The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers, etc.

[Danny Franks]

That's as good an idea as any. Really, the crux of any Fantastic Four movie has to focus on Reed vs Doom so they've got to get those characters RIGHT which... I can't say they have in any of the versions. And the other thing you need to take into consideration is the FF being 'the First Family of Marvel Comics' -- but what do you really do with that other than show that they are a tight knit crew working together.

 

It's still Doom vs the Four... but mostly Reed. So you have to put it out there... why does Doom hate Reed? (And please don't make it all about Susan. A love triangle is LAME.) Do you bring Doom ruling Latveria into it? Sure! And throw it into a 60's situation where you've got the space race going on to further develop these two brilliant minds working to out-do each other. You can do retro-future stuff as was imagined back in the 60s. It could be fun to go that route. But they've still got to get the basics right which they've consistently failed to do.

 

Well, my personal view on it is that the Fantastic Four are just not an interesting or engaging group of characters. Reed is a cold, science dick, Johnny is a jackass, Ben is okay as a curmudgeonly grump and Sue? Well, Sue is definitely one of the Fantastic Four.

 

They're just a dated concept that Marvel has tried, over and over again, to update without real success. The most interesting things about them are their antagonists. Doom is a great Marvel villain, who can work with any hero because his motivation as a despotic, power-mad dictator doesn't really need any explanation. And Namor has been great as the anti-hero character who no one really likes a whole lot but who has enough power and sway, and charisma, that you end up dealing with him anyway.

 

Oh, and the Silver Surfer is a great concept too. One of Marvel's more elegiac characters, with a deep melancholy to his existence.

 

Writing and casting the movies badly certainly hasn't helped, but I'm just not sure that a good Fantastic Four movie is possible, unless they made it some sort of comedy/parody movie. They're just complete cheese.

[VCRTracking]

Ruffalo Confirms: THOR RAGNAROK Is A Buddy Movie

[benteen]

Sweet!

[Jazzy24]

Does anybody else think that Marvel is waiting till the hype of Star Wars and DC movie trailers die down before releasing the Civil War trailer?

[scarynikki12]

I think they'll release the Civil War trailer/teaser with Star Wars itself.  That movie's going to be massive so why not take advantage?

 

(I type this and watch it get released tomorrow)

[stealinghome]

Ruffalo Confirms: THOR RAGNAROK Is A Buddy Movie

I know I'm probably alone in this, but I'm so NOT excited about this news. It just drastically cut down on my interest in this movie. The Hulk just isn't interesting to me at all, nor is Banner's whangst. Not happy they saddled my favorite Avenger with him. And the Thor movies have had the best supporting cast to date, and now I'm wondering if we'll even see them at all.

[VCRTracking]

I think Hulk/Banner seems to be a lot funnier around Thor for some reason and vice versa. Maybe it's because Asgardians can take a whole lot of punishment. I just want a scene where Loki's being smug and then he turns around to see the Hulk and his is expression is like "Oh shit!"

Edited October 31, 2015 by VCRTracking

[Danny Franks]

I know I'm probably alone in this, but I'm so NOT excited about this news. It just drastically cut down on my interest in this movie. The Hulk just isn't interesting to me at all, nor is Banner's whangst. Not happy they saddled my favorite Avenger with him. And the Thor movies have had the best supporting cast to date, and now I'm wondering if we'll even see them at all.

 

You're not alone. I'm right there with you. The Hulk is just not a character that interests me. 'He's mild-mannered and seems nice, but when he gets angry he turns into a big green monster that destroys things'. It's basically Stan Lee's analogue for any kid going through puberty.

 

Whedon tried to inject some nuance into the concept with the first Avengers movie, but then they gave up in favour of an anaemic, ill-though-out, quasi-romance in the sequel. 

 

The Thor movies are pretty weak, but the Warriors Three have been enjoyable. I would much rather see more of them than the Hulk. Give me more Sif, please, and more of Zach Levi's Fandral. Though, being that it's Ragnarok, they'll probably only turn up to die anyway.

[VCRTracking]

Well my mother was surpisingly a big fan of the old Hulk TV show starring Bill Bixby. There's something to the fantasy of someone who seems meek becoming unstoppably powerful when somebody or somebodies tries to mess with them. It was like Caine on Kung Fu, when some jerks don't realize they picked a fight with the wrong guy!

