Joss Whedon Discusses ‘The Avengers 2,’ ‘S.H.I.E.L.D.’ TV Series & More

Published 2 years ago by , Updated February 27th, 2013 at 2:09 pm,

 Joss Whedon Discusses The Avengers 2, S.H.I.E.L.D. TV Series & More

Joss Whedon has had a cult fanbase for years, thanks to his work on Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, and Firefly (and to a lesser extent, the comic book Astonishing X-Men), but writing and directing Marvel’s The Avengers was undoubtedly his most mainstream success to date.

The movie was so successful – with a 92% Rotten Tomatoes rating and nearly $1.5 billion in the bank – that Marvel signed a three-year deal with him that includes directing The Avengers 2 and writing/directing the pilot for a new S.H.I.E.L.D. TV series. In a recent interview, Whedon talked about all of the above and more.

On why he decided to direct The Avengers 2 – courtesy of Vulture - Joss Whedon said:

“[The three-year contract and being able to help on other Marvel projects] was part of what made [working on 'The Avengers 2'] attractive to me. I loved the idea of being a consigliere. Every writer loves the idea of being able to go in and fix a problem and then leave without obligation. It’s fun! I also love these characters and the Marvel universe, and I grew up reading the books, and I’ve been going back and reading the old books and realizing that they shaped my storytelling way more than I give them credit for.

“Now I’m starting up a TV show, which is something I really wanted to do, but I thought it wasn’t going to be a part of my life for the next several years. It’s like a tapas menus of projects that excite me, in addition to the ‘Avengers’ sequel, which I’m excited for because I’m incredibly excited about the next story that I’m going to tell. For me, it’s a huge win. […] What’s great is that the deal with Marvel is nonspecific, so I will give all I can, but the moment I can’t [help with projects other than 'The Avengers 2'], I just walk away. The moment I say, ‘You know, I’d like to help more on this project, but I need this time for “The Avengers.”‘ There’s no obligation.”

One imagines that whatever deal he received from Marvel gave him far more creative flexibility and authority with The Avengers 2 – and the other Marvel projects – than he ever had on The Avengers, which, by Whedon’s own admission, had a number of studio stipulations.

Speaking of creative flexibility, Whedon talked about the sort of control and leeway he’ll have with the S.H.I.E.L.D. TV series, and how that compares to his past TV shows that had conflicts from the networks:

“The important thing to me is that we know what the show is. We love what it is. It came together very organically, so when we went in to pitch [to Marvel], it wasn’t like, ‘We’re trying to find this because you want a TV show,’ it was, ‘Check this out.’ And that’s a good way to walk in a room. […]What I do know is that it’s the show it should be, and we’ve got some really dope notions. It’s going to work very well for people who either love the Marvel universe or for people who’ve never dipped a toe in the Marvel universe.”

Although Joss Whedon is not the showrunner for the S.H.I.E.L.D. TV series – that role will be handled by his brother, Jed Whedon, and Jed’s wife, Maurissa Tancharoen – he is, as previously stated, going to write and direct the pilot and will almost definitely continue to have a role with its development.

On why he cut the recently released opening scene that depicted Maria Hill being interrogated about the battle for New York at the end of The Avengers:

“Two factors. One: The movie was three hours long. Two: Audiences didn’t respond to it as well in the movie as I think they would as a DVD extra. Most of them didn’t know who this character was or what the context was, and they were like, Uhhh, I don’t know why I’m supposed to be personally involved in this character I don’t know. The rollout to the Avengers getting to Loki was so gradual that people were getting restless. I thought Cobie nailed it, and the reason I thought it was necessary is because I was trying to make a war movie and I wanted to give context that something bad had happened in the past. In a war movie, you don’t know who’s going to live or die, but you do know that this war happened and that [the characters] are going to be in a dire circumstance, and I wanted to create that atmosphere.”

The Internet response to the deleted scene was decidedly mixed. Some felt the somberness of the clip gave the film a seriousness – and gravity – that may have been missing from the overall story in the theatrical release. And yet others felt that the somberness totally undermined the point of the superhero team-up, and ultimately clashed with the overall tone.

