What Other Marvel Character Could Vin Diesel Play in 2016-17?

Published 11 months ago by

Blackbolt Inhumans Marvel Comics What Other Marvel Character Could Vin Diesel Play in 2016 17?

While promoting the release of Riddick, star Vin Diesel couldn’t avoid talking about another major film franchise he’s about to enlist in. For two months, Diesel’s been teasing and then unofficially confirming that he’s joining Marvel’s (currently shooting) Guardians of the Galaxy but that wasn’t the original plan, nor is it the only one going forward.

Diesel went on record over a week ago, confirming that he’s going to not only voice, but also will perform the motion capture for the one remaining uncast member of the Guardians roster, the alien tree named Groot. He also explained that Marvel’s original intention was to cast him in a different role down the road.

“What we were initially talking about was a fresh IP  and that was the focus of our conversation, which was a fresh IP that would come out in 2016 or 2017, and potentially launch the third phase. And when we went to Comic-Con we realized that people wanted something a little more immediate…”

In an in-depth interview this week (watch it here), the star told the entire story about how the Groot offer came about and what it took for Marvel to convince him to take it. Diesel also explained that he and Marvel are still going to focus on that 2016-17 movie, a film that he teases will lead to a “merging of brands.” Yes, Diesel may end up playing two different characters in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

“I had heard over the last year people on the social media page saying ‘what’s up Vin? Why aren’t you going to Marvel? Why aren’t you doing anything with Marvel? It would be a crime of cinematic history for you not to be.’ So I’m thinking this Marvel thing is becoming really, really important to these people. Okay, what can I do? What should I think?

I get the call, I go down to meet with Marvel – a great meeting. I mean it was just… it was even talking about something so big I can’t even talk about because it’s like a merging of brands in a way which I won’t get into, but that was way, way, way, way down the road.”

Any analysis of Diesel’s words comes down to what he means by “brands.” We can say for sure that two franchises, whether from the same studio or not, are coming together and a big stepping stone towards that path potentially begins in 2016 - after Ant-Man and The Avengers: Age of Ultron - with a new IP. That last part is key.

Marvel Studios Doctor Strange Movie Logo Fan Made What Other Marvel Character Could Vin Diesel Play in 2016 17?

Before jumping to speculation that he’s teasing a potential agreement between Disney’s Marvel Studios and either Twentieth Century Fox (Fantastic Four, X-Men) or Sony Pictures (The Amazing Spider-Man) for some mindblowing crossover, that’s almost certainly not a possibility. Any hopes of a Fox-Marvel team-up were dashed recently with both Joss Whedon and Bryan Singer writing their own versions of the Quicksilver character into their respective next projects, The Avengers 2 and X-Men: Days of Future Past.

That leaves us with two possibilities of a “new IP” that will “merge brands,” one far more realistic than the other:

  1. The Unrealistic – Marvel Studios has a deal with Universal Pictures (who produced and distributed The Incredible Hulk) to co-produce (or co-distribute with Disney) an adaptation of Namor – a character that was recently revealed to still be owned by Universal. That news came from Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige a week ago where he also said, “next spring is when we really sit down and start to decide what we announce for 2016 and 2017.
  2. The Realistic – One of two unannounced Marvel films with 2016 release dates (or the third unannounced film with a May 2017 date) is a story that can serve as a bridge between the Earthly portion of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (i.e. The Avengers) and the cosmic side (Guardians of the Galaxy) and that “new IP” (Vin Diesel’s words) would be none other than The Inhumans, a project Feige said he’s “confident” in.

Inhumans Roster Art Marvel Comics What Other Marvel Character Could Vin Diesel Play in 2016 17?

Fans can move on past speculation that Marvel may be greenlighting a feature based on recently re-acquired licenses of Blade, Punisher, Ghost Rider, Daredevil, etc. or adapting a Heroes for Hire or a more adult property like Moonknight as a Vin Diesel vehicle. Those characters are simply not part of the plan in the immediate future, nor are they pertaining to a new IP that wold “merge” brands. They aren’t big enough, or as Kevin Feige would say, not “different” enough.

