Rumor: A Whole New Team For Avengers 3?

Rumor: A Whole New Team For Avengers 3?

avengers old order

Hot new rumor says it's out with the old, in with the new for Avengers 3.

While currently riding high on an unbroken string of box-office megahits, Marvel Studios has a potential problem looming in their future: The multi-film contracts of almost all of the actors who portray The Avengers are rapidly running out. Once they do, the stars would be in position to renegotiate new contracts - which could lead to expensive, budget-busting pay-raises.

Last week, a popular rumor suggested that Marvel might try to extend their stars' commitments by splitting Avengers: Age of Ultron into two films - but it's technically illegal to pay actors for one movie and turn it into two afterwards. But now, a new rumor suggests that Marvel's planned solution could be something similar... but much more ambitious.

A rumor/speculation piece posted to reliable film-geek site Badass Digest claims to have learned that Marvel plans to have the "established" Avengers sit out the third film, instead debuting an entirely new team likely comprised of post-Ultron "Phase 3" characters like Doctor Strange, Ant-Man and (many suspect) Ms. Marvel or even Black Panther for Avengers 3.

The piece then goes on to speculate that Marvel would do so in order to "save" the final appearance of the original Avengers for an even bigger post-A3 crossover (in the vein of Secret Wars or The Infinity Gauntlet) that could unite the entirety of the Marvel Universe including the "new" Avengers, the Guardians of The Galaxy, The Defenders and any hypothetical others.

There is some precedent for this: During the Civil War event, there were pro and anti-government Avengers teams. Additionally, Age of Ultron features the Marvel Cinematic Universe debuts of Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch; longtime Avengers who first joined as part of a major status-quo shakeup wherein everyone quit but Captain America - who had to build a new Avengers team from scratch.

Marvel Studios has not commented on these new rumors.

Source: Badass Digest

image

Permalink

I'd love to see what might happen if they added Lady Thor or, dare I hope, Beta Ray Bill for one of the Avengers films.

I know eventually they'll have to do something to keep the films going after the current group runs out their contracts or whatever, but man the MCU was a perfect storm of great casting with great directors making amazing cinema that I really enjoyed. Here's hoping whoever they get for Avengers mk 2 will be equally as great.

Since they've already got Falcon set up to be Captain America in the comics and Lady Thor is currently riding high, this seems highly plausible. Brodie can sub in for Iron Man and anyone can replace Black Widow and Hawkeye. The only real trouble I can see is that the Avengers without HULK would pretty much suck.

EDIT: Forgot to mention just how much I hope Captain Marvel (Carol Danvers) gets a movie of her own. The current run in comics is going really well from what I hear. Again, here's hoping. :)

Add Lady Thor?

She's had 0 appearances, why would you want her in a movie?

This is an entirely subjective opinion, but I don't like the idea at all. I want to see the good old Avengers fight Thanos in The Avengers 3. I don't want someone new to just come out of nowhere.

Sounds like it would get convoluted as all heck pretty damn quick. I mean, it's standard for comics, but the average movie-goer is going to be confused out of their mind when they show up for Avengers and don't see RDJ.

It would certainly be an interesting test of how much of The Avengers' success is down to the characters and how much is the Marvel brand - a big hit with new characters would certainly give them some levaerage in negotiating any future contracts.

I'd rather have some new members join up with the veteran Avengers. If the old crowd goes, at least have them pass the torch onscreen, instead of throw away lines or cheap cameos in the next film.

I still want Spidey and Wolverine. But we all know the former is being dragged down in a pile of stagnant filth by a dying movie studio, and the former is still the star of most of the good super hero movies another studio makes. Would it hurt the almighty Disney/Marvel/Lucasfilm[1] Empire to at least try negotiating "renting" the characters for a few minute of screen time? (It will probably hurt their pride, but they smoke cigars wrapped in $100 bills soaked in orphan tears. They can take one for the fans that give them tons more money.) It would give the other two studios some much needed spending cash, so I'm sure they'd be on board.

[1] Heh, how 'bought a Jedi in the Avengers?

That would be amazing if they could pull this off. It would be the ultimate superhero movie.

Adam Jensen:
This is an entirely subjective opinion, but I don't like the idea at all. I want to see the good old Avengers fight Thanos in The Avengers 3. I don't want someone new to just come out of nowhere.