As for the gargantuan success of The Avengers, Whedon said:

“You know, at some point, the numbers become meaningless. They’re large, and you can’t really count that high. I felt like I had a particular mission in making what I felt was a slightly old-fashioned movie, because I grew up wanting to make summer movies and wanting to make superhero movies, and I got to do both at once. I felt like summer movies haven’t been what I remember them to be, so I felt like I would love to evoke something that’s less hip and ironic and more heartfelt and character-driven, and apparently, other people cared about that in a large way. I don’t think it’s a perfect movie. I don’t even think it’s a great movie. I think it’s a great time, and I’m proud of it, but for me, what was exciting is that people don’t go to see a movie that many times unless it’s pulling on something from within, unless there’s a need there. That’s very gratifying.”

It’s refreshing to see a filmmaker like Joss Whedon talk about his work so candidly – and, more importantly, with humility. While I’m sure there are plenty of fans who would argue with the man about how great The Avengers was, some would agree that there were maybe one or two areas where the film could’ve improved. (Personally, I could’ve done with a more interesting threat than the Chitauri.)

Joss Whedon Discusses The Avengers Joss Whedon Discusses The Avengers 2, S.H.I.E.L.D. TV Series & More

Regardless, the movie was a smash success in every measurable sense, one that smartly embraced its comic book and old adventure movie roots in a way that almost seemed (young) Spielbergian. It’s hard to recall the last live-action film that managed all that.

Head over to Vulture to read the full interview.

The Avengers 2which will probably be called something else – hits theaters May 1st, 2015. There’s no word yet as to when S.H.I.E.L.D. will begin production.

-

Follow me on Twitter @benandrewmoore.

Source: Vulture

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: agents of shield, the avengers, the avengers 2

69 Comments

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. HAha… “Spielbergian”, I like that.

    Joss whedon is the new Spielberg! Long live Whedon!!

    • Loki was the villain. LOKI! Not the Chitauri… They are just a segue to THANOS! A very interesting threat INDEED!

      • I agree with you, Eddie. I think he wanted to make the actual fighting alien like a generic brand. I could have gone with an intro into the Skrulls or something, but all the good ones represent greater threats in the future, so he’s keeping that door open.

        • Too bad the Skrulls are still a Fox property. I want to see Kree-Skrull War movie.

          • Marvel Studios can use the Skrulls… just not the Super Skrulls.

      • I have not seen the full movie yet, just internet clips. I am planning to be first in line to buy the DVD, tho, when it comes out later this month. I would have liked to have seen Skrulls, tho, and would not have minded the “pondering” depressed Steve Rogers clip being included in the full-length film. Also, 3 hours is not too long for a GOOD film such as this…it could still keep moviea at a steady pace all throughout. Due to the number of characters a Justice League movie would entail, I would recommend it be about 3 and a half hours long. I think enough characters and action could be found to fill that.

  2. So Joss is going to have a hand in all projects set in the Marvel Cinematic Universe from now on? Awesome.

    • Well, for at least three years. And only if he wants to.

  3. They should have a Wakanda/Black Panther story arc. There’s some crisis with the Vibranium, maybe Klaw and/or Hydra, and have SHIELD send in some spies to help with the problem. Maybe even give his back story . That would be awesome. I mean, we’re not getting a Black Panther movie anytime soom.

    Plus, look at Iron Man 2. Jon Favreau put the easter egg at the end where we see Wakanda on a map, which pinpoints various metahumans across the globe. One of these electronic indicators was shown in Africa, and according to director Jon Favreau, this was meant as an explicit reference to Black Panther.

    • I wouldn’t be so sure of that: http://screenrant.com/marvel-black-panther-movie-2014-kofi-177159/

      • dude, thats an old article and that theory has been debunked. The film they thought was going to be Black Panther is actually Guardians of he Galaxy

    • They definitely need 2 get something going with black panther. Don’t know what marvel ‘s problem is as 2 why they can’t or won’t get that project off the ground.

      • Me neither. While I’d love to see a Black Panther movie, they say it’s likely not gonna happen. So why not an story arc in the show. That’s a great idea American Captain.