Edited November 1, 2015 by VCRTracking

[Joe]

 

It's basically Stan Lee's analogue for any kid going through puberty.

I thought the Hulk was a take on Jeckyll and Hyde. Unless that too is a puberty metaphor. And while I like the Hulk, I'd rather keep the focus on the established Thor cast.

[vb68]

 

I thought the Hulk was a take on Jeckyll and Hyde.

 

 

That's the way I've always seen it.  And it really works for me. I think the Hulk is a great character when done right.

[Danny Franks]

I thought the Hulk was a take on Jeckyll and Hyde. Unless that too is a puberty metaphor. And while I like the Hulk, I'd rather keep the focus on the established Thor cast.

 

I doubt it was a deliberate analogy for puberty, just like the X-Men weren't a deliberate analogy to prejudice against minorities, but it's still there.

 

Whenever Stan Lee is asked about how he came up with these ideas, he's self-deprecating to the point of sounding like he lucked into his success. But I have always found the Hulk one of his least inspiring creations. As the Hulk movies have shown, there's really not a whole lot you can do with him that's interesting, unless you take serious liberties with the concept (like Greg Pak did). He smashes stuff, the army tries to stop him, he smashes more stuff, he gets away and is all sad about the stuff he smashed.

 

As for Ragnarok, I was hoping that they'd introduce Balder, and delve more into the world of Asgard.

Edited November 1, 2015 by Danny Franks

[Demented Daisy]

I know I'm probably alone in this, but I'm so NOT excited about this news. It just drastically cut down on my interest in this movie. The Hulk just isn't interesting to me at all, nor is Banner's whangst. Not happy they saddled my favorite Avenger with him. And the Thor movies have had the best supporting cast to date, and now I'm wondering if we'll even see them at all.

 

Nope, not alone.  It annoys me that a movie subtitled Ragnarok is being called a "buddy movie".  Mostly because I associate that with comedy.  Not sure what would be comedic about death and destruction.

 

My husband, however, can't wait because Hulk and Thor are his two favorite Marvel characters.  He's really looking forward to it.  He also goes to movies strictly to be entertained and spends zero time analyzing them.  Sometimes I wish I could do that.

[revbfc]

I know it might not happen (FOX has shown itself to be stubborn to their own detriment), but I hope Marvel would try another approach to the FF should they get the rights. Maybe a movie set in the 1960's where they can interact with Peggy Carter, Howard Stark and Hank Pym? That might be a great palette cleanser for Marvel audiences. also, that time period has been set up perfectly for a big movie to take advantage of.

[VCRTracking]

Judging from this promo art Cap finally has his scale mail armour from the comics:

 

[Demented Daisy]

According to this article, RDJ made $40 mil for AoU while Ruffalo only made $2.8 mil.  But I take it with a grain of salt because the author cites no sources for his numbers.

[Kel Varnsen]

According to this article, RDJ made $40 mil for AoU while Ruffalo only made $2.8 mil.  But I take it with a grain of salt because the author cites no sources for his numbers.

Considering that Ruffalo is 1) playing a character whose actor was already replaced once and 2) playing a character who most of the time is fully CGI and doesn't talk I can see him having a hard time really having much bargaining power when it comes to negotiation. Especially compared to RDJ where I have read that the bosses at Marvel/Disney consider him the only irreplaceable actor in the whole MCU. I actually read once that the reason that Tony is out of the suit for so much of Iron Man 3 was a contract thing where Disney kind of said that if we are going to pay you that many millions we need you to actually be on screen (not just doing voice over) for a big chunk of the movie.

[Bruinsfan]

I think Ruffalo spends considerably more time as Banner than the Hulk in both movies (and IMHO his portrayal is head-and-shoulders above Bana's or Norton's). But yeah RDJ being the top breadwinner is a no-brainer as he's largely responsible for the Marvel Cinematic Universe taking off in the first place.

[Kel Varnsen]

Considering how long the big action scenes were in age of ultron and how many characters the movie was following i would actually becurious to know if banner or the hulk got more screen time.

Either way I would not be surprised to hear that the hulk being cgi is a bargaining chip for marvel. I mean anytime blace widow or hawkeye is on screen and you see them Johansson or Renner have to show up. Obviously not the same for the hulk.

[Demented Daisy]

Considering how long the big action scenes were in age of ultron and how many characters the movie was following i would actually becurious to know if banner or the hulk got more screen time.

