Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
vb68

The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers, etc.

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

Richard Madden? I thought he had a girlfriend, some blonde? 

That was at least two relationships ago. His current quarantine roommate, international traveling companion, and "friend" he took home to meet his family is former Teen Wolf twink Froylan Gutierrez.

I think I'm more interested in seeing how that premiere goes down than the actual movie.

33063014-8723279-Pals_It_was_reported_earlier_this_year_that_Richard_was_spending-a-9_1599986780466.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

3 hours ago, Bruinsfan said:

That was at least two relationships ago. His current quarantine roommate, international traveling companion, and "friend" he took home to meet his family is former Teen Wolf twink Froylan Gutierrez.

I think I'm more interested in seeing how that premiere goes down than the actual movie.

33063014-8723279-Pals_It_was_reported_earlier_this_year_that_Richard_was_spending-a-9_1599986780466.jpg

Shows you how much attention I pay to that kind of stuff. LOL 😀

 

19 minutes ago, Starfish35 said:

Ohh, that sounds fun. I always wanted a Fury+Hawkeye+Black Widow spy thriller movie.

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Dani said:

Given what we saw in Fury’s last appearance this could be the SWORD show that has been rumored for awhile. 

Given the number of other MCU shows Disney+ has on deck, this show should come out some time around 2030.

  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post

23 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

Ohh, that sounds fun. I always wanted a Fury+Hawkeye+Black Widow spy thriller movie.

Hawkeye is my favorite.  Every movie needed more Hawkeye.

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder if they'll use the opportunity to introduce his son.  They could use a younger SHIELD agent running around.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, swanpride said:

Hawkeye's oldest child is his daughter….

It's an easy mistake to make since Endgame barely showed either of Hawkeye's sons, but his oldest child is his son, Cooper.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, swanpride said:

Why his son? Hawkeye's oldest child is his daughter….

Fury's son.  A number of years ago, the elder Fury essentially became the Watcher (don't ask), and they introduced his son, Nick Jr.  Jr is biracial, so the main continuity has a Fury who more closely resembles his MCU version.

Share this post


Link to post

On 9/26/2020 at 3:45 AM, swanpride said:

If they do a sword show, I would be extremely disappointed if we don't get to see Quake in it....

I will be ok if we don't. Those Agents of SHIELD characters have gotten more screen time and character development time then anybody else in the MCU. I am fine saying her story is done and moving on to other characters.

Also if the Fury show is a Nick Fury in space thing like we saw at the end of Far From Home, it would be a great way to set up the Kree-Skrull war as the next big Avengers level threat. If we get the Supreme Intelligence as a giant green head in a jar that would be even better. Although they would have why it has been almost 30 years and Captain Marvel still hasn't shut the Kree down.

Edited by Kel Varnsen
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/26/2020 at 3:45 AM, swanpride said:

If they do a sword show, I would be extremely disappointed if we don't get to see Quake in it....

Me too. But I know that they probably will just ignore all of AoS. Which is kind of frustrating since it was a really good show. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

3 hours ago, JessePinkman said:

In what the actual fuck news:

'Spider-Man 3' Jolt: Jamie Foxx Returning as Electro (Exclusive)

If this is true hopefully they re-think the character completely because whatever they were going for in ASM2 was hot garbage. And if JK Simmons and Jamie Foxx can come back, can I PLEASE see Willem Dafoe and Alfred Molina again? PLEASE???

I think of all the previous Spider man movie villains the only one I might be less interested in seeing is Topher Grace as Venom. And that is mostly because I hate Venom. Plus it seems like they were setting up Michael Mando as Scorpion and Scorpion has a great connection to Jameson.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Kel Varnsen said:

I think of all the previous Spider man movie villains the only one I might be less interested in seeing is Topher Grace as Venom. And that is mostly because I hate Venom. Plus it seems like they were setting up Michael Mando as Scorpion and Scorpion has a great connection to Jameson.

Topher Grace was a complete miscast. And Thomas Haden Church was fine as Sandman but the backstory with him as the robber who shot Uncle Ben taints it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/1/2020 at 2:57 PM, JessePinkman said:

In what the actual fuck news:

'Spider-Man 3' Jolt: Jamie Foxx Returning as Electro (Exclusive)

If this is true hopefully they re-think the character completely because whatever they were going for in ASM2 was hot garbage. And if JK Simmons and Jamie Foxx can come back, can I PLEASE see Willem Dafoe and Alfred Molina again? PLEASE???