    • According to Stan Lee @Fan Expo:

      “They have so many things they’re working on: they’re thinking about a DR. STRANGE movie, a BLACK PANTHER movie, and an ANT-MAN movie. There are so many things in the works, they just don’t have enough time to do all the movies they want to do…and of course, then we need all the sequels!”

      link: http://www.newsarama.com/comics/stan-lee-fan-expo-panel.html

  4. I really don’t care for flash-forward beginnings, neither in movies nor on TV shows. I don’t wanna know any facts about the outcome in advance before embarking on the adventure of the story. It’s like a spoiler that comes with the movie/episode, and I hate that. The scene in itself was pretty good, even though it tonally clashes with rest of the movie.

    • Are you referring to the Black Panther easter egg?

      • Think he’s referring to the Maria Hill scene that they are talking about in the interview.

        • That’s right. I was refering to the Maria Hill Opening scene.

    • I think the flash-forward can be useful and interesting story-telling device. However it is getting to the point that it is being overused.

  5. Personally I liked the Chitauri for the first one. Have something in some regards a small threat even though it was still a big one to get the heroes together and learn how to work together. Start small and build up to bigger and better. I like the fact that Joss is approaching his work with humility. Humulity makes a man strive to do better. Have no doubt Joss will knock The Avengers 2 out of the ballpark just as he did with the first one. Be awesome if somehow he could take over Marvel when the day comes that Stan “The Man” Lee isn’t around anymore.

    • Stan Lee hasn’t been a creative force within Marvel for decades…

      • Perhaps he meant as a “spokesperson” or “face” of Marvel, which Stan Lee has always been whether he was running Marvel, simply an editor or as he is at present.

        • I don’t think that’s what he meant, but I also don’t think that Stan Lee has been the “face” of Marvel for a while. Aside from the cameos he does in the movies, he doesn’t represent Marvel at conventions or anything. That’s not a slight against Lee – I just think he’s probably got better things to do. Also, I’m not sure why Whedon would want to be the face of Marvel either. I would assume, after he’s done with his stint in the Marvel movie (and TV) universe, he’ll want to go back to doing his own thing creatively, but with more control than he ever had before.

          • Too true Ben, too true

  6. I wonder if Hydra or A.I.M. will appear as enemy organizations in the show. Hydra appeared in Captain America, but that was in the ’40s and it hasn’t been mentioned at all by Fury or SHIELD. A.I.M. is appearing in Iron Man 3, so that has more of a chance.

    • that would be kool if hydra appeared

      • It definitely should be Hyrda. that would be cool.

      • Hydra should be a go-to villain organization, imo, simply because the original SHIELD was formed primarily to combat them. If nothing else, as a nod to that fact.

  7. The concept of the show is very potential… fans were hoping for Black Panther and many other characters, but obviously it would be risky to put it on the big screen, especially along with the numerous anticipated sequels. They can go to the TV and it will serve awesome I think…

    God, I’m loving Whedon’s humble manner all the way. He doesn’t try to act like he’s the smartest or biggest director of all, he just try to give the best. I think he’s perfect for a comic-book movie, because he’s a comic-book lover as well, and not just a director who once read the piece as a child and found it as money-worth-making. Here’s hoping he will not change his warm attitude in the near future… fame can sometimes bring you down

  8. Uhhhh….hmmmm. Did someone besides Colson “die” in this movie? Didn’t, like, EVERYBODY live? All I saw was a bunch of robot aliens that conveniently looked like evil skeletons taking a whallop. Everything organic not only lived, but no one else besides Colson even got SERIOUSLY INJURED. We could assume some city residents got killed, but we wouldn’t know, because we didn’t see any of that either. At least in the Hulk movie, people got killed. DUH. Hmmmm. Maybe that’s why the “drama” didn’t come across in the movie? I actually hate the term for what it represents, but this movie was nothing but another “blockbuster,” that was a “popcorn flick.” I liked the movie, but if you start asking logical questions about why this or that happened, your brain will explode. This movie wasn’t drama. It was fanboy fantasy.

