Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
vb68

The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers, etc.

Recommended Posts

I must have the UO of preferring Vol 2. I liked Vol 1 but I thought 2 was hilarious. Especially with baby Groot and Rocket.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

46 minutes ago, Avabelle said:

I must have the UO of preferring Vol 2. I liked Vol 1 but I thought 2 was hilarious. Especially with baby Groot and Rocket.

Baby Groot is my favorite character in all of MCU.  I know I said it was Captain America the other day, but that's because he's a main character... Baby Groot is the best supporting character.

I don't love either GOTG movie, except for Baby Groot and Rocket.  I will watch the movies, it's not like I hate them, but they are weaker overall movies in the MCU than many of the others.  It's probably because I can't stand Peter Quill... and I don't find Drax to be funny.  JMO.  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Avabelle said:

I must have the UO of preferring Vol 2. I liked Vol 1 but I thought 2 was hilarious. Especially with baby Groot and Rocket.

I think Gunn wasn’t very subtle with some things in Vol 2. He just took the things that worked in Vol 1 and ran with it. I feel that it was too much asshole, obnoxious Rocket, Drax was the funny man too much and the constantly insulting Mantis bugged me. Also he wasn’t very subtle. There was a lot of problems but I really did like the movie. The visuals and Nebula and Gamora’s relationship was definitely a highlight   

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, cambridgeguy said:

That's not quite all of it - if all he wanted was to be front and center then he could have had virtual carte blanche for Iron Man 4.  He had to be a co-lead to get that sweet leading man money.  If they had offered him the same cash for a smaller role he might have taken it.

I imagine that if they were going to get RDJ back for another movie where he is in it for any significant it has to be some kind of big team-up/event movie. Because if you are going to be paying him $40 million plus a back end deal you want it to be something that is going to make a ton of money, vs some Iron man sequel where he fights I don't know Titanium Man or something. 

I also read once that part of the reason that Downey was out of the Iron Man suit so much in Iron Man 3 was because that was the only bargaining chip that Marvel had. Like if they were going to be paying him $20+ or whatever he made, they wanted him to actually show up on set and not just be doing voice work.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

I imagine that if they were going to get RDJ back for another movie where he is in it for any significant it has to be some kind of big team-up/event movie. Because if you are going to be paying him $40 million plus a back end deal you want it to be something that is going to make a ton of money, vs some Iron man sequel where he fights I don't know Titanium Man or something. 

Iron Man 3 made over 1 billion dollars worldwide and outperformed Civil War - I don't think anyone was particularly worried about a box office bomb if he didn't have some other Avengers to help.  That's the beauty of the MCU right now - pretty much everything makes lots of money and most fans are satisifed.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Avabelle said:

I must have the UO of preferring Vol 2. I liked Vol 1 but I thought 2 was hilarious. Especially with baby Groot and Rocket.

I'm another one that prefers volume 2. (They're both great, but I enjoyed the character interactions since we got the introductions out of the way in the first movie).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

They are pretty even for me...GotG has the better structured story, but GotG 2 packs a bigger punch in certain scenes. Or, to put it differently: I prefer the battle for Xandar over weird blobs popping up on random planets, but there is no denying that the funeral scene in Vol2 is still the best in the MCU. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/11/2021 at 3:58 PM, Jazzy24 said:

Speaking of Guardians I really really hope that Feige reigns James Gunn in on the next installment. 
 

Vol 1 was so good but vol 2 was 1 upped 20.  I liked Vol 2  but it had so many problems and Gunn is so much better when he has someone to tell him no and to write his scripts. 

I'm mixed on Guardians 2.  Enjoyed Guardians 2, thought there was a lot of character development and the Yondu stuff was great.  But watching it again, I was surprised with how little action there was in the movie.  It feels like nothing happens in it for a long period of time.  Ego was a great idea to see realized but I wish they have kept Quill's original comic backstory, being the heir to a galactic empire.  There's a lot there for future stories while everything we learn about Quill's origins in Guardians 2 ends up being wiped away and meaning absolutely nothing.

Edited by benteen

Share this post


Link to post

On rewatches of GOTG2, I often just fast forward through the Ego stuff.  I like the Yondu story, and of course I must watch every scene that Baby Groot is in.  Someone else mentioned above that the visual effects for Ego's planet are also great, and I agree so sometimes I'll watch a few scenes to see some of that, but I'll basically skip forward after they land for the first time and then not watch again until the battle at the end.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, the Yondu story is good, and I love baby!Groot.  But a lot of it is just...too much.  Like Drax.  I was fine with Drax in GotG1.  It wasn’t until GotG2 that I started outright disliking him.  Quill - all of his annoying quirks were dialed up as well (although not quite as bad as in Infinity War).  And the Ego plot was much less interesting (to me) than the plot of GotG1.

