Marvel Flicks

[Masa]

Rumor: Marvel's Fantastic Four Being Rebooted, Too?!

Superheroes are hot in Hollywood right now. And 20th Century Fox is not. Although Watchmen didn't break any records (it only made $55.7 million opening weekend), it did fare pretty well and has caused quite a bit of commotion. On the other side of town, however, Fox is still stuck in a rut trying to figure out how they can actually make money again (besides suing other studios). They're already working on rebooting both Daredevil and Planet of the Apes, so why not reboot another nearly dead superhero franchise - Fantastic Four? According to IESB, a reboot is in the works, complete with a new director and a new cast.

The first Fantastic Four, which hit in 2005, went on to make $155 million, which could barely be called a success for Fox. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, on the other hand, only made $132 million domestically, just barely above its $130 million budget. Disregarding the box office numbers, though, the Fantastic Four movies in general seem to be some of the most disliked superhero adaptations, alongside of Daredevil, Elektra (both of those were Fox as well), and Catwoman. Fox wants this reboot a bit "less bubble gum" and follow more of the Iron Man template this time, which was unquestionably a big success.

So here's the thing - I actually think Fantastic Four has a lot of potential. The problem is you can't let someone like Tim Story direct. Those of you are that real comic book fans know that Reed Richards aka Mr. Fantastic, the smartest man in the world, shows up in so many of Marvel's comics because almost everyone comes to him for help solving their problems. I'd love to see them tap into that true potential that the comics have always had. Obviously we're not going to get any crossovers (since Fox has their hands on this), but it would still be cool to see this team actually show up in a good adaptation.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/03/09/rumor-marvels-fantastic-four-being-rebooted-too/

[LaJon]

Awesome.  I'm all for reboots if they make sure to do it properly the next time around.  They've got plenty of great material to work with when it comes to comic books, so there's really no excuse.

[Masa]

Mickey Rourke Finally Confirmed for Iron Man 2!

Although he didn't win the Oscar, Mickey Rourke will get his big break this year. We initially reported that Rourke would be joining Jon Favreau's Iron Man 2 back in early January, but since then it's been a rocky road. In early February, news hit that Rourke's villain wouldn't necessarily be Crimson Dynamo. Then a few weeks later, news started to spread that Rourke's deal didn't go through with Marvel and he wasn't going to be in Iron Man 2 at all. Well, Nikki Finke has chimed in with an update saying Rourke's agent David Unger helped save the day and brokered a deal that has officially gone through and secured the role.

Finke says, "after at first being low-balled by the studio to the tune of $250K, Rourke has signed on for the role of the Russian villain in the sequel after his agent David Unger got the quote up to a 'significant' level despite this punishing economic climate where the studios are taking advantage of talent." This is the second time Marvel has been "cornered" by an actor, the first being Samuel Jackson, who was confirmed two weeks ago for a total of 9 upcoming Marvel movies. Now the next question is whether Rourke will play Crimson Dynamo or Whiplash. Finke claims it's the "Russian," meaning Dynamo, but we're not sure?

Whatever the case, I need to say again that this is exciting news for Iron Man 2. Although Rourke's last few months have been scrutinized, I still look at him as an actor with a lot of great potential, and playing a villain in a superhero movie is certainly a perfect fit. Can't wait to see how this sequel develops!

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/03/11/mickey-rourke-finally-confirmed-for-iron-man-2/

Johansson In, Blunt Out of Iron Man 2; Rourke is Whiplash

Apparently Mickey Rourke wasn't the only actor who finally signed a deal with Marvel today. Nikki Finke also confirmed that Scarlett Johansson will be indeed stepping in to replace the originally announced Emily Blunt in Iron Man 2. Blunt was initially chosen to play Black Widow, but then Fox required her to star in Gulliver's Travels instead, due to a contract she had signed with them during The Devil Wears Prada. Finke says that, "Scarlett actually screen-tested for the role and didn't get it," but is the replacement that Favreau and Marvel chose, primarily because her agent signed her on for a very low pay out.