    • You see Loki murder a BUNCH of shield agents at the beginning, Cap tosses a guy off the helicarrier to fall to his death,Brainwashed hawkeye kills two guards in Germany and you clearly see the arrows sticking out of their necks. That old man standing up to loki (which is a great scene) nearly gets zapped. Loki stabs Thor in the ribs with that wuss knife, the film does a good job of portraying Iron Man’s nuke sacrifice (even if he doesn’t die, but It’s Iron man, He’s awesome.) Cap gets Shot in the chest by a chitauri and is obviously injured and you can see he’s holding his side. Tons of explosions occur on the roads and you can safely assume people are dying, thor talks to loki on stark tower and you see those dragon type things wreaking havok, the movie does an excellent job of portraying drama, if you want gritty realism and the good guys getting killed or dying watch the batman movies for a superhero movie(awesome)

      • None of the main people die in Batman either

    • Thor: Have a care how you speak! Loki is beyond reason, but he is of Asgard and he is my brother!

      Natasha Romanoff: He killed eighty people in two days.

      • To be fair, Natasha was probably talking about all the agents that died when the SHIELD base was destroyed because of the Tesseract. And Loki only killed some of those personally (the ones he took down when he arrived), he only caused the death of the others indirectly.

        Loki killed surprisingly few people during the movie for a main villain… although he had others to kill instead of him, so that probably counts too.

        There was a big body count in the movie, it just mainly didn’t happen on-screen. PG-13 and all that.

    • @chris k. Looking forward to the awesome superhero movie you obviously are making. Let us all know when it’s done so we can see what a real comics-based movie is supposed to be! Godspeed!

      • Let the man rant. the avengers has just as many plot holes (more like coincidences that solve story problems) as the dark knight rises. people just didn’t care to notice cause it was so much fun

  9. i have a feeling the shield tv series might be similar to shows in essence of burn notice, everything minus the burnt spy part. would be really cool to see sam jackson taking names using home appliances (if he already hasn’t done so in one of his movies) :P

    i also look forward to all the easter eggs and appearances of smaller heroes/villains and organisations in the tv series. i bet the antagonists of the series would be one of the 3 (or 4) evil organisations in the MU atm…

    • I doubt we will see Sam Jackson in the show as Nick Fury. Maybe possibly for a guest stint (and a cameo at that). Cobie Smulder’s as Maria Hill is more likely but only the How I Met Your Mother comes to an end any time soon. She would be a logical choice as a bridge character to the cinematic universe (presuming the two are suppose to be set in the same Universe). More interesting is how they are going to handle putting in the super powered universe. My guess is that there will be very little actually showing of superheroes and villians (since their licensing can be problematic – theren there is casting, special effects, etc) but more about S.H.I.E.L.D vs A.I.M and/or Hydra.

  10. I think a Shield TV series is a great idea.It will be an interesting casting challenge…

  11. I really want this to be like a marvel team up show, with the main SHIELD agents teaming up with various heroes of the marvel universe. great way to expand the universe exponentially.

    • Yes, please.

  12. I wonder if the characters from Item 47 will be in SHIELD.
    That’s 4 characters that are already established, would be practical to use them.
    Claire (Lizzy Caplan) and Benny (Jesse Bradford) for one.
    And also Agent Sitwell, who was already in a previous marvel one-shot with Coulson and briefly in The Avengers too. And Agent Blake of course, played by Titus Welliver, who is an awesome actor.

    I would expect to see them in the show. I am very much looking forward to watching it :D

    I’m pretty sure Whedon will take a role in the other Phase 2 movies, like he did it with Captain America. It is also better for him if the movies before the Avengers 2 have a fluid continuity and enough (but not too much) elements to see that they are in the same universe. Plus important scenes, characters or info that are leading us towards Avengers 2.
    Joss will want to make sure those are in place in the right ways, I’m fairly sure of that.

    • I’m pretty sure the characters from the short will appear (or even star) in the show.
      If you’ve seen Item 47, you’ll know those characters do get set-up for possible future appearances.

