Marvel Studios needs to get Galactus and Silver Surfer

[JakeSully]

MCU is seriously lacking them and Galactus could be the ultimate MCU villain even in an Avengers movie.

Silver Surfer needs to be in Guardians 2 or 3.

[DarkLightDragon]

Too bad Fox is sticking to it's guns and keeping the rights to using any FF-stuff for their films, even after their little reboot failed miserably.

[NinjaPug]

Now that Marvel Studios is outside the Marvel reporting umbrella I wonder if Feige will be able to negotiate any type of agreement for any Marvel characters with Fox. I don't know how much of the bad blood between the two was caused by Perlmutter who is out of the picture now.

[TheSkeletonMan939]

I don't care much for the FF, I think we've all seen enough of them cinematically for now, but Silver Surfer? Galactus? Annihilus? I'd love to see Marvel get all of those cosmic characters.

[Amaranthus]

You guys are way too obsessed with Marvel movies.
They're not even that good.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

You guys are way too obsessed with Marvel movies.
They're not even that good.

You're back! The pet rock missed you! :tgrin:

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Also, Galactus seems like a pretty good contender for the next big bad of the MCU after Thanos is dealt with. Provided they can get the rights, of course.

Watching the original 2005 or whenever Fantastic Four film, I think the team could be successfully translated to the MCU. Here's what I can come up with after a few weeks of mulling it over:

In the Cold War Era, disgraced scientist Franklin Richards has been unable to find any support in the U.S. or NATO for his research and eventually turns to President Victor Von Doom, leader of the small but powerful nation of Latveria. He and his team (Sue, Johnny, and Ben) travel to Latveria and work on a dimensional portal that eventually opens to the Negative Zone.

The five travel through the portal, affected, powers, Von Doom realizes the power of the technology and becomes determined to conquer all for Latveria's rise among the nations, blah blah...

Eventually, the Fantastic Four have to lock Von Doom in the Negative Zone--but at the cost of locking themselves in with him, destroying the portal...

Cut to present day, when SHIELD, Pym, or some equivalent science force opens the Negative Zone and rescues the Four. Doom returns to Latveria, fighting the Four and the Avengers to a standstill before retreating to Latveria.

[MikeandRaph87]

What characters are free for Marvel to use? Quicksilver was allowed to be used, but was offed in his initial appearance. They are not the Fantastic Four, but Galactus is among their rouges gallery. Silver Surfer on the otherhand should be allowed to be used however there might have to be a fee to include him.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

What characters are free for Marvel to use? Quicksilver was allowed to be used, but was offed in his initial appearance. They are not the Fantastic Four, but Galactus is among their rouges gallery. Silver Surfer on the otherhand should be allowed to be used however there might have to be a fee to include him.

As of right now, I believe the characters in Fox's "Fantastic Four bundle" are Doom, Galactus, Silver Surfer, Skrulls, the Fantastic Four themselves, and Reed's future kids (Franklin and Valeria).

Kang the Conqueror is, I believe, a traditional FF villain, so he might be tied up with Fox as well.

However, it is my understanding that Namor got sold off separately to Universal...?

[DarkLightDragon]

You guys are way too obsessed with Marvel movies.
They're not even that good.

Who said anything about me?

I was commenting based on the fallout of Failtastic Four and how it would affect the likelihood of seeing SS and Galactus in Marvel Cinematic movies.

This has nothing to do with my personal preference for the company.:roll:

[ZariusTwo]

Bleeding Cool hints the Fiege/Horn teaming may not be the only shake-up at the company

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2015/09/01/perlmutterfeige-split-is-only-the-start-of-big-marvel-changes/

Really, if Quesada and Loeb get the boot, I will be dancing in the street with Jagger and Bowie. That will happen and you will all let it happen.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Bleeding Cool hints the Fiege/Horn teaming may not be the only shake-up at the company

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2015/09/01/perlmutterfeige-split-is-only-the-start-of-big-marvel-changes/

Really, if Quesada and Loeb get the boot, I will be dancing in the street with Jagger and Bowie. That will happen and you will all let it happen.

