Joss Whedon ‘Almost Done’ Writing ‘Avengers 2′ Script; Says ‘S.H.I.E.L.D.’ Needs ‘Spectacle’ - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Marvel shared universe architect Joss Whedon has a busy three years ahead of him. In addition to coordinating tie-ins with other upcoming Marvel properties – Iron Man 3, Thor: The Dark World, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and Guardians of the Galaxy – the fan-favorite filmmaker is tasked with launching a successful S.H.I.E.L.D. TV series spin-off for ABC while also writing and directing a follow-up to the biggest box office success of all time. Understandably, expectations for The Avengers 2 are already very high – especially considering the film could go see competition from DC’s Justice League movie at the 2015 summer box office. Nevertheless, with 2.5 full years of development still to go, Whedon claims he’s nearing completion of his Avengers 2 script – and maintains that fans can look forward to deeper insight into the superhero team. Speaking with MTV, Whedon confirmed that he’s nearly finished writing: ”I’ve done the outline, I’m writing the script now and so the script should be done in a couple of months. I’m pretty excited about it, I have to say.” Part of his excitement comes from being able to cause trouble for his previously assembled Avengers – as the director claims that we shouldn’t expect a “bigger” film but we’ll get to see a “deeper” character piece. “Don’t go bigger; go deeper. All of these people have met, so you have that out of the way. Now you can spend your time just digging in – and by digging in, I mean with a scalpel, to cause pain.” We don’t yet know exactly how Whedon intends to complicate the established character dynamics – given that certain moments of Avengers-infighting were criticized for being a bit too heavy-handed (most notably the lab argument scene). That said, it’s easy to imagine that fallout from the various Phase Two movies along with fresh faces (most notably a group of Guardians of the Galaxy) could help stir things up. Regardless of Whedon’s methods, it’s hard to imagine that the painful scalpel treatment won’t also equal higher stakes (and subsequently bigger set pieces) in part two. Especially considering the heroes are expected to face-off against formidable super villain Thanos – in place of a generic (albeit vast) army of Chitauri soldiers/superhero-fodder. Still, Whedon is clearly aware that he raised the superhero action bar – a point that comes up when he talks about the need for “spectacle” in the more grounded (i.e. not-so-superhuman) S.H.I.E.L.D. series: “You’ve got to bring a little bit of spectacle to it. It’s got to be bigger than your average cop show. But at the end of the day it’s about the peripheral people. It’s about the people on the edges of the grand adventures. The whole point of this show is that even with all these big things, the little things matter. So it’s about people who don’t have super powers. There will be some people with powers, there will be effects, the spectacle of science fiction story telling, but all played on a very human/small level.” Tied to the record-breaking success of The Avengers (along with the growing shared movie universe), S.H.I.E.L.D. isn’t likely to be a tough sell and could cull an enormous pilot viewership. That said, Whedon and ABC have a tricky road ahead of them – given that balancing grounded human stories in a superhero universe (on a television budget) will be challenging. Similar shows like Heroes and Smallville started off strong but struggled to find a good balance between characters and the “spectacle” Whedon mentioned. DC’s recent Arrow took a different route and has yet to introduce any “powered” cast members – to its credit. As a result, S.H.I.E.L.D., which occupies a human-focused story in a super-human world, is in somewhat uncharted territory. As for what comic book movie lovers can expect from the rest of Marvel’s lineup, Whedon didn’t offer any specifics but was happy to report that all of the phase two Avengers tie-in projects are coming together – and that he hasn’t had to step in and do any major restructuring: “It’s been pretty equal. I read all the scripts and I give notes on everything. I’ll look at cuts when they’re ready to show me. I’ll talk to directors if they want to. I try to make myself useful without being intrusive. I’ve gotten to be a part of all of them. That’s a dream job for a kid like me.” Whedon’s point about being “useful without being intrusive” should come as a relief to readers who are still bitter about Jon Favreu’s experience working with Marvel on Iron Man 2 – which is considered to have suffered from all of the shoehorned pre-Avengers material. Based on Whedon’s comments it sounds as though the collected roster of Marvel directors have a lot of creative freedom (as much as you can have when you’re movie is instrumental in a multi-billion dollar shared universe). - Iron Man 3 releases May 3rd, 2013, Thor: The Dark World on November 8th, 2013, Captain America: The Winter Soldier on April 4th, 2014, Guardians of the Galaxy on August 1st, 2014, The Avengers 2 on May 1st, 2015 and Ant-Man on November 6th, 2015.[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://cdn1.screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/The-Avengers-ILM-Featurette.jpg[/IMG] [url]http://screenrant.com/avengers-2-script-joss-whedon-shield-tv-series/[/url]

that lab scene was a fucking own [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOlumXJ5HWQ[/media]

Easily my favourite movie of 2012, can't wait for it. SHIELD could be very good if played right.

