The Avengers

[DC 536]

After much "hummin' 'n' hawin'" (as my mother would say), it seems The Avengers may finally have a director.

 

Joss Whedon To Assemble THE AVENGERS!

 

Beaks here...

 

Deadline New York's Mike Fleming is reporting that Joss Whedon is in final negotiations to direct THE AVENGERS. Huge tip of the hat to IESB for being the first to name Whedon as a finalist for the project.

 

In many ways, Whedon is the ideal choice for this dream superhero project: starting with BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER (hell, even going back to writing in a reference to Gigantor in SPEED), he's been integral in the mainstreaming of geek culture; he's also been extremely active in the comic book world, launching ASTONISHING X-MEN and taking over for Brian K. Vaughan on RUNAWAYS. As a feature filmmaker, however, the jury is out: SERENITY may have been shot anamorphic, but it still played like TV on the big screen; as for the multitude of BUFFY, ANGEL and DOLLHOUSE episodes he's directed, I've yet to see him deliver something that has impressive physical scale.

 

And this is crucial because THE AVENGERS needs to be the biggest movie ever from Marvel Studios. It's the film they've been building towards since Nick Fury's post-credits cameo in IRON MAN. If they fall short, the Marvel Studios brand could be irrevocably diminished.

 

Another challenge for Whedon: managing egos, and not allowing THE AVENGERS to turn into IRON MAN 3 just because Robert Downey Jr. is the biggest star in the cast. This needs to be a true ensemble effort; if anyone leads the way, it should be Captain America. Though I don't know much about the script (Nick Fury allegedly plays a significant role in the narrative), I wouldn't be surprised if pressure is brought to bear on Zak Penn to beef up a role or two before the film goes before cameras in early 2011. Love Downey, love Tony Stark, but, as Harry said a couple of weeks ago, I'd rather this be the superhero version of THE PROFESSIONALS.

Credit: AICN

 

 

This has potential to be the best decision for the film and the Marvel universe in general, but the part I've made stand out is 100% correct. Mess this up and every good thing Marvel have done will go to waste.

[Guest Sparrow]

I don't know who he is, but I have heard he is quite the good writer. His work on the comic series Astonishing X-Men is always brought up when I read some news and I heard some news that he is re-writing the script which is a bonus because Zak Penn did not go down well with a lot of fans.

[Fletch 204]

I heard Ed Norton is still in the dark about whether he's in or not as he says there seems to be no rush or interest to do a sequel to The Incredible Hulk (which I thought was better than Iron-Man if I'm honest), and that another actor may be brought in to play Banner.

 

I though Norton was excellent as Banner to be honest.

 

See the thing for me was always with the Avengers, yeah I like Iron-Man, Hulk, but I don't give a rat's ass about Thor or Captain America or Ant-Man. I'm not enthused about all these films, because for me Marvel was always Hulk and Spider-Man, those are the ones I loved growing up, Spidey especially.

[Guest Sparrow]

I heard Ed Norton is still in the dark about whether he's in or not as he says there seems to be no rush or interest to do a sequel to The Incredible Hulk (which I thought was better than Iron-Man if I'm honest), and that another actor may be brought in to play Banner.

 

I have heard nothing about another actor. I have watched interviews and stuff were Ed says that they have just not signed him on yet. If the people want him in it then they just got to speak up. I have faith that Ed Norton playing Banner will be in the Avengers movie. It would be a waste of a big name Superhero and actor.

 

The reason there is not a rush to do Hulk 2 is there are other things to do. I think it was a case of Hulk or Iron man was always going to get a sequal between now and Avengers, it was just which ever one made the more money would get it. Both are going to be in the movie. If not then Marvel are missing out.

[Guest RatedHHHBKTaker]

Joss Whedon is a great choice but the 2012 release is looking unlikely, apparently. Same with Captain America next year. Thor is scheduled for release a month earlier and has wrapped already but we are only just Cap cast info.

[Guest Saz]

I'll be honest, Avengers as the comic never really interested me that much, same with Justice league.

 

Somehow, sticking a load of superheroes together doesn't float my boat.

[DC 536]

Rumours have been picking up steam that the villains for this film is going to be the Skrulls (with The Kree also appearing). Nothing has been confirmed, but various reliable sources are all singing from the same hymn sheet.

[Guest Fiona]

I got really excited there for a minute or two. I thought they were making a movie about the British TV series, with John Steed and Emma Peel. If it's just a bunch of superheros trying to outdo each other, not interested.

[Paul 584]

Theres already been a film of our version of The Avengers. I still havent seen it...

[Guest Phil]

don't, it's w*nk

[Paul 584]

That was my fear. I loved the series so much that I'd be let down.

 

I'd still watch a new Man From U.N.C.L.E film if they made one. :lol

[Guest John Hancock]

The inclusion of the Skruggs killed it for me. I've had no interest in anything remotely sci-fi since I turned 10, be it film, T.V. or video games, and a load of little green alien goblins running around in silly skin tight suits holds about as much interest for me as a production of Schindler's List On Ice.

[DC 536]

That was my fear. I loved the series so much that I'd be let down.

It was really, really pathetic.