Probably a good job that it wouldn't involve anyone coming out of nowhere then. There's going to be, at the very least, Ant-Man, Doctor Strange, and another Guardians film before Avengers 3. Plus Avengers 2 and Captain America 3 which are fairly likely to introduce new characters which could get expanded parts later on, as happened for Black Widow and (ugh) Hawkeye. There's essentially zero chance that Marvel will just throw out everything they've done so far and start from scratch with an entirely new team, but I don't see what the problem would be with retiring the more established characters and replacing them with newer (in cinematic terms) ones.

softclocks:
Add Lady Thor?

She's had 0 appearances, why would you want her in a movie?

Maybe to promote her?
At this point it's the movies are what brings more people to read more comics, and not the other way round.

Flatfrog:
...a big hit with new characters would certainly give them some levaerage in negotiating any future contracts.

Guardians of the Galaxy says "Hi!"

softclocks:
The only real trouble I can see is that the Avengers without HULK would pretty much suck.

That's as logical as saying "the Avengers without Spiderman would pretty much suck" since Spiderman is one of the most iconic Avengers team members. Same could possibly be said for Wolverine, but neither of them could possibly be in any future Avengers because of legal bulls-it. I'm also currently operating under the assumption that Marvel could make Avengers 3 staring Rosie O'Donnell and it would still be awesome.

Sounds like this rumour is a contract negotiating tactic. I'm reminded of that episode of Louie with David Lynch. I guess we'll see how it plays out!

If this happens It won't be simple to pull off from the writer's end (especially since Marvel has proven it isn't a fan of good writers (*rimshot*)), but it makes me want to create 2-3 minute videos that provide a skeleton summary of all the movies so people can remember what the hell is going on without needing to watch ten feature films.

Darxide:
I'm also currently operating under the assumption that Marvel could make Avengers 3 staring Rosie O'Donnell and it would still be awesome.

I would argue that it would only sell as much as an awesome movie, but hey I'd still go see it.

ZZoMBiE13:
I'd love to see what might happen if they added Lady Thor or, dare I hope, Beta Ray Bill for one of the Avengers films.

I know eventually they'll have to do something to keep the films going after the current group runs out their contracts or whatever, but man the MCU was a perfect storm of great casting with great directors making amazing cinema that I really enjoyed. Here's hoping whoever they get for Avengers mk 2 will be equally as great.

Since they've already got Falcon set up to be Captain America in the comics and Lady Thor is currently riding high, this seems highly plausible. Brodie can sub in for Iron Man and anyone can replace Black Widow and Hawkeye. The only real trouble I can see is that the Avengers without HULK would pretty much suck.

EDIT: Forgot to mention just how much I hope Captain Marvel (Carol Danvers) gets a movie of her own. The current run in comics is going really well from what I hear. Again, here's hoping. :)

I think that not all that much is going to change to be honest, I suspect all the discussion on these grounds is simply a form of advertising. In today's world what's going on behind the scenes interests and excites people as much as the movies themselves. I imagine Marvel starts rumors just to keep their stuff in the limelight right now, they probably have a whole team of social media plants running all over the place to generate this stuff.

At the end of the day the guys playing The Avengers aren't that big a deal, they largely became a big deal because of the Marvel stuff. Chris Evans has very little on his plate, and despite him talking about "taking a break" or wanting to retire I just can't see him staying out of the game and giving up the fame and fortune he aspired to this long when he finally has it. Robert Downy Jr. is only valuable right now because he's Iron Man, he gets lots of film offers BECAUSE of Iron Man, the guy wrecked his life and was almost literally pulled out of a gutter, they didn't even want to cast him initially because he made such a mess out of things for himself. The man does not seem stupid and already made his mistakes, I think at the end of the day he might push for more money, but he knows what his fan base wants, and knows how he could fall again and what it's like to hit bottom. I think he'll keep being Iron Man as long as people want him to be Iron Man. Scarlet Johansson is just coming into her own for the kinds of movies she wants to make, and let's be honest, she's a good actress, but a big part of her appeal is her looks and sex appeal and she gets older every year. I can't see her walking away from the paydays, "Black Widow" arguably put her in the A-list, and really to keep her all they really have to do is offer her that Black Widow movie she wants and she'll probably eat out of a dog dish at their staff meetings if they ask her to. Chris Hemsworth [SP] is in the same basic case, pretty much being the male version of Scarlet Johansson, he's there for the sex appeal in the other direction, and he's already getting his starring roles, what's his career going to be like if he stops being "Thor" moving from being an A-lister doing blockbusters to a male lead in goofy romantic comedies? He probably did something, but other than Thor I mostly remember him as the male jock from "Cabin In The Woods", which was good, but Thor is pretty much the best thing he has going. Jeremy Renner was supposed to go places, but he didn't seem to really explode like some people expected, his "Hansel and Gretel" movie
was just okay. Samuel L. Jackson sort of forced his way into the role, as opposed to being asked to do it. The story I keep hearing is that when they did "The Ultimate Universe" not expecting it to be around as long, someone though it would be cool to make Nick Fury look like him. As you know from the way guys like Todd Macfarlane got sued (By the real "Tony Twist") if a celebrity complains they have room for legal action. Sam pretty much told them it was cool, as long as he got to play the character if they ever did a movie, years later they actually did start making movies and thus this agreement was invoked. Basically he wants to be there.