      I gotta say though, this new short just didn’t have the “heart” that the other two have. It’s probably because of Coulson not being in it, but the new one just wasn’t as interesting as the previous ones… still, it was fun, and the special effects were pretty good.

  13. Really nothing of substance in that interview and it was all fluffy PR talk.

    If this WILL be a shared universe with the Avengers we want the tough questions answered:

    1) Will our current Avengers make even cameo appearances?
    2) Will they introduce other supers or will it be all about the “normal” agents?
    3) How are they going to handle the main SHIELD characters like Fury? Will Jackson (and others) agree to do the show, will they be re-cast or will they do something SHIELD that doesn’t involve the Helicarrier?

    I’m sure there are other questions but the answers to those would be a good start.

    • I think it is just too early to answer such questions and, personally, i appreciate him taking the time to share anything and speak frankly and comprehensively.

      • I think he probably knows the answers to those questions. There is no way he is going to answer them, but he knows. Maybe they are negotiating with one of the bigs, but maybe not. I think they are very important points but at least we know Whedon will make the show interesting no matter how they do the main characters.

      • As Capnadolny states, they wouldn’t be where they are without knowing the answer to my questions. Not that I’m expecting Marvel/Whedon to answer them right now but if they want me on board they will have to be answered eventually. :)

        • Of course they have to be answered eventually, the show is going to be put on the air (probably). It will answer all your questions. Marketing will probably spoil it before then.

  14. Whedonian… To do a Whedon.

  15. S.h.i.e.l.d. the tv series gives them alot of leeway, they can draw on characters from all across Marvel’s catalogue. Perhaps Spiderwoman, Luke Cage, I’d prefer a Panther movie though, so no T’Challa til Phase 3.

    They’ll likely use a lot of avengers that we might not see in the movies, maybe Hercules, Ms. Marvel or Jocasta.

    But will the movie actors crossover? I can’t see Jeremy Renner’s Hawkeye or Hemsworth doing TV. Maybe A cameo by Sam Jackson in the pilot but RDJ? They could never afford him.

    • Eh…it could happen if RDJ is interested. In theory any of them could pop-up (presuming no licensing entanglements with TV rights) but as it is we don’t even know if the TV series and cinematic universe are connected.

      Honestly I doubt we will see much of the superpowered set. I suspect part of the reason they are doing SHIELD tv show is because it is relatively free of licensing entanglments. I suspect they won’t do guest villain/hero of the week often is because of those entanglements and having to come with differents sets of special effects. My guess is that the main antagonist is going to be AIM or Hydra.

  16. @avatar_popco,

    Thor: He is adopted.

    Lol! Sorry, those were one of the funniest lines in the movie, I had to finish it. Funny, like Joss, the general conversation in the Helicarrier was probably my favourite part of the movie. The ego clashes, the wit and sarcasm, altruism v. narcissism, the whole Avengers’ and Loki verbal exchange. I pick something new everytime I watch it.

    If there’s anything I didn’t like in the Helicarrier, it was how Thor’s might was downplayed against the Hulk. In the comics, his punches wouldn’t merely stun the Hulk…that’s what Cap’s punches would do, not Thor. Ah well, being a first Avengers’ movie, I guess Joss’ main focus was to celebrate each Avenger’s main powers within the limited timeframe alloted. So Hulk sold himself in that scene (amongst others) just like Thor’s mjolnir sold itself as well.

    Good to have Joss around for another possible 3 years.

    • Hulk is one of the few beings capable of taking Thor down (once he has built up enough rage) and able to take full on hits from him w/o being obliterated.

      A punch from Cap would be like me giving you a light tap.

      • And it’s not like The Hulk managed to do any damage in Thor in that scene. Thor had like a tiny cut on his lip after he was attacked by the Hulk!! So I don’t think he was made too weak.

        He was not fighting with all his might. Considering that he was talking to him and tried to get him to calm down even mid-fight, it’s obvious that he only tried to restrain and/or keep him from hurting others, he didn’t try to actually injure him.

