The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers, etc.

[Spartan Girl]

1 hour ago, tv echo said:

Venom: Let There Be Carnage comes out in theaters today and it apparently has a mid-credits or post-credits scene that affects the MCU. I've posted media reporting about this scene in the Venom thread here.

Yup, saw the credits scene online. So 

Spoiler

Venom is going to be in No Way Home? Poor Peter, yet another villain he’ll have to fight.

Starting to get nervous because need I remind you about the last time a Spider-Man movie had a fuckton of villains. I don’t care what the Twitter apologists say, Spider-Man 3 was crap.

 

[Morrigan2575]

Oh that's cool.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

Stewart.

Frankly they sounded implausible to me. More extensions of all the Wandavison speculation/spoilers that went on endlessly...oh the season finale will feature Stewart and McKellen no no it will feature McAvoy and and Fastbender!

I was just surprised to see so many YouTubers saying these look/feel authentic.

Of course the fact that I doubt them probably makes them accurate 😂

Yeah, the Fox X-Men rumors feel like wishful thinking combined with the everything but the kitchen sink mentality of “insiders”.  I just can’t see them introducing those characters to the MCU in that way. 

8 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Yup, saw the credits scene online. So 

  Hide contents

Venom is going to be in No Way Home? Poor Peter, yet another villain he’ll have to fight.

Starting to get nervous because need I remind you about the last time a Spider-Man movie had a fuckton of villains. I don’t care what the Twitter apologists say, Spider-Man 3 was crap.

 

I can’t say I’m surprised. I assumed this was coming ever since the deal to keep Peter in the MCU. It could be the most amazing thing ever or it could be the wheels coming off the bus. 

[Danny Franks]

Okay, all the guest spots and cameos rumoured and confirmed for No Way Home are really killing my interest in it. I want to watch it for Tom Holland's Spider-Man and Zendaya's MJ, and what I hoped would be a fresh take on a villain. Not a rehash of old movies, old Spideys, old villains and whoever else they can find to shove into it.

[Raja]

35 minutes ago, Danny Franks said:

Okay, all the guest spots and cameos rumoured and confirmed for No Way Home are really killing my interest in it. I want to watch it for Tom Holland's Spider-Man and Zendaya's MJ, and what I hoped would be a fresh take on a villain. Not a rehash of old movies, old Spideys, old villains and whoever else they can find to shove into it.

I know, I already have Into the Spiderverse

[swanpride]

Well, I look forward to the part which deals with the fallout of people knowing who Spider-man is...I just fear that I will care about everything else so much less. Especially since I am not even a particular fan of the original trilogy. What we got in the MCU is so much better. 

[tv echo]

Edited October 3, 2021 by tv echo

[swanpride]

So I guess we get Hawkeye this Christmas and the Holiday special the next one and after that...maybe an animated one? Just for fun? 

[Kel Varnsen]

13 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

Okay, all the guest spots and cameos rumoured and confirmed for No Way Home are really killing my interest in it. I want to watch it for Tom Holland's Spider-Man and Zendaya's MJ, and what I hoped would be a fresh take on a villain. Not a rehash of old movies, old Spideys, old villains and whoever else they can find to shove into it.

I am not super excited about the whole multiverse angle either. All the old characters and actors rumoured and confirmed doesn't sound that great to me. Especially since we are getting at least two movies back to back that dive into the whole multiverse thing. Plus it seemed like they had a pretty good straight forward plot already set up, since last movie they introduced right wing internet JJ, and in Homecoming they hinted that Michael Mando would be The Scorpion. In the comic JJ financed the creation of the Scorpion because he hated Spiderman so much.

[cambridgeguy]

14 hours ago, swanpride said:

Well, I look forward to the part which deals with the fallout of people knowing who Spider-man is...

If the reaction to Tony was any indication, there will be an initial surge of interest and then most people will stop caring as long as he's exonerated for Mysterio's death.  Yeah, finishing high school and going to college are probably out, but this is a world where Tony could walk around without too many people staring in shock and the only people who bothered Thor were a few random folks who wanted a selfie.  We also saw random pedestrians not giving a damn when Spidey dropped out of the air with MJ - you'd think more people would be curious about who was swinging around with the guy.

[Raja]

44 minutes ago, cambridgeguy said:

If the reaction to Tony was any indication, there will be an initial surge of interest and then most people will stop caring as long as he's exonerated for Mysterio's death.  Yeah, finishing high school and going to college are probably out, but this is a world where Tony could walk around without too many people staring in shock and the only people who bothered Thor were a few random folks who wanted a selfie.  We also saw random pedestrians not giving a damn when Spidey dropped out of the air with MJ - you'd think more people would be curious about who was swinging around with the guy.

However the Avengers Big 3 were different. Tony was a cover boy before capture and the suits. Thor, the Crown Prince of his people and Captain America was on tour for the government after going after the Nazi/Hydra spy. Peter Parker is in a post Sokovia Accords world with presumably some in government and the street eager to prove that he can't go full vigilante.

[scarynikki12]

I'm guessing that the various characters who have been confirmed and rumored won't actually amount to significant part of the story. I remember when he growing list of characters in Suicide Squad was making people worry about the movie being too bloated and then most were killed off in the opening bloodbath. While I don't think No Way Home will contain a bloodbath I do think the focus will remain on MCU Peter and his circle so I'm not worried about the list of people connected to the movie.

[swanpride]

Peter never had the protections the other Avengers had. And he is a teen. 

[tv echo]

FYI (if Halloween is your thing)...

