Red Mosquito

bune wrote:It would be nice if they decided, after the Infinty War ends, to reboot the series like they do in comics. Recast everyone and do other stories. So after 2018 or whenver those movies come out it would be a New52 type of thing.

It'd be the best of both comics and movies: New stories and new (cheaper) faces to perform them.

There was initially a lot of talk about just simply recasting characters like the Bond movies.

Say, write character A off at the end of this movie, have him sit out 5 years, then rejoin with a new actor. Repeat for Actor B, C, and D the next few years. So youd always have a few main characters in the movies.

But, the movies got so popular so fast, instead of sticking with that plan, Marvel rushed its guns and gave us Civil War without any real build up because they wanted us to get Downey vs Evans.

The other problem Marvel has, is their top villains are all owned by Fox/Sony. Galactus, Magneto, Doom, Apocalypse, Super Skrull (the Skrulls and the Shiar empires)Mister Sinister, Venom, Dr Oct, Green Goblin, Dark Phoenix, Dark Silver Surfer, even Kang the Conqueror is rumored to be under Fox control.

So Marvel has to resort to B-villains and slow playing the Thanos character. And basically give us endless movies that really dont go anywhere.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:But aren't they doing a Black Panther movie? And they did Ant-Man, and are doing some other non-major characters.

True. I guess I mean even deeper in the well of Marvel.

MadTIGERmaN wrote:

bune wrote:It would be nice if they decided, after the Infinty War ends, to reboot the series like they do in comics. Recast everyone and do other stories. So after 2018 or whenver those movies come out it would be a New52 type of thing.

It'd be the best of both comics and movies: New stories and new (cheaper) faces to perform them.

There was initially a lot of talk about just simply recasting characters like the Bond movies.

Say, write character A off at the end of this movie, have him sit out 5 years, then rejoin with a new actor. Repeat for Actor B, C, and D the next few years. So youd always have a few main characters in the movies.

But, the movies got so popular so fast, instead of sticking with that plan, Marvel rushed its guns and gave us Civil War without any real build up because they wanted us to get Downey vs Evans.

The other problem Marvel has, is their top villains are all owned by Fox/Sony. Galactus, Magneto, Doom, Apocalypse, Super Skrull (the Skrulls and the Shiar empires)Mister Sinister, Venom, Dr Oct, Green Goblin, Dark Phoenix, Dark Silver Surfer, even Kang the Conqueror is rumored to be under Fox control.

So Marvel has to resort to B-villains and slow playing the Thanos character. And basically give us endless movies that really dont go anywhere.

And that too, I guess.

At this point im not sure i care for expanded universes and continuity movies...its nice to have maybe a trilogy of sorts, but i would prefer new stories over the whole ¨universe¨ stuff.
It was great and new and i didnt thought it could be done, but i feel its just too much these days.

bune wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:But aren't they doing a Black Panther movie? And they did Ant-Man, and are doing some other non-major characters.

True. I guess I mean even deeper in the well of Marvel.

MadTIGERmaN wrote:

bune wrote:It would be nice if they decided, after the Infinty War ends, to reboot the series like they do in comics. Recast everyone and do other stories. So after 2018 or whenver those movies come out it would be a New52 type of thing.

It'd be the best of both comics and movies: New stories and new (cheaper) faces to perform them.

There was initially a lot of talk about just simply recasting characters like the Bond movies.

Say, write character A off at the end of this movie, have him sit out 5 years, then rejoin with a new actor. Repeat for Actor B, C, and D the next few years. So youd always have a few main characters in the movies.

But, the movies got so popular so fast, instead of sticking with that plan, Marvel rushed its guns and gave us Civil War without any real build up because they wanted us to get Downey vs Evans.

The other problem Marvel has, is their top villains are all owned by Fox/Sony. Galactus, Magneto, Doom, Apocalypse, Super Skrull (the Skrulls and the Shiar empires)Mister Sinister, Venom, Dr Oct, Green Goblin, Dark Phoenix, Dark Silver Surfer, even Kang the Conqueror is rumored to be under Fox control.

So Marvel has to resort to B-villains and slow playing the Thanos character. And basically give us endless movies that really dont go anywhere.

And that too, I guess.

All of these would be cool.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/avengers/ ... he-a142169

B wrote:
All of these would be cool.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/avengers/ ... he-a142169

Oh god no. The only one on that list that seems slightly interesting is Mephisto. The rest seem like they would come across very cheesy. She hulk, spider girl, moon knight, Captain Britain (lol), no thanks. And it sounds like they have already fucked up the Venom thing.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:Captain Britain (lol)

pretty sure Captain Britain is Fox, as he is a mutant, but he might fall into the grey area like Quicksilver and the Scarlet Witch.

VinylGuy wrote:At this point im not sure i care for expanded universes and continuity movies...its nice to have maybe a trilogy of sorts, but i would prefer new stories over the whole ¨universe¨ stuff.
It was great and new and i didnt thought it could be done, but i feel its just too much these days.

I think thats why I'm enjoying the Fox movies more at this point. Granted, I'm a far bigger X-fan than Avengers, but Fox doesnt seem boxed into this "big universe" picture, and doesnt seem to care if things dont line up exactly to the other movies.

Marvel ya almost can predict whats gonna happen in each movie because you already know the next 4 getting filmed.

I saw this one on Sunday. There were multiple non-comedic moments that my theatre just openly laughed at. I'm kind of a sucker for this series, and I thought this movie was OK at best. This whole genre is getting played out. I know there are big plans for mutiple universes for years amd years, but I kind of cant imagine audiences continuing to accept the same boring, waste of time over and over again forever.

MadTIGERmaN wrote:pretty sure Captain Britain is Fox, as he is a mutant, but he might fall into the grey area like Quicksilver and the Scarlet Witch.