[QUOTE]Iron Man 3 releases May 3rd, 2013, Thor: The Dark World on November 8th, 2013, Captain America: The Winter Soldier on April 4th, 2014, Guardians of the Galaxy on August 1st, 2014, The Avengers 2 on May 1st, 2015 and Ant-Man on November 6th, 2015.[/QUOTE] Hot damn

The avengers wasn't that amazing

[QUOTE=Cats meow;39191241]The avengers wasn't that amazing[/QUOTE] It (arguably) wasn't as amazing as the first Iron Man or Nolan's 'Dark Knight' trilogy, but it was a groundbreaking film. To my understanding, this is the first time in history that so many separate films from the same universe built up to an event where they all finally meet up. Not only did they succeed, but they did so in a way that felt damn near seamless, Hulk's constantly changing actor aside. Avengers was pretty much the definition of a summer blockbuster, with good effects and great writing. But it also showed the potential of what could be if they keep working in the same universe. Also, since Whedon is again at the helm and he says he wants to cause pain...anyone taking bets on who's going to be the first to die?

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;39191500]It (arguably) wasn't as amazing as the first Iron Man or Nolan's 'Dark Knight' trilogy, but it was a groundbreaking film. To my understanding, this is the first time in history that so many separate films from the same universe built up to an event where they all finally meet up. Not only did they succeed, but they did so in a way that felt damn near seamless, Hulk's constantly changing actor aside. Avengers was pretty much the definition of a summer blockbuster, with good effects and great writing. But it also showed the potential of what could be if they keep working in the same universe. Also, since Whedon is again at the helm and he says he wants to cause pain...anyone taking bets on who's going to be the first to die?[/QUOTE] The whole fight part felt wrong A million aliens vs 3 dudes and they fight in like 1 block

[QUOTE=McGii;39191603]The whole fight part felt wrong A million aliens vs 3 dudes and they fight in like 1 block[/QUOTE]They did make it clear that the destruction was occurring throughout the city. But in the context of the story, they were on that main street for a reason.

[QUOTE=McGii;39191603]The whole fight part felt wrong A million aliens vs 3 dudes and they fight in like 1 block[/QUOTE] I get what you're saying but pulling off a fight scene that takes place in all of New York would be impossible and too expensive.

the avengers is so overrated it's incredible, hope the second one is better

The Avengers certainly didn't have "good writing", only in a sense where "it kinda works without being tooooo cheezy" means "good"

Here we go. When it came out most of facepunch loved it. But now it's incredibly popular so inevitably we all think its overrated.

[QUOTE=Killuah;39191654]The Avengers certainly didn't have "good writing", only in a sense where "it kinda works without being tooooo cheezy" means "good"[/QUOTE] It was incredibly cheesy, but then again it's incredibly difficult to make a superhero movie without a certain measure of cheese. PHOOAAAAR GIANT FLOATING AIRCRAFT CARRIER SO AWESOME

[QUOTE=demoguy08;39191761]It was incredibly cheesy, but then again it's incredibly difficult to make a superhero movie without a certain measure of cheese. PHOOAAAAR GIANT FLOATING AIRCRAFT CARRIER SO AWESOME[/QUOTE] That's why I said "without being toooooo cheezy"

[QUOTE=Killuah;39191654]The Avengers certainly didn't have "good writing", only in a sense where "it kinda works without being tooooo cheezy" means "good"[/QUOTE] it's just too meta for you~

Lol, Do Facepunch not like Avengers? What a shocker. I thought it was pretty kick-ass.

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;39191500]It (arguably) wasn't as amazing as the first Iron Man or Nolan's 'Dark Knight' trilogy, but it was a groundbreaking film. To my understanding, this is the first time in history that so many separate films from the same universe built up to an event where they all finally meet up. Not only did they succeed, but they did so in a way that felt damn near seamless, Hulk's constantly changing actor aside. Avengers was pretty much the definition of a summer blockbuster, with good effects and great writing. But it also showed the potential of what could be if they keep working in the same universe. Also, since Whedon is again at the helm and he says he wants to cause pain...anyone taking bets on who's going to be the first to die?[/QUOTE] I'm thinking if anyone is gonna walk away from this, it's gonna be Tony, although I can't be sure since I don't know if they're gonna do an Iron Man 4.