28 minutes ago, benteen said:

everything we learn about Quill's origins in Guardians 2 ends up being wiped away and meaning absolutely nothing.

Exactly. That’s part of what annoys me.  At the end of GotG1 we find out that there’s something different about Quill, so the mystery is intriguing.  But at the end of GotG2 it’s all just erased and he’s returned to baseline human.  Nothing further to explore. 

Edited by Starfish35
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Not to mention if you keep Quill's backstory, you probably could have kept Kurt Russell around as well.  

If Quill's backstory can be so neatly wrapped up in one movie, then the storyline wasn't worth telling.

And please, let Quill visit his grandfather to let him know he's all right.

Edited by benteen
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I don't mind Quill as a character, even while recognising that he's a self-righteous ass a lot of the time and even while knowing that Chris Pratt himself is someone I find problematic. But I do think it's time for the Guardians movies to concentrate on other characters.

I'm pleased that we're apparently getting Rocket's backstory in the third movie, because that's something that I'm interested in, though I don't want it to leave him too maudlin. But really, it would make sense for them to ride the Karen Gillan train and focus a lot on Nebula. She was one of the unexpected stars of Endgame, and she's so hot right now, thanks to that and to Jumanji.

Make the search for Gamora at least as much about her finding her sister as it is about Quill finding his lady love.

They could even introduce Moondragon, who is the daughter of Drax in the comics, to add some complexity to his character.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

1 minute ago, Danny Franks said:

But really, it would make sense for them to ride the Karen Gillan train and focus a lot on Nebula. She was one of the unexpected stars of Endgame, and she's so hot right now, thanks to that and to Jumanji.

Make the search for Gamora at least as much about her finding her sister as it is about Quill finding his lady love.

Agree with all of this.  Nebula has really turned into one of my favorite characters, and I personally find her relationship with Gamora far more compelling than the Quill/Gamora romantic relationship.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Starfish35 said:

Agree with all of this.  Nebula has really turned into one of my favorite characters, and I personally find her relationship with Gamora far more compelling than the Quill/Gamora romantic relationship.

Amen! Seriously, give me more sister bonding/rivalry over another romantic relationship.

Nebula ended up being one of my favorite characters, her development from GoTG to Endgame is such a beautiful character arc. 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

Nebula is definitely an absolute highlight of GOTG Vol 2.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, VCRTracking said:

Feige should hire Zack Snyder to do a Squadron Supreme movie.

Help a girl out here, please... is this sarcasm?  

Because... that's just... no.  DC movies can't hold a candle to Marvel, IMO, and Marvel doesn't need a 6 hour, horrible movie to ruin their mojo.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

On rewatches of GOTG2, I often just fast forward through the Ego stuff.  I like the Yondu story, and of course I must watch every scene that Baby Groot is in.  Someone else mentioned above that the visual effects for Ego's planet are also great, and I agree so sometimes I'll watch a few scenes to see some of that, but I'll basically skip forward after they land for the first time and then not watch again until the battle at the end.

The visuals in 2 are way better than 1. The scene where they first come to Ego's planet and My Sweet Lord is playing is gorgeous. By comparison in  1 there is the part where they are flying in the prison control room as part of the prison break and it looks like a video game cut scene (and not even a current generation video game).

2 hours ago, Starfish35 said:

Exactly. That’s part of what annoys me.  At the end of GotG1 we find out that there’s something different about Quill, so the mystery is intriguing.  But at the end of GotG2 it’s all just erased and he’s returned to baseline human.  Nothing further to explore. 

I imagine that was by design. They had to find a way to power down Quill otherwise he would have been too big a threat against Thanos in Infinity War.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I want Cosmo to have a role.

The MCU needs a dog.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

Because... that's just... no.  DC movies can't hold a candle to Marvel, IMO, and Marvel doesn't need a 6 hour, horrible movie to ruin their mojo.