Either way I would not be surprised to hear that the hulk being cgi is a bargaining chip for marvel. I mean anytime blace widow or hawkeye is on screen and you see them Johansson or Renner have to show up. Obviously not the same for the hulk.

 

 

Except -- have you seen the bonus materials?  Ruffalo is filmed for all of the Hulk scenes using a new, special suit.  It mimics his movements and facial expressions so the character is as much him as Banner is.  (They did the same with Spader/Ultron.)

 

So whenever you see the Hulk on screen, it is Ruffalo.  And he does have to show up.

 

I only mentioned Ruffalo because he's at the bottom of the list; Johansson was second on the list at around $20 mil.  Everyone else made less than $7 mil.

[AimingforYoko]

I noted in the gender thread that while Johnasson got half of what RDJ got, she made nearly as much as Evans, Hemsworth, Renner and Ruffalo put together.

[ChelseaNH]

I can see Ruffalo making less money because 1) he works mostly in smaller movies, so he wasn't a big box office name (more of an actor's actor than a movie star) and 2) he hasn't had a solo movie.

[Kel Varnsen]

Except -- have you seen the bonus materials?  Ruffalo is filmed for all of the Hulk scenes using a new, special suit.  It mimics his movements and facial expressions so the character is as much him as Banner is.  (They did the same with Spader/Ultron.)

 

So whenever you see the Hulk on screen, it is Ruffalo.  And he does have to show up.

 

It's probably part of the reason why I am not a hollywood director, but I am wondering why even bother. I mean if an imaginary monster is smashing an imaginary building or an imaginary robot, has anyone ever said "I wish that imaginary moved more like Mark Ruffallo?

Add to the fact that I would be shocked to hear that anytime you see Tony Stark fully enclosed in the Iron Man suit, that it is actually RDJ in the suit (instead of a double) or doing motion capture. Hell I am pretty sure that anytime you see someone talking to Tony and he is shot from behind and you see the back of his head, it is more than likely a stand in rather than RDJ actually being on set. 

[nobodyyoucare]

It's probably part of the reason why I am not a hollywood director, but I am wondering why even bother. I mean if an imaginary monster is smashing an imaginary building or an imaginary robot, has anyone ever said "I wish that imaginary moved more like Mark Ruffallo?

Add to the fact that I would be shocked to hear that anytime you see Tony Stark fully enclosed in the Iron Man suit, that it is actually RDJ in the suit (instead of a double) or doing motion capture. Hell I am pretty sure that anytime you see someone talking to Tony and he is shot from behind and you see the back of his head, it is more than likely a stand in rather than RDJ actually being on set. 

 

Motion capture requires cgi to be layed over an actor's face. The actor's face often has special sensors or materials put over it. Using a stand in means the result doesn't look like the actor in close up shots because the other guys face is there instead. If the actor wants to do all the cgi action mo-cap and can do it that means less time spent. 

[Shannon L.]

 

I can see Ruffalo making less money because 1) he works mostly in smaller movies, so he wasn't a big box office name (more of an actor's actor than a movie star)

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but another thing these movies have probably done for Mark (and maybe even the others except RDJ and Scarlett Johannson) is made him a household name.  I don't think I've seen one thing that he was in before The Avengers, but now, when I see him listed in a cast, I'm definitely interested in what the movie is about.  I'm not saying that he deserves more money now because of that, but if he has become more well known, then that's definitely a bonus. 

 

 

Except -- have you seen the bonus materials?  Ruffalo is filmed for all of the Hulk scenes using a new, special suit.  It mimics his movements and facial expressions so the character is as much him as Banner is.  (They did the same with Spader/Ultron.)

 

So whenever you see the Hulk on screen, it is Ruffalo.  And he does have to show up.

 

A while ago, in the Untitled Movie Talk section, I posted a link to some footage of Benedict Cumberbatch doing this for the next Hobbit movie (I think).  It was not only impressive, but it looked exhausting.

Edited November 10, 2015 by Shannon L.

[OakGoblinFly]

Judging from this promo art Cap finally has his scale mail armour from the comics:

 

 

 

<crosses fingers> I hope, I hope, I hope ........ that was always my favorite Captain America look.

[Kel Varnsen]

Motion capture requires cgi to be layed over an actor's face. The actor's face often has special sensors or materials put over it. Using a stand in means the result doesn't look like the actor in close up shots because the other guys face is there instead. If the actor wants to do all the cgi action mo-cap and can do it that means less time spent. 