As fun as it'd be to talk about the inner workings of Hollywood agencies, let's stick to the topic at hand. I still feel the same way as I did when we first reported this rumor - this is terrible! I guess I've just lost all interest in Scarlett Johansson. I'm really sorry, but big boobs and a sexy body don't also mean good acting. I'll admit that Johansson was great back in Lost in Translation, but now she's lost her touch. And above all else, she's really not the right fit for this role. Black Widow is sleek and athletic and Russian, and Johansson is voluptuous. Emily Blunt would've been a much better fit, but damn you Fox for taking her away!

In other news, it was confirmed by Variety that Mickey Rourke will be playing the villain Whiplash. They say that the version in Iron Man 2 "includes elements from that comicbook villain and Crimson Dynamo, another Russian baddie." Whiplash is a villain who wears leather and has three retractable steel whips on each arm. My guess is that Rourke's character will not only build a nuclear powered suit of armor like Crimson Dynamo, but will also use whips as mentioned before. Whatever the case, he'll make make for quite a formidable villain. Even with Johansson on board, Iron Man 2 is shaping up to be one hell of a sequel!

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/03/12/johansson-in-blunt-out-of-iron-man-2-rourke-is-whiplash/

[Masa]

Marvel Delays Thor and The Avengers An Extra Year!

We knew it was all too good to be true! Marvel Studios originally announced back in May of 2008 that Iron Man 2 and Thor would both be out in the summer of 2010 and that The First Avenger: Captain America and the highly anticipated Avengers movie would follow in 2011, but that schedule was just a bit too ambitious. Marvel has announced today that Thor has been delayed until June 17th, 2011 and that The First Avenger: Captain America has been pushed until July 22nd, 2011 to account for that change. Additionally, The Avengers has been delayed until May 4th, 2012, a complete 31 months from now.

"This new schedule strongly sequences Marvel's movie debut dates, big screen character introductions and momentum. It maximizes the visibility of our single character-focused films, leading to the highly anticipated release of the multi-character The Avengers film in 2012," said David Maisel, Chairman, Marvel Studios. It's a bit baffling to think that it'll be nearly 3 years until we see The Avengers, but it'll be worth the wait, I'm sure. That's the big crossover movie everyone is waiting to see and it's best that they take their time on it. Marvel also confirmed that Sony is still releasing Spider-Man 4 on May 6th, 2011 as well.

These are some hefty delays, but they shouldn't upset fans. In fact, I'm glad to see that Marvel is bold enough to step back and give themselves some room to breathe. If they need to shift the schedule to work, then go ahead. Plus, we'll still see two huge superhero movies in 2011 - both Thor and Captain America.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/03/12/marvel-delays-thor-and-the-avengers-an-extra-year/

Might Jon Favreau Actually Get to Direct The Avengers?

This could actually be a dream come true. It all began back in January of 2008, when we ran a story about Jon Favreau saying he'd love to direct an Avengers movie. Since that story first hit, Favreau has mentioned his interest numerous times, and not only did Marvel actually announce The Avengers, but Iron Man went on to become a huge box office hit and success for everyone involved. We learned earlier this week that Marvel decided to push back The Avengers release date an entire year to May 4th, 2012. We obviously don't know the real reason, but Ain't It Cool News has a spy who claims to have the answers.

In addition to saying that The Avengers was delayed due to "financing issues," the spy claims that Marvel really wants Jon Favreau to eventually direct it. "Everybody here loves the guy and he wants to do it, but it would have been impossible for him to do before the date change given his Iron Man 2 commitments." Obviously we can't trust this report, but given Favreau has shown an interest in directing The Avengers plenty of times before, and also given that Marvel just pushed its release back to give enough time for Favreau to finish Iron Man 2 and move on to The Avengers, it all could work out perfectly in the end.

We know that Marvel announced Kenneth Branagh as the director of Thor and Joe Johnston as the director of The First Avenger: Captain America. But besides directors like Christopher Nolan and Zack Snyder (who are both involved with Warner Brothers / DC Comics), I can't think of any other directors that I'd actually trust with complete control over a movie as epic as The Avengers. Funny enough, I actually said in that very first article about Favreau, before I had even seen Iron Man at all, that, "if Iron Man turns out as good as I'm expecting, then having Favreau direct the Avengers movie couldn't be a better decision."