Only way I would accept this is if he were doing a cameo in the new Dr. Strange film because of the multiverse. Otherwise? Hard pass. 

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/1/2020 at 8:44 PM, JessePinkman said:

Topher Grace was a complete miscast. And Thomas Haden Church was fine as Sandman but the backstory with him as the robber who shot Uncle Ben taints it.

I thought he was ok as a guy who works at the bugle but was lame a Venom. But Venom is like the Poochie of Marvel comics so even the best actor in the world couldn't have improved him. Plus they should have just not had Gwen Stacey in the movie and made Elizabeth Banks's Betty Brant the girl they were fighting over. 

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/5/2020 at 3:59 PM, Kel Varnsen said:

I thought he was ok as a guy who works at the bugle but was lame a Venom. But Venom is like the Poochie of Marvel comics so even the best actor in the world couldn't have improved him. Plus they should have just not had Gwen Stacey in the movie and made Elizabeth Banks's Betty Brant the girl they were fighting over. 

The problem with the Spider-Man movies has been a chronic inability to get away from comic book canon. The Raimi trilogy was bound to the Spider-Man origin story, but omitted Gwen to make MJ his first love interest while sticking to all the villain origins slavishly. 

Then the Amazing Spider-Man movies went with Gwen, but apparently couldn't countenance the idea of not killing her off, despite the chemistry between Garfield and Stone, and the popularity of the couple.

Funnily enough, Marvel themselves getting involved seems to have prompted the biggest shifts from comic book canon, with the newest movies. No Gwen, no Mary Jane (at least, not to the satisfaction of a lot of fanboys), no redo of the origin story, the involvement of Tony Stark at a much earlier stage of Peter's life, much more down-to-earth interpretations of the villains than the comics.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Going with an actor (and a highly talented one at that) who can pass for a high schooler is an immense help in my opinion. Andrew Garfield is a good actor, but seeing him walk around the halls of a high school without some teacher stopping him to ask "sir, what are you doing here? Parents are supposed to clear visits with the principal's office!" required more suspension of disbelief than someone who can crawl up walls or a man turning into a giant lizard.

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

I like the idea of two of Steve Ditko's most popular creations together. Also Holland and Cumberbatch are fun to watch offscreen and on.

 

Edited by VCRTracking
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, VCRTracking said:

I like the idea of two of Steve Ditko's most popular creations together. Also Holland and Cumberbatch are fun to watch offscreen and on.

 

So does that, along with Jamie Foxx as electro, provide evidence that we will be getting some Into the Spider-Verse style alternate universe shit? So does Spiderman 3 come out before or after Doctor Strange 2?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

So does that, along with Jamie Foxx as electro, provide evidence that we will be getting some Into the Spider-Verse style alternate universe shit? So does Spiderman 3 come out before or after Doctor Strange 2?

I believe so. Will we get the three Peter Parkers? Will we get Miles Morales? We already have Aaron Blake in the MCU.

Spider-Man 3 is scheduled for Christmas 2021, Multiverse of Madness is scheduled for March 25, 2022.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, AimingforYoko said:

I believe so. Will we get the three Peter Parkers? Will we get Miles Morales? We already have Aaron Blake in the MCU.

With those movies being so close together I wonder if all the multiverse stuff will be like a post credits teaser scene. They could actually have some fun with that. I would pay money to just have Eric Bana walking by in the background wearing purple pants.

  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

Will we get Spider-Gwen as well as Miles? 

Thing is, I don't want them to get too ambitious and crazy with this movie, after what was set up at the end of Far From Home - Spider-Man being branded a menace by the media and at least some conflict from the people of New York as to whether they idolise or demonise him. It's a good opportunity to explore the 'fake news' and brazen manipulation of media that we're dealing with in the real world.

I don't really need to see Jamie Foxx's Electro again, but I would like to see some other Spider-Man villains we've not had yet - Rhino, Scorpion, Hammerhead. And why on earth haven't we managed to get Black Cat on the big screen yet?

 

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, Danny Franks said:

And why on earth haven't we managed to get Black Cat on the big screen yet?

Sony's been trying to get a two-hander with Silver Sable up and running.

Share this post


Link to post

34 minutes ago, Danny Franks said:

Thing is, I don't want them to get too ambitious and crazy with this movie, after what was set up at the end of Far From Home - Spider-Man being branded a menace by the media and at least some conflict from the people of New York as to whether they idolise or demonise him. It's a good opportunity to explore the 'fake news' and brazen manipulation of media that we're dealing with in the real world.

That's why I am hoping any alternate universe stuff is just to connect it to the Doctor Strange movie which comes out a few months later.  Although it would also be cool to see JK Simmons with the hair piece being the alternate version editor of the print bugle.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/8/2020 at 3:34 PM, AimingforYoko said:

Spider-Man 3 is scheduled for Christmas 2021, Multiverse of Madness is scheduled for March 25, 2022.

I think I read November 5, 2021, for Spider-Man 3, but I could be wrong.

I'm new to watching all of the MCU movies; I binged them all during quarantine.  Can someone please explain (briefly) why there are so many Spiderman movies and if any/all of them are supposed to go together?  Are only the movies that star the same actor as Spiderman supposed to go together and then we just pretend the next series with a new actor is a "reboot"?  And what's with an animated movie, does that connect with anything?

I guess all of that is to ask - if I only care about MCU, do I have to watch any movie that doesn't star Tom Holland?  I think I saw that Tobey Maguire movie years ago and don't remember it being very good...

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

I think I read November 5, 2021, for Spider-Man 3, but I could be wrong.

Over the summer it was pushed back to December 17, 2021. 

6 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

I'm new to watching all of the MCU movies; I binged them all during quarantine.  Can someone please explain (briefly) why there are so many Spiderman movies and if any/all of them are supposed to go together?  Are only the movies that star the same actor as Spiderman supposed to go together and then we just pretend the next series with a new actor is a "reboot"?  And what's with an animated movie, does that connect with anything?

Sony has been trying to build a spiderverse for years and when the franchise faltered they would scrap it and reboot the character. At the moment only the movies with the same actor are connected. However there are indications that is changing and the franchise’s will be connected in the upcoming movies. 

To make things more complicated Sony has created the Sony Pictures Universe of Marvel Characters with their Spider-Man characters. The animated Into the Spider-verse is a part of that along with Venom and other movies in development. No one really knows yet how that world will interact with the MCU. 

32 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

 

I guess all of that is to ask - if I only care about MCU, do I have to watch any movie that doesn't star Tom Holland?  I think I saw that Tobey Maguire movie years ago and don't remember it being very good...

Maybe. It really depends on how the multiverse is handled in the next few movies. Into the Spider-verse would probably be a good one to watch. It is a very good movie on it’s own and provides a good introduction into the multiverse. 

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

 

I'm new to watching all of the MCU movies; I binged them all during quarantine.  Can someone please explain (briefly) why there are so many Spiderman movies and if any/all of them are supposed to go together?  Are only the movies that star the same actor as Spiderman supposed to go together and then we just pretend the next series with a new actor is a "reboot"?  And what's with an animated movie, does that connect with anything?

I guess all of that is to ask - if I only care about MCU, do I have to watch any movie that doesn't star Tom Holland?  I think I saw that Tobey Maguire movie years ago and don't remember it being very good...

Basically Marvel Comics in need of cash sold off the movie rights to their most popular character Spider-Man and his gallery of villains gallery to Sony. However the gallery are sort of small fry in the greater Marvel world and one, Kingpin had evolved into Daredevil's chief nemesis and used in his movie and NetFlix series.

After the first Avengers movie proved the concept of the integrated universe to draw additional customers Sony wanted access to that cash so sort of leased back Spider-Man to Disney and the MCU but they still wanted to cash in on that Spider-Man gallery of villains and anti heros that they own. Meanwhile now that the MCU had their most popular character back they put him and just him, Tom Holland   and Aunt May into Captain America and the Avengers without most his supporting cast to use in their Infinity Saga. While Sony gave us a couple of that Spider-Man gallery of villains in the two movies

However being real life and actors aging out of roles with the Infinity Saga done beside a few echos on Disney + miniseries it does look like the "its all connected" tagline is going away in favor of the branches of a multiverse introduced by the Ancient One in Avengers Endgame so Sony can publicise a Venom or Morbius connected to the MCU Spider-Man but any connections will be less than the TV series from least to most  the Runaways and Clock and Dagger through the 5 NetFlix title characters to the Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. and Agent Carter.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Jamie Foxx? Even assuming this is a live action Into the Spider-Verse thing why? He's a good actor and the character was theoretically interesting but they mangled him pretty hard. I wonder if it's an attempt to do a bigger version of what Legends of Tomorrow did with a few villains, rehab them in a different story and/or let them in on the "joke" because the actor is good?

On 10/7/2020 at 10:27 PM, Danny Franks said:

The problem with the Spider-Man movies has been a chronic inability to get away from comic book canon. The Raimi trilogy was bound to the Spider-Man origin story, but omitted Gwen to make MJ his first love interest while sticking to all the villain origins slavishly. 

Then the Amazing Spider-Man movies went with Gwen, but apparently couldn't countenance the idea of not killing her off, despite the chemistry between Garfield and Stone, and the popularity of the couple.

Funnily enough, Marvel themselves getting involved seems to have prompted the biggest shifts from comic book canon, with the newest movies. No Gwen, no Mary Jane (at least, not to the satisfaction of a lot of fanboys), no redo of the origin story, the involvement of Tony Stark at a much earlier stage of Peter's life, much more down-to-earth interpretations of the villains than the comics.

Amazing Spider-Man was the time I really had a massive "OMG, what the frak! Why are they rebooting this already!" (By the MCU announcement I had given up being outraged.) And that colours a lot of my viewing of the movies. Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone were the best things about them. I never understood why they needed to kill her off, even with Because Comics. 

I do find it interesting that Marvel has made it less beholden to the comics but that's possibly because he was introduced as a supporting character/special cameo in Civil War so they had to work everything around that. And of course beloved Golden Goose Tony for obvious reasons. 

I was rewatching Far From Home over the weekend for the first time and I'm still iffy on making Peter Tony's heir. They did have a lovely, albeit quite brief mentor bond but I wasn't a fan of the whole world, including Skrull!Fury, Happy and Tony himself making 17 year old Peter the next head of the Avengers complete with full control over Project Insight. I know a lot of the big guns died, left Earth or are unreliable but still. Conversely I was also frustrated at the "I don't want to be the next Iron Man I just want to go on my (disastrous) trip to Europe and confess my love!" Even when buildings were literally crumbling around him. 

I feel it would make more sense from an outside perspective if they had Tom Holland and Sony tied into another 6 movie contract to be seen as the Next Big Avenger, but that doesn't seem to be the case. 

image.png

Edited by Featherhat
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I had to Google Jamie Foxx being in Spider-Man or even when Electro showed up on screen. I was feeling a bit like Paltrow until I read it was not Tom Holland's Spider-Man franchise but Andrew Garfield's (which I have not seen). I am sure you all said this. I clearly missed that.

  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Featherhat said:

Jamie Foxx? Even assuming this is a live action Into the Spider-Verse thing why? He's a good actor and the character was theoretically interesting but they mangled him pretty hard. I wonder if it's an attempt to do a bigger version of what Legends of Tomorrow did with a few villains, rehab them in a different story and/or let them in on the "joke" because the actor is good?

The more I read about this the more I think it would be a quick gag, rather than Foxx being the actual villain of the movie. Plus how much time does anyone think Cumberbatch has to be in a Spiderman movie on top of his own and every other project he is involved in.

2 hours ago, Featherhat said:

Amazing Spider-Man was the time I really had a massive "OMG, what the frak! Why are they rebooting this already!" (By the MCU announcement I had given up being outraged.) And that colours a lot of my viewing of the movies.

I am pretty sure a lot of the reboot was because Sony and Sam Raimi couldn't agree on what the story of Spiderman 4 should be. I can't remember if he walked away or they fired him (Sony also forced him to use Venom in 3 and Venom sucks) but either way I think they had to reboot since if they didn't make another movie within a certain time frame they would lose the rights to the character. Which is too bad, because the bit of the story I have heard of Raimi's Spiderman 4 it could have been awesome.

  • Like 1
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Featherhat said:

I was rewatching Far From Home over the weekend for the first time and I'm still iffy on making Peter Tony's heir. They did have a lovely, albeit quite brief mentor bond but I wasn't a fan of the whole world, including Skrull!Fury, Happy and Tony himself making 17 year old Peter the next head of the Avengers complete with full control over Project Insight. I know a lot of the big guns died, left Earth or are unreliable but still. Conversely I was also frustrated at the "I don't want to be the next Iron Man I just want to go on my (disastrous) trip to Europe and confess my love!" Even when buildings were literally crumbling around him. 

In my head, Peter is so set on the school trip in part BECAUSE he's not ready to deal with people's expectations of him being "the next Iron Man." Sure, part of it is that he's a lovesick teenager who doesn't always make smart decisions, but I also think part of it is that he's a kid who's grieving the loss of an important mentor to him, after he fought an army of aliens, after he was dusted out of existence on another planet, and he doesn't want to feel like he has the weight of the world on his shoulders. And while he tries to rebuff "Fury's" attempts to rope him into the mission, he always springs him action the moment people are in trouble.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, angora said:

In my head, Peter is so set on the school trip in part BECAUSE he's not ready to deal with people's expectations of him being "the next Iron Man." Sure, part of it is that he's a lovesick teenager who doesn't always make smart decisions, but I also think part of it is that he's a kid who's grieving the loss of an important mentor to him, after he fought an army of aliens, after he was dusted out of existence on another planet, and he doesn't want to feel like he has the weight of the world on his shoulders. And while he tries to rebuff "Fury's" attempts to rope him into the mission, he always springs him action the moment people are in trouble.

I completely agree. He's dealing with a lot and it's entirely unsurprising he'd just rather focus on his normal life and also the "friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man" things that he can deal with. I really liked that he and May were using his profile to raise money for the homeless of the neighbourhood.  That he's trying not to be a 17 year old who's having to focus on the safety of the entire world. People were seeing him as a superhero/symbol and not as an actual person, and projecting their need to feel safe onto him.  It was just jarring to have "Fury" going "we need you to help save Prague" and Peter going "no can do!" Even though as I said, giving him the literal keys to the kingdom was wrong as well. I think I was also getting Smallville flashbacks and that didn't help. 

Overall I really enjoyed the movie, I especially liked the supporting cast of friends and teachers this time around and the hilarious "in Memoriam" of stock photos complete with Getty Images over the candles

 Happy and May both deserve some romance after all they've been through but it definitely finished on an awkward note. 

11 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

The more I read about this the more I think it would be a quick gag, rather than Foxx being the actual villain of the movie. Plus how much time does anyone think Cumberbatch has to be in a Spiderman movie on top of his own and every other project he is involved in.

Yeah I don't think he's going to be the villain, or at least main villain but it's still a little strange of all the choices that he's in it. Unless he was just the one that said yes. I was kind of thinking maybe Tony/Happy levels for Strange, that could be done with tight scheduling, but I really have no idea. 

Edited by Featherhat · Reason: corrected some quoting errors
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Tony giving his responsibilities to Peter makes completely sense to me. I mean, he is impressed by Peter when he tells him his motivation for being a hero, he tells him that he wants Peter to be better than him and than he is impressed again when Peter turns down the chance to be an Avenger. Tony is always obsessed about Legacy and I guess in his mind, Peter is part of his legacy...hence he is also his main motivation to participate in the time heist, even though he could be perfectly happy just spending time with Pepper and Morgan.

And in my head canon they had more contact between movies anyway.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Peter knew how to operate the armor customizing equipment in Tony's private jet, so I'm going to guess they spent quite a bit of time together offscreen. I don't care how good you are at high school chemistry, you don't just walk in off the street and start running unique and extremely sophisticated tech like that.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Plus, the photo in Tony's kitchen had to have been made at some point….They had one and a half year to get crazy with each other.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/18/2020 at 10:38 AM, starri said:

Netflix's Baby-Sitter's Club Xochitl Gomez in case in Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness.

They don't say who she's playing.  The chances that it's anyone other than America Chavez are between 0-0.1%.

Is she the only young, Hispanic/Latinx female superhero at Marvel? (Not trying to be snarky; I'm only familiar with Marvel's A-listers.)

Edited by Trini
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

The only other Latinx female superhero I can think of off the top my head is Anya Corazon, the current Spider-Girl.  That's highly unlikely for two reasons:  A) she'd be playing in Sony's league, and B) one of America's powers is being able to hop between universes.  I can't imagine they'd cast a young Latinx actress for a movie about the Multiverse and have her playing someone else.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

There is also Yoyo (who is already in the MCU, in Agents of shield to be concrete) and my personal favourite for a leading lady of her own trilogy, Silverclaw.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Ava Ayala, the current White Tiger as well.  Her powers are magical in origin, but they're more like Black Panther and the Heart-Shaped Herb.

I just think America makes too much sense.

No disrespect for Silverclaw, but I don't think she's been seen since the first Civil War, and that was fifteen years ago.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Trini said:

Is she the only young, Hispanic/Latinx female superhero at Marvel? (Not trying to snarky; I'm only familiar with Marvel's A-listers.)

She’s the only Hispanic/Latino member of the Young Avengers. Marvel has been moving all those pieces into place so I would be very surprised if this isn’t another step in that direction. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size