avengers" or Marvel Cinematic Universe is done, this is how the second one is shaping up:

2013: Iron Man 3, Thor 2

2014: Captain America 2

2015: Hulk 2, Avengers 2

Now the two in 2015 are not fully locked in, but most likely will happen. There is a very good chance there will be at least one more film, probably a new character's origin story film (like Ant-Man or Black Panther or Dr. Strange) who will get a 2014 film made, but we'll have to see.

After the money "Avengers" made, I think it is safe to say we'll be seeing more Marvel films. My feeling is I'd love to see as many as three film a year or every other year. More then that may be over kill, but at the least, I hope we don't see one film a year anymore. As a huge Marvel fan, I'm really excited with what they have been doing with these films so far, very cool!

Avaitor wrote:Regarding Black Panther, I heard that scripts for movies for both him and Luke Cage have been finished and are awaiting approval, so they may very well join the team for the next Avengers movie.

I have heard similar things, as well as for an Ant-Man movie. Who knows, we may see all three of those soon?

Great news! Keep the Marvel movies coming!:D

I'm a bit iffy, considering the true nature of these films.

Still at the start of its rapidly-increasing box office take, Marvel's The Avengers is already set to be followed next year by Iron Man 3 and Thor 2 with Captain America 2 following in 2014.

Today, Disney Chairman and CEO Bob Iger spoke with CNBC about the massive success of Marvel's The Avengers and what it means for the future of the cinematic Marvel Universe.

"The Avengers isn't just a film," says Iger. "It's a franchise from our perspective. Obviously, it was helped a lot by the success of the 'Iron Man' movies and of 'Thor' and 'Captain America'. From 'The Avengers' we get a chance to make 'Thor 2' and 'Captain America 2' and 'Iron Man 3' and hopefully another 'Avengers' movie. So this one film that is immensely successful... is going to get a number of other films and franchises."

In addition to the films he lists, the studio has announced plans for an as-of-yet-undisclosed project to be released on May 16, 2014. There's no confirmation yet on whether or not that will be a sequel or if it might be based on a new Marvel Universe character.

"We have an ability to leverage what was a very fun film done by a great group of filmmakers into something much bigger for the company," he continues, "and the effect will be prolonged and that's very, very exciting for us."

http://www.superherohype.com/news/artic ... ers-sequel

ajmrowland wrote:I'm a bit iffy, considering the true nature of these films.

"True nature" of these films? What do you mean by that?

^That they're made by the studios just for money, really, while so many good films are passed over.

I'll still be seeing this. I enjoy a good blockbuster.

ajmrowland wrote:^That they're made by the studios just for money, really, while so many good films are passed over.

I don't really believe that. Just because a film can produce a bunch of merchandise doesn't mean it's a bad film. Sure, they'll milk the hell out of any super-hero film, but that doesn't discredit Marvel from being excellent story tellers.

Marvel has been capturing the imagination of people all over the world for decades. It's my personal belief that Marvel's stories and characters have just as much a fan base and power as Star Wars, Star Trek, Disney, Harry Potter, and any other HUGE franchise. It's about time a movie studio started doing these films right, like Disney is now.

singerguy04 wrote:
Marvel has been capturing the imagination of people all over the world for decades. It's my personal belief that Marvel's stories and characters have just as much a fan base and power as Star Wars, Star Trek, Disney, Harry Potter, and any other HUGE franchise. It's about time a movie studio started doing these films right, like Disney is now.

Well exactly, the Marvel film makers are excellent story tellers, and the big Marvel and DC comic characters have just as faithful a following (if not more so) as fans of Star Wars, Star Trek, Harry Potter, Pixar, Dsiney, Lord of the Rings, etc.

The only thing I'd have to say, is I have a hard time giving Disney much credit for these films. The Marvel Cinematic Universe started well before Disney bought Marvel and up to Iron Man 3 had already been planed. Disney had very little to do with the quality or these films, save for the fact they bought Marvel and then claimed the success their own. I really see the Marvel/ Disney relationship right now as pathetic. Pixar, Marvel, Muppets, Dreamworks...remember when Disney came up with Disney's big hits? I do.

