Marvel Movies Thread - Holy Shitballs

[Robby]

@Nobodyman:

What's weird to me is that, throughout all the Phase 2 movies, Ultron himself was never really built up at all. Like, at the end of Iron Man 3, couldn't we have seen an ominous glimpse of some blueprints for the "Ultron Project" or something?

I think one of Tony's armors sneaking up on Pepper in bed with basically a mind of its own and being creepy as all hell was setupy.

Plus the stuff Rin mentioned. They didn't broadcast it from a mile away like Thanos, but the little pieces and buildup have been there.

[Satsuki]

I still am curious if any mention of Hank Pym will be there.

[Nobodyman]

@Demon:

The buildup to Ultron was there it was just more subtle.

The Buildup as I saw it:

! - Cap asking Tony if losing Coulson was the first time he'd ever lost "A Soldier" and Tony lashing out at him about how they're not Soldiers

• Thor: The Dark World had the minor aspect of setting up Thor as living on earth now at the end of that movie.
• It also sets up Loki as ruling Asgard, and as Idris Elba accidentally let slip, Loki is going to be in AoU.
• We know HYDRA plays a hand in the movie because of Baron Von Strucker being in it plus the fact that the "Twins" were last seen in Strucker's custody at the end of Winter Soldier.

I don't see what any of these have to do with Ultron.

As for the rest, you are correct that they have at least set up a precedent for Ultron to exist, but, to me, that's not really the same thing as "building him up" (no pun intended). In the first Avengers, pretty much everything except those weird random aliens had been heavily hinted at ahead of time (Loki, the Tesseract, the forming of the Avengers, etc.). With Avengers 2, yes, we have that set up, but all of it could just as well lead to other things and none of it really strongly hints at Ultron specifically.

Now, I must clarify this is a relatively minor complaint, but I guess it's just my one lingering fear that Ultron may come off as kind of a randomly inserted villain. But I have faith in the MCU.

tl;dr I want everything spelled out to me because I'm a stupid dumb casual movie-goer

[Ubiq]

@FirstClassCook:

It looks so good! Who was the girl at 0:33?

Probably Scarlet Witch.

[Outerspec]

@Nobodyman:

I don't see what any of these have to do with Ultron.

As for the rest, you are correct that they have at least set up a precedent for Ultron to exist, but, to me, that's not really the same thing as "building him up" (no pun intended). In the first Avengers, pretty much everything except those weird random aliens had been heavily hinted at ahead of time (Loki, the Tesseract, the forming of the Avengers, etc.). With Avengers 2, yes, we have that set up, but all of it could just as well lead to other things and none of it really strongly hints at Ultron specifically.

Now, I must clarify this is a relatively minor complaint, but I guess it's just my one lingering fear that Ultron may come off as kind of a randomly inserted villain. But I have faith in the MCU.

tl;dr I want everything spelled out to me because I'm a stupid dumb casual movie-goer

Fortunately, even if Ultron was a somewhat randomly inserted villain with big ties in the marvel comic universe but not so much hinted at in the movies, he'll never come off as randomly bad as this guy.

[hide][/hide]Was this guy just randomly popped in for the Thor sequel? Was he built up to? It really doesn't matter. Never again.

[WolfWood37]

Well for the most part the villains have always been the weakest link. Save Loki of course.

[FirstClassCook]

@Ubiq:

Probably Scarlet Witch.

I think it might be someone from Wakunda, but who knows.

[The Laughing Man]

The mysterious chick in the trailer is, in my opinion, obviously black, and therefore, probably from Wakanda. It's probably going to end up being Black Panther's sister, Shuri.

[Kaiolino]

@Outerspec:

Fortunately, even if Ultron was a somewhat randomly inserted villain with big ties in the marvel comic universe but not so much hinted at in the movies, he'll never come off as randomly bad as this guy.

[hide][qimg]http://i59.tinypic.com/etw1du.jpg[/qimg][/hide]Was this guy just randomly popped in for the Thor sequel? Was he built up to? It really doesn't matter. Never again.

