Avengers Assemble
Flush with enthusiasm over Iron Man hitting big this weekend, Marvel Entertainment announced four more titles for 2010 and 2011.
Iron Man 2 is set for April 30, 2010 and Thor is scheduled for June 4 of the same year with Matthew Vaughn (Layer Cake) apparently no longer attached to direct.
Summer of 2011 will kick off with The First Avenger: Captain America on May 6 with The Avengers to follow in July.
Iron Man was the first film to be produced by Marvel Entertainment. The second is The Incredible Hulk coming June 13.
Source: Hollywood Reporter
Filed under: News
Related Posts: - Miramax up to its ass in ‘Debt’
- Jolie replaces Cruise as ‘Edwin A.’ becomes ‘Edwina’?
- Finke on Favreau: Signed on for IM2…and an Asshole
- Regal Turns Red with Restricted Trailers
- More Loose Ends: 10/29/08
Well, let’s face it, the tag at the end of Iron Man perfectly set up the sequel. :-)
“The First Avenger: Captain America” is a really shitty title. This kind of built-in marketing pisses me off.
Indeed Alison.
It’s not only a shitty title, it’s not technically accurate either if you want to be anal about it. I don’t, I’m just saying.
Assuming of course my comic history is accurate, I’ll be the first to admit it might not be.
Depends on how literally you want to take “Avenger”. Because when you get right down to it, we’re all Avengers, aren’t we? Thank you.
Better late than never, I always say. ;-)
I suppose, but I should’ve been thinking before I posted.
I’m sure 90% of the people who give a shit have seen the movie, but you never know.
That title would be so much better if they just flipped it to “Captain America: The First Avenger”. What they have right now just has no flow to it.
With that said, I love what Marvel is trying to do here. They’re trying to consolidate multiple film franchises into a single universe. This is ambitious on a purely organization level. Overlapping productions will presumably have to share actors. If this is done right, it could be some genuinely historic filmmaking.
I wouldn’t be shocked if they change the Captain America title before it comes out.
I hadn’t thought about it in those terms alynch, but they really do seem to be going for an intergrated approach, rather than piecemeal which is potentially pretty exciting for fans.
Plenty of opportunity for crossovers and whatnot, plus a sense of a whole universe rather than a bunch of stand-alone characters.
Of course, geek that I be, Nick Fury should have been smoking his stogie in the scene. At least it would have given Sam Jackson a different look. He always looks and sounds like Sam Jackson.
Yeah, but that was the whole idea of modeling the “ultimate” universe Fury on Jackson. They kinda threw out the WWII-era Fury (save the eye patch).
I don’t know about that end teaser. It was very wooden and didn’t get me excited for anything to come. I like the idea, kinda, but then I also like the idea of not trying to create a big Marvel-verse onscreen, just leave the superhero movies to exist on their own. But hey, maybe it will be cool.
At the very least, Marvel is less likely to screw up their properties the way some of the studios have (cough cough Daredevil, cough Elektra, cough cough).
Well, I was never into comic books. Of course, I loved the Spiderman cartoon and watched the cheesy but hilarious Adam West Batman series.
And I never read the Iron Man comic, or watched the show. Was there a show? I went to see the movie for Robert Downey Jr. and no other reason. It was a real blast, and since I wasn’t comparing it to the comic I have no idea if the changes they made were good, bad or otherwise. As long as RD Jr. is in the sequels, my butt will be in the theater when they’re released. :-)
Samuel L. Jackson needs to do some other roles to show off his range. I like him and it’s great to see him in the blockbusters. His cameos are always fun. But he has much more potential. Black Snake Moan was not a movie that everyone liked (I really did); but it’s undeniable that the role was so different from his usual and it was a convincing, moving performance.
I think you’re better off not knowing all the back story or various versions or whatever. For those of us who have chosen to bear that weight, we like to geek out on it, but believe me Alison: what little I know of the Iron Man world offered little or nothing to the movie. It held up fine on its own.
Knowing stuff and having expectations is just asking for trouble Alison. You saw it in the best way and with the best attitude.
No, there was never really an Iron Man show…maybe a short lived cartoon once a million years ago? Plus, he didn’t always have his own comic. I think he was more frequently just in the Avengers comics.
I’m not the one to ask about all that so maybe I should shut up.
I took the spoiler warning off and changed the title back. If you haven’t seen the movie by now, you really probably don’t care either way.
As always Craig, you’re considerate to a fault.
I always stay through the credits at movies unless I truly despised the movie so much I just want to get out and delouse. But that only happens about once a year… Last two movies I remember doing that with distinctly were Da Vinci Code and the new Funny Games.
i have the iron man cartoon intro on my welcome page:
http://christiandivine.com/welcome.htm
the theme is even used twice in the film. catch it.
the cartoons were pretty cool because they were very imited animation of the actual comic book panels. lotsa kirby goodness.
How long was the cartoon on Christian, and when?
Alexander, I can’t stand sitting through credits and I usually only do it if I’ve been warned in advance. There was a recent rant on Cinematical about post-credit BS and I agree with that guy: if it’s important, put it in the movie.
the toons ran in 1966/67. they’re all on dvd and some youtube.