Subscribe to RSS Feed

Marvel’s Film Slate Update

March 13, 2009 by

Yesterday Marvel announced changes to it’s film slate, with their revised offerings now playing out like this:

IRON MAN 2 – May 7, 2010
THOR – June 17, 2011
THE FIRST AVENGER: CAPTAIN AMERICA – July 22, 2011
THE AVENGERS – May 4, 2012

Essentially, Thor has been pushed back a year, as has The Avengers.

I’d say that was a smart move. For an uncast movie that’s bound to be special-effects heavy, I think the turnaround on Thor was unrealistic. Now that it’s pushed back, we can look forward to a well produced, unrushed version – and with Kenneth Branagh behind it, I’m more than happy.

The move also makes more financial sense, spreading the risk and cost over a longer period, enabling the company to offset the cost with recouped profits on DVD sales on other movies somewhat (from a cashflow basis, anyway). I’m a little leery of the fact that Marvel Studios is pretty reliant on financing to get these films made in the first place, but this should spread the risk a little.

Just as long as the market starts recovering at some point…

I’m a little disappointed, if not surprised, that there’s no Incredible Hulk 2 on there, though. I like the idea of him being a driving force in getting the Avengers assembled in their movie, but by that time he will, presumably, have been off the big screen for four years. Can we get a big green cameo in any of the other movies along the way?

Bright side to the delay. None of this:

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • FriendFeed
  • MySpace
  • Netvibes
  • Posterous
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Propeller
  • email
  • Wikio

Tags: , , , , , , ,

This entry was posted on March 13, 2009 at 6:16 am and is filed under Archive, Comics-Archived. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

5 Responses to Marvel’s Film Slate Update

  1. Phillyradiogeek on March 13, 2009 at 8:49 am

    I don’t know why neither of the Hulk films have connected with audiences. I haven’t seen the 2008 film yet, but I rather enjoyed the 2003 version (yes, I’m the one).

    They might have both been hurt by the fondness for the TV series. When non-comic book geeks think of the Hulk, they think of Lou Ferrigno and Bill Bixby, not a CGI monster based on comics they haven’t read, and they have a hard time accepting any other version.

  2. Comic Book Character Artist on March 13, 2009 at 2:37 pm

    I know the may be good for making a better movie and financially, but I am so antsy to see these films. Hell, I hope I’m still around to see them.

  3. Rich on March 13, 2009 at 5:13 pm

    Philly – I really enjoyed the 08 Hulk, much more than the 03 one. I liked Ang Lee’s take…although I thought it had a LOT of problems.

    But yeah, it hasn’t connected.

    CBCA – I’m antsy too but if it increases the chances they get made, I’ll take it!

  4. Massacremike on March 14, 2009 at 1:48 am

    Loved the 2008 Hulk movie myself. Ang Lee’s version was… okay at the time, but definitely put to shame by the 2008 version.

    Side note – LOVE the pic of Hulk and especially Thor from their old tv outings. Horrible but hilarious.

  5. James A Woods on March 14, 2009 at 3:10 pm

    This new schedule makes more sense to me than the previous one. I hope it translates in better quality movies, but you just never know…