They cut out all his character building scenes to add a bunch of irrelevant Loki scenes.

[LightningAce]

@Kaiolino:

They cut out all his character building scenes to add a bunch of irrelevant Loki scenes.

The people want Loki and Loki is what they get.

[Satsuki]

@The:

The mysterious chick in the trailer is, in my opinion, obviously black, and therefore, probably from Wakanda. It's probably going to end up being Black Panther's sister, Shuri.

They're already shoving in Wakanda? Like the movie isn't already packed as it is?

Guess that's why they needed to announce Black Panther's casting ahead of time.

[Megadoomer]

@Satsuki:

I still am curious if any mention of Hank Pym will be there.

There was a plot summary a couple of months ago saying that Tony based Ultron off of a long-dormant peace-keeping project. People are figuring that it's something that Howard Stark and Hank Pym worked on together before setting it aside for some reason. (seeing as Howard's appearing in a flashback in the Ant-Man movie) It'll probably just get a brief mention in this and maybe be part of a flashback in Ant-Man, but it's better than nothing.

[DartG]

@Satsuki:

They're already shoving in Wakanda? Like the movie isn't already packed as it is?

Guess that's why they needed to announce Black Panther's casting ahead of time.

Well we're not supposed to actually see Black Panther until Civil War, but the lady at :33 is maybe his sister or someone from his bodyguard team?
Comic spoilers

! Instead of Savage Land the bunker is actually either in South Korea or South Africa(Wakanda)?

[Furisu]

[Kaiolino]

It'a a Latino Review rumour.

[Demon Rin]

I dunno, wasn't it LR that first dropped the "Marvel and Sony are at least talking about it" rumor that ended up being true?

[Satsuki]

If it's true then Infinity War is getting very crowded.

[Robby]

@Satsuki:

If it's true then Infinity War is getting very crowded.

Well its going to be 2 movies. And have like 20 movies behind it setting it up (and Captain Marvel in between the two parts.) It's allowed to be crowded. Its the damn Infinity Gauntlet. Its SUPPOSED to be a crazy collection of everything ever so far.

[Mr. Zoro]

@Outerspec:

Fortunately, even if Ultron was a somewhat randomly inserted villain with big ties in the marvel comic universe but not so much hinted at in the movies, he'll never come off as randomly bad as this guy.

[hide]http://i59.tinypic.com/etw1du.jpg[/hide]Was this guy just randomly popped in for the Thor sequel? Was he built up to? It really doesn't matter. Never again.

Like Kaiolino said, some scenes were cut, and he originally had some decent depth to him. I can't recall exactly, but apparently he lost his family, and went after the Aether to use for his revenge. How cliché or not his revenge was will probably never be known (unless it's a dvd extra?), but I feel seeing at least a few scenes would've been better than what we got.

[Zack]

Not that familiar with a bunch of the 'behind the scenes' stuff with Marvel movies, but it seems like Thor: Dark World in particularly got pretty convulted in its production compared to the other films.

[GetsugaZoro]

So I'm like 2-4 years late but I have a question I finally decided to see the rebooted Spiderman movies(I didnt want to see them because of the reboot happening) and holy shit is it just me or is the guy doing his part an awful actor? I'm not sure if its bad writing or him being a bad actor or both things combined, I haven't seen more of his work so I cant judge him based on anything else but damn hes awful in this movie.

It may be just me not sure but his acting made me cringe a bunch of times.

Oh and I haven't watched the second movie only the first.

–----

I also watched Captain America Winter Soldier two days ago, why did they make Quicksilver and Scarlet witch lab experiments instead of mutants? it seems in the Avengers/Captain America/Ironman/Thor universe they are trying to avoid having mutants there at all cost(which is my favourite part of marvel).