But... but Quesada and Loeb are the guys running the TV side of things, right? I don't give a rat's patooey about Agents of SHIELD or Agent Carter, but Daredevil was epic. And I'm expecting Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, et al to be just as good.

Why should I want them gone?

[ZariusTwo]

The success of Daredevil has nothing to do with those hacks outside of them hiring the people responsible for that success. Anyone can do their f*cking job.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

In the Cold War Era, disgraced scientist REED Richards has been unable to find any support in the U.S. or NATO for his research and eventually turns to President Victor Von Doom, leader of the small but powerful nation of Latveria. He and his team (Sue, Johnny, and Ben) travel to Latveria and work on a dimensional portal that eventually opens to the Negative Zone.



Fixed that for you.


As of right now, I believe the characters in Fox's "Fantastic Four bundle" are Doom, Galactus, Silver Surfer, Skrulls, the Fantastic Four themselves, and Reed's future kids (Franklin and Valeria).

Kang the Conqueror is, I believe, a traditional FF villain, so he might be tied up with Fox as well.

However, it is my understanding that Namor got sold off separately to Universal...?


I'd personally rather see Namor than Kang- he's got personal history with Sue.


Really, if Quesada and Loeb get the boot, I will be dancing in the street with Jagger and Bowie. That will happen and you will all let it happen.


And you won't be the only one. But then, you know my feelings on Joephisto....


But... but Quesada and Loeb are the guys running the TV side of things, right? I don't give a rat's patooey about Agents of SHIELD or Agent Carter, but Daredevil was epic. And I'm expecting Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, et al to be just as good.

Why should I want them gone?


These are also the guys responsible for MOST of the bad directions of the Marvel comics in the last decade. Spidey and Avengers fans everywhere would be vindicated!


The success of Daredevil has nothing to do with those hacks outside of them hiring the people responsible for that success. Anyone can do their f*cking job.


Exactly. In fact, I'd venture to say that they are a large part of the reason for mass fan-exodus.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Thanks, Duckie! I did indeed mean Reed Richard. :tlol:

So these guys are basically Dan Didio for the Marvel Comics?

[ZariusTwo]

So these guys are basically Dan Didio for the Marvel Comics?

They're worse. Much worse.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Heh, unless it's years later when Franklin grows up and uses his reality-warping powers, LOL! In which case, maybe he took dad's place? Hmm, now I'm suddenly thinking of interesting "What If" storylines. Sounds like fodder for my Red-Back series!

And yes, that would be an accurate assessment.

[JakeSully]

That would be awesome to have FF back to Marvel.

Fox needs to stick to X-Men and their universe and leave FF alone.

Wouldn't Galactus be the best MCU ever?

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

That would be awesome to have FF back to Marvel.

Fox needs to stick to X-Men and their universe and leave FF alone.

Wouldn't Galactus be the best MCU ever?

Honestly, Fox needs to give ALL the rights back to Marvel. Or at least roll the X-Men under the MCU and retain distribution rights or something...

If Marvel got ALL the rights back, they could/should/would have enough power to come up with deals to finance more movies per year. Thus, allowing an MCU X-Men series... where Rogue wouldn't be useless, Cyclops wouldn't be useless, Storm wouldn't be useless, Jean Grey wouldn't be EMO, and Wolverine wouldn't be God.

[sdp]

I hate people that say that X character from the FF should be at Marvel or that Marvel should get the FF so they can use their rogues/characters. I do agree that FF has awesome characters but the FF are not lame characters, they're some of the best heroes that Marvel has, I'd rather see some FF adventures than a bunch of the other movies of heroes Marvel is making, People just haven't read any good FF stories I guess since they don't seem to get any respect on the internet.

I do think Fox ****ed up the FF so I'm not sure how they plan to salvage it, their "Cinematic" Universe doesn't really benefit from the F4. At least the way things are now. I do think studios missed the ball, Sony still had control of Punisher and Ghost Rider and Fox could've kept Daredevil easily. Marvel was already making bank with their early cinematic universe and yet Sony and Fox couldn't get their sh-t together. Fox having F4 and Daredevil to play with would've made a lot more room to explore ideas and Sony with Punisher and Ghost Rider as well.