As for Thanos, the character will appear in Guardians of the Galaxy and Diesel would have referenced such a possibility of voicing/playing two characters in the project – unless Marvel is saving the full reveal of the character until later. Diesel is unlikely in talks for a role in Doctor Strange either since that does meet his description of “merging” anything outside of bringing in magic to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

With Marvel Studios planning two films for 2016 and another two in 2017 (only has a release date so far), leading to what we can expect to be The Avengers 3 in May 2018, it’s a safe bet that two of the four will be three-quels to Captain America and Thor with the remaining two slots left open for one or two new IPs. At this point, based on namedrops alone from Marvel execs, Doctor Strange and The Inhumans are the most likely candidates, the latter of which can even serve as a quasi-sequel to Guardians of the Galaxy due to its cosmic origins.

The Inhumans are a group of superpowered individuals, born from genetic manipulation on early humans by one of Marvel’s biggest alien races. They’re led by Blackbolt (images above), a character we think is a possibility for Vin Diesel, and they have ties to characters who will be introduced in Guardians. It’s a new IP, one that can be “different” for Marvel and one that can launch a new franchise for Marvel and help bring the Guardians of the Galaxy and The Avengers together by the end of Phase Three where all of Marvel’s heroes can come together to battle Thanos.

As an added bonus, the origins of The Inhumans and their special abilities could be used by Joss Whedon to explain how and why Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch have powers in The Avengers: Age of Ultron since they reportedly are unable to reference “mutants” due to Fox owning all things mutant and X-Men related when it comes to film.

Let us know your thoughts in the comments. Diesel as Blackbolt, Thanos or someone else?

Guardians of the Galaxy is directed by James Gunn off of his script co-written by Nicole Perlman. Cooper joins a cast led by Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Lee Pace, Michael Rooker Karen Gillan, Djimon Hounsou, Benicio del Toro, John C. Reilly and Glenn Close.

_____

Thor: The Dark World on November 8, 2013, Captain America: The Winter Soldier on April 4, 2014, Guardians of the Galaxy on August 1, 2014The Avengers: Age of Ultron on May 1, 2015, Ant-Man on November 6, 2015, and unannounced films for May 6 2016, July 8 2016 and May 5 2017.

Follow Rob on Twitter @rob_keyes for your Marvel movie news!

Source: conversationsMM

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: guardians of the galaxy, inhumans, namor, the avengers 3

125 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. Spider-Man

    Lol

    • i hope you die in a terrible house fire.

    • Spidey? Nah.
      Venom or Carnage and you may have a point.

    • If you think my flying fists of fury are fearsome, wait until I boot your buttinsky up so far between your shoulder-blades for these spamish posts that you will have to reach up to tie your shoelaces! That’s a heaping helping of my hospitality!

  2. I am really thinking that he is going to play both Groot and Thanos in GOTG

    • Kinda what I was thinking, too.

  3. Groot (seriously he is a tree) for mo cap and voice. thanos for voice (we already have dominic) and blackbolt for his main no mo-cap part

  4. My first thought was maybe PowerMan/Luke Cage. But they may catch flack for that as Vin isn’t black enough for one of the few prominent black heroes in the MU.

    That logic would also negate Black Panther and Black Goliath.

    But maybe Vision? His physique with a modulated voice…

    or maybe Gladiator. THAT would be a good fit.

    • Gladiator I can see, good call!

      What new IP that would “merge brands” involve Vision though? That’s not a solo character movie Marvel would make.

  5. Lets see him go Black Bolt! Think about it Groot is a speaking part and Black Bolt doesn’t talk so he is a physical part

  6. I could see Vin Diesel playing Thanos with the Infinity Gauntlet taking on the GOTG, and The Avengers.

  7. I think Vin would make a great Namor or Black Bolt. I’d love to see either of these properties developed and added to the MCU.

  8. I could totally see him as Black Bolt. Weirdly enough, I could also see Vin Diesel covered in cgi silver and riding a surfboard throughout the cosmos. But unfortunately thats not possible.

  9. I see him being Black Bolt more than I see him playing Thanos (mostly because I can’t see Thanos being strictly CG, but maybe they could Ruffalo him up). I could definitely see a Vision/Scarlet Witch film happening after the events of Age of Ultron, however that plays out.

  10. Luke Cage.

    • No he is black and Vin Diesel is white.

      • Vin Diesel looks like he could pass for light skin.

        • Vin Diesel refers to himself as “a person of color” as his mother is white and he has never met his biological father. He just acknowledges that he is of mixed decent.

          • Doesn’t matter. Luke Cage is black. Not light-skinned, not ‘a person of color’ but BLACK.