Best Marvel Halloween Costumes for 2021: From 'Black Widow' and 'WandaVision' to 'Venom'
BY JENNY DESBOROUGH ON 10/6/21
https://www.newsweek.com/best-marvel-superhero-halloween-costumes-2021-1636032 

Quote

Newsweek reveals where to buy the best Marvel superhero costumes this Halloween.

1.  Black Widow
2.  The Hulk
3.  WandaVision
4.  Doctor Strange
5.  Spider-Man
6.  Venom
7.  Deadpool
8.  Captain Marvel
9.  Ant-Man and the Wasp
10. Black Panther

Edited October 6, 2021 by tv echo

[tv echo]

Bob Iger’s Long Goodbye
BY KIM MASTERS     OCTOBER 6, 2021
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/bob-iger-disney-exit-bob-chapek-succession-1235025504/ 

Quote

All that spilled dramatically into public view when Scarlett Johansson sued Disney over her payday for Black Widow, which was offered day-of release on the service. Disney shocked Hollywood and sparked backlash with an aggressive response accusing Johansson of indifference to the effects of the pandemic. The suit was briskly settled, however, and Chapek is now getting some support from Disney’s single most important creative player. Marvel boss Kevin Feige won’t address the Johansson litigation, but, while he is not known for discussing Disney internal politics, he says the still-new CEO is being underestimated. “I think he is a creative guy, a nice guy, a real guy,” Feige says, adding that Chapek offers “just enough of an opinion to give good feedback” on early cuts of movies and shows.
*  *  *
As head of theme parks, Chapek was a proponent of replacing the Tower of Terror attraction with the Guardians of the Galaxy — Mission: Breakout! ride, which opened in 2017. Feige says he remembers an entire plane trip to Hong Kong listening to songs Chapek had recorded for the attraction and thinking, “This guy goes deep when it comes to contemporary artists.” And after the record-breaking 2019 opening of Avengers: Endgame, Chapek celebrated the Marvel team by installing a Dole Whip machine — a theme park favorite — in their offices. “I thought that was pretty cool,” Feige says. “I thought that was great.”

But as important as the master of the Marvel universe is, he doesn’t direct or star in movies. Chapek still has to handle that part of the talent equation without the experience that Iger brought to the job. Many Disney veterans and outside observers think the public fight with Johansson never would have happened on Iger’s watch, and even before that blew up, the feeling among many in Hollywood was that Chapek was using the pandemic as an excuse to throw movies onto Disney+, steamrolling talent in the process. “The thing about Hollywood is, you can behave badly, you can be rude, you can make duds, but the thing you cannot do is fuck with people’s money,” says a producer with business at Disney. “You just don’t do that and hide behind technology as the reason why.”

Clearly Chapek is not oblivious to this and has made efforts to defuse the tension. He has repeatedly spoken of his high regard for talent and creativity and, though a Johansson legal victory was not assured, the suit was quickly settled. Before that, Disney locked up a new deal with Emma Stone — whose Cruella went day-and-date on Disney+ for $30 — and committed to exclusive theatrical releases for the remaining 2021 movies, though he committed to nothing beyond this year.

But as WarnerMedia’s Jason Kilar has learned, when talent is bruised, the marks heal slowly. After blindsiding the creative community in December by putting the studio’s 2021 slate on his HBO Max streamer, Kilar tried to make peace by writing big checks and agreeing to a 45-day theatrical window going forward. Yet he was still apologizing for the original sin as recently as Sept. 28.
*  *  *
The critical question now is whether Chapek ever will be able to mimic the talent-friendly words that Iger said at the Aulani and convince anyone that he means them. “The single biggest topic is, does Disney now think its IP is more important than talent itself?” says Greenfield. “The question is, who is Bob Chapek?”

 

Edited October 8, 2021 by tv echo

[tv echo]

FYI: ACE Universe did interviews ("Conversations") with a few MCU stars - here's the video playlist (Don Cheadle, Josh Brolin, Paul Bettany, Chris Evans)...

https://www.youtube.com/c/ACEUniverseComicCon/videos 

Edited October 9, 2021 by tv echo

[tv echo]

Marvel Studios' Victoria Alonso | What's Up, Disney+
Disney Plus  Oct 16, 2021

 

[tv echo]

Marvel Making So Many Trilogies Was An Accident
BY RICHARD FINK    OCTOBER 17, 2021
https://screenrant.com/marvel-trilogies-iron-man-captain-america-accident-explained/ 

Quote

In January 2020, Screen Rant and other venues were invited to a set visit of Marvel's Eternals to talk with the filmmakers behind Marvel's latest film. Producer Nate Moore discussed how the studio never set out with a plan to make trilogies and it happened organically. The studio does not have a hard rule of once a trilogy is over a character's story is done, or they can't make more films about that character. Moore said:

"Even in Phase 1, I would argue did not think 'Oh, we're definitely going to do three films and then be done,' So again, as Kevin would say, 'let's put all the great ideas in this film and then see if people like it.' So we don't necessarily have a trilogy planned out, it's not something that is a must have. Obviously, we hope people love the movie and obviously we have ideas just as fans where we could go, but there isn't a hard and fast rule of like we got to have three of these things and this is the first."
*  *  *
Trilogies seem to be the standard way in which Hollywood operated for years, as it gives a sense of structure similar to a three-act story. This is probably most popularized in film by the original Star Wars trilogy, which eventually due to the additions of the prequels and sequels became a trilogy of trilogies. For years the Indiana Jones, Mad Max, and Matrix film series were a trilogy of films until later sequels were added, and properties like Back to the Future and Austin Powers having stayed trilogies. Even the early Marvel films like Blade, X-Men, and Spider-Man were defined as trilogies. Much like classic horror franchises, Marvel can make multiple films for a given character as long as the audience wants is still there and based on early ticket tracking for Eternals, it is certainly still there.