Honestly, Fox needs to give ALL the rights back to Marvel. Or at least roll the X-Men under the MCU and retain distribution rights or something...

If Marvel got ALL the rights back, they could/should/would have enough power to come up with deals to finance more movies per year. Thus, allowing an MCU X-Men series... where Rogue wouldn't be useless, Cyclops wouldn't be useless, Storm wouldn't be useless, Jean Grey wouldn't be EMO, and Wolverine wouldn't be God.

Why do they need to? Financial reasons aside which is why they would never do it do you really want Marvel to have X-Men back?

What good would it honestly do? Besides having some cool moments of having say Wolverine in an Avengers movie there's nothing to gain. Fox does a fairly decent job with the X-Men movies. Sure some characters haven't gotten the same characterizations but I could say the same thing in the MCU.

Marvel wouldn't magically release more movies per year, they already have too many movies in their calendars so that only means some other heroes would get bumped back in favor of X-Men. If Marvel had had them all along we might've never seen the GotG movie and would definitely not be getting the inhumanoids etc. And we'd see a new X-Men movie every few years, I mean Fox is releasing them fairly consistent while at Marvel they'd see one new movie every few years. X-Men is good at Fox, Marvel wouldn't do anything better with it.

[CyberCubed]

I think Singer recognizes his mishandling of Cyclops and is going to make up for it. The good thing about casting young new actors for Cyclops, Jean and Storm means they'll probably stick with them for future movies and give them proper screentime this go around.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

I hate people that say that X character from the FF should be at Marvel or that Marvel should get the FF so they can use their rogues/characters. I do agree that FF has awesome characters but the FF are not lame characters, they're some of the best heroes that Marvel has, I'd rather see some FF adventures than a bunch of the other movies of heroes Marvel is making, People just haven't

I've finally come around to the "give it back to Marvel" mantra because I finally do think that they're the only ones out there currently willing or able to do justice by the characters. I'm not saying it all has to be rolled into one linear cinematic universe, as I absolutely don't think the X-Men belong in a normal shared universe; I think they function best isolated, in a world without superheroes.

But Fox doesn't seem to get the X-Men; the only movie where it felt like an ensemble team was "First Class", but even then, it didn't feature most of the real "First Class" team. I could list all of the major players in the X-Men universe that have been mishandled, but instead, I'll list the characters that have been done well... it's a much shorter list:

Magneto
Professor X
Wolverine
Mystique
Beast
Quicksilver
Nightcrawler
Angel
Stryker
Sebastian Shaw

Most of the main roster have been done poorly or even flat-out terribly. Fox has also had SEVEN films to get this right. Whereas Marvel got Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Bruce Banner, and Guardians of the Galaxy right in ONE movie each.

As for Sony, I'm not a Spiderman fan so I can't confidently critique the characters or films. But considering that after a pretty good trilogy, Sony rebooted and did a completely unoriginal reboot (Amazing Spiderman did barely anything new for the character, despite excellent casting) and the sequel was an absolute CLUSTERFRAK... I'm not a Spiderman fan, but Marvel just might change that. It could happen.

Anyone who's seen both the Fox Daredevil movie and the Netflix Marvel series doesn't have a single solitary toe to stand out; Matt Murdock going back to Marvel was a godsend. And I don't even need to address the Fantastic Four... we ALL know what's down with that. :tlol:

As far as I understand the current MCU/Sony deal, Marvel isn't going to be solely producing or financing the Spiderman movies; but they WILL be providing vast creative input (hopefully control) for the property, characters, stories, and direction. It's hopefully going to be a win/win.

I want to see the same sort of financial/legal cooperation between Fox and Marvel. X-Men won't happen anytime soon, because Fox has made vast improvements with their last films. But they've still had quite a few problems with those same vastly improved films. With the same creative team, I'm not overly optimistic that Fox is ever gonna give us any truly definitive X-Men movies. They'll range from terrible to passable to pretty good. But that's it.

