JPHiP Forum
General => Entertainment => Movies => Topic started by: Masa on May 05, 2008, 08:14:36 PM
-
Marvel Studios Sets Four More Release Dates!
Marvel Entertainment released their first quarter report to its shareholders this morning to coincide with the announcement about the success this past weekend of Marvel Studios' first production Iron Man, which grossed an estimated $104.2 million domestically and over $201 million worldwide. The announcement included an update of Marvel Studios' feature film slate with the already-rumored Iron Man 2 announced for a release on April 30, 2010, followed by three more movies for the summers of '10 and '11. Matthew Vaughn's Thor is set for a release on June 4, 2010, and The First Avenger: Captain America (the working title) will kick off the summer of 2011 on May 6, followed by the highly-anticipated and foreshadowed The Avengers scheduled for July 2011. (Edgar Wright's Ant-Man is also listed as being in development with no release date set.)
In a conference call this morning, Marvel Studios' David Maisel said that Iron Man 2 will be used to introduce Thor. Regarding more "Hulk" movies, Maisel said "We definitely plan on continuing." He added that development continues on Spider-Man 4. "I can't give any other updates other than to say it's in development and everybody's excited about 'Spider-Man 4,'" he said.
With that in mind, one can start expecting a lot more announcements in the coming months about creative teams and casting for those movies including who might direct the Captain America and Avengers movies. (Whomever plays Steve Rogers AKA Captain America presumably will be making two movies at once.)
http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=7165
-
I love Thor!
Marvel is supposedly getting better with their movies (I haven't seen Iron Man yet, but I've heard nothing but great things about it), so hopefully these will follow suit.
-
Paramount Will Distribute All of Marvel's Upcoming Films
Do you remember way back in April when we kept seeing new trailers, TV spots, and photos for Iron Man every week? That excess of media was due in part to Paramount's marketing team, but it paid off considering the film made $318 million in the end. Marvel Studios and Paramount Pictures will extended their distribution agreement that began with Iron Man to distribute all of Marvel's upcoming films (through 2011 and beyond). The deal includes distribution for: Iron Man 2, Thor, The First Avenger: Captain America, The Avengers, and Iron Man 3. Good news? It certainly is! Paramount is one of the best distributors in Hollywood and obviously knows how to take care of fans.
"Marvel's iconic brand, its popular characters and its proven ability to create compelling and visually spellbinding films complement Paramount's great history of filmmaking. We look forward to a long and successful run together," said Rob Moore, Vice Chairman of Paramount Pictures. For those who don't know enough about the business side of Hollywood to care, this is great news that will pay off in the end. We all know that Iron Man 2 and The Avengers will eventually be two of the most highly anticipated films, and there's no better studio out there to manage the distribution and marketing for those films. In comparison, I think Universal did a fairly bad job with The Incredible Hulk this summer.
In addition to the announcement today, Paramount has already shifted the release dates for Marvel's upcoming films. Iron Man 2 will hit theaters on May 7th, 2010. Thor will hit theaters on July 16th, 2010. The First Avenger: Captain America will hit theaters on May 6th, 2011. The Avengers will hit theaters on July 15th, 2011. Iron Man 3 does not have a release date yet.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/09/29/paramount-will-distribute-all-of-marvels-upcoming-films/
-
Verily: Kenneth Branagh in Talks To Tackle "Thor"
According to Variety, Marvel Studios has entered into negotiations with director Kenneth Branagh to helm the adventures of their Asgardian hero. No distributor has been chosen for the self-financed project.
This could be seen as an unusual choice by Marvel's Kevin Feige, seeing as the last action work Branagh did was 1989's blood-soaked "Henry the Fifth," but is actually a fairly common theme based on the choices of Jon Favreau for "Iron Man," Christopher Nolan's success with the Batman franchise and Gavin Hood's upcoming "X-Men Origins: Wolverine."
Branagh's not the first name attached to this project, as director Matthew Vaughan was long considered the man to bring this project to the silver screen. He turned in a script that gave the studio budgetary heebie jeebies. Vaughan eventually fell from favor, leaving the door open to new possibilities. The fact that negotiations were reported in a trade publication of this caliber is a sign that Branagh's a serious contender, but until the credits roll, nothing is set in uru stone.
From CBR News (http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=18254)
-
i dont like spiderman anymore its washed up. it went downhill after the 1st one.
-
The First Avenger: Captain America Full Synopsis Revealed
We already confirmed back in May after Marvel's announcement of The First Avenger: Captain America that the film would be set in WWII. But an actual plot synopsis beyond that hasn't ever been released. In the latest issue of Production Weekly, a new full plot synopsis for the project was published. I'm a bit hesitant to trust this magazine, since they seem to have a lot of information on a project that's very far out, but for now this is what we'll go with. It does seem accurate and it does seem like a great way to introduce us to Captain America before progressing into The Avengers movie just months later.
"Born during the Great Depression, Steve Rogers grew up a frail youth in a poor family. Horrified by the newsreel footage of the Nazis in Europe, Rogers was inspired to enlist in the army. However, because of his frailty and sickness, he was rejected. Overhearing the boy's earnest plea, General Chester Phillips offered Rogers the opportunity to take part in a special experiment… Operation: Rebirth. After weeks of tests, Rogers was at last administered the 'Super-Soldier Serum' and bombarded by 'vita-rays.' Steve Rogers emerged from the treatment with a body as perfect as a body can be and still be human. Rogers was then put through an intensive physical and tactical training program. Three months later, he was given his first assignment as Captain America. Armed with his indestructible shield and and battle savvy, Captain America has continued his war against evil both as a sentinel of liberty and leader of the Avengers."
Reading that actually makes me wonder whether they just took the standard synopsis from some sort of Marvel database and used that until the studio puts out something officially. Either way, I'm glad that they're sticking with the original Captain America story and going all the way back to WWII. That should make for the perfect introduction just months before we move into the Avengers story. No director or actors have been officially announced yet. The First Avenger: Captain America will hit theaters on May 6th, 2011 with its follow-up, The Avengers hitting theaters on July 15th, 2011.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/10/05/the-first-avenger-captain-america-full-synopsis-revealed/
-
Downey Jr., Favreau & Cheadle Suit Up for The Avengers!
ROBERT DOWNEY JR. AND JON FAVREAU SUIT UP FOR MARVEL STUDIOS' THE AVENGERS AND IRON MAN 2
As part of his four picture deal with Marvel Studios, Robert Downey Jr. is appearing as Tony Stark in THE AVENGERS motion picture, as well as reprising his starring role as the larger-than-life leading character in IRON MAN 2. Jon Favreau will return to direct the sequel to the blockbuster IRON MAN, which to date has grossed over $578 million worldwide, as well as executive produce THE AVENGERS.
Academy Award® nominee Downey was most recently seen in the summer comedy blockbuster TROPIC THUNDER starring opposite Ben Stiller and Jack Black. Before Iron Man, he was best known for his film roles in KISS KISS BANG BANG, WONDER BOYS and CHAPLIN, the film for which he was nominated for an Oscar®.
In addition to directing the first IRON MAN, Favreau has previously directed ELF, ZATHURA: A SPACE ADVENTURE and MADE. He is also well known for writing and starring in SWINGERS. He will next be seen acting in FOUR CHRISTMASES, I LOVE YOU MAN and COUPLES RETREAT.
DON CHEADLE WILL STAR AS RHODEY IN IRON MAN 2
Marvel Studios is pleased today to confirm that an agreement has been finalized with award-winning actor Don Cheadle to take on the role of Colonel James "Rhodey" Rhodes in Marvel's IRON MAN 2 due in theaters on May 7, 2010. In casting Cheadle, Marvel replaces Terrence Howard who appeared in the role of Rhodey in IRON MAN.
Cheadle is also signed on to perform the same role in THE AVENGERS and subsequent installments of the IRON MAN franchise.
