Movie News: Captain America: Civil War-- NON-SPOILER THREAD

playdohsrepublic

So rumors are rampant about the Cap sequel coming in 2016. First and foremost is that it will be an adaptation of Civil War. And that Robert Downey Jr. will co-star

playdohsrepublic

Given the rumors about Avengers: Age of Ultron, and a fractured team in Avengers 3, it definitely seems like a real possibility.

Marvel also released a tease that they will be revisiting Civil War next summer:

David_D

Interesting.

Of course, "Iron Spider" certainly won't be in a Cap movie. But even if the 2015 comic story is completely different than the movie story (as well it should be) I could see where they might be getting this title synergy going.

playdohsrepublic

David_D said:

Interesting.

Of course, "Iron Spider" certainly won't be in a Cap movie. But even if the 2015 comic story is completely different than the movie story (as well it should be) I could see where they might be getting this title synergy going.

Actually, another rumor I read, and take this with a huge grain of salt, is that this is part of the reason Marvel and Sony are so keen to share the Spider-man character. And if that deal is done in time we could see Spidey web up for this or Avengers 3.

matchkitJOHN

I'm sorry but I was hoping for just a Cap 3 with him facing Winter Soldier with Falcon. And possibly having Red Skull.
I don't know about this. Iron Man is going to be in Avengers 2 with Cap and they can team-up again in Avengers 3. Not feeling RDJ right now.

RickM

I loved the Civil War storyline and followed it in several titles. I am eager to see this on the big screen.

playdohsrepublic

matchkitJOHN said:

I'm sorry but I was hoping for just a Cap 3 with him facing Winter Soldier with Falcon. And possibly having Red Skull.
I don't know about this. Iron Man is going to be in Avengers 2 with Cap and they can team-up again in Avengers 3. Not feeling RDJ right now.

One of the big rumors for Avengers 3 is that Cap and Thor won't be in it, that it will be a group of lower tier heroes with Iron Man.

Matt

Interesting. I've actual heard Evans was signed for Avengers 3.

M

David_D

playdohsrepublic said:

David_D said:

Interesting.

Of course, "Iron Spider" certainly won't be in a Cap movie. But even if the 2015 comic story is completely different than the movie story (as well it should be) I could see where they might be getting this title synergy going.

Actually, another rumor I read, and take this with a huge grain of salt, is that this is part of the reason Marvel and Sony are so keen to share the Spider-man character. And if that deal is done in time we could see Spidey web up for this or Avengers 3.

Interesting. I haven't read into that one, so take this as an uninformed reaction, but on the face of it, I would be surprised for Marvel Studios to actually *need* Spider-Man in an Avengers movie. I am sure some part of sharing that character as a movie property would be some of the take going to Sony. And we can pretty well project (I mean, nothing is guaranteed, but maybe project) that if the Avengers franchise continues to grow based on these characters completely Marvel-owned characters, then why share some of that success with Sony? (Especially when you are already getting a piece of the Spider-Man movies they are making) Would adding Spider-Man to Avengers actually make it a bigger success? Do we imagine there are fans of the Spider-Man movies not showing up to Avengers movies already? I feel like this would be giving away money that they are not currently missing out on.

Avengers has made far money money than any Spider-Man movie has. Heck, Iron Man 3 has beat every Spider-Man movie to date. Amazingly, at this moment Iron Man is a bigger box office draw than Spider-Man. Why give away some of your Iron Man money to Sony?

playdohsrepublic

David_D said:

playdohsrepublic said:

David_D said:

Interesting.

Of course, "Iron Spider" certainly won't be in a Cap movie. But even if the 2015 comic story is completely different than the movie story (as well it should be) I could see where they might be getting this title synergy going.

Actually, another rumor I read, and take this with a huge grain of salt, is that this is part of the reason Marvel and Sony are so keen to share the Spider-man character. And if that deal is done in time we could see Spidey web up for this or Avengers 3.

Interesting. I haven't read into that one, so take this as an uninformed reaction, but on the face of it, I would be surprised for Marvel Studios to actually *need* Spider-Man in an Avengers movie. I am sure some part of sharing that character as a movie property would be some of the take going to Sony. And we can pretty well project (I mean, nothing is guaranteed, but maybe project) that if the Avengers franchise continues to grow based on these characters completely Marvel-owned characters, then why share some of that success with Sony? (Especially when you are already getting a piece of the Spider-Man movies they are making) Would adding Spider-Man to Avengers actually make it a bigger success? Do we imagine there are fans of the Spider-Man movies not showing up to Avengers movies already? I feel like this would be giving away money that they are not currently missing out on.

