The Spill Movie Community
If it's crap ... We'll tell you
Follow Spill!
Latest Activity
The Loading Bar Appreciation and Remembrence Society
For The Loading Bar: Gone but not forgotten.A place for Ladyboy Tequila Slaves and Cocaine…See More
Jon, Gallifrey's Mindfreak posted a status"I figured it out. Obamacare means that 1000 paranoid schizophrenics will get the treatment they need...thus meaning 1000 less Republicans."
Gary LeVine posted a status"I feel like the opposite of Billy in that I love me some black women but not so much white women. .-."
Hey it's Melvin! posted a status"Oldies but goodies http://my.spill.com/group/lostaudioreviews/page/leog"
Photos
Music
Uncle Leon Explains: Why You WIll Never See an Avengers Movie
Actually, it would be more appropriate to say "Why you won't see a GOOD Avengers fetaure film". Last night I tried explaining this to the rest of the Spill Crew to no avail. But I believe our audience is alot smarter and can understand when I explain the economics of it. It all comes down to a simple math equation.
First off, there's already been a couple of way mediocre "Ultimate Avengers" animated movies and there's a new Avenegers cartoon ready to roll out any day now. It's an embarassing piece of crap that would never see the light of day if not for it's potential to capitalize on the new Iron Man movie.
But these aren't what any of you are qualifying as an Avenger's movie. I know, now that Iron Man has been such a roaring success (trust me, it will be. the movie kicks all kinds of ass), The Incredible Hulk is right around the corner and Edgar Wright is talking about Antman all of you are giddy about a prospect of a real Avengers movie. How could you not?
Even here it's mentioned in this Wikipedia entry:
In August 2006, Zak Penn was hired to write the script for an Avengers film.[13] Iron Man director Jon Favreau said he would like to direct the film, which would be a crossover to fictional universes in other upcoming Marvel films such as Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, and The Incredible Hulk. He also explained that Marvel has told him that "they're pretty clear on wanting to do it with the actors who’ve established the roles or to not do it at all. I think it’s a good idea if you use the characters established in the other franchises that then come together for an event."[14]
Now THAT'S what everybody's talking about! Keeping the same A-list stars in their same roles, not replacing them with rejects from the latest teen angst, primetime soap opera. Otherwise what's the point? Nobody wants to pay to go see that and a Hollywood Studio is only gonna make the movie if they can make money off of it.
But consider a few factors in what it would take to make this movie.
As we've learned from Tobey Maguire, Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellan and Christian Bale, it's casting good actors in the lead roles that make these movies work.
Edward Norton and Robert Downey Jr. are two of the best actors of their generation. They may even be THE best. Hell, in the cast of Iron Man are four -count 'em, FOUR- Oscar nominated actors (Gwyneth Paltrow, Terrence Howard, Jeff Bridges). How much do you think it costs to pull all of them into the same movie? Maybe none of them are a Will Ferrell-sized box office draws so they weren't paid king's ransoms for the first movie, but you best believe their salaries will double for the sequel once Iron Man is a runaway hit. Especially RDJr., whose face was used to model the toys.
If The Incredible Hulk is good too (and you can stop all talk of an Avengers movie if it's not) the same will happen with Edward Norton. And if they're going to open a Captain America movie franchise they're gonna have to lead with actor that's already got enough heat to put butts in the seats on his own. I want you to start thinking about (just abstractly) what it might costs to get all these actors re-signed to the project. Sure, I've heard about how Samuel L. Jackson shot a scene as Nick Fury for the Iron Man movie (he didn't, really)
Now imagine yourself as a movie producer. It's not your job to make money, it's your job to make the studio ALOT of money. To the point, more money than their last picture that was like yours. The production on a superhero movie is looooong and very expensive, with a high potential for failure. That's when it's a movie about just ONE superhero. Considering that to make an Avengers movie you'll have to triple (at least) your budget for salaries, specical FX and promotions, are you really that confident that you can make back three times as much profit as you could from making just making a sequel from one of your already proven successful properties? Are you confident that the studio will "understand" if you don't?