Well that makes sense. If you are going to use the actor to get the face anyways, I guess you might as well get their body at the same time.

[nobodyyoucare]

Remember this movie? All the actors of the Davy Jones ship wore mo cap suits. The main guy who had close ups had sensors and special makeup on his eyes and mouth.

Edited November 10, 2015 by nobodyyoucare

[Danny Franks]

Andy Serkis did all that to play Gollum fifteen years ago. And it's probably still the most impressive use of the technology, in my view. 

 

I don't have any problem with RDJ getting paid significantly more than Ruffalo, because RDJ has proved he can make money for Marvel. A lot of it, over three Iron Man movies. Ruffalo has been part of an ensemble in two movies, and that's it. Now, RDJ getting paid significantly more than Chris Evans or Chris Hemsworth? That's a different argument, because both those guys have headlined profitable movies for Marvel as well.

 

Perhaps paying Scarlett more makes up for the tacky way her character has been treated when it comes to merchandise? Or perhaps it's just that she's probably the biggest star in the movies, other than RDJ and Samuel L. Jackson. I reckon she's one of the few actresses in Hollywood who has the name power to get a movie made.

[JBC344]

Marvel is notoriously cheap by all accounts despite RDJ's pay.  I'm not surprised by the particular wages.  Also good to remember that Scarlett was a star before she came to Marvel.  Evans and Hemsworth weren't anywhere near her level, and are more stars now because of Marvel.  Yes, Evans has been around a lot longer but didn't reach star status until CA.  And their post Marvel projects haven't exactly done all that great.

[JessePinkman]

I have a feeling that the other actors get a good backend deal. Chris Evans just seems way too happy playing Cap to be paid crap (comparatively).

[JBC344]

Maybe.  I think it is more that he is starring in huge big budget movies and getting his face out there.  The leverage he gets from playing Cap definitely helps raise his star power.  Even if the pay isn't amazing.  It's also a huge security issue with knowing that you have a secure job for the next 10-12 years.

[fireice13]

I know most of the actors make multiple picture contracts. i wonder if they get raises for each one or if it's the same pay for all the movies they contracted for? I wonder too if they could ever re-negotiate like if they were in something else and won a bunch of awards if they could get more money?

[JBC344]

I'm guessing that there is probably a bonus with each individual movie that the actor headlines, but probably not much of a raise for the ensemble movies that they do.

[Bruinsfan]

If any of them signed deals with points having the team movies make almost three billion dollars at the box office will have resulted in very lucrative paydays regardless of base salary.

[JBC344]

That is not actually true.  A lot of actors have come out and shared that the "backend deals" are not structured like they used to be.  Or are not structured in the way that the average person thinks that they are.  It is not as simple as Chris Evans owns 2% of the Avengers and the box office was 1 billion, so Chris Evans made 2% of a billion.  The studios have gotten smart over the years and have put in all these conditions to backend deals so that the actor may get a nice little bonus, but it is nothing like you think they would make based on the success of the movie.

 

It is sort of like when Seinfeld made 100 of millions of dollars on syndication and everyone thought that any tv actor must be swimming in money once they hit syndication on their show. The truth is that the Seinfeld deal was a very specific deal and time in the industry.  That time and/or deal doesn't exist anymore.  If Seinfeld was doing his syndication deal  at this period in time he would of probably made a quarter of what he did in the 90's.  Still a lot of money but a life changing difference.

 

My understanding is that Marvel whom is notoriously cheap had a very traditional backend deal with RDJ which is why he made so much money off of the Iron Man franchise.  The key being is that Marvel had no idea or expectation that Iron Man would make the money it did.  I assure you that Marvel wouldn't dare offer anyone else that deal at this point in time.

 

Don't get me wrong I'm not feeling sorry or prescribing that anyone else feel sorry for the actors who take on these roles, just that they don't make the money that people think that they do.  I just think that there are people who think that the only reason an actor would do a superhero movie is money and I think it is more of a career choice than a money one.  There is great career stability when you sign a six movie deal with Marvel that you are going to have a job for the next ten years and be paid well.  Also the visibility factor that being in these movies does for ones career. 