In essence, what I'm saying is that out of all the possible directors, Jon Favreau is certainly my top choice for The Avengers. The way he handled Iron Man was enough proof for me that he can handle a film as big as it will be. I just hope Marvel is smart enough to recognize that as well, because they do not want to screw this up.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/03/13/might-jon-favreau-actually-get-to-direct-the-avengers/

[Masa]

Magneto Spin-Off Movie Dependent on Wolverine's Success

With X-Men Origins: Wolverine hitting theaters in a few weeks, I'm always seeing that "X-Men Origins" prefix and thinking about more X-Men movies. And one of them that always comes to mind is X-Men Origins: Magneto, the spin-off about Eric Lensherr that was once receiving as much attention as Wolverine, before that went into production. So what's the latest on that project? SciFi Wire talked with producer Lauren Shuler Donner recently and got a somewhat hazy update. "I don't know," she admitted at first. "We will do that. We all want to. Magneto is a fantastic script, and hopefully we'll make it."

She continues, "Honestly, we have all been just so focused on getting Wolverine out that we didn't take the time to sit down and explore 'What are the movies we're going to do next within the genre?'" Although, we have heard about X-Men: First Class as well. Of course, it goes without saying that Wolverine's box office will affect what happens with Magneto, but it had to be asked anyway. "I think this is partly to do with it, yes. And then we have First Class, which is based on the X-Men comics' first class and is very literal to the title. It's the first class in Xavier's school. But that's just being written. I haven't even seen a first draft."

So if you want to one day see X-Men Origins: Magneto, or even X-Men: First Class, then go see X-Men Origins: Wolverine in theaters starting on May 1st. I'm sure it'll do well and we don't have anything to worry about. Plus, I'm guessing the reaction to Wolverine (which is leaning towards the negative side at the moment) might have more an affect on their decisions regarding Magneto than its box office total.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/04/22/magneto-spin-off-movie-dependent-on-wolverines-success/

Sony Wants Spider-Man 4 in 3-D? Say it Ain't So!

"Could be" is all that Sony's head Amy Pascal said in response when asked about if we'll see Spider-Man 4 in 3-D. So how did we get to this point? Forbes.com has posted a very interesting interview with Pascal and fellow studio head Michael Lynton. They discuss most of the business side of Sony Pictures, but near the end they get into the 3-D realm, starting with a question about Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, Sony's upcoming fall animated release. From there, they continue into a question about live-action 3-D. Her answer to that question is not only very intriguing, but it leads directly into the Spider-Man 4 question.

First up, Pascal was asked what she thought about using 3-D in live action movies, and this is her answer.

"I think James Cameron's new movie [Avatar] could change the world. I think everyone is in anticipation thinking it's going to be like Star Wars. It's going to change the way you consume entertainment. I don't know that it will ever be the way you see dramas, but I can't say anymore that it won't be."

I hate to get all antsy, but if the head of another competing studio is already saying (eight months out) that Avatar could "change the world," I think that's a good sign that if it does live up to everyone's expectations, it's worthy of being called revolutionary right away. But that's a story for another day. Forbes followed up with the question about Spider-Man 4 and Pascal's response was only "could be." Then Lynton chimed in and added: "People are paying a premium to see movies in 3-D and that's a very big deal. It's never been done before that someone says you have to pay more to see Spider-Man than a romantic comedy."

It's too early to officially say that Spider-Man 4 is going to be in 3-D, especially when they're still working on casting anyway, but this is a good sign that Sony at least wants to pursue it. I also don't believe it's hasty of me to say that all of the major studios are anxiously awaiting Avatar's release, for many reasons, but most importantly to see how well a live-action 3-D movie plays on a large scale. If it is does incredibly well, then it'll be the first sign that live-action 3-D will actually be the future of filmmaking. So although we'll probably hear rumors about 3-D like this for a while, nothing will be confirmed until December 18th.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/04/22/sony-wants-spider-man-4-in-3-d-say-it-aint-so/

[Masa]

Kenneth Branagh Finally Shooting Thor Next January?!

We know Marvel is currently shooting Iron Man 2 as we speak with Jon Favreau. And we know they're still working on The Avengers for 2012 sometime. But what about Thor? It got pushed back all the way to 2011, to allow more time for Kenneth Branagh and the creative team at Marvel to figure things out. But even though it was delayed, Branagh says he's on track to start shooting next January. IGN caught up with the actor/director recently and got a very brief update. "Well, I'm working currently on Thor for Marvel and we're planning that one. We're having a great time at the moment. We're in intense pre-production."