[chrisdude]

Singer definitely didn't "stick to the script," as far as characterizations (X-Men is about Charles and Erik, anyway) (Still bummed about Iceman, though), but I think they've delivered more compelling stories than 90% of the MCU. People talk all day, here, about who's done justice to what characters, but not about how almost every MCU movie is about stopping the power hungry bad guy who wants to abuse the special technology/infinity stone. They just plug in the characters. literally formulaic. It's so darn repetitive, like me doing this rant.

At least Civil War should be interesting. I mean, it's basically the same ethical question the first X-Men movie was about. But still, anything where Stark and Rogers argue can have my money.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Singer definitely didn't "stick to the script," as far as characterizations (X-Men is about Charles and Erik, anyway) (Still bummed about Iceman, though), but I think they've delivered more compelling stories than 90% of the MCU. People talk all day, here, about who's done justice to what characters, but not about how almost every MCU movie is about stopping the power hungry bad guy who wants to abuse the special technology/infinity stone. They just plug in the characters. literally formulaic. It's so darn repetitive, like me doing this rant.

At least Civil War should be interesting. I mean, it's basically the same ethical question the first X-Men movie was about. But still, anything where Stark and Rogers argue can have my money.

I definitely agree with you on that. The X-Men movies have a FAR more compelling theme: prejudice, society, and acceptance. That's why I really love First Class, which I think laid out the themes best of all the movies. But upon more recent rewatches, it just really bugs me how so many great characters are just... MEH. :tlol:

So, you can have strong stories (Fox), strong protagonists (MCU), or divisive but compelling stories with strong protagonists (Warner Brothers/DC). Or repetitive Spiderman origin stories. :tlol:

[TigerClaw]

The X-Men movies are more about the characters, it was never about major events that happen.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

The X-Men movies are more about the characters, it was never about major events that happen.

Depends on which characters... I'd say the original timeline movies are about Wolverine, Xavier, Magneto, (and sort of about Rogue and Jean Grey). The new movies are about Xavier, Magneto, Mystique, and Beast.

I'd say the movies are much more about events, sacrificing many characters on the potential roster to focus on events.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

That's actually sort of true. The X-Men movies are character-driven, while most of the MCU films have been more event-driven. The MCU has been about the build-up to Infinity Gauntlet and Ultron and Thanos and Civil War all along, seeding the stories to lead up to those stories. On the other hand, the X-Men films have borrowed or adapted stories from the comics almost whole-cloth, while focusing more on the character interactions, and the broader themes of the comics themselves. They're two very different animals.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

That's actually sort of true. The X-Men movies are character-driven, while most of the MCU films have been more event-driven. The MCU has been about the build-up to Infinity Gauntlet and Ultron and Thanos and Civil War all along, seeding the stories to lead up to those stories. On the other hand, the X-Men films have borrowed or adapted stories from the comics almost whole-cloth, while focusing more on the character interactions, and the broader themes of the comics themselves. They're two very different animals.

Agreed.

However, I personally think they're both failing at what they're trying to do. To me, it's ironic;


The MCU is being plot-driven, but its plots are cookie-cutter, repetitive, and growing tiresome... but their characters are developed incredibly well, for the most part. Tony, Steve, Natasha, Clint, Bruce, Thor, Wanda, Scott, Quill, etc... those are the draw for me.
The Fox-Men is being character driven, but so many of their characters are underutilized and marginalized compared to their source material counterparts... but the plots and stories are being done incredibly well, regarding the prejudice, oppression, and human rights issues.


But hey. I do greatly enjoy both film franchises, all my problems aside. They all have a spot on my DVD shelf (except Thor 1/2 because I find Thor incredibly boring, and Iron Man 3 because f*** that movie). At the end of the day, while I want them to be BETTER movies, they're still (for the most part) GOOD movies.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

I'll give you that one, for certain. You found Thor boring? Really? I actually kind of enjoyed those, even though I'm not a big Thor fan. I liked the second one better, admittedly, because of the interesting dynamic of having to Team up with Loki, and because, well, I just LOVE dark elves, LOL!

I'll admit I had a few issues with I-M 3, however. Mandarin being the biggest, obviously, though it was an unusual twist to do that. I'd still have preferred the REAL Mandarin, though.

