Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Very interesting rumors for Avengers 2 and the Hulk (possible spoilers)


Cary Kollins

Recommended Posts

Movie websites exploded yesterday with the rumor that the "phase 3" for Marvel will include the Planet Hulk and World War Hulk storylines. Sounds pretty badass if you ask me. Planet Hulk has Hulk outcast to space where he ends up on a planet where he is sold into slavery and he eventually becomes King of the planet. Then he returns to Earth to battle the Avengers all Hulk-like. This would be pretty epic and sounds conceivable given how popular Hulk was in The Avengers.

51sGEDh7L0L._SL500_AA300_.jpg

"So, according to the site's sources The Avengers 2 will set up The Hulk's next solo movie, with a third act or post-credits sequence that sees the Hulk blasted into space by the Marvel Cinematic Universe's version of the Illuminati, presumably after some kind of enormous rampage. Then, as as Phase Three gets underway, we'll see an adaptation of the comic book story Planet Hulk for The Incredible Hulk 2, which would see the Hulk conquering the planet Sakaar Gladiator-style, and lead to a World War Hulk adaptation for The Avengers 3 as Earth's Mightiest Heroes find themselves squaring off against an super-angry Hulk"

http://www.flickerin...-movie-and.html

Here is the original source:

http://latino-review...-phase-3-plans/

Wikipedia pages for "Planet Hulk" and "World War Hulk":

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Planet_Hulk

http://en.wikipedia..../World_War_Hulk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless they did it as a solo hulk movie I don't see it working

From Kevin Feige, Marvel's movie head honcho: "Planet Hulk is a cool story. World War Hulk is a cool story... Do I think Hulk can carry a movie and be as entertaining as he was in Avengers? I do believe that. I do believe he absolutely could. We certainly are not even going to attempt that until Avengers 2, so there is a lot of time to think about it."

sounds ambitious and daring, so i doubt its true

i would not mind being wrong

I agree it sounds ambitious and daring, but so was the whole Avengers plan to begin with. I only wish DC had as much balls as Marvel does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean in terms of feature films. Word on the street is that DCs holding out on a Justice League movie until they see how "Man of Steel" performs at the box office.

Marvel had a vision and stuck with it. They planted the seeds for the Avengers movie all the way back to Iron Man 1 and it paid off with the 3rd highest grossing film of all time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the success of The Avengers has caused a combination of panic and depression at DC.

They know the odds against them pulling off a similar success are astronomical.

I think it's a mistake on their part to reverse the process (i.e. introducing the group before introducing the individual characters). Marvel did it the right way.

Since Marvel did it first - and did it so incredibly well - DC knows there's a good chance they'll wind up looking like little brothers / copycats no matter what happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think the finally got Bruce Banner right when they picked Mark Ruffalo.

I wanted to like Edward Norton better because his "skinny nerd" persona best fit the physical image I've always had of Banner, but Ruffalo's nervous, twitchy, always-on-edge portrayal just plain worked in a way that I honestly can't imagine Norton duplicating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I don't think it was fear of the unknown because he tried to hide the extent of the injuries that made him drop. After the drop, the reports I heard were that teams knew what was wrong with his knee and it was something similar to another athlete from a few years ago (honestly don't remember if it was even a football player).  That it was basically one of those things where he should be fine for a while, there isn't a huge concern of immediate injury risk.   But what he has going on with his knee is something that is degenerative and there's little chance he'll be able to play more than 5 or so years on it before he won't be able to play anymore. So basically it was teams knowing if they draft him, he's probably going to be only a rookie contract player and even if he's great, you might not be able to get use out of him on a second contract.  Which in turn makes the drop make sense, but I'm kinda surprised some contending team didn't take him late in the 1st, hoping he'd put them over the top on a SB run but then not even have to worry about giving him a big contract in 4 years too.
    • Depends if they see the writing on the wall with their roster and contracts and decide to bite the bullet and begin a complete rebuild and roster overhaul.  I have no clue why some franchises (IE us) refuse to do this and keep half assing trying to win 8 games or so.  Do it correctly, take your lumps and build a contender.  We shall see what loomis decides.
    • Each team plays 17 games.  I do not see why they don't just have each team play one international game per year.  Neutral site game, 8 home, 8 away.    
×
×
  • Create New...