            If you don’t have a BLACK man play Luke Cage, fans will fly crazy. He’s probably the most recognizable black super hero in the MU (cuz Black Panther wears a mask!) and anything less than Terry Crews would be an insult. Not even Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson would be accepted for that role.

            Shoot, look at the flack they caught for using light-skinned Halle Berry as Storm.

            • Slightly depressingly, Vin Diesel made a little documentary style film about how he was considered too white to portray ‘black’ people onscreen but not white enough to play ‘white’ people which caused him to struggle to find roles early on in his career.

            • Think you are probably right there. Whites should play white parts, blacks should play black parts. Black panther and Power Man (Luke Cage) were written as black heroes, and need to be played by black-appearing actors. I am sure there are a number of them out there who could lend credence, ability, and talent to the part.

      • Vin Diesel is biracial(black & white)

  11. It still kinda bothers me that Whedon chose 2 characters, Scarlett Witch and Quicksilver, that come with so much continuity baggage in terms of the whole mutant thing. It’s kind of important to their characters that they’re mutants and official Avengers. Not that I have a problem with the characters, I just think he sort of painted himself into a corner with fans and the franchise because he’s not gonna be able to call them mutants. If he comes up with some other explanation, it’s gonna piss a lot of fans off. I get that they’re some of the earlier members, having been introduced to the Avengers in the 60′s, but I’m just saying that he could’ve made a lot of things easier on himself later if he had just used other characters. It seems more like Marvel/Disney was trying to get ahead of the Fox/Sony side of Marvel and use the characters just because they legally could rather than picking characters with whom they could have free reign. It’s just another thing to add to the list of unnecessary changes they’re making to characters.

    • Ye that was some of my thoughs but hopefully it will turn out good in 2015.

      • I hope it does as well. It seems like Whedon is changing quite about about character dynamics though. I hope it does go well but I still see them as unnecessary changes.

    • Cool bro, what else?

      • @ Dean
        Changing Ultron from Pym’s creation to Stark’s, changing The Hulk’s back story into a search for the super soldier serum as opposed to it actually being a gamma test gone wrong, THE MANDARIN, Thor completely remembering who he is rather than being made to forget and think he is Donald Blake until he earns his power again just to name a few. I’m certainly not saying they haven’t been successful or that most of the changes have severely detracted from the characters (with the exception of the Mandarin). I’m simply saying that these changes are unnecessary. If they had remained the same as the comics, they would not have had an impact on the story the MCU has created. It’s really more about staying true to the source material as best as possible. I understand not making Nick Fury the guy who led the Howling Commandos in WWII alongside Cap. That would be ridiculous to have him still alive unless they used some comic book magic. I’m fine with stuff like that. There’s no reason to change most of these things though and that’s what I have a problem with. Not a huge problem but a problem none the less.

        • Hulk’s origin was changed because we know so much about atomic bombs that people wouldn;t have accepted it so readily, plus we’re not living in constant fear of an atomic bomb dropping on us any more.

          The super soldier thing works perfectly and also adds a whole new dimension to Cap that was never there before, where he could blame himself for being the cause of so many problems in the search to recreate what made him who he is. So much potential to explore.

          The Thor/Donald Blake thing was also unnecessary because lets be honest, a guy who needs a walking stick hitting it and turning into Thor is pretty ridiculous by today’s standards. It almost reminds me of the superhero parody cartoon in the 80s, Bananaman, where a young child ate a banana and became an adult superhero.

          I also loved the Mandarin twist in IM3 so no complaints there either. You had the face of terror and fear then realised it was a front for someone else, the real culprit. We’ve had patsies like that for decades so it made a lot of sense.

          I have faith in Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver’s stories being just as well thought out. I also don’t think they did it just to beat Fox to the punch either, it seems more like Fox decided to add Quicksilver after hearing about him being in Avengers: Age of Ultron to try and get him on screen before Disney’s movie one year later.

          • @ Dazz
            I know why the Hulk’s origin was what it was and it worked for the story. I’m saying that it wasn’t necessary for them to change it, whether people are afraid of atomic bombs or not. People aren’t in constant fear of random gamma experiments designed to reproduce a super soldier serum either. I get the point but it was still unnecessary.

            Donald Blake hitting it with a stick and becoming Thor would have added the destiny dynamic in there. He was always Thor, he just didn’t remember because Odin took all of his power and made it so. Again, it worked and it was fine but it was unnecessary.

