|
|
Post by mcufan on Jul 31, 2017 0:53:51 GMT
So a few actors are ending their contracts. But does that mean they have to kill off the characters?
All these characters have been around for several decades and no one bats an eye if the timeline is compressed or expanded or whatever so they always live in the present. So for instance Peter Parker has been around for years and years as spider Man and he aged just a few in the course of several decades and they seem to live in the present, with technology always bring the current one.
So, what if the movies do the same? There's been a debate about the 8 years in homecoming and I'm guessing they are toying with the idea that the passing of time is malleable like in the original comics, and want to see if people care. Some do, but most seem to be oblivious to that inconsistency, just like it happens in the comics.
So, if they can do that, and don't kill off the characters, I think they should give them a few years of rest, but never reboot them. Recast a few years from now, but mention them in the meantime, and when it's time for a new trilogy, Recast the actor, but don't throw away what came before. Sure, the timeline will be expanded but it's been done in the comics. So a new actor being iron Man in a few years wouldn't be a shock as is if they recasted now. Mind you, this new actor would be the same Tony Stark just played by a different actor.
Sure, they had to reboot Spider-Man for this universe and if they obtained the rights for other characters they would have to do the same, but for those that are already in the universe, just continue the story.
(Cauldendhauler try not to post higher than a kite... Dc-fan say that the MCU sucks and move on, thank you)
|
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jul 31, 2017 1:05:00 GMT
So a few actors are ending their contracts. But does that mean they have to kill off the characters? All these characters have been around for several decades and no one bats an eye if the timeline is compressed or expanded or whatever so they always live in the present. So for instance Peter Parker has been around for years and years as spider Man and he aged just a few in the course of several decades and they seem to live in the present, with technology always bring the current one. So, what if the movies do the same? There's been a debate about the 8 years in homecoming and I'm guessing they are toying with the idea that the passing of time is malleable like in the original comics, and want to see if people care. Some do, but most seem to be oblivious to that inconsistency, just like it happens in the comics. So, if they can do that, and don't kill off the characters, I think they should give them a few years of rest, but never reboot them. Recast a few years from now, but mention them in the meantime, and when it's time for a new trilogy, Recast the actor, but don't throw away what came before. Sure, the timeline will be expanded but it's been done in the comics. So a new actor being iron Man in a few years wouldn't be a shock as is if they recasted now. Mind you, this new actor would be the same Tony Stark just played by a different actor. Sure, they had to reboot Spider-Man for this universe and if they obtained the rights for other characters they would have to do the same, but for those that are already in the universe, just continue the story. (Cauldendhauler try not to post higher than a kite... Dc-fan say that the MCU sucks and move on, thank you) I'm honestly not going to worry about it until just before Avengers 4. That's 6 films from now, and I honestly don't think this question will be relevant for another 10 years. That's when it will get interesting to see where they are at.
But the answer is going to depend on the character,
Contracts expiring doesn't mean they actor will never play the role again any way. Any of them could resign for cameos any time.
That being said, I don't think they'll be quick to recast if they decide to try that at all. They're going to see how many miles they can get out of the new characters they've established. Cap has a built in replacement, they can mo cap Hulk without Banner, and I don't think Hemsworth has anything better to do. Strange, Spidey, Carol, Panther, and any other new characters they bring up will be plenty to move forward with for the time being.
|
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jul 31, 2017 1:19:04 GMT
Reboot the damn MCU, bah gawd!!!!1
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Jul 31, 2017 1:41:33 GMT
There's been a debate about the 8 years in homecoming What's there to debate? Someone was supposed to write "4 Years Later" on that screen but dropped the ball and wrote "8 Years Later". It was a FUCK-UP. Nothing to debate. |
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Jul 31, 2017 1:59:24 GMT
There's been a debate about the 8 years in homecoming What's there to debate. Someone was supposed to write "4 Years Later" on that screen but dropped the ball and wrote "8 Years Later". It was a FUCK-UP. Nothing to debate. Or not, the MCU's timeline does not flow in order of film releases. |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jul 31, 2017 2:29:30 GMT
What's there to debate. Someone was supposed to write "4 Years Later" on that screen but dropped the ball and wrote "8 Years Later". It was a FUCK-UP. Nothing to debate. Or not, the MCU's timeline does not flow in order of film releases. But what about Homecoming destroying the continuity of our beloved MCU?! |
|
|
|
Post by thenewnexus on Jul 31, 2017 3:43:10 GMT
Reboot it completely and no more humor
|
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Jul 31, 2017 6:19:26 GMT
I think Cap should be killed. They have Falcon and Bucky to replace him.
It could be the emotional gut-punch these Avengers movies need.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcufan on Jul 31, 2017 6:49:22 GMT
I think Cap should be killed. They have Falcon and Bucky to replace him. It could be the emotional gut-punch these Avengers movies need. Sure, and keep him dead for a while. But these characters don't stay dead. They come back. Steve Rogers came back. If he comes back later, should they Recast? I vote Recast and keep this MCU going. |
|
|
|
Post by mcufan on Jul 31, 2017 7:12:48 GMT
So a few actors are ending their contracts. But does that mean they have to kill off the characters? All these characters have been around for several decades and no one bats an eye if the timeline is compressed or expanded or whatever so they always live in the present. So for instance Peter Parker has been around for years and years as spider Man and he aged just a few in the course of several decades and they seem to live in the present, with technology always bring the current one. So, what if the movies do the same? There's been a debate about the 8 years in homecoming and I'm guessing they are toying with the idea that the passing of time is malleable like in the original comics, and want to see if people care. Some do, but most seem to be oblivious to that inconsistency, just like it happens in the comics. So, if they can do that, and don't kill off the characters, I think they should give them a few years of rest, but never reboot them. Recast a few years from now, but mention them in the meantime, and when it's time for a new trilogy, Recast the actor, but don't throw away what came before. Sure, the timeline will be expanded but it's been done in the comics. So a new actor being iron Man in a few years wouldn't be a shock as is if they recasted now. Mind you, this new actor would be the same Tony Stark just played by a different actor. Sure, they had to reboot Spider-Man for this universe and if they obtained the rights for other characters they would have to do the same, but for those that are already in the universe, just continue the story. (Cauldendhauler try not to post higher than a kite... Dc-fan say that the MCU sucks and move on, thank you) I'm honestly not going to worry about it until just before Avengers 4. That's 6 films from now, and I honestly don't think this question will be relevant for another 10 years. That's when it will get interesting to see where they are at.
But the answer is going to depend on the character,
Contracts expiring doesn't mean they actor will never play the role again any way. Any of them could resign for cameos any time.
That being said, I don't think they'll be quick to recast if they decide to try that at all. They're going to see how many miles they can get out of the new characters they've established. Cap has a built in replacement, they can mo cap Hulk without Banner, and I don't think Hemsworth has anything better to do. Strange, Spidey, Carol, Panther, and any other new characters they bring up will be plenty to move forward with for the time being.
Absolutely, there is no need to do it right now plenty of stories to be told no doubt for the foreseeable future, but there will be a time to do a new trilogy. In 20 years let's say. If they do a new one for the big ones I don't want it to be like Batman or Superman or spiderman where we get a reboot. I want the character to have lived the adventures, to be a veteran, for the stories that came before to have meaning. If they do red skull in twenty years, the encounter should be a reencounter with the heaviness of their story being already started, and being witnessed by the audience even on a movie 20 years ago. Look at Batman today. The new reboot has the stories, we think, knows the joker for a long time, lost a Robin or several robins or maybe not, we think. See, there's no depth to this character, you are only told those things might have happened. We know this is not the same Bruce Wayne from the dark Knight. But what if it was? It would give the character depth and background that we witnessed, not told. Marvel has the chance to do it. The same goes for Superman and spider Man but the opposite. They are starting out, again, they haven't lived any adventures, this Superman never wound back time. I know Brian singer tried this, but the movie suffered from being a continuation but not really. See he failed because it was a soft reboot. Don't reboot continue the story. With Spider-Man it's a little different, I think they have what I'm saying in sight. Thus cast him young so he can play the role for a long time. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jul 31, 2017 8:49:34 GMT
Absolutely, there is no need to do it right now plenty of stories to be told no doubt for the foreseeable future, but there will be a time to do a new trilogy. In 20 years let's say. If they do a new one for the big ones I don't want it to be like Batman or Superman or spiderman where we get a reboot. I want the character to have lived the adventures, to be a veteran, for the stories that came before to have meaning. If they do red skull in twenty years, the encounter should be a reencounter with the heaviness of their story being already started, and being witnessed by the audience even on a movie 20 years ago. Look at Batman today. The new reboot has the stories, we think, knows the joker for a long time, lost a Robin or several robins or maybe not, we think. See, there's no depth to this character, you are only told those things might have happened. We know this is not the same Bruce Wayne from the dark Knight. But what if it was? It would give the character depth and background that we witnessed, not told. Marvel has the chance to do it. The same goes for Superman and spider Man but the opposite. They are starting out, again, they haven't lived any adventures, this Superman never wound back time. I know Brian singer tried this, but the movie suffered from being a continuation but not really. See he failed because it was a soft reboot. Don't reboot continue the story. With Spider-Man it's a little different, I think they have what I'm saying in sight. Thus cast him young so he can play the role for a long time. I agree. The idea of picking up a story later that is a continuation would be an interesting idea and I'm for it. I've wondered for awhile what they will do in 10 or 15 years. Sometime 5 or 6 films into phase 4, we might get our first real idea. Do they attempt a recast. That will be an interesting day. |
|
|
|
Post by mcufan on Jul 31, 2017 11:25:07 GMT
There's been a debate about the 8 years in homecoming What's there to debate? Someone was supposed to write "4 Years Later" on that screen but dropped the ball and wrote "8 Years Later". It was a FUCK-UP. Nothing to debate. If it was a fuck up, it wasn't just the card. The vulture mentions it in the movie. For 8 years we worked undisturbed until this guy in tights comes sniffing. Something like that he says. It's bigger than a fuck up. It's premeditated. Plenty to discuss. Not that I want to discuss it with the likes of you, mind you. But hey here we are discussing it. |
|
|
|
Post by mcufan on Jul 31, 2017 11:27:00 GMT
Reboot the damn MCU, bah gawd!!!!1 I told you, do not post high... |
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Jul 31, 2017 12:29:28 GMT
I say retire the characters and bring in new blood. Than finish the story and close the MCU for good. Do a reboot in the next 25-50 years after the MCU ended.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcufan on Jul 31, 2017 15:30:44 GMT
I say retire the characters and bring in new blood. Than finish the story and close the MCU for good. Do a reboot in the next 25-50 years after the MCU ended. I don't see what will be gained by a reboot. In 20 years the origin of these characters will be the same. Do we really need to see it again, ever? Maybe a flashback here and there but mainly it enables filmmakers to focus on new stories without discarding what came before. Like I said this new Batman has no connection with the audience because we know he went through a lot, but what? What is his history with the joker? With Robin? We already saw those but alas they were not this Batman. |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Jul 31, 2017 16:28:39 GMT
What's there to debate? Someone was supposed to write "4 Years Later" on that screen but dropped the ball and wrote "8 Years Later". It was a FUCK-UP. Nothing to debate. If it was a fuck up, it wasn't just the card. The vulture mentions it in the movie. For 8 years we worked undisturbed until this guy in tights comes sniffing. Something like that he says. Because the script writers fucked up and wrote "8 years" instead of "4 years". It was a FUCK-UP, just like all the other FUCK-UPs in the awful script:
Iron Man: "The ferry boat is split in half. I'm just going to push the 2 split halves together and that'll stop the boat from sinking."
Ned brings a bomb into the Washington Monument and blows up the elevator yet DHS, FBI , and DC Police don't detain him for questioning until he gives up Peter as the guy who gave him the bomb? What the fuck?