But how can we have a good superhero movie without 85% of the movie being in slow motion? Snyder weirdly has kind of the opposite of the problem that a lot of people complain about when it comes to the MCU. Snyder can create great cinematic imagines and camera shots and can really tell a story with only images and music (especially when he doesn't overindulge in slow motion and symbolism), but struggles when it comes to creating really interesting, likable characters and writing natural sounding dialogue and his plotting is often mixed. The MCU often struggles with interesting cinematography or dynamic camera work, but has created tons of memorable and likable characters with great dialogue and plots. I prefer having good characters and writing over good camera work when it comes to my movies.  

It could just be me, but I actually liked Guardians Two even more than Guardians One, and I loved Guardians One. Its not a perfect movie, some of the more goofy bro jokes are pretty lame especially, it has some tonal issues, and there are parts that feel like a retread of the first movie, probably because the first movie was so fresh and exciting, but I really liked its themes of parenting and family, I found Ego to be a really interesting villain performed really well by Kurt Russell, and they did a lot to build on the dynamics between the characters now that the introductions were made in the first movie. It also looked great, its in my opinions one of the most creatively shot of the MCU movies, and its one of the most alien of the movies, with Ego as this almost godlike entity that has no concept of right or wrong in the way that we recognize, and I like that almost everyone gets a character arc of some kind, all building on previously established characterization. The Nebula and Gamara stuff is especially stand out, its not surprising the rest of the movies would go onto use that bond so much and Nebula became a much more prominent character, and everything with Rocket and Yandu and his complicated relationship with Peter is really strong. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I don't mind the change to Ego. Honestly the "heir of an empire" idea is somewhat overdone and something which can just as well if not better be explored with Shang Chi. The more evil the leader the better. Quill defeating "ego" had way more meaning. Sadly the Russos didn't really built on this, but okay.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, benteen said:

I'm mixed on Guardians 2.  Enjoyed Guardians 2, though there was a lot of character development and the Yondu stuff was great.  But watching it again, I was surprised with how little action there was in the movie.  It feels like nothing happens in it for a long period of time. 

The best way I've heard to compare the two movies is that Guardians 1 is more of a Star Wars movie (based on the old serials and enough plot to get from one action scene to the next). Guardians 2 is more like an episode of Star Trek. (Crew goes to an alien alien world; everything seems great; learn a little more and realize something is odd; learn the full story and realize it's time for the climactic battle).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I’m watching Iron Man - why did the replace Terence Howard as Rhodes. I actually preferred him in the role. I hated Don Cheadle as the replacement. He didn’t have the same edge as Howard.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

18 minutes ago, Avabelle said:

I’m watching Iron Man - why did the replace Terence Howard as Rhodes. I actually preferred him in the role. I hated Don Cheadle as the replacement. He didn’t have the same edge as Howard.

He played hardball in negotiations and they decided he wasn't that important.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, AimingforYoko said:

He played hardball in negotiations and they decided he wasn't that important.

I heard that it was basically RDJ. Howard's contract had a negotiated raise for IM2 but, RDJ re-negotiated his contract after the success of IM. Marvel turned around and, cut Howard's raise to compensate. Ironic since Howard apparently got RDJ to role...at least according to Howard 😁

Edited by Morrigan2575

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, Avabelle said:

I’m watching Iron Man - why did the replace Terence Howard as Rhodes. I actually preferred him in the role. I hated Don Cheadle as the replacement. He didn’t have the same edge as Howard.

I heard that he thought he was important enough to get RDJ money.  (But he's a sidekick - was he trying to tell them that Robin always made Batman money?  LOL, that doesn't happen.)

All of these answers make sense to a certain degree, so there is probably some truth to all of them and the real reason is a combo of all of the above.

Share this post


Link to post

I nearly wish they have just cut the character. I really really disliked Cheadle in the role. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, VCRTracking said:

Feige should hire Zack Snyder to do a Squadron Supreme movie.

No. He should never touch Marvel characters. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

I heard that he thought he was important enough to get RDJ money

He actually made more than RDJ on the first film. RDJ was a risk for Marvel.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

3 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

I heard that it was basically RDJ. Howard's contract had a negotiated raise for IM2 but, RDJ re-negotiated his contract after the success of IM. Marvel turned around and, cut Howard's raise to compensate. Ironic since Howard apparently got RDJ to role...at least according to Howard 😁

Maybe the problem is that Howard was negotiating using his math and Marvel was confused.🤣

I have a feeling that it least part of the reason Marvel played hardball (other than Perlmutter being a cheapskate) is that they wanted him out. There are rumors he was very difficult on set, that Favreau did not like his performance and that a lot of Rhodey scenes were cut.

