chairdriver Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 I don't think they did any market research before choosing Loki, or Maria Hill -- there's no need to do so. People aren't stupid, they have the capacity to take in new characters. What more do you have to know about Valkyrie before going into the cinema apart from she's a Valkyrior from Asgard? Let the film do the talking, when she kicks ass, let that be the introduction to her character. Most people will know what the Valkyries are anyway (most famously the classical music "Flight of the Valkyries"), and if not, it takes 5 minutes to read her wikipedia profile. I really don't see the problem with the introduction of characters which have been well-established in the comics for like 40 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintendohnut Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 But it would've taken away from Thor in the first film. We (cinema goers) needed to be introduced into a character so that they rooted for him and wanted to hear his story. They managed to tell the story about Thor AND Loki effectively in that film, and they both made their way into the Avengers. Add another character into that first film and that's fine, but how much screen time do they get? A little/a few scenes? Half/a third of the film? If its the former, then the character can't justifiably be added to the lineup in the first Avengers film. If it's the latter then we wouldn't have known as much about Thor and Loki - it would've taken away from their stories, which was the main aim of the film in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 But it would've taken away from Thor in the first film. We (cinema goers) needed to be introduced into a character so that they rooted for him and wanted to hear his story. They managed to tell the story about Thor AND Loki effectively in that film, and they both made their way into the Avengers. Add another character into that first film and that's fine, but how much screen time do they get? A little/a few scenes? Half/a third of the film? If its the former, then the character can't justifiably be added to the lineup in the first Avengers film. If it's the latter then we wouldn't have known as much about Thor and Loki - it would've taken away from their stories, which was the main aim of the film in the first place. I'm talking about Thor 2 / Avengers 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintendohnut Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Well then there's the concern of too many characters. Before Avengers a LOT of people voiced concerns that there might be too many characters to each one justice. You yourself have said that you weren't a fan of the film because of the lack of extra themes. There was too much to fit into one film - characterisation of each member, visually amazing fight scenes, humour, and then the extra things they missed: more characterisation for each one, themes explored such as the ones you mentioned in the Avengers thread... Now fast forward to Avengers 2. The film is pretty much guaranteed to reprise the same characters as Avengers 1 as they are signed on for a set number of films and they need to keep the marketing going. Each of these well-known characters needs enough screen time to, again, make people actually care about them, along with all the other things mentioned above. Then add Ant Man (who is pretty likely to feature, I'm sure we can agree), plus an extra female character or two as you are suggesting. Now, that would be one awesome 6-hour film right there, but that's how long it would have to be to fit everything in. Do you see what I mean? Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see extra characters introduced in Thor 2, but I'm just not sure how well they would fit into the Avengers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellmeister Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Avengers 2 to be a two parter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted May 19, 2012 Author Share Posted May 19, 2012 Avengers 2 to be a two parter?In what sense? Pretty much every Marvel film ends on some form of cliff hanger anyway. And they're all connected/follow on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellmeister Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 In what sense? Pretty much every Marvel film ends on some form of cliff hanger anyway. And they're all connected/follow on. I was referring more to Nintendohnut's revelation that the film should be 6 hours with all the new characters Chair is demanding be put in to satisfy any possible discriminatory undertones because there aren't enough women etc. If it was that long they could make it into a two parter like they seem to be doing for big films like Harry Potter and I think Twilight. I don't actually want this to be the case though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted May 19, 2012 Author Share Posted May 19, 2012 No, I wouldn't want that either tbh. Nor does it need it, too mnay characters would ruin the film, no matter what length, and this 'discriminatory undertones' talk is rediculous, it's a comic book movie!! and based on a universe where all the vast majority of lead characters are male. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Yes, but the point is that the universe was largely conceived in the 60s, it would be nice to acknowledge that it's an influential thing and has a responsibility to reflect changed attitudes. Which I think Marvel actually does well in the comics, if you look at the new superhero teams created in the last 10 years like Runaways, Young Avengers, New/Young X-Men they all have good female presence. [X-Men in particular has been all about women for the past like 20 years, lol, but then, that's always had such a good track record on being gøod] And Ms Marvel has had her own series, is the leader of the Avengers, is a character you want to read about and feels like she's on level with Iron Man etc nowadays. [Actually the Avengers have often been led by women, off the top of my head both Wasp and Monica Rambeau led them.] It just feels unrepresentative of the comics the film is drawn from that the Avengers film fails the Bechdel test. Ok, they chose those characters for Avengers specifically because they are the most famous (I contest they're the most popular; I feel like I've never encountered a Thor fan for instance) and they happened to be men. But now the franchise has had success it would be nice if it introduced characters to reflect the fact comics have moved past the "man's world" of the 60s. I just really reject the idea that you can't have 4 female leads, and that it'd be too much. I don't really understand the reasoning, especially when the two characters I suggested they introduce (Valkyrie and Enchantress) are pretty central to the Thor mythos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted May 19, 2012 Author Share Posted May 19, 2012 Do you not see the conflict of interest behind the characters you're suggesting appearing in the same film? You've got Jane as Thor's love interest, You've got Enchantress who wants to suduce Thor away from Jane, and you've got Sif who is going to jealous of Jane! It's already gone past a workable love triangle; and that's even before you throw in Valkyrie, who forms another clash. [Not gonna happen but] Surely Valkyrie would be better suited to her own film, because what do you envisage happening, Valkyrie fighting Enchantress?... meanwhile what's Thor [the central character] doing, or switch it around, what's Valkyrie doing?... fighting off hords of enemy fodder?... That would be a waste and something The Warriors Three/Sif can do. Also, that's a problem with female comic book characters in that there's often some romantic involvement, and/or they're all sexy characters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 (edited) Do you not see the conflict of interest behind the characters you're suggesting appearing in the same film? You've got Jane as Thor's love interest, You've got Enchantress who wants to suduce Thor away from Jane, and you've got Sif who is going to jealous of Jane! It's already gone past a workable love triangle; and that's even before you throw in Valkyrie, who forms another clash. Yes, that love triangle works. And Valkryie is separate from that. She has no romantic interest in Thor. In the same way that Hogun, Fandrall and Volstagg have no romantic interest in Thor. How does that not work? [Not gonna happen but] Surely Valkyrie would be better suited to her own film, because what do you envisage happening, Valkyrie fighting Enchantress?... meanwhile what's Thor [the central character] doing, or switch it around, what's Valkyrie doing?... fighting off hords of enemy fodder?... That would be a waste and something The Warriors Three/Sif can do. Well Valkryie's bag is that she's a Valkryie -- she escorts fallen warriors to the afterlife, and can rescue people from the verge of death. Lots of room to fit that into the story. For instance Thor / Jane / any character dying and she bringing them back to life. And her winged horse has such room for a stunning CGI sequence. Hey cunts. Also, that's a problem with female comic book characters in that there's often some romantic involvement, and/or they're all sexy characters. I feel this is really wtf, you sound like you're from the 80s or something. There isn't "often" some romantic involvement. Of the biggest female Avengers [spider-Woman, Black Widow, Scarlet Witch, She-Hulk, Ms Marvel, Wasp, Monica Rambeau] only Scarlet Witch and Wasp had romantic ties (Black Widow had a romance with Daredevil, but that was in Daredevil's comic). Wasp in particular was domestically abused by Ant-Man, and has since been a figurehead of independent women. Scarlet Witch soon became a central Avengers character and it was more like Vision was defined as the partner of Scarlet Witch rather than the other way round. And male heroes aren't sexy? With their rippling muscles? Striaght men aren't the only people watching these films. --- Also, I feel this is so appropriate: But calm down, it's just Enchantress impersonating her: Also, my favourite thing. Clearly 85 points: Edited May 19, 2012 by chairdriver Automerged Doublepost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted May 19, 2012 Author Share Posted May 19, 2012 A love triangle doesn't have four characters, Thor, Jane, Sif, Enchantress, that's why it doesn't work. I'd prefer you didn't talk to me as though I'm sexist/don't consider that gay people might be watching the films etc... What you're not doing is thinking realistically about these films and