This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"Bored now."
11971 members | you are not logged in | 19 January 2021


June 06 2014

Mark Ruffalo on his 'bigger, more complex' Hulk in The Avengers: Age of Ultron. A preview of a recent interview Mark Ruffalo did with Total Film magazine.

I'm confused about this.

Black Widow is getting a bigger role.

Hawkweye is supposedly getting a bigger role because he didn't appear in any movie since Avengers and god knows he needs more character development.

Scarlett Witch and Quicksilver are also getting highlighted because they're the new shiny toys.

And now Hulk has a bigger role as well? Who is getting the short end of the stick here? It sure as hell isn't Iron Man! (Though I wouldn't mind. He's probably my least favorite Avenger after Hawkeye.)

I just hope Thor has something to do. I really like the character and the performance but his movies are very underwhelming.

Anyway, in Whedon we trust. I'm sure it will be great. And if he can end without a battle to save the world, I would be grateful. Been getting kind of tired of those.
A bigger role may not mean more screen time. We don't need a scene of Phil convincing Pepper to convince Tony to pay attention. We don't need Natasha recruiting Banner or Nick Fury trying to cheer up Steve Rogers and get him, "into the world." The audience knows most of the characters and they know each other, so we can get to more interesting stuff faster.
Who is getting the short end of the stick here?

Less setup as Jason_M_Bryant said and much less SHIELD/Nick Fury.
Yeah, the first 1/3-ish of The Avengers was exposition.
Or, much of these scenes wil be cutted in the edition and realesed after in the DVDs/BDs bonus.
Or, Joss will pull a Peter Jackson and splir the movie in parts - One can dream, right?
they should do that, and release part 2 on ant-man's current date. what a summer that would be.
Splitting movies is a horrible, money-driven trend in my opinion. The Hobbit especially has been stretched out and distorted beyond recognition. I was bored out of my mind during the first two installments.
Considering Joss's comments about Empire Strikes Back and its lack of an ending, I think he would rather beat himself to death with a script than cut his movie in two.

I'm thinking that, with SHIELD rebuilding, the Avengers will have to be Assembled by someone else. Quite probably one of the Avengers themselves. I can see Banner doing the recruiting, actually -- either him or Cap. But since Banner's not usually a team player, his character development could be to do the team-gathering. (I figure Stark's too arrogant to call for help, at least at first.)
I really do hope that no character gets the Avengers 1 Hawkeye treatment. I was nervous enough when I heard they were to introduce Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver, then I hear Don Cheadle and Paul Bethany have been cast? It looks like a huge juggling act, even by Joss's standards.
Splitting movies is a horrible, money-driven trend in my opinion. The Hobbit especially has been stretched out and distorted beyond recognition. I was bored out of my mind during the first two installments.

I totally agree, libradude, but if Joss would do it, I bet it would be amazing.
I believe most of the Avengers will be already together, in Stark's Avengers Tower. Think they have a floor each, going by the plan from end of A1.

Re: two films. I dunno, man. I keep thinking about the third Avengers film and how freaking cool it would be to have Part 1 in April and Part 2 in August. A big, massive monolith. It's not Empire. It's a short break - a breather - before the massive world changing story continues on.
I agree that a healthy amount of skepticism of making multiple movies of a single story is often valid, but the adaptation of Harry Potter and the Dealthy Hallows is one of my favorite things ever. I think that a two-part telling of an Avengers story could be pretty remarkable, but another part of me thinks that these movies are a bit too serialized already.
I did not like the two part adaptation of Deathly Hallows. I felt like the second part had little emotional story and overly long battle scenes.

In any event, Avengers 2 is much too far along to do something like that. For this kind of thing to be done well, it would have to be planned from the beginning. That's necessary to make sure that part one feels like it has an ending, instead of feeling like it just stops at the two hour mark.

As for Avengers 3, maybe. Since it will be an original story and not an adaptation, maybe they could avoid some of the problems of previous split movies. I still wouldn't think it was a good idea, but it might be a less problematic idea.
According to Mark (on the Graham Norton Show the other day) they are now shooting in London (Shepperton). He also mentioned that unlike the others who were bulking up/training he was asked to lose weight to show the difference between Bruce and the Hulk. *snicker* He's the HULK, it's clear.

I recommend watching the show - Mark gets on a Unicycle! And I couldn't help but think how the Hulk would look on one. LOL
It's gonna be so awesome! I hope they say "Avengers Assemble!"
I'm indifferent to the potential of an "avengers assemble" line, but sometimes I do stop and appreciate the fact that the glorious events we see next year in the movie are basically happening right now, and it makes me forget that I have 3 finals to study for.

Damn it.

This thread has been closed for new comments.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.

joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home