At best, you can hope to have all the original actors work together doing voices for an Avengers PS3 game.
Maybe.
First off, there's already been a couple of way mediocre "Ultimate Avengers" animated movies and there's a new Avenegers cartoon ready to roll out any day now. It's an embarassing piece of crap that would never see the light of day if not for it's potential to capitalize on the new Iron Man movie.
But these aren't what any of you are qualifying as an Avenger's movie. I know, now that Iron Man has been such a roaring success (trust me, it will be. the movie kicks all kinds of ass), The Incredible Hulk is right around the corner and Edgar Wright is talking about Antman all of you are giddy about a prospect of a real Avengers movie. How could you not?
Even here it's mentioned in this Wikipedia entry:
In August 2006, Zak Penn was hired to write the script for an Avengers film.[13] Iron Man director Jon Favreau said he would like to direct the film, which would be a crossover to fictional universes in other upcoming Marvel films such as Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, and The Incredible Hulk. He also explained that Marvel has told him that "they're pretty clear on wanting to do it with the actors who’ve established the roles or to not do it at all. I think it’s a good idea if you use the characters established in the other franchises that then come together for an event."[14]
Now THAT'S what everybody's talking about! Keeping the same A-list stars in their same roles, not replacing them with rejects from the latest teen angst, primetime soap opera. Otherwise what's the point? Nobody wants to pay to go see that and a Hollywood Studio is only gonna make the movie if they can make money off of it.
But consider a few factors in what it would take to make this movie.
As we've learned from Tobey Maguire, Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellan and Christian Bale, it's casting good actors in the lead roles that make these movies work.
Edward Norton and Robert Downey Jr. are two of the best actors of their generation. They may even be THE best. Hell, in the cast of Iron Man are four -count 'em, FOUR- Oscar nominated actors (Gwyneth Paltrow, Terrence Howard, Jeff Bridges). How much do you think it costs to pull all of them into the same movie? Maybe none of them are a Will Ferrell-sized box office draws so they weren't paid king's ransoms for the first movie, but you best believe their salaries will double for the sequel once Iron Man is a runaway hit. Especially RDJr., whose face was used to model the toys.
If The Incredible Hulk is good too (and you can stop all talk of an Avengers movie if it's not) the same will happen with Edward Norton. And if they're going to open a Captain America movie franchise they're gonna have to lead with actor that's already got enough heat to put butts in the seats on his own. I want you to start thinking about (just abstractly) what it might costs to get all these actors re-signed to the project. Sure, I've heard about how Samuel L. Jackson shot a scene as Nick Fury for the Iron Man movie (he didn't, really)
Now imagine yourself as a movie producer. It's not your job to make money, it's your job to make the studio ALOT of money. To the point, more money than their last picture that was like yours. The production on a superhero movie is looooong and very expensive, with a high potential for failure. That's when it's a movie about just ONE superhero. Considering that to make an Avengers movie you'll have to triple (at least) your budget for salaries, specical FX and promotions, are you really that confident that you can make back three times as much profit as you could from making just making a sequel from one of your already proven successful properties? Are you confident that the studio will "understand" if you don't?
At best, you can hope to have all the original actors work together doing voices for an Avengers PS3 game.
Maybe.
Comment
-
Comment by Chaos Jumper on August 9, 2012 at 2:29pm -
FOUR YEARS LATER!!
-
Comment by TheCrackFox11 on June 16, 2008 at 1:37pm -
Leon, what do you mean Samuel L. Jackson 'didn't really' shoot a scene as Nick Fury? I've seen it! You should've stuck around for the credits... If anyone cares to see the scene here is the link http://video.aol.com/video-detail/nick-fury-after-iron-man-credits-by-chozowarrior/1533385801
-
Comment by Beau on May 5, 2008 at 11:36am -
You know I love you man but you are now officially wrong:
Marvel Studios Sets Four More Release Dates!