I think it has more to do with Marvel wanting its flagship character back in its house and Sony wanting to reinvigorate an underperforming franchise. I'm sure there would be some kind of profit sharing, and I'm sure that's why its a complicated deal that will take a long time to iron out, or may never happen.

DoctorDoom

playdohsrepublic said:

matchkitJOHN said:

I'm sorry but I was hoping for just a Cap 3 with him facing Winter Soldier with Falcon. And possibly having Red Skull.
I don't know about this. Iron Man is going to be in Avengers 2 with Cap and they can team-up again in Avengers 3. Not feeling RDJ right now.

One of the big rumors for Avengers 3 is that Cap and Thor won't be in it, that it will be a group of lower tier heroes with Iron Man.

Is that rumor in conjunction with the other one about "splitting" Avengers three into two films?

playdohsrepublic

Matt said:

Interesting. I've actual heard Evans was signed for Avengers 3.

M

m.theepochtimes.com/n3/1001043-avengers-3-rumors-no-thor-captain-america-hulk-and-black-widow-in-movie/

It's just a rumor. But the reasoning is that Marvel wants to stretch out the contracts of their heavy hitters and not lose them all in one fell swoop, or at least not have to renegotiate for all of them at once. This would save the rest of the Avengers for a 4th installment, one presumably without Iron Man.

David_D

playdohsrepublic said:

David_D said:

playdohsrepublic said:

David_D said:

Interesting.

Of course, "Iron Spider" certainly won't be in a Cap movie. But even if the 2015 comic story is completely different than the movie story (as well it should be) I could see where they might be getting this title synergy going.

Actually, another rumor I read, and take this with a huge grain of salt, is that this is part of the reason Marvel and Sony are so keen to share the Spider-man character. And if that deal is done in time we could see Spidey web up for this or Avengers 3.

Interesting. I haven't read into that one, so take this as an uninformed reaction, but on the face of it, I would be surprised for Marvel Studios to actually *need* Spider-Man in an Avengers movie. I am sure some part of sharing that character as a movie property would be some of the take going to Sony. And we can pretty well project (I mean, nothing is guaranteed, but maybe project) that if the Avengers franchise continues to grow based on these characters completely Marvel-owned characters, then why share some of that success with Sony? (Especially when you are already getting a piece of the Spider-Man movies they are making) Would adding Spider-Man to Avengers actually make it a bigger success? Do we imagine there are fans of the Spider-Man movies not showing up to Avengers movies already? I feel like this would be giving away money that they are not currently missing out on.

I think it has more to do with Marvel wanting its flagship character back in its house and Sony wanting to reinvigorate an underperforming franchise. I'm sure there would be some kind of profit sharing, and I'm sure that's why its a complicated deal that will take a long time to iron out, or may never happen.

I suppose. But Spider-Man already is in-house when it comes to licensing and (non-directly-movie-related) merchandise. So a Sony movie already advertises all sorts of things as Marvel you get to license and sell. And if Marvel uses an Avengers movie to help Sony reinvigorate their growing Spider-Man franchise, then you are helping the competition, as there are only so many weekends to open on, and if Sony continues to have success enough with Spider-Man to make Spider-Man movies, then they will always have Spider-Man.

Having the character in hand just to tell a movie story with him, or control him in a film, or have him be an Avenger-- while exciting and attractive to us-- from a financial point of view just seems to me like lending the cache of your bigger, more prestige brand (Avengers) to the other guys' movies.

Any amount of attention and screen real estate you'd have to give to Spider-Man in an Avengers movie is time you COULD be spending getting characters you own-- like Falcon, Hawkeye, Black Widow, War Machine, etc.-- in a better position to maybe have a movie of their own (starring actors who likely have more punches left on their contract card). Even in a long Avengers movie, there is only so much spotlight time to go around, and putting Spider-Man in one would probably eat up a lot of attention. (And you'd have to deal with Sony's input as they would want to protect "their" character) As an Avengers fan, no thanks!

playdohsrepublic

Hey, I'm with you on this. I don't think Marvel needs Spider-man in the MCU. I remember reading an editorial last year where the writer made a great argument about why not having Spiderman, FF and X-men was the best thing for Marvel. Basically it said that if they had them they all would have been Phase 1 and 2 films. We wouldn't have had sequels to any of the movies we've gotten and we certainly wouldn't have had Guardians or Ant Man or even the upcoming Dr Strange. We'd be on X-men 2, Spiderman 2. And so on.

