| Posted: 02 Apr 2010 19:57 |
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 74
Join Date: Jan 2010
|
Word from Marvel about the titular role and Bucky!
I'm glad to be done with all the rumors and hearsay and to see that they are moving forward and making progress on our good Cap's blockbuster debut.
So here you have it Marvel confirming
Chris Evans as Captain America
Sebastian Stan as Bucky
http://marvel.com/news/moviestories.11746.captain_america~and~buc ...
|
| Posted: 03 Apr 2010 06:00 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 757
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/MarvelFreshman/news/?a=16588
Just finished reading the confirmation. Also, I thought this article was interesting. I always said that the Cap movie should have someone young playing Cap, Evans being 28, 30 by the time Cap movie comes out and becoming/learning to be a leader, fighter, hero, etc. Then in Avengers movie, age 34 maybe, he'll be the seasoned warrior, hundreds of experience, and up to the task to fight alongside with people of super powers and advance technology.
Now it's cast, lets whine about how to make this movie great, like:
1)No Bookends, No Nick Fury reading the story of Captain America, ... just a timestamp and start the adventure.
2)Period movie, stay in the 40s, introduce Cap, no time travel. Avengers is when Cap enters the modern age (It is one of Avengers greatest moments and that should be in the Avengers movie).
3)No ending of Cap getting frozen in ice. I liken this to living past the danger, ...how could the danger be dangerous if the hero eventually lives? Just thrill us with the stunts, chase, story and fights.
With the Avengers movie, Captain America 2 won't have to explain why he's in the modern time. It'll be him adjusting to the new America/time and hanging out with the Falcon and Sharon Carter. Then #3 could be Bucky returns and becomes the new Captain America.
|
| Posted: 03 Apr 2010 17:19 |
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 370
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
|
Quote:
Then #3 could be Bucky returns and becomes the new Captain America.
This storyline should not even be included in the films. Bucky should have stayed dead in the comics. His death was an important part of Steve's character. After Bucky dies in the First Avenger, he should not return again.
|
| Posted: 03 Apr 2010 23:17 |
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 135
Join Date: Jun 2008
|
Actually I disagree. Captain America is who he is, not because Bucky died, but because he became a super soldier and fought a hard fight in a memorable war. Bucky dying was more of a footnote and wasn't really essential to his character. Spider-man on the other hand was shaped because of the death of his Uncle Ben. Daredevil was similar with the death of his father, although his heightened senses came from chemical exposure. Many characters were forged in death, but Captain America wasn't one of them.
__________________"--When the mob and the Press and the whole WORLD tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth and tell the whole world 'No you move'."
|
| Posted: 04 Apr 2010 06:04 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 757
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
Bucky in the 3rd movie???
I was reading some background stories of the Superman movies, in the 3rd movie, someone proposed Supergirl to be introduced in it, ...instead they opted for Richard Pryor.
I just thought it would be different and out of the ordinary since 3rd movies tend to be less than good or not-as-good-as-no.1and2movies.
|
| Posted: 04 Apr 2010 20:02 |
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
Bucky is like Robin. They both get in the way of the true story. That is why Nolan left out Robin.
I'm not saying that Bucky shouldn't be in the movie, but don't have him interfere too much from the storyline. So to summarize it- just have Bucky be like a normal regular soldier that just is in Cap's unit of something.
|
| Posted: 05 Apr 2010 00:49 |
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 322
Join Date: Jun 2007
|
|
I think they should use Bucky because unlike Robin he was there with Cap from issue # 1. Robin didn't show up until well over a year later.My other reason for wanting him there is: stick to the original storyline from way back in 1963, NONE of this revised Ultimates crap. To me the Ulitmates are nothing more than a cheap Parallel copy, a bunch of Johnny come lately's.
|
| Posted: 05 Apr 2010 19:57 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 457
Join Date: Oct 2008
|
I think I could have lived without Bucky in the Film, but since he's there, I've got no malice towards him.
They should absolutly explore the Winter Soldier story, and perhaps eve use him as an antagonist in the Avengers film (there is some obvious ties to russian politics in the Iron Man film, so it can likely all tie together).
Now, I'm more intersted in what's going on with the Invaders.