Edited November 13, 2015 by JBC344

[Joe]

Chris Hemsworth wants more humour in Thor: Ragnarok. Yes, because the first two, like all the MCU movies, were so dark and dour. And ragnarok is such a funny topic. Barrel of laughs. Wonderful idea. I'm all in favour.

[Advance35]

I think I may actually agree with him.  I VERY much enjoyed the first THOR but the 2nd, meh.   And I think the sequel did try to get darker with the character and the Loki of it all.   I don't know if it was the villain  or what, but I much preferred the more humorous first movie.   Since Bruce/Hulk is rumored to appear, maybe the humorous parts will be his fish out of water reactions to it all.

[benteen]

I've enjoyed the Thor films but I agree with Hemsworth.  Thor was humorous in the first movie but he was downright grim in The Dark World and it was not appealing at all.

[OakGoblinFly]

Honestly, I think you need those moments of humor to offset most of the darkness.

[stealinghome]

The Thor supporting cast has excellent comic timing and they play very well off each other's humor. Agree that having a little more humor in Ragnarok, as opposed to TDW, would be a plus.

That said, the way larger must for Ragnarok is getting a script that ISN'T a steaming pile of shit.

[Danny Franks]

I want Balder in Thor: Ragnarok. And much more Sif and the Warriors Three. Sadly we can't all get what we want. In all likelihood, we'll get more of the least passionate Marvel relationship to date, and Kat Dennings throwing out the odd one-liner while fangirls swoon over Loki's wooby face.

Edited November 26, 2015 by Danny Franks

[VCRTracking]

Looking back the Phase One movies work really well like a season of a TV show. It starts out strong with Iron Man, then you have Incredible Hulk, Iron Man II, Thor, and Captain America: The First Avenger which just  moves the main arc along, has a lot of filler. Each were different but they helped set up to the big finale which is The Avengers. 

Edited November 26, 2015 by VCRTracking

[Bruinsfan]

I really enjoyed CA:TFA more than any of the solo movies (and possibly Age of Ultron).

[MrsRafaelBarba]

I wonder if Edward Norton is kicking himself, over his bitter split from Marvel.

Really liked him in the Hulk reboot and would've loved seeing him on Team Avengers.

No shade towards Ruffalo, just that I like his work outside of Marvel more.

[nobodyyoucare]

Edward Norton needs a lot of kicking but none of it is from him. He has burned a lot of bridges due to his behavior on set. 

 

http://www.cracked.com/article_22340_5-movie-stars-who-demanded-hilariously-insane-plot-changes.htmlnumber 5 details a number of reasons Marvel was glad to no longer work with Norton.

[Kel Varnsen]

When the hulk came out it was like a completely different time for marvel movies and their studio. If norton had issues back then with wanting control over production way backnthen, how the hell would he have managed to work with the marvel studios of later years that wanted complete control over everything. I cant imagine marvel given any actor the power to make script or casting changes now.

[Eegah]

With the news that the sequel to the 2015 Fantastic Four movie is dead, I have one rather crazy idea for how to incorporate them into the MCU: make Reed Richards a villain. Just play completely into his very earliest characterization as a sexist, abusive asshole that fans typically write off with "Hey, it was the '60s," plus his gleefully signing up to throw all his friends into the Phantom Zone during Civil War, and let him get the punishment for that stuff that people have wanted to see for decades.

[Danny Franks]

With the news that the sequel to the 2015 Fantastic Four movie is dead, I have one rather crazy idea for how to incorporate them into the MCU: make Reed Richards a villain. Just play completely into his very earliest characterization as a sexist, abusive asshole that fans typically write off with "Hey, it was the '60s," plus his gleefully signing up to throw all his friends into the Phantom Zone during Civil War, and let him get the punishment for that stuff that people have wanted to see for decades.

 

I'd watch that. I've never been able to abide Reed Richards and his dickish, chauvinist behaviour. I don't think it's as '60s as all that, though, because whenever I've read a Fantastic Four story, Reed has come off as a tool who doesn't appreciate at all how great his wife is, and his god complex is always disturbing.

 

Perhaps I just missed the relevant stories, but I found it odd that Hank Pym got so much hate for his role in Civil War, but Reed just got yelled at by Sue and then everyone forgave him. Hell, when Namor is a sometimes less douchey romantic rival for your wife, you must be going wrong somewhere.

[AimingforYoko]

I suppose when you're one of the biggest brains in the Marvel Universe, arrogance is kind of likely to happen. Prime example: Tony Stark.