Marvel definitely dodged a bullet. Howard would not have been able to handle the insane level of press that now comes with the MCU. 

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Morrigan2575 said:

He actually made more than RDJ on the first film. RDJ was a risk for Marvel.

If I recall correctly he was the highest paid actor on the first movie.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Aw, I really like Don Cheadle as Rhodey. I didn't find any fault with Howard's performance (unlike, basically, everything about him off-camera), but I don't mind the recasting.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Bruinsfan said:

Aw, I really like Don Cheadle as Rhodey. I didn't find any fault with Howard's performance (unlike, basically, everything about him off-camera), but I don't mind the recasting.

Me, too. I liked Howard’s version of Rhodes but feel Cheadle’s affability works better with Tony. I feel like Howard is too intense to go from the fight at Tony’s birthday to fighting with Tony in the finale.

Plus, that scene in Iron Man with the stripper flight attendants made me feel Howard couldn’t balance out Tony in the way that was needed. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Dani said:

Maybe the problem is that Howard was negotiating using his math and Marvel was confused.🤣

I have a feeling that it least part of the reason Marvel played hardball (other than Perlmutter being a cheapskate) is that they wanted him out. There are rumors he was very difficult on set, that Favreau did not like his performance and that a lot of Rhodey scenes were cut.

I remember some gossip floating around about Terrance Howard. He had a strong opinion on women's hygiene and wouldn't shut up about it. As such, he didn't endear himself to the other cast and crew. He made himself replaceable.

I've seen Don Cheadle in all the other movies, sometimes more than once. He's fun enough and I haven't heard about his opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

He actually made more than RDJ on the first film. RDJ was a risk for Marvel.

Interesting, I thought I read that they made the same.  But it makes sense that since the first movie was such a success and RDJ was an instant star, he deserved star money.  Howard didn't deserve star money for a sequel.

Share this post


Link to post

Money was part of the reason, but if it had been the only one, Marvel could have walked away from the negotiation table waiting if Howard relented, but they didn't, they basically cut him lose at the first opportunity. Rumour says that the bigger reason was that Howard didn't really get along with everyone else, especially with the female staff. Considering that since then there have been multiple domestic abuse incidences, one of which Howard admitted to with the words "she was talking to me real strong, and I lost my mind and slapped her in front of the kids." (yes, he actually used the "she provoked me" excuse - apparently his wives "provoke" him a lot, because that was his first wife and his second one has by now requested two restraining orders against him. And then there is the story with the flight attendant he assaulted because she dared to tell him to get back on his seat when the seat belt sign went on). 

 

In short, Howards is apparently quite a piece of work. His history with women points to him being an abuser and a misogynist, the whole 1x1 story points to him being a narcist who can't take any criticism. 

 

And all this aside, I am actually pretty dispassionate regarding the two performances. Both did a fine job, I would have to lie to claim that I would miss either of them. Partly because Rhodey is simply not that important, partly because neither of them ever managed to make as much out of the scenes they got as for example Sebastian Stan or Anthony Mackie did. They just lack the natural charisma of the latter, or the ability to put all the hurt of the world into one look if needed. 

  • Like 6
  • Surprise 1

Share this post


Link to post

This year is the 10th anniversary of Thor and Hemsworth reposted that “Marvel rolls dice, casts no-names for Thor” headline. It made me wonder if Marvel was more willing to go with lesser known actors for Thor and Captain America because casting the big name backfired so badly with both Howard and Norton.  

1 hour ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

Interesting, I thought I read that they made the same.  But it makes sense that since the first movie was such a success and RDJ was an instant star, he deserved star money.  Howard didn't deserve star money for a sequel.

No one really knows for sure but the reported numbers are that RDJ made $500,000 for Iron Man. Howard says he made $3.5 Million after taking a $1 Million paycut to get Downey the job. All of that should be taken with a grain of salt since Marvel says Howard is lying and he thinks 1 x 1 is 2. 

Edited by Dani
  • Like 3
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

Possible. But maybe that was also the point at which they realised that they didn't need big names to draw the audience in because the names of the characters were already more than enough. Or a combination of both. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Dani said:

This year is the 10th anniversary of Thor and Hemsworth reposted that “Marvel rolls dice, casts no-names for Thor” headline. It made me wonder if Marvel was more willing to go with lesser known actors for Thor and Captain America because casting the big name backfired so badly with both Howard and Norton.  

Marvel have shown a remarkable amount of faith in their casting choices, and created some big stars off the back of it.