Not that it matters but Captain Britain is not a mutant. He just hangs out with them.

doone wrote:

MadTIGERmaN wrote:pretty sure Captain Britain is Fox, as he is a mutant, but he might fall into the grey area like Quicksilver and the Scarlet Witch.

Not that it matters but Captain Britain is not a mutant. He just hangs out with them.

Correct. He gets his powers from magic. His sister is a mutant. Psylocke.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

B wrote:
All of these would be cool.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/avengers/ ... he-a142169

Oh god no. The only one on that list that seems slightly interesting is Mephisto. The rest seem like they would come across very cheesy. She hulk, spider girl, moon knight, Captain Britain (lol), no thanks. And it sounds like they have already fucked up the Venom thing.

She Hulk, Spider Woman, Moon Knight? I want all those guys. Lady Thor!?!

There was some interview where Joss Whedon said he would come back to direct an A-Force movie.

Who do I see in there? She Hulk, Medusa, Captain Marvel, Wasp, Spider Woman, Black Widow, Elektra, Spider Gwen, Some lady Iron Man. I don't know why the new Thor isn't in there, but she should be. I'd watch the shit out of this.

Surely it wouldn't be a big deal if they just came up with their own, unique villains that didn't have any comic book precedence, right?

VinylGuy wrote:At this point im not sure i care for expanded universes and continuity movies...its nice to have maybe a trilogy of sorts, but i would prefer new stories over the whole ¨universe¨ stuff.
It was great and new and i didnt thought it could be done, but i feel its just too much these days.

Yeah, I have to admit, I'm really big into universe building. It's one of the things that got me into Stephen King (once I learned he had this whole extended, connected network or sorts). This is something I've been looking forward to for a long time in the world of cinema. When I was a kid I used to dream about building massive cinematic universes.

However, I'm not a huge fan of these products such as they are. What Marvel's doing is fine for what it is. I like it well enough. But when I imagined doing my own building, it was more satisfying and done a little differently.

I can't wait for movies to just be movies again. I couldn't be less interested in serialization, or at least how it's currently being implemented.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I can't wait for movies to just be movies again. I couldn't be less interested in serialization, or at least how it's currently being implemented.

It's so watered down and obvious right now. I love serialization, obviously. It's a big reason why I'm so happy with this "golden age" of TV we're enjoying. But cinematic serialization isn't as interesting as it could be. And it's becoming way too forced. You can have a single unified universe that adheres to continuity without jamming everything in all the time and exploiting every aspect at once.

durdencommatyler wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I can't wait for movies to just be movies again. I couldn't be less interested in serialization, or at least how it's currently being implemented.

It's so watered down and obvious right now. I love serialization, obviously. It's a big reason why I'm so happy with this "golden age" of TV we're enjoying. But cinematic serialization isn't as interesting as it could be. And it's becoming way too forced. You can have a single unified universe that adheres to continuity without jamming everything in all the time and exploiting every aspect at once.

The only instance I can think of when cinematic serialization worked well was The Lord of the Rings, and I think that worked because:

1. It was supremely cinematic in scope and style.
2. It was approached as one long movie, instead of trying to make each one separate, so it felt cohesive.
3. They only used that approach because there was way too much material to do it any other way, so it was organic and not forced.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I can't wait for movies to just be movies again. I couldn't be less interested in serialization, or at least how it's currently being implemented.

It's so watered down and obvious right now. I love serialization, obviously. It's a big reason why I'm so happy with this "golden age" of TV we're enjoying. But cinematic serialization isn't as interesting as it could be. And it's becoming way too forced. You can have a single unified universe that adheres to continuity without jamming everything in all the time and exploiting every aspect at once.

The only instance I can think of when cinematic serialization worked well was The Lord of the Rings, and I think that worked because:

1. It was supremely cinematic in scope and style.
2. It was approached as one long movie, instead of trying to make each one separate, so it felt cohesive.
3. They only used that approach because there was way too much material to do it any other way, so it was organic and not forced.

And then they ruined shit by making 18 Hobbit movies

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I can't wait for movies to just be movies again. I couldn't be less interested in serialization, or at least how it's currently being implemented.

It's so watered down and obvious right now. I love serialization, obviously. It's a big reason why I'm so happy with this "golden age" of TV we're enjoying. But cinematic serialization isn't as interesting as it could be. And it's becoming way too forced. You can have a single unified universe that adheres to continuity without jamming everything in all the time and exploiting every aspect at once.

The only instance I can think of when cinematic serialization worked well was The Lord of the Rings, and I think that worked because:

1. It was supremely cinematic in scope and style.
2. It was approached as one long movie, instead of trying to make each one separate, so it felt cohesive.
3. They only used that approach because there was way too much material to do it any other way, so it was organic and not forced.

Obviously, it is serialized. But that's not the kind of thing I'm talking about here. As you said it was basically one giant movie based on one giant book. So, yes, it works well enough. Though, I don't really like the last installment very much.

This kind of serialization is something a bit different, I think -- at least, I separate them -- and its not being done to its potential yet.

I love it when in books, movies or comic books you can sense they are all tied up by the same world. For example, the ViewAskew universe was fun and cool...But in the Marvel movies what was once a novelty become a pure gimmick...the post credit sequence, the cameos, the feeling that its just an episode in this big exhausting tv series thats not going to end...its like its a law and they have to go with it like in the comics and its like they forgot that comics and movies are two different separate things.

VinylGuy wrote:I love it when in books, movies or comic books you can sense they are all tied up by the same world. For example, the ViewAskew universe was fun and cool...But in the Marvel movies what was once a novelty become a pure gimmick...

This this this this this. This all day, son. ALL DAY.