 

Edited October 17, 2021 by tv echo

[tv echo]

Joe Russo on Fallout From Scarlett Johansson’s ‘Black Widow’ Lawsuit: ‘People’s Nerves Are Fraying’ (EXCLUSIVE)
By Christopher Vourlias    October 14, 2021
https://variety.com/2021/film/global/joe-russo-scarlett-johansson-black-widow-disney-1235088864/ 
 

Quote

Joe Russo weighed in on Scarlett Johansson’s “Black Widow” legal battle with Disney on Thursday, calling it “unfortunate” that the conflict spilled out into the public domain, but suggesting that it’s a sign of the times for an industry gripped by uncertainty.

“There’s a lot of tension, just like there is in a lot of industries, because there’s a lot of disruption,” he said. “People’s nerves are fraying, and it’s hard to predict what’s going to happen or where anything is going.”

The “Avengers: Endgame” and “Avengers: Infinity War” co-director spoke to Variety during Rome’s MIA market about Johansson’s breach-of-contract lawsuit against the Mouse House, in which she alleged that the company sacrificed the movie’s box office prospects — and millions in potential backend payments — by releasing “Black Widow” simultaneously in theaters and on its streaming platform, Disney Plus.

Before the lawsuit was settled last month, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Russo Brothers had hit a standstill in talks to direct another movie for Marvel, which is owned by Disney, due to uncertainty over how a potential next feature would be distributed and how they would be paid.

Russo declined to discuss the status of those negotiations, saying “it would be inappropriate for us to comment on a deal if we were in the middle of it.”

However, he added, “I’m glad that the lawsuit’s resolved. I do think it was indicative of significant change that’s been happening. The resolution speaks volumes about the respect for artists moving forward in this changing landscape.”

The resolution, however, also belies an industry in a state of unprecedented flux. “Corporations are panicking at the moment, because I think that half the studios are going to disappear in the next 5-10 years, and the game has changed dramatically,” he continued. “There are content producers who can outspend any studio, and it’s just a rounding error for them, because they’re $1 trillion companies. We’ve never seen that before in the business.”
*  *  *
“I don’t see a resurgence of independent movies in theaters in the future. I just don’t,” he said. “You get more money to make them digitally. Less headaches. The easiest thing for Netflix to do is to greenlight a smaller film. What I’ve found, and what a lot of other filmmakers have found, is that nobody really bothers you. That’s an incredible experience to have.”
*  *  *
The prolific multi-hyphenate also teased some of the projects currently on the slate at the Russo Brothers’ AGBO production outfit, screening the trailer for “Extraction 2” – the sequel to the Chris Hemsworth-starring actioner which was Netflix’s most-watched original movie – and discussing the upcoming Amazon Prime series “The Citadel,” a globe-trotting espionage thriller being produced in multiple territories.
*  *  *
This summer, the Russos wrapped filming on the Netflix espionage thriller “The Gray Man,” starring Ryan Gosling and Chris Evans as competing assassins. The first entry in a potential franchise, the film is said to have a $200 million-plus budget, making it the priciest original to date for the streamer.

 

Edited October 18, 2021 by tv echo

[tv echo]

Marvel Movie Shifts: ‘Doctor Strange 2’ To Kick Off Summer 2022, ‘Thor: Love And Thunder’ Heads To July & More
By Anthony D'Alessandro    October 18, 2021 
https://deadline.com/2021/10/doctor-strange-2-thor-love-and-thunder-black-panther-wakanda-forever-release-date-changes-1234857549/ 

Quote

Sam Raimi’s Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness will now kick off summer 2022 on May 6 instead of opening on March 25, 2022. That will push Taika Waititi’s Thor: Love and Thunder from that summer kickoff date to July 8, 2022. The only other movie opening against Doctor Strange 2 on May 6 is Focus Features’ Mrs. Harris Goes to Paris, starring Lesley Manville. No rival studio event films are currently dated against Thor: Love & Thunder on its new date.

The moves will push Black Panther: Wakanda Forever from Ryan Coogler off its date to November 11, 2022. The movie is currently shooting in Atlanta and will wrap sometime late next month. Black Panther 2 on its new date is the weekend after Warner Bros/DC’s The Flash, which just dropped a sneak peek during the studio’s DC FanDome over the weekend. Also opening in that preceding November 4-6 weekend is Paramount’s Bee Gees feature and 20th Century Studios’ untitled David O. Russell movie.

Black Panther 2 knocks The Marvels from filmmaker Nia DaCosta from November 11 next year to February 17, 2023. No other tentpoles are dated against it.

This will then push Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania from that date to July 28, 2023. No competition for Ant-Man 3 on its new date, either. Both The Marvels and Ant-Man 3 are in production. 

The only Marvel movie sticking to its release date is Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, which is currently set to kick off summer 2023 on May 5.

There’s another untitled Marvel movie which Disney is moving from November 10, 2023 to November 3, 2023.

Meanwhile, Disney has scrubbed a live-action title previously set for July 14, 2023 as well as an untitled Marvel movie on October 6, 2023. Also, an untitled 20th Century Studios movie dated on October 20, 2023 is no longer on the schedule.

