[quote]Professor X wrote:
Hopefully Sony won’t screw up Spiderman. Raimi did not do him well by that 3rd movie. Taking away the web shooters was a huge mistake. That was a pretty big part of that character…the planning involved and the fact that he could run out in mid fight.[/quote]
Parker actually had the ability to shoot webs after the Avengers Disassembled storyline, he lost it after Brand New Day though. is clone Kaine(Scarlett Spider) also has organic webs.
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]JaseHxC wrote:
[quote]andrew_live wrote:
6 pages later…anyone hear about a cameo by spiderman?[/quote]
Negative, but that would be very intriguing. I’d lose my shit if Wesley Snipes appeared on screen as Blade though…it would make no sense as I don’t recall him ever having any interaction with The Avengers though, but still would be awesome.[/quote]
There’s a fair chance that Marvel will bring Snipes back as Blade, if only for the reason that when he’s released, they’ll be able to snap him up for a fraction of his previous asking price.
They could even start the movie with Blade being released from clink after being framed by the vamps. I don’t think Blade is part of Marvel’s immediate plans, but now they have the rights back from New Line, I think they may revive the franchise at some point, but for now Marvel’s game plan is to focus on the Avengers.
[/quote]
They could have Blade leave a mental instituition like in Nightstalkers 1, have him “cured” and believe that Vampires don’t exisit that it was all in his mind, then weird shit starts to happen then bam right back into the world of Vampires. Sort of like how the original Blade was done it was all “real world” until Snipes jumped out of the hospital window and then the fantasy world took over.
[quote]kevinm1 wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]JaseHxC wrote:
[quote]andrew_live wrote:
6 pages later…anyone hear about a cameo by spiderman?[/quote]
Negative, but that would be very intriguing. I’d lose my shit if Wesley Snipes appeared on screen as Blade though…it would make no sense as I don’t recall him ever having any interaction with The Avengers though, but still would be awesome.[/quote]
There’s a fair chance that Marvel will bring Snipes back as Blade, if only for the reason that when he’s released, they’ll be able to snap him up for a fraction of his previous asking price.
They could even start the movie with Blade being released from clink after being framed by the vamps. I don’t think Blade is part of Marvel’s immediate plans, but now they have the rights back from New Line, I think they may revive the franchise at some point, but for now Marvel’s game plan is to focus on the Avengers.
[/quote]
They could have Blade leave a mental instituition like in Nightstalkers 1, have him “cured” and believe that Vampires don’t exisit that it was all in his mind, then weird shit starts to happen then bam right back into the world of Vampires. Sort of like how the original Blade was done it was all “real world” until Snipes jumped out of the hospital window and then the fantasy world took over.[/quote]
Sounds good to me.
[quote]kevinm1 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Hopefully Sony won’t screw up Spiderman. Raimi did not do him well by that 3rd movie. Taking away the web shooters was a huge mistake. That was a pretty big part of that character…the planning involved and the fact that he could run out in mid fight.[/quote]
Parker actually had the ability to shoot webs after the Avengers Disassembled storyline, he lost it after Brand New Day though. is clone Kaine(Scarlett Spider) also has organic webs.[/quote]
The organic shooters were James Cameron’s idea. They can be traced back to when he lobbied Carolco to buy the rights in the late '80s- early '90s. He wanted Michael Biehn as Parker and Arnie as Doc Ock.
The movie never happened as Carolco was on the verge of going bust and the rights had been split up in such a way that no single studio was able to produce a movie. The following article touches on the bitter legal battle over the rights which lasted for over a decade and ended with Sony as the victor:
There’s also a section on the bio-shooters near the end.
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]kevinm1 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Hopefully Sony won’t screw up Spiderman. Raimi did not do him well by that 3rd movie. Taking away the web shooters was a huge mistake. That was a pretty big part of that character…the planning involved and the fact that he could run out in mid fight.[/quote]
Parker actually had the ability to shoot webs after the Avengers Disassembled storyline, he lost it after Brand New Day though. is clone Kaine(Scarlett Spider) also has organic webs.[/quote]
The organic shooters were James Cameron’s idea. They can be traced back to when he lobbied Carolco to buy the rights in the late '80s- early '90s. He wanted Michael Biehn as Parker and Arnie as Doc Ock.
The movie never happened as Carolco was on the verge of going bust and the rights had been split up in such a way that no single studio was able to produce a movie. The following article touches on the bitter legal battle over the rights which lasted for over a decade and ended with Sony as the victor:
There’s also a section on the bio-shooters near the end.[/quote]
I read some of the Cameron’s script to Spiderman and I am so glad that film was never made Doc Oc was supposed to have a catch phrase “okee dokee” and would say it all the time it reminded me of the first draft of Superman where Luthor ate Kleenix’s and Superman mistakenly grabs Tully Salvalis thinking he’s Luthor with the “Who loves ya babe” thrown in. I’m happy that Hollywood has smartened up and gotten directors and writers who actually care about the characters on film.
