It's being reported on multiple sites, based on the report:

http://www.deadline.com/2010/04/marvel-close-to-whedon-hire-on-the-avengers/


Personally, while I have some reservations, I think this could be a really great choice.

I don't know if Whedon has done any action films (Buffy isn't really an action flick even though there is fighting), but I think he has a good grasp on the superhero genre. We could certainly do a lot worse; we could have got Michael Bay.

EDIT: I forgot about Serenity...I guess that would qualify as an action flick.

~Hat~

I finally saw the new Star Trek film the other day, and I don't know if there is a better potential Hawkeye than Chris Pine (Kirk).

~Hat~

I'll be curious to see if he gets to cast many hero roles, or if they're pretty much all established for him. Wasp seems like the only other female Avenger we could count on, but you'd think the guy doing the Ant Man movie would get to say who he wants for Hank and Jan.

And Serenity was indeed actiony enough to make me think he could do a good job. I'm not sure it was "big" enough to remove all doubts, however. Still, usually studios can rely on solid second unit directors for action if necessary.

I wasn't overly fond of that Star Trek movie, but I did think the cast was the best thing about it, and enjoyed their takes on the classic roles. To me, the interesting thing about Hawkeye is that everyone seems to have a different idea where he should fall on a scale between humorous and full out action hero. Pine would land in my comfort zone, though I'd also take funnier.

Having Whedon makes me feel more confident that we won't get something like "The Ultimates" versions of the remaining Avengers. That Hawkeye sucks... And the one from that Avengers cartoon from a decade ago was essentially Wolverine with a bow..

I think they realized the key to a good Star Trek story is Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. McCoy was a little third wheel by the end and didn't really have much to do (other than get Kirk on the Enterprise), but it was a good start.




I'm hopeful for a little more plot with Whedon then we might get with another director. I liked Ang Lee's Hulk because it wasn't just a smash-'em up monster movie (like the sequel was); the ending kind of fell apart but otherwise it was a strong film.

~Hat~

Is the Ant-Man movie still going ahead? I wish Bill Nye was young enough to play Hank, that'd be awesome.

On a more serious note, I imagine that most of the heroes will already be cast, but Whedon will get some input on the villains. I hope they find a way to work in Jarvis, although that could be tough since Tony named his computer system Jarvis. Could still be done though.




One point I saw in an article is they might save some money going with Whedon over another director but still get the fan base support, which is true. Probably not a lot of money, since Whedon is a pretty big name, but less proven on this type of film. While my initial choice for director might have been Jon Favreau, I'm confident with Whedon.

On the superhero film topic, I wouldn't mind seeing Kevin Smith direct a Green Arrow film. He had a good feel for Ollie on his tenure writing the book.

~Hat~

...that they signed Sam Jackson (Fury) and Chris Evans (Cap) to, in order to have them appear in multiple franchises.




Ha! That'd be interesting casting. I'd love to see Bill Nye build a murderous robot.

Ant-man is still a go, last I heard. Here's an old interview bit from the director Edgar Wright (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World) from ComingSoon.net:

CS: The interesting thing about "Ant-Man" is that after "Iron Man" opened so big, there was this huge Marvel Studios bells and whistles announcement of their movies for the next three years and "Ant-Man" wasn't mentioned.

Wright: I think having spoken to Kevin Feige, the "Ant-Man" film I have in mind is a bit more stand-alone, and that's kind of what I wanted to do in a way. I think my take on it is something that may or may not fit into what "The Avengers" would eventually do, but they're very keen on it and they've even talked a release date with me in very vague terms. It looks likely that I will do "Scott Pilgrim" next and then "Ant-Man" straight afterwards.

It's interesting that he says it might not fit in with the Avengers. It occurs to me that if they do it afterwards, then Hank and Jan could be introduced in Avengers and then Ant-man becomes almost a spin-off. Conversely, they could make Hank Giant-man from the start, and make Ant-man Scott Lang, keeping it mostly separate as its own thing.





They could possible have a human Jarvis at the Stark family home in NY, and the Jarvis in California is based on him. Sadly, I doubt they'll go that way though.





I'm sure Whedon comes significantly cheaper than any other name that would excite anyone, considering he has only one feature under his belt, and it didn't light fire to the box office.

Marvel seems to be fairly frugal in setting these movies up... they're not going crazy with the casting money and making sure they lock people up for long deals when they do spend some.





After "Cop Out" kind of flopped, I think Kevin Smith is going to have a really hard time getting major studio work. All of his movies seem to be capped at around $30m or below (Cop Out being the lone exception, at $44m.) I think he may be stuck as an indie director now.

None of which goes to whether he'd actually do a really good job on Green Arrow or not...

The board always seems to churn along well when I have little time to visit, and then days like today when I'm stuck at a computer from morning to night, nobody has anything to post. Go figure.