UPDATED RELEASE SCHEDULE:

November 5, 2021
Eternals

December 17, 2021
Spider-Man: No Way Home

May 6, 2022
Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness

July 8, 2022
Thor: Love and Thunder

November 11, 2022
Black Panther: Wakanda Forever

February 17, 2023
The Marvels

May 5, 2023
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3

July 28, 2023
Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

November 3, 2023
Untitled Marvel Movie

Edited October 18, 2021 by tv echo

[Kel Varnsen]

58 minutes ago, tv echo said:

February 17, 2023
The Marvels

That's a bummer. My daughter loved Captain Marvel, and the sequel was coming out on the weekend of her birthday. I wonder what movie is behind schedule.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

That's a bummer. My daughter loved Captain Marvel, and the sequel was coming out on the weekend of her birthday. I wonder what movie is behind schedule.

I could be one of the shows that is behind schedule. A few months ago it was confirmed that Hawkeye and Ms. Marvel were released this year but were both pushed back. 

[swanpride]

Maybe Marvel simply realised that a winter release is risky, because the likelihood of part of Corona lock downs are much more likely than in summer. 

[Kel Varnsen]

5 hours ago, swanpride said:

Maybe Marvel simply realised that a winter release is risky, because the likelihood of part of Corona lock downs are much more likely than in summer. 

The linked article says production delays. It just doesn't say which movie/movies.

[tennisgurl]

Sucks about the delays, especially Multiverse of Madness, which I am really curious about, and the third Guardians. I guess it will be a Merry Maymas! 

[Morrigan2575]

I'm just curious on the Untitled Marvel Movie....give me the name! 😃

[Kel Varnsen]

4 minutes ago, Morrigan2575 said:

I'm just curious on the Untitled Marvel Movie....give me the name! 😃

Sam Wilson Captain America?

[Morrigan2575]

23 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Sam Wilson Captain America?

Maybe but, I think that would be a 2024+ movie.

It's too late for Blade...maybe Deadpool 3? 

Or is it really F4?

Edited October 19, 2021 by Morrigan2575

[swanpride]

Silver Surfer? Ghost Rider? Namor? 

[Llywela]

Surely the delays are related to the new IATSE contract...

[FnkyChkn34]

17 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

I'm just curious on the Untitled Marvel Movie....give me the name! 😃

A movie related to the post-credits scene in Eternals?  Twitter really is full of assholes to spoil that already.  If you haven't seen the spoiler yet, don't go over to Twitter!

[Morrigan2575]

49 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

A movie related to the post-credits scene in Eternals?  Twitter really is full of assholes to spoil that already.  If you haven't seen the spoiler yet, don't go over to Twitter!

Nope, unspoiled and will avoid. Thanks for the warning!

I think for Endgame I had to put blocked words in so i could avoid spoilers, will try that again.

ETA: OK blocked about 6 phrases #Eternals Spoilers, Leaks, Post Credits and #Marvel Eternals (same 3).

Hopefully that does the trick.

Edited October 20, 2021 by Morrigan2575

[FnkyChkn34]

3 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

Nope, unspoiled and will avoid. Thanks for the warning!

I think for Endgame I had to put blocked words in so i could avoid spoilers, will try that again.

ETA: OK blocked about 6 phrases #Eternals Spoilers, Leaks, Post Credits and #Marvel Eternals (same 3).

Hopefully that does the trick.

It is also on CNN's main page.  Don't go there either!  A journalist for Variety apparently leaked it, so now it's "news."  

[Morrigan2575]

2 hours ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

It is also on CNN's main page.  Don't go there either!  A journalist for Variety apparently leaked it, so now it's "news."  

Mother fudgers...😂

[tv echo]

Media is now reporting on behind-the-scenes info that's revealed in this book...

For example:

--Marvel Studios SVP Jeremy Latcham revealed that director Joss Whedon wanted to include the Wasp in 2012's The Avengers. Whedon also wanted to cast Zooey Deschanel in the role. "It was all about The Wasp. He wanted to cast Zooey Deschanel. [Wasp] was the funniest character in the whole movie, and well-written." But that idea was ultimately vetoed by Latcham and Kevin Feige because it was decided that Whedon's script focused too heavily on introducing new characters rather than bringing the established team together. Whedon later agreed with this decision: "The Wasp happened because there was a short period where it looked like we weren't going to be able to get Scarlett [due to scheduling conflicts], so I was panicking. I thought, 'Hold on, we could do The Wasp.' Then, I fell in love with that. But we did get Scarlett, and then I realized that I had written this entire movie about The Wasp. Oops, I overcompensated there." (source)

--  According to Jon Favreau, when RDJ was being considered for Iron Man, "Marvel had already met with [Robert Downey Jr.] before, I think, to play Doctor Doom" (for 2005's Fantastic Four). (source)

-- In the book, there's a section within its 2015 chapter that brings up the release of Agent Carter, the show on ABC that starred Hayley Atwell as Peggy Carter. "Launched on January 6, the series debuted on the ABC midseason slate. Notably, Agent Carter marked the first time an MCU-originated character would transition from the big screen to the small screen, with canon storytelling that would eventually dovetail back into future films." A show revolving around Peggy Carter had been trying to get off the ground for years but "had been difficult to push through on the theatrical side, due to impasses with Marvel Entertainment in New York." (source)

--In 2013, when characters such as Daredevil and Elektra (previously owned by 20th Century Fox) had their rights reverted back under the Marvel umbrella as those licenses expired, with heroes such as Ghost Rider, Blade, The Punisher, and Luke Cage having reverted even earlier, "[w]hile many observers assumed that this entire stable of characters would go directly into Marvel Studios' movie development process, it was decided by Marvel Entertainment's higher-ups that because the movie side was already deeply committed to their successful Avengers characters, and the impending Guardians of the Galaxy characters, that the returnees would instead help build a planned TV empire under the direct control of Marvel Entertainment (entirely separate from Marvel Studios). The film side had no control over those characters, despite their interest in developing them. Instead, they all went to Marvel Entertainment. Ghost Rider appeared in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, and the others were placed in different streaming series." (source)