Pretty much any of these guys would probably regret it if they walked away and their money ran out while they tried to keep acting like an A-lister hoping for movies that might not come without piggybacking off of their "Avengers" fame. Those riding on sex appeal might get a couple of films but they wouldn't even be close to what they are making now in terms of paydays, fame, and exposure.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if they do play games with the casting, and make it look like there is behind the scenes tension at the same time. All of that generates attention. The actors get to stoke their egos while people beg them to come back, people discuss the new ones, and inevitably they bring the old guys back. As a general rule comics always revert back to the established status quo. In the end if they decide to replace the actors you'll see new guys playing these roles, NOT supporting cast stepping up.

Look at it this way, everyone seems to think Rhodey can step up and be Iron Man and point to how he did this in the comics, and then went on to become "War Machine". That worked as a gimmick to sell comics for a while while people waited for the old one, but it also worked because he had support from Stark and his technology, Rhodey isn't stupid but he's not a genius, and part of the whole appeal of "Iron Man" isn't just the armor and all of it's weapons, but the arrogant genius of the guy inside the armor. Indeed half the thing with Iron Man is that he runs into things that he can't blast his way through, oftentimes gets trashed, and then comes back with the perfect solution because Tony Stark is one of the smartest men on the planet. Beating the Iron Man armor has never really been the point, you have to beat the guy inside of it. Rhodey is great as a supporting character, War Machine works wonderfully as a way of bringing in some extra muscle, or to be trashed to sell the credentials of a new threat (especially in a shared continuity when they want to lead into an Iron Man story but the actual Iron Man is busy in another storyline for the moment). Bucky or Falcon being Cap both happened but again, largely just as attention getters for Steve.

All of the things that have been mentioned could happen, but I doubt they will remain for the long term in an ongoing franchise. I'll also say that the one I find least likely is Falcon taking over for Cap. I say this because they seemed to put a lot of time and effort into developing his costume and justifying why it exists, a sort of hybrid between the original "wing glider and bird" version and the later "Wakandan armor" version. I don't think they will retire that. Besides they have plans to promote two of Marvel's longest running "Black Heroes" we have Luke Cage getting a TV series and apparently "Black Panther" is already under production, they don't really need the diversity points, especially seeing as Cap and Black Panther are kind of redundant on a lot of levels (match ups between them are classic).

I'll also say that I wouldn't equate short term success with a character that should get a movie. Like it or not some characters simply work better as supporting characters or as part of an ensemble cast. Scarlet Witch, Gambit, and others have all tried to hold down their own books for many years and inevitably failed. Ms. Marvel is another one of these, she's always popular enough for people to want around, but after an initial run (like many such things) her titles
seem to inevitably die. Guardians Of The Galaxy sort of worked because of it's comparative obscurity even compared to various "support characters" and also because it was an ensemble cast and none of those characters had to hold down a movie on their own.

Let me put it to you this way, other than generating controversy can you name one major storyline that Ms. Marvel was starring in that wasn't playing off other characters, or so heavily connected to ongoing lore and backstory that it defies easy trimming for a movie to capture the essence of it? I'm not saying it can't be done, but it's not something most fans can do, where really a lot of what you see in the current movies are based around well known lore, and make nods to those kinds of storylines.

