The various movies obviously deserve their own threads once things actually start moving on them, but it seems like we should have a place just for general discussion about what they're planning. So here ya go. [Reply]
"In 1998, a young Sony Pictures executive named Yair Landau was tasked with securing the theatrical screen rights to Spider-Man. His company had DVD rights to the web slinger but needed the rest in order to make a movie."
Marvel Entertainment, then only a famed name in the comic-book world, had just begun trying to make film deals. The company was fresh out of bankruptcy and desperate for cash, so its new chief, Ike Perlmutter, responded with a more audacious offer. Sony, he countered, could have the movie rights to nearly every Marvel character—Iron Man, Thor, Ant-Man, Black Panther and more—for $25 million.
Mr. Landau took the offer back to his bosses at Sony, whose response was quick and decisive, he recalled in an interview: "Nobody gives a sh—about any of the other Marvel characters. Go back and do a deal for only Spider-Man."
One thing I think is pretty clear, if you know the comics, Marvel is getting the pieces in place to do Young Avengers in some form. They've already aged up Cassie Lang (Stature), Kate Bishop is in the Hawkeye show, they're apparently introducing America Chavez in Dr. Strange. Kang is the villain in Ant Man 3. It's not a stretch to guess that WandaVision will introduce Wanda and Vision's sons (Wiccan and Speed).
Ms. Marvel hasn't been part of the Young Avengers in the comics, but really makes more sense in this group. Spider-Man would also make sense in this group, and Marvel does have one more appearance for him in the Sony deal after Spider-Man 3. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990:
That’s kinda odd. It’s not like he was iconic in that role and the movie wasn’t very good.
But it makes sense, especially from a marketing perspective, to bring back a hugely popular and well-known actor as opposed to re-casting.
The same thing can be said for bringing back J.K. Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson.
IMO, the last two Spider-man movies starring Tom Holland are among the best MCU films of this run. Holland is absolutely perfect, the story arcs excellent and the cast has been spot on across the board. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
But it makes sense, especially from a marketing perspective, to bring back a hugely popular and well-known actor as opposed to re-casting.
The same thing can be said for bringing back J.K. Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson.
IMO, the last two Spider-man movies starring Tom Holland are among the best MCU films of this run. Holland is absolutely perfect, the story arcs excellent and the cast has been spot on across the board.
Now Simmons was beloved in that role. I can understand that.
I like Jamie Foxx, but didn’t really think he was anything special in that role. The makeup was cool though. [Reply]
It’s kind of a weird thing between Sony/Marvel Studios how they are keeping ties to the old spider universes with Toby Maguire and Andrew Garfield. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990:
It’s kind of a weird thing between Sony/Marvel Studios how they are keeping ties to the old spider universes with Toby Maguire and Andrew Garfield.
Where are you going to find a better actor than JK Simmons for that role?
Jamie Foxx wasn't the problem with the Garfield led Spiderman movies, so why replace a Top Line, Oscar Winning Actor? [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
Where are you going to find a better actor than JK Simmons for that role?
Jamie Foxx wasn't the problem with the Garfield led Spiderman movies, so why replace a Top Line, Oscar Winning Actor?
Scripts and direction seemed to be the problem with the Garfield Spiderman movies. I thought he was fine as Spiderman.
Not nearly as good as Holland though. Both of Holland's Spiderman movies have gotten better with subsequent watchings. Much like Dr Strange and Thor Ragnarok. [Reply]
Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider:
Scripts and direction seemed to be the problem with the Garfield Spiderman movies. I thought he was fine as Spiderman.
Not nearly as good as Holland though. Both of Holland's Spiderman movies have gotten better with subsequent watchings. Much like Dr Strange and Thor Ragnarok.
For me, Tom Holland has been absolutely pitch perfect as Spider-Man. The cast has been absolutely perfect, the movies light-hearted and fun yet heavy at times. The relationship between Iron Man and Spider-Man feels so real and is so endearing that I forget that I’m watching a Super Hero movie. And of course, the banter and relationship between Happy, Aunt Mae and Peter has been a blast to watch.
The only “complaint” I have about the Holland-led Spider-Man films is that most likely, we won’t see Jake Gyllenhall again, who based on his performance, would have been the perfect guy to lead the Avengers into their next phase, obviously as a different character.
His performance was fantastic, IMO, and is right up there with RDJ, Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth and Mark Ruffalo’s best performances in the MCU.
Maybe if Wanda warps reality, we’ll see Gyllenhall return but as Tony Stark, Ariel not many could pull off, especially after RDJ, but based on Far From Home, Gyllenhall would be the perfect fit, IMO. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
...
Maybe if Wanda warps reality, we’ll see Gyllenhall return but as Tony Stark, Ariel not many could pull off, especially after RDJ, but based on Far From Home, Gyllenhall would be the perfect fit, IMO...
I'm guessing it more likely we see Ironheart introduced than someone who has to fill RDJ's shoes. Maybe RDJ would be willing to be involved just doing voice overs?
Originally Posted by : Post-Civil War II
Appearing in her Rescue armor following the "Civil War II" storyline, Pepper Potts confronts Riri Williams and Tony Stark, that has transferred his consciousness into a device becoming an A.I., in an attempt to explain the problems of being a superhero.
