avengers1

So much info comes out of Comic Con about comic-related projects that it sometimes takes a couple days to filter through. Collider and CHUD have posted interview bites with Marvel Studios prez Kevin Feige, who reveals some interesting things about both the The First Avenger: Captain America and Avengers films. First up is the roster for The Avengers, not that it really takes rocket science to figure it out. Feige says:

I think we know. It’s going to be Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Nick Fury. 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 interact with each other.

He hedges on whether or not the Hulk will actually be part of the team, so the rumor/suspicion that the Hulk would be the initial villain in the film is still hanging. But Devin at CHUD found that Marvel still owns the rights to shape-changing alien race the Skrulls, and supposes that they’ll be the real villain in the film. As he explains, that makes the scope of the movie truly huge, and allows for all sorts of screenwriting fun. What if one incarnation of the Hulk was revealed to be a Skrull (the sort of thing that often happened in the comics) or if a character from an earlier Marvel film (say…Terrence Howard’s Jim Rhodes) had been a Skrull? Regardless, it’s good to see that Marvel seems determined to keep the team from becoming a sprawling organization. At least at first. Zak Penn is outlining The Avengers now. More details on Captain America after the break.

I’m equally intrigued about the Captain America ideas, which suggest that he might be fighting alongside some form of the Invaders in the period piece story. The Invaders were a WWII-era supergroup that included Cap’s sidekick Bucky (who we know is likely in the film), Union Jack, the Sub-Mariner and the original Human Torch. We’re not likely to see that exact lineup in the film, since Fox owns the Human Torch and Sub-Mariner as well. But the original Human Torch was an android, and Marvel owns the rights to that character (confused yet?) so there’s plenty of room for Marvel Studios to create a non-Human Torch. Here’s what Feige said to CHUD:

Setting it in the Marvel version of WWII is going to open it up [to an international audience] in a big way. It’ll actually end up being our most diverse and our most international film. In terms of the cast there’s a group that [Cap] works with that will have an opportunity for much more international casting.

There’s been the question of how to sell Captain America overseas, and an international supergroup fighting alongside the main character is obviously a good way to go. Feige also mentioned a couple of other possible inclusions in the film: the organization Hydra, which is the classic foe of Nick Fury’s S.H.I.E.L.D. and Howard Stark, father of Tony.

Introducing Hydra in this movie could also open them up for inclusion in The Avengers (where they could always be making a deal with the Skrulls) and Howard Stark could also tie into Iron Man 2. In the clip we saw at Comic Con, Mickey Rourke’s villainous Whiplash is heard calling Stark’s family ‘thieves and butchers’, so events in the flashback story of Captain America could come to bear on the creation of Whiplash. Could Marvel Studios really be making a set of films that are as intricately tied together as their classic comic book plotlines? I hope so.

  • Matthew
    If you're going to make blanket comments about super hero possibilities, do you think you guys could at least go on Wikipedia and read about these heroes for five minutes before speculating? That or hire someone who knows a thing or two about comics. Seriously - Skrulls in an Avengers movie. Are you kidding?
  • RussFischer
    Are you? The Skrulls have crossed over across many of Marvel's major books over the years -- SHIELD and the Avengers have both been involved with them, as your suggested cursory glance at Wikipedia quickly shows. Marvel needs a Big Bad for the movie, and since they own them why not consider the Skrulls?
  • AfroVince
    I was laughing so much at that guys post, Russ.
  • Matthew
    The Skrulls are the most improbable large scale super villain assault due to the way they attack. The only possible connection you could make to the Skrull working for this movie is either a) you heard about Secret Invasion, which had been in the works for 5 years, and thinking "Hey, I read this, I get comics now!" or b) you read the Ultimates, which everyone in Marvel is saying the movie is most likely based on, which feature the Chitauri, the closest thing you could call "Ultimate Skrulls." However, the Chitauri weren't even a villain until the second half of Ultimates. The first villain was the Hulk, which is much easier to place as a villain due to the work in the New Marvel Film World. BESIDES, we've had TWO animated feature films based on the Ultimates already, so that should show you the most likely candidate for a live action film.

    Furthermore, to put the Skrulls in a feature film would take a lot of large scale groundwork which would work about as well on screen as Watchmen. Do you think the average film goer is going to go into the theater knowing what a Skrull is? Do you think they'll care that Terrance Howard was really a Skrull and that's why he was replaced? Do you actually think that makes the tiniest bit of sense? You could only possibly consider the Skrulls for an Avengers sequel, and even then it would take more ground work than I'm sure Hollywood will allow Marvel to lay, especially after Marvel's previous cinematic endeavors. Besides, you said it yourself - the Skrulls crossed over MANY books at once. There have only been a few Avengers/Skrull moments that matter, and none of them would translate to film. The Skrulls have always been primarily a Fantastic 4 villain, not an Avengers villain, and the Fantastic 4 have already proven to be cinematic dung in the eyes of the world.