Talking about Captain America’s costume they wanted Evans to appear tall and muscular… they failed
[quote]kevinm1 wrote:
Talking about Captain America’s costume they wanted Evans to appear tall and muscular… they failed[/quote]
Agreed. Unless they went back and reshot some scenes against green screen after he gained some more muscle, what I’ve seen so far makes Cap look like he sucks. I really don’t understand focusing as much as they did on their builds in their independent movies but then allowing them to lose it for the big movie later.
Compared to actors in the 80’s though, I can’t gripe too much…and yeah, they do pretty much fine tune and screw with a movie up until release date so some scenes may even look way better in the final product…but I’m not seeing that yet. Cap should stand out by himself not just because of how colorful he is. Dude is smaller than I was in college. And yeah, I still think he comes across as too young right now even though Chris Evans should be in his 30’s.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]kevinm1 wrote:
Talking about Captain America’s costume they wanted Evans to appear tall and muscular… they failed[/quote]
Agreed. Unless they went back and reshot some scenes against green screen after he gained some more muscle, what I’ve seen so far makes Cap look like he sucks. I really don’t understand focusing as much as they did on their builds in their independent movies but then allowing them to lose it for the big movie later.
Compared to actors in the 80’s though, I can’t gripe too much…and yeah, they do pretty much fine tune and screw with a movie up until release date so some scenes may even look way better in the final product…but I’m not seeing that yet. Cap should stand out by himself not just because of how colorful he is. Dude is smaller than I was in college. And yeah, I still think he comes across as too young right now even though Chris Evans should be in his 30’s.[/quote]
Watch it in 3D. You won’t be able to see the costume…or anything else.
[quote]WolBarret wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]WolBarret wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]WolBarret wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]WolBarret wrote:
Trailer looks cool, but they are underplaying Thor’s abilities. Iron Man would get his shit pushed in Dark Ninja style if he tried to fight Thor. Trailer seems to be a little focused on Iron Douche.
The movie had better get it right when it comes out.[/quote]
Wol, I’m going to appeal to your geek side now: Stark was the first superhero to emerge in the real Marvel movie universe (Thor was a myth, Cap was lost in time). He is one of the most powerful men in the world, heir to one of the biggest businesses in history, always a cheeseburger away from a press conference, and politically untouchable. He is also the ultimate celebrity: Arnie crossed with Bill Gates. Thor is on probation, but that doesn’t stop Stark, as one of the most recognizable faces on the planet, from busting his or Loki’s balls. They’re used to peasants bowing down to them, but Stark is a god in his own mind.
Thor can’t match egos with Stark after Odin’s lesson in character building; Cap hates bullies and will probably compare Tony unfavorably with Howard Stark. Whedon said that he treats every character he writes as a lead even if he kills 'em off…
I trust him to make this an epic.
I mean, he wrote comics for Marvel and now he’s writing and directing a Marvel movie. He has a proven track record in both mediums. He’s no Frank Miller.[/quote]
And if Whedon and Marvel studios play this correctly, Iron Douche gets put in his place by Thor, Cap, and Loki. Cap had better lead and Thor had better display his Godly prowess. Just like the comics. [/quote]
Stark is unlikely to make the jump from team reject to team leader, unless every other team member screws up so badly that Starks looks like a model of stability.
Cap is most definitely Fury’s most obvious choice for leader. He is Fury’s boy, and the team member he is the closest to going by their boxing gym conversations. Also Cap is the most experienced in leadership (everybody else are solo acts). Not to mention he is flag and standard bearer combined in that costume.
[POSSIBLE THOR-RELATED AVENGERS SPOILERS AHEAD]
I heard that Thor is extremely pissed off that anybody else is trying to stop Loki. He feels it is his duty and his duty alone to tackle his wayward bro and anyone else is trying to encroach on his territory.
[/SPOILERS]
Things seem to be shaping up the way you want them to.
[/quote]
Sorry, bro. Been busy.
Roybot, I trust your opinions in the matter of movies and geekdom. Hopefully Whedon and Marvel studios live up to your expectations. [/quote]
Wol, I don’t have abnormally high expectations for this. I’m just going by the plot established by the previous movies & a ‘calculated guess’ based on actor interviews (Tom Hiddleston originally auditioned for the role of Thor, but when Branagh cast him as Loki he told him that the hero is only as good as the villain, so Thor’s heroism will grow in parallel to Loki’s villainy).