Avaitor wrote:Regarding Black Panther, I heard that scripts for movies for both him and Luke Cage have been finished and are awaiting approval, so they may very well join the team for the next Avengers movie.

I always worry about how they portray black superheroes. Black Panther could make a good movie if they take it seriously. IDK, I'm just going by what happened to Blade and Spawn, which to me were terribly campy and diminished the characters.

Oh, and I almost forgot to mention that crappy Black Panther show that was on BET. *sigh*

milojthatch wrote:Ok, so now that the first wave or story arc to "the Avengers" or Marvel Cinematic Universe is done, this is how the second one is shaping up:

2013: Iron Man 3, Thor 2

2014: Captain America 2

2015: Hulk 2, Avengers 2

Iron Man 3 should be good. It's based on the Extremis story arc and is directed by Shane Black (who worked with Downey on the underrated Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang). I expect the humor to be intact and it looks like SHEILD is gone (or at least, Scarlett Jo is, which is a huge plus).

As for Thor 2 and Captain America 2, I expect standard sequels but I REALLY don't see a Hulk 2 (or is it 3, or is it just considered 1 again???) happening. Both of the pervious Hulks bombed at the box office and failed to make back their budgets back (I also remember them specifically saying that is wasn't going to happen). Besides, I think Hulk is rather boring without The Avengers, since he basically just fights other giant beasts (which is boring) and I think his relationship with the group brings out some character.

milojthatch wrote:I have heard similar things, as well as for an Ant-Man movie.

Wasn't Edgar Wright making the Ant-Man? I remember something about him taking a humorous approach to it but this was a while ago, since I also remember them saying they wanted it done before the first Avengers movie.

jpanimation wrote:
As for Thor 2 and Captain America 2, I expect standard sequels but I REALLY don't see a Hulk 2 (or is it 3, or is it just considered 1 again???) happening. Both of the pervious Hulks bombed at the box office and failed to make back their budgets back (I also remember them specifically saying that is wasn't going to happen). Besides, I think Hulk is rather boring without The Avengers, since he basically just fights other giant beasts (which is boring) and I think his relationship with the group brings out some character.

The 2003 Hulk has nothing to do with these films (thankfully!), while the 2008 film is cannon with the Marvel Cinematic Universe. While it has been the lowest performer from these MCU films so far, I'd hardly call it a box office bomb. There has been talk since Avengers of a new Hulk film, and I for one would love to see the Abomination come back as well as the Leader, who was set up so nicely in the first one. Then again, one could argue both Hulk villains could come back in an Avengers film, but I don't get the feeling that will happen.

It would be great to see Hulk in one of the other heroes' films. I also don't feel everyone of the Avengers has to have the same number of solo films, if any. If Hulk gets only two films, Iron Man gets four or five and Black Panther gets one, that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Whatever works for the franchise as a whole I say.

jpanimation wrote:

milojthatch wrote:I have heard similar things, as well as for an Ant-Man movie.

Wasn't Edgar Wright making the Ant-Man? I remember something about him taking a humorous approach to it but this was a while ago, since I also remember them saying they wanted it done before the first Avengers movie.

That film was talked about back when they started work on the first Iron Man. It was actually meant to come out before Thor, Captain America or The Avengers, but for various reasons, didn't. I would not be surprised if it was the next new solo character film to get released. We will see.

OK, so Universal saw the success of Spider-Man and joined in by making a Hulk movie. Here's what happened:

Hulk

Production Budget: $137,000,000
Domestic: $132,177,234
Foreign: $113,183,246
Worldwide: $245,360,480

Factor in marketing and other costs...box office bomb. Universal's not sure what to do with the property. Fast forward a few years and Marvel is starting plans to make it's own movies, beginning with Iron Man. They approach Universal, who still owned the movie rights, about rebooting the Hulk. Universal agreed when Marvel said they pay for most of it. Marvel promised fans it would be different and we got a very different movie from the first time (still not good IMO). Here's how they responded:

The Incredible Hulk

Production Budget: $150,000,000
Domestic: $134,806,913
Foreign: $128,620,638
Worldwide: $263,427,551

With a slightly higher budget and just slightly higher take, the end results were the same. At this point, Universal just let Marvel have the rights to The Hulk. Why would Marvel waste their time rebooting the franchise again, when the results will most likely be the same? It didn't even take in half of what Iron Man did (I only mention this because at the time, Hulk was a much more recognizable name then Iron Man). I think they'll just stick with the TV spin-offs and see how that does, since Hulk has yet to have a successful movie or TV series (unless you count that crappy 70s show). The only success he's ever had is with The Avengers.