Edited October 21, 2021 by tv echo

[tv echo]

The Story Of Marvel Studios Review: A Meticulous Chronicle Of The Passion And Struggles Behind The MCU
BY ETHAN ANDERTON    OCT. 19, 2021
https://www.slashfilm.com/637044/the-story-of-marvel-studios-review-a-meticulous-chronicle-of-the-passion-and-struggles-behind-the-mcu/ 

Quote

Perhaps the most intriguing details about the creation of the Marvel Cinematic Universe is the villain whose calls were coming from inside Marvel's house. The book isn't shy about painting what is known as the Marvel Creative Committee in New York. Up until 2015, when the hierarchy of Marvel Studios was restructured, a lot of roadblocks and arguments were caused by Marvel CEO Ike Perlmutter and a team at Marvel Entertainment that included Marvel Comics writer Brian Michael Bendis, former Marvel Comics editor-in-chief Joe Quesada, Marvel Comics publisher Dan Buckley, and president of Marvel Entertainment Alan Fine. 

Initially, Kevin Feige was able to keep their constant notes and suggestions about the trajectory of Marvel movies at bay by carefully compromising the needs and wishes of his creative team and the demands of Marvel Entertainment executives in New York. But as time went on, the Marvel Creative Committee starting becoming more demanding and meddlesome. In case you need to know how misguided this group was, they're the ones responsible for delivering 25 pages of notes across four years of development on "Ant-Man," and their demands resulted in Edgar Wright leaving the project. They also tried to put a kibosh on James Gunn's signature soundtrack for "Guardians of the Galaxy," and they're responsible for reducing Rebecca Hall's much more significant role in "Iron Man 3" based on the perception of female action figures not selling well (a perspective that would also hurt Black Widow and delay the introduction of Hela, the goddess of death).

The battle with the Marvel Creative Committee comes to a head with the development of "Captain America: Civil War," where it became clear that this group had a fundamental misunderstanding about what made the films of Marvel Studios successful. It seemed they even forgot exactly the kind of stories that their own comic books told. When the demand for an alternate ending for "Civil War" was too much for Kevin Feige and directors Anthony & Joe Russo, the fight went all the way up to Alan Horn, chief creative officer of Walt Disney Studios. Thankfully, this tiff resulted in Kevin Feige and Marvel Studios gaining autonomy from Marvel Entertainment, and the rest is (ongoing) history.
*  *  *
What's missing from "The Story of Marvel Studios" are some of the more controversial moments in the development of certain films and the disagreements between creative forces that brought about some key changes in the MCU. Though the recasting of Don Cheadle as "Iron Man" sidekick Colonel Rhodes and Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner/Hulk are covered in this book, you won't find any details about why Terrence Howard wasn't asked to return in "Iron Man 2," and the creative conflict with Edward Norton on "The Incredible Hulk" is only vaguely touched upon. Obviously this story is more about the success of Marvel Studios than the controversy, but it would have been nice to get details on these occasional disruptions.

Not all Marvel's issues are ignored though. There's plenty of discussion on Edgar Wright's development woes with "Ant-Man," and some details on why Patty Jenkins ultimately didn't stick with "Thor: The Dark World." In fact, a lot of the key talent involved with the "Thor" sequel and "The Incredible Hulk" are rather honest in their assessment of both movies after all these years. However, it should be noted that the likes of Edgar Wright, Patty Jenkins, Terrence Howard, Edward Norton Rebecca Hall, and others who had not so favorable experiences with Marvel do not offer any commentary on the subject.

One of the most controversial subjects that is entirely ignored is the firing of James Gunn from "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3" in the summer of 2018. Perhaps it's because the lapse in judgement from Disney was so widely publicized that they didn't need to cover it. Or maybe no one wanted to offer up anything on the subject that hadn't already been said. But I can't help but feel like it would be refreshing to hear an honest conversation from Marvel's creative minds about how that whole situation was handled. 
*  *  *
Finally, for all its careful and meticulous coverage of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, "The Story of Marvel Studios" leaves out some key details that might make some fans unhappy. There's only a fleeting mention of the short-lived "Agent Carter" series. But perhaps more frustrating for Marvel TV fans is the fact that "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D." gets no significant coverage in the book at all. It's mentioned while talking about "The Avengers" and "Captain America: The Winter Soldier," but otherwise, it's as if the show doesn't exist. Granted, that's basically been how Marvel Studios feels about the series too, mostly because it was more of a Marvel Television production that felt separate from the larger MCU, but plenty of fans will be disappointed.

On top of that, Netflix's run of Marvel TV shows are completely ignored too. Though the transfer of rights for characters like "Daredevil," "Luke Cage" and "The Punisher" are mentioned, there's zero discussion about their Netflix shows. "Jessica Jones," "Iron Fist" and "The Defenders" are nowhere to be found in this book, with the only mention of Iron Fist at all being references as just the glimmer of a potential film early in Marvel Studios' history.
*  *  *
Despite some shortcomings, "The Story of Marvel Studios" is a must-read for Marvel fans. It will make you want to go back and watch the entire "Infinity Saga" all over again. The fact that authors Tara Bennett and Paul Terry were able to put together such a comprehensive two-volume book together that spans over 10 years of blockbuster filmmaking is an achievement in itself. The fact that they were able to speak to the most important and significant people from Marvel Studios is even more impressive. Even though the book frustratingly uses the term "Super Hero" when discussing the superhero characters of the big screen, this is still the definitive chronicle of the rise of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and it's absolutely worth adding to your shelf.