I thought it was amazing how they gave every character enough screentime, without letting anyone falling into the background. And man, watching it in a big cinema was so fucking incredible. When I watched it, everything felt so right. [QUOTE=The_J_Hat;39191951]I'm thinking if anyone is gonna walk away from this, it's gonna be Tony, although I can't be sure since I don't know if they're gonna do an Iron Man 4.[/QUOTE] IM3 is the last one with Robert Downey Jr. but he will return for Avengers 2. [QUOTE=McGii;39191603]The whole fight part felt wrong A million aliens vs 3 dudes and they fight in like 1 block[/QUOTE] Hey, at least we've got this: [video=youtube;4Rn3gm_DEdo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Rn3gm_DEdo[/video]

[QUOTE=demoguy08;39191761]It was incredibly cheesy, but then again it's incredibly difficult to make a superhero movie without a certain measure of cheese. PHOOAAAAR GIANT FLOATING AIRCRAFT CARRIER SO AWESOME[/QUOTE] But it was awesome

[QUOTE=Antimuffin;39191960] IM3 is the last one with Robert Downey Jr. but he will return for Avengers 2.[/QUOTE] Oh shit.

[QUOTE=demoguy08;39191761]It was incredibly cheesy, but then again it's incredibly difficult to make a superhero movie without a certain measure of cheese. PHOOAAAAR GIANT FLOATING AIRCRAFT CARRIER SO AWESOME[/QUOTE]You do realize the S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier has been a part of the lore since 1965, correct? Hell, they've had at least a dozen Helicarriers in 616 alone. [editline]12th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Antimuffin;39191960]I thought it was amazing how they gave every character enough screentime, without letting anyone falling into the background.[/QUOTE]That is because, on the whole, they didn't have to worry about developing or flushing out any of the main characters over the story. They each got their own separate movies to do that, so it was unnecessary. Instead, they could show them as those characters the entire time, and freely swap between them as needed.

My only problem with it was the cliche plotline. "Arrogant superheroes can't get on but learn to work together in the face of adversity"

What else where they gonna do? They couldn't put a bunch of superheroes in the same film without any tension. That would be boring.

[QUOTE=chaz13;39192174]My only problem with it was the cliche plotline. "Arrogant superheroes can't get on but learn to work together in the face of adversity"[/QUOTE]That's basically been a key element of the Avengers. They couldn't stand to be around each other, but they could put up with each other when they were needed. [editline]12th January 2013[/editline] That's what happens when you take a massive geek and tell him to make a movie about comic book superheroes. He'll make a movie about comic book superheroes. He wasn't trying to go the Christopher Nolan "Almost believable" route. He wanted the "Larger-than-life Comic Book action" route.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;39192224]That's basically been a key element of the Avengers. They couldn't stand to be around each other, but they could put up with each other when they were needed. [editline]12th January 2013[/editline] That's what happens when you take a massive geek and tell him to make a movie about comic book superheroes. He'll make a movie about comic book superheroes. He wasn't trying to go the Christopher Nolan "Almost believable" route. He wanted the "Larger-than-life Comic Book action" route.[/QUOTE] The problem is that it's essentially the "first world problem" of the superhero world so the entire plot revolves around "how superheros finally manage not to be fucking idiots"

So now there's hate for the Avengers? You people make me fucking sick. People worked insanely hard on that movie, and at the time, it was thought to be impossible to write in all the superheroes without doing some of them injustice. They succeeded in doing that [I]and[/I] adding two more, with as much depth as they could put on. The CGI was great and all the action scenes were interesting and put together nicely. I bet you all hate it now because everyone likes it, or it wasn't [I]edgy[/I] enough for you. God your opinions are so twisted and childish.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;39192055]You do realize the S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier has been a part of the lore since 1965, correct? Hell, they've had at least a dozen Helicarriers in 616 alone. [/QUOTE] Nope I don't know anything about the comic, doesn't make it less cheesy. Don't get me wrong, I still enjoyed the movie! I would never walk into a superhero movie expecting anything less than lots of dumb action sequences.

[QUOTE=rrunyan;39192319]So now there's hate for the Avengers? You people make me fucking sick. People worked insanely hard on that movie, and at the time, it was thought to be impossible to write in all the superheroes without doing some of them injustice. They succeeded in doing that [I]and[/I] adding two more, with as much depth as they could put on. The CGI was great and all the action scenes were interesting and put together nicely. I bet you all hate it now because everyone likes it, or it wasn't [I]edgy[/I] enough for you. God your opinions are so twisted and childish.[/QUOTE] Actually it's your exagerated, generalizing reaction to [I]a few[/I] people critically discussing the movie that's twisted and childish. It's a good movie in respect to what it wanted to accomplish and noone said "lol avengers sucked" and the only thing we are saying is that it doesn't have good writing so yeah, good job, you polarized yourself.

Hope they use the Mjölnir and Capt.'s Shield combo in a fight.

I thought the Avengers movie was better than each of the individual films with the possible exception of Iron Man. I know that if I had watched Thor and Hulk before The Avengers I would have never wanted to see it.