[y2kyle89]

@GetsugaZoro:

I also watched Captain America Winter Soldier two days ago, why did they make Quicksilver and Scarlet witch lab experiments instead of mutants? it seems in the Avengers/Captain America/Ironman/Thor universe they are trying to avoid having mutants there at all cost(which is my favourite part of marvel).

Fox owns the rights to X-Men and, consequently, all mutants.

Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are a special case

[Kaiolino]

A) Andrew Garfield is a pretty great actor, but his role was mostly written as a selfish jerk without responsibilty. Plus Kurtzman and Orci are like the shittiest writers in Hollywood.

B) Fox owns the rights to the X-Men and the word mutant, so Disney isn't allowed to refer to the twins as such (the reason Marvel is allowed to use those characters in the first place is because they've been longtime Avengers characters). They've been building up the Inhumans property as a replacement concept for mutants.

[Green_vs_Red]

@GetsugaZoro:

So I'm like 2-4 years late but I have a question I finally decided to see the rebooted Spiderman movies(I didnt want to see them because of the reboot happening) and holy shit is it just me or is the guy doing his part an awful actor? I'm not sure if its bad writing or him being a bad actor or both things combined, I haven't seen more of his work so I cant judge him based on anything else but damn hes awful in this movie.

Almost everyone acknowledges the problem with Peter in the movies is due to the writing not the actor.

But the muffled voice in costume…...I don't know why they haven't fixed that still.

@y2kyle89:

Fox owns the rights to X-Men and, consequently, all mutants.

Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are a special case

Why would Marvel's parent company get involved in something that concerns Marvel, Sony, & Fox directly and with Marvel apparently being content with those presumably hefty licensing and royalty fees they're being paid.

[GetsugaZoro]

Ok then I guess its the writing, he just feels so awkward in some scenes, I kinda saw some articles sharing my opinion after googling a bit, bashing the writing but saying he wasn't the rigth guy for the part.

So I knew Sony owned Spiderman but I didnt know about Fox owning the Xmen so how does that exactly work?

Yeah I saw there is an Inhuman movie in the making(or porjected atleast) and Shield(spoilers), I guess there goes my hope for a decent Xmen movie or the Xmen being part of the most decently written part of the mavel cinematic universe.

Anyway tks for the answers.

[y2kyle89]

@Green_vs_Red:

Why would Marvel's parent company get involved in something that concerns Marvel, Sony, & Fox directly and with Marvel apparently being content with those presumably hefty licensing and royalty fees they're being paid.

Well, sure, if you put it all reasonable like, it makes sense…

[valiantt]

@GetsugaZoro:

1.Ok then I guess its the writing, he just feels so awkward in some scenes, I kinda saw some articles sharing my opinion after googling a bit, bashing the writing but saying he wasn't the rigth guy for the part.

2.So I knew Sony owned Spiderman but I didnt know about Fox owning the Xmen so how does that exactly work?

3.Yeah I saw there is an Inhuman movie in the making(or porjected atleast) and Shield(spoilers), I guess there goes my hope for a decent Xmen movie or the Xmen being part of the most decently written part of the mavel cinematic universe.

Anyway tks for the answers.

1.People are always going to bitch about Peter simply because no one will ever be happy with whoever plays him considering how big and known Spiderman is in general. Likewise, most writers seem to struggle a lot trying to write him in general. A fair number of folks don't like crybaby Mcguire and a fair number don't like smugface Garfield. But yeaaah I figure Spiderman/Peter is just…difficult overall for most folks to be satisfied with in films (unlike RDJ in Iron Man).

2. That just means that Marvel/Disney can't make X-Men movies. Nor can they utilize any of its characters (with the twins being a unique exception) or refer to "Mutants" in general (hence the Inhumans). This is also the same reason why one shouldn't expect anything from Fantastic Four/Spiderman to show up in the Marvel Cinematic Universe sooo....no Galacticus or Dr. Doom :( (unless they strike a deal with the designated companies like this SUPPOSED Spiderman thing.)