"We are very excited about working with the extraordinarily talented Don Cheadle as we expand the role of Rhodey in Iron Man 2. It has already become apparent as we prep the movie for production, that the dynamic between Robert and Don will take Iron Man 2 to new heights," said Kevin Feige, President of Marvel Studios.
Cheadle is best known for his Oscar® nominated lead performance in HOTEL RWANDA as well as his role as Basher Tarr in the OCEAN'S franchise, CRASH and SWORDFISH.
Based on Marvel's iconic Super Hero, IRON MAN 2 continues the story of this summer's box office blockbuster IRON MAN, the first feature film produced independently by Marvel Studios. IRON MAN 2 will be produced by Marvel Studios' President, Kevin Feige, and executive produced by Louis D'Esposito, Jon Favreau, Stan Lee, David Maisel and Denis Stewart.
In a movie event, THE AVENGERS will bring together the super hero team of Marvel Comics characters for the first time ever, including Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, the Hulk and more, as they are forced to band together to battle the biggest foe they've ever faced.
The highly anticipated sequel to IRON MAN will be released in theatres on May 7, 2010 and THE AVENGERS will be released July 15, 2011. Both films will be distributed by Paramount Pictures.
Cheadle is represented by UTA. Downey and Favreau are represented by CAA.
http://www.superherohype.com/news/ironmannews.php?id=7763
-
what why they took out terrence howard???!!!
-
i heard terrence howard wanted too much money or something
-
Joe Johnston Directing Marvel's The First Avenger: Captain America
Marvel has officially announced that Joe Johnston will direct the upcoming The First Avenger: Captain America. Johnston previously directed Honey I Shrunk the Kids, The Rocketeer, Jumanji, October Sky, Jurassic Park III, and Hidalgo, and also has The Wolf Man coming up in March. Johnston now joins the ranks of Jon Favreau, Louis Leterrier, and Kenneth Branagh as Marvel's dream team of directors set to turn bring the real Marvel universe to life in a series of films that will eventually converge in The Avengers in 2011. It's pure coincidence that this news hits on the same evening that I wrote about the return of WWII movies, considering The First Avenger: Captain America will be set during that time.
Marvel first met with Johnston two years ago and their meetings have continually led to Captain America. Marvel's Kevin Feige is producing the film, which will be set during World War II, although no writer is attached yet. Marvel claims they are still hearing pitches on story ideas and will hire a screenwriter soon. Unfortunately Johnston isn't the most exciting choice for director, although Feige references other elements of his background to the contrary. "This is a guy who designed the vehicles for Star Wars, who storyboarded the convoy action sequence for Raiders of the Lost Ark," Feige said. "From Rocketeer to October Sky to The Wolfman, you can look at pieces of his movies and see how they lead to this one."
Captain America was first created in 1941 by Jack Kirby and Joe Simon and is the alter ego of Steve Rogers. Rogers volunteered for a top-secret defense project called Operation: Rebirth after he was deemed too sickly to join the army. He was the first human test subject for the Super-Solider serum which transformed him into a human with maximum efficiency, greatly enhancing his strength and reflexes. The man who had created the serum was killed and the ability to duplicate the process was lost. Thus Captain America was born, and combined with his iconic indestructible shield, he served as both a counter-intelligence agent and a propaganda symbol to counter Nazi Germany's head of terrorist operations, the Red Skull.
I never would've imagined so many years ago while watching Honey I Shrunk the Kids or even Jumanji that the same guy who made those movies would years later bring us a live-action version of Captain America. Looking at this news now, that's not a good thought. Johnston may have been great doing behind-the-scenes work on Star Wars or Raiders of the Lost Ark, but he's not a great director. October Sky may prove that he can direct character-driven movies, but nothing in his filmography proves that he's capable of taking on such an ambitious and highly anticipated film as Captain America. I hope my fears as wrong and, just like Jon Favreau, we find out that Johnston was the perfect choice in the end.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/11/09/joe-johnston-directing-marvels-the-first-avenger-captain-america/
-
i heard terrence howard wanted too much money or something
actually, ive since heard that money wasnt the issue, but rather hes a PAIN IN THE FUCKING ASS to work with and no one (see: Jon Favreau) wanted to put up with his shit on another movie
also cool they got a director for CapAm, his credits seem pretty nice (except Jurassic Park III, wtf)
-
I've seen a cm for the new Punisher movie, Warzone.
One of his main villians from the comics, Jigsaw, will be in the movie.
-
Samuel Jackson Might Not Be Returning as Nick Fury?!
A rather disappointing bit of news to report today, coming from Geoff Boucher of the LA Times' Hero Complex. Despite previous confirmations otherwise, apparently Samuel Jackson might not return as S.H.I.E.L.D. agent Nick Fury in the upcoming Marvel movies. "I saw Jon Favreau at the Scream Awards and we had a conversation. He said, 'I hope things are working out for you because we're writing stuff for you.' Then all of a sudden last week I talked to my agents and manager and things aren't really working that well," Jackson said. So what the heck happened since then? Well, it always comes down to money.
"There was a huge kind of negotiation that broke down. Maybe I won't be Nick Fury. Maybe somebody else will be Nick Fury or maybe Nick Fury won't be in it. There seems to be an economic crisis in the Marvel Comics world so [they're saying to me], 'We're not making that deal.'" First it was Terrence Howard being replaced by Don Cheadle, now it's Sam Jackson! Before we get too far into this, let's look at Marvel's situation. The problem is that The Avengers movie will require salaries for at least five big actors: Robert Downey Jr., Don Cheadle, whoever plays Thor, whoever plays Captain America, and whoever is the villain.
If you look at it that way, obviously Marvel's "economic crisis" is that they're going to need a lot of money to be able to pull off an enormous crossover movie like that. While I expect it to be a huge hit that's entirely worth it in the end, it's an issue they need to address before they go into production. And that means potentially cutting Jackson's side character out of the movies. I know that Nick Fury is definitely not a side character, considering he is the leader of the Avengers team, but he's not leading his own movie and I'm sure Marvel doesn't want to pay him (or whoever plays him) a lead actor salary on top of all the others.
So what hope do we have, if any? Well, when Boucher told Jackson that it's likely no one else would want to step into the role that was designed from the ground up for Jackson to play, his response was: "Maybe nobody will wear it. Maybe they'll decide Nick Fury won't be part of it." That would be very sad to see, but it really could happen. Or maybe Marvel could realize how important Jackson is, find some extra funding, and do their best to keep him in it.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/01/14/samuel-jackson-might-not-return-as-nick-fury/
-
^thats ghey.
oh and about terrence howard, man that guy is such bad actor. i checked out his deleted scenes for iron man. LOL they're pretty bad
-
haha really? man, i gotta check them out now.
-
Mickey Rourke and Sam Rockwell Joining Iron Man 2 as Villains!
Variety and Hollywood Reporter are reporting that both Mickey Rourke and Sam Rockwell are in talks to join Jon Favreau's Iron Man 2! Rourke is in discussions to play a villain described as Iron Man's Russian alter ego, a heavily tattooed bruiser named Ivan who becomes Crimson Dynamo, a villain with his own nuclear-powered armored suit. Rockwell would play a British villain named Justin Hammer, a multibillionaire businessman and a rival of industrialist of Tony Stark. No other new details were revealed about the highly anticipated sequel. Can you handle two huge casting announcements in one day?
Crimson DynamoThis is the second casting news for Rourke today, following confirmation that he had also joined Sylvester Stallone's The Expendables. This is certainly one of the greatest acting comebacks we've seen in years. As for the villain, the original Crimson Dynamo first appeared in Tales of Suspense #46 in 1963. There have been 12 various Crimson Dynamo incarnations over the years, so it's likely this one is being written specifically for the cinematic Iron Man universe. However, there are conflicting reports that Rourke might be a villain named Whiplash instead. My best guess is that he's actually Dynamo, not Whiplash.
