
Ambrosia Slaad |

I'm not sure why, but that trailer for it didn't grab me as much as the first one did. Actually, I've got a fair idea why. First one had way more James Spader talking. Plus that scene with everyone trying to lift Mjolnir at the start amused me to no end.
Especially that moment when Cap moves Mjolnir a bit, and Thor looks worried until Cap gives up.
---
The new trailer didn't offer much new:
* I'm glad it's Tony in the Hulkbuster armor. Nice set up for Planet Hulk. I imagine Ultron is most worried about The Science Bros, and has set things up to keep Banner and Stark in conflict to stop them from working together to stop him.
* A peek into Natasha's pre-BW background and hints she was operated/experimented on. Wild guess: Did Strucker's scientists work on Natasha in the past for the Soviets, and now the Avengers track them down to discover Scarlet Witch & Quicksilver in their "care"?
* Is the woman in the cave/underground scene Shuri (T'Challa's/Black Panther's sister)?

Alex Martin |

I definitely think the first trailer had a more unique, Marvel Universe appeal to it. Whether it was the fun "lift the hammer" bit to Spader's Ultron voiceover (with the haunting version of Pinocchio song in the background even). It works because it touches on some of the unique Marvel character themes.
This trailer just comes off as brooding and action (with some plot hints), but nowhere near as fun or interesting. Since the first Avenger's movie, I've noticed there's been a trend to have at least one of these style of trailers for all their MU series (Thor 2, Captain America 2, Iron Man 3, for example.) It's like they want to say to the audience that these movies are "more serious" than before, I guess. It tends to point the movies more towards the "Ultimates" comics series as time goes on - for better or worse.

Tinkergoth |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Also interesting is that the trailers that have the fun additional bits (like the extended version of the first trailer that includes the trying to lift the hammer scene) tend to not be the American trailers. From memory, the extended version was listed as the UK trailer in most places. Could be that they're trying to compensate for the fact that different regions are looking for different things in their films. We tend to get the UK trailers at the cinema here in Australia, and certainly they often appeal more to me than the American ones do.

Lord Fyre RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32 |

His thirst will never be sated...
Apparently not.
Could he not foresee this problem (coming to dislike the characters) before he agreed to direct the 1st Avengers film?

thejeff |
Freehold DM wrote:His thirst will never be sated...Apparently not.
Could he not foresee this problem (coming to dislike the characters) before he agreed to direct the 1st Avengers film?
I don't think that's quite what he said or meant.
In fact, I read it as getting so far into the character of Ultron that he's taking his viewpoint. Because he's been working on the Ultron parts.

Alex Martin |

It doesn't surprise me that "destroying" the Avengers might be part of the storyline. If you are reader of Avengers, there have been several depowered phases in the team's comic history.
Most famously was when it was reduced down to Captain America, Hawkeye, Quicksilver, and the Scarlet Witch. I could see them doing something similar - given the new appearance in this movie of those two.
Production wise, it would certainly reduce your cost on actors and effects if you have four relatively-human characters. I could see them keeping Black Widow or introducing some characters they want for future movies like Black Panther as well.

![]() |

I'm with TheJef here. I feel fairly confident that people are reading way too much into what is essentially a joke by Whedon. He's just saying that he feels really into the character of Ultron - NOT the he actually is going to "destroy the Avengers".
Evans and Downey, Jr. are near the ends of their contracts, so it's entirely possible that 'destroy' refers to breaking up the original lineup and making room for Winter Soldier or War Machine to move into those 'slots' on the team.
There's not yet an obvious replacement for Hemsworth/Thor, but Thor 3 is already in the works, and could bring up the focus on one of the other Asgardians (perhaps even Sif, after her profile was bumped a bit by her Agents of SHIELD appearance) or introducing a new character (such as Beta Ray Bill or Thunderstrike).
If Scarlet Johanssen is also reaching the end of her movie deal (which I have no idea...), Sif, or some other female Avenger (such as a Wasp spun off from the Ant-Man movie, or Clea from a Dr. Strange movie, or new interpretation, such as Betsy-Ross-as-She-Hulk or Extremis-Pepper), becomes even more likely.

![]() |

Evans and Downey, Jr. are near the ends of their contracts, so it's entirely possible that 'destroy' refers to breaking up the original lineup and making room for Winter Soldier or War Machine to move into those 'slots' on the team.
It might be possible that the Avengers would be destroyed but that has nothing to do with what Whedon was saying in the linked article. He was simply saying in a creative way that after spending so much time writing Ultron he is seeing things from the characters' point of view. Not only is that what he is saying, but also he wouldn't be revealing a MAJOR plot point in this casual manner.
I do recall that when Marvel announced all their movies up to (and including) 2844 they mentioned that the next movie to really shake things up in the MCU would be Thor 3, so I expect the Avengers will not be defeated in the upcoming movie.

![]() |

The official poster for Avengers 2 is up.
Can you see Doctor Strange in the background?

GreyWolfLord |

The official poster for Avengers 2 is up.
Can you see Doctor Strange in the background?
I have to admit I can't. I see The Vision, but I'm not seeing where Dr. Strange would be.

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

I am amused that this poster at least doesn't Scarlet charging butt-first into a gunfight.
In real life Scarlett Johansson has a tattoo on her right side rib cage that say's "lucky you." I assume that for the reader who wakes up next to her.
This Thursday the new Avengers II trailer drops.

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

This Thursday the new Avengers II trailer drops.
It's almost Thursday in the UK so we have the trailer.
Oh my.

Ambrosia Slaad |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

Not the same without ant man. I don't see Tony making ultron, I just don't. He's not a philanthropist/scientist in the same mold.
In an interview, Whedon himself stated how he really wanted to use Pym for the Ultron origin, but Ant Man was already in development and he couldn't step on Wright's toes. Tony is smart enough—especially with J.A.R.V.I.S. established as Chekov's A.I. back in Iron Man (I)—has the resources, is an untrusting control freak, and was looking for a way to get out of the armor since IM3... he has great believable motivations for developing a robot peacekeeper(s) program. And he has an ego big enough to think he can pull it off successfully, despite a track record (starting with his dad) of inventions that turn out to dangerously malfunction and/or be misused.
After Avengers 2 ends, those same motivations can easily and believably lead into the Civil War, Armor Wars, and Demon in a Bottle storylines.
---
Sorry Freehold, but your hate for Whedon is clouding your judgment. ;)

Lord Fyre RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32 |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Freehold DM wrote:Not the same without ant man. I don't see Tony making ultron, I just don't. He's not a philanthropist/scientist in the same mold.In an interview, Whedon himself stated how he really wanted to use Pym for the Ultron origin, but Ant Man was already in development and he couldn't step on Wright's toes. Tony is smart enough—especially with J.A.R.V.I.S. established as Chekov's A.I. back in Iron Man (I)—has the resources, is an untrusting control freak, and was looking for a way to get out of the armor since IM3... he has great believable motivations for developing a robot peacekeeper(s) program. And he has an ego big enough to think he can pull it off successfully, despite a track record (starting with his dad) of inventions that turn out to dangerously malfunction and/or be misused.
Actually, with S.H.I.E.L.D. imploding, he would see a void (Global emergency response) that would need filled.

Ambrosia Slaad |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Another possible parallel/character beat just occurred to me between Tony and his dad. In Agent Carter, Howard Stark emotionally confesses that Captain America is the one good thing he can take pride in having created. Post-A2:AoU...

Freehold DM |

Freehold DM wrote:Not the same without ant man. I don't see Tony making ultron, I just don't. He's not a philanthropist/scientist in the same mold.In an interview, Whedon himself stated how he really wanted to use Pym for the Ultron origin, but Ant Man was already in development and he couldn't step on Wright's toes. Tony is smart enough—especially with J.A.R.V.I.S. established as Chekov's A.I. back in Iron Man (I)—has the resources, is an untrusting control freak, and was looking for a way to get out of the armor since IM3... he has great believable motivations for developing a robot peacekeeper(s) program. And he has an ego big enough to think he can pull it off successfully, despite a track record (starting with his dad) of inventions that turn out to dangerously malfunction and/or be misused.
After Avengers 2 ends, those same motivations can easily and believably lead into the Civil War, Armor Wars, and Demon in a Bottle storylines.
---
Sorry Freehold, but your hate for Whedon is clouding your judgment. ;)
I liked armor wars...

Freehold DM |

Ambrosia Slaad wrote:Actually, with S.H.I.E.L.D. imploding, he would see a void (Global emergency response) that would need filled.Freehold DM wrote:Not the same without ant man. I don't see Tony making ultron, I just don't. He's not a philanthropist/scientist in the same mold.In an interview, Whedon himself stated how he really wanted to use Pym for the Ultron origin, but Ant Man was already in development and he couldn't step on Wright's toes. Tony is smart enough—especially with J.A.R.V.I.S. established as Chekov's A.I. back in Iron Man (I)—has the resources, is an untrusting control freak, and was looking for a way to get out of the armor since IM3... he has great believable motivations for developing a robot peacekeeper(s) program. And he has an ego big enough to think he can pull it off successfully, despite a track record (starting with his dad) of inventions that turn out to dangerously malfunction and/or be misused.
I could easily see Tony making an army of killbots without batting an eye, especially with whedon at the helm of the film.

Ambrosia Slaad |

Ok, at the 1 minute mark there is someone who in the darkness looks like they have Wolverine claws. Any idea who it might be?
At first I thought it was T'Challa popping claws, but replaying the trailer in super slow-motion makes the "claws" look more like some technological device. I can't make out out who is holding the device.

Caineach |

Caineach wrote:Ok, at the 1 minute mark there is someone who in the darkness looks like they have Wolverine claws. Any idea who it might be?At first I thought it was T'Challa popping claws, but replaying the trailer in super slow-motion makes the "claws" look more like some technological device. I can't make out out who is holding the device.
Yeah. Discussions in the youtube comments seem to think it is a quiver, but it looks nothing like what is in the very next scene with Hawkeye.

![]() |

Ok, at the 1 minute mark there is someone who in the darkness looks like they have Wolverine claws. Any idea who it might be?
I'm going to guess that it is