Avengers 4

[oldmanwinters]

One thing that's been bugging me about Hulk in the MCU (post 2008 ) is that it seems like Betty Ross never existed (unless you acknowledge Stark's Veronica armor joke). General Ross still comes around. I can believe that Banner could move on to other love interests like Black Widow, but seems to me the Hulk would always have an insatiable desire to reunite with Betty at some point.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by oldmanwinters

One thing that's been bugging me about Hulk in the MCU (post 2008 ) is that it seems like Betty Ross never existed (unless you acknowledge Stark's Veronica armor joke). General Ross still comes around. I can believe that Banner could move on to other love interests like Black Widow, but seems to me the Hulk would always have an insatiable desire to reunite with Betty at some point.

It's like at some point, Marvel decided love interests shouldn't be a regular part of The Formula™. Adios Betty, Jane, etc..

But Betty is super essential to Hulk.

Spoiler:

The "consequences" for using the gauntlet don't really sit right with me. You can use this stone or that stone on it and it's no big deal (like Thanos using the reality stone in the Collector's lair in Infinity War)... but you use all of them at once, it hurts you no matter what? And somehow wiping out half of the population of the universe hurts you less than just making the stones go away, or just wiping out like 200 people (Thanos and his army)? I don't get the rules. And couldn't you just snap again to heal yourself?

[oldmanwinters]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Spoiler:

The "consequences" for using the gauntlet don't really sit right with me. You can use this stone or that stone on it and it's no big deal (like Thanos using the reality stone in the Collector's lair in Infinity War)... but you use all of them at once, it hurts you no matter what? And somehow wiping out half of the population of the universe hurts you less than just making the stones go away, or just wiping out like 200 people (Thanos and his army)? I don't get the rules. And couldn't you just snap again to heal yourself?

As I recall from the old Capcom Marvel Super Heroes video games...

Spoiler:

Thanos only uses a single stone power at a time in his special moves. I never read the comic story, so I just assumed that's the way the Gauntlet was supposed to work, just pick your preferred power for the occassion. So maybe Capcom was onto something back then.

[AquaParade]

As much as I love a good romance story, the lack of them in the MCU is one of the aspects I've really respected about these films. Even with Mary Jane's lack of character, I still love the romance angle in Spider-Man 2, but way too many of these comicbook films have relied on that crutch at this point. It's refreshing to see Marvel tackle storylines that don't revolve around the guy getting the girl, or vis versa.

[oldmanwinters]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

As much as I love a good romance story, the lack of them in the MCU is one of the aspects I've really respected about these films. Even with Mary Jane's lack of character, I still love the romance angle in Spider-Man 2, but way too many of these comicbook films have relied on that crutch at this point. It's refreshing to see Marvel tackle storylines that don't revolve around the guy getting the girl, or vis versa.

Oh, believe me, I don't have much interest in 2.5-hour romance plots but once you establish a piece of the mythos (and the 2008 movie laid it on hard) it becomes all the more curious when it's never acknowledged over the next 10 years. Pepper Potts was written out of just about every Ironman plot after his third movie (but returned triumphantly) and the Thor movies did all they could with the Jane Foster storyarc but Thor still slips those references to her in now and then.

[raph27]

Originally Posted by oldmanwinters

Oh, believe me, I don't have much interest in 2.5-hour romance plots but once you establish a piece of the mythos (and the 2008 movie laid it on hard) it becomes all the more curious when it's never acknowledged over the next 10 years. Pepper Potts was written out of just about every Ironman plot after his third movie (but returned triumphantly) and the Thor movies did all they could with the Jane Foster storyarc but Thor still slips those references to her in now and then.

I think a lot of that had to do with Paltrow and Portman doing other projects at the time, plus being pretty high-profile actresses probably aren't the easiest to grab just for a small cameo. I am really glad Pepper came back though. Her story with Tony needed to be completed, and I hope we haven't seen the last of her. (Is she in Far From Home? I forgot if she was in one of the teasers or not. Might have just been thinking of Happy.)