As for Rockwell's character, Justin Hammer, he first appeared in the comics in Iron Man #120 in 1979. Hammer invented a device called the hypersonic scan transmitter, which allowed him to take control of Iron Man's armor. Angered that he had lost a lucrative bid to Stark Industries, Hammer took control of his armor and forced him to kill the Carnelian ambassador. Since then, Hammer has been one of Stark's primary adversaries, coming up with endless evil schemes over the years. Sounds like Favreau has found the right two villains for this sequel!! Paramount will bring Iron Man 2 to theaters on May 7th, 2010.
Update: Both articles from Variety and Hollywood Reporter have turned this casting news into quite a debacle. No one really knows who is playing who. Devin at CHUD has a great breakdown looking at potential characters. We'll hopefully have some clarification on this in the next few days or weeks.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/01/07/mickey-rourke-joins-iron-man-2-as-crimson-dynamo/
Emily Blunt Rumored as Black Widow in Iron Man 2!
It looks like Jon Favreau has finally decided on the new additions to Iron Man 2. Last week we heard that both Sam Rockwell and Mickey Rourke would join as villains. Today, Variety reports that Emily Blunt is rumored to playing the character of Black Widow aka Natasha Romanoff. We previously reported a rumor that both Black Widow and Hawkeye would have larger roles in the film and it looks like this is first confirmation that at least one of those characters will appear in the sequel. Like the Rockwell and Rourke news, this isn't confirmed by Marvel, and they probably won't be announcing it officially for a while.
Black Widow is a Soviet super spy that dons a skintight black costume that is enhanced by high-tech weaponry. She is an integral character in the Avengers universe (more than just Iron Man) because she betrays them in the comics even though she works for them and gains their trust. I'm guessing this is integral in the further development of The Avengers movie and the Tony Stark storyline that leads into that. Her character actually reminds me a lot of The Baroness from the upcoming G.I. Joe - right down to the black latex outfit. But I will admit that I think Blunt is a much better actress than Sienna Miller.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/01/14/emily-blunt-rumored-as-black-widow-in-iron-man-2/
-
Exclusive: Is Neal McDonough Marvel's Captain America?!
Yesterday afternoon I interviewed with one of my favorite actors, Neal McDonough, who plays M. Bison in the upcoming Street Fighter movie. As the interview was wrapping up, I asked him about what he's doing next, as part of a question about what he looks for in scripts. And at the last second, he said that, "I think it's time for me to go back to playing some of the really good guys who can get the job done, like Captain America, maybe." I immediately asked him if that was a hint, and his response was even more confusing. It's been on my mind since the interview, and I just had to open this discussion up to all of our readers.
His answer wasn't a definitive yes or a definitive no, so I didn't want to run this news as anything official, but instead as a "what if?" kind of scenario. When you look at the bigger picture, Neal McDonough has starred in a lot of big World War II roles previously ("Band of Brothers", Flags of Our Fathers), which means he's got that experience, since Captain America was a soldier in WWII. Secondly, if you look at the comparison shots above, Neal is a near identical match visually to the Cap from The Ultimates series of comics, which as we know from previous articles, is almost the exact storyline that Marvel is borrowing from for all of its big movies that will eventually marge into The Avengers movie by 2011. So, what if?
To confuse things even more, his answer when asked if that was a hint that he might be Captain America, contained some "who knows?" and "fingers crossed!" kind of dialogue. So, I thought, why not share that part of the interview with our readers, and ask them whether they think McDonough might be the guy for the role and if he would be a good fit or not? Is he too old, too young, too inexperienced? To be honest, he seems like a perfect fit. Wasn't Robert Downey Jr. only still a rising star when he was cast as Tony Stark? He's got the muscle, he's got the acting chops, he's got the looks, maybe this is our Captain America after all?
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/02/20/exclusive-is-neal-mcdonough-marvels-captain-america/
So, Mickey Rourke Won't Be in Iron Man 2 After All?
Just a few days before Mickey Rourke's big day the Oscars, word has hit the streets that apparently he won't be in Iron Man 2 after all. The news about Rourke joining the project first hit in early January, but just a few days later, we started hearing that the trades had made that announcement very prematurely. Then, just a few weeks ago, we got confirmation that Rourke's character wasn't actually Crimson Dynamo, but potentially the villain Whiplash instead. Now apparently his involvement was been wiped enitrely off the table! Rourke himself told New York Magazine that, "right now, we're not doing Iron Man 2." Sad news!
We're not exactly sure what happened, but if we're reading the NY Mag story correctly, apparently Rourke's agent has been "battling Marvel for a bigger paycheck." And as we all know, Marvel doesn't play well with others, so when he started asking for more money, they must have got cold feet. To top it all off, Rourke has been handed more new projects than he can handle, and has officially attached himself to at least Stallone's The Expendables and Chopra's Broken Horses recently. That might make fitting in Iron Man 2 a bit tough in the end. Too bad, because I was really hoping to see him take on Robert Downey Jr.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/02/18/so-mickey-rourke-wont-be-in-iron-man-2-after-all/
-
Samuel Jackson Signs Nine Movie Deal as Nick Fury!
Back in January, we ran a rather disappointing article about Samuel Jackson potentially not returning as S.H.I.E.L.D. agent Nick Fury in any upcoming Marvel movies. But it looks like that rumor couldn't have been any further from the truth. Jackson has signed one for not one, not two, but a total of nine upcoming movies for Marvel which will contain Nick Fury in some capacity, starting with Iron Man 2 and also including Thor, Captain America, The Avengers, any of their sequels, and even potentially a S.H.I.E.L.D. spin-off. This was announced by Marvel today and confirmed by Variety, so it's not just another rumor.
Audiences got their first glimpse of Jackson as Nick Fury at the end of the credits of Iron Man, where he appears inside Tony Stark's house and tells him about a team called the Avengers. In the blink of an eye, Jackson became the face of what is now the most integral character in tying the Marvel universe together. Even though he didn't appear in The Incredible Hulk, we knew he was there lurking in the shadows, and we knew that the Avengers was still being developed in that very same cinematic Marvel universe. Now it's great to finally know that Marvel won't be losing him ever again.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/02/25/samuel-jackson-signs-9-movie-deal-with-marvel-as-nick-fury/
:shocked: :shocked: :shocked:
-
^
Now thats the great news to read, oh yea.
Sam's gonna be seriously busy.
-
Really good to see that he's coming back as Fury. We all know the movies are going to make an absolute killing, so making the deal to entice him back was really a smart move by Marvel.
-
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/
-
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.
-
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/
-
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/
-
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/ (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/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/04/22/sony-wants-spider-man-4-in-3-d-say-it-aint-so/)
-
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/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/04/30/kenneth-branagh-finally-shooting-thor-next-january/)
-
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/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/05/16/taylor-kitsch-is-really-excited-about-more-potential-gambit/)
-
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/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/06/01/ryan-reynolds-promises-deadpool-will-be-like-in-the-comics/)
-
(http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/4703/lsmarvelbig.th.jpg) (http://img199.imageshack.us/my.php?image=lsmarvelbig.jpg)
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/41283 (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/41283)
-
Rumor: Katee Sackhoff Researching Typhoid Mary Role For a Daredevil Reboot Or Deadpool Movie? (http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/05/23/rumor-katee-sackhoff-researching-typhoid-mary-role-for-a-daredevil-reboot-or-deadpool-movie/)
-
Natalie Portman Officially Cast in Kenneth Branagh's Thor!
(http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/5800/natalieportmanjanefoste.jpg)
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/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/07/13/natalie-portman-officially-cast-in-kenneth-branaghs-thor/)
-
Ghost Rider Sequel/Reboot Still Under Consideration
by Russ Fischer
SlashFilm.com (http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/07/15/ghost-rider-sequelreboot-still-under-consideration/)
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.
-
Norton: Hulk's future is 'opaque'
By Simon Reynolds
TheMovieInsider.com (http://www.themovieinsider.com/nrl3724-norton-future-of-hulk-is-opaque/)
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?"