The inclusion of the Skruggs killed it for me. I've had no interest in anything remotely sci-fi since I turned 10, be it film, T.V. or video games, and a load of little green alien goblins running around in silly skin tight suits holds about as much interest for me as a production of Schindler's List On Ice.

Surely the part in bold means that the majority of superhero movies wouldn't interest you anyway, with The Avengers (with the various science-fiction orientated strands surrounding Iron Man, Hulk and Captain America) being a total no-no even without The Skrulls?

[Guest John Hancock]

I'm fine with advanced technology and things like that, that's all fine, but I always lose interest in comics are soon as something that isn't human, or is just plain stupid turns up. For example; I love Magneto, but I hate The Imperial Guard, I love The Joker, but I hate Killer Croc, I love The King Pin, but I hate the Sandman. Any of those type's of character just, for me, take comics completely out of any sort of even narrow pretext of reality, and at that point, I find it unreliable, and I lose interest.

 

Really, in all media, since apart from being into Star Wars as a kid, I've just never cared about anything involving aliens, and spaceships, and living other planets and all that stuff. I'm not saying it's inherently bad or anything, it's just a genre of fiction that personally holds absolute zero interest for me.

 

Like;

 

Ant-Man and The Wasp have a magic potion that shrinks their particles. Okay, I can buy that, it's not really possible, but, it's been explained, so cool.

 

Thor, yeah, stupid creation story and I never cared for him. That's the thing, the only way Thor can be really, is if the Norse creation myth is true, so you have to believe that Iron-Man and Spiderman and the X-Men and everything are living in a world where God exists, and is Odin. Never liked it.

 

Iron Man's just Batman +1. He has a cool little suit he made that does things, which is pretty believable.

 

The Hulk got mutated by gamma radiation, which is just about believable.

 

Captain America got crazy army drugs, which is based loosely on reality, so, again, believable.

 

So, yeah, the only one of those that really just makes my brain switch off is Thor, because his creation story is just too stupid, and the second it's bought up, it undermines the rest of the story, and just makes everything seem ridiculous. Same with the aliens. Their aren't aliens on Earth, and the second a film puts them here on any large scale, in my mind, that's not Earth anymore. They might as well have just set the film in space for all I care, because if it's got aliens running around, it isn't a relatable Earth.

 

All that said, I probably wasn't going to see it anyway :lol I was never really into the Avengers, and (and I know I'm the minority here) I thought the first Iron Man movie was a big load of balls.

 

I'll still probably watch the Captain America movie though, just because I always liked that character.

[Guest Phil]

Any of those type's of character just, for me, take comics completely out of any sort of even narrow pretext of reality, and at that point, I find it unreliable, and I lose interest. .

 

isn't that kinda the point of comics though? I mean it be really boring if comics were written to be a reflection of reality. I mean even 'realistic' comics like Kick Ass take a walk on the wild side with the realism.

[Guest John Hancock]

They're always some what grounded though. Like, for Batman, a billionaire who's good at martial arts makes himself so gadgets. That's just James Bond in a lycra, so I'm fine with that. Spiderman had his DNA altered by poisoning. It's never going to happen, but, at least they've attempted to explain it in realistic terms. Then Thor comes along and you're supposed to believe that God got the Earth pregnant, and then the Earth had a magic baby that was a supreme lord or thunder and... urgh. As I said, my brain just switches off.

 

I think it's the amount of ridiculous elements. I can take, at most, three to five, depending on how good the writing is. Having the ancient Nordic equivalent of Jesus Christ coming to Earth to fight shape shifting green skinned space midgets from the future?;

 

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d135/Roman_warrior/untitled-3.jpg

 

Nah. As I said, doesn't make it a sh*t film or anything like that, but it's just really not my cup of tea.

[Kam 243]

From Digital Spy:

 

Norton's Hulk out of 'Avengers'?

Sunday, July 11 2010, 07:10 BST

By Daniel Sperling

Edward Norton will not return as The Hulk in the upcoming adaption of The Avengers, according to sources.

 

HitFix claims that Marvel Studios intend to give the role to an unknown actor if they decide to keep the character in the superhero movie at all, in order to keep down production costs.

 

Norton's involvement in the project has long been in doubt despite the success of 2008's The Incredible Hulk, with the Fight Club actor recently urging fans to write to Marvel in order to get him cast.

 

Norton was also denied a cameo as The Hulk's alter ego Bruce Banner in the recent Iron Man 2, thereby severing a link to The Avengers, where the two heroes are meant to form an alliance.

 

The Avengers is due for release in 2012 and will feature Robert Downey Jr as Iron Man, Chris Evans as Captain America and Chris Hemsworth as Thor, with the latter two each receiving their own individual movies next year.

[DC 536]

My main issue with this is that Norton actually wants to do it and with The Avengers easily going to be the biggest, (arguably) most important comic-book movie of all time, rocking the boat now isn't the best idea.

[Guest Phil]

Norton's come across as a bit of a control freak though, to me anyway. He seems to think the franchise won't work without him and is basically way overestimating his influence.

[Maxximus 353]

Without Norton as Banner, this movie won't be anywhere near as good. He can be a control freak as much as he wants. Dude gets sh*t done!