Movie Avengers

[Shogunn2517]

Just took a quick five minutes and threw something together for those who couldn't see these guys together.

[captmorgan72]

Found this on another site, very cool don't you think?

[Shogunn2517]

Psh.  Better.

[detourne_me]

i've seen a few other fan mock-up posters, but i have to say that the one capmorgan posted is easily the best and most realistic one yet.

also you should look for the posters with shots of sam and scarjo on them,  very cool.

[Podmark]

It seems that Edward Norton will not be returning as Bruce Banner for the Avengers movie.

As reported by Hitflix.com:

"We have made the decision to not bring Ed Norton back to portray the title role of Bruce Banner in the Avengers. Our decision is definitely not one based on monetary factors, but instead rooted in the need for an actor who embodies the creativity and collaborative spirit of our other talented cast members. The Avengers demands players who thrive working as part of an ensemble, as evidenced by Robert, Chris H, Chris E, Sam, Scarlett, and all of our talented casts. We are looking to announce a name actor who fulfills these requirements, and is passionate about the iconic role in the coming weeks."

I like Edward Norton so I'm disappointed he won't be back, but I'd rather lose him than Robert Downey Jr. or Samuel L. Jackson. It'll be interesting to see who gets the roll.

[BentonGrey]

Man!  I am REALLY disappointed to hear that.  Norton was an unbelievably fantastic Bruce Banner.  I still am really looking forward to the movie, but this certainly dampens my enthusiasm a bit.

[Talavar]

Wow, interesting quote as to why they're not bringing back Norton - I mean, they're basically saying he doesn't play nice with others.

[TheMarvell]

someone had to do this:

[deano_ue]

Wow, interesting quote as to why they're not bringing back Norton - I mean, they're basically saying he doesn't play nice with others.

from what others have said, that maybe true, he demanded rewrites to hulk and wanted final cut of the film

[Reepicheep]

Interesting. I've never known anything about Norton off screen. On screen, he's amongst my top ten. Amazing to hear that even a fantastic actor like him can be sacked based on his real character.

[Trelau]

To be fair, "final cut" is a common request for famous actors. It basically means "i want to get sure you didn't distorted what i said with montage". I had an article about a guy who attack his filmmaker because he did his role "normally" and realise when the film got out that he had been changed into a comic relief via montage. That gotta sting.

Plus rewrites are the number one arguments between actors and authors. Nobody's ever happy with their lines.
Still, might beworth looking into, it'd be interesting if Norton is an ego-maniac off-screen, since he's used to play "modest" character. That's be a nice irony.

[Podmark]

I don't have the quote on hand but Norton's agent obviously rejects Feige's reason. Rumor is it could be money that caused this decision.

[detourne_me]

I really dug Norton as Bruce Banner... he was spot-on perfect casting... too bad
The latest rumour is that Joaquin Phoenix will take his role... i'm not sure about that cause Joaquin is a big guy like Eric Bana...  Norton.. you could tell he's a little powder keg or snapcase.

[Reepicheep]

I dunno, Joaquin is the kind of actor who will adjust his physique for the role. Think about how weedy he was in Gladiator - I know it was a while back, but if he can get that same sort of awkwardness again, you're in for a pretty decent Banner.

I'd be happy with Joaquin Phoenix myself.

[BlueBard]

I don't have the quote on hand but Norton's agent obviously rejects Feige's reason. Rumor is it could be money that caused this decision.

Here's the quote from Ed Norton's agent:

This offensive statement from Kevin Feige at Marvel is a purposefully misleading, inappropriate attempt to paint our client in a negative light.  Here are the facts:  two months ago, Kevin called me and said he wanted Edward to reprise the role of Bruce Banner in The Avengers.  He told me it would be his fantasy to bring Edward on stage with the rest of the cast at ComiCon and make it the event of the convention.  When I said that Edward was definitely open to this idea, Kevin was very excited and we agreed that Edward should meet with Joss Whedon to discuss the project.  Edward and Joss had a very good meeting (confirmed by Feige to me) at which Edward said he was enthusiastic at the prospect of being a part of the ensemble cast.  Marvel subsequently made him a financial offer to be in the film and both sides started negotiating in good faith.  This past Wednesday, after several weeks of civil, uncontentious discussions, but before we had come to terms on a deal, a representative from Marvel called to say they had decided to go in another direction with the part.  This seemed to us to be a financial decision but, whatever the case, it is completely their prerogative, and we accepted their decision with no hard feelings.