Ideally, I'd like to see the MCU movies delve deeper into the wider world around the heroes a bit more, which I think would help bring them into better focus in relation to the rest of the world. I think the biggest problem to date has been that they're trying to cram stories that took 3-4 or more issues (sometimes a full year's worth) to tell, into a two hour movie each time. On the other hand, the X-Men films are using shorter story arcs that can work better in a film format. Shaw and the First Class story are a perfect example. Though I'd have rather had Shaw as the main villain in Last Stand instead of Magneto, since he and the Hellfire Club are more closely tied to the Phoenix Saga than to the original X-Men.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

I'll give you that one, for certain. You found Thor boring? Really? I actually kind of enjoyed those, even though I'm not a big Thor fan. I liked the second one better, admittedly, because of the interesting dynamic of having to Team up with Loki, and because, well, I just LOVE dark elves, LOL!

I'll admit I had a few issues with I-M 3, however. Mandarin being the biggest, obviously, though it was an unusual twist to do that. I'd still have preferred the REAL Mandarin, though.

Ideally, I'd like to see the MCU movies delve deeper into the wider world around the heroes a bit more, which I think would help bring them into better focus in relation to the rest of the world. I think the biggest problem to date has been that they're trying to cram stories that took 3-4 or more issues (sometimes a full year's worth) to tell, into a two hour movie each time. On the other hand, the X-Men films are using shorter story arcs that can work better in a film format. Shaw and the First Class story are a perfect example. Though I'd have rather had Shaw as the main villain in Last Stand instead of Magneto, since he and the Hellfire Club are more closely tied to the Phoenix Saga than to the original X-Men.

I just don't like Thor. He seems more like a male model with designer stubble than a Norse god or warrior... and I can't stand Natalie Portman as Jane. Loki and Darcy (yeah, I said it) are the only characters I really like in the Thor movies. Everyone else is just unlikeable or bland to me.

I'm probably gonna have to add the Thor movies to my shelf at some point, for continuity's sake, as Loki sure as heck isn't gonna go away any time soon. Maybe they'll at least not bring Jane back or kill her off. Wishful thinking...

2013 was the worst year of MCU movies yet. When I like the Thor sequel better than the Iron Man threequel, you KNOW something's jacked up. :twink:

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Well, to each their own, I suppose. I did like the scientist guy. (Gods, I can never remember the names of half the characters unless I read the comics, LOL!) I liked Heimdall and the Warriors Three, and Odin was just awesome all around! But then again, I'm more well-versed in Morse mythology than most, due to having studied it a bit as part of my Wiccan practice.

[ZariusTwo]

Following the announcement that Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige will now report directly to Disney Studio Chief Alan Horn instead of Marvel Entertainment CEO Isaac Perlmutter, word is circulating from BirthMoviesDeath that the Marvel Creative Committee has disbanded.

The group, which once oversaw the development of Marvel Studios productions, included members like President of Marvel Entertainment Alan Fine, superstar comics writer Brian Michael Bendis, Marvel Comics publisher Dan Buckley and Marvel Chief Creative Officer Joe Quesada. The Committee would offer notes and thoughts on projects as they developed from script to screen.

Though Marvel's films have been almost unanimously embraced by audiences worldwide, BirthMoviesDeath reports that the Committee was a source of frustration for many working on the productions, focusing "on details of nit-picky science that ignored the general tone of the script itself" and causing director Edgar Wright to depart the "Ant-Man" film. Additionally, as many of the Committee members hold other important jobs within the publisher, this process was often slow and affected the work of the filmmakers.

"Captain America: Civil War" and perhaps "Doctor Strange" will likely be the last films overseen by the Committee and Perlmutter. Feige, Louis D'Esposito and Victoria Alonso will now reportedly helm the projects without the Committee's influence as the studio shifts gears and heads into Phase Three.