    That's why you don't consider the Skrulls - because Marvel needs a hit, not an epic miss. You want a big bad? AIM. HYDRA. Hell, I'll even take the Ultimate Skrulls over normal Skrulls. If the Skrulls appear on the big screen, everyone will laugh, call it BS, and walk of the theater just talking about how they'd rather watch the Dark Knight again.
  • zebrat
    lighten up, nerd. skrulls ftw!
  • Hi_there
    You people don't know crap. The skrulls the main guys for the first Avengers movie... retarded. Already fails.
  • Kim
    I'm a comic book geek and even my eyes were glazing over at this comment.
  • Merciful_budah
    I fail to see what would be so cinematically unworthy about using the Skrulls. What does it matter that Joe Average doesn't know Jack all about them. Same could be said for Iron Man or Ra's al Ghul. And it's not as though you need to give to much exposition for a Skrull Invasion.

    "Hey there Thor. How's it going buddy?"

    "AHAHAHAHA I'M IN FACT NOT THOR!" ::Shapeshift::

    "Holy Crapsticks! You're a green Alien? What in god's name do you want?"

    "YOUR PLANET AHAHAHAHAHA"

    There see. Simple as that. Shapeshifting green aliens who want to conquer the earth are not a hard sell. The real trick in centering the movie around that is not letting the payoff seem contrived at the end. If it plays like a movie where that comes across as a last minute B.S. decision that would be lame. If they took the time to really center the plot around an unseen menace and present the reveal in a suitable way that could be great. And as Devin at Chud pointed out, an alien Invasion would be a great way to give all the Avengers plenty of action.
  • Allm0st
    The Skrull or even Super Skrull are a Fantastic Four villain which also ties into Silver Surfer + Galactus more so than The Avengers. Yes they had their quick spot in the Kree-Skrull war. I personally do not think that would be a good story. They could go with forming them by taking down a great threat such as Ultron or even Kang really. Hulk would be a good villain as well considering the government is after him, why not assemble a bunch of these super-heroes to take down this super-bad ass?
    Simply put, Skrull imo is just 'facepalm' so to say as far as being in an Avengers movie.
  • ken
    you dont have to be rude its his opinion
  • he was being a gay retard ... (only female asian drivers are worse than that) ... serves him right!
  • The Great Cambino
    Well, I see you've managed to slur gays, retarded people, Asians, and women in a single post! Sure makes your argument look intelligent!

    At any rate, I really don't think we'll see either The Hulk or Skrulls as a villain. Having aliens doesn't seem to fit in with the direction they've taken Iron Man, and making an oft-filmed, shaky box-office hero into a villain seems like a bad idea from a financial point of view. I would guess we'll be seeing someone else.
  • Just wondering who you think would be a good villain for the Avengers if not the Hulk?
  • The Great Cambino
    Actually, I do think the Hulk would be a good villain, I just don't really see the studio going for it. I'm not really sure who else I'd like to see as the villain yet, I'm waiting to see where they take the next few movies to decide.
  • lol ... intelligent? your chick's ass it is! well its prettier and smells good but yeah! suck it u dick
  • talk something that u knw of u prick ...
  • Allynd Dudnikov
    Have you ever read a comic book? I suggest you pick up The Ultimate Marvel book "The Ultimates" aka the Ultimate Universe Avengers, the first villain and the reason the team is even assembled is because of attacks by the Skrulls. (Which are called some other name I can't remember at the moment.)

    Screenwriter Zak Penn has stated many times that his current drafts for the Avengers film is based heavily on the Ultimates.
  • not keeping up with comics huh Matthew. Skrulls were ALL over the Avengers and the Marvel U.
    Hit up a comic book store some time man. its not a bad idea at all.
  • dannybell1805
    oh yeh, funny that, cos i thought those WERE the skrulls in ULTIMATES Vol.2

    (a comic book property after which the film is so obviously gonna be based on (at least in part) considering the involvement of SHIELD and a black Nick Fury)

    so, yknow, stop commenting before you read ALL the comics

    ;-D
  • kfizz
    The skrull seem to be to new for the story they are telling. It feels like it would cheapen the whole reckcon the movies were doing. The Skrull could still be in it but have taken the place as real heros since the start is just to happenstance. Its to comic booky for a movie.
  • Anyone know when does Fox's rights for X-men (or Sony's rights for Spiderman) expires?
  • It doesn't matter because they just keep renewing the rights. I don't know exactly how it work but Fox keeps coming up with ideas for reboots and they keep renewing the right to X-men and Daredevil. Plus they're not going to let go of characters that make the majority of their money. I think it will be decades before we see a Marvel Studios version of either which sucks for us.
  • To get the rights, they have to pay Marvel anyways right? If so, why not they just demand a sum thats just not economically viable for Fox?