They've established a successful brand without him (though not completely as the original films certainly gave Marvel the financial footing to create its own studio, but so did X-men). But Marvel must see some value in it, and it's probably appealing to have a franchise in your brand that you are less fiscally responsible for but still have input in. No one really knows what Marvel and Sony are discussing anyway. It could just be to kind of thing where Sony can make oblique references to the greater MCU and Marvel has greater access to the Spider-Man roster of characters.
But if they do want to bring him into the greater MCU it's not hard to imagine Civil War being a spring board, as he is the only major character left out of the mix.

Matt

Unless they're rebooting Spider-man again, I'm so hoping the character is separate. I found Garfield's portrayal more annoying then inspiring in ASM. I continue to have no interest in ASM2. All the clips I've seen he sounds more like Deadpool then Spider-man.

M

David_D

playdohsrepublic said:

Hey, I'm with you on this. I don't think Marvel needs Spider-man in the MCU. I remember reading an editorial last year where the writer made a great argument about why not having Spiderman, FF and X-men was the best thing for Marvel. Basically it said that if they had them they all would have been Phase 1 and 2 films. We wouldn't have had sequels to any of the movies we've gotten and we certainly wouldn't have had Guardians or Ant Man or even the upcoming Dr Strange. We'd be on X-men 2, Spiderman 2. And so on.

They've established a successful brand without him (though not completely as the original films certainly gave Marvel the financial footing to create its own studio, but so did X-men). But Marvel must see some value in it, and it's probably appealing to have a franchise in your brand that you are less fiscally responsible for but still have input in. No one really knows what Marvel and Sony are discussing anyway. It could just be to kind of thing where Sony can make oblique references to the greater MCU and Marvel has greater access to the Spider-Man roster of characters.
But if they do want to bring him into the greater MCU it's not hard to imagine Civil War being a spring board, as he is the only major character left out of the mix.

I hear that. But I hope they don't.

Another thought-- in a movie version of Civil War, that being split between two sides, 'who do I choose??' role could easily go to Black Widow. Both because you'd need a place for her in the story if it is an Avengers movie. And she is one of the only characters that has history with both Tony and Steve. Introducing Spider-Man into a Civil War movie basically means he couldn't really play the role he played in the comic, at least not well, because he would be a character with no existing relationships.

David_D

Also, if RDJ is in Cap 3, and it sounds like he is, then I imagine WB is especially glad they moved off that date.

WetRats

I really doubt Superhuman Registration will be the issue.

The MCU just isn't heavily-populated/infested with enough superhumans at this point.

Sound more like a post-SHIELD, post-Ultron conflict between Stark and Cap.

Although I'm hoping this is a misdirect, and it's really a stepping-up of the Hydra storyline or the Inhumans/Miracles/Marvels concept.

TheOriginalGMan

I wonder if the Age of Ultron concept art that they released showing Iron Man vs Hulk in the "Hulkbuster" armor is a clue, perhaps? Iron Man decides on his own that Hulk is too unstable to stay on Earth and jettisons him to "Planet Hulk" (where he meets the Guardians, btw). Meanwhile, back on Earth, Cap and Iron Man have a blowout over Iron Man unilaterally deciding who can, and can't, be a superhero.

#spitballing

WetRats

Though I think the Civil War title is likely correct, I still think Captain America: The Last Avenger would be cool.

David_D

TheOriginalGMan said:

I wonder if the Age of Ultron concept art that they released showing Iron Man vs Hulk in the "Hulkbuster" armor is a clue, perhaps? Iron Man decides on his own that Hulk is too unstable to stay on Earth and jettisons him to "Planet Hulk" (where he meets the Guardians, btw). Meanwhile, back on Earth, Cap and Iron Man have a blowout over Iron Man unilaterally deciding who can, and can't, be a superhero.

#spitballing

That could definitely work. Also, I think we have already seen Tony use his suits as drones. If the Ultron AI is the next step, turning over superhero-ing to force of robots, I could see where Cap would be very uncomfortable with the hubris and risk of that, given what he was just through in Winter Solider.