A version of the Committee may survive at Marvel TV, according to BirthMoviesDeath, as that division remains under Perlmutter's control.

http://www.comicbookresources.com/article/marvel-studios-creative-committee-has-disbanded

Quesada and Bendis removed from anything is good news. Now if only they'd get the overall boot.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Well, to each their own, I suppose. I did like the scientist guy. (Gods, I can never remember the names of half the characters unless I read the comics, LOL!) I liked Heimdall and the Warriors Three, and Odin was just awesome all around! But then again, I'm more well-versed in Morse mythology than most, due to having studied it a bit as part of my Wiccan practice.

Odin was very well done, but I didn't find him a likeable character. Terrible father, awesome character. :tlol:

The Warriors Three were just... for me, it felt like the writers and director didn't bother to flesh them out as anything other than three interchangeable Not-Thor's who were there to help Thor. They felt pointless to me.

And when people waste somebody as awesome as Idris Elba in a role where he just stands there in gold contact lenses... basically, I could have liked Heimdall and Sif if they got to do anything interesting instead of just stand there and watch, and be jealous of Jane.

And I liked Eric Selvig until he lost his pants. :tlol:

[chrisdude]

I don't think it's fair that the X-Men films get so much flack for underutilizing characters. The fact of the matter is, there are a million mutants, and countless opportunities to team them up. I feel like we should be happy that SO MANY characters even appear, and accept that they can't include a ton of mutants and develop all of them. I mean, X-Men stories are going to involve large teams, and we can't really blame them if your favorite character isn't one of the 20-something characters they've focused on. Every character that barely has a speaking role, or is simply included in a team of goons, is a character who wouldn't be there if Singer or somebody didn't say, "Hey, here's a role we could fill with a classic character."

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

I don't think it's fair that the X-Men films get so much flack for underutilizing characters. The fact of the matter is, there are a million mutants, and countless opportunities to team them up. I feel like we should be happy that SO MANY characters even appear, and accept that they can't include a ton of mutants and develop all of them. I mean, X-Men stories are going to involve large teams, and we can't really blame them if your favorite character isn't one of the 20-something characters they've focused on. Every character that barely has a speaking role, or is simply included in a team of goons, is a character who wouldn't be there if Singer or somebody didn't say, "Hey, here's a role we could fill with a classic character."

It's not that they're under-utilizing characters--it's that they're under-utilizing MAIN characters.

Personally, I loved Blink and Bishop in Days of Future Past. Personally, I'd prefer they got more screentime but they didn't. But Cyclops, Jean Grey, Storm, Rogue, and (sometimes) Xavier are all incredibly incompetent or outright useless in the X-Men films.

[ZariusTwo]

Disney consider Age of Ultron a failiure.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2015/09/03/avengers-age-of-ultron-was-considered-a-failure-at-disney-and-what-happened-next/

[TurtleTitan97]

Disney consider Age of Ultron a failiure.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2015/09/03/avengers-age-of-ultron-was-considered-a-failure-at-disney-and-what-happened-next/

Wow, didn't see that coming...

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Disney consider Age of Ultron a failiure.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2015/09/03/avengers-age-of-ultron-was-considered-a-failure-at-disney-and-what-happened-next/

A number of Marvel movies deserve hate and vitriol, or at least strong disfavor and condemnation.

Age of Ultron wasn't one of them... I really don't see what has so many people up in arms or with wadded undergarments on it.

[chrisdude]

Every sequel is expected to make more money. The first movie was a success, and floated around for a couple years. Naturally, they expect more people to be in line for the second one.

[TheSkeletonMan939]

Age of Ultron wasn't one of them... I really don't see what has so many people up in arms or with wadded undergarments on it.

Even The Incredible Hulk was more bearable than Age of Ultron. It felt like a huge step backwards for the world they've been trying to build up.

I consider AoU a failure, not financially though.

[ToTheNines]

Every sequel is expected to make more money. The first movie was a success, and floated around for a couple years. Naturally, they expect more people to be in line for the second one.

Plus, of the phase 2 sequels, AoU is the only one to make less than the original.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Even The Incredible Hulk was more bearable than Age of Ultron. It felt like a huge step backwards for the world they've been trying to build up.

I consider AoU a failure, not financially though.

Please explain, how did it feel a huge step backwards?