Yeah, McCoy really had nothing at all to do in that one once Kirk was aboard. Assuming future sequels don't have Nimoy, however, I assume he'll get to have a larger role as they go forward. Getting the proper screen time balance in Star Trek movies seems to be really difficult.

Admittedly, with the original series the rest of the crew were always bit parts, but I kind of felt bad for all the others in the Next Generation films. They were never really given anything decent to do in the films, it seemed... At least nothing memorable.





I remember liking parts of it, and then finding other parts grinding to a halt or spinning off the rails into truly bizarre territory. I liked that it was contemplative, however, and as you said not just a smash 'em up (though that can be fun if done well.) I do remember being somewhat disappointed, however, because I had recently read a "Hulk" novel by Peter David and it gave me all sorts of insights into the character that I hadn't had before that the movie didn't match.

I especially liked the idea the novel raised that getting cursed with the Hulk was divine judgment, because God gave Banner the gift of an intellect that could change the world and instead of using it to help solve the problems of the world, he used it on gamma bomb weapons development. And so he was cursed to repeatedly lose that intellect and transform into a living bomb as penance.

I know, I wasn't able to get here on the week-end (was working this week-end) and yesterday I was doing soccer registrations all day, so I had time to pop in here and there and nothing. I'm a little over a page into the new AL story; I'd hoped to work on it yesterday, but my planned 10 hour day turned into an 11 hour day with registrations getting dropped off at my house after work too, so I didn't really get a chance.







Now that the stage is set, if they can maintain this cast, I hope they can build on the crew relationships a little more. I did like that each of the "old" crew got a moment to shine, and especially liked that Uhura got a boost beyond just being the receptionist. Was surprised to see her rocking the mini-skirt though; I thought that didn't really fit with the military aspect of Star Fleet.

I wouldn't mind seeing some of the old cast pop in as their characters grandparents or parents too, actually, though having Nimoy as Spock was nice.

The alternate reality thing was a good way to shut up all the Trek purists who would've been screaming about every changed detail too I thought.




Yeah, whenever Jonathan Frakes directed I noticed he always shifted Riker away from the rest of the cast, presumably so he could direct everyone else. Kind of sloppy really.







I don't know if I've ever seen a movie that was as good as the novel, to be fair.




It's a little meta-textual for me, but it's an interesting idea. Kind of "My Name is Earl" meets a Gamma Bomb.

I'd watch that show, actually.

~Hat~

He has experience with robots too; he was the tech expert on one of those Battling Robots shows that were all the rage maybe 8-10 years ago.







I hate to say it, but I'd be worried that the Ant-Man movie would be focusing on the new Ant-Man, Eric O'Grady (I think that's his name). If they're going for a different feel or look from the Avengers that character would allow for the most logical separation.







That's my theory and hope too.







I enjoyed Serentiy, but Firefly was better.




It's true, they've done a pretty good job of keeping a rein on the budgets. The multi-picture deals probably help in this regard, actually; who doesn't like guaranteed work?







I haven't seen Cop Out...to be honest, I kind of out-grew Kevin Smith movies awhile ago. Though I really enjoyed Jersey Girl, except for the bits where he tried to shoe-horn in classic Kevin Smith material (like having Jennifer Lopez complain to Ben Affleck that she wanted to look like a cracked out whore).




He might need some help with the action bits, but he understands the character. I think it could be worth the financial risk for DC, who really have to step it up in the movie department quite frankly. They have Warner Bros to work with and Marvel is destroying them in films.

You could keep the budget fairly low on a Green Arrow movie, since nobody actually has to have super-powers. Smith would be a cheap director who would bring an established fan base, both from his films and from his time writing the book. It could pay off big or probably at worst break even, I'd guess.

I remember hearing about a Green Arrow movie being in development, with the plot centering on him being stuck in some kind of maximum security prison, but that was awhile ago. Really, until I see some kind of teaser I don't believe any of the DC film rumours.

~Hat~

That's right! I was trying to remember where I saw him last. I feel like he popped up somewhere else since then...





That wasn't my impression from the discussions back when it was announced, but I really have no idea. I suppose as long as Hank gets a good showing in Avengers, I won't really care what they do in a separate Ant-Man movie. I do gather it will likely be more humorous than the average hero flick, no matter who the main character is... But that's really just an impression I have based on the director.





Jarvis is so much better than the idea of generic staff/government employees running around in the background of a SHIELD provided headquarters.


I loaned a coworker my set of Firefly after he and his wife got hooked on Buffy. He loved it, but was disappointed it ended so soon. So I loaned him Serenity... and then he was pissed at how it ended. He'd have rather imagined they were all still out there flying then getting endings to certain characters.





I don't know... actors seem to get burned out playing Superheroes pretty quickly. Christopher Reeve did it the longest, and he is held up as the poster-child for getting typecast. While I'm not surprised that Sam Jackson agreed (nobody is going to "only" see him as Nick Fury, and I'm sure most of his appearances will be "Mace Windu" sized), I'm a bit surprised that Evans signed on to 9 Cap appearances. Hell, Sean Connery and Roger Moore only managed 7 films each as James Bond.