WetRats

David_D said:

TheOriginalGMan said:

I wonder if the Age of Ultron concept art that they released showing Iron Man vs Hulk in the "Hulkbuster" armor is a clue, perhaps? Iron Man decides on his own that Hulk is too unstable to stay on Earth and jettisons him to "Planet Hulk" (where he meets the Guardians, btw). Meanwhile, back on Earth, Cap and Iron Man have a blowout over Iron Man unilaterally deciding who can, and can't, be a superhero.

#spitballing

That could definitely work. Also, I think we have already seen Tony use his suits as drones. If the Ultron AI is the next step, turning over superhero-ing to force of robots, I could see where Cap would be very uncomfortable with the hubris and risk of that, given what he was just through in Winter Solider.

Also, I can see Stark trying to research/recreate/harness the tech used to open the warp gate or whatever it was over New York. 'Twould be a useful think to drop an uncontrollable Hulk into. (Hell, I could even see Banner developing a series of anti-Hulk prototypes with Stark.)

DoctorDoom

WetRats said:

David_D said:

TheOriginalGMan said:

I wonder if the Age of Ultron concept art that they released showing Iron Man vs Hulk in the "Hulkbuster" armor is a clue, perhaps? Iron Man decides on his own that Hulk is too unstable to stay on Earth and jettisons him to "Planet Hulk" (where he meets the Guardians, btw). Meanwhile, back on Earth, Cap and Iron Man have a blowout over Iron Man unilaterally deciding who can, and can't, be a superhero.

#spitballing

That could definitely work. Also, I think we have already seen Tony use his suits as drones. If the Ultron AI is the next step, turning over superhero-ing to force of robots, I could see where Cap would be very uncomfortable with the hubris and risk of that, given what he was just through in Winter Solider.

Also, I can see Stark trying to research/recreate/harness the tech used to open the warp gate or whatever it was over New York. 'Twould be a useful think to drop an uncontrollable Hulk into. (Hell, I could even see Banner developing a series of anti-Hulk prototypes with Stark.)

I think the latter would be the most interesting.

Hex

WetRats said:

I really doubt Superhuman Registration will be the issue.

The MCU just isn't heavily-populated/infested with enough superhumans at this point.

Sound more like a post-SHIELD, post-Ultron conflict between Stark and Cap.

Although I'm hoping this is a misdirect, and it's really a stepping-up of the Hydra storyline or the Inhumans/Miracles/Marvels concept.

"Registration" is what Cap 3 is all about.

http://variety.com/2014/film/news/robert-downey-jr-to-join-captain-america-3-exclusive-1201312229/

TheOriginalGMan

Wasn't reading comics at the time. How was the "Civil War" arc received?

Hex

TheOriginalGMan said:

Wasn't reading comics at the time. How was the "Civil War" arc received?

The "civil war" storyline was a massive hit for Marvel. And rightfully so, I thought it was very well done and posed some relevant questions about "superheroes". The whole "who's side are you on" angle was well done... and at the beginning of the arc was actually a difficult decision.
If you haven't read it, you should really check it out. I think it was was probably the best cross-over event that Marvel has done in the last decade.

WetRats

Hex said:

WetRats said:

I really doubt Superhuman Registration will be the issue.

The MCU just isn't heavily-populated/infested with enough superhumans at this point.

Sound more like a post-SHIELD, post-Ultron conflict between Stark and Cap.

Although I'm hoping this is a misdirect, and it's really a stepping-up of the Hydra storyline or the Inhumans/Miracles/Marvels concept.

"Registration" is what Cap 3 is all about.

http://variety.com/2014/film/news/robert-downey-jr-to-join-captain-america-3-exclusive-1201312229/

That article's author appears to be presuming the film is a straight adaptation of the comic.

Honestly, the article's author seems to be presuming a whole lot.

WetRats

TheOriginalGMan said:

Wasn't reading comics at the time. How was the "Civil War" arc received?

Divisively.

WetRats

Hex said:

I think it was was probably the best cross-over event that Marvel has done in the last decade.

That's rather like saying "the best root canal surgery I ever had." :D

Hex

WetRats said:

Hex said:

I think it was was probably the best cross-over event that Marvel has done in the last decade.

That's rather like saying "the best root canal surgery I ever had." :D

HA! I'm not a big fan of the annual force-feed massive crossover either, but I do think Civil War was the best of the most recent "events". I think it had some great moments, and it was probably the one that had the most impact/change going forward.

WetRats

This article also refers to Cap 3 leading into Avengers 4.

Cap 3 is scheduled to come out before Avengers 3.

I smell fish.