        The Hulk is damn sturdy, but Thor probably could’ve knocked him out at least, if it came down to it. Plus this was Thor’s first fight against him, he didn’t have any idea how strong the Hulk was, so he was probably being careful, not to accidentally kill him or something.

        Thor probably looked at him as a “big green mortal human”, and Thor is ever careful not to kill humans.

        • I agree. I thought Thor was pretty weak. He has Hulk level strength.

          • The Hulk is the strongest there is. In the comics, when Professor X broke Hulk from Banner to beat Onslaught, he said that his strength is unlimited. Basically, there is NO being stronger than Hulk at his max. I think that he is clearly not under control yet, so that would make his strength even mightier.

  17. I hope Heroes for Hire & New Warriors are introduced in the S.H.I.E.L.D. TV Series. I’d love to see Luck Cage, Iron Fist, and Kid Nova.

  18. When is the Incredible Hulk tv show supposed to come on and will Joss Whedon have any writing credits on the show

  19. Future Avengers plans: need to add Goliath (Hank Pym), Wasp, Quicksilver, and Scarlet Witch for the good guys; add Ultron, Kang, and Skrulls for the bad guys. I also think the Guardians of the Galaxy is a bad idea, that will cheapen and “kiddify” the original Avengers storylines (I mean c’mon, a taking tree and a racoon rocketeer? Gimmee a break, keep Avengers reasonably serious and do not fantisize it’s image in a Disney-esque way). A Heroes-For-Hire movie eventually would not be bad seperate from Avengers, with Luke Cage and Iron Fist. A Black Panther movie or Avengers spot? Well, maybe eventually, but he is not that important that he needs to come ahead of Goliath, Wasp, Quicksilver, and Scarlet Witch.

    • Why does a talking tree and raccoon automatically make it “kiddy”? Did seeing Treebeard in LotR make that movie for kids? Did Yoda and R2D2 in Star Wars make that show strictly for kids?

      The fact is BOTH characters are not what they appear to be and are not comic relief. I would really suggest doing some research into GotG before commenting further that this will turn turn into a kids movie because nothing could be further from the truth.

      • Groot is not so much the problem. RR is the biggest issue. We will never agree on this, even though we seem to have similar taste on most things comic/movie related (judging from your posts that I’ve read). The RR is goofier than these other things you mentioned. I can see a world where tree-like creatures live, and Yoda and R2D2 are a small alien and a robot. Now, from what I understand they are making RR an alien that looks like a Raccoon, which will make it more palatable in my opinion than the genetically altered one in the books.

        But here is the problem for me and I think most of the Raccoon haters: It is hard to imagine a fluffy little creature, kind of cute except when they are rabid in your yard, wielding a rocket launcher and huge gun. I mean, have you ever seen Laser Cats on SNL? It is Puss ‘n Boots only not animated. We are programed to think stuff like this raccoon are very childish, which isn’t bad in certain instances, but Marvel has set a standard of keeping it somewhat grounded in reality.

        Don’t get mad about it. I respect your opinion. This is just how the other side thinks. I will still watch the movie and hopefully love it. But the problem is, will the public? Will they even see it with a Raccoon as a lead character? Kids may make this movie a hit.

        • While we may never agree on the issue, at least I know you know what the characters are all about and not still reacting to what minimal information they have read here on SR.

          I also “get” the other side of the coin but feel people have no real position to stand on if they have seen (and enjoyed) any of the more fantastical shows out there with talking animals, aliens and what not. Why is it ok for all those other shows to have such characters and not be for kids but all of a sudden this show just HAS to be? It’s just reactionary and irrational thinking imho.

          All I can say is…..make an effort to exceed your “programming” and be a bit more willing to think out of the box :)

          And they are changing RR’s origin in Uncanny Avengers (along with all other sorts of silliness) but there is no indication they will do so for the GotG movie.

          I also don’t get mad and take nothing personally. :)

          • I’m glad you don’t get mad because it is not really an issue that bothers me much and you and Avenger are two of my favorite commentators on this site. My main problem is that many people that love the movies are NOT comic book fans. Even some that are remain skeptical about this idea. The main thing they have going for them is that they’ve put out such great movies so far so people may give them a chance because of that.