I do agree that MCU hasn't had the best track record with romances, especially the Age of Ultron fiasco. Honestly, the best chemistry they've had recently was with Strange and Christine in Doctor Strange. I'd like to see her show up again.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by raph27

I think a lot of that had to do with Paltrow and Portman doing other projects at the time

Maybe for Portman, but definitely not for Paltrow. She was never asked. I remember reading that Downey had to push to even have Pepper appear in Avengers 1.

[oldmanwinters]

No doubt big name actors/actresses factor a ton in so far as contracts and cameos are concerned.

The first Thor movie exceeded my expectations. I tolerated the second one, and was thankful for Loki being around to liven things up. Ragnarok basically saved the Thor franchise in my mind, as it was so fresh, fun, and over-the-top, in addition to having plenty of tragedy. I just don't see how continuing the Jane Foster romance would have aided the film in any way.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by oldmanwinters

I tolerated the second one, and was thankful for Loki being around to liven things up. Ragnarok basically saved the Thor franchise in my mind, as it was so fresh, fun, and over-the-top, in addition to having plenty of tragedy.

I think you and I are kind of of opposite minds on Thor 2 and 3, it's safe to say.

I just don't see how continuing the Jane Foster romance would have aided the film in any way.

That film, no. But there is plenty of ways to imagine how they could have continued the Jane character.

Or the Warriors 3.

Or Lady Sif.

[oldmanwinters]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Or the Warriors 3.

Or Lady Sif.

Now I'll agree there. They were cast off with careless abandon considering all their lore in comics and significance in earlier movies.

[Leo656]

You guys and ScreenRant do a bang-up job of extrapolating on why exactly I couldn't give a single fig about these movies.

Gets lonely sometimes, but eh.

[Redeemer]

Originally Posted by Leo656

You guys and ScreenRant do a bang-up job of extrapolating on why exactly I couldn't give a single fig about these movies.

Gets lonely sometimes, but eh.

and I always thought you were just being your usual pessimistic self...... Joking of course.

You guys all bring up really good points and questions.

Does anyone else wish or want a solo Hulk movie for Mark Ruffalo?????? I liked the Edward Norton Hulk movie, it wasn't great, but it was a decent movie for me.

[Autbot_Benz]

Originally Posted by Redeemer

Does anyone else wish or want a solo Hulk movie for Mark Ruffalo?????? I liked the Edward Norton Hulk movie, it wasn't great, but it was a decent movie for me.

I would I think Hulk is long over due for a solo movie

[Leo656]

Sadly, a solo Hulk movie isn't likely to happen since Disney and Universal can't play nice.

It's like, my disinterest is multi-layered and long-running. Very early on, it became very obvious that the characters I like were never going to be portrayed in a fashion I was interested in seeing more of (don't get me started on what's become of poor Thor since the pretty decent first movie), and that stuff I was very interested in seeing more of was going to be pushed aside in favor of things I was definitely not interested in seeing more of.

And then there's the billion articles in the past week across various media that are all some variant of, "This Is The Best Movie Ever! But It Also Makes Absolutely Zero Sense And Here's 90 Reasons Why!" and it's like, yeah, I just can't get on with that kinda thing. And a lot of them have been like that. No internal consistency, just a lotta hand-waving and "Comic book movies, man, don't think so hard." I can tell that this new one would absolutely make my head explode from "What-The-F*ckery". It's fine if people can have fun with it, but I have this problem where I think too much and expect things to make sense. I can marathon David Lynch stuff all day for a week, but I just can't seem to get into these flicks. It's just how I'm personally wired.

A few are okay with me, though, don't get me wrong. I liked the first Cap, Iron Man, Thor, and The Incredible Hulk pretty well. Those are the only ones I've ever bothered watching more than just once. But yeah, a lot of the grievances (maybe too harsh a word) echoed here and elsewhere just speak very loudly as to why I personally have never had too much fun with these.

[Redeemer]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Sadly, a solo Hulk movie isn't likely to happen since Disney and Universal can't play nice.

What does universal have to do with the Hulk???? I thought or assumed Marvel had the Hulk license back????

[Leo656]

No, it's a weird shared-custody thing, not entirely dissimilar from the Spider-Man issue.