We know a lot of fans have voiced their public disappointment with this result, but this is no excuse for Feige's mean spirited, accusatory comments.  Counter to what Kevin implies here, Edward was looking forward to the opportunity to work with Joss and the other actors in the Avengers cast, many of whom are personal friends of his.  Feige's statement is unprofessional, disingenuous and clearly defamatory.  Mr. Norton talent, tireless work ethic and professional integrity deserve more respect, and so do Marvel's fans.

[BlueBard]

I'll say this much... it looks like any bridge that might bring back Norton has been smashed, burned, and blown sky high.  So folks who'd like to lobby for a reversal might as well get over it.

Of all the characters, the Hulk has to appear in CGI every minute he isn't Banner.  So whoever plays Banner isn't going to get any superheroic face-time.  Not knowing the storyline, there's no way to tell how much the actor was really going to be able to interact with the other leads.

I have no idea who would be the best actor for the part, besides Norton.  He's got to look the part.  He's got to be able to play a really smart guy who's been living on the run for a long time, and he's got to be able to make you believe that he's struggling to keep his emotions in check without coming across as distant.

As long as they don't pick Tobey McGuire, I'll probably be happy with whoever they choose.  Marvel is not going to send Avengers down in flames by picking a horrible actor for the part.  I wouldn't be surprised if they already had someone in mind to replace Norton.

The real issue will be who the main villain will be.

[thanoson]

I'm thinking Kang or the Masters of Evil. It has to be a group effort for the Avengers to shine. Going against hordes of robots and Kang would do the trick. Masters of Evil would allow them to go toe to toe with a counterpart as well.

[ow_tiobe_sb]

Am I the only one concerned about whether or not Marvel can pull this off?  Isn't it a well documented fact that there is an inverse proportion between number of super-powered beings on camera and quality of character development, screenwriting and editing?  Of the actors mentioned in connection with this film, only Robert Downey, Jr. and (if we accept the rumours), arguably, Joachin Phoenix have proven their mettle in ensemble casts.  (If Ms. Johansson reprises her role as the Black Widow, I would add her to this list as well.)  Say what you will, in my estimation, Samuel L. Jackson has become something of an immediate parody of himself by essentially playing the same role under different names for years, and that role always demands significant attention from the audience (not to mention the rest of the cast) that seems to run contrary to the idea of an "ensemble cast."  We have yet to see Mr. Evans and Mr. Hemsworth in their respective superhero roles (at least for this go round as Capt. America for Evans), so 'twould be unfair to subject them to intense skepticism until after their upcoming films have been released.

Perhaps it is fairer to say that The Avengers will not necessarily offer a truly ensemble piece; however, changing the terms used to describe the film does not speak to the question of whether or not Whedon, Penn, et al. can strike the right balance between characterisation (which will need to be revisited, at least in part, to help the audience come to terms with the new team dynamic), pace, special effects and action sequences, and some demonstrable commitment (however weak that may be) to continuity (at least to the continuity established by the satellite films, if I may coin that phrase, in orbit about this much anticipated film, if not to the comic books themselves).

There, I said(/wrote) it.  Tar and feather me for being an early skeptic.

ow_tiobe_sb
Phantom Bunburyist and Whirled Braker

[BWPS]

Joaquin Phoenix, for those who haven't been keeping up with him, has gone completely insane. He's supposedly quit acting a few years back to focus solely on rapping. Either way, I doubt this is true, why would anyone ever want to work with him after that?

Of course I'm concerned the movie MIGHT not be good, but I really don't have any reason to think that. People always take the smallest trends and say they're rules or something. Just because Spider-Man 3 didn't handle having three villains very well doesn't give me any reason to assume The Avengers isn't going to work with four super-heroes.

[BlueBard]

Joaquin Phoenix, for those who haven't been keeping up with him, has gone completely insane. He's supposedly quit acting a few years back to focus solely on rapping. Either way, I doubt this is true, why would anyone ever want to work with him after that?

Of course I'm concerned the movie MIGHT not be good, but I really don't have any reason to think that. People always take the smallest trends and say they're rules or something. Just because Spider-Man 3 didn't handle having three villains very well doesn't give me any reason to assume The Avengers isn't going to work with four super-heroes.

Avengers MAY work with four superheroes because their backstories will have already been dealt with in previous movies.  They don't have to rush or skimp on all of that detail.

