Monday, March 12, 2012

KAT MCPHEE SMASH PUNY IVY? Look, I'm quite excited for The Avengers, and not just because they filmed part of a major action sequence outside my office building (in the most recent trailer, sure looks like Hulk is smashing my office), but I'm not sure I'm in for a marathon of all 5 prior Marvel Universe films (Thor, Iron Man, Iron Man 2, Captain America, and the Ed Norton Hulk) leading up to a midnight showing of Avengers, which select AMC theatres will apparently be offering.


  1. Paul Tabachneck11:21 AM

    Slice of life:

    Last night, my girlfriend and I were lazing about and she pulled the classic girlfriendian move: she asked me to tell her a story.  

    "Well," I said, "OK.  There once was a boy named Peter, who grew up raised by his aunt and uncle, because his parents had died mysteriously....."

    By the time I was done with the origin story, she said, "That's a good story."

    "....Wait.  You've never heard that story before."


    "You've never seen or read Spider-Man."



    "I know what he looks like."

    "Well, if you liked that story, you should see the movie."

    "I don't have to, I get to pick the next three movies." (An arrangement we came up with to convince her to come with me to see The Room) "By the way, one of them is the BBC version of 'Pride and Prejudice.'"


    .....Anyhow, I will probably try (and fail) to convince her to come with me to that event.  

  2. One of my (many) pet peeves with the Ed Norton HULK movie was that it was, clearly, filmed in Toronto.  I'm used to seeing movies/shows filmed in Toronto or Vancouver that at least make an attempt to disguise where they were actually filmed, and that only folks with a strong familiarity with the cities might actually notice.  (I've lived in both cities, so I'm always on the lookout for recognizable locations.)  But HULK used, and made minimal effort to hide, some VERY iconic Toronto locations - such as buildings on the U of Toronto (one of my alma maters) campus.  But most egregiously, they filmed much of the climactic battle on Yonge St, and it prominently features the iconic (and now demolished) Sam the Record Man storefront.  And iirc, the climax was supposed to take place in Harlem, which the filmmakers approximated by creating some fake storefronts for, like, wig shops and nail salons.

    But, no, I can't say that a marathon of those movies appeals to me.  (I could watch IRON MAN again and again, but that's it.)  My interest in THE AVENGERS is almost exclusively due to Whedon.  (And speaking of, THE CABIN IN THE WOODS cannot open soon enough.)

  3. Joseph J. Finn1:12 PM


    I stopped reading and immediately clicked over to see how much and and when they go on sale.  Sadly, Chicago was hosed.

  4. A second round of location is being announced later this week, and I have no doubt Chicago will be on the list.  That said, looks like they're screening Thor/Cap/Avengers in 3-D, which will result in FINN SMASH!

  5. isaac_spaceman2:12 PM

    So Ghost Rider, Daredevil, Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four, and the X-Men don't live in the Marvel Universe any more?   

  6. I'm glad I wasn't the first to post the comic-geek response.  And let's not forget that 1993 "Power Pack" movie.

  7. No, because they're separately licensed and not folded into the film Marvel universe.  That's why we're getting a Spider-Man reboot and why we got Ghost Rider reboot--all of the properties apparently have "use it or it reverts" license terms, and the studios that presenstly have those properties  (mostly Fox) don't want the rights reverting to Marvel/Disney.

  8. Tosy and Cosh2:49 PM

    Makes me wonder how long that can continue. I mean does Sony give up at some point and let the rights revert, or will we be getting a Spider-Man movie every 4-5 years, minimum, for the next 50 years? Can they do it in perpetuity? Or is there a set time limit. I know bits and pieces of this stuff from various reading, but would love to see a good thorough article lay it all out for the layperson.

  9. Everything's going to depend on the license documents, which are non-public, but there are a few additional wrinkles now:

    1.  When the licenses were signed, Marvel was an independent company--it has now been acquired by Disney, which makes a reversion even less desired.
    2.  Because there are a bunch of common elements in Marvel books, it's going to get messy at some point.  For instance, is Fox permitted to use Skrulls since they appear in Fantastic Four?  Can Fox prevent Disney from using Skrulls in a hypothetical Avengers sequel?  What if Sony wants to use Kingpin in a Spider-Man movie?  (My understanding is Kingpin is specifically part of the Daredevil IP under the license, even though he's appeared in a lot of Spider-Man stories.)
    3.  The theme park issue--apparently, Universal has a quite long-term and irrevocable license to at least some characters for use in their Orlando theme park, but other characters?  Not so clear.  You can bet Disney would LOVE to have an Avengers show at Hollywood Studios (retheme Indiana Jones to Captain America, for instance).

  10. Joseph J, Finn7:08 PM

    I hate it when people know me quite this well.  ;)

  11. Tosy and Cosh10:47 AM

    Thanks for the clarification. I wonder how explicit the contracts got in terms of characters. I'm betting VERY specific. ;) Wonder if we'll get a Karen Sisco situation. A very large, bald nemesis in a Spider-Man movie named The King, for example. Also, I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall for teh horse trading that surely must have gone on inside Marvel. Beast is X-Men, not Avengers. But Avengers have mutants. Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are likely under Avengers license. But their Dad is under X-Men license.

  12. isaac_spaceman9:23 PM

    My guess is that there is no way to identify every single character ever used anywhere, so either they negotiated specific inclusions and general exclusions (i.e., "license covers characters X, Y, Z; all others excluded") or they decided that the characters belong to the title in which they first appeared.  That would explain why Beast is in X-Men.  As for Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch -- did they appear first in X-Men?  That would explain why they're not in the Avengers.  That and the inability to construct Scarlet Witch's costume in the real world. 

  13. The movies have largely jumped off the Ultimate continuity (which updates backstories), where the Avengers/Ultimates were (at the start) Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, Giant Man, Wasp, Hulk, Black Widow, and Hawkeye.  Giant-Man and Wasp are both pretty lame characters, so I can get them being pruned.

  14. Anonymous2:52 PM

    What's Happening i am new to this, I stumbled upon this I've discoverеd It absolutely hеlpful and it has hеlped
    mе out loаds. I'm hoping to give a contribution & aid different users like its aided me. Great job.

    Also visit my web blog; payday loans