New Avengers Trailer

**PeanutButterMunky** · 03-04-2012

Originally Posted by RedDragon7

No, I made a simple statement when Funeralfrog said the Thor, Captain America, and Hulk movies were only because of Iron Man.

Since The Incredible Hulk released the same year as Iron Man, that clearly isn't the case. Marvel's and Paramount's interest in comic-book movies shot through the roof with Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy breaking box office records. All of sudden they realized these Marvel comics can be a gold mine after all, especially after the disappointing Hulk with Bana.

That went into full speed once The Avengers movie was planned. Hence the after credits tie-ins.

What bothers me is they had a tie-in with Edward Norton's Hulk, yet wouldn't allow him to come back for the role. Kind of douchey.

<< TapaTalk >>

**[DT]** · 03-04-2012

Originally Posted by PeanutButterMunky

What bothers me is they had a tie-in with Edward Norton's Hulk, yet wouldn't allow him to come back for the role. Kind of douchey.

<< TapaTalk >>

Yeah, that would’ve been continuity across all the lead-in movies, same actors, etc., I actually heard there was some kind of “contract” issue with Ed Norton, and that’s not the first time I’ve heard he’s a PITA to work with ... not so much they just kicked him to the curb, but his demands were extravagant compared to the other principals. At least from nerd/geek/fan sources like AICN, CHUD and whatnot.

It actually looks pretty swell, I mean, if you asked me 10+ years ago if there would ever be a “real” attempt at an Avengers movie I’d say NFW.

Also if you asked me if Sailor Jerry’s, fresh orange juice and La Croix orange would be awesome, I would’ve said, f*** yes, and well, I was right

**PeanutButterMunky** · 03-04-2012

Originally Posted by [DT]

Yeah, that would’ve been continuity across all the lead-in movies, same actors, etc., I actually heard there was some kind of “contract” issue with Ed Norton, and that’s not the first time I’ve heard he’s a PITA to work with ... not so much they just kicked him to the curb, but his demands were extravagant compared to the other principals. At least from nerd/geek/fan sources like AICN, CHUD and whatnot.

It actually looks pretty swell, I mean, if you asked me 10+ years ago if there would ever be a “real” attempt at an Avengers movie I’d say NFW.

That's what happened with Terrence Howard... ridiculous demands.

Maggie Gyllenhaal replacing Katie Holmes in Batman was a little unsettling as well. Not because Katie Holmes is a great actress or a vital role or anything... just the fact that Bruce Wayne's love interest shouldn't look like... Maggie Gyllenhaal. She's dog ugly... no offense to anyone here who's into beastiality.

<< TapaTalk >>

**Funeralfog** · 03-04-2012

well to be fair, Christian Bale is a retard when playing batman so i could see him screwing a dog

**PeanutButterMunky** · 03-04-2012

Originally Posted by Funeralfog

well to be fair, Christian Bale is a retard when playing batman so i could see him screwing a dog

I wasn't aware that retarded people had relations with dogs. As much as you may hate him, at least he's not George Clooney.

<< TapaTalk >>

**RedDragon7** · 03-04-2012

Originally Posted by PeanutButterMunky

What bothers me is they had a tie-in with Edward Norton's Hulk, yet wouldn't allow him to come back for the role. Kind of douchey.

<< TapaTalk >>

It is very unfortunate that Norton isn't the Hulk and may not be again at any point. It's my one disappointment with The Avengers, Mark Ruffalo just isn't cutting it... everything else looks good so far.

This seems to be the case, at least it seems most believable:

Entertainment Weekly outlines the argument between Marvel and Norton, which started over the final edit of the upcoming Incredible Hulk. Director Louis Leterrier talks about being concerned about working with Norton at the start due to his reputation thanks to pictures like American History X. Instead Norton was an ideal part of the project… until that edit. Norton and Leterrier wanted a slower paced film that meditated on key ideas while Marvel wanted a more commercial flick. The studio won and Norton lost.

Norton's Statement:

"Like so many people I've loved the story of The Hulk since I was a kid, so it was thrilling when Marvel asked me to write and help produce an altogether new screen incarnation, as well as play Bruce Banner. I grew up reading Marvel Comics and always loved the mythic dimension and contemporary themes in the stories, and I’m proud of the script I wrote. In every phase of production, including the editing, working with Louis Leterrier has been wonderful...I've never had a better partner, and the collaboration with all the rest of the creative team has been terrific. Every good movie gets forged through collaboration, and different ideas among people who are all committed and respect the validity of each other's opinions is the heart of filmmaking. Regrettably, our healthy process, which is and should be a private matter, was misrepresented publicly as a 'dispute,' seized on by people looking for a good story, and has been distorted to such a degree that it risks distracting from the film itself, which Marvel, Universal and I refuse to let happen. It has always been my firm conviction that films should speak for themselves and that knowing too much about how they are made diminishes the magic of watching them. All of us believe The Incredible Hulk will excite old fans and create new ones and be a huge hit...our focus has always been to deliver the Hulk that people have been waiting for and keep the worldwide love affair with the big green guy going strong.''