3.Yeaaaah...don't expect an Disney X-Men movie...

[Cyan D. Funk]

This post is deleted!

[Robby]

Garfield is great as Spiderman, not so good as Peter Parker… and has FANTASTIC chemistry with the actress playing Gwen. Most of the problems come down to the script, rather than his acting.

He's miles better than Toby Crybaby regardless.

Josh Keaton is better than them both.

@GetsugaZoro:

So I knew Sony owned Spiderman but I didnt know about Fox owning the Xmen so how does that exactly work?

Marvel went bankrupt a few years back. Movie studios bought the rights to those character for use in film (but not tv, animation or comics). They get to keep using them as long as they make a movie every couple years. They were apparently awful contracts, but… they were bankrupt so they took what they could get.

They've let some rights slide back, such as Daredevil and Punisher and obviously Hulk.

Fox has been completely unwilling to play ball with X-Men and Fantastic 4, and so the comics are being written off.

Sony has been willing to play ball with Spiderman, especially after the mostly negative reviews to Spiderman 2, but figuring out the logistics, budgeting, scheduling, who is in charge and profit sharing is obviously tricky.

[valiantt]

@Robby:

Sony has been willing to play ball with Spiderman, especially after the mostly negative reviews to Spiderman 2, but figuring out the logistics, budgeting, scheduling, who is in charge and profit sharing is obviously tricky.

Yeah…I'm very curious how this is going to work out. And just to make sure, the deal was JUST for Spiderman? (As in no one else in the Spiderman universe BUT Spiderman? Or the franchise in general?....which I prefer the latter due to the opportunity to use Norman Osborne).

Because if there's anything I am kinda miffed about in the MCU is the lack of outstanding/compelling villains. Like what do we have? Loki? Yeaah...

[Robby]

@valiantt:

Yeah…I'm very curious how this is going to work out. And just to make sure, the deal was JUST for Spiderman? (As in no one else in the Spiderman universe BUT Spiderman? Or the franchise in general?....which I prefer the latter due to the opportunity to use Norman Osborne).

There hasn't even been an official announcement of a deal yet, and its not the most reputable of sites. We don't know anything.

But presumably it'd be in everyone's best interest to be able to really share, more than just the one character… and Sony would be better off letting Marvel handle the character in general properly... while they maybe just provided financial backing and took in heavy profits. (Given that their talks of doing say, a Sinister Six movie, a Venom movie, and an Aunt May movie have all been sour cause its jut them grasping at straws.)

I know they were talking about including Osborn tower in Avengers for instance, but just couldn't work it out in time.

[Kaiolino]

Sony Studios has been bleeding out for years and in 2011 they sold the entire Spider-Man merchandising rights back to Marvel in exchange for no longer having to pay the roughly 5% of the movie profits that get sent to Marvel as royalties. This is also why Marvel advertises Spider-Man, as a property and the Sony movies, almost as much as their Avengers movies. Because merchandising is ultimately what makes or breaks these things (just ask fans of the DC cartoons). And recently it was revealed that Spidey merch far outgrosses both Batman and Avengers merch. So now there's a situation where Sony is grossing less and less with Spidey, while Marvel keeps making more and more of it.

Apparantly there were similar merchandise discussions with Fox about a year ago, but they fell through and the old agreements still stands where Marvel gets 5% of the movie profits and the merchandise profits are equally shared (and have to be equally paid for). So Marvel went with a scorched Earth policy, that allowed them to focus on producing merch that they would get the full profits back from while at the same time sticking it to Fox, because now there's no new audiences being formed as there are no kids watching X-Men cartoons on TV or buying X-Men toys in stores. However, with the movies catching a second wind and executives' natural need for MORE MONEY they will at some point have to go into new discussions even Fox realises that with the mighty Marvel marketing machine backing you even a piece of shit like ASM2 can gross over 700 million. It's not like there's merch for Fox to profit from right now. And Marvel made about 75 million off of DoFP without doing anything, so that must sting as well.