All the way through, people scoffed at their choices - 'RDJ is too risky. Evans was already Johnny Storm, and plays douchy fratbros. Who the hell is Chris Hemsworth? Chris Pratt is a chubby TV clown. Bautista is a bloody wrestler!'

I've been guilty of some of that myself, but I honestly can't think of any casting choice that they got wrong. Even Howard, who is apparently not the nicest person, made a good Rhodey.

You'd think we'd all learn to just trust them, but I still hear the surety of the online fans that John Krasinski and Emily Blunt will play Reed and Sue and I just shake my head at the predictability of it, and of imagining John Krasinski as the headliner of an MCU movie. He's such a dull actor... which actually might end up making him perfect for the Reed Richards I know and can't abide.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Norton and Liv Tyler were a terrible choice if one asks me, but I guess that is more on Universal anyway. 

I actually never complained about a casting ahead of time. Marvel knows better what they need in a role than I do anyway. (Though I still hope that they will cast Matt Bomer one day). 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, swanpride said:

Norton and Liv Tyler were a terrible choice if one asks me, but I guess that is more on Universal anyway. 

I don’t about Tyler but, according to the director, Norton was Marvel’s choice because he was more famous. He wanted Ruffalo from the very beginning. 

36 minutes ago, Danny Franks said:

Marvel have shown a remarkable amount of faith in their casting choices, and created some big stars off the back of it.

Now. The first few movies had some real missteps by going with a famous name. Actors that were shunted to the side or replaced very quickly. A big part of that is temperament even more than acting ability. 

40 minutes ago, Danny Franks said:

All the way through, people scoffed at their choices - 'RDJ is too risky. Evans was already Johnny Storm, and plays douchy fratbros. Who the hell is Chris Hemsworth? Chris Pratt is a chubby TV clown. Bautista is a bloody wrestler!'

Yeah but those are the risky and less famous choices I was referring to them focusing on after the famous names didn’t work out all the well. To me it seems like they course corrected very early on and went with the best actor for the part rather than the biggest name available. One reason Marvel seems to do so well is that they do learn and adjust as they go along. 

Share this post


Link to post

Ironically eventually people started to scoff because Cumberbatch for Doctor Strange was "too obvious". 

 

I have to correct myself, though, there is one casting choice I am bothered with ahead of time and that is the one for Shang Chi. But that is less because of the actor and more because I imagine the character younger. 

Edited by swanpride

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Dani said:

don’t about Tyler but, according to the director, Norton was Marvel’s choice because he was more famous. He wanted Ruffalo from the very beginning.

The weird thing about Norton and Hulk is that his contract gave him a certain level of script control (can't imagine Marvel giving any actor that now) and he apparently made enough changes where he felt he was due a written by credit. I think he was even trying to make changes during filming which made it obviously more difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Dani said:

Maybe the problem is that Howard was negotiating using his math and Marvel was confused.🤣

There's Howard's version, he's an innocent victim of corporate greed and a ego driven, back stabbing ex-friend. There's Marvel version, Howard was a greedy, difficult actor. The truth lies somewhere in the middle. 

Everything in Hollywood comes down to money, power and ego...all 3 were in play here. 

Edited by Morrigan2575
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Dani said:

This year is the 10th anniversary of Thor and Hemsworth reposted that “Marvel rolls dice, casts no-names for Thor” headline. It made me wonder if Marvel was more willing to go with lesser known actors for Thor and Captain America because casting the big name backfired so badly with both Howard and Norton. 

Don't forget that Marvel made a point of casting big-name actors in the supporting roles to prop up the unknown leads, though. Thor had Natalie Portman, Anthony Hopkins, Rene Russo, and Stellan Skarsgard, just off the top of my head; Captain America had Tommy Lee Jones, Hugo Weaving, Stanley Tucci, Toby Jones, and Richard Armitage.

Share this post


Link to post

There have been some casting choices that didn't work onscreen for whatever reason, like Lee Pace as Ronan and Sam Rockwell as Justin Hammer (both are superb actors, just... not in those performances). The only casting decisions that I'd have vetoed ahead of time are Mickey Rourke as Whiplash and Taika Watiti casting himself as Korg so he could hamstring half the dramatic moments in his own film with unfunny jokes.

Share this post


Link to post

I don’t think Emily VanCamp was a great choice for Sharon Carter.  Or Jeremy Renner for Hawkeye.  Although part of that can be blamed on the writing I suppose.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Hugo Weaving as Red Skull was a disappointment.

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