-
Samuel L. Jackson Signs With Marvel Until the End of Time
by Elisabeth Rappe
Cinematical.com (http://www.cinematical.com/2009/02/25/samuel-l-jackson-signs-with-marvel-until-the-end-of-time/)
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.
-
^ epic, motherfucker
-
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. (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/06/07/profile-on-marvel-studios-with-big-updates-from-kevin-feige/)
-
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/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/07/26/comic-con-marvels-kevin-feige-reveals-avengers-line-up/)
WTF?! No Hulk? :?
-
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/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/08/03/so-ed-norton-might-appear-as-hulk-in-avengers-after-all/)
-
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/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/08/09/louis-leterriers-awesome-idea-for-a-summer-of-the-avengers/)
-
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/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/08/10/hugh-jackman-confirms-wolverine-is-heading-to-japan-next/)
-
Sony Rehires James Vanderbilt to Write Spider-Man 5 and 6
Web-heads young and old, rejoice. We'll be seeing a lot of our friendly, neighborhood Spider-Man on the big screen in the years to come. Now, as for the details of who, what, and when - the web thickens. Just as Sony is ready to launch Spider-Man 4 (set for a 2011 release) with Sam Raimi, Tobey Maguire, and Kirsten Dunst all on-board once again, they've hired a writer to start work on Spider-Man 5 and 6, according to Variety. James Vanderbilt, of The Losers and David Fincher's Zodiac, will write an over-arching storyline that will extend from the fifth movie into the sixth - which might mean both films could even be shot back-to-back.
There's no word yet on exactly what Vanderbilt's story arc will contain, or if Raimi or the original cast will return to reprise their roles. Now, Vanderbilt isn't new to the Spider-Man universe, as he wrote the first draft of Spider-Man 4. Many of his original ideas will be seen on-screen come 2011; Raimi and Vanderbilt failed to see eye-to-eye, so David Lindsay-Abaire was brought on to rewrite Vanderbilt, which then led to Gary Ross, who is rewriting the whole thing yet again. In fact, this interconnected storyline was supposed to be a part of 4 and 5, but that idea was scrapped as shooting back-to-back was apparently out of the question.
By forcing the fifth and sixth movies to be shot in succession, Sony is hoping to pump out more Spider-Man films more frequently. As the interim periods have extended from two years to three to four between each franchise installment, Sony hopes to capitalize on the web slinger as often as possible with Vanderbilt's help. But here's the real kicker. Should Raimi, Maguire, and Dunst not want to continue their established roles, Spider-Man 5 will be treated as "the blueprint for a franchise reboot." I know a lot of you are probably seething through clenched jaws and grinding your molars to dust - but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't smiling.
Though I can appreciate the Spider-Man franchise's strengths (by that, I'm talking Spider-Man 1 and especially Spider-Man 2), I've never been a huge fan of what the main creators and cast have brought to the cinematic adaptation of my favorite comic book hero. Tobey Maguire never, ever felt like Peter Parker. And he was no Spider-Man that I recognized (except maybe the Spider-Man in the recent abysmal Brand New Day arc). Kirsten Dunst plays a fine Mary Jane - but she never knocked my costume off like I feel she should have. And while I'm an enormous fan of Sam Raimi's campy horror films (of both past and present), that sensibility never gelled with Spider-Man the way I hoped (and have continued to hope for).
Not to mention it's no secret that the main cast and crew have had their fair share of squabbles creatively. And, for that matter, now that this news has hit - I'm not sure just how excited I am for Spider-Man 4. Originally, Raimi, Maguire, and Dunst weren't even going to return. And with a script now passing through its third writer - I'm thinking we'll be seeing a lot of that discontent on screen. But who knows, maybe because this is their last shot, Raimi et al. will pull out all the stops and send this quadrilogy out with a bang. It could happen, I suppose.
Regardless, my mind is whirring at the mere notion that a new face will be behind those arachnid eyes and those eyes will be behind a fresh pair of taped-up glasses. There's so many directions this reboot could go. Will they incorporate Spider-Man's conception and Parker's most iconic moment of power versus responsibility? Will Peter Parker be in high school again, perhaps a younger take on the hero and a juxtaposition of his transformation as hero as well as a teenage boy raging with hormones (Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince as filtered through Brian Michael Bendis' Ultimate Spider-Man)?
Will they flash forward and welcome us into a more experienced and established Spider-Man universe? A universe (like J. Michael Straczynski's run from #471 to #545) where Mary Jane and Peter Parker are a more mature couple, where Spider-Man has been in the hero profession for a while, yet still struggles to relate to today's youth. As of yet, this is all speculation. And, I'm guessing, will remain as such for a couple of years. Perhaps Vanderbilt's reboot of Sony's Spider-Man franchise will finally provide me the Spider-Man that I know and love from the panels of my Wednesday comics. And - just to get this out there - please, please, please consider Joseph Gordon-Levitt for the role. That's a casting change I can swing behind.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/08/16/sony-rehires-james-vanderbilt-to-write-spider-man-5-and-6/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/08/16/sony-rehires-james-vanderbilt-to-write-spider-man-5-and-6/)
-
20th Century Fox Moves Forward on a Fantastic Four Reboot
Fox fires back. Following the surprising announcement this morning about Disney acquiring Marvel, Fox has announced that they're moving forward on rebooting the Fantastic Four franchise that director Tim Story ruined twice already. Screenwriter and producer Akiva Goldsman (Poseidon, I Am Legend, Hancock) has been hired to oversee the reboot as producer. The studio has also hired Michael Green, a co-executive producer on "Heroes" who also co-wrote the Green Lantern movie, to write the new screenplay. No word yet on exactly what they're planning to change this time around, but it will certainly be scrutinized by the fans.
This is most likely a political move by Fox because they're worried that their Marvel licenses will be running out sooner than later. And at this point, they really don't have a chance to get any new franchises (Marvel won't give them any more extensions), so I'm sure they realized today that, well, they better get these Marvel movies going now or never. Although the first Fantastic Four made $155 million and the Rise of the Silver Surfer made $132 million in 2007, I don't really know that many people who actually enjoyed them at all. I'm curious whether this means the Silver Surfer, played by Doug Jones, will be back in a big way or not?
It's unclear yet, since this news was released so early, if any of the original cast will return. My guess is that they won't - just because I think a reboot should mean a complete recasting. Additionally, Variety mentions "though the related Silver Surfer character soared in the Fantastic Four sequel, that iconic personality has remained a priority project for his own film at the studio." That sounds like he probably won't appear, which is unfortunate, since he was unquestionably the highlight of the sequel. As for Akiva Goldsman, he's actually a smart guy, I trust he'll do a good job. This also confirms the rumor from March that a reboot was coming.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/08/31/20th-century-fox-moves-forward-on-a-fantastic-four-reboot/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/08/31/20th-century-fox-moves-forward-on-a-fantastic-four-reboot/)
-
Bruce Campbell Says Spider-Man 4 Shooting in January?
Bruce Campbell is certainly a novelty in the Spider-Man franchise. In each film he's played a character who has somehow defeated the unbeatable Spider-Man (something which no other villain can seem to do). The actor's charisma and close relationship with director Sam Raimi pretty much guarantees his involvement in the upcoming sequels, so when Campbell dishes out some info, we should probably be listening. This time Access Hollywood caught up with Campbell and found out from him that not only is his role in Spider-Man 4 considered to be a "major one," but apparently the sequel will begin shooting in January of 2010.
Of course there's plenty of speculation about Campbell potentially taking on the role of a villain (Mysterio seems to be the most popular), but with all the craziness that's been going on hiring writer after writer for the forthcoming sequel, who really knows what's going on with the script. There's a chance they could even have a bigger role for Campbell set up in the fourth sequel to become a villain in either the fifth or sixth installments. Or maybe Campbell himself could simply be hyping it up (afterall he is out promoting his role in Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs) so for now I think we'll just have to take this with a grain of salt and wait for some official word from Raimi or Sony (hopefully).