Marvel Studios is famous for its secrecy. In a new two-volume set, the company finally opens up.
By David Betancourt   October 19, 2021
https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/marvel-studios-history-interview/2021/10/18/83bf75c4-2dc1-11ec-8ef6-3ca8fe943a92_story.html 

Quote

For example, Marvel almost didn’t get the necessary approval to use the classic rock of Black Sabbath that is now synonymous with “Iron Man” films. But last-minute meetings to get corporate approval (i.e. to spend the money to secure the rights) saved the day.

Meanwhile, the negotiations with Sony to bring Spider-Man to the MCU in a shared capacity were tense. It wasn’t easy for Sony to relinquish its status as superhero-movie heavyweight champion, and the company wasn’t eager to accept that it needed help with one of the most popular superheroes of all time.

The books also answer questions that have nagged superfans. For instance, why didn’t admired filmmaker Edgar Wright direct the first of several “Ant-Man” movies after being attached to the project for so long? The MCU had become a sprawling, interconnected web, which wasn’t necessarily what Wright had originally signed up for, according to Bennett and Terry,

 

Edited October 21, 2021 by tv echo

[swanpride]

Yeah, well, for me Agents of Shield was a huge part why I got so invested in the MCU. A story without the show being featured is worthless in my eyes. 

[Fool to cry]

1 hour ago, swanpride said:

Yeah, well, for me Agents of Shield was a huge part why I got so invested in the MCU. A story without the show being featured is worthless in my eyes. 

I would like a separate book on that anyway. 

[tv echo]

Behind-the-scenes civil war at Marvel (from The Story of Marvel Studios: The Making of the Marvel Cinematic Universe book)...

The Ending Of Captain America: Civil War Was Almost Destroyed By The Marvel Creative Committee
BY ETHAN ANDERTON     OCT. 21, 2021
https://www.slashfilm.com/639180/the-ending-of-captain-america-civil-war-was-almost-destroyed-by-the-marvel-creative-committee/ 

Quote

Back in 2015, we heard Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige almost walked away from the company due to ongoing disagreements with the Marvel Creative Committee about "Captain America: Civil War." This group situated at the Marvel Entertainment offices in New York consisted of Marvel Entertainment CEO Ike Perlmutter, president Alan Fine, Marvel Comics writer Brian Michael Bendis, Marvel Comics publisher Dan Buckley, and Marvel Entertainment CCO Joe Quesada, and they were constantly meddling in the affairs of Marvel Studios with terrible notes and worse ideas. At the time, all we heard was talk about the brass in New York wanting to scale down "Captain America: Civil War," but it was actually much worse than that.
*  *  *
The Marvel Creative Committee, in all their infinite wisdom, didn't want Captain America and Iron Man coming to blows. Instead, they wanted The Avengers to reunite to battle the super soldiers that Baron Zemo led them to in a secret Hydra facility in Siberia. "Captain America: Civil War" co-writer Stephen McFeely recalls, "We had to do a draft where they had a fight in a submarine base with five super soldiers." 

Directors Anthony & Joe Russo were not happy about this potential change to "Captain America: Civil War." Joe Russo said, "We kept saying, "There's nothing interesting about that film. We're not here to make that movie. We're not interested in telling another superhero story.'"

Kevin Feige found himself siding with the filmmakers. After years of playing nice and working as the go-between for the Marvel Creative Committee and the creatives at Marvel Studios, this was the straw that broke the camel's back when it came to negotiating and compromising with the executives in New York. This time there would be no negotiating. As Joe Russo said:

"Civil War started a civil war in Marvel. But when we drew the line in the sand, it became a moment where that company was either going to slowly bend back toward where it had come from, or it was gonna slowly start to bend toward new territory."

With the start date looming for the big budget superhero movie that was essentially on par with an assembly of The Avengers, Marvel Studios and the Marvel Creative Committee were at a stalemate. So the battle went all the way up to the head honcho at Disney. Chief Creative Officer Alan Horn brought in both parties to make their case about the trajectory of "Captain America: Civil War." Joe Russo recalled:

"The big thing I used to say all the time was, 'People tell you how much they love chocolate ice cream. You give it to them six days a week, they're gonna throw it in your face on day six. And the problem is, if you have three chocolate ice creams in the can at 200 million dollars a pop, you're screwed. So you better start figuring out ahead of time how to be disruptive."

As we all know, since we saw how "Captain America: Civil War" ended, Alan Horn sided with Marvel Studios. This was the beginning of the end for the Marvel Creative Committee constantly clashing with Marvel Studios. Not long after, the corporate structure at Marvel was changed in 2015 so that Kevin Feige and Marvel Studios reported directly to Alan Horn, and they didn't have to answer to the Marvel Creative Committee anymore.

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by tv echo

[Spartan Girl]

6 hours ago, tv echo said:

Behind-the-scenes civil war at Marvel (from The Story of Marvel Studios: The Making of the Marvel Cinematic Universe book)...

The Ending Of Captain America: Civil War Was Almost Destroyed By The Marvel Creative Committee
BY ETHAN ANDERTON     OCT. 21, 2021
https://www.slashfilm.com/639180/the-ending-of-captain-america-civil-war-was-almost-destroyed-by-the-marvel-creative-committee/ 

 

Uh, honestly—and this may be an UO—I would have preferred the ending of the Avengers reconciling and fighting the super soldiers. That way Zemo would at least been a bigger villain like he was in the comics and we would have avoided the stupid “who was right” Iron Man/Cap CW debate that’s still going to today!