Not to mention you need to think in terms of doing the FX properly, which is why they power down characters. See, one of Marvel's big techniques is to do the flashier stuff with almost complete CGI and green screen. When you see Iron Man flying around and doing stuff for example a lot of it is a cartoon, and the fact that he's in armor makes it easy. Ms. Marvel for example does not do things that way, she runs around in a costume and flies as a person, which means they need to do more "Superman" type effects and then on top of that splice it with the pure CGI stuff and make it look seamless. With Falcon it was all live action to an extent so it wasn't quite as jarring. On top of this her powers are heavily energy based and you'll notice for example that while he's around, the amount of time characters like "Iron Man" actually fire is lower than you might think (I've read how expensive a convincing energy blast can be, going back to things like Star Trek and why they don't use phasers and such more often). The point I'm getting at here is that your talking a huge, expensive, movie with a character that treads a lot of the same territory as say "Green Lantern" which was an absolute disaster. To do Ms. Marvel you might run into similar problems (human head bouncing around obviously animated screen) and if you put her into a movie with an already inflated FX budget with conflicting styles... heh.

I'm not saying they won't do some lesser characters, and I anticipate we'll see a much-powered down version of Ms. Marvel at some point given what they have already dropped, but I don't think your going to see that many individual
hero movies, especially with characters that haven't been able to hold down titles and even appearances regularly. See, one of the things that you need to understand about "The Avengers" is that in the comics it's a lot different than the movies, the comics exist as a sort of "dumping ground" for characters that are popular but not popular enough to hold down their own books or appearance schedule. Despite the original "big name" formation it's generally been one or two big name heroes (like Cap and Iron Man) and a bunch of B an C listers. Characters created and being experimented with hoping they become more popular, or characters flagging in interest but still popular enough to have some of that interest so they get dumped into a team book. Very popular characters with stories people want to tell move to, or go back to, their own titles in rotations of a sort. To use Ms. Marvel as an example she's functionally been "kicked off the team" before albeit mostly by the writers because nobody really cared enough to keep her around. That whole "rape of Ms. Marvel" thing happened because it was callous in the way the characters just dismissed her reason for leaving as "yet another excuse why this character won't be around", and this was the reason the writers came up with to stop writing her. The irony is that if there was some outrage over the way that was handled, the character probably wouldn't be around now, because really that's arguably what saved her by getting people interested. While many people might see it this way nowadays since she's succeeded somewhat on her own, it could be argued Ms. Marvel's greatest contribution to Marvel and Comics in general was getting raped, impregnated with an "evil baby", and being dismissed for it and not having had the situation handled realistically because the writers didn't think it through. Of course at the same time they reason why people leave shared team books can be ridiculous all around, but that one happened to hit some raw nerves at just the right time and remain in the public eye long enough to become a feminist rallying point.

Pyrian:

Flatfrog:
...a big hit with new characters would certainly give them some levaerage in negotiating any future contracts.

Guardians of the Galaxy says "Hi!"

Well, quite - but I specifically meant a new hit under the Avengers brand. I would be pretty astonished if the Guardians don't show up in Avengers 3 (or even in at least the stinger for Avengers 2), but an Avengers movie without the four big hitters would certainly be the biggest risk Marvel will have taken so far. And that includes Ant Man.

Pyrian:

Flatfrog:
...a big hit with new characters would certainly give them some levaerage in negotiating any future contracts.

Guardians of the Galaxy says "Hi!"

If you think Disney's shareholders are happy that 3 very expensive Marvel films have failed to even make 50% of what the Avengers did I've got some magic beans to sell you.

Shareholders care about growth and after Avengers and the IM3 both easily broke way over $1billion for the next 3 to struggle to even make $700 million they will want better results with future films or they will want changes that will not make comic fans happy.

Remember making money and being profitable is not good for these people they want MORE profit every year.

I really, really REALLLY hope they don't split the movie in 2. What a waste, a crazy robot just isn't interesting enough to span two movies. The Thanos showdown would be great for something like that, but pretty much only that.

Well, as long as they actually bring Ms. Marvel into the Avengers films I'll be happy. I still think she should have been in Age of Ultron.

So...

Heavy hitters: Doctor Strange, Vision, Ms./Captain Marvel?
Utility: Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, Ant-Man, Falcon(/Wasp?), Black Panther?

...plus likely the Guardians as a unit (whatever that unit looks like after the changes in Guardians 2), because Thanos is a sticking point for most of them. I don't know about star power or compelling lead characters, since the vast majority of that list hasn't even hit the screen yet, but just in terms of the powersets involved it looks like a fun combination of heroes. Interesting team dynamic, too, with an android, a pair of kids (relatively speaking), and an ex-criminal, at the bare minimum (plus, again, the Guardians and their collective zaniness). I'd still watch it, but then, I just like seeing more Marvel characters explored in the MCU. More variety is nice! (A few members of the old guard sticking around would help establish a contrast between the old Avengers and the new Avengers, but cutting most of them out might be the only way to get the whole cast enough relevant screen time.)