    It'd be the day when marvel get to make x-men/daredevil films!
  • Yes that would be the day. hopefully someday that will happen. As for the first part of your response, I don't think that's possible or that would have been done by now. There's probably something in the contract that states that they just keep paying a certain amount for the rights every few years in order to keep the characters. Maybe the contract has an expiration date and on that date Marvel can make that ridiculous amount and possibly get their characters back. But don't you think that if the characters are so profitable, that any amount of money wouldn't really compare to the money they'll make from the Box Office?
  • Merciful_budah
    part of owning the rights is putting out a movie every few years. That's why Wolverine had the "X-Men Origins" banner and why they're already planning a reboot of Fantastic Four (because seriously, who really wants to see a part three of that series).

    Fox should seriously just cut their losses though. Give the properties back to Marvel in exchange for Distribution rights. At least then the movies will be good AND make them money...
  • I agree with your idea at the bottom of your response. It would be a win win for both Fox and Marvel if they gave the rights back and Fox could distribute. I know that Marvel and Paramount have a contract for distribution but I'm sure something could be written up for these circumstances.
  • first...marvel owns the characters,..NOT fox. fox just has the MOVIE RIGHTS, NOT THE ACTUAL TRADEMARKS. (otherwise marvel couldn't claim to own them at all in the comic books, which they do.)

    and second...the skrulls sell. period. the green lantern corps and sinestro corps are all going to be in the lantern film. why wouldint it make absolute perfect sense to put them (the skrulls) in the first avengers film?!?!? if they want to compete now that DC is finally getting their shi-together, with not only a wide scale green lantern already filming, but a script for justice league, the logical choice is to utilize the skrulls, who have proven to sell elsewhere.
  • Genaro
    Universal had optioned Jonathan Mostow to make a Namor film, so it's not part of the Fox-Fantastic Four package. Perhaps by the time Captain America is made or the Avengers, their rights will revert back to Marvel.
  • I don't think Zak Penn has it in him to write an intricately tied together classic screenplay. I actually think the movie will be alright but all of these possibilities seem unlikely.

    I think that the Skrulls won't be apart of the film even though it would be awesome. I'd say if they were going to do a Skrulls story, they should save it for a sequel.

    Almost forgot about Hulk being a villain which I'm in favor of. They need to show how he's going to be a part of the film or at least have Iron Man battle him in the third Iron Man film if they make that one first. I'm just saying Hulk needs to be a part of this story and not Nick Fury, well not that much.
  • Merciful_budah
    I agree on saving the Skrulls for a sequel. I do think a big character piece like the Avengers will need a few villains just to keep shit interesting. I'd love to see them set up the Red Skull in Cap (cuz seriously, if they don't then.....I don't even know...) and have him return as the main bad guy leading Hydra or some such.
  • Well to have a Cap movie without Red Skull would be ridiculous. I mean he is the main arch villain of Captain America so he needs to be in there.
  • Guest
    since when FOX owns Sub-Mariner i thought Marvel Studios got the rights now which marvel characters does Marvel Studio owns i hope they have Dr Strange and Black Panther
  • CooperKai
    It saddens me that there is such little speak of The Hulk...I would really love to have Edward Norton in this lineup...but I can just picture that smug a-hole not agreeing to do it if he can't control everything.
  • Since Edward Norton is a big Hulk fan, I doubt he would be an ass about not doing this movie. I think he's signed on for sequels anyway. Plus when has he ever turned down a movie anyway? I mean he's in every other movie. It is sad though that they act like Hulk never happened. They need the Hulk in this movie.
  • No Skrulls. Please. While I won't harangue, I think Skrulls would be completely overkill. I think the Hulk would be the best bet. Or, as someone already pointed out, an organization like Hydra or AIM. SHIELD and the Avengers have had their fill of them in the comics. Heck, I'd even take a page from the recent story arcs in New Avengers and introduce The Hood and his cronies. That could work out extremely well, as long as they make some powerful bad guy that could go toe-to-toe with Thor.

    Honestly, Thor needs to be presented as a grade-A badass. Little in the Marvel Universe can disrupt Thor, and that's why the Hulk could be a good first villain.
  • You're right about Thor being a bad-ass. I think that they should have the Hulk as he villain because there has to be a reason why the Avengers assemble in the first place. I mean there has to be some kind of bad villain that not just one hero can take on and defeat.

    If they really wanted to mix it up, make Hulk the villain in the first film. After his defeat, make it seem as though the "Bad" Hulk was actually a Skrull and they have banner locked away somewhere. The Avengers need Banner for some reason and battle the Skrulls to get him back.

    Just a thought, what do you think?
  • I love they are building a universe for the film canon. Sucks that they don't have rights to some of their major characters anymore but they got a nice little crew here.
  • Hi_there
    Why only Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Nick Fury???????!!!!!!! That's the stupidest roster ever. Where's Spiderman (it doesn't even have to be Tobey!), Wolverine, Ant Man, She Hulk, Namor, some of the F4, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. Why in the hell would you JUST have those... four guys (that's not even enough to qualify as a super team imo)????? I'm just laughing at how stupid a 4 person Avengers team would be.
  • Danisgod6491
    The Orignal Avengers was Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Ant-Man & Wasp. Just one more then the roster for the film. I will admit that Hulk should be apart of the film, but as a member of the team not as a villain or a side story. Wolverine and Spidey didn't become apart of the avengers untill 2004, so i would rather have Classic over New.
  • Giant-Size Man-Thing
    FOX owns the rights to Wolverine, Namor and the Fantastic Four. Sony owns the rights to Spider Man.
  • Merciful_budah
    I doubt it will be just those three, those are the ones they know for certain at this point is all. I'm sure after gauging response to War Machine and Black Widow they'll option those two for the team in some manner. Also there's a bunch of Avengers that will most likely not have a solo movie at any point who they can fill out the roster with (Hawkeye anyone?)
  • Danisgod6491
    I Think the roster for the film should be Hulk, Thor, Iron Man, Captain America. While Nick Fury and Shield just watch over them. The Villain should be Loki. He is after all the real reason the avengers ever got together. Skrulls are more of the Fantastic four villains. It they play off that certain characters are Skrulls it would be just as lame as it is in the comics. I know that like Iron Man and Hulk there will be a scene at the end of IM2 that will have the Hulk or Banner that will connect to the Avengers.

    That would be awesome to see some Invaders action in Captain America. I would love to see Union Jack, Spritfire (Bro and Sis, British heroes), Jim Hammond (Human Torch), Namor, Toro, & Bucky.
  • Renton Thurston
    Finally someone said Loki!!! I think they should do the same thing they did in Hulk vs. Thor where Loki took control of Hulk and used him to fight against the Avengers or something. I think it would be cool to use the Skrulls for a sequel where they[the Skrulls] take Hulk's powers or something, something like in Illuminati. I really think it sucks that Fox and Sony have rights to the other characters.
  • motorjed
    I'm all for news of films we're excited for, and speculation is certainly a fun way to pass the coming months as things continue to leak/get reported, but I wish Mr. Fischer would more clearly differentiate his speculation from the reported comments and the speculation from other sites.

    After the quote from Feige -

    "He hedges on whether or not the Hulk will actually be part of the team, so the rumor/suspicion that the Hulk would be the initial villain in the film is still hanging. But Devin at CHUD found that Marvel still owns the rights to shape-changing alien race the Skrulls, and supposes that they’ll be the real villain in the film. As he explains, that makes the scope of the movie truly huge, and allows for all sorts of screenwriting fun."

    Is this Fischer or Feige or Devin from CHUD talking?
    As he explains - who? Feige? Devin?

    I'm assuming Devin, but I'd prefer to see someone's point like this made clearer - at least clear enough I know who is saying what.


    Just sayin' . . .

    That said, I dug the write-up.
  • PintelGuy
    Too bad they weren't able to push an Ant-Man movie forward, cuz if they did that, they could have laid ground work for Ultron, who I think would have made for a pretty good Avenger villian.
  • RussFischer
    There's a quote from Feige, so the 'he' that follows refers to him. Mention of Devin follows, so the pronoun after that refers to Devin. Not so difficult to follow.
  • Renton Thurston
    There is an Ant-Man movie in the works, just in pre-preproduction right now. But Marvel has already stated they have plans for one. So let's hope they are and that he'll be a part of the sequel [which we know there probably will be].
  • no
    Hydra organization that gets taken over by red skull, who also partners with loki.

    meanwhile they fight hulk halfway through the film in order to get banner on board to help the avenger team. Someone accidentally pushes banner too hard like thor or something. tey end up having to fight him. but towards the very end hulk comes out again and gives the team the edge to stop a nuclear holocaust or something.

    badabing badaboom. Make it happen marvel.
  • flashzh
    i would like skulls to be enemies in the new deadpool movie but i know that will never happen. not sure how this is related but i just wanted to put it out there.
  • justrobby
    CHUD sux.. Devin is a douche bag
    But Avengers news is always good
blog comments powered by Disqus