Personally, my hope is that rather than the real invaders we get a group of super soldiers inclusive of Ultimate Nick Fury, The Destroyer, Captain Midlands, and Maybe Red Guardian for Cap to lead into battle. That saves you the trouble of some of the back story. You don't need additional origins, if you just expalain that these are people created trying to recreate what made Cap.
You could toss in one or two super humans, but really super humans are hard without origins, and origins will just seem silly without orgainic back story.
Namor and Torch are great, but with both you'd either need to rush thier origin, or skip.
You can maybe skip namor's origin, sort of do a man from atlantis thing, barrowing a bit from his later apperances, where maybe he's not quite sure where he comes from. He's just a super powered being, you could also theoreticlaly replace Torch with Toro, and do something similar, perhaps even having the reaveal of those mysteries be something improtant to the story, but then it becomes the Human Torch Namor film, instead of the Captain America Film.
So yeah, I think sticking to more humanbase line heroes works. you might be able to put in the Whizzer along similar lines, and tie them all to the Weapon Plus program in some way or another, and then you've got something you can probably work with in the limited story area.
You can maybe even explain why by the time Hulk and Ironman come around there aren't super soldiers everywhere by explaining that a side effect of many of these attempts is violence and insanity.
So there you have the reveal of the Super Soldiers, and when Bucky asks when he get's super soldiered up, they explain that the five or six they have are out of thousand or so volunteers who survived.
They wanted an army of Cap's but the best they could get was a small team, but that's as good as they are going to get as Cap leads them into battle.
Also, for even more fun they coudl stick mastermind excello in there. I loved his little mentalist schtick in Spearhead recently.
|
| Posted: 07 Apr 2010 00:18 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 757
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
If you've seen that new Iron Man cartoon, Tony Stark's a teenager attending a school for rich kids, plus Happy Hogan's now a basketball jock that reminds me of Flash Thompson in the Spidey cartoons.
So, if Marvel animation wants to make a kid-friendly cartoon on Captain America, how about the Young Allies, Bucky, Toro and those misfit kids (Politically corrected and have a female character) from the 40s comics. It'll be the Little rascals fighting crime.
I'm rooting for a Bucky character, and along with the Invaders, in a brief or cameo appearance in the movie.
|
| Posted: 07 Apr 2010 00:38 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
Kid-Friendly?
I don't know how you're gonna fit a kid friendly CAp cartoon...are they going to edit out all the parts where he's owning???
|
| Posted: 08 Apr 2010 02:13 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
I just also read that Chris Evans DIDN'T AUDITION for playing Cap>
http://www.worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=17305&count=0
|
| Posted: 08 Apr 2010 21:37 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 757
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
Didn't audition? Friends at Marvel? Suspect that Evans is there to mislead us? Give us fodder to whine and groan and comment? When the Cap movie start filming, they'll slip in another guy to play Cap?
Can that be done?
|
| Posted: 09 Apr 2010 03:42 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 457
Join Date: Oct 2008
|
Anything can be done (Hugh Jackman was a last minute replacement for Wolverine).
That said, Chris Evans was the lead choice from the start. He obviously impressed folks at Marvel as Johnny Storm, and since that francise got kiboshed, I'm sure he's looking to book his next big budget super hero film (especially if it has job security).
I'm not a big booster for the kid myself, but he's fine. It's all about the writing. If it's well written any halfway good actor will do. If it's poorly written Sir Lawrence himself couldn't do it well.
I think Chris was who Marvel wanted from the start, and until he could clear up his calander, Marvel went through the motions on other people just in case. Once Chris became free, they said, you're in, and he was.
I do wonder however, if Chris' contract with Fox had an other heroes clause, and if refernces to MArvel being able to use the original human torch was a way to get Fox to let Chris out of his contract.
Marvel agrees not to make the Original Human Torch a film star, and they leave the Fox Human Torch open for use, and free up Chris Evans.
|
| Posted: 09 Apr 2010 21:05 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 757
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
Remember Star Trek First Contact? The tabloids reported the script to be about Roxanna Troi's mother (Played by Majel Barret) sacrificing her life to blow up the Borg, ... the movie turned out to be a time travel tale.
My reservation about Evans is that playing Captain America is a Leading man role, all cameras, eyes and ears are on him, and if he comes off silly and unbelieveable, it'll just derail the entire movie.