He continues, "I shoot Thor in January of next year and because the time of release has been moved, it's allowed me to have a moment in the summer where I can shoot the Wallanders." If you haven't been following, Wallander is a series of TV movies that Branagh has been starring in for the BBC. "Strangely, there's a weird, pleasing connection between the Swedish Wallander and the Nordic Thor. And as I've played a lot of Danish Hamlets, I feel as though my Scandinavian trilogy is forming," he jokes. So there's still 8 months until production starts, but we still don't know who they've cast. Come on Branagh, spill it!

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/04/30/kenneth-branagh-finally-shooting-thor-next-january/

[Masa]

Taylor Kitsch is Really Excited About More Potential Gambit

So do we! Canadian actor Taylor Kitsch, who played Gambit in X-Men Origins: Wolverine, is ecstatic about his character's potential return. Rotten Tomatoes caught up with Kitsch at Cannes, where he was previously unaware that a sequel had even been greenlit. "I hadn't heard that was going to happen! You have my brain going now about what I'd love to do with Gambit!" And that's just the start of his enthusiasm, as Kitsch really goes off. "I'm just excited to go deeper into Gambit. It's a flattering thing when people say that the only shitty part about the character is we didn't see enough of him. If that's the case, bring it on."

Unfortunately, Kitsch didn't confirm whether or not he'd officially be back as Gambit in the Japan-set Wolverine 2 - but we're hoping for the best. Gambit has been a fan favorite to see brought to the big screen since the X-Men series first kicked off in 2000. The "Ragin' Cajun", as he's also known, was seen briefly in the movie, at least in a scene where Logan travels to New Orleans to ask him about the "island." We got a glimpse at some of his powers - he has the ability to manipulate kinetic energy - meaning he can hurl playing cards with an immense amount of force. And he loves to use that bo staff, which we also saw.

"He has so many more colours to explore. I want to go dark with that cat. There are so many things I want people to see of him and he really is his own deal… If I can have some moments where you go deeper into Gambit's back-story and why he was the way he was at that poker table — that's a fun thing to explore." Kitsch is already making comic book fans foam at their mouth with that statement. Sadly, Fox hasn't made any plans for a Gambit spin-off, yet, though it could happen sometime in the future. Or so we really hope. From the brief glimpse of Gambit that we got in Wolverine, I'm all for seeing more of Remy LeBeau.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/05/16/taylor-kitsch-is-really-excited-about-more-potential-gambit/

[Masa]

Ryan Reynolds Promises Deadpool Will Be Like the Comics

We've all heard this before - someone "intimately involved" promises they'll deliver a movie as close to the comics as possible. The question just is if all these early statements will hold up years from now when it is actually about to be released. Back in May, it was confirmed that Fox is moving forward with a Deadpool spin-off starring Ryan Reynolds. We heard plenty off-and-on from Reynolds during Wolverine's release about the possibility of a Deadpool spin-off, but now HitFix has another brief quote from Reynolds after its official announcement, and it sounds like it's moving along fairly quickly. But will any of this hold up?

"Well, I'm intimately involved with it. We're just trying to break a story right now and figure out who the villain is going to be and all that stuff. But, it's going to be just like the comic books. I'm gonna have a messed up face and you may see some flashbacks of Wade earlier in his life, but primarily what you see is what you get in the comics and that's the goal. And there is no better place to draw material from then the comics which are incredible."

I'm sure director Gavin Hood or screenwriter David Benioff or even Tom Rothman would've said that X-Men Origins: Wolverine was going to be "just like the comic books" back in the day. Not that I don't trust Reynolds, I love the guy, he's one of my favorite actors, I think he'll do a great job playing Wade Wilson, I just don't trust Fox at all. The original announcement said that they would go back to the character's roots and that it'd be "classic Deadpool" and not a continuation of the mutant from Wolverine. It just comes down to who they hire as a screenwriter, I guess. At least it's good to know Reynolds is fighting the good fight.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/06/01/ryan-reynolds-promises-deadpool-will-be-like-in-the-comics/

[Masa]

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/41283

[coachie]

Rumor: Katee Sackhoff Researching Typhoid Mary Role For a Daredevil Reboot Or Deadpool Movie?