Spider-Man 3 didn't work very well with three villains for the same reason that certain other superhero movies have not worked well -- too many plot lines in too little time.  The origin for Venom was especially complex and they simply could not do it justice while sharing screen time with other villains.  And they didn't do it justice, did they?  They had to change it and rush it and rationalize how it fit in with the others.

Most of the time movies have had to introduce characters in some detail in order to establish who the person is, how they fit into the plot, and what their motivations are.  In the case of super villains, it is also usually necessary to explain how they got their abilities.  By the time you've done so for two or three major supervillains, that's a lot of screen time that can't be used for something else.  Screen time can be flexible, but a 3 1/2 - 4 hour Avengers movie would be a hard sell.

If anything happens to trip up Avengers, it will be the complexity of tying all of these superhero characters together while also introducing one or more villains and the plot that goes with that villain/villains.

I think part of that has already been solved, keeping in mind the end credit clip from The Incredible Hulk where Stark introduces himself to General Ross.  The Hulk can theoretically provide the motivation to bring together Captain America, Iron Man, and Thor.  I have a suspicion that the Avengers villain(s) will be foreshadowed in either the Captain America movie or in the Thor movie.

[Podmark]

They should really only go with one primary villain, be that Loki or the Red Skull or Zemo or Kang or even Hulk. If that villain has a few minions they that will probably work as well. Too many full fledged villains will be tough to do justice - unless they're pulling them from the solo movies, like reusing the Red Skull.

[Talavar]

Joaquin Phoenix, for those who haven't been keeping up with him, has gone completely insane. He's supposedly quit acting a few years back to focus solely on rapping. Either way, I doubt this is true, why would anyone ever want to work with him after that?

Of course I'm concerned the movie MIGHT not be good, but I really don't have any reason to think that. People always take the smallest trends and say they're rules or something. Just because Spider-Man 3 didn't handle having three villains very well doesn't give me any reason to assume The Avengers isn't going to work with four super-heroes.

It's pretty certain Joaquin Phoenix's craziness was staged for a mockumentary he filmed with Casey Affleck, which is currently being shopped around to distributors. 

[TheMarvell]

I thought they said the villain of the first Avengers movie was going to be the Hulk himself. Is that not true anymore?

[Podmark]

I thought they said the villain of the first Avengers movie was going to be the Hulk himself. Is that not true anymore?

I don't think they've ever made such a definitive statement. Is the script even written yet?
I'm kinda expecting that a villain (probably Loki) will turn the team against the Hulk for most of the film.

[BentonGrey]

I thought they said the villain of the first Avengers movie was going to be the Hulk himself. Is that not true anymore?

I don't think they've ever made such a definitive statement. Is the script even written yet?
I'm kinda expecting that a villain (probably Loki) will turn the team against the Hulk for most of the film.

That's actually what I've been thinking in vague terms.  I would be perfectly happy with that, but I'd also be thrilled with Kang....or....pretty much anything from the first 20 years of the Avengers.  I am mildly sad that it doesn't seem like Ant-Man is actually going to make it into the flick, but I can live with it.  I do think it would be awesome to see this brought to life:
http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o1/CocaC0la99/GiantManMarvelspanel.jpg

I don't know what to think about the Norton thing...I suppose I hope they just keep Hulk as Hulk for most of the movie, because it's going to be hard seeing anyone else in that role.  What I REALLY hate about this is that Marvel has pretty much shot themselves in the foot in terms of ever getting him to reprise the role for Hulk sequels....I really, REALLY wanted to see Hulk II with the Leader that they set up at the end of the first one.

I see absolutely no reason that the flick can't work.  If a movie like League of Extraordinary Gentlemen can work moderately well, then there is no reason at all that an Avengers film can't be great if they get a good director and script.

[Podmark]

I see absolutely no reason that the flick can't work.  If a movie like League of Extraordinary Gentlemen can work moderately well, then there is no reason at all that an Avengers film can't be great if they get a good director and script.

Um wasn't that movie considered terrible? It's got a 17% on Rotten Tomatoes.
Regardless, I agree Avengers can be good. And I think that making sure it's good is a huge priority for Marvel Studios, and have they let us down yet?

[BentonGrey]

I see absolutely no reason that the flick can't work.  If a movie like League of Extraordinary Gentlemen can work moderately well, then there is no reason at all that an Avengers film can't be great if they get a good director and script.

Um wasn't that movie considered terrible? It's got a 17% on Rotten Tomatoes.
Regardless, I agree Avengers can be good. And I think that making sure it's good is a huge priority for Marvel Studios, and have they let us down yet?