Also, that 9 movies deal requires a lot of commitment, time and sacrifice, so when someone like Tatum who is an up-and-coming rising star might lose other film roles and jobs, and get type-cast playing this character. Could be like Pierce Brosnan, who pursued a few high-profile leading roles outside of the Bond movies (And I felt that was a factor in the downfall of him in getting the Bond role in Casino).
|
| Posted: 09 Apr 2010 21:36 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 457
Join Date: Oct 2008
|
By the time Casino Royal came around Brosnan was way to old to play bond. Really, Much like Roger Moore he was too old to play bond from the start, but because of the positive buzz over their previous roles, (The Saint and Remington Steele) the producers felt they were good bank.
By the time they did Royal, Bosnan was about as likely as Sean Connery, sure people would have watched it, but it would be a one off, not the start of a Series.
All that said, the 9 films are likely set to be seriel style (like Back to the Future or more recently LOTR) where they will shoot everything back to back, so even though it may take four or five years to release everything, they will likely shoot the majority of it over a two to three year period. Which means that the Actor will have money in the bank even as they explore indy projects to build their oscar cred after the whole thing is done.
Basiclly 9 films is as much of a gamble for the studio as it is the actor, more so really, In the worst case scenerio the actor has guarnateed work, in the worst case scenerio for the studio they have to pay a huge ammount of Billy Dee Williams money to get them out of the contract and replace them with someone new if they don't work out.
|
| Posted: 09 Apr 2010 22:32 Last Edited By: PS Schmucker |
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 859
Join Date: Sep 2007
|
|
Quote:
Pierce Brosnan, who pursued a few high-profile leading roles outside of the Bond movies (And I felt that was a factor in the downfall of him in getting the Bond role in Casino).
Brosnan was an excellent Bond who brought in major bank for the franchise.
When Die Another Day came out, it set the (Bond) box office record for opening weekend, US gross, and Worldwide gross.
It beat all Bond previous records, the last being the other Brosnan Bond movies.
EON productions didn't go with him though because they had just got the rights to Casino Royale which was a prelude to the Bond movies.
They have had all the rights to all the Bond movies except Casino Royal which they had been fighting to get for some time. (Casino owned by Sony)
I think it was in 2004 when Sony agreed to work with EON and let them finally make Casino Royale.
It was a huge win for EON to be able to make Casino Royale, something they have been wanting to do to decades.
So when they decided that Casino would be officially the next movie, they never seriously considered Brosnan despite all the money he had made them in the past.
It was a prelude, an origin story to Bond. They have expressed how much they love Pierce and everything he has done for the franchise, but now with the rights to Casino in their hands they wanted to finally make this movie and was ready to take the franchise in a entirely new direction.
I'm just saying it wasn't Pierce Brosnan's fault he didn't get the part in Casino Royals, it was the studio that now had the chance & rights to finally make the ultimate Bond origin movie.
Even though Pierce Brosnan was good for the Bond franchise, he just wasn't going to fit with their new future plans.
If they didn't acquire the rights to Casino Royale from Sony, I'm positive he would have remained on board as Bond for at least another film.
Quote:
Much like Roger Moore he was too old to play bond from the start, but because of the positive buzz over their previous roles, (The Saint and Remington Steele) the producers felt they were good bank.
Moore was too old to play Bond in 1973's Live and Let Die?!?! Wow. I have to disagree with that although he was considered by Fleming previous to Connery to be in Dr. No.
I read that Fleming did not like the idea of Connery playing Bond when he was originally cast. Fleming had wanted Moore, Cary Grant, and a few others in mind.
After he saw Dr. No, he had a change of heart about Connery though.
Still, I had never thought as Roger Moore as "too old" while watching Live and Let Die.
A view to a Kill though, yeah...too old! LOL! 
|
| Posted: 10 Apr 2010 00:37 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 757
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
Roger Moore really nurtured his Bond role. He popped up in supporting roles in movies like Cannonball run, never having a movie that outshined his appearances in the Bond movies. Brosnan kept making movies like the Thomas Crown affair, which in my opinion, competed with the Bond movies.