[Masa]

Natalie Portman Officially Cast in Kenneth Branagh's Thor!

Marvel has officially announced today that Natalie Portman has been cast as Jane Foster in Kenneth Branagh's Thor. In the early Thor comics, Jane Foster was a nurse who became Thor's first love. The character will be updated for the feature adaptation. Portman will star opposite Chris Hemsworth who will play Thor and Tom Hiddleston who will play the villain Loki. News that Portman was in the running first hit back in March, so this is only late confirmation. It's especially good, because I started to hear rumors that Jessica Biel was involved instead. Shooting will start in early 2010 after she finishes Your Highness.

This epic adventure spans the Marvel Universe; from present day Earth to the realm of Asgard. At the center of the story is The Mighty Thor, a powerful but arrogant warrior whose reckless actions reignite an ancient war. Thor is cast down to Earth and forced to live among humans as punishment. Once here, Thor learns what it takes to be a true hero when the most dangerous villain of his world sends the darkest forces of Asgard to invade Earth.

We originally speculated that Portman might be playing Sif, Thor's wife who is also a goddess in Asgard. But as it turns out, she's actually playing Jane Foster, which means that a lot of Thor will probably take place on Earth and not in Asgard. However, per that new synopsis above, there will probably be an even amount of time spent between the two universes. Portman has been making some very interesting choices recently, with this and Your Highness and Hesher, which can only mean good things, because the more screen time she has, the better. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing what she can do in Kenneth Branagh's Thor!

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/07/13/natalie-portman-officially-cast-in-kenneth-branaghs-thor/

[RatBastich]

Ghost Rider Sequel/Reboot Still Under Consideration

by Russ Fischer

SlashFilm.com

While promoting the goofy secret agent guinea pig movie G-Force, Nicolas Cage was roped into talking about the potential Ghost Rider sequel by MTV. Or is that a reboot, not a sequel? What do you call it when some of the principal talent wants to try again with a movie that they screwed up the first time? Cage, who plays his comments cautiously, talks about re-conceiving the whole story, and going “in a whole other direction.” What Ghost Rider v2.0 might be, after the break.

For the past couple years Nic Cage and various other original Ghost Rider participants have talked about continuing the franchise, despite the lackluster box office of the original, and earlier this year Peter reported that Columbia was officially soliciting writers for pitches and that Cage had been signed for another film. But no one really wants to see the story continue from the original film, which was poorly realized.

Cage seems to agree. “I would like to do a re-conceive. I would like to go in a whole other direction, and I think that’s what they’re talking about. I would make it much less of a Western and more of an international story.” We’ve heard before that the character could end up working for the church in Europe, in a story that has Da Vinci Code sort of influences.

Not that the fact that the movie was a Western was the problem at all. A good script could have done right by the old west influences in the story. And there was Sam freakin’ Elliott, and you’ve got to work pretty hard to misuse him. The problem was the script and direction, both by Mark Steven Johnson, who didn’t seem at all suited to the material. Hire a writer who gets it and is willing to really have fun with the idea of a demon riding a motorcycle and things might work out just fine.

[RatBastich]

Norton: Hulk's future is 'opaque'

By Simon Reynolds

TheMovieInsider.com

Edward Norton has admitted that he is uncertain about the future of the Incredible Hulk franchise.

The actor told MTV News: "The minds of Marvel are sometimes opaque. I won't say [they're] obtuse, but I don't have any idea what they want to do."

Earlier reports claimed that the comic book film is unlikely to get a sequel.

However, Norton suggested that the character could return in The Avengers, a film uniting Marvel's most popular superheroes.

"They've got this notion of collecting the Marvel characters," he added. "Who knows where they'll go?"

[RatBastich]

Samuel L. Jackson Signs With Marvel Until the End of Time

by Elisabeth Rappe

Cinematical.com

I was in the minority when it came to Samuel L. Jackson returning to the Marvel Universe. I know the Ultimate Nick Fury was based on him ... but the Marvel girl in me is traditional and boring.* I wanted to see someone like George Clooney sporting the eyepatch. I like Jackson (to dislike him is a sin) a lot, but he's just such a blatant fanboy choice nowadays ... and can anyone argue that he'll bring anything to Fury other than just being Jackson in an eyepatch? (Arguably, Clooney wouldn't either, but he'd bring that retro charm that non-Ultimate Fury swaggers with.)