I admit to having ABOVE average expectations of Thor the movie, which is the primary set-up for this. Basically Odin sent Thor to Earth, knowing Thor would succeed. Then Loki took advantage of the Odinsleep and Thor’s exile. Classic prophecy story with the twist that the villain hasn’t been defeated… yet. Odin is also the master of the Marvel cinematic universe, so I’d say that the story is 'Thor-centric’for the most part:
http://screenrant.com/thor-movie-odins-vault-artifacts-rob-115931/all/1/
Thor was the first movie to really expand on the Marvel universe by taking it beyond Earth; Cap America touched on it, but Thor is the real precursor to The Avengers, in terms of story.
I believe that Joss Whedon was responsible for casting Hemsworth as Thor (Whedon produced The Cabin In The Woods which starred an unknown Hemsworth; Hemsworth said he only won the Thor role after he got a second shot when they couldn’t find the right actor) and also for casting Jeremy Renner (Whedon gave Renner an early break in Angel), both actors featured in Thor, so Whedon has been involved at casting snd script level since then at least, maybe earlier.
Nobody expected the Renner cameo. After The Hurt Locker Renner had his pick of roles. He wouldn’t have signed for a supporting role unless Whedon persuaded him.
And this is just the first phase…[/quote]
We become internet best friends with each post, Roy.[/quote]
I just read that RDJ insisted that Iron Man should have pride of place during script development. Whedon tried it his way, but the screenplay became “overbalanced”, so Iron Douche will serve the script.
Stark and Banner strike up a rapport with their mutual penchant for extreme science, with Stark deliberately tempting Banner to Hulk out; Thor has a reluctant protectiveness towards his brother, and Cap is still adjusting to lost friends and a new world. Cap acts as a conduit between the audience and the world of the movie: things we take for granted are strange to him; his ideals are antiquated in an age of technology, and he becomes (in Whedon’s words) an “identification figure”. In early cuts the story was told from Cap’s perspective.
Whedon said that is no longer the case, but what better way is there to introduce noobs to the Marvel universe than through the eyes of a guy who is seventy years behind, so just walking down the street is an adventure in itself?
Best of all, Whedon’s two main cinematic influences for this are The Dirty Dozen and Black Hawk Down.
[quote]Grimlorn wrote:
I read an interview for him after Captain America. Apparently, he was having shoulder problems. It hurt and was clicking all the time. He also thought he got too big for the role.
Not familiar with steroids, but didn’t some of you guys say he would have had to do them to put on the size he did in a short time for the Captain America movie? I remember reading about it in the Captain America thread. Isn’t it possible after he went off them that he’d lose that size, or that he’d have to go back on to maintain that size?[/quote]
Too big for the role? Horseshit… he has seen what Cap looks like in the comics, right? I can’t see a way that he didn’t… How the hell could he think he was too big to play Cap?
He had some size to him when he played Human Torch. I mean, he wasn’t quite as big as he is in the CA movie, but I don’t think he’s that much bigger. It actually looks to me like he lost some detail in his muscularity and put on a little size. I’d almost say it looks like he started taking creatine between the movies and started lifting a little heavier and dropped off a little on his cardio. I couldn’t bring myself to think he was on roids, but hey, it’s possible.
All he needed for his shoulder was some Flameout, why didn’t someone at T-Nation tell him, then maybe he wouldn’t have lost that size before they filmed Avengers.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]TDub301 wrote:
And I’m sure that Japan gets a better trailer because they’ll need more convincing to come see it than we will. I doubt Marvel comics is as popular in Japan as it is here (this is based off of no knowledge at all about the topic, so I could may be completely wrong about that). In comparison, I don’t need to see any damn trailer, I’ll be watching the movie regardless(hopefully on opening night).[/quote]
I think the internet has clued Japan in on quite a few things so I don’t think The Avengers are a new concept. They USED to be about 30 years behind us in “pop news”…but that was like in the 80’s.
Now…of course they wouldn’t see “Cap America” in the same light as us.
(And, once again, I don’t like that costume and think the problem with it is the guy in it. Every scene I see with him in it makes me wonder why he shrunk so much since his own movie.)[/quote]
Oh I’m not saying that they know nothing about Avengers. I’m just assuming from what I know about Japan when reading video game news and other stuff that Avengers just probably isn’t as poopular in Japan, since they tend to have their own, unique stuff that they’re into and a lot of it seems silly to westerners (again, from what little I’ve seen).
So I can only make sense of their trailor being better by assuming that it isn’t as popular there as it is here so they’ll need more convincing to go see the movie than we will. Aside from that, I have no idea why Japan would get a cooler trailor than we do. Maybe time alotted for trailers on Japanese tv is longer than the time that trailor’s in the US have?