With Craig, I suppose the powers-that-be wanted him to be identified with Bond, even starring in that war movie and with Kidman in that fantasy movie, they didn't outshine or competed with the Bond franchise. Die another day did very well, and they could've continued making another 2-3 movies with Brosnan, but they felt it was time to do a relaunch with a new actor and an origin gimmick to sell it. It worked, then Quantum sucked.
|
| Posted: 10 Apr 2010 01:14 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 859
Join Date: Sep 2007
|
|
Quote:
It worked, then Quantum sucked
YES IT DID!
I saw it in the theatres....twice.
Yes I did enjoy it, but compared to other Bond movies it just doesn't compare. It did kinda suck.
You have the car chase, then the foot chase, then the boat chase, then the action scene with the planes, and that was the movie.
Dare I say that Casino Royale is a top 5 Bond movie.
If not, I would say it is one of the better Bond movies ever made. (I also loved Goldfinger, Thunderball, OHMSS, Spy who loved me, & Goldeneye)
I felt that Quantom was the complete opposite of Casino, and I would rank it in the bottom 5 of all the Bond movies.
Don't get me wrong, I've seen every Bond movie and love them all.
Too me there really hasen't been a Bond movie that I haven't sat though and wasn't completely entertained.
Even though I like them all, there are just ones that I liked a lot more then others.
Casino Royale rankes high up there with me, Quantom of Solace... not so much.
Martin Campbell directed Goldeneye & Casino Roayle and those were both hits with me.
I really wanted him to return for Quantom.
I heard he read the scropt and passed on the project.
That was my first hint that it was going to be not that great of a movie.
|
| Posted: 10 Apr 2010 01:52 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 788
Join Date: Sep 2008
|
Didn't Brosnan walk away from the role of Bond first?
I don't think Roger Moore was purposely choosing movies that didn't outshine his Bond role in terms of popularity. He was making movies like THE WILD GEESE and FFOLKES and CANNONBALL RUN. There are very few roles and movies though that would overshadow the Bond role. But unless it was for comedy, he would not choose roles that were too similar to Bond's character.
When Cubby Broccolli was going after Brosnan for the role in the mid-1980s, the Remington Steele show got renewed. The network was willing to share and allow Brosnan to do both (and get the bump in ratings for the new Bond) but Cubby nixed it because he didn't think "Bond" should be on TV as well as the movies. I think they also have written in the Bond contract that the actor can't be in a tux in any other movie just to avoid the confusion.
The confusion with their Bond roles didn't stop another Bond actors in the 1960s. In the low budget Italian film OPERATION KID BROTHER (also known as OK CONNERY), the actors for M (Benard Lee) & Moneypenny (Lois Maxwell) played roles similar to their Bond roles. The movie also starred the actress who played Jill Masterson (Shirley Eaton) from GOLDFINGER along with the villain Largo from THUNDERBALL played by Adolpho Celi. And just in case you didn't get the Bond connection, the lead spy was played by Sean Connery's brother. The actor/wrestler Harold Sakata (Oddjob) use to parody his role too for commercials.
My personal favorites are...
ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE
FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE
YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE
THE SPY WHO LOVED ME
with my 2nd favs being..
THUNDERBALL
GOLDFINGER
THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS
GOLDENEYE
OHMSS is a film that grows on Bond fans over the years. I even visited Blofeld's lair, Piz Gloria, when I was in Switzerland two years ago. DAYLIGHTS doesn't usually top most people's lists but it was my first Bond movie in the theater. I'm still having a tough time sitting through the original CASINO ROYALE TV movie from the 1950s. Bond is played by an American (Jimmy Bond).
I'm also working my way through the Fleming novels and am down to the last two books. Currently reading The Man with the Golden Gun.
__________________
|
| Posted: 10 Apr 2010 02:50 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 457
Join Date: Oct 2008
|
Brosnan Was supposed to be Bond in the Living Daylights, but his producers on Remington Steele wouldn't let him do it, so they went with Timothy Dalton, and angered a good deal of Bond Fans who felt Brosnan was the better choice, which I think plyed into Dalton being dropped from the Series.
Moore was in a similar spot, where his obligation on the Saint wouldn't let him do the role until after that series ended.
In both men's cases, they really were not in the ideal range to play a dashing young super spy. Given that Casino is Bond's first mission, Brosnan would not have been right, firstly because it would have been his what fourth bond film? and second because by that point he was a man in middle age (if we're being generous). Still handsome and swauve as all get out, but kind of like Harrison Ford in the last Indiana Jones film, clearly past his prime for punching people in the face.
|
| Posted: 11 Apr 2010 02:50 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 757
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
For me, it was when the bad guys made that General of some South American country sign the contract, that ruined the movie. That's it? That's the evil plot???