Marvel can use The Hulk in team-up movies or as a supporting player such as in the third Thor flick, but they're not allowed to do any solo Hulk movies or else Universal gets the distribution rights and all the money that goes with that. Universal would also have certain approvals and other perks that Marvel/Disney simply doesn't want to bother with. It's a leftover from before the whole "Marvel Studios" thing was finalized.

The Incredible Hulk was the overall least-successful of the Phase One solo films, and since people didn't seem to mind Ed Norton being swapped out for Ruffalo, or pretty much all of that movie's events being ignored completely, Marvel/Disney don't see any reason to fight with Universal to work out a more favorable deal, they way they did with Sony for Spider-Man, since people seem to care a lot less about Hulk. Spider-Man is much more lucrative; they couldn't have a "true" Marvel Universe without him, and that includes the need for solo films. But people seem fine to take Hulk in small doses and comic relief spots within the ensemble films; very few people are absolutely begging for a solo Hulk movie, so Marvel simply doesn't see any reason to jump through the hoops which would be necessary to make it happen. Disney is historically not very good about sharing unless it's like 90% in their favor, after all.

It's probably for the best, anyway. The Ang Lee "Hulk" movie was the closest thing to what a Hulk movie should probably be, and people pissed on it for not being "Shreck Goes Wild". I mean, yeah, it could've had a few more action beats and the CGI was abysmal, but they got the story right. People don't generally want to see "Hulk" as a psychological thriller/body horror type thing, but that's the story. But even then, "Incredible Hulk" was a bit more like what people expect from a "Super-Hero Movie" (although it could be strongly argued that Hulk is NOT a "super-hero", but that's a whole other thing) but people still didn't really care for it.

I have a feeling, based on how he's been used in other films (or at least what people most strongly respond to in those other films), that a Hulk solo movie would be more of a screwball comedy than anything. Less about Banner's deep-seeded psychological trauma stemming from his abusive past, and more stuff about "He can't have sex with Liv Tyler because he'll just Hulk Out, because being Angry is Exactly The Same As Simply Being Excited!" So yeah, we're probably fine not getting a solo Hulk movie anytime soon. They'd screw it up. Or at least make something I'd have zero interest in watching.

[raph27]

Originally Posted by Redeemer

What does universal have to do with the Hulk???? I thought or assumed Marvel had the Hulk license back????

Marvel/Disney has production rights to Hulk films, but Universal still has the distribution rights. That's why The Incredible Hulk still has all its Blu-ray/DVD/digital releases done through them instead of Disney. Disney could make a new Hulk solo movie, but Universal would get the profits from it. That's why he was put in Ragnarok instead: he still gets a major part in the film but Disney keeps the $$$.

Feige sat down with Ruffalo before Endgame and got his thoughts on where he would want a Hulk sequel to go, and they instead wove that arc through Ragnarok, Infinity War, and Endgame. I wouldn't count him out of future Avengers movies, but I think his major story is pretty much wrapped up.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Leo656

I have a feeling, based on how he's been used in other films (or at least what people most strongly respond to in those other films), that a Hulk solo movie would be more of a screwball comedy than anything. Less about Banner's deep-seeded psychological trauma stemming from his abusive past, and more stuff about "He can't have sex with Liv Tyler because he'll just Hulk Out, because being Angry is Exactly The Same As Simply Being Excited!" So yeah, we're probably fine not getting a solo Hulk movie anytime soon. They'd screw it up. Or at least make something I'd have zero interest in watching.

Sadly probably true. Though tucked in there probably would be some scene with genuine emotion... to be cushioned afterward with some lame joke or something.

But no, you are crazy if you think Marvel/Disney is "done" with the Hulk. There isn't like a basket full of Hulk-type characters that can sell to draw from. Hulk is the Hulk. They'll eventually square up with Universal (or they won't, and it'll be She-Hulk to the forefront and strong womyn and that'll be that, Hulk just cameoing in stuff with his gimp arm) and we'll get more Hulk movies.

And in terms of recasting if they get too old, people have the least right to complain if Hulk gets recast for the third time.

[ranger_scout]

Here's a video that I'm sure that lots of fans have been waiting for.

[Sumac]

Thor Ragnarok was amazing.
One of the best comic book movies, I've seen. Mainly because it was bright and fun. No gloom **** or attempt to cram some pretentious crap.