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/09/13/bruce-campbell-says-spider-man-4-shooting-in-january/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/09/13/bruce-campbell-says-spider-man-4-shooting-in-january/)
-
Marvel Still Working on Ghost Rider 2, Daredevil, & Silver Surfer
An interesting update has hit Variety today regarding Marvel and specifically some of the upcoming comic book projects Fox has in the works - such as Ghost Rider 2. The article primarily mentions that Columbia Pictures has begun moving forward with the Ghost Rider sequel and brought on David Goyer to create the story and supervise writers (even though Goyer said "he hadn't signed on yet"). Goyer last directed The Unborn but is probably better known for writing the Blade trilogy as well as Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. The plans are to apparently base the sequel on a Ghost Rider script that Goyer wrote years ago.
The article also includes a mention about other projects Fox has in the works, including: Fantastic Four with writer Michael Green and producer Akiva Goldsman, a Wolverine sequel and several X-Men spinoffs, and a new version of Daredevil and a Silver Surfer film that they're "quietly working" on. We've heard of all of these before, so none of them are new, but this is being reported as new confirmation that all of these projects still exist. For a while we thought the Silver Surfer movie was dead. And we also recently heard that Daredevil was being rebooted late last year. We've also heard about the Ghost Rider sequel before as well.
Speaking about the success of Blade back in the day, producer Avi Arad said: "The character was virtually unknown, didn't even have his own comic book, and had been part of Tombs of Dracula. It tells you what can happen if you unleash a library with the right creative partners." That's a very optimistic outlook especially considering Fox's Marvel movies are often hit-and-miss. Let's hope these three aren't misses.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/09/23/marvel-working-on-ghost-rider-2-daredevil-silver-surfer-movies/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/09/23/marvel-working-on-ghost-rider-2-daredevil-silver-surfer-movies/)
-
Rumor: Black Cat as Spider-Man 4 Villain and a New Female Lead?
We're going to pump the brakes after that headline because there's a lot of rumor manure to sift through. Earlier today Mania reported a big rumor that Black Cat would be the new villain in Spider-Man 4, and that Rachel McAdams (of The Notebook and Wedding Crashers fame) was the frontrunner for the role. However, this seemed to be just another in a long line of ridiculous villain rumors, but then our friends at SlashFilm found a post in The Observer regarding actress/columnist Romola Garai, who revealed she had an audition for a role in Spider-Man 4. But is she auditioning for Black Cat or a supposed new female lead?
Let's answer that second question first before we dig into this villain debacle. SlashFilm's apparent certainty on Sam Raimi looking for "a new female lead" is quite misleading and because of this misrepresentation, highly inaccurate. A new female lead fully implies that the story would put Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane on the back-burner in favor of a new leading lady, but this is simply not the case. Dunst is still very much involved with the production and our sources say is being paid her full price for the project, so I doubt this new female role is that of a female lead, but rather a strong supporting role akin to Bryce Dallas Howard's work in Spider-Man 3 as Gwen Stacy. Now that we've cleared that up, onto the real story.
First let's just keep everyone on the ground and say that this should all be taken with a grain of salt. There seems to be a decent chance that Black Cat could be the villain if not at least one of the villains but at this point it's almost impossible to know. After Sam Raimi's talk about getting back to basics, it seemed like the two villain formula would be abandoned, but maybe he just wants to do it right this time. In fact, Black Cat's story (which includes a struggle with her unethical thieving ways and later a romance with Spider-Man) fits well with Raimi's Spider-Man formula, which always finds the villains troubling not only the costumed hero, but also becoming entangled in Peter Parker's personal life as well.
Black Cat's incarnation begins with her secret identity Felicia Hardy who was inspired to follow in her imprisoned father's footsteps as a cat burglar. But her new life was thrown into upheaval when she was date-raped by her boyfriend, Ryan. She turned her grief and shame into rage, channeling her feelings for revenge towards intensifying her training regime in martial arts and acrobatics. But when Ryan was killed by a drunk driver, depriving her of the satisfaction of revenge, Felicia set out stealing from others to compensate psychologically for what was stolen from her. It was her thievery and attempt to break her father out of prison that ultimately brought her into Spider-Man's life where she would find love and reform from her criminal lifestyle.
As I said, there's no way we can know this for certain just yet. There's still just as much of a chance that the other recent rumor of Dr. Kurt Connors finally stepping into the villainous role of The Lizard could happen as well. Anything could happen at this point! All I know is that what I'm hearing (but cannot divulge) are huge details along the lines of something from Mania's source that got buried in their story, and that's "[Sam Raimi and Co.] are [also] casting for a male villain, but had few details." I'd keep my eyes peeled for that bit before obsessing about this Black Cat business.
And really, this story from Romola Garai probably has nothing to do with Black Cat, because if Rachel McAdams was really a frontrunner, that means they've got quite the list of actresses for this character and I seriously doubt they are still putting lesser known actresses "on tape" for it. Unless it is known there is a wide search for a role to be filled, roles like this usually don't have auditions especially with names like Rachel McAdams being thrown around. And narratively I just don't know if this is the right approach because not only is a lone female villain a hard sell (remember Catwoman had The Penguin with her in Batman Returns), but she just feels a little too similar to Black Widow from the upcoming Iron Man 2.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/11/10/rumor-black-cat-as-spider-man-4-villain-a-new-female-lead/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/11/10/rumor-black-cat-as-spider-man-4-villain-a-new-female-lead/)
-
i almost forgot about spiderman!
-
Silver Surfer Spin-Off Movie Isn't Dead, Still Being Developed
A week or so ago, screenwriter J. Michael Straczynski, who had been writing a Silver Surfer spin-off screenplay for Fox, told Collider in an interview that "if they do a Silver Surfer film down the road, it'll have to be its own separate thing." The way he answered the question caused most news websites to report that the Silver Surfer spin-off movie was dead mainly because Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer didn't do as well as Fox wanted. However, Straczynski emailed Latino Review and explained that it's not dead at all, and Fox is just going a different route and having someone else write a script for them instead of using his.
We never reported on the "dead" news last week because I thought it was mostly speculation anyway (and I'm an optimist). Plus, I found this post from September where it had been stated that Fox was still "quietly" working on a Silver Surfer film. So it doesn't sound like it's dead at all, just still in very early development, kind of like the Venom spin-off. Here's the update Straczynski gave in order to clear up any confusion:
"When I was asked about the Silver Surfer script, I responded about the one I'd written around the time that FF2 was launched, and was designed to pick up where that one left off. When FF2 didn't do as well as hoped for, that script was set aside, but that has NOTHING to do with the Silver Surfer script that is NOW under development at Fox with other folks. As far as I know, that is proceeding apace. So the hysteria that's gripped the nets about 'ohmygod the Surfer movie is dead!' is not correct, as I was again referring to only that one specific script tied into FF2, NOT what's being done now."
I've been patiently waiting for good news on the Silver Surfer spin-off because it's one movie that I'd love to see, no matter how long it takes to get made. After reading some Silver Surfer comics earlier this year, I fell in love with the character and have been hoping we'd get to see Norrin Radd in all of his glory at some point, especially because the "tease" we were given in Rise of the Silver Surfer was pretty awesome (I loved Doug Jone's performance). Straczynski said in the interview that his script was going to tell the Surfer's origin story. Let's hope that whatever version Fox is developing now also touches upon his origin, because that's one of the best parts. We'll be sure to keep you updated on this, but for now just know that it is not dead.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/11/30/silver-surfer-spin-off-movie-isnt-dead-still-being-developed/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/11/30/silver-surfer-spin-off-movie-isnt-dead-still-being-developed/)
-
New Writer Hired for X-Men: First Class, Singer is Returning
Yesterday night, Bryan Singer announced on the "blue carpet" at the Avatar premiere that he would be directing X-Men: First Class, the next movie in Fox's X-Men franchise. Just in case you didn't believe it, Heat Vision has confirmed that Singer is officially directing the spin-off/prequel. They also report that Fox has hired Jamie Moss (Street Kings) to rewrite the script and work with Singer on developing the project. Oh and they also mention that "new characters will also be created," as in they're going to create some new mutants that haven't been seen in the comics. Fox has made some smart choices, so maybe there's hope?
