Seriously? I'm not looking forward to this one - the appeal of Hank Pym, for me at least, is the fact that his powers have literally driven him quite crazy over the years, which the film probably won't even touch. If it does, then it'll be a flop. No win scenario.

 

I'm looking forward to it, because Edgar Wright is a director who has yet to let me down.

 

Still waiting on a good Spider-Man movie. If they cast Percy Jackson and Wichita in the new one, I imagine I'll still be waiting after that.

Also, lets get Chiwetel Ejiofor in the Black Panther outfit already (or Djimon Hounsou, but he's probably too old).

And Michael Jai White as Luke Cage.

 

Possible spoiler in the link URL:

[link=http://www.everyeye.it/cinema/notizia/iron-man-2-in-anteprima-il-martello-di-thor-spoiler-warning-_74208]First look at Thor's hammer[/link]

 

I have to admit I'm thrilled beyond all reason that these movies are happening, and that most of them have been as successful (in popular terms and artistic, IMO) as they have been. As a Marvel fan since the 70s, and especially during the 80s when I had no less than 9 Marvel subscriptions (Iron Man, Thor, Avengers, Captain America, Web of Spider-Man, plus all four Conan titles), today I feel a sense of ownership of, or at least participation in, this phenomenon.

Without the massive, collective will of the fanbase to make these films, a force which has been snowballing for some decades, there never would have been the numbers, from a marketing standpoint, to produce any of these movies on such a colossal scale or, most importantly, to remain so true to the source material. We, the fans, en masse and individually, can be proud to say that we affected those creative and corporate decisions; we helped to get these movies made.

Now, with success after success from various teams and approaches and studios, the Marvel film-making machine seems to have reached its stride, and is now building toward its zenith. I feel like the next three films -- Cap, Thor, Avengers -- are movies for which I've been waiting almost my entire life; I remember reading Captain America in 1976 -- the year before Star Wars came out -- and thinking what a great movie it would make! (The 1989 "movie" does not count -- because it doesn't. ) In 1987 I wrote the first act of a Thor screenplay, using various versions of his comic-book origin story, and some tomes on Norse mythology, as sources. (Even today my 1978 Mego Thor action figure stands guard nobly over my computer, hammer cocked in readiness!) I'm attached to these characters at the heart.

I'm primed, I'm pumped, I'm ready to cheer for what I imagine (and hope) will become the greatest superhero movie of all time: The Avengers. On the way toward that pie-in-the-sky goal, I'll take each character film as its own entity, not as a mere set-up, and critique each on its own terms. Yet I regard the Avengers as the culmination of all matters Marvel -- and it had better be a 4- or 5-star masterpiece, to justify its own existence!

 

While I largely agree with Merlin_Ambrosius69[/i] -- the shared Marvel film universe is a lovely concept and I'm so glad to see it happening -- I can't help but wonder how broadly shared the sentiment of [link=http://www.ultraculture.co.uk/3335-iron-man-2-review.htm]this unfortunate review[/link] of Iron Man 2 is. How invested will people who aren't interested in the comics going to be in this shared universe style of storytelling, especially if it grows? I mean, if Marvel Studios helms films like The Runaways outside the immediate Avengers franchise, will they be throwing in links and easter-eggs to the Avengers films? Will movie fans who aren't comics fans geek out over such gratuitous stuff, or will they be indifferent to it, or annoyed by it?

 

To be honest I don't feel like it matters. If people miss the point of the inclusion of certain elements, I don't see why that interferes with the enjoyment of the film, and there is something for the fans to enjoy on a whole other level.

The article you link to asks why anyone else should care who Nick Fury is. And maybe they shouldn't. The way I see it though, its one more inclusion of a larger franchise that I don't find to be any different than laying seeds in any other franchise. Nick Fury and S.H.E.I.L.D. may not have anything to do immediately with the story of Iron Man, but they will. Do nods like the Ten Rings really make that much of a difference?? Not presently no, but in the event they get to doing a Mandarin Story I am sure that will make a lot more sense and make people go back to the first Iron Man movie to enjoy seeing the seeds being laid that they missed the first time.

As Quest says the films stand alone and serve to tell individual stories. I don't see the problem with weaving in a larger tapestry. Its not like doing so makes the films entirely inaccessible to anyone whose never read a comic. In fact I find it gets more people interested.

 

I find that layering in of background material lends verisimilitude to a film; it's akin to the world-building we see in the SW and LOTR films.

 

That's along the lines I was thinking as well.

 

[link=http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=25987]Kevin Feige talks about the Marvel Movieverse[/link]

 

That is a freaking awesome -- read: highly informative -- interview and article! Feige confirms that the Avengers will be "a culmination of this first cycle of Marvel films", but that "the cycle was as much about the will to make films with those [individual] characters as much as it is to bring them all together in one film."

Here's a demonstrative (and juicy!) sample:


[blockquote]The producer said the sequence of films is a deliberate choice to give each character a debut. "['The Avengers'] comic was not about five new heroes you've never seen before just forming a team. It was about five heroes you've seen, whose comics you've liked, teaming up together for the first time," Feige explained. "The fun for us in an Avengers movie is not just simply having the characters interact together and having to introduce them for the first time, but if you've already seen them and already know them, hopefully, you'll already like them and see how their heroism and how their dynamics change entirely when they're butting up against each other."[/blockquote]

That about sums up the thrill of the Avengers, and Feige's approach and attitude in general (especially about creativity and not caving to fans' demands) is very promising.

 

[image=http://www.winonlyriders.net/thelostforum/cinema/Spiderman2.jpg]

 

[image=http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3365/4565805724_f82808c1af_o.jpg]

 

Wow. Sweet Thor picture!

 

Yeeeeaaaahhhhh, still waiting.

Sweet Thor picture. After seeing that and the leaked Destroyer pic, this movie will at least look badass.

 

That is mighty awesome. I like that they're going with the more modern, armored look, and that he's bearded, and that his hair is kind of a reddish-gold rather than yellow blond. He looks and feels like Marvel's Thor, but also subtly evokes the original mythological conception as well. Bravo, Branagh!

 

Matthew Vaughn (Layer Cake, Stardust, Kick-Ass) is directing X-Men prequel X-Men: First Class, opening June 3, 2011.

 

And Hugo Weaving has been confirmed as the Red Skull in Captain America.

 

I just had a fangasm.

 

Eh, unless an Age of Apocalypse film ever comes about the continuing Super Hero Boom doesn't really interest me at all. I'd love to see something that feels like an honest to god story in itself rather than another franchise installment that mostly sets up the next installment, which will be slightly different than the previous one, but with a new hottie actress thrown in...ugh.

 

Watchmen