            I don’t want Marvel’s new universe to be tainted by a small mistake. People will see a preview and see RR and they will think that just looks silly. You, on the other hand, already know RR and will be excited. And I’m telling you from someone on the other side of this, a Raccoon, rodent, or any type of animal that is domesticated, actually any type of non-primate animal, will look silly walking around carrying weapons and talking. Unless, of course, it is a comedy where they are supposed to make you laugh.

            I hope they prove me wrong and I will be on here to admit it. Oh, and they already changed his origins. Read Avengers Assemble.

            RR: “Do I look like an earth raccoon?”
            Hawkeye: “Yeah.”

            Why not have Howard the Duck become an Avenger? B/c he’s a stupid talking duck.

            • The best thing Marvel can do is make RR as crued as PG13 allows, at least in a trailer, that way even if he is normal, which is close to crued, there will be something to show people that hes not just a talking raccoon. RR is a comic relief character in my opinion, but he is not a Robin Williams type CRC, he is more Adam Sandler in Grandmas boy or Thats my boy. RR does make jokes, but he is not childish. For Groot, LOTR succeeded at it and that series had a billion dollar grosser, so I dont see a problem there. Oh, and RR is less childish than Yoda

              • Sandler wasn’t in Grandma’s Boy. He was a producer or something I think.

                I agree with some of the points,but what I’m saying is that RR is going to scare away a portion of the mainstream audience. Every non-comic fan thinks it’s a dumb idea. Sure, they don’t know about his character, but that’s the point. If they nail it them they will be successful. But that is a big IF.

                My thoughts, change the name at least. Have him look similar to a raccoon as an ode to the original character. I know it’s already done but that is what I think they should have done. But hey, I’m just an idiot, what do I know? I think it’s funny that many RR fans are just as rabid as the one I had to shoot in my back yard. It was a traumatizing experience for my wife who just wants to hug anything that looks cuddly and fluffy.

            • Just to counter your domesticated animals wielding weapons is silly……Reepicheep. Even though I was displeased at how they butchered the Narnia films, they did this character justice. I never EVER felt for a second that this character was used for comedic relief (other than the initial quips) and thought he was a worthy opponent even though he was “just” a 2′ tall talking mouse with a rapier. So it CAN be done right. (and Howard has always been comedic relief so I don’t consider him a good comparative example)

              And it makes sense that if they changed him for Uncanny Avengers that they would continue the continuity. The only disturbing thing is the possible relationship between the comic and the upcoming animated show that is supposedly a close parallel to the cinematic universe. If it happens though it happens and I can’t do anything to change that. It’s not like I’m completely happy with everything Marvel has done in the movie-verse so this would be another thing.

              I guess for me it makes more sense that he is an abducted Earth raccoon and genetically altered rather than having a race that happens to look just like Earth raccoons. It also makes him a unique being which I prefer.

              • Narnia was a kid’s book. You are a fantasy fan, which is great. I like some good fantasy every now and then. But the Marvel universe is grounded in more sci-fi than fantasy. I happen to like that better. Even when I was a kid I liked to pretend the books were a version of the real world and I hated when characters like RR came along. Maybe I’m a minority, but that’s the way I feel. Honestly, most of the characters you named earlier to prove your point, I didn’t like. I’m a Star Trek, not Star Wars fan because of that reason. Star Trek tried to present things that they believed could happen.

                So, you are basing your whole argument off of your opinions, which is the reason we write on here. You said that I should be more open minded. I think that you are being very close-minded on this issue because you are alienating all of those who might like Star Trek over Star Wars. That’s close to half. And then there are some Star Wars fans who might not like RR either. There is over half of the population that might still see the movie based on what Marvel has put out already, but might not because you’ve got a raccoon and a tree.

                There are two sides to every story.

    • oh and don’t get your hopes up for Hank Pym anything or Ultron.

  20. The chitauri was nice but wouldn’t it be a good idea to introduce the Kree/skrulls or captain marvel etc. I’d love to see the Vision and some of the other marvel heroes involved. The next movie should hopefully outstand this one.