But for the majority of fans, that's enough, and the following is news for you to rejoice over. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Jackson has signed on for nine (count 'em, nine) films with Marvel Studios. He's set to play Nick Fury in the following: Iron Man 2, Thor, Captain America, The Avengers, and any sequel that they might spawn. A S.H.I.E.L.D / Nicky Fury movie is also a possibility.

So, there you go. Not only is Jackson returning as Fury for Iron Man 2, but he will be the head of S.H.I.E.L.D for as long as it lives and breaths on our cinema screens.

* I will, however, give Marvel Studios major props for not making its movie universe a white one.

[tenkei]

^ epic, motherfucker

[RatBastich]

Profile on Marvel Studios with Big Updates from Kevin Feige

by Alex Billington

from FirstShowing.net

I spent most of the later half of my day today at the Sony Pictures lot in Culver City where the Produced by Conference was being held. One of the presentations was a profile on Marvel Studios being moderated by the LA Times' Geoff Boucher featuring Marvel's president of production Kevin Feige. A few days ago, we posted a big update on Marvel's upcoming projects featuring quotes from Feige, but Paramount quickly had us pull down the post. In lieu of that missing update, we now have this one, with a few more tidbits from Feige on upcoming Marvel projects as well as just a general sense of his direction and ideas for the studio.

[Masa]

Comic-Con: Marvel's Kevin Feige Reveals Avengers Line-Up

As almost everyone knows, Marvel stopped by Comic-Con yesterday to premiere the first footage from Iron Man 2 (which we didn't get to see). Marvel's Kevin Feige talked with press afterwards (via Collider) and one of the questions he was asked was whether or not they had worked out the line-up for The Avengers movie yet. Apparently they have, even though "Zack Penn is outlining it as we speak." So who's in it? I think we already know exactly who to expect. "It's going to be Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Nick Fury." But that's not all - there's a few more other members who might show up in the movie as well.

"I think it's safe to assume that there will be some members of the Hulk universe in the film as well. In terms of the additional, I think Black Widow for sure. SHIELD's organization for sure. And, again, what's exciting to me about the Avengers movie are seeing those four characters together and interacting with each other. Anywhere from the first issue of the Avengers to Civil War, the dynamic between Steve Rogers and Tony Stark is awesome and fascinating. It brings out sides of the others that won't be brought out in their own franchises. Throwing Thor into the mix is a whole other thing and I think that will be cool. So to pile in another ten or fifteen… or frankly even four… I think will be too many."

This isn't very surprising to hear, as he pretty much just named off all the superheroes who have their own solo movies coming up in the next few years. What is a bit interesting is that we're not going to see other heroes like Ant-Man or The Wasp involved. It sounds like they're going to stick with the big four that by then the entire world will be familiar with: Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, and Nick Fury. And you know what, I'm perfectly fine with that. I think Feige is dead on with this one - too many superheroes might be problematic. And at least for this one, they should just stick with those four guys for now.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/07/26/comic-con-marvels-kevin-feige-reveals-avengers-line-up/

WTF?! No Hulk?

[Masa]

So Ed Norton Might Appear as Hulk in Avengers After All?

We've been running a lot of speculative articles recently, and we have yet another for you today. In this one, though, I think I'm reading between the lines a little too much. IGN caught up with Edward Norton at the Television Critics Association press event and asked him the inevitable question about the Hulk appearing in Marvel's Avengers movie. This time, though, his answer was a bit different than anything we've heard before. "I probably won't comment on that, just because they [Marvel] keep a pretty tight reign on what they are letting out. I'll let them say," he replied. Is there hope that he's in it and wants to let them announce it?

Or is he just saying that he wants to let Marvel announce themselves that there's no Hulk in Avengers? I'm personally hoping it's the former. In Kevin Feige's most recent interview from from Comic-Con, he talks about the line-up for The Avengers, and mentions "there will be some members of the Hulk universe in the film as well." Of course, we can turn to any number of past articles where Hulk is brought up, like this one where Mark Fergus talks about having Hulk, or this one where Favreau lets slip that Hulk is in the line-up, or this one where Louis Leterrier talks about the end of Hulk being open for continuations of the character.