are seemingly caught up on some equality/human rights campaign/taking a comic book movie universe far too seriously? Did you have a problem with 300, for not modernising itself by having female warriors fighting alongside the men? I didn't say there had to be a love interest, I said it exists, and that it would be tough balancing a bunch of sexy female leads... How many films aimed at the general audience can you name that have this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 (edited) Basically Valkyrie is like the fiercest feminist bitch in town. A love triangle doesn't have four characters, Thor, Jane, Sif, Enchantress, that's why it doesn't work. Enchantress isn't part of the triangle, she's the one trying to kill Thor, manipulating Sif and Jane to do it. Did you have a problem with 300, for not modernising itself by having female warriors fighting alongside the men? I had a problem with 300 because Frank Miller is a neo-Fascist and prefer not to participate in his work. Edited May 19, 2012 by chairdriver Automerged Doublepost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murr Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Marvel Wants Mads Mikkelsen For Villain Role In THOR 2 Casting is about to go into full swing for Thor 2 as the film is set to start filming later this summer in London. First up for Marvel is choosing the right actor for the villain role and they have set their sights on Casino Royale baddie, Mads Mikkelsen. Mad Mikkelsen, the Denmark native is having a great week. First, he found out that he is contention for a best acting award at the Cannes Film Festival for his portrayal of a man accused of being a pedophile in The Hunt. And now Variety is reporting that Mads is up for a villainous role in the sequel to Thor. It is unknown at this time what part he will play, but what is known is that his Tom Hiddleston, who played Loki in the original, will still have a big part as an antagonist. Marvel and Disney declined to comment on the casting. source - comicbookmovie.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Interesting. Can work out who they'd be casting him as? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted May 25, 2012 Author Share Posted May 25, 2012 (edited) Hmm, I thought Thor 2 might go with Enchatress/Executioner, with Executioner being manipulated by Enchantress and also Loki in the background pulling the strings, but maybe not. Or maybe so, but if Thor's visiting a number of the other Nine Worlds, could always be a characters wearing a lot of make-up like the Frost Giants... Reading around on the other 9 Realms... Malekith the Accursed, of the Dark Elves? Malekith the Accursed is a supervillain in the Marvel Universe. He is ruler of the Dark Elves of Svartalfheim, and has come into conflict with Thor. He once wielded the Casket of Ancient Winters. Malekith struck an alliance with Loki on behalf of the fire demon Surtur. We've already had the Casket of Ancient Winter, so that's one connection to the first film,And seems the character has ties with Loki, so there's a second. Edited May 25, 2012 by Retro_Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Oh yes, Malekith is touching all my buttons right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReZourceman Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 A) Frank Cho's artwork gives me a boner. B) Executioner please. We NEED Enchantress. A strong female villain is so missing from this universe and Enchantress is awesome. The only other villain I'd be happy with for Thor would be Earth based villains, either Absorbing Man or The Wrecker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murr Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Few tid-bits - Odin To Share Scenes With Jane Foster In THOR 2 In the first film Thor destroys the rainbow bridge thus preventing him from venturing back to Earth. Of course this issue was sort of solved in The Avengers because Odin mustered up some Dark Magic. But that came off as something they couldn't do all the time going forward, so now it seems they'll transport Jane Foster to Asgard instead. Well, according to Sir Anthony Hopkins, and you never question a Sir. “I haven’t got a script yet but I believe Natalie and I have some scenes together this time." Zachary Levi Now Confirms Playing Fandral In THOR 2; Says He'll Be At Comic-Con While not being able to comment on the matter just yesterday, comedian Chuck actor Zachary Levi proudly confirmed today that he'll be replacing Josh Dallas in the dashing role of Fandral in Marvel's Alan Taylor-directed Thor sequel. In addition, during his appearance on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, Levi seemingly confirms he'll appear at San Diego Comic-Con this weekend to promote the film. While some Thor 2 updates should be expected during Marvel Studios' Iron Man 3 panel this weekend, Zachary saying "we got a big event this weekend [at comic-con]" alludes to the possibility that the sequel's entire cast may be among "surprise guests" mentioned in the press release. Do you think Zachary Levi spoiled the big surprise? Source - Comicbookmovie.