            That’s great that you loved the Mandarin and all but the fact is that they took characters and concepts from the comics, kept the names, and changed everything about them. For no reason. I’m glad you liked the twist but, for people who have read these stories their whole lives, it was a bastardization of the lot of it. There was nothing well thought out about any of that, as you suggest Quicksilver and Scarlett Witch are going to be. IM3 was terrible with just as many plot holes as The Dark Knight Rises. The Mandarin is his arch nemesis and they turned him into a silly drunk actor. I don’t care that they made Killian claim that he was the Mandarin. They just used him as a symbol when he’s actually a real character separate from the leader of AIM. I’m not even going to go into the discrepancies with the Extremis virus. The point is that there was no reason aside from them wanting to do own selfish thing with the movie. I haven’t been so turned off to a movie since The Last Airbender. I won’t get into a huge debate about that because it’s long past but the fact remains that the majority of long time fans were outraged.

            And yes, what you said about Quicksilver is pretty much I said up there. I think Marvel/Disney anticipated Fox/Sony eventually using those characters so they added them then Fox/Sony decided to go ahead and add Qucksilver because they could as well. It’s just business before art and is, again, unnecessary.

            • Mandarin’s twist was kinda clever, though. Captain America wasn’t as ‘America! F**k yeah!’ as I thought it would be, but it acknowledged that part of the comic’s history when it was a propaganda tool. Iron Man 3 paid homage to the Mandarin’s comic roots, but then played up the industrial genius Mandarin seen in more modern comics who is much more of a man-behind-the-man.

              Again, Killian didn’t ‘claim’ that he was the Mandarin – as the mastermind behind everything, he really was the Mandarin. Also, there’s the very important real-world aspect of having a stereotypical ‘yellow peril’ character in a heavily-China-backed movie. That evil Asian thing was accepted (but still not really acceptable) in the 60s, but now? It’s clearly just a product of a ‘certain age.’ I’m not saying that they would have had a slightly racist and evil Chinaman as the bad guy if they didn’t have Chinese backers, but I’m sure it had some impact on their portrayal of the villain.

            • it’s called an “adaption”, based on the scource material, changed a bit from the comics. they do not have the same plan in mind for the characters in the films as they do the comic books.
              it’s not as if they are making changes to something YOU created. the original stories are still there to read. these are MARVEL’S characters, and they can present them how they think best. they have a plan for all this [or are making it up as they go, who knows] so if they make some adjustments to back storys and whatnot, so what? this is a new version of old characters. they dont have years to build huge back storys, just a couple of hours.

        • I’ve never been able to understand this grievance from comic book fans. For fans of regular novels that undergo changes while being adapted to film, sure. But only because novels are stagnant. Their characters undergo one arc per novel and that’s it. But comic books themselves change all the time. How many times has a character “died,” only later to have it redacted as a life model decoy or something? How many times has an origin story changed in the comic books? Most of the time, I feel like modernizing the stories are for the better. It keeps the characters alive and relevant in today’s world as opposed to relics that nobody could relate to.

          Film versions of comic characters are just that: modernized narrations of the characters from the books. It’s not like their taking your favorite comics and burning them in front of you. If you truly cannot fathom the changes they’re making, read your comics. Those stories will always be there for you.

          • that’s what I’m sayin’!

            • Well my response has been awaiting moderation for a while now. sorry guys.

          • You’ve all completely missed the point of my original comment.

            “There’s no reason to change most of these things though and that’s what I have a problem with. Not a huge problem but a problem none the less.”
            I’m not trying to rant and rave about all the injustices because they changed one little bitty thing. I’m perfectly fine with most of the changes. They’re, overall, unnecessary, but I am fine with them nonetheless.

            @ reno2200

            I don’t know where the whole “evil Asian” thing came from. Of course the original character was Asian but Ben Kingsley is not. It’s kind of a moot point. I loved his character and was completely fine with them adapting (to use Jeffro’s term) his character for a modern day international terrorist. That was perfect. The whole hodgepodge of eccentricities like the Captain America/Anarchy tattoo on his neck and stuff like that was brilliant. Then they turned him into a complete idiot. They took Iron Man’s arch nemesis and made him buffoon. Imagine if there had been a twist at the end of Batman and it turns out the Joker isn’t really a psychopath and he was just kidding the whole time. Again, there was no need to make the Mandarin an idiot. The movie would have been even better if he had been a real villain working with Killian because the obstacles Stark would have to overcome would have been that much greater.