I thought it built very naturally on the Avengers 1 and the various Captain America and Iron Man movies. There were some problems, which I'll list in a second, but none of them were a huge detraction from the overall movie.

Bruce Banner / Natasha Romanov romance... Straight Outta Nowhere
HYDRA being dealt with in the first few minutes (not what a lot of us were expecting, but it got us to Ultron faster)
No callbacks to Iron Man 3 (this is a GOOD thing IMO)
Thor's bizarre cave visions (obviously a victim of script cuts)

[MsMarvelDuckie]

About Bruce and Natasha: (Why do I keep thinking of Boris and Natasha from Bullwinkle, LOL?) It wasn't completely out of nowhere. Natasha seemed to have made a connection with him in Avengers, and she has been the closest to him of all of them- starting from when Fury sent her to bring him in! There was a reason he sent HER in, and not Cap or Tony. That said, there also seems to have been some sort of code or training regimen instated between the two, hence her lullaby" routine with him. They were clearly finding some kind of bond from the beginning.

Now, I know some of it seemed a bit TOO mushy or intimate, but given the difficulty of both characters for forming close relationships, it seems logical that they would find some common ground in their shared estrangement from others. So, I found it quite natural, if a bit "deep" for being so early in their association. But maybe they just felt like they might not have time to beat around the bush.

A also feel Thor's vision was missing something, probably from editing. It will be interesting to see if they add a director's cut or deleted scenes in the DVD or Blu-ray release. I'd like to see that.

[CyberCubed]

So what's going to happen to Joss Wheden now? Go back to his Buffy comics and never be allowed to write a big movie screenplay ever again?

[ZariusTwo]

P HYDRA being dealt with in the first few minutes (not what a lot of us were expecting, but it got us to Ultron faster)[/LIST]

And boy that was worth the wait huh? Not.

Ultron was a major problem with the movie. He came across as a Schumacher-level Bat villain with no sense of menace from him. Just constant quips and sarcasm. He was a walk in the park by the end of it all. Wanda caused more damage to the group than he did overall.

[Cure]

Ultron was a major problem with the movie. He came across as a Schumacher-level Bat villain with no sense of menace from him. Just constant quips and sarcasm. He was a walk in the park by the end of it all.

Agreed. The overall jokey nature of ALL Marvel movies is an issue for me. I still have fun with them, but man I wish the characters took things more seriously.

So what's going to happen to Joss Wheden now? Go back to his Buffy comics and never be allowed to write a big movie screenplay ever again?

That would be ideal.

[ToTheNines]

And boy that was worth the wait huh? Not.

Ultron was a major problem with the movie. He came across as a Schumacher-level Bat villain with no sense of menace from him. Just constant quips and sarcasm. He was a walk in the park by the end of it all. Wanda caused more damage to the group than he did overall.

He's certainly one of the most poorly adapted characters of all time. I get that he was part Tony Stark, but not only was that aspect half baked, it was just dumb and not who Ultron is.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Yeah, they may have strayed too far in making Tony his creator instead of Pym.

[TheSkeletonMan939]

Please explain, how did it feel a huge step backwards?

I felt like it was a sequel to The Avengers - and only The Avengers, with complete disregard to the rest of the MCU.

Tony Stark is still Iron Man, even though in Iron Man 3 he made it clear that he was no longer intending to ever put on the suit again (he blew every single one up, too). This is more of a problem with IM3 than AoU, but that doesn't mean it's all right to just pretend IM3 never happened.

Gone were the badass antics of Black Widow that we saw in Winter Soldier. The only thing she did in this movie was ride a motorcycle. Any chemistry and trust she and Cap had built up in that film seems virtually nonexistent in this installment.

SHIELD is back, even though that goes completely against the ending and message of Winter Soldier.

Add all that to the silliness you mentioned, and it doesn't pan out well at all.

I feel compelled to point out that the first Avengers film didn't WOW me either, so I'm a little biased.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

I felt like it was a sequel to The Avengers - and only The Avengers, with complete disregard to the rest of the MCU.