Source: Marvel Entertainment
May 5, 2008
Marvel Entertainment released their first quarter report to its shareholders this morning to coincide with the announcement about the success this past weekend of Marvel Studios' first production Iron Man, which grossed an estimated $104.2 million domestically and over $201 million worldwide. The announcement included an update of Marvel Studios' feature film slate with the already-rumored Iron Man 2 announced for a release on April 30, 2010, followed by three more movies for the summers of '10 and '11. Matthew Vaughn's Thor is set for a release on June 4, 2010, and The First Avenger: Captain America (the working title) will kick off the summer of 2011 on May 6, followed by the highly-anticipated and foreshadowed The Avengers scheduled for July 2011. (Edgar Wright's Ant-Man is also listed as being in development with no release date set.)
In a conference call this morning, Marvel Studios' David Maisel said that Iron Man 2 will be used to introduce Thor. Regarding more "Hulk" movies, Maisel said "We definitely plan on continuing." He added that development continues on Spider-Man 4. "I can't give any other updates other than to say it's in development and everybody's excited about 'Spider-Man 4,'" he said.
With that in mind, one can start expecting a lot more announcements in the coming months about creative teams and casting for those movies including who might direct the Captain America and Avengers movies. (Whomever plays Steve Rogers AKA Captain America presumably will be making two movies at once.)
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=44654
-
Comment by Rusty Shackelford on May 3, 2008 at 9:08pm -
Its that Stargate Theme at the end?
-
Comment by THE Don THE SHO 'GUN OF SPILL on May 2, 2008 at 12:26am
-
Comment by Syncos on May 1, 2008 at 10:49pm -
While I completely agree, Leon, about the actors salaries. There's no reason to double or triple the effects budget because of having an ensemble cast. X-Men was an ensemble, and i'm sure the budget for effects was high, but if the crew was all A listers, the effects budget would still be the same. I would at least assume.
-
Comment by Anti-Venom on May 1, 2008 at 9:11pm -
Samuel L. Jackson did shoot a scene for the movie it was at the end after the credits
-
Comment by Beau on May 1, 2008 at 4:05pm
-
You make a really good point here and one I’ve made to people before. However if it was impossible to make a movie due to the cost of casting multiple big names, well, a lot of movies would never have been made. Ever hear about a movie called Ocean’s 12? How abut 12. Or 13? Trust me Unless they get Tom Cruise as Ant-Man and Reese Witherspoon as the WASP there isn’t any way and Avengers flick would cost as much as a Clooney, Pitt, Damon production.
What it would take is a production credit each AND points. And Marvel is greedy enough that they may not want to do it. But given the fact that Superhero movies are fast becoming Hollywood’s safest bet for blockbuster fare I wouldn’t hedge your bets to stiffly against it.
But this is neither here nor there. The greatest thing standing between the moviegoing public and a decent Avengers movie is Zak Penn. A man who has obviously managed to take out a timesharing plan between his soul, Xenu, Loki, and every demon of twenty-five different sets of hells. He’s prolly gonna ruin Cap beforehand for good measure. Will somebody get Ray Stevenson to put a cap in that guy's ass?
-
Comment by ThaShining on May 1, 2008 at 10:25am -
marvel needs to stop making cartoons and stick with the movies
-
Comment by TerryFTW on May 1, 2008 at 10:02am -
Anyone who actually read ultimates would never say the Ultimate Avengers cartoons were good, they were bad carbon copies of one of the best series ever written.
I agree with leon on this, but I will not agree that Thomas Jane sucked he pwned John Travolta and Kevin Nash, and his voice was perfect for the role, way better then that terrible Dolph Lundren movie.
© 2013 Created by The Spill Crew.
You need to be a member of The Spill Movie Community to add comments!
Join The Spill Movie Community