[Kel Varnsen]

5 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Uh, honestly—and this may be an UO—I would have preferred the ending of the Avengers reconciling and fighting the super soldiers. That way Zemo would at least been a bigger villain like he was in the comics and we would have avoided the stupid “who was right” Iron Man/Cap CW debate that’s still going to today!

Civil War was far from a perfect movie but the fight scenes were really well done. And I think that following the airport scene with a scene where the Avengers fight a bunch of nameless goons would have been a huge letdown. Plus Avengers fighting expendable super soldiers at the end of the movie would be a lot like Avengers fighting expendable Ultron drones at the end of a movie or expendable aliens at the end of a movie.

Edited October 22, 2021 by Kel Varnsen

[Dandesun]

Civil War is not my favorite but the Marvel Creative Committee had to be put down and if this is what it took, so be it. Fiege wrestling control away from fucking Perlmutter was necessary and, frankly, Quesada and Bendis were marching to his tune with regards to storylines at the time. 

[swanpride]

I like Civil War exactly as it is, my only disappointment is that Bucky never quite got the room he deserved and there was never a scene of Tony encountering Bucky again after the movie. 

[Perfect Xero]

I dislike Civil War because:

1. The film uses every trick possible to stack the deck in favor of showing that any form of external oversight of a (self appointed) police force is a bad thing. Ross being the face of it, muddying the waters by having him talk about New York and DC instead of just pointing at the killer robots created by one of their founding members and the dead people in Africa.

2. Zemo's plan is absurdly convoluted and requires (among other things) that Tony Stark be able to jet around the world visiting different locations and having tense conversations in the same amount of time it takes Steve and Bucky to fly straight from Germany to the Winter Soldier base.

3. Tony Stark straight up tries to murder Bucky for something that Tony is aware that Bucky did while he was brainwashed. This basically just gets brushed aside by the end of the film as if it's an understandable reaction because Steve lied to him.

Bonus. Steve's breaking point to Tony's pitch to sign on is Wanda's "internment" at the Avengers Compound, when Wanda was just a few years prior working with the previously mentioned killer robot until she realized that it was planning on destroying all of the people instead of just people she didn't like, and she also unleashed a mindless Hulk on a major city filled with people. Yeah, this single incredibly powerful person with a recent criminal history being kept in modern comfort is totally comparable to what happened to Japanese Americans during WW2.

[swanpride]

1. Not true. The movie does a really good job laying out the argument for oversight. The main take-away from it is, is, that while oversight in itself is not necessarily a bad idea, the kind of oversight which is proposed is. That you have to design oversight carefully or you replace just one wild card outfit with another one. 

2. The very point is that Zemo's plan is flexible. Meaning if plan A doesn't work he goes over to plan B, C and so on. Like, if he had gotten what he wanted from guy one, he would have never bothered with bucky. If the Avengers hadn't turned up, he would have created another opportunity. Aso. Yeah, they cheat a little bit with the timeline towards the end, but this is the kind of stuff I can easily handwave in an otherwise wellwritten story.

3. Tony is highly emotional and snaps in that moment. It's human, because Tony is human. I never understand that attitude of some fans who want Tony to be perfect and try to defend everything he does when the very point of the character is that he is a flawed human being who makes mistakes. If you want to root for a hero with high morals and a nearly perfect track record, you have to be a fan of Cap, or Bucky, or Sam, because they are this kind of hero. Tony isn't supposed to be, and arguably that is what makes the character interesting. 

It doesn't MATTER what Wanda has done beforehand, randomly putting her under house arrest because she didn't sign a stupid accord (she didn't even decide against it, she was still trying to make a decision), is a human rights violation. You can't just go around and arrest people because you deemed them to be dangerous. I never understood the mindset that acting like this is in any way okay. 

[Kel Varnsen]

5 hours ago, swanpride said:

The very point is that Zemo's plan is flexible. Meaning if plan A doesn't work he goes over to plan B, C and so on. Like, if he had gotten what he wanted from guy one, he would have never bothered with bucky. If the Avengers hadn't turned up, he would have created another opportunity. Aso. Yeah, they cheat a little bit with the timeline towards the end, but this is the kind of stuff I can easily handwave in an otherwise wellwritten story.

Yea Zemo just had a plan with a ton of offramps. If his plan just stopped with Bucky being arrested and framed for killing T'Chaka and people believing it he would probably take that as a win.

5 hours ago, swanpride said:

It doesn't MATTER what Wanda has done beforehand, randomly putting her under house arrest because she didn't sign a stupid accord (she didn't even decide against it, she was still trying to make a decision), is a human rights violation. You can't just go around and arrest people because you deemed them to be dangerous. I never understood the mindset that acting like this is in any way okay. 

Wasn't she being held because of her involvement in the death if a bunch of Wakandans? If anything that seems like a good reason for some kind of oversight, so there is standard procedure for handling events like that.

[Perfect Xero]

5 hours ago, swanpride said:

1. Not true. The movie does a really good job laying out the argument for oversight. The main take-away from it is, is, that while oversight in itself is not necessarily a bad idea, the kind of oversight which is proposed is. That you have to design oversight carefully or you replace just one wild card outfit with another one. 

2. The very point is that Zemo's plan is flexible. Meaning if plan A doesn't work he goes over to plan B, C and so on. Like, if he had gotten what he wanted from guy one, he would have never bothered with bucky. If the Avengers hadn't turned up, he would have created another opportunity. Aso. Yeah, they cheat a little bit with the timeline towards the end, but this is the kind of stuff I can easily handwave in an otherwise wellwritten story.