Of course, I could just be reading between the lines too much, and I'm probably doing that just because I really want to see Edward Norton back as Hulk in The Avengers. The reason why this is such big news and always a shock to hear is because, I believe, Norton kept saying he wasn't sure if he'd return (after doing The Incredible Hulk) and that there were other issues with bringing Hulk into the Marvel Studio's Universe. But who knows what's really going on behind closed doors? We'll find out the truth soon enough. But in the meantime, should we start getting excited about seeing Hulk in Avengers after all?

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/08/03/so-ed-norton-might-appear-as-hulk-in-avengers-after-all/

[Masa]

Louis Leterrier's Awesome Idea for a Summer of The Avengers

Now this you need to hear! Geoff Boucher of Hero Complex recently talked with director Louis Leterrier on the set of Clash of the Titans recently. As you hopefully already know, Leterrier last directed the newest Incredible Hulk movie, which was much more well-received than Ang Lee's Hulk. Although he doesn't know yet if he'll be back for another Hulk sequel, he does want to work with Marvel again (and is contracted to do another movie for them anyway). "I would love to do the Avengers film. I’d love to work with Marvel again. I loved working with them." There's a lot more to it than that, just listen to this idea, it might be brilliant.

I’ll tell you my real dream: To work with Joe Johnston and ["Thor" director] Kenneth Branagh and Jon Favreau and make like a triptych. We do four movies. We release them one a month for the summer. Or even every two weeks or three weeks. And the whole summer would be Avengers summer. So we do it the way they make television shows. One story arc but told in installments by different directors. So all of the directors that touch part of the Avengers world would do a part; we could make the movies shorter, maybe less than an hour and a half, and we use the same sets and save Marvel money. I would love to sit around a table with all of them a kick around the story. That’s my dream.

Now wouldn't that be awesome to see? I doubt it'll ever happen, not only because the cost is just way too much for Marvel, but I don't know if Paramount (who releases their movies) can handle a distribution pattern like that. Plus, if each movie isn't at least 90 minutes long, I think audiences would hate paying for four tickets when they're not getting a full movie each time at that price. But man, if they could pull this off, it would just be incredible. This is the kind of future of comic book movies I'm very excited to see, not 3D, not hybrid CGI, but movies that are just like comic books themselves, a truly cinematic representations.

This reminds me about something Kevin Feige once said (though I can't remember exactly where/when he said this) about how he hoped that comic book movies would one day mirror comics as well. His examples were crossovers, where you never know who might show up in the next issue that's out this week, and that other superheros could just pop up in movies that weren't their own. And if you apply that to what Leterrier said, well, we get new comics every month, wouldn't it be cool if we also got new movies every month? At least for one summer at a time, that is. This would take a lot of time and effort, but it would be awesome.

"People will get bored seeing the same superhero movie every summer. If we change the concept and package it differently, then we do something really original then people get excited." I think Leterrier is on to something here. What do you think? Could this work? Would you go see four Avengers movies?

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/08/09/louis-leterriers-awesome-idea-for-a-summer-of-the-avengers/

[Masa]

Hugh Jackman Confirms Wolverine is Heading to Japan Next

Question of the Day: Are you more excited to see a G.I. Joe sequel or a Wolverine sequel? Let me remind you that the next Wolverine movie will see Logan venturing to Japan for some samurai training and Eastern philosophy. MTV caught up with Hugh Jackman recently at the Teen Choice Awards and talked briefly about the sequel, confirming pretty much what we already know. "Japan is where we're heading, [and] we're starting to work on it now. We're in the… first steps of developing that story." It was confirmed back in May after X-Men Origins: Wolverine opened that they'd be heading to Japan, so that's not big news.

"I think the fans love that saga. It's my favorite saga of the Wolverine stories," Jackman says. "That's a movie I've longed to make from the beginning, so that's where we're heading." After that movie hit earlier this summer, despite scathing reviews, most people seemed open to the idea of seeing Wolverine head to Japan because it was actually a good storyline. Frank Miller and Chris Claremont introduced the story arc where Logan heads to Japan back in 1990 in Wolverine #1-4. I think it's a great idea and I'm excited for this sequel. Now they just need to find a better writer and director - why doesn't Jackman announce them yet?

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/08/10/hugh-jackman-confirms-wolverine-is-heading-to-japan-next/