            @Jeffro

            You make a good point. They are Marvel’s characters and they can do what they will and I get that. My point was that there wasn’t any purpose, story wise, to change such a great character into something stupid. I can list off tons of changes that I’m completely fine with. I don’t mind change. I mind asinine change. I mind the stuff that makes a character less than what they were rather than add something to them. They didn’t need years to build backstory for a Mandarin more similar to the one in the comics. That’s why the change was pointless. It was unnecessary.

            @ Hollywood

            I think missed my point most of all. I do no mind change. I said a couple times. I do not mind adapting things for a modern times. For example, I do not want to see Wonder Woman in a spangly one-piece lingerie outfit. Maybe for a scene and then have Steve Trevor say something similar to the animated movie like, “You can’t wear that or I’ll get arrested for solicitation.” Ya know, just a cool nod to the popular version. Then go with a more classic Greek armor outfit with the same color scheme. Xena style. I also said I don’t mind the changes they made to Nick Fury or the fact that Captain America didn’t actually fight any Nazis. I’m also fine with origin stories changing. For example, I am fine that Tony Stark was not captured by some crazy Vietnamese terrorists but rather a more modern terrorist organization. I don’t have a problem with Hulk’s new origin, it was just an example in response to Dean. I think it’s very disingenuous to say that it’s ok to change comics for movies but not novels. Novels are hundreds of pages long and it’s unrealistic to expect every detail to flushed out…unless they do the Hobbit thing and split one book that is shorter than any of the others into 3 movies. But that’s Hollywood, eh Hollywood? You missed my point the most because you all you did was reiterate things other people have said rather than address the comments I actually made in any definitive way. I didn’t say anything about having a problem with modernizing, or adapting, or adding new things; I have a problem with them taking things from great characters and dumbing them down to useless bits of a malformed plot device just so they can tell a story that they think is cool. It isn’t as if making the Mandarin a real international terrorist mastermind would not have been, “relevant in today’s world as opposed to relics that nobody could relate to.” I do not appreciate the condescension of your final comment. It is, however, a good summary of how you miss the point entirely.

            • In response to your response to me (I’ve just realised that I’m rather bad at sentence structure) – it’s not like having The Joker but then revealing him to be a fraud and that he was ‘just kidding’ and so on. It’s more like Batman Begins where **SPOILERS** there’s the stereotypical Ra’s Al Ghul that just kind of sits there looking scary before it’s revealed later on that Liam Neeson is the real Ra’s Al Ghul – a suave, notably-not-Asian-looking man-behind-the-man evil genius. Actually, did Iron Man 3 just rip off Batman Begins? :P

              • @ reno2200

                Good point and correlation. However, Ken Watanabe was Ra’s al-Ghul until he died then Liam Neeson took over just like Taliah took over after him. Nolan changed the character into a sort of Dread Pirate Roberts kind of thing which worked for his universe because there were no superpowers or Lazarus pits or anything like that. Iron Man’s universe clearly has superpowers and could have easily handled a Mandarin like the one in the comics. So, because the TITLE of Ra’s al-Ghul is passed along and not used a smokescreen, your point is a little off.

                As for the race thing that people seem to keep getting hung up on, Ra’s al-Ghul was born in Pre-Islamic Arabia to a tribe of Nomads. I did not have a problem with them changing that just like I didn’t have a problem with a militant, self described “yellow-supremacist” with magical rings he found in a crashed alien space ship becoming an eclectic international terrorist who is pretty obviously white. I have a problem with watering down great characters, especially when the watered down version make it literally impossible to come back and do it right should they want to do that character in another movie. I have a problem with terrible writers being selfish with stories and getting praised for it. Mostly, I have a problem with people being content with mediocrity in their stories. We all pretty much agreed that Wolverine Origins was a big steaming pile because it bastardized every single character involved and was terribly written. Iron Man 3 was no different.

                • I thought that Liam Neeson was *always* Ra’s Al Ghul and the typical ‘ninja boss’ played by Watanabe was misdirection and theatricality. Talia was definitely Neeson’s character’s daughter.

                  • http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0372784/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

                    Liam Neeson is listed as Ducard and Watanabe is Ra’s al-Ghul. I can see why you’d think he was because that’s the point of his character but Talia talks about taking up her father’s work and becoming Ra’s al-Ghul. In Nolan’s universe it’s a mantle that is taken up to give the illusion of an immortal “demon” to strike fear into criminals. that’s the misdirection and theatricality; using superstition to promote fear in criminals.

                    • Liam Neeson is Ra’s. He isn’t the ‘second in command’ or the next in line if the worst should happen to Watanabe’s character – he ran that ninja base. Henri Ducard was an alias. Marion Cotillard is listed as ‘Miranda Tate’ in many places (IMDB included) but she’s really Talia Al Ghul.

                    • Also (and I don’t mean to go on about this) Liam Neeson is credited as Ra’s Al Ghul in The Dark Knight Rises. Perhaps they just wanted a major actor (Watanabe) to have a proper name for his character since he’s an established actor.

            • @Oneiros
              How did I reiterate anyone when I posted before them? Check time stamps. The order is based on what comment they chose to reply to.
              Not directly addressing specifics, but rather your post as a whole, is not “missing the point.” In fact, it’s quite the opposite. I only addressed the point.
              Novels come out once, in one version, one story, one set of characters, one plot, one ending. Thus stagnant. Comic book characters are restarted all the time. Literally, all the damn time. There are several versions of the same characters, as well as several people that serve a time as one hero. There is no one, true version of a character in comics. That’s all that was meant by that.
              Telling a story they think is cool is their job, yet you find fault in that. For the most part, the people put in charge of these things are pretty good at it. You say you have no problem with adapting, yet have a problem with “taking things from great characters and dumbing them down.” I hate to say it, but that is the process of film adaptation. Writers for books get much more time to explain motivations, characters, plots, and settings. Writers for movies get far, far less. So although you may consider it “dumbing” them down, they are simply trying to expediate the process and progress the story in a timely manner.
              It’s obvious you feel some degree of personal attack from my post, and I’m sorry for that, but while it was in response to your comments, I was addressing the gripes of many comic book fans, not just yourself. I understand you are okay with some of the changes, you’ve said that several times and provided more examples than I’d care to ever read again, but you turn right around and contradict yourself by saying they’re making unnecessary changes. I assure you that the changes they make are not unnecessary. I have to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume a great deal of thought goes into everything they do when they’re spending hundreds of millions of dollars on these things. Especially when it comes to Whedon, like you say in your initial comment, as every impression I’ve gotten from him is that he is a HUGE comic fan. He would not deliberately change Marvel canon just because he can. There is a reason behind everything he does. The tone and attributes of both the character and the plot have to match up. Introducing superfluous information dilutes the main story they are trying to tell. Specifically with Marvel when you’re selling the audience on a combined universe. Most movies struggle to tell one complete story without creating plot holes, imagine telling 10 or 20 overlapping stories with different backgrounds, tones, and characters, as well as future plans for IPs, without causing plot holes.

              • When I said you reiterated things I didn’t mean the people on this page specifically. It was the same ignorant talking points people come up with when they don’t understand the grievances from comic book fans. By ignorant, I do not mean that you’re stupid, but rather that you don’t seem to be willing to try to understand. It basically just sounds like, “What’s the big deal? It’s just a comic book.” Comic, novel, poem, play, song; the medium is irrelevant. It’s a story and characters to which people are fans are attached. To use your novel argument, I’m sure anyone that has actually read Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein would find the old black and white movie laughable. Not because it’s old but because they completely ruined the main character. They turned an educated, thoughtful, and justified “man” into a mindless, raging moron. They completely ignored the association to Paradise Lost and robbed the story of any real insightful substance.

                Telling a story they think is cool is their job, yes, that’s true. Not that it’s a particularly insightful statement but true nonetheless. I would hope that the people who make these decisions showed more discretion when deciding whether or not to change something. I’m going to have to strongly disagree with you on what the process of film adaption is all about. It is not watering down characters until they aren’t even close to character they were adapted from. Shortening things, glossing over details, leaving out things that take far too much time to explain is all well and good. What I’m getting at is changing important fundamental things about characters. There doesn’t need to be lenghty back story for a great villain. Look at Nolan’s Joker. No back story at all. Well, it was multiple choice. But still, these arguments for dumbing down characters because it’s too hard to fit into a 2 hour movie or people just won’t get it or something like are completely unfounded.

                I’m glad I have your assurance that they give it a lot of thought before they change things but it’s not very comforting. Yes, Whedon is a comic fan and, without getting into a long Ultron thing, he hasn’t made any drastic changes until Ultron. I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt just like I am Batfleck but I still think, that the end of the day, I’m going to ask, “Why couldn’t Pym have done that? What did it add to the story to have Stark make Ultron?” Telling cool stories is their job but it seems to me, and I think a lot of other fans, that these writers and directors want to tell THEIR story rather than a COOL story. It’s ultimately selfish. That’s my main problem with it: selfishness.

                I’m not going to be able to convince people like you who are not fans that these changes are unnecessary and pretty stupid. Without reading the stories you won’t know that the story would have been better if they stayed closer to the source material. It’s not important to you and I guess that’s fine, but don’t tell fans that their grievances aren’t justified when they’re the ones who actually care about HOW these characters are adapted and not just that they are adapted to make money. It’s about the story and they aren’t living up to them.

                • Whilst I agree that sometimes they will change things unnecessarily – e.g. in X-Men The Last Stand, even though my X-Men knowledge isn’t great, I felt that instead of giving comic book characters different powers, they could’ve just used the comic book characters that *did* have those powers – or put focus on marketable actors rather than the main event (Transformers) but there are semi-acceptable reasons on occasion.

                  Ant-Man is Edgar Wright’s baby. The man has been working on it since 2006 (!!) and the project has only recently been given a release date. Since Ant-Man is a more obscure Marvel character, the film would set up what both Hank Pym and Scott Lang got up to when first using the suit.

                  Then Avengers happened and it was massively successful. How unfair would it have been if Joss Whedon got dibs on the character after the years Wright had dedicated to him? If Pym or Lang featured in Age of Ultron, how much of Wright’s story would get drafted in to fill in the gaps in the backstory in AoU?

                  It doesn’t ‘add’ to have Stark make Ultron, but it’s an already established character and therefore does not take away from Wright’s Ant-Man film. Wright has said that Ultron was never a part of his Ant-Man script (Ultron would be a massive villain to take on solo, obviously) and the combination of Robert Downey Jr’s popularity (read: bankability) along with professional courtesy probably contributed to this particular change.

                  Unless is was Pym that created Ultron, but Ultron messed with his memories so he only remembers in Ant-Man and it gives him the heroic resolve he needs to continue fighting the good fight after a failure because he reasons that he needs to be a hero to atone for the creation of a monster.

                • @Oneiros
                  I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree then. I respect your opinion as you’ve made an intelligent argument for it, I just simply do not agree.

                  Not to say that every comic book movie is outstanding, that’s obviously not the case. But I find the problems to be plot oriented or how the story is presented, e.g. Ghost of Russell Crowe in MoS, Hulk vs. Gamma Cloud/Dad-Monster-Thing in Ang Lee’s Hulk, emo Peter Parker Jazz session in Spider-Man 3, as opposed to character adaptations which I usually find more progressive to the story and franchise, e.g. Captain America being… well… less “America, F**k yeah!”, Nolan’s Batman not being the world’s greatest detective (or Bane being Talia’s bud, or even Talia being a one-night stand and not Bruce’s wife or whatever”, and even the villain changes in IM3 (might be the only one on planet earth that actually liked those).

  12. omg vin as black bolt!! make it hap’n cap’n!

  13. Maybe “merging of brands” means that Marvel studios is planning on a team up movie for phase three a la Batman/Superman?

  14. Blackbolt.

  15. If he’s Black Bolt, would he be happy acting but never speaking in that role?

    Unless they go REALLY radical.

    We know Johnny Storm is a Fox property but is the original Human Torch? Maybe Vin could play him and then also The Vision, who was created by Ultron based on samples from the Torch?

    Fun to speculate, whatever role he’ll end up filling.

    • It would be cool to see a nod to the android Human Torch from the 30′s as he was Marvel’s first hero. I don’t know if they’re gonna do that but it’d be a great way to introduce Namor as well.

      • Wasn’t The Human Torch in Captain America?

        • Yep, during the Expo in his glass tube. That was a cool easter egg.

          • Yup :) I enjoyed that too. It’d be cool to see him as an actual character though.

  16. Vin’s definitely going to be Groot, no questions there, Thanos not so much. Black Bolt would be kinda interesting, since he’s be going from having one line to no lines. If Vin is serious about challenges as an actor, Black Bolt would be that next part.

    Definitely think Inhumans is that “merging of brands” that Vin is talking about and somewhere in the cards for Marvel phase 3, it can mix with GotG or Avengers. But how epic would an Inhumans, Avengers and GotG movie be with Thanos as the major villain and everything has been leading up to that since Avengers!

    • Exactly what I was saying.