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted July 14, 2012 Author Share Posted July 14, 2012 http://uk.ign.com/articles/2012/07/14/comic-con-thor-2-title-buzz-and-ant-man-footage Comic-Con: Thor 2 Title Buzz IGN is hearing that Thor 2 will be titled Thor: The Darkest World. The title will be revealed during today's Marvel panel at San Diego Comic-Con panel in Hall H. We hear there may even be some footage from the film shown. (We'd imagine it might be visual effects/proof of concept-type stuff.) Sequels with proper titles are so much better! Just seems strange then that Iron Man didn't follow this route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iun Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I had a problem with 300 because Frank Miller is a neo-Fascist and prefer not to participate in his work. Also, that's a problem with female comic book characters in that there's often some romantic involvement, and/or they're all sexy characters. I love you guys to pieces, but I have to ask: why do you bother getting up in the morning when the world is clearly such a CONSTANT DISAPPOINTMENT to you? Personally, I thought Avengers was awesome, Thor was more like a TV movie and Iron Man should be called whatever the hell they like! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostmario Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murr Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Revealing Filming And Scene Details Surface For THOR: THE DARK WORLD Maybe I should spoiler - As principal photography nears kickoff for Marvel's anticipated sequel, Thor: The Dark World, the folks over at ComingSoon.Net have received quite a bit interesting information. Highlighting a new filming location, confirming the movie's production title, and revealingly what the scene(s) will consist of, the info reads: “We're writing to let you know about some filming about to be undertaken in Bourne Wood in the coming months. Please find a brief overview & introduction to this project. “Thursday Mourning” is the working title of a major feature film. It is comic book adaptation set in another "fictional realm." We plan to start prep in Bourne woods in the week of 6th August for a period of 5 weeks where a temporary set will be constructed within the bowl area. Filming is scheduled to take place for approximately 10 days from 10th September TBC. All of the proposed sequence is due to take place during the day. There is no night filming. We will be establishing a fictional village set in another realm, with yurts and village like dressing in the bowl. The sequence involves a battle between two kingdoms, ending in our comic book hero arriving to save the day. The sequence will involve a substantial amount of Stunts and controlled special effects all within the hours 0700 - 1900hrs. We plan to use most of the areas that are usually occupied by film units for all our support vehicles. The sequence will involve approximately 300 extras who will arrive in the early hours prior to call time to go through costume and makeup, which we will undertake in marquees positioned on site. As always we will endeavour to keep any noise disruption to an absolute minimum. We will have very friendly security looking after our set and trucks (most of whom you have probably met before) and to ensure that all members of the public can still enjoy the woods and walk your dogs as normally as possible. We may have to seal our set off periodically to members of the public for safety reasons as there will be quite a lot of activity at certain times. On completion of filming, we will remove all temporary sets and associated equipment and will be completely vacated from Bourne woods by the 13th October.” Exploring Thor's relationship with the Asgardian all-father Odin, as well earthbound companion Jane Foster, “Thor: The Dark World” follows the God of Thunder to The Nine Realms beyond Asgard and earth. And as his evil half-brother, Loki, returns for Asgardian justice, a new threat rises. Also rejoining Thor are his fellow Asgardians, Lady Sif, gatekeeper Heimdall and Warriors Three, as they encounter mythical Norse creatures among evildoers. Source - Comicbookmovie.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murr Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Christopher Eccleston Cast as Malekith in Thor 2 Former Doctor Who star Christopher Eccleston has been cast as the primary villain Thor: The Dark World. Deadline claims the 28 Days Later and Shallow Grave actor will play Malekith the Accursed in the Marvel sequel. Eccleston is no stranger to comic book-oriented fare having played Destro in G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra and having a stint on the TV series Heroes. Malekith the Accursed is the leader of the dark elves of Svartalfheim, who in the comics stole the Casket of Ancient Winters. (The casket can be seen in the first Thor movie.) Malekith also had a badass servant, Kurse, who ultimately turned on Malekith and killed him. The Malekith and Casket of Ancient Winters storyline was adapted for an episode of The Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes. Mads Mikkelsen was initially approached for the role, but had to bow out due to scheduling. Source - IGN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted August 2, 2012 Author Share Posted August 2, 2012 So they did go with Malekith! Though I've never really seen Christopher Ecclestone act well in anything; so he'd better raise his game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts