Welcome Guest ( Login | Register )



It is currently Fri Jul 30, 2010 7:00 am

Board index » Everything Else » Film & TV

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 4
  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
S.H.I.E.L.D.
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:31 am 
Knight
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:02 am
Posts: 4413
Location: Indiana

Thanked 1 time for this post.
5,050 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
Has anyone given thought to what they would think with rebooting the series if they made this new Spider-man work into the whole Avengers movie that will soon happen?
 Profile  
 

CactusFunk
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:36 am 
King
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 10:53 pm
Posts: 6417
Location: Hull, England

Thanked 3 times for this post.
6,567 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
It won't. Spider-Man is owned by Sony.

_________________
Image
Jesus Christ I'm not scared of dying, I'm a little bit scared of what comes after.

 Profile WWW E-mail  
 

batgirl
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:26 pm 
Squire
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:10 am
Posts: 25

Thanked 2 times for this post.
24 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
Oh gosh, the Avengers movie. I'd forgotten about that, I heard about it so long ago.

Funk is right, Sony would have to give permission for one-time use or something. I'm a little sad, actually, because with the cast of heroes they have lined up for the Avengers movie he would balance it out nicely in a humorous sort of way, kind of like Flash in the Justice League. The younger people are always sillier, and it makes for good contrast.

Iron Man
Thor
Hawkeye
Black Widow
The Hulk
Nick Fury
Loki
War Machine

Seems like a pretty intense form of the Avengers.
 Profile  
 

S.H.I.E.L.D.
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:51 pm 
Knight
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:02 am
Posts: 4413
Location: Indiana

Thanked 1 time for this post.
5,050 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
I see I had forgotten who owned the rights to what super hero film franchise. But still it was just an interesting thought to me cause Spider-man has been apart of The Avengers and I guess I just sort of thought what if they tried to tie it in with The Avengers movie since they are rebooting it.
 Profile  
 

batgirl
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 27, 2010 8:14 pm 
Squire
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:10 am
Posts: 25

Thanked 2 times for this post.
24 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
S.H.I.E.L.D. wrote:
I see I had forgotten who owned the rights to what super hero film franchise. But still it was just an interesting thought to me cause Spider-man has been apart of The Avengers and I guess I just sort of thought what if they tried to tie it in with The Avengers movie since they are rebooting it.


It doesn't sound like a bad idea, either. I'm not sure how I feel about this movie yet. Oh, by the way, I found this on an info site:

"From now on, all Marvel Studios movies are part of the same universe, one of the many parallel universes in the Marvel Multiverse.

"Blade" is made by New Line Cinema. "X-Men", "Daredevil" and "Fantastic Four" are made by 20th Century Fox. "Spider-Man" and "Ghost Rider" are made by Columbia Pictures. "The Punisher" is made by Lions Gate. These movies are not part of the Marvel Movie Universe. This is why the Fantastic Four won't appear in this movie."

I'm a little sad about that, but oh well. I hear Kenneth Branaugh is directing Thor's solo movie, which I am quite happy about. It looks like Jon Favreau might end up directing the Avengers movie.

Oh yeah, and it seems as though they really want to add Ant-Man to the movie.

Sorry if any of these things seem random, my brain has a strange way of connecting these tidbits.
 Profile  
 

batgirl
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 8:48 pm 
Squire
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:10 am
Posts: 25

Thanked 1 time for this post.
24 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
By the way, if anyone is interested in the Avengers movie, I have some interesting info on that. Don't read unless you want spoilers. *gasp* The horror!


Spoiler: show
"Discussions have been minimal on this subject as of now, but recent reports have many Marvel sources, including the writers of Iron Man, as well as Louis Leterrier in his Director's commentary to the Incredible Hulk movie, saying that the villain should be none other than one of the Avengers: the Hulk.

If Hulk is used, a smart thing to do would be to include another villain that would be pulling the strings. This could be anyone from Loki (Thor's brother and enemy), Mandarin (Iron Man's arch-nemesis), or Red Skull (Captain America's arch-nemesis). Though that is just pure speculation. The ending of the Incredible Hulk movie adds weight to the expectation that SHIELD is assembling the Avengers apparently to contain the Hulk problem, as a spillover of the Super Soldier program; in this case there would be no need for an external villain to manipulate either Hulk or the Avengers to fight each other.

In the comics, Thor's brother Loki manipulated the Hulk into destroying a bridge and endangering (and saving) the lives of hundreds of train passengers. When the news of the Hulk's destruction of the bridge goes out it is decided that the Fantastic Four should be contacted in order to stop the Hulk but Loki diverts the signal from reaching its intended target in order to have the signal reach Thor, so that he would be destroyed by the Hulk; however, not only does Thor receive the signal but so do Iron Man, Ant-Man, and the Wasp. When they all come together to stop the Hulk, they initially get in each others' way in their attempts to stop him, but eventually it is discovered that Loki was behind all this and they decide to join forces in order to stop him. They decided to remain together as a team and the Wasp suggests the name "The Avengers".

It would be logical (but not completely necessary) for the movie to follow a similar story. Especially considering the currents rumors of the Hulk being a villain in the movie."
 Profile  
 

panamagoo
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 9:06 pm 
Duke
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:41 pm
Posts: 1817
Location: Queens, N.Y.

Thanked 2 times for this post.
1,643 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
That's kinda non-news... and in the wrong thread too. All discussion for the Avengers movie should be done in here: avengers-movie-t193-60.html

_________________
I knew i wanted to taste it again, always and forever.

More than anything else, however, i wanted to be with you. i wanted to be part of your world.

 Profile E-mail  
 

batgirl
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:07 pm 
Squire
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:10 am
Posts: 25

Thanked 1 time for this post.
24 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
panamagoo wrote:
That's kinda non-news... and in the wrong thread too. All discussion for the Avengers movie should be done in here: avengers-movie-t193-60.html


Ooh! :shock: I didn't see that before! Thank you.
 Profile  
 

Spaced
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:50 pm 
Duke
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 9:03 pm
Posts: 7793
Location: Up north, England

Thanked 1 time for this post.
6,640 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
Bit more news about the new Spidey movie:

Quote:
Spider-Man is the latest tentpole to get the 3D treatment. Columbia Pictures has decided to make the next installment, which follows Marvel superhero Peter Parker during the high school years, in 3D. The studio has also dated the Marc Webb-helmed pic for a July 3, 2012 release.

"Spider-Man is the ultimate summer movie-going experience, and we're thrilled the filmmakers are presenting the next installment in 3D," said Jeff Blake, chairman of Sony Pictures worldwide marketing & distribution. "Spider-Man is one of the most popular characters in the world, and we know audiences are eager and excited to discover Marc's fantastic vision for Peter Parker and the franchise."

The untitled film lenses later this year from a screenplay by James Vanderbilt. Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin will produce.

_________________
Image

 Profile WWW E-mail  
 

fsw
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:19 am 
Count
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:47 pm
Posts: 3364

Thanked 2 times for this post.
1,689 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
If it is released as 3D only, I will definitely be skipping it. I will probably end up watching it eventually if it is available in 2D but am not a fan of 3D movies.

_________________
Image

 Profile  
 

CactusFunk
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 11:45 am 
King
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 10:53 pm
Posts: 6417
Location: Hull, England

Thanked 2 times for this post.
6,567 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
fsw wrote:
If it is released as 3D only, I will definitely be skipping it. I will probably end up watching it eventually if it is available in 2D but am not a fan of 3D movies.

That's a bit sad, you can't rule out all films just because you're not a fan of the effects you've seen so far.

_________________
Image
Jesus Christ I'm not scared of dying, I'm a little bit scared of what comes after.

 Profile WWW E-mail  
 

fsw
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 1:46 pm 
Count
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:47 pm
Posts: 3364

Thanked 2 times for this post.
1,689 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
I'm willing to give 3D another chance in a few years when technology has had a chance to improve with a movie that truly interests me but will not give it a chance on a movie that barely garners a passing interest from me. 3D is just the straw that broke the camel's back in this case.

_________________
Image

 Profile  
 

CactusFunk
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:24 pm 
King
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 10:53 pm
Posts: 6417
Location: Hull, England

Thanked 1 time for this post.
6,567 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
The fact that this whole film seems destined to piss me off is why I have a more vested interest in it; I'm hoping it'll eventually prove me wrong.

You'd probably enjoy the 3D more if they invested in the kind that needs Active Shutter glasses as opposed to polarised. I think they already have that in some Imax's.

_________________
Image
Jesus Christ I'm not scared of dying, I'm a little bit scared of what comes after.

 Profile WWW E-mail  
 

fsw
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:28 pm 
Count
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:47 pm
Posts: 3364

Thanked 1 time for this post.
1,689 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
I would check out a movie using active shutter because that is a technology I have not experienced but the polarized lens don't work for me over the course of a feature film. Strange thing is that the work at the start but my eyes or brain try to compensate over the course of the movie and I get a headache and the film is blurry without the glasses.

_________________
Image

 Profile  
 

CactusFunk
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:38 pm 
King
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 10:53 pm
Posts: 6417
Location: Hull, England

Thanked 1 time for this post.
6,567 total thanks.
Say thanks
Offline
My dad took his own 3D glasses to the cinema and watched the whole of Avatar wearing those red & green ones... He said if you tilted your head and kind of squinted then you could see the 3D effect. :roll:

_________________
Image
Jesus Christ I'm not scared of dying, I'm a little bit scared of what comes after.

 Profile WWW E-mail  
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 4
  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Board index » Everything Else » Film & TV

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Hosted by Dedicated TV and Powered By phpBB