don't know if this has been discussed yet but i've seen rumors that the christain bale casting could be for mephisto

 

Some more random Hugo Weaving vs Marvel schtuff...

Hugo Weaving says his Red Skull wasn't in 'Avengers: Endgame' because Marvel were 'impossible'

"Hugo Weaving has said that while he would have been up for reprising his role as Red Skull in Avengers: Infinity War and Endgame, Marvel proved 'impossible' to negotiate with.

Weaving was the villain in 2011 movie Captain America: The First Avenger, and was all up for making a comeback in the final two chapters.

The Russo brothers also confirmed he'd been approached, but it was not known why he didn't end up in the finished movies, until now.

He told Time Out: “Oh, yeah. I loved playing that character Red Skull – it was a lot of fun. We were all obliged to sign up for three pictures: I was thinking [Red Skull] probably wouldn’t come back in Captain America but he may well come back as a villain in Captain America but he may well come back as a villain in The Avengers.

By then, they’d pushed back on the contracts that we agreed on and so the money they offered me for The Avengers was much less than I got for the very first one, and this was for two films. And the promise when we first signed the contracts was that the money would grow each time.

“They said: 'It’s just a voice job, it’s not a big deal'. I actually found negotiating with them through my agent impossible. And I didn’t really wanna do it that much. But I would have done it.”

Instead, actor Ross Marquand, of The Walking Dead fame, voices the character in Infinity War and Endgame, in the pivotal scenes on Vormir, with the character being rendered in CGI."
​

I lol'd a bit at the "I loved playing that character Red Skull - it was a lot of fun" part considering he has so vocally said otherwise in the past, so we know it's bullshit.

 

yea i remember the exact opposite of "i loved playing that character". i also remember him saying he'd never reprise the role too so i have no idea what fairy tale he's trying to tell here.

this guy is full of shit. i hate actors that knowingly take roles then shit all over then when the project is done. if you don't like the script say no. kinda simple. this guy has done it a few times now.

 

Worked out in the end so, don’t really care at this point.

 

More over, he chimed off back then by specifically pointing out that while he indeed was in a contract, Marvel would do well to not force someone to come back if they didn't want to. Seems like his tune only changed once all of these movies started making a gerbillion dollars and were the most popular thing going. How curious  

This is old hat for Weaving, though. The guy has turned into a pretentious sounding prick about the same movies he was in after the fact more than just here. And as evidenced with this brand new interview, he evidently doesn't like to let things go either.

 

I too remember him being very vocal about how he disliked being in that movie and didn't want to play the character ever again. This turn around imo is him trying to save face in addition to the marvel movies making billions.

 

Yeah he's been kind of...two faced(if I'm being nice.)with hating roles when he voiced them then freaking out and changing his time when they're still profitable without him. I liked his work as megatron but man the guys annoying. I hope he learns to quit this BS, stop disrespecting movies he's in, and just not try to take himself so seriously.

 

He's been incredibly two-faced about anything involving his voice. Transformers/Megatron. Red Skull/Marvel. He hates not being seen and one of his biggest problems was being behind makeup and not being able to fully emote. So, yeah, this is a lot of hogwash.

That said, I'll meet him in the middle to a degree... Disney *is* notorious for being difficult and have strong-armed actors/actresses before, so he's at least telling the truth there.

His end of it, though... He's full of it.

 

MOON KNIGHT Gets A New Writer, WANDAVISION Lands A Composter, ETERNALS Scene Description, & More Marvel News

Bad Boys for Life has been a bigger hit than anyone could have imagined and directors Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah find themselves in demand as a result. During a recent interview with HLN, Adil revealed that Marvel Studios is keen to add them to the fold. "Marvel wants to meet us, not really for something concrete, a film or series," he reveals. That's vague but they clearly want the filmmakers for one of their upcoming big or small screen projects and Blade seems like a very real possibility.

 

As if movie credits weren't long enough already, now they're going to start crediting their refuse receptacles?  

 

Nebula, daughter of Thanos.

 

So I agree with some of the points both of you made.

I can understand the MCU burnout. I myself feel that the MCU keeps things too connected and I can't really follow everything. It was a lot easier with standalone Marvel film series, I find the X-Men films, their Deadpool spinoffs and Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films more enjoyable because they're a lot lighter (ie less baggage) and self-contained; additionally standalone films/series allow for a distinct unique touch from the director that overall makes the film stand out.

However, where possible the MCU does allow for that touch too. James Gunn's GOTG series have the 80s space adventure feel, Captain America's got a patriotic/political angle, and so on. So if you're able to look deeper, each MCU series gets its own unique tone that appeals to whatever you want.