X-Men: First Class will "look at the teenage years of the super-powered mutant heroes seen the X-Men movies and the Wolverine movies." Last year, Fox hired "The O.C." and "Gossip Girl" writer Josh Schwartz to write the first draft of the script. I can't tell you how incredibly thankful I am to hear that they brought in someone else, because I guarantee you his script would've been "The O.C." but with young X-Men, and no one wants to see that. No word on when we can expect X-Men: First Class to hit theaters, but this seems like a sign that they really want to get things going. New characters, new writer, old director.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/12/17/new-writer-hired-for-x-men-first-class-singer-is-official/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/12/17/new-writer-hired-for-x-men-first-class-singer-is-official/)
-
Rumor: Spider-Man 4 on 'Indefinite Hold' Due to Villain Issues?
This is only a rumor and I'm writing about it purely for the sake of discussion. IESB claims they've heard from an "inside source" that Spider-Man 4, or Spider-M4n as it's currently being referred to at the studio, was put on "indefinite hold" due to arguments over the villain between Sony execs and Sam Raimi. While IESB says that some department heads working on SM4 were notified of this halt last week, SuperHeroHype says they contacted Sony who told them that they "are simply on hiatus for the holidays and production will resume in the new year." So who do you believe? Or is there some truth to both stories? Read on for more!
IESB goes on to say that Sam Raimi really wants Vulture (see this article) to be the villain, but the studio wants "which ever character is selling [comic] books right now but basically they have no idea, just not the Vulture." You have got to be kidding me! I actually completely believe that. They may be going on break, but I actually believe Raimi is fighting with the Sony execs about this exact issue. Apparently Raimi wanted Vulture in Spider-Man 3 alongside of Sandman, but that didn't happened and he was eventually forced to include Venom because that's what Sony thought fans wanted. And look how bad that movie turned out.
So apparently production was stopped until "some compromises are made." As in, until Sony gets their way and ruins another Spider-Man movie. I'm calling this right now. If Vulture does not appear in Spider-Man 4, the movie is going to suck. If he does (along with other villains), it should be awesome. I guarantee you if Raimi had his way and made a Spider-Man movie exactly the way he wanted, it would be awesome (just like Spider-Man 2). Instead of arguing further, Sony has decided to let everything cool down over the holidays, despite they're desire to get this made right away. Hence why there is some truth to both stories.
Let's not forget that when Movieline reported that John Malkovich might be cast as the Vulture, they also added that the Sony execs don't want the Lizard as a villain at all because they "can't bring themselves to sign off on such an odd-looking enemy — instead, they'd rather hew closer to villains with a human face." Obviously these execs are complete fucking idiots. I'm tired of hearing this crap about a franchise I once loved because Raimi made movies with villains he loved, not what Sony execs thought were "selling books." Even if this is just a rumor, it's disheartening to know that they're having these kind of problems again.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/12/17/rumor-spider-man-4-on-indefinite-hold-due-to-villain-issues/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/12/17/rumor-spider-man-4-on-indefinite-hold-due-to-villain-issues/)
-
Kevin Feige Looks Back at a Decade of Marvel on the Big Screen
By now you probably all know who Kevin Feige is - if not, he's the current President of Marvel Studios and is now responsible for bringing us Iron Man 2, Thor, and The Avengers. He began his Marvel career as associate producer on Bryan Singer's X-Men in 1998, even though it didn't hit theaters until 2000. Now a decade later he looks back at how comic book movies have become so much more than just a fad and how there's so much more in store in their future. "As the year 2000 dawned, Marvel Comics had only recently escaped bankruptcy and the company's future stood on shaky ground at best. Flash forward 10 years."
"With landmark achievements in film, animation, publishing and digital media behind it, Marvel not only solidified its hold on the comic book world, [but] it established itself as an incredibly successful worldwide entertainment brand with few peers." Feige talks about the past decade over on Marvel.com although I've pulled some of his best comments below. He has some great stories to tell and so much to say, so read on!
And Along Came a Spider, Again
In 2004 came "Spider-Man 2." I think that was one of the best films we've ever done. Again, with the sequel, we were able to get the origins out of the way and focus on the character and his relationships with those around him. There was even talk of Alfred Molina being up for an Oscar [for his performance as Doctor Octopus].
Mining the Marvel Universe
The mid-decade also brought the "Fantastic Four," "Punisher" and "Elektra" films. This got studios wanting to move forward with a lot of the characters faster. Things got a little out of our hands then. That's when we started thinking above making the movies internally. When the day finally came that we had our own studio, that's when everything changed.
I could not agree with him more! Not only is Spider-Man 2 one of my all-time favorite comic book movies, but he's dead on with the comment about how making movies under one roof, not with multiple studios, is a much better idea. They really did learn from their mistakes. I absolutely love Feige because he knows what he's doing. He's one of the best executives working in Hollywood right now and I can't wait to see what's in the store for the future of Marvel Studios this upcoming decade. Speaking of which, Feige ends with this:
Hammer Time
To be honest the thing that I'm most excited about right now though, is the screen test we just finished for "Thor." We've done some costume tests and watching the Asgardians walk onto the sound stage takes me back to that first time I saw the X-Men on the set all together in Toronto. Only it was unlike anything we've ever put on film before! It's great to be starting the next decade in such an exciting way just as we did last decade. We're really redefining the comic book genre and what a Marvel movie can be. It's going to be great.
If you've enjoyed reading this so far, I suggest heading to Marvel.com and reading Feige's full report on the last decade. He talks about how casting Ian McKellen as Magneto and Patrick Stewart as Xavier "set the bar pretty high." And how Spider-Man 3 was "too much of a good thing" and that they've learned that "bigger is not always better" moving forward. It's not only quite a relief (knowing he's this smart), but also inspiring and exciting, to hear Feige talk about all of this. It's fascinating to see how far they've come in a decade and exciting to think about where they're heading next. Bring on more awesome Marvel movies, I can't wait!
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/12/31/kevin-feige-looks-back-at-a-decade-of-marvel-on-the-big-screen/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/12/31/kevin-feige-looks-back-at-a-decade-of-marvel-on-the-big-screen/)
-
Confirmed: Spider-Man 4 on Hold, Sam Raimi 'Hates' the Script
This sounds bad. We wrote a few stories at the end of last year about Spider-Man 4 being put on hold because Sony and Sam Raimi were fighting about the script for the fourth movie. Sony wants another record-breaking blockbuster while Raimi wants to get "back to basics" and make a movie that everyone actually enjoys this time. Well, Nikki Finke of Deadline Hollywood has now confirmed that Spider-Man 4 is indeed on hold and it may not even make its May 2011 release date. "We will be extending the production hiatus on the film. The studio is firmly committed to this franchise but, for us, the script must come first."
If you thought thinks were bad last year, apparently they've only gotten much worse. Drew McWeeny of HitFix says: "Since that first story ran, I've been hearing some really terrible things about what's going on between Sam Raimi, the studio, and the writers, and I've been starting to wonder if there's any chance they can reach an agreement that will make all involved parties happy." I'm starting to worry about that as well. Will Raimi and Sony be able to work things out? I'm surprised that they're even fighting with Raimi, especially if they paid copious amounts to make sure he would return to begin with. Doesn't make sense?