3. Tony is highly emotional and snaps in that moment. It's human, because Tony is human. I never understand that attitude of some fans who want Tony to be perfect and try to defend everything he does when the very point of the character is that he is a flawed human being who makes mistakes. If you want to root for a hero with high morals and a nearly perfect track record, you have to be a fan of Cap, or Bucky, or Sam, because they are this kind of hero. Tony isn't supposed to be, and arguably that is what makes the character interesting. 

It doesn't MATTER what Wanda has done beforehand, randomly putting her under house arrest because she didn't sign a stupid accord (she didn't even decide against it, she was still trying to make a decision), is a human rights violation. You can't just go around and arrest people because you deemed them to be dangerous. I never understood the mindset that acting like this is in any way okay. 

1. The film presents all the reasons that oversight is a good idea so that the film can then turn around and dismiss them. At no point does anyone say, "We need oversight, but a better system." It's just, "the best hands are still our own," as the only alternative.

2. As far as I can tell Zemo's plan was to destroy the Avengers by engineering a fight between Steve and Tony based on Winter Soldier killing Tony's parents. What does Zemo do if Tony never shows up at the Hydra base? Does he show Steve and Bucky the video and offer them popcorn as a cover for his escape?

3. There's a big difference between wanting someone to be perfect, and that person not trying to straight up murder an innocent man for half of the 3rd act of the film. Then that attempted murder being brushed off and completely ignored afterwards because he was mad that Steve lied isn't interesting.

4. Wanda is in the US without a Visa or citizenship according to that conversation. One might assume that means that her presence is somehow tied to her service in the Avengers relating directly to her past actions, at the very least her status is clearly something very different than the internment of American citizens based on nothing other than their ethnicity during WWII as Wanda is not an American citizen and has actually shown herself to be highly volatile and dangerous to the American people in the recent past. Granted we can only speculate on this because, of course, the film never gives us any explanation of Wanda's status before having a key moment in the film turn on it.

[Kel Varnsen]

24 minutes ago, Perfect Xero said:

As far as I can tell Zemo's plan was to destroy the Avengers by engineering a fight between Steve and Tony based on Winter Soldier killing Tony's parents. What does Zemo do if Tony never shows up at the Hydra base? Does he show Steve and Bucky the video and offer them popcorn as a cover for his escape?

If Tony never shows up in Siberia aren't the Avengers pretty much destroyed anyways? They basically blew up a major airport due to fighting each other, and Captain America is a wanted fugitive on the run with a guy wanted for killing the king of Wakanda. At the very least they have lost a ton of credibility and support.

[swanpride]

17 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

1. The film presents all the reasons that oversight is a good idea so that the film can then turn around and dismiss them. At no point does anyone say, "We need oversight, but a better system." It's just, "the best hands are still our own," as the only alternative.

The point is that the audience is supposed to think about the arguments and come to an own conclusion. Why should the movie just serve an easy answer to a complicated question?

 

17 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

2. As far as I can tell Zemo's plan was to destroy the Avengers by engineering a fight between Steve and Tony based on Winter Soldier killing Tony's parents. What does Zemo do if Tony never shows up at the Hydra base? Does he show Steve and Bucky the video and offer them popcorn as a cover for his escape?

He takes the video and engineers another opportunity. Remember that the original plan didn't involve framing Bucky at all, the plan was to get the information from this one Hydra guy and only after he didn't talk, plan B to frame Bucky was implemented. If that guy had talked, Zemo would have fetched the video directly and then had thought up a method to use it for full effect. 

 

17 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

3. There's a big difference between wanting someone to be perfect, and that person not trying to straight up murder an innocent man for half of the 3rd act of the film. Then that attempted murder being brushed off and completely ignored afterwards because he was mad that Steve lied isn't interesting.

Tony acts in affect. After he sees live how his mother got killer. If you don't think that it is human to snap, especially considering that at this point Tony has to be extremely tired and battle-wary, and feeling betrayed in more than one sense, oh well. 

17 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

4. Wanda is in the US without a Visa or citizenship according to that conversation.

According to the conversation that is not the reason why she gets detained though. If that were a problem, they could have done it months ago. They do it specifically because she hasn't signed the Sokovia Accords (yet). Apparently retiring is not really an option for a "weapon" like her. And while Wanda might feel guilty for Lagos, that wasn't her fault. How many more people would have died if the bomb had exploded on the crowded place? 

[Starfish35]

1 hour ago, swanpride said:

And while Wanda might feel guilty for Lagos, that wasn't her fault. How many more people would have died if the bomb had exploded on the crowded place?

👆

Totally agreed.  I will die on this hill.  Whatever a person may think about Wanda and Pietro siding with Ultron, that has nothing to do with Lagos.  Wanda was in no way responsible for that - she was just the convenient scapegoat.  If she had not been there, people still would have died.  It just would have been dozens, maybe hundreds, on the street (along with Steve and whoever else of the team was too close) rather than the people in the upper levels of the building.  That anyone died is a tragedy of course, but nobody stops to think that if Wanda wasn’t there it could have been much much worse.

Although I will disagree and say that I think this is a rather major flaw in the movie.  Wanda isn’t really responsible for what happened, but the movie allows her to be scapegoated for it.  Not even Steve really defends her against Ross’s accusations.   Until it comes to defending Bucky, Steve is too passive in his objections against the Accords IMO.  The writers give him a reason for that by killing off Peggy, but still.  I would have liked to have seen him come out stronger against the Accords and against Ross, than them making it all about defending Bucky.  (And really, the Hunt for Bucky Barnes should have been a completely separate movie.)

Edited October 25, 2021 by Starfish35