Cool tech and what to do with it is a major theme of the MCU: Stark's suits/tech which set things off, Pym's particles, Wakanda's vibranium, the Asgardian Bifrost which can be weaponized, and so on. And on the villains' side, we have Toomes being a scavenger and Mysterio being a hologram dude both with stolen Stark tech. Toomes' link to Stark seemed to have worked out well IMO; I'm a little less sure with Mysterio cause like with some good tricks once it's explained a lot of the appeal vanishes and it ends up looking lame.

Spider-Man as a supporting character of Iron Man may not sound fair, but it does enable Stark to explore that apprentice/parent side of himself with Spidey also developing on the other side because of his need for a father figure. Anyway, now that Stark is gone it's not just Spidey figuring things out by himself and making his own tech, but other villains will have to do that too. And the MCU seems to be moving beyond armor and bringing in actual superpowers, eg Shang-Chi, She-Hulk, etc. The armored dudes set the foundation for actual superhumans to appear, which sounds fair as part of the world-building process.

 

"Howard the Duck", "Tigra & Dazzler" Cancelled; 2 Shows Remain [Report]

Yup they are eliminating everything they can greenlit by Loeb.

 

Just to clarify one thing... I actually like the relationship between Tony Stark and Peter Parker. They're both playing their parts well and are perfect for those characters. I just wish that relationship didn't also extend into making all of Spider-man's villains into Ironman villains.

Also the Spider-suits... something has to be done about those suits. The Iron-Spider armor is actually something from the comics that Tony Stark makes for Spider-man… and I already made another post talking about changes from the source material should ADD or IMPROVE the story in some way.

Here's my problem with the MCU Spider-man suit... while it's entirely accurate to the comics it makes no sense. That's something that NEEDED to be changed. He looks like a cartoon because his suit defies real world physics. This is a little more acceptable in a cartoon or a comic book but not in a live action movie. It just makes him come off as a cartoon character who's never really there. They need to have him make his own suit again like the Andrew Garfield version. I love that costume because it's very similar to the comics but changed in was that make it look real... like not having the expressive eyes in the mask. That looks dumb in live action. It's not as bad on Deadpool because his eyes are smaller and the expressions are a lot more subtle and less noticeable but Spider-man has these GIANT FREAKING EYES on his mask that can't do subtle expressions when the eyes are that big and considering they're not even connected to his actual eyes there's no reason why they should have any expression at all... it's a mask... treat it like a mask and not as part of his face.

And the Iron Spider costume... that thing should be more bulky like the Ironman armor. As I said before it's a lot more believably plausible to have all that tech in there when he's not wearing skin tight spandex. And there is oddly enough... already a version of the Iron Spider armor from the 90's Cartoon series that looks more realistic than the skin tight spandex MCU Spiderman is wearing... because at least that version actually has similarly bulky armor to the Ironman suit but with a Spider-man design aesthetic instead of having a skin tight spandex Spider-man suit with Ironman tech some how crammed inside a much thinner layer of armor. Even as a cartoon I've hated that suit. Where do those spider legs go when they retract? There's no freaking room for them to go anywhere.

 

It worked for Vulture, but yeah, it sure didn't work out for Mysterio and his crew.

Vulture was somewhat only tangentially made an Iron Man villain, and only because of Tony's role in the creation of DODC and subsequently driving him out of business.
Let's be honest, if his vendetta wasn't against Tony, it would be against some other businessman (I'm gonna say Norman) or directly toward those in charge of Damage Control, so the plot would functionally be the same.

 

A few notes

* Hugo Weaving was frank that he wasn’t invested in his role as Megatron. That’s fine, he wasn’t shitting all over the role or anything, he even said he felt kinda bad from what I remember. Then Bay took it personally and demanded he go donate money to funds to save elephants.
* Weaving has been candid that he has grown to dislike big franchises and wants to stay to small stuff. Fair enough. I remember people like Stellan Skarsgard and John Hurt saying they like doing big movies so they can go do some little movies too.
* Weaving is kinda talking out of his ass because he’s been outright negative about franchises for a while, he definitely didn’t care to be Red Skull.
* Marvel recast Red Skull after knowing Weaving wouldn’t really want to do it.
* Ross Marquand was amazing and I honestly could barely tell it wasn’t Weaving.
* The CGI on Skull in Infinity War and Endgame was so good I thought it was prosthetic with CGI, not full CGI.

 

WTF? I literally just hit the post button when I got the reply notification. How the heck did you do that?

(Looks at time stamps)

OK there's actually 18 minutes between those posts... which means I've lost time again... which means someone else was fronting for 18 minutes between me hitting the post button and you replying to it. But from my perspective there was no time at all in between... I wander what I did during those 18 minutes...

 

Suspension of disbelief is key. If you don’t have that, then your not going to enjoy movies of this nature. I know my dad doesn’t... unfortunately.