dc20willsave Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 ^I'd much prefer her since she's more of a physical match AND already knows how to fight. Emily Blunt's not what I imagine when I think Carol Danvers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Feige just said that Black Panther will have a big role in Cap 3. Told ya. Says we'll first see him in costume in Cap3 which means we'll probably see T'Challah in Avengers 2. I'm on fire. And humble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Well c'mon, man, let's hear some lotto numbers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venneh Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Des - Natalie Dormer (aka Margaery Tyrell) Kathryn Winnick (aka Laegertha from Vikings) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davedevil Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 There's fanart of Natalie Dormer as Captain Marvel. I dunno, I love her but I think she has a bit too much of an elfin look to her for Carol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainAmerica2011 Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Natalie Dormer was already in the First Avenger. I guess they could just ignore it, such a small role, but still a little weird. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 I don't like either of them for Carol lookswise. Dormer has a weird look to me. Elfish? Maybe. She has a smile that says "I've pooped somewhere in your house that's not the toilet and I'm not telling you where." I've also never seen Vikings. Blunt is the shit. I'm for her. Edit: Chris, pay attention to these lotto numbers: 6, 6, 6, 666, 69, Pi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Katee Sackoff or bust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainAmerica2011 Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 I like those numbers, but could be the whisky sour talking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Sackoff was great in Longmire, but I don't see her as Carol. Put me on the Emily Blunt train. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Leaked Avengers 2 scene, major seeds laid for Civil War. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I suppose it's a moot point since they have years, but I'm kinda wondering how they plan to do Civil War in a universe with like....12 superpowered beings that all have public identities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Kevin Feige answered that this week at the Marvel event. Basically the movie version of Civil War will be less focused on superheroes and their identities, and more on people who have power in general (so basically the Avengers). Tony wants to keep dangerous individuals under control; Cap disagrees. So it's the same story, basically, just framed differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothian Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 But what are they going to do about Spider-Ma.......oh, never mind.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted November 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2014 There is a rumor that Sony is making a young Aunt May movie. This is possibly the weirdest rumor I've heard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted November 11, 2014 Report Share Posted November 11, 2014 Trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted November 11, 2014 Report Share Posted November 11, 2014 Oh for gods sake why. It wasn't good the first time. Hell, I'd be more interested in an origin story for J Jonah Jameson, Norman Osbourne, Doc Ock, literally any of a dozen other characters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dc20willsave Posted November 11, 2014 Report Share Posted November 11, 2014 From the article, it wouldn't be trouble. Instead, it sounds like Aunt May: Super Spy. I'd rather Aunt May: Golden Oldie but that's just me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainAmerica2011 Posted November 11, 2014 Report Share Posted November 11, 2014 It would have to be Sony though right? Although it does sound more like something fox would do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted November 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2014 I'm sorry, I meant Sony, not Fox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted December 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2014 The Sony hack has revealed that Marvel tried to get Spider-Man into Civil War, but Sony said no. Sony then tried to pitch a new Spidey trilogy produced by Marvel and distributed by Sony, but that fell through. As of now, all plans for the future of Spider-Man are on hold until January. Source Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted December 10, 2014 Report Share Posted December 10, 2014 That's a slightly skewed version of the report. Here's the source article. The basic notes are: -Marvel wanted Spider-Man to be in Civil War -Separately, there was an idea for a trilogy of Spider-Man movies produced by Marvel but with Sony retaining "creative control, marketing and distribution." -At some point talks broke down, but there's no evidence as to who said no to what. -As the article puts it, "As of late November [after the cross-studio talks broke down], executives were planning a 'Spidey summit' for January to discuss future plans." The idea that Marvel would let Sony retain creative control while still allowing Spider-Man to be part of the MCU is kinda bonkers, but then Sony kinda seems not to know what they're doing, since they announced a huge slate of Spidey movies and are now planning to have a planning meeting to redo that whole slate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete Posted December 10, 2014 Report Share Posted December 10, 2014 There are new reports today that Sony Japan might overrule Sony Pictures and allow Spiderman's use in the MCU http://www.latino-review.com/news/marvelous-da7e-75-the-spider-manmarvel-deal-is-very-much-alive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted December 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 I think Sony knows they can't make the kind of money with Spider-Man they used to anymore by making movies, but don't want to lose the license. Marvel can make money with anything, so "hey lets let them make it and we'll still make all the money". The problem with that is that Marvel is notorious for playing hardball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete Posted December 11, 2014 Report Share Posted December 11, 2014 Would it not be an easy thing to do where Spiderman is allowed in team movies for Marvel injecting new life in the character and allowing Sony to keep doing the solo films with a character that now has some renewed interest? Is that not a win/win for both sides? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.