-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Deadline: Marvel’s ‘Thunderbolts’ Movie Taps Jake Schreier As Director
- Thread starter Spectromixer
- Start date
- News Entertainment Comics
He's the perfect kind of newbie who will do whatever Marvel tells him to do.
I wish I understood this weird appeal of "they're villains, but they gotta do hero things!" stories. We have The Suicide Squad. Do we really need Marvel and Sony (since they seem to want to do it too) to make the same movie?
The original pitch for Thunderbolts is better. The avengers are gone, so this new team shows up! All new heroes! Only, secretly they're villains. But the more hero stuff they do, the more they like it and the more conflicted they are about being villains!
I'm still thinking they'll try and maintain the composition of the original (movie) Avengers for a team so they can even re-do that big reveal shot.
US Agent
Yelena Belova
Abomination
Bullseye
Ares (or Ragnarok, might be a good plot device)
Mach I
Boom, there you have it, the original Avengers made up of villains.
US Agent
Yelena Belova
Abomination
Bullseye
Ares (or Ragnarok, might be a good plot device)
Mach I
Boom, there you have it, the original Avengers made up of villains.
Marvel has been doing supervillain team-ups since the 60s and villains have hooked up with heroes several times throughout the decades. It's not like Marvel is new at this. Besides, there was a lot going on with the Thunderbolts besides villains doing hero things.
I'd be willing to bet that Marvel doing it in the movies is going to be significantly better than The Suicide Squad. Those movies sucked. It most definitely won't be the same movie.
I don't think we'll get Mach I. His original identity was The Beetle, a Spider-Man villain which falls under Sony's control.
Don't be ridiculous, just because the David Ayer one sucked doesn't mean the James Gunn one was bad too.
For Thunderbolts comics fans, lets say you only get one: Songbird or Moonstone, who do you pick?
Ultimately I would go with Songbird. But damn, that's a tough one.
Songbird's the one who stuck the landing in regards to making the jump to hero. She also has an interesting powerset. And more Jewish representation is a good thing.
Moonstone has largely remained the same. A villainous manipulator. (She is loads of fun, though.)
They could introduce him in Iron Heart.Then Zeke Stane would be a good pick
Songbird for sure, way more interesting powers and a better character overall IMO
To be fair, a music video background seems like it can translate into action films pretty well since music videos are a very visual medium with quite a few well-known directors making the shift:
Michael Bay, David Fincher, Zack Snyder, Spike Jonze, Marc Webb, Michel Gondry, Gore Verbinski, Antoine Fuqua, etc.
We will never get Songbird vs Green Goblin on the big screen.
I haven't read this comic but I could see a version of this page working with MCU John Walker. Probably doesn't fit the rest of the confrontation but I think Wyatt Russell could sell the hell out of something like this.
Moonstone was cool and nasty with some strong powers. Very good villain. Good in Dark Reign. She could have been used better in Thunderbolts.
Screaming Mimi was more of a natural fit for the Thunderbolts IMO. I think for sure she'll have an important role in the movie.
Screaming Mimi was more of a natural fit for the Thunderbolts IMO. I think for sure she'll have an important role in the movie.
Norman being a misogynist and known for killing a woman (we all know what that "throw you off a bridge" is in reference to), and then he gets his ass kicked by a woman, doesn't quite work with John Walker.
Now you are getting it.
People get to finally see the pieces fall into place, especially for people that claimed that Phase 4 is directionless and that Marvel doesn't know what to do after Endgame. It's very intentional that there is no new Avengers and they've been planting the seeds for new teams to appear in their absence.
Norman being a misogynist and known for killing a woman (we all know what that "throw you off a bridge" is in reference to), and then he gets his ass kicked by a woman, doesn't quite work with John Walker.
Ah okay, then yeah if the misogyny is the lynchpin here then you're probably right. There was kind of a hint of that sort of thing with the Dora Milaje but I imagine his experience there probably beat it out of him.
Yeah, for sure. Transition time for future phases. Thunderbolts showing up and their origin really is a natural fit for the MCU right now. It's the way the comic universe evolved so incorporating them into the MCU is logical. If they want to continue future phases involving some of the big comic events, tying it altogether with Thunderbolts makes a lot of sense. I like where they're going with this.
if im understanding this correctly, the next "milestone" movies for the MCU are going to be: thunderbolts (phase 4) -> young avengers (phase 5) -> secret wars (phase 6)?
i guess fantastic four (still no director attached) will start phase 5?
i guess fantastic four (still no director attached) will start phase 5?
By the time they get back to doing the Avengers, they won't be young anymore. It will just be the Avengers.
Dark Avengers is an easy natural start for the team, but they already have enough potential characters to have a huge roster, so I doubt it stops there with the idea and identity of the team. Especially since a lot of the members are arguably anti-heroes, anti-villains, reformed villains/criminals rather than strict bad guys. It would really throw people for a loop if some of the members ended up being Bucky, Scott Lang, Clint, Yelena, Wanda, etc. even if just for one movie, since it would really set the team apart from the Suicide Squad and make some B-list heroes become A-list heroes on a villain team because of their past
We may unofficially be in Phase 4, but I've heard Feige state a while back that they may not even have phases anymore and by the way that Phase 4 has kept extending beyond the slate we originally had with no end or event or "milestone" (as you put it) to signify the bookending of a phase in sight, I really do believe that they don't have any plans to organize the films the same way, especially not with an Avengers film being that bookend or crossover event film supposed to signify that.