Anyway, word from Finke is that the Raimi "hated" the latest draft of the script. Sony has hired a fourth writer, Alvin Sargent, who wrote Spider-Man 2 and 3, to work on a new draft (which they're waiting on). But the problem is they're already behind schedule waiting on this script and therefore, according to an insider at Sony, "it is unlikely that May 11, 2011, date will be made." But of course, "it depends on how quickly the script can get in," and if Raimi and Sony both like it. Finke says that Sony still wants to release Spider-Man 4 that summer, even if they have to do push it back to July. But they'll be losing that May spot.
So what's the big fight all about? Well, referring to the article we wrote in December, it sounds like Raimi really wants John Malkovich to play Vulture, and Sony doesn't like that idea. They also don't like the idea of hiring Anne Hathaway as Vulturess (or some other key female character) because "she'd cost too much and that they probably don't need 'such a big star' for the pic." And let's not forget why they don't want Dr. Connors to ever turn into The Lizard - because they "can't bring themselves to sign off on such an odd-looking enemy." Raimi is the one who should win this - he knows his franchise better than anyone.
I really have no more energy to write about Spider-Man 4 or Spider-M4n or whatever it'll be called. The more I hear, the more depressed I get. If only Sony would listen to Raimi and go with what he wants in his movie, then we'd not only have another big record-breaker in the works, but it'd probably be an awesome movie as well (just like Spider-Man 2). We'll keep you update on this anyway, hopefully with better news.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2010/01/05/confirmed-spider-man-4-on-hold-raimi-hates-the-script/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2010/01/05/confirmed-spider-man-4-on-hold-raimi-hates-the-script/)
-
I think the recent Batman movies are a good example of absolutely stupid looking comic book villains that can look AMAZING on screen. Really now, Scarecrow? That shit is just lame, but on screen they still made him awesome. We need not even mention the Joker.
I'm not the hugest Spider-Man fan, but if he wants The Lizard as his villain, let him have the damn Lizard. Studios suck.
-
Malkovich Seemingly Confirms He'll Be Vulture in Spider-Man 4
It's odd to report this when we already know that Spider-Man 4 is officially on hold until further notice, but then again, this is a pretty good story and it will probably make a few people upset. Our Italian friends at BadTaste.it sent an email over this morning informing us that actor John Malkovich had appeared on an Italian TV show called "Quelli Che il Calcio" and spoke about his involvement in Spider-Man 4. Nearly a month ago, it was discovered that Malkovich was Sam Raimi's top choice for the role of the villain Vulture. While we don't have a complete transcript from the show, it sounds like he did confirm that he's on-board.
"When conductor Simona Ventura asked him about his role of Vulture in the movie, he not only didn't deny his involvement, but confermed [sic] that he's waiting for the final script to be sent to him, and that the movie has been delayed. He also hopes that shooting will begin as soon as possible."
There isn't a clip of this available online yet, but I do have a feeling it's accurate. And beyond that, when we first heard about Malkovich, it fit with exactly what I was hearing from a few people on the inside anyway. Obviously Sony won't confirm that he's cast or that Vulture is even the villain and they probably won't even mention Spider-Man 4 for a few more months. If this is indeed the case, I'm still very excited. I'd love to see Malkovich in a Spidey movie and I think this is as inspired casting as Alfred Molina was for Spider-Man 2. And if you're still unhappy with Vulture, go read this article again from our resident Spider-Man expert.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2010/01/10/malkovich-seemingly-confirms-hell-play-vulture-in-spider-man-4/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2010/01/10/malkovich-seemingly-confirms-hell-play-vulture-in-spider-man-4/)
-
Peter Parker is going back to high school when the next Spider-Man hits theaters in the summer of 2012.
Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios announced today they are moving forward with a film based on a script by James Vanderbilt that focuses on a teenager grappling with both contemporary human problems and amazing super-human crises.
The new chapter in the "Spider-Man" franchise produced by Columbia, Marvel Studios and Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin, will have a new cast and filmmaking team. Spider-Man 4 was to have been released in 2011, but had not yet gone into production.
"A decade ago we set out on this journey with Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire and together we made three 'Spider-Man' films that set a new bar for the genre. When we began, no one ever imagined that we would make history at the box-office and now we have a rare opportunity to make history once again with this franchise. Peter Parker as an ordinary young adult grappling with extraordinary powers has always been the foundation that has made this character so timeless and compelling for generations of fans. We're very excited about the creative possibilities that come from returning to Peter's roots and we look forward to working once again with Marvel Studios, Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin on this new beginning," said Amy Pascal, co-chairman of Sony Pictures Entertainment.
"Working on the 'Spider-Man' movies was the experience of a lifetime for me. While we were looking forward to doing a fourth one together, the studio and Marvel have a unique opportunity to take the franchise in a new direction, and I know they will do a terrific job," said Sam Raimi.
"We have had a once-in-a-lifetime collaboration and friendship with Sam and Tobey and they have given us their best for the better part of the last decade. This is a bittersweet moment for us because while it is hard to imagine Spider-Man in anyone else's hands, I know that this was a day that was inevitable," said Matt Tolmach, president of Columbia Pictures, who has served as the studio's chief production executive since the beginning of the franchise. "Now everything begins anew, and that's got us all tremendously excited about what comes next. Under the continuing supervision of Avi and Laura, we have a clear vision for the future of Spider-Man and can't wait to share this exciting new direction with audiences in 2012."
"'Spider-Man' will always be an important franchise for Sony Pictures and a fresh start like this is a responsibility that we all take very seriously," said Michael Lynton, Chairman and CEO of Sony Pictures. "We have always believed that story comes first and story guides the direction of these films and as we move onto the next chapter, we will stay true to that principle and will do so with the highest respect for the source material and the fans and moviegoers who deserve nothing but the best when it comes to bringing these stories and characters to life on the big screen."
The studio will have more news about Spider-Man in 2012 in the coming weeks as it prepares for production of the film.
http://www.superherohype.com/news/spider-mannews.php?id=8976 (http://www.superherohype.com/news/spider-mannews.php?id=8976)
Spider-Man 4 Scrapped; Raimi and Maguire Gone; Sony Plans Franchise Reboot for 2012
Nikki Finke just recruited Variety’s chief newshound Mike Fleming, and now the new duo are coming out of the gate with a massive story. Their first big report is that Sony is scrapping Spider-Man 4 after script and schedule concerns caused Sam Raimi to walk away from the film. The scuttled sequel has already been confirmed by a Sony Pictures press release, and the studio will now go for a full franchise reboot. New director, new cast. Details after the break.
Finke and Fleming’s report says the decision was made just today, and that the studio will start over with a “franchise reboot” script by James Vanderbilt. They quote sources reporting that Raimi said he couldn’t make the picture’s 2011 release date and maintain quality standards.
The Sony press release offers more info. Shorn of back-patting quotes, the core info is as follows:
Peter Parker is going back to high school when the next Spider-Man hits theaters in the summer of 2012. Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios announced today they are moving forward with a film based on a script by James Vanderbilt that focuses on a teenager grappling with both contemporary human problems and amazing super-human crises.
That means no Malkovich, no Vulture, no Vulturess, and no more Kirsten Dunst. Let’s see what Sony comes up with now; bets on a thinly-translated Ultimate Spider-Man adaptation? Reboot writer James Vanderbilt wrote an early draft of Spider-Man 4, and had been hired to write the presumptive fifth and sixth films.
When that deal for SM5 and 6 came down last August, the possibility of those scripts being the basis for a reboot was mentioned, so this isn’t an utter left-field surprise. Though a studio scrapping a film as potentially massive as Spidey 4 in favor of a reboot is still a huge deal; this is nothing like rebooting the Hulk, or Ghost Rider or Fantastic Four.
What next for Raimi? Will he go directly on to World of Warcraft, the Dennis Lehane adaptation The Given Day, or something else? (Another smaller film?) All things considered, you’ve got to guess that he and Tobey Maguire are both more happy than anything else to get away from increasingly difficult franchise.
http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/01/11/spider-man-4-scrapped-raimi-and-maguire-gone-sony-plans-franchise-reboot-for-2012/ (http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/01/11/spider-man-4-scrapped-raimi-and-maguire-gone-sony-plans-franchise-reboot-for-2012/)
-
More Spider-Man Reboot Details?