Comes from EW: http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20191802_3,00.html

Originally Posted by PeanutButterMunky

That's what happened with Terrence Howard... ridiculous demands.

Maggie Gyllenhaal replacing Katie Holmes in Batman was a little unsettling as well. Not because Katie Holmes is a great actress or a vital role or anything... just the fact that Bruce Wayne's love interest shouldn't look like... Maggie Gyllenhaal. She's dog ugly... no offense to anyone here who's into beastiality.

<< TapaTalk >>

Haha, I had the same reaction.

**Ixion** · 03-04-2012

Originally Posted by PeanutButterMunky

Maggie Gyllenhaal replacing Katie Holmes in Batman was a little unsettling as well. Not because Katie Holmes is a great actress or a vital role or anything... just the fact that Bruce Wayne's love interest shouldn't look like... Maggie Gyllenhaal. She's dog ugly... no offense to anyone here who's into beastiality.

I had the same feelings regarding Eva Green in Casino Royale. I thought the romance was not believable, since she was so plain and average looking. But apparently I'm the only person in the world who doesn't think she's beautiful.

**RedDragon7** · 03-04-2012

Your not the only one Ixion. I don't think she looks sexy or hot... However she does have a quality about her, especially the way they presented her in CR, that fit the role very well complimenting Craig's bond. She seemed sophisticated.

**DreDayDetox** · 03-04-2012

Originally Posted by RedDragon7

Your not the only one Ixion. I don't think she looks sexy or hot... However she does have a quality about her, especially the way they presented her in CR, that fit the role very well complimenting Craig's bond. She seemed sophisticated.

I actually hated her at first too, but then on the second viewing, she was nice. There was just something about her charm or cuteness that had gotten a rise out of me....a rise, deep below the surface of the abyss and dwelling deep underneath my boxers.

**RedDragon7** · 03-04-2012

Dre, I was wondering where that sentence was going till I got to the last two words

**PeanutButterMunky** · 03-04-2012

Originally Posted by DreDayDetox

I actually hated her at first too, but then on the second viewing, she was nice. There was just something about her charm or cuteness that had gotten a rise out of me....a rise, deep below the surface of the abyss and dwelling deep underneath my boxers.

Lol. That poetic rant soon took a sharp turn downhill.

<< TapaTalk >>

**DreDayDetox** · 03-04-2012

Originally Posted by PeanutButterMunky

Lol. That poetic rant soon took a sharp turn downhill.

<< TapaTalk >>

For you and it's not so much a rant as more of a joke.

**PeanutButterMunky** · 03-04-2012

Originally Posted by DreDayDetox

For you and it's not so much a rant as more of a joke.

I know, Buzz Killington. I found it funny.

**Funeralfog** · 03-05-2012

Originally Posted by PeanutButterMunky

I wasn't aware that retarded people had relations with dogs. As much as you may hate him, at least he's not George Clooney.

<< TapaTalk >>

yeah, thank goodness for that hahaha

**RedDragon7** · 03-08-2012

Quick Q&A with Whedon (huh.. qqww) on the movie and what's on the horizon for a sequel:

It's still about two months to go before Marvel's The Avengers assemble on the big screen, but SFX (via Digital Spy) managed a few details from writer/director Joss Whedon about both the first film and a potential sequel.

"I want to know what makes them tick, what makes them flawed, what makes them fight - and ultimately, what makes them awesome," Whedon says of his superhero team. "I go to these movies for those moments when the heroes define themselves, either through action or deliciously overwritten speeches."

Asked how a sequel could possibly be bigger than what he has planned for the May 4th release, Whedon responded:

"By not trying to. By being smaller. More personal, more painful... By being the next thing that should happen to these characters, and not just a rehash of what seemed to work the first time. By having a theme that is completely fresh and organic to itself."

Whedon always proving his worth.

**DreDayDetox** · 03-09-2012

Awesome stuff. And to think that I was pissed off when I saw who the director of this movie was. I quickly watched Firefly and changed my opinion just from the pilot episode alone..oh and realizing that he made the Buffy series which I watched as a kid.