Oh, and then there's the whole Star Wars thing where Fox ALSO still owns distribution rights to Episode IV that will never expire (I think. Episode V and VI will expire in a couple years)

[Demon Rin]

What Robby said.

We're also in a weird situation where you can literally trust nobody. Latino Review has SOME cred in this situation because they originally leaked the "Sony and Marvel are talking" info before the Hacked Emails became public, so it seems they have or at least had some kind of actual solid source for this kind of info. That's honestly the only reason I'm entertaining the idea of their story being true.

However, Neither Disney or Sony have announced anything officially, and even if it's true, they will NEVER admit this is a thing until the ink is officially dry on all pertinent contracts and both parties are satisfied it's ok to announce it.

I mean, the US rights to the original 13 episodes of Dragonball were owned by Lionsgate for decades, that's why FUNimation never released an uncut DVD of those episodes here (Despite Australia getting one) during the initial DVD run. Then one day out of the blue, a retailer (Wal-Mart) jumped the gun and posted an entry on their website for the first Blue Brick Season Set, along with cover art and a release date. FUNi had to deny the hell out of it and every time they were asked, the canned answer was always "Nope, not a thing at all" for months. Then, finally, a bit down the line, FUNi officially announced it and it indeed had the same cover art and Release date Wal-Mart.com had posted.

What this means is that whatever deal FUNi struck to get the rights back either wasn't finalized at the time Wal-Mart posted that, or it was but there was some kind of time-based non-disclosure agreement on it that meant it still wasn't "Official", so FUNi had to deny it despite it being 100% true.

The Moral of the story is: Until Disney or Marvel announces Spidey is officially in the MCU, there's no way to verify any of this, and even if Latino Review happens to be dead on the money, the deal could still fall apart at the zero hour anyway. So just take this thing with a HUGE grain of salt at this point.

[GetsugaZoro]

I dont know I guess I'll shut up about it, seems most of you guys actually like him and yes I actually didnt have any issue with the "Spiderman" scenes just with Peter Parker like Robby mentioned.

@Robby:

Marvel went bankrupt a few years back. Movie studios bought the rights to those character for use in film (but not tv, animation or comics). They get to keep using them as long as they make a movie every couple years. They were apparently awful contracts, but… they were bankrupt so they took what they could get.

They've let some rights slide back, such as Daredevil and Punisher and obviously Hulk.

Fox has been completely unwilling to play ball with X-Men and Fantastic 4, and so the comics are being written off.

Sony has been willing to play ball with Spiderman, especially after the mostly negative reviews to Spiderman 2, but figuring out the logistics, budgeting, scheduling, who is in charge and profit sharing is obviously tricky.

So Fantastic 4 also belongs to Fox? what a clusterfuck, man that really limits the movies and makes them work around things.

Thats lame yeah, they could all make a lot of money if they worked together, specially likem you said with the infinity Gauntlet, if I read it rigth in the comics its was basicly everyone against Thanos, so having the Xmen, the Fantastic 4, etc in the movie would be great but the budget would be gigantic to pay all those actors.

[Demon Rin]

@GetsugaZoro:

So Fantastic 4 also belongs to Fox? what a clusterfuck, man that really limits the movies and makes them work around things

Yeah, it sucks but the situation has at least gotten WAY better over time.

Blade, Ghost Rider, Daredevil, Punisher, and Man-Thing all used to belong to other studios, and they have since reverted back to Marvel despite being with other studios originally.

There's some question about Namor, with some sources saying he's reverted from Universal, but others saying he hasn't yet, and others saying he BASICALLY has but there's a time restriction on when they can start using him.

However, ignoring Namor due to that, right now, Spider-Man and all his directly related characters are owned by Sony, while the X-Men and Fantastic Four charas are Fox. That's it. Otherwise, Marvel owns everything else

[Green_vs_Red]

@Kaiolino:

So Marvel went with a scorched Earth policy, that allowed them to focus on producing merch that they would get the full profits back from while at the same time sticking it to Fox, because now there's no new audiences being formed as there are no kids watching X-Men cartoons on TV or buying X-Men toys in stores.

Isn't that because no one's bothered to come up with a new series since Wolverine & The X-Men bit the dust on Nickeledeon a few years ago or was the writing already on the wall before that?

[Kaiolino]

Infinity Gauntlet didn't have that many X-Men/FF members in it. Only Wolverine, Cyclops and Reed Richards I think. And they were all cannon fodder without much dialogue. The storyline was more Thanos vs. cosmic beings with the handful of heroes just being a time-waster/hype builder for Thanos. It wasn't some epic Marvel heroes vs. Thanos battle like how Infinity War will probably play out.

–- Update From New Post Merge ---

@Green_vs_Red:

Isn't that because no one's bothered to come up with a new series since Wolverine & The X-Men bit the dust on Nickeledeon a few years ago or was the writing already on the wall before that?

WatXM was cancelled mid-production because of "budgetary reasons" conveniently around the time Iron Man started raking in cash and Marvel got the Spider-Man rights back. Since then they've started pumping out shows entirely focused on introducing as many new characters as possible, yet there hasn't been a single X-Men cameo (excluding Wolverine and Deadpool but there X-Men affiliation is never acknowledged) in any of these shows (Avengers EMH, Hulk, Avengers Assemble, Ultimate Spider-Man).

Then recently, the vice-president of animation said in an interview that there will never be another X-Men cartoon because there isn't any public interest in that property (I feel I should mention this was said in the summer where DoFP made 750 million, which isn't Avengers money, but it's still money) and that the movies were too "mature" and that it would be irresponsible for Marvel to create a cartoon that deal with similar themes (which is obvious bullcrap because there have been 3 X-Men cartoons already, two of which aired during the too mature movies and all of them dealt with the too mature themes of bigotry).

They could've just been honest and said "No, the X-Men are off-limits because it's not a valuable property to us anymore. Maybe next decade."

[GetsugaZoro]

@Kaiolino:

Infinity Gauntlet didn't have that many X-Men/FF members in it. Only Wolverine, Cyclops and Reed Richards I think. And they were all cannon fodder without much dialogue. The storyline was more Thanos vs. cosmic beings with the handful of heroes just being a time-waster/hype builder for Thanos. It wasn't some epic Marvel heroes vs. Thanos battle like how Infinity War will probably play out.

Well I just read mostly wikia and comicvine stuff since I dont own the comics(I was 3y old anyway) but yeah they cant really beat Thanos by themselves anyway specially with the Infinity Gauntlet, he just handed them all their asses last year in his storyline with his new black order henchmen, they got all those new avengers recruited(Hyperion, Ex Nihilo, etc) and they still got beaten down

! and it took his out of nowhere Jesus son to forze him in Amber(I put this in spoiler tags since it migth spoil people that didnt read it).

[Green_vs_Red]

@Kaiolino:

Infinity Gauntlet didn't have that many X-Men/FF members in it. Only Wolverine, Cyclops and Reed Richards I think. And they were all cannon fodder without much dialogue. The storyline was more Thanos vs. cosmic beings with the handful of heroes just being a time-waster/hype builder for Thanos. It wasn't some epic Marvel heroes vs. Thanos battle like how Infinity War will probably play out.

–- Update From New Post Merge ---

WatXM was cancelled mid-production because of "budgetary reasons" conveniently around the time Iron Man started raking in cash and Marvel got the Spider-Man rights back. Since then they've started pumping out shows entirely focused on introducing as many new characters as possible, yet there hasn't been a single X-Men cameo (excluding Wolverine and Deadpool but there X-Men affiliation is never acknowledged) in any of these shows (Avengers EMH, Hulk, Avengers Assemble, Ultimate Spider-Man).