Just an awful script. "8 Years Later" was just 1 of the many FUCK-UPs in the awful script. Nothing to debate.
|
|
|
|
Post by furiousstyles77 on Jul 31, 2017 17:05:47 GMT
If it was a fuck up, it wasn't just the card. The vulture mentions it in the movie. For 8 years we worked undisturbed until this guy in tights comes sniffing. Something like that he says. Because the script writers fucked up and wrote "8 years" instead of "4 years". It was a FUCK-UP, just like all the other FUCK-UPs in the awful script:
Iron Man: "The ferry boat is split in half. I'm just going to push the 2 split halves together and that'll stop the boat from sinking."
Ned brings a bomb into the Washington Monument and blows up the elevator yet DHS, FBI , and DC Police don't detain him for questioning until he gives up Peter as the guy who gave him the bomb? What the fuck?
Just an awful script. "8 Years Later" was just 1 of the many FUCK-UPs in the awful script. Nothing to debate.
nothing comes close to Martha |
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Jul 31, 2017 17:12:29 GMT
I think Cap should be killed. They have Falcon and Bucky to replace him. It could be the emotional gut-punch these Avengers movies need. Sure, and keep him dead for a while. But these characters don't stay dead. They come back. Steve Rogers came back. If he comes back later, should they Recast? I vote Recast and keep this MCU going. Eh, I would keep him dead. That should be the one that stays dead. If he must come back, I wouldn't recast. Just sign Evans up for the rest of the time that the franchise is going. He's not a very busy guy. |
|
|
|
Post by mcufan on Jul 31, 2017 17:57:48 GMT
If it was a fuck up, it wasn't just the card. The vulture mentions it in the movie. For 8 years we worked undisturbed until this guy in tights comes sniffing. Something like that he says. Because the script writers fucked up and wrote "8 years" instead of "4 years". It was a FUCK-UP, just like all the other FUCK-UPs in the awful script:
Iron Man: "The ferry boat is split in half. I'm just going to push the 2 split halves together and that'll stop the boat from sinking."
Ned brings a bomb into the Washington Monument and blows up the elevator yet DHS, FBI , and DC Police don't detain him for questioning until he gives up Peter as the guy who gave him the bomb? What the fuck?
Just an awful script. "8 Years Later" was just 1 of the many FUCK-UPs in the awful script. Nothing to debate.
Don't be stupid. A ferry is not a boat, it floats like a catamaran. It has two empty spaces on each side. If split like in the movie it wouldn't sink, it would tip over like we see in the movie. Also in the same scene we know Tony Stark has influence with the FBI, clearly he covered for the kid. Do you need everything spelled out for you? |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Jul 31, 2017 18:15:22 GMT
A ferry is not a boat, it floats like a catamaran. It has two empty spaces on each side. If split like in the movie it wouldn't sink, it would tip over like we see in the movie. You're as stupid as the SMH writers are. When a ferry or boat is split in half like that, pushing it together won't stop the boat from sinking. Tony Stark has influence with the FBI, clearly he covered for the kid. You really as stupid as the SMH writers are. This isn't a case of a high school kid getting caught dealing drugs or even accidently killing someone because he was driving drunk or speeding. The kid brought a bomb into the Washington Monument and blew up the elevator. There's no way to cover up a bomb blowing up in the Washington Monument like covering up a drug deal or a drunk driving incident. The public is going to fear that it was a terrorist attack. And the media would be all over the story and would want answers from the government.
DHS ad FBI would detain Ned for questioning until Ned gave up Peter as the guy who gave him the bomb. Then DHS and FBI would investigate Peter and would be suspicious why Peter quit the Academic Decathlon team only to re-join the team in time to travel with the team to DC but then skip out on the actual competition as well as skip out on the team's trip to the Washington Monument on the same day that his best friend brings a bomb (that Peter gave him) into the Washington Monument. DHS and FBI would get a warrant and search Aunt May's apartment.Like I said before, just awful writing in SMH. |
|