I've only seen a couple of Smith films, and I liked them... although it was in a "this is really good for what it is" kind of way. Early Sam Raimi films had that same kind of vibe, but he made a much smoother transition into big budget Hollywood.





My understanding is that action is often shot by a second unit director, and so studios nowadays hire the main director for his overall vision for the project, and rely on hiring a skilled second director to help him stage and get the kind of shots he needs. It seems to be a good plan, since the guys who are great with action and FX aren't always the greatest at getting performances out of actors or hitting all the right story beats, and vice-versa.

I think a lot of comic fans feel that Warners has redeemed themselves forever with The Dark Knight. I wasn't nearly that enamored with it (though I liked it... it just wasn't some religious experience for me.)





You'd think at the very least, it wouldn't be any more expensive than those "Punisher" movies that came out in recent years. Maybe a bit, since arrow effects are probably trickier than putting blanks in a gun... but it seems like you'd be right about it being reasonably affordable.





Yeah, I remember hearing about that. Seemed a little too high-concept for an introductory movie, but sounded like a fun graphic novel idea.

I'd love to write something (I suppose some kind of capper to the St. Patrick's Day story is in order), but I actually do have work to do instead. I just keep dropping by here on various breaks when work gets too frustrating.

I always get the most ideas for stories when I have the least time to do anything about them.





I think the miniskirts were used because it'd be the most fun way to go, costume wise. I did respect the movie for making those kinds of decisions quite often. Of course, sometimes it lead to the flick being aggressively dumb, but it seemed like its heart was at least in the right place.





Scotty and Bones are dead now, aren't they? And I think Shatner's ego is a bit much for him to do a cameo like that... but I think the rest of the old cast might be game, and would be fun to see.

I caught a Dr. Pepper commercial for a tie-in with Iron Man last night, and Stan Lee was doing his cameo thing again as a janitor in Stark's home. No lines, just there. I admit, I get a kick out of each of his cameos, although this is the first one I recall that was just for a commercial.

I think the saddest thing about the Spider-man relaunch for me is that the next one won't have a Bruce Campbell cameo in it.




I would have to bet they still freak out whenever there's a change that would have to predate the events in the relaunch. They do like to freak out.

He could have, but I'm not sure where. I think they should bring him onto Mythbusters every now and again.







The humourous take is where the Eric O'Grady Ant-Man would excel the best of the three, though.

If they want to do a humourous superhero flick they need to get Pixar working on a Power Pack movie, I think.










There are a couple of Serenity mini-series (collected as graphic novels) out there if you want a little more of a fix.







They've signed for 9 pictures, but not to star in 9 pictures. Downey Jr. was in Hulk for all of 2 minutes, tops, meaning he was on set for a day or less. Fury was in a 30 second scene at the end of the first Iron Man...I don't think they'll burn out doing these walk-on role bits.







To be honest, I don't know if I've seen a Raimi film outside of the Spider-Man series.







That makes sense. Though if they use this method with Michael Bay on Transformers 2 I think they wasted their money.

Actually, no matter how you slice it, they wasted their money on Transformers 2. And mine.




It was good, but I liked Iron Man better (they came out around the same time). Really the Joker stole the show in Dark Knight, and I'm sure it's gross was boosted by the death of Heath Ledger.







I actually enjoyed the Thomas Jane Punisher film. It was refreshing having old school special effects instead of doing everything in CG. There were some hiccups in the film, but overall it wasn't bad. I haven't seen War Zone though.







Agreed.

~Hat~

I have an idea for another round robin actually, but I don't want to start it until the St. Patty's one is wrapped up. I'm in no rush though, and the idea can keep as long as it needs; it's not tied to current continuity.




Yeah, I usually get the urge to write when I have no time to do it, and when I sit down with a lot of time I find it really hard to get started.










Yeah, but Uhura, Chekov, Sulu, Spock, and Kirk are all still around. George Takei is still taking on new roles (he was in Heroes as Hiro's father and was recently the voice of Galactus on Superhero Squad), so working him in would be fun. Not sure if the other ones are still acting much any more (Shatner has been, though I'm not sure what he's in right now).




It took me forever to find Stan Lee in the first X-Men movie. I had heard which scene he was in but misunderstood which scene that was.




Shave a few years off of Bruce Campbell and I think you could have a ridiculously fun Captain Marvel film.







That they do. When Vulcan got destroyed I was thinking this is a really radical change, but then the whole alternate reality thing explained it away.

~Hat~

Believe it or not, I've never watched Buffy. Still, I do know he loves a good strong female lead. If we get Hank and Jan, she might be the leader Jan instead of the bubble head Jan.

At least I can hope.