I maintain the Hulk re-boot didn't do better because of the foul taste in the movie going audience's mouths from the 2003 fiasco, which made the strong bulk of it's money opening week. If Marvel made another Hulk film, I suspect it would do much better, especially with Ruffalo as Banner.

singerguy04 wrote:

ajmrowland wrote:^That they're made by the studios just for money, really, while so many good films are passed over.

I don't really believe that. Just because a film can produce a bunch of merchandise doesn't mean it's a bad film. Sure, they'll milk the hell out of any super-hero film, but that doesn't discredit Marvel from being excellent story tellers.

Never said it was a bad film. I actually enjoyed it a lot. I just feel that blockbusters in general dont feel made out of passion for the material, except Harry Potter and a few other properties.
[/quote]

Scarlett Johansson set to make history as best paid female actor of all time with £13million deal for Avengers 2

Scarlett Johansson has reportedly been offered £13million to star in the sequel to Avengers Assemble. The monumental fee will make the 27-year-old the highest paid female actor of all time. The huge fee would eclipse the £12.2million paid to Angelina Jolie for her role in The Tourist, back in 2010.
A source told The Sun newspaper: 'Scarlett is the hottest star in Hollywood and her inclusion in the sequel is a must.
'Producers think that as the only lead woman in the film male fans have found her a key ingredient — both for sex and story appeal. She is loved by critics too.'

LINK - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/ar ... ds-newsxml

Personally I think that is an OTT, Sure she's a valued member of The Avengers, but she hasn't even stared in her OWN Marvel Film? For this price I hope Marvel & Disney will be getting there money's worth and hopefully she'll sign on for her own starring film. (but it's been reported there are no current plans at the moment) Hopefully this is just a rumor. + I really hope Marvel introduces Wasp to the Avengers!

WHAT ?! She barely said a full sentence in the entire movie ?! I guess she sure is a draw for men I suppose.....that does seem terribly expensive though.

atlanticaunderthesea wrote:WHAT ?! She barely said a full sentence in the entire movie ?! I guess she sure is a draw for men I suppose.....that does seem terribly expensive though.

What? Black Widow did a lot.

-She untangled her way out of being tied up by crime lords and beat the crap out of them in enough time to keep Coulson on hold for too long, all in a nightie.
-She got Bruce Banner to leave Calcutta to help S.H.I.E.L.D. without invoking the Hulk or getting the agents outside to take action.
-She got Loki to reveal his plan by playing the "weeping girl" card, without shedding an actual tear.
-She fought against a Loki-controlled Hawkeye with just her bare hands, feet...and teeth.
-She took on a buttload of Chitauri by herself and with the team in Manhattan, and even jumped up from Cap's shield to hop in one of their cruisers.

Tell me if I'm forgetting more, but Black Widow was totally a badass in Avengers. Moreso than in Iron Man 2 at least, where she didn't do anything interesting until she and Happy took those soldiers out together.

i agree with Avaitor but i do understand what atlanticaunderthesea is saying, as her parts may not be considered as memorable as that to the likes of Iron Man.

Also Avaitor what are your views on her "supposed" £15million pay check?

DisneyDude2010 wrote: Also Avaitor what are your views on her "supposed" £15million pay check?

About how much does that equate to in US dollars?

It sounds a little steep, but Scarlett Johansson is a busy woman, arguably more so than the rest of the cast, so I can understand why she might get paid a little extra to stick around.

And if it means we might get a movie with her and Hawkeye showing exactly what happened in Budapest, I'm all for it.