Tony Stark is still Iron Man, even though in Iron Man 3 he made it clear that he was no longer intending to ever put on the suit again (he blew every single one up, too). This is more of a problem with IM3 than AoU, but that doesn't mean it's all right to just pretend IM3 never happened.

Gone were the badass antics of Black Widow that we saw in Winter Soldier. The only thing she did in this movie was ride a motorcycle. Any chemistry and trust she and Cap had built up in that film seems virtually nonexistent in this installment.

SHIELD is back, even though that goes completely against the ending and message of Winter Soldier.

Add all that to the silliness you mentioned, and it doesn't pan out well at all.

I feel compelled to point out that the first Avengers film didn't WOW me either, so I'm a little biased.

Good points. But I'm personally grateful IM3 was swept under the rug.

And yeah, Ultron could have been handled better; it's one of those cases of the trailer villain being more menacing than the film villain. I think the main problem with Ultron is that the entire character was based on Stark, not Pym. The film did a good job of portraying Ultron based on Stark... but that was the wrong thing to do.

[chrisdude]

Well, SHIELD's return is covered in Agents of SHIELD, along with the set-up and build-up to the attack on the Hydra base.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Well, SHIELD's return is covered in Agents of SHIELD, along with the set-up and build-up to the attack on the Hydra base.

But given how divorced the Agents of SHIELD show is from the movies, it can easily be counted as a plot hole (even though those in the know are aware of it).

I mean, Whedon has point-blank said that Coulson is still "dead" in the MCU movies and won't be making a return. That's always subject to change, but there it is.

[chrisdude]

If everyone's gonna complain that Age of Ultron ignored things from previous movies, they've got to give Agents of SHIELD credit for connecting to Age of Ultron, Iron Man 3, Thor 2, Winter Soldier, Agents Carter AND Guardians (if you wanna count the Kree stuff). It's the most connected thing in the MCU.

And the show's called Agents of SHIELD. Everyone who was in the theater like, "SHIELD's back? I wonder how" should immediately follow that thought with, "I guess I should've been watching that show."

[TheSkeletonMan939]

Whedon has point-blank said that Coulson is still "dead" in the MCU movies and won't be making a return.

And that's why AoU didn't work. Whedon apparently doesn't have much respect for the concept of a shared universe. Comic writers tend to have this mindset as well; it's okay in comics because there's an issue every month, they have to keep it interesting every now and then.

But that's just plain dangerous to do in a big-budget top-of-the-line Hollywood film that is clearly supposed to be building on top of what has already been established. Whedon can't just pretend IM3 never happened, he can't pretend AoS isn't happening...

Incidentally, I think it'd be awesome if Coulson appeared in Civil War somehow.

[Ninjinister]

Silver Surfer is lame. Fox can keep him for all I care.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

If everyone's gonna complain that Age of Ultron ignored things from previous movies, they've got to give Agents of SHIELD credit for connecting to Age of Ultron, Iron Man 3, Thor 2, Winter Soldier, Agents Carter AND Guardians (if you wanna count the Kree stuff). It's the most connected thing in the MCU.

And the show's called Agents of SHIELD. Everyone who was in the theater like, "SHIELD's back? I wonder how" should immediately follow that thought with, "I guess I should've been watching that show."

Brilliant point. :tlol:

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Good points. But I'm personally grateful IM3 was swept under the rug.

And yeah, Ultron could have been handled better; it's one of those cases of the trailer villain being more menacing than the film villain. I think the main problem with Ultron is that the entire character was based on Stark, not Pym. The film did a good job of portraying Ultron based on Stark... but that was the wrong thing to do.


I agree. That was my only real issue with the movie, but it's a pretty big one.

[sdp]

Silver Surfer lame? wow. He's one of the coolest characters ever created, and I'm not talking about Marvel. But I guess casual Marvel fans can enjoy their Deadpool or whatever.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

That's being little judgmental, don't you think? Plenty of "serious" (aka hardcore, rabid, etc) Marvel fans like Deadpool. And plenty of "casual" fans like Silver Surfer. There's no rule who a fan can or can't like, or how "serious" a fan has to be to like a certain character. Blanket statements like that bother me, as it shows an elitist attitude toward the fans AND the characters.