*shrug* I found it a thoroughly enjoyable adventure flick, even if it was a lobotomized version of the source material.  It put together an ensemble cast with little to know prefacing, and gave them an understandable group dynamic and an understandable enemy.

But yes, as I've said many times before, Marvel has earned some good faith on my part.

[Trelau]

Ok i'm gonna be the bad guy here ^^
Since the idea of an Avenger movie was announced, i've always though "this will never work. it's too ridiculous"
The reason some superhero movie work very well is because they are movies first, and superhero flick second.

Spiderman was great because we get to see him outiside of the costume living his normal life. Ironman was brilliant because the main plot is Tony's ego and lifestyle.
Hulk only works as an action film, even though Norton did justice too Banner, 90% of the crowd (the non-comic crowd) didn't care about the human, they wanted to see him become hulk and smash thing.

My point his: Avenger might work for comic-fan (or to be more specific marvel-fan, because i consider myself a comic-fan and i already know i won't go see that movie) but the general crowd will NEVER follow. Unless you make it a general action flick, in that case you could just as well call it The A team, The Expendable or The Losers.

I'll take an other axample close to me: my girlfriend,comic-sceptic to the root. I tricked her with V for Vendetta (telling her this was a comic-book movie AFTER seeing it), i had to litterally beg for her to go see Dark Knight ("oh common! i made a costume! you have to take pictures!").
This were the big movies that convinced her that comic book movie could look like something else than X-Men or Fantastic Four.
Ironman was a great victory, since i went to see it alone first, and then drag her in be cause i knew she HAD to see this one to get her to accept comics-movies as movies in their own right.

But now Marvel crosses the line. I'll never be able to convince her to go see a green giant smashing stuff, a walking and talking Flag full of trope

Spoiler

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AmericaWinsTheWar http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WearingAFlagOnYourHead http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CaptainGeographic http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CaptainPatriotic

or an inexplicable actual freaking  god walking among men.
It asks for too much. Thor? The real mythological Thor, god of thunder, speaking with ironman? Why don't we have Jesus teaming up with superman then? I don't see his solo movie working, putting him in a team won't change a thing. They can try to do a "clash of the titan" approach, but as soon as you want to put him in the "real" world, it won't work. It's just too weird to have a true deity walking in modern day new york.
And captain america. Captain overly-patriotic. Captain imperialism. Captain jingoist. Captain "this A doesn't stand for france". Trying to export this movie outside of the US is a really strange decision, to say the least. Unless you make him the comic relief? He could behave as a cliché from the 40s, constantly having to explain to him "how the world works now", and that would become tiresome (it would explain the casting though)

This two, i'll never be able to sell to the non-marvel fan. Don't flame me, i still read the Avenger comic book, i don't hate Thor or Captain America, but you have to realise that you can't tell a serious story with those guys.
The only salvation is the generic action flick route, and let's hope marvel don't suffer from "i haven't seen/didn't liked that guy's movie, i won't go see the team version". I hope they realise who their strong suit are...or "is", really, just show a lot of ironman in the trailer and everyone who liked the first two movies will come see the avengers as if it was a sequel.

By the way, one friend from my school worked last week on the special effect of thor (he did the 3d hammer for the cgi-stunt double). He says the environnment/decor and effects look amazing, but the costume/character still look very..."kitsch"

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

So in other words, you hate comic books?  Because you're attacking all the typical comic book elements here.

And if you hate patriotism towards my country, you can keep it to yourself, thank you very much.

[TheMarvell]

I've been doubting the Avengers movie ever since it was announced. Thor is especially hard to swallow, comic book fan or not. A regular person getting super powers, is believable in it's own way. A deity walking among men who came from another realm called Asgard is in a completely different ballpark. Combine them both and I'm guessing it's something the general audience won't quite understand. And what if Thor or Captain America ends up being terrible? How will that affect the Avengers movie?

but if there's one thing I really dislike about all the gearing up for this film, is that Marvel seems to be quickly forgetting that they're making other movies besides Avengers. A good portion of Iron Man 2 was an ad for future Marvel films (Avengers & Thor) and I have a feeling much of Cpt America and Thor will be the same. Focus on the movie you're making now, while throwing in a couple of easter eggs (like Iron Man 1).

I'm cautiously optimistic about this, since I think Marvel is taking most of the right steps. But I can't help but feel skeptical all the same.