Uh Oh. Joss is in trouble.
He so used to filming on location: Firefly, Dollhouse... ;)

When you see the amount of "outside LA" shows that are shot on greenscreen without people noticing it, I'm not even worried.

I'd question staying in LA being economically advantageous, though.

poltergeist | November 16, 21:44 CET

I was thinking that too, poltergeist, particularly because other articles suggested they had begun building sets already. But I'd guess Marvel's number-crunchers know best.

sumogrip | November 16, 22:02 CET

As long as the movie gets made (and makes it into theaters, dammit!), I don't care where it's filmed. The only thing I'll miss is the sightings of filming (and Joss) in NYC - but since I am near Philly, I wouldn't likely be there anyway! ☺

Nebula1400 | November 16, 22:20 CET

Isn't this old news? They moved Tony Stark to Malibu, so it doesn't seem at all illogical to place these Avengers on the West Coast. Besides: innovation is primarily a West-coast thing in 21st century America, contra the Golden- and Silver-age comics.

jclemens | November 16, 23:47 CET

The setting will still be NYC right? I feel like the city is just as much a part of the Avengers (as it is for a lot of Marvel heroes) as the members are. I want to see Avenger's Mansion!

cazador | November 17, 01:25 CET

The article doesn't say they are moving the team to LA in the movie, just that they are moving production to LA. You'll notice it's still expected to shoot some exteriors in NY.

The One True b!X | November 17, 01:38 CET

Ok that's what I figured from that, just clarifying. Thanks.

cazador | November 17, 01:44 CET

Damnit...! I really wanted to creep the filming!

grrarg | November 17, 02:26 CET

NO! Avengers=New York. Period. I'm in denial and am skeptical until this is confirmed by a more legit source.

marvelknight616 | November 17, 03:14 CET

In denial of what? The team can be in NY despite the film shooting in LA, which is all this article says.

The One True b!X | November 17, 03:26 CET

Shooting on location is always more expensive because the crew has to be put up for the duration of the shoot -- imagine the cost of housing and boarding several hundred to thousands of crew and factor in unexpected cost overruns because shooting outside the controlled environment of the studios (with real weather, among other hassles to deal with) equals delays and delays equal money. Because movie-making on this scale is essentially trying to make sure 1,000 little things and 50 big things go exactly right, and shooting on location adds a factor of unpredictability to the whole enterprise. Unpredictability equals money too.

It doesn't matter where all the interiors are shot, and a few weeks of location shooting will probably provide enough authetic atmosphere needed.

[ edited by dottikin on 2010-11-17 04:56 ]

[ edited by dottikin on 2010-11-17 05:00 ]

dottikin | November 17, 04:54 CET

Joss has always loved working in LA in the past so he could very well be part of this decision (if we know for sure such a decision has been made!). I think they can get enough shots of NYC to say that the film is set in NYC, and then do all the studio work in LA where everyone gets to be home near their families (and save money). It seems all good to me.

I'm just not wanting the movie to be postponed!

embers | November 17, 05:57 CET

But doesn't New York offer a nice, healthy 30% tax rebate to offset costs of film and TV productions shooting on location? Relocating production to L.A. isn't going to save them a huge amount of money, considering how expensive it is to shoot in California nowadays.

If Marvel is all for stretching their pennies, why don't they move production to cheaper states? I'm sure Michigan, Louisiana, Georgia and Philadelphia would bend over backwards to get "The Avengers" in their area.

Mcjw_serenity | November 17, 06:25 CET

When I worked in downtown L.A. I'd constantly see shows and films set in NYC shooting within blocks of us in the fashion district, including Castle, Spiderman 3, and, oh yeah, CSI: New York.

There are plenty of areas with buildings that look very Manhattany, so it's not a huge deal at all, in terms of architectural versimilitude. ; >

Regarding tax advantage, I'm fairly sure L.A. stepped up the industry tax breaks to stop film shoots hemorrhaging to Canada and other climes.

Bonus: it's where Jossir's family is, so - if this is true - that's very possibly a contributing factor as well.

In summation, I feel that this registers a zero (0) on the infamous Whedonesque Picnic scale.

QuoterGal | November 17, 07:23 CET

One downside to shooting in L.A. -- it also means the studio gets to keep tabs on the production. But I think Joss is used to that, hopefully, and finds the notes from execs useful. He has in the past!

dottikin | November 17, 08:56 CET

OMFG ! The Whedonesque picnic scale has hit zero, rock bottom, the absolute pits, as low as it goes ! In short, we're doomed !


... hang on... no, it's OK, I had mine upside down. Picnic ye not.

More disturbingly, am I reading the article right when it implies that movies sometimes pretend to be in one place when they're actually somewhere else ? Isn't that lying ? So my question is, why does Hollywood hate little baby Jesus ? Is it because of Communism again ?

Saje | November 17, 12:38 CET

Avengers = New York? Really? They've been all over the place in their time, I'm not sure there was ever really anything specifically New York about them...

daylight | November 17, 23:50 CET