Latest TV spot shows Stark doesn’t need ball-buster armor to trash talk Loki. The aliens also finally get their close up with the first real view of what they look like:
Hulk decides the E.Ts are too ugly, and performs a delicate facial reconstruction procedure on two of them…using the side of a building…
[quote]roybot wrote:
Latest TV spot shows Stark doesn’t need ball-buster armor to trash talk Loki. The aliens also finally get their close up with the first real view of what they look like:
Hulk decides the E.Ts are too ugly, and performs a delicate facial reconstruction procedure on two of them…using the side of a building…[/quote]
Sheninigans!!! Thor is a god not a demigod a demigod is a being who has one parent who is a god and the other a human Hercules is a demigod, Achilles is a demigod, Odin, Thor, and Zeus are gods
[quote]kevinm1 wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
Latest TV spot shows Stark doesn’t need ball-buster armor to trash talk Loki. The aliens also finally get their close up with the first real view of what they look like:
Hulk decides the E.Ts are too ugly, and performs a delicate facial reconstruction procedure on two of them…using the side of a building…[/quote]
Sheninigans!!! Thor is a god not a demigod a demigod is a being who has one parent who is a god and the other a human Hercules is a demigod, Achilles is a demigod, Odin, Thor, and Zeus are gods[/quote]
You’re technically correct, but I know of two reasons why Thor would be demoted to a demi-god, other than a needless depowering:
The producers don’t want Thor stealing the thunder of the #1 God and are trying to avoid any Bible-thumping backlash. People can get very sensitive about that kind of thing in movies…
Joss Whedon has promised references to the comics that newcomers will miss, but that dedicated readers will pick up on: Stark has been known to challenge divine beings in the comics and rejected Thor as a god in Ultimates. Perhaps this is one of those references?
Even though the Thor movie doesn’t draw heavily on Ultimate Thor, it does re-work the backstory enough to cast doubt on whether Thor is truly a god or a being who has come to be known as one over millennia. It’s still consistent with classic Thor but edges more towards Arthur C. Clarke tinted sci-fi. I wrote quite a lot about it in the Comic Chracter Battles thread:
The idea that Thor is ‘something else’ was proposed by Kirby himself and is far more interesting (at least to me) than a blanket explanation of “Thor is a god - he can beat everyone”. Kirby brings a modern mythology to bear on an ancient myth.
I think Roybot’s right. They’re playing it safe to not call Thor a god…or God.
[quote]Nards wrote:
I think Roybot’s right. They’re playing it safe to not call Thor a god…or God.[/quote]
In one of the older comics Thor actually visits with a nun in a Church, takes of his helmet and is visibly uncomfortable there. They don’t just play it safe in the movies, I think.
DC is going a different route. In Wonder Woman when someone says:“Lord Almighty”, both Hermes and Hades turn and say:“Yes?”. Quite irreverent 
I agree with Roybot’s initial write up from a while ago. Much more interesting to go a different route then:“I am a god and yadda yadda”. Our perception, even among non-believers, about G-d is that he is almighty and all powerfull. Can’t really be a true G-d and get your holy ass kicked by mortal enemies, right?
[quote]IamMarqaos wrote:
[quote]Nards wrote:
I think Roybot’s right. They’re playing it safe to not call Thor a god…or God.[/quote]
In one of the older comics Thor actually visits with a nun in a Church, takes of his helmet and is visibly uncomfortable there. They don’t just play it safe in the movies, I think.
DC is going a different route. In Wonder Woman when someone says:“Lord Almighty”, both Hermes and Hades turn and say:“Yes?”. Quite irreverent
I agree with Roybot’s initial write up from a while ago. Much more interesting to go a different route then:“I am a god and yadda yadda”. Our perception, even among non-believers, about G-d is that he is almighty and all powerfull. Can’t really be a true G-d and get your holy ass kicked by mortal enemies, right?[/quote]
100% agree with that.
I think they really have to as well as the stories based on the Norse, the Greek and the Roman gods all seem to indicate highly powerful beings BUT they still act very ‘human’. All this bickering and fighting for position, warring with each other, being exceptionally cruel in punishment, etc.
The also include myths on when these gods were young growing up. Some gods have been imprisoned and even killed. If you really delve into it, you really cannot go another route.
I believe DC is making a mistake and Marvel is going to do it right. But what else is new 
EDIT: thanks X
So the Thor hate begins.
[quote]WolBarret wrote:
So the Thor hate begins. [/quote]
Comic book characters are much like professional wrestlers: abilities change with storylines.