If the next phase is a set-up for Secret Wars, I will be all kinds of giddy. Sure, it'd require a serious rewrite or a coffers-draining repurchase of all non-Marvel Studios film rights to make things happen (Doom, FF, Galactus, Spidey, Doc Oc and X-Men off the top of my head would need to be re-acquired) but if they pulled it off? Incredible. The nerd-hype alone would be...

...hm. Actually, that much nerd-hype could kill the film based on over-inflated expectations. Curious.

P-89 Scorpion:

Pyrian:

Flatfrog:
...a big hit with new characters would certainly give them some levaerage in negotiating any future contracts.

Guardians of the Galaxy says "Hi!"

If you think Disney's shareholders are happy that 3 very expensive Marvel films have failed to even make 50% of what the Avengers did I've got some magic beans to sell you.

Shareholders care about growth and after Avengers and the IM3 both easily broke way over $1billion for the next 3 to struggle to even make $700 million they will want better results with future films or they will want changes that will not make comic fans happy.

Remember making money and being profitable is not good for these people they want MORE profit every year.

Still its Disney. If the voices that actually matter are the ones that come out on top in the end it will be fine. I mean Nintendo share holders hate how the company has been doing the past two years but Iwata and Miyamoto have just plowed ahead and committed to making good and fun products which, if the world was ideal, they will be rewarded for. Disney also is trying to keep these movies relatively cheap instead of bloating them unlike Sony with The Amazing Spider-man if reports are to be believed. To Sony $800 million sounded like it was just barely above even where as to Disney even $500 million is a huge profit off the movie. Sadly shareholders and investors don't seem to have a brain when it comes to the nature of fan culture and franchises, especially mega franchises like this.

Iron Man was one of those lightning in a bottle superhero movies like The Dark Knight was for DC that same year. Both rewrote the book on how a superhero movie can be done and both also had great actors handing in defining performances for the characters they were chosen to play. Its hard to make lighting strike twice. While I think the Captain America movies are the best of the solo bunch so far it is clear that Iron Man and Robert Downey Jr. are the break out stars of the whole enterprise. Those are the two names that will draw the money in. They shouldn't expect the same returns from Captain America, Thor, or Hulk. I know if I was in their position I wouldn't expect it. Still if Kevin Feige is left to his own devices and the shareholders do the proper thing and stay out of his way I don't think we have anything to worry about.

At first I thought this sounded absurd, but then I realized that it's probably the best way to break it to the fanboys that Downey, Evans and Hemsworth won't be around forever.

I'm predicting that a major theme of this new A3 will be, that the second-stringers feel insecure about living up to the example set by Cap, Tony and Thor, and the big character arc will be about proving to themselves that they can be just as good, just as heroic, and won't need their heroes to hold their hands forever, &c.

Maybe Marvel Studios can launch a kickstarter to raise money to pay the new salaries of all the Avengers actors after they re-negotiate their contracts. OH! Or maybe the world is going so well that all of the actors will just decide that being those super heroes is so super awesome in itself that they'll decide they don't need extra money to keep playing them.

I'm not delusional, I just couldn't decide which one of those 2 sounded more hilarious/preposterous.

This problem won't even manifest until it's time to cast Avengers 4, and they already have a lot of options.

They've got Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch already established (a little bit). They've got Falcon and Bucky as plausible replacements for Cap. Vision comes naturally out of the next movie's Ultron storyline. If Don Cheadle is up for it (or even if he's not, ask Terrence Howard), they have War Machine. Toss in a She-Hulk and I'd say they have a team.

Darxide:

softclocks:
The only real trouble I can see is that the Avengers without HULK would pretty much suck.

That's as logical as saying "the Avengers without Spiderman would pretty much suck" since Spiderman is one of the most iconic Avengers team members. Same could possibly be said for Wolverine, but neither of them could possibly be in any future Avengers because of legal bulls-it. I'm also currently operating under the assumption that Marvel could make Avengers 3 staring Rosie O'Donnell and it would still be awesome.

Hmm, I don't think I made that post.

So Marvel wouldn't need to pay for ALL of the original cast. It's already true that Robert Downey Jr gets paid leagues better than the rest of the cast, so trimming him out would go a long way to budgeting for some of the other originals. They'll try to keep Scarlett Johansson until they bring on more women to the cast.

 

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.