Yesterday, Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios confirmed that (500) Days of Summer helmer Marc Webb is going to direct the Spider-Man reboot. In reporting on the news, the Risky Business blog has some possible more details on the project: Webb, who has options on two sequels, will now tackle a Jamie Vanderbilt script that sees a “Spider-Man” movie that will look and feel very different from the big movies that went before it.
The plan for the movie is to be in the $80 million range and feature a cast of relative unknowns (so you can quash those Rob Pattinson or Gordon-Levitt rumors at this point). And the story will be pared down to center on a high school kid who is dealing with the knowledge that his uncle died even though the teen had the power to stop it.
The touchstone for the new movie will not be the 1960s comics, which were the inspiration behind the movies by Raimi, who grew on up on them, but rather this past decade’s “Ultimate Spider-Man” comics by Brian Michael Bendis and Mark Bagley where the villain-fighting took a back seat to the high school angst. Please keep in mind that none of this is confirmed and we may not know for sure until closer to release. Stay tuned for more announcements as they come in...
http://www.superherohype.com/news/spider-mannews.php?id=9001 (http://www.superherohype.com/news/spider-mannews.php?id=9001)
:smhid
-
I can't express at all my total loathe towards a Spider-Man reboot; Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire did something AWESOME (not to count that Spidey was and is my favorite fictional character). Both of them brought to life just as great as I imagined Spider-Man films; alright, I do not have anything against (500) Days of Summer's director (that movie is beautiful but c'mon...is not the fucking same!) but well, if the original cast is off...why do a goddamn reboot right now? Is that big the need of money? Can't they bring something better instead? I mean, why re-do something that's already well-done?!
...
Fuck...I've read about those news as they surfaced and I can't still forget my anger.
-
(http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/2035/mv5bmtyyntg0mta0nf5bml5.jpg)
Summary: Hulk smash.
-
Veteran Writer Alvin Sargent Polishing the Spider-Man Reboot
It must be a good week for news focusing on big name screenwriters doing "punch-ups" on major projects. Just yesterday we heard about Charlie Kaufman spending a couple weeks on Kung Fu Panda: The Kaboom of Doom, and now Heat Vision is back with yet another punch-up scoop as they report veteran screenwriter Alvin Sargent (Ordinary People) is putting some finishing touches on the screenplay, written by James Vanderbilt (Zodiac) for Marc Webb's reboot of Sony's Spider-Man franchise. Sargent has been involved with all of the past Spider-Man films and is apparently Sony's "go-to-guy for punching up weighty scenes."
This is likely only good news for the franchise and it means we're probably getting closer to finally getting some official casting announcements on the horizon now that a completed script is in sight. Heat Vision says this new Spider-Man is rumored to be more emotionally anchored and realistic than the previous films so bringing in someone who has great dramatic experience with an Oscar winning film like Ordinary People, is definitely a smart move. Word is that Peter Parker will be a 17-year-old high school kid struggling with shifting hormones and an outsider status and though it doesn't seem like an 83 year-old screenwriter would be the right guy for tackling a young character like that, his work on the first few Spider-Man movies should speak for itself (well, maybe not the third film with the jazz hands and whatnot, but you still get the idea).
http://www.firstshowing.net/2010/05/14/veteran-writer-alvin-sargent-polishing-the-spider-man-reboot/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2010/05/14/veteran-writer-alvin-sargent-polishing-the-spider-man-reboot/)
-
Sam Jackson Says a S.H.I.E.L.D. Movie Coming After Avengers?
It is? The big Marvel news of the day seems to be this little quote from an interview that RadioBigBoy (via The Playlist) recently had with Samuel L. Jackson, better known as Nick Fury in the cinematic Marvel Universe. In the interview, Jackson states: "The Avengers should start shooting some time next year, and then some time after that there'll be a big S.H.I.E.L.D. movie." Whoa, this brings up plenty of questions. First, does he mean a Nick Fury movie, because isn't The Avengers a S.H.I.E.L.D. movie as is? Second, if it's a spin-off, will they bring in other secondary S.H.I.E.L.D. members who aren't big superheroes to fill it up?
Our friends at SlashFilm remind me that we've got at least two S.H.I.E.L.D. members who might appear in this spin-off: Agent Coulson (played by Clark Gregg) and Black Widow (played by Scarlett Johansson). But who else might be in this if not the big superheroes (Iron Man, Thor, Captain America)? It's interesting to note that so far the only S.H.I.E.L.D. people we've ever met have all been from the Iron Man movies, so maybe we'll meet more secondary characters in the Thor and Captain America movies before we get to The Avengers. All I know for now is that Marvel has a very exciting line-up coming down the road.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2010/05/13/sam-jackson-says-shield-movie-is-coming-after-avengers/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2010/05/13/sam-jackson-says-shield-movie-is-coming-after-avengers/)
-
Big Rumor: Jamie Bell Already Selected as New Spider-Man?
Despite a big internet campaign to get comedian/actor Donald Glover (of "Community" and Mystery Team) an audition for Peter Parker in the upcoming Spider-Man reboot, a big rumor has surfaced from Bleeding Cool (via The Playlist) that says British actor Jamie Bell (King Kong, Defiance), who was on the shortlist of considered actors we brought up last month, has already been chosen as the new webslinger in Marc Webb's reboot. Obviously, the rumor is helped by the fact that Bell was on the shortlist of actors in consideration for the role, but remember when we all thought that John Krasinski was the frontrunner for Captain America?
Of course, if this does turn out true, I'll be the first to say that I'm immensely pleased with the decision. Bell was my favorite actor out of the bunch that was brought up because of his versatility and experience with big effects driven flicks like King Kong and more recently, The Adventures of Tintin franchise. Of course, since he already has a film trilogy that he's dedicated himself too, that might create problems for his availability on the Spider-Man front. But for now, this must be taken with a grain of salt as we'll surely be hearing more rumors down the line until we get official word from the studio. Would you be happy with Jamie Bell?
http://www.firstshowing.net/2010/06/07/big-rumor-jamie-bell-already-selected-as-new-spider-man/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2010/06/07/big-rumor-jamie-bell-already-selected-as-new-spider-man/)
-
^
Omg no, I'd rather have Donald Glover! I love his insane twitter/web campaign, and it would be awesome if it landed him a part in the new Spider-Man film(s)~!
-
Samuel L. Jackson announces 'Avengers' cast (AP)
SAN DIEGO - Comic book fans no longer have to imagine what it might be like to see all their favorite superheroes in one place.
They got the chance Saturday at Comic-Con, when the cast of the forthcoming "Avengers" film took the stage. Samuel L. Jackson surprised some 6,000 fans gathered for a Marvel Studios presentation when he stepped out just as it was ending and started introducing the cast of "The Avengers."
Jackson brought out stars Clark Gregg, Scarlett Johannson, Chris Hemsworth of "Thor" and Chris Evans of "Captain America."
He then introduced another surprise guest, Robert Downey Jr., who brought out the rest of the all-star cast, including Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye and Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner.
"The Avengers" is based on the comic book series of the same name, which brings various Marvel superheroes together. The film is due in 2012.
http://movies.yahoo.com/news/movies.ap.org/samuel-l-jackson-announces-avengers-cast-ap (http://movies.yahoo.com/news/movies.ap.org/samuel-l-jackson-announces-avengers-cast-ap)
So yes, Hulk will be starred by Mark Ruffalo. Whoever he is... :lol:
Oh wait. Last time I watched a movie with him in it was Zodiac. And Collateral before that.
And he's apparently been in this year's Date Night and Shutter Island.
-
Marvel Studios' The Avengers: The Intros (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkINcovFxaY#ws)
-
The Avengers (2012) Teaser Trailer HD 720p (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvL4iJy2PPw#ws)