After Quantum, the third Craig/Bond movie better be a cool movie or have a pay off for everything set up in QoS, or the Bond franchise will sink again.
|
| Posted: 12 Apr 2010 00:36 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
|
http://www.accesshollywood.com/chris-evans-on-playing-captain-ame ...
|
| Posted: 12 Apr 2010 00:53 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 457
Join Date: Oct 2008
|
Well, I would have to say if he wasn't confident, I doubt he'd be making such a joke. Honestly, I bet he's looking forward to tackling something with a little more dramatic fair, since he's more known for playing the wise cracker, but probably doesn't want to say that outloud since it is a comic book movie and among those not familiar would sound pretty pedestrian.
Anyway, fingers crossed as always.
|
| Posted: 12 Apr 2010 01:54 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
|
Yeah well we had our fingers crosses in 2006, 2009, and now 2011...what does that say?
|
| Posted: 12 Apr 2010 04:15 Last Edited By: PS Schmucker |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 859
Join Date: Sep 2007
|
|
Quote:
Yeah well we had our fingers crosses in 2006, 2009, and now 2011...what does that say?
Third time's the charm? 
|
| Posted: 12 Apr 2010 16:46 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 457
Join Date: Oct 2008
|
Well, I am a big believer in casting against type.
Obvioulsy, someone at Marvel liked him, and saw something that made them want him over anyone else. I'd never suggest that I know more about the character of Cap, or care more about it then the folks at Marvel itself, so I have to say, it's likely a good bet that Chris will be able to hit all the right notes in this.
|
| Posted: 12 Apr 2010 21:54 |
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 296
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
Let's get off the James Bond stuff.
In terms of Cap, you absolutely have to have him frozen in ice as a result of the accident with the drone plane and Bucky's death. If you don't have this, the movie loses its teeth and loses its tie to the canon that is the comic books of the 40s-60s.
I could've lived without Bucky in this movie, but if he's there, then they need to stick to the story. I could totally live without the Winter Soldier storyline, I didnt like in in the comics and I doubt that I'll like it now.
For me, all you need is Cap, Bucky, Peggy and Red Skull. Forger the frakkin' Invaders ... that will only muddle up what should be an awesome WWII period piece.
As for Chris Evans, the writing/direction/action will make this film, including his contribution. If he is supposed to carry it all by himself, I have reservations, but I'll stay positive for now.
__________________I want a giant penny and a lifesize T-Rex statue in my high tech basement.
|
| Posted: 13 Apr 2010 01:11 Last Edited By: Pole805 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
Exaclty, its Cap's movie, we don't need other heroes takin it up.
Cap- Yes DUHHH.
Bucky- meh, I don't want him to be all happy side kicky, it's WWII.
Peggy- it depends, if it gets all emotional, lovey-dovey then no. You can some, to make it realistic, but not drama "oh steeve why??" type.
Red Skull- make sure he's an actualy evil Nazi genuis, so it is all puzzled, then piece by piece its all comes together, like Dark Knight.
|
| Posted: 13 Apr 2010 23:04 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 757
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
Nice to hear that you just want Cap. Other heroes or the Invaders, okay as cameo appearances.
About our rants on Bond, it's because Bond is our guage in what we want in action movies, and Cap movie should be an action movie. Plus, Bond hasn't had a war scene since Living Daylight, and now's a great time to throw in a war scene in the Cap movie.
Nowadays, the general public likes our heroes, or super spies, to be flawed (Bourne movies) or complicated. The 60s-90s Bonds were competent, confident and well-established men, who knew what to say, do or act. And we like to see that in Cap. Think of Raiders of the Lost Ark, Indiana kept saying, "That should be in a museum." Good enough reason for his motives and why he's risking his life and breaking his body. So Cap's motive was, "I want to fight in the war." That's good enough and should be his character.
Then it gets complicated when he's with the Avengers and stuck in the modern age, but that's fodder for future movies and or a tv series.
|
| Posted: 15 Apr 2010 23:44 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
|
http://www.collider.com/2010/04/15/joss-whedon-re-writing-captain ...
|
|
|