Then recently, the vice-president of animation said in an interview that there will never be another X-Men cartoon because there isn't any public interest in that property (I feel I should mention this was said in the summer where DoFP made 750 million, which isn't Avengers money, but it's still money) and that the movies were too "mature" and that it would be irresponsible for Marvel to create a cartoon that deal with similar themes (which is obvious bullcrap because there have been 3 X-Men cartoons already, two of which aired during the too mature movies and all of them dealt with the too mature themes of bigotry).

They could've just been honest and said "No, the X-Men are off-limits because it's not a valuable property to us anymore. Maybe next decade."

That's an even bigger load a shit than what Warner Bros. was shoving into everybody's face after Green Lantern crashed and burned.

[Kaiolino]

[GetsugaZoro]

@Kaiolino:

They are doing a lot of Xmen/mutant related stuff though, we got the new "Wolverines" team and I see Wolverine being alive before the end of next year, they are going around with his corpse, Xmen seem to be doing well a lot of them still get to appear a lot as Avengers and in the Xmen comics, even Sabertooth is part of the Avengers unity division it seems after this whole inversion, we got X -Factor and X force series, as for FF4 Reed appears with the Iluminati but maybe after this arc they get rid of him, Sue is working as an avenger and for Shield apparently, so I'm not that sure they are really being written off.

Also dafuq is he saying that Scarlet Witch and QS aren't mutants anymore, didnt she just cut the blood relation with their father with that spell?

And meh its Deadpool they are probably troling withl that, he just died in Axis, he got ripped in half and then was alive two chapters later, they killed a bunch of people last year and the only ones that seem to be actually death is Wolverine(that like I said will probably be alive by the end of this year) and Wonderman.

Heck they just randomly revived Doctor Voodoo just because they needed him.

[Robby]

It's been said before and it'll be said again. HONESTLY, all things considered? X-Men is better off seperated from the regular Marvel U, cause the prejudice thing is just weird when there's all the beloved superheroes… and that people are totalyl fine with mutants whenever they happen to be Avengers like Beast was. The themes just don't mix that well and it's better with a wall in the way.

Fantastic 4 though, should be back at Marvel. And given everything we've heard about the upcoming movie, I just can not imagine that going well or establishing a franchise. Hell, it comes out 6 months and we still haven't seen a single costume, promotional image, or teaser. SO hopefully that bombs terribly and Fox lets it go... though it'd be a few years before Marvel would be able to, or want, to touch it.

@GetsugaZoro:

Also dafuq is he saying that Scarlet Witch and QS aren't mutants anymore, didnt she just cut the blood relation with their father with that spell?

Magneto isn't their father, and apparently they've maybe been Inhumans rather than mutants this whole time. Or are going to be Inhumans, I dunno, I haven't followed it closely at all.

[GetsugaZoro]

@Robby:

Magneto isn't their father, and apparently they've maybe been Inhumans rather than mutants this whole time. Or are going to be Inhumans, I dunno, I haven't followed it closely at all.

I didnt see that in Axis, maybe it was some other side chapters but didnt QS get repowered by Terrigenis once, that migth be a hint that they could be inhumans I guess as retarded as that sounds.

[Satsuki]

I don't need any of the other Spiderman characters, I think just Spidey would be enough, it's just how he's written in. And I don't trust anybody but Joss Whedon to do it, just the thought of him writing Spidey's lines is pretty exciting.

@Kaiolino:

A) Andrew Garfield is a pretty great actor, but his role was mostly written as a selfish jerk without responsibilty. Plus Kurtzman and Orci are like the shittiest writers in Hollywood.

It's kind of my same feeling with Henry Cavill as Superman. I think he's a decent actor and if Superman had been written PROPERLY he could have done a really good job. But Superman was never even allowed to even freaking smile. Seriously, did Superman ever smile in that movie? And I mean as Superman, not Clark Kent.

[Kaiolino]

@GetsugaZoro:

I didnt see that in Axis, maybe it was some other side chapters but didnt QS get repowered by Terrigenis once, that migth be a hint that they could be inhumans I guess as retarded as that sounds.

[hide][/hide]

@Satsuki:

I don't need any of the other Spiderman characters, I think just Spidey would be enough, it's just how he's written in. And I don't trust anybody but Joss Whedon to do it, just the thought of him writing Spidey's lines is pretty exciting.

http://s5.photobucket.com/user/gabrencillo/media/spidey_whedon_1_big.jpg.html

–- Update From New Post Merge ---

Winter Soldier, Guardians and X-Men all got visual effects Oscar nominations. I guess ASM2's videogame cutscene effects were too embarassing to take seriously.

Guardians also got a makeup and hairstyling nom.

[Daz]

@Satsuki:

They're already shoving in Wakanda? Like the movie isn't already packed as it is?

They can integrate Wakanda rather smoothly in the narrative, seeing how Ultron

! goes after a Vibranium upgrade, and Wakanda has the worlds only vibranium deposit.

If they can build up Andy Serkis' Klaww to be more memorable while they're at it, then I'm all for it.

–- Update From New Post Merge ---

@Nobodyman:

I don't see what any of these have to do with Ultron.

As for the rest, you are correct that they have at least set up a precedent for Ultron to exist, but, to me, that's not really the same thing as "building him up" (no pun intended). In the first Avengers, pretty much everything except those weird random aliens had been heavily hinted at ahead of time (Loki, the Tesseract, the forming of the Avengers, etc.). With Avengers 2, yes, we have that set up, but all of it could just as well lead to other things and none of it really strongly hints at Ultron specifically.

Now, I must clarify this is a relatively minor complaint, but I guess it's just my one lingering fear that Ultron may come off as kind of a randomly inserted villain. But I have faith in the MCU.

tl;dr I want everything spelled out to me because I'm a stupid dumb casual movie-goer

While it doesn't really count as Ultron-build up per se, according to toy packaging spoilers (of all things) they connect Ultron to the overall picture by having him

! Be based off some Chitauri AI program Tony found in their tech, after the attack on New York.

[Robby]

To the surprise of absolutely no one, the F4 film is a mess.

We get the word that people at Fox are not happy with the upcoming Fantastic Four movie, directed by Josh Trank. While some have called it “Chronicle 2 rather than Fantastic 4″ , this is clearly not what the studio was looking for.

One well-connected senior executive described it to me as “a mess”. And multiple sources are telling me about major disquiet at Fox regarding the state of the movie.

A year ago, I was directly told by primary sources that Fox were approaching other directors and writers to take on the project and start from scratch, though they didn’t find anyone willing. Fox denied this at the time.

As it stands, I’m told that reshoots are now being demanded, that millions of dollars are being freed up for the purpose and sets are being rebuilt in Louisiana.

Also, apparently the director trashed the set.

http://dailysuperheroes.com/josh-trashed-fantastic-four-set/

According to a number of thread posts on Tiger Droppings from staff associated with the project and their close ones, during the filming, Josh Trank had damaged property of the movie’s set in Baton Rouge worth no less than a few thousands of dollars. One of those posts claims that the director had trashed things so badly that the Chairman and CEO of Fox, Jim Gianopulos had to make an immediate visit to the spot apologizing in person to the owners of Celtic Media Center, where the sets were built.

Another one claims that Josh had ‘treated crew terribly’, was either late to respond to phone calls by the team or to arrive to the set, and on some days he didn’t even show up. A number of them stated the situations went so horrible that Josh might no longer be involved in any of the Fox ventures, including the sequel of The Fantastic Four.

[Zack]

Maybe the production goes so badly it never releases and the rights go back to Marvel? :ninja:

[TLC]

That's what happens when a director with tunnel vision tries to force a comic book movie to further his own agendas rather than embrace and tell the story for what it is.

[valiantt]

I'm more astonished that they have enough faith in this movie to actually CONSIDER the existence of a sequel.