      Damon Poitier is Thanos and I doubt Joss Whedon would want that to be changed purely to have a well known actor in the role so that’s my reasoning why I never even give the Thanos speculation a second thought.

      Besides, what would it do for the guy’s career? We’re meant to root for the little known actors to make it big instead of recasting characters they played two movies ago for a bigger and more expensive name while the original guy languishes in obscurity.

      A movie (or two part movie) with Earthly and cosmic threats where three teams are needed would be amazing. It’s just a shame we just have Thanos to fill that role and can’t have Galactus appear to fill a similar role in future too.

  17. I’d love to see him as black bolt.

  18. @Oneiros there was a nod to the original Human Torch in Captain America: The First Avenger. i would like to see a Human Torch or Namor movie tho.

    btw i have no idea which character Vin Diesel could play

  19. My guess is definitely Black Bolt or Thanos. Hed be perfect for both, especially Black Bolt… I like the idea of Gladiator but find it very unlikely

  20. Black Bolt’s main weapon was his voice tho and Vin Diesel is known for his voice

    • I suppose they could change Black Bolt’s power so that Vin can mumble his way through another movie.

      • lol

  21. If not Black Bolt, maybe the voice of Lockjaw…

    …don’t laugh, see how important time travel is becoming for X-men. And Robert Downey isn’t getting any younger, or cheaper….

  22. The Inhumans are a no name IP, I don’t think there going to waste it on Vin, who has the potential to be huge. Black Panther, or Power Man, or really, any IP is up for grabs, all of them holding more mental real estate in the average person than Black Bolt. Why would you give Vin, who has an awesome voice, a character who couldn’t talk?

    • As per Marvel’s marketing strategy thus far, your point actually works against your argument. They’ve made sure so far to use big names to carry their less-recognizable IPs, or at least until they’ve been established, e.g. the laundry list of household names in GotG.
      It seems he would fit their mold for carrying the flag on Inhumans.

  23. From the bits and pieces of the interview I’ve read, i got the impression that the “merging brands” would be more of the merger of Vin Diesel’s typical action movie fare de la Riddick and Fast and Furious with the Marvel brand of action movies. That’s why I thought something like Power man would be right up his ally

    • Everyone is also loving the team up movies, so maybe a Heroes for Hire story could fit in to the MCU, and that would also allow Hulk to be in another movie.

  24. Merging of brands maybe Universal’s Namor with the Avengers would be pretty good, as well as a Inhumans film. I would love to see those films and a Black Panther films, and Punisher with Thomas Jane coming back as Frank Castle. I have to say I personally do not like Dr. Strange and could care less if that film is made. I do not care for the magic realm and think if they where going to create that they should have done so with Ironman 3and brought the real Mandarin and Fin Fang Foom , or have Mandarin have a ten tech rings from another Universe. Marvel films I want to see Hulk/S.H.I.E.L.D, Black Panther, Inhumans, Namor, X-men days of future past and further sequels, She-Hulk, and Ant-Man.

    • A solid argument could be made by a lot of people for the classic version of Mandarin, although I’m definitely not one of them. Never cared for him much at all. A tech-based Mandarin would be something very interesting, however.

      On the other hand, I can’t see how Fin Fang Foom as an actual interstellar dragon would work in live-action. just seems… far fetched. Then again, I would say the same thing about Rocket Raccoon and Groot if they weren’t already making a movie with them.

  25. Gotta be DAREDEVIL… He was up for the part back then but didn’t get the role. Now that Daredevil is back with Marvel Studios, he finally gets it!

    • Now that you mention it… that might be alright.

    • @ Smike

      I could live with that. Still keeping fingers crossed for Marvel Knights.

    • Is Wilson Fisk/Kingpin a property of Marvel since he was in the Daredevil movie? If so, I hope they remake Daredevil with Diesel as a new version of Fisk. He may not have the size, but his voice is commanding enough to be the Kingpin.

  26. black panther nuff said

    question what does IP stand for?

    • Intellectual property. Unless we’re talking about Internet.

  27. Please, no more superhero/comic book movies.

    • LOL! What? :D

    • is someone forcing you to go see them?

  28. If Diesel is playing Namor, could the new IP be The Defenders, with Doctor Strange, Hulk, Namor and Ghost Rider replacing the Silver Surfer?

  29. Merging of IP? How cray-cray would it be to see Richard Riddick get dumped into the MCU?

Be Social, Follow Us!!