Marvel Studios Adjusts Pipeline Schedule For Release Of ‘Thor’, ‘Captain America’, ‘The Avengers’, & Sony’s ‘Spider-Man 4′

COMMENTS (25)

• Having grown up with these comics, I am truly excited. Marvel should do the X-men Brood warsalso which include SPidey and everyone else also in parts.

  Comment by Anonymous — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 4:31am PDT  Reply to this post

• Excellent news – there is no need to rush to make The Avengers and having that and Cap Am in the same summer might be overkill. Now how about Marvel getting the rights back to Daredevil, X-Men & Fantastic Four? (Spidey is doing just fine at Sony)

  Comment by Sumit — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 5:29am PDT  Reply to this post

• I’ll assume this change was necessary as part of landing the high-profile, multi-film stars they just got, as it allows them a bit more time for other projects or vacations in Cabo.

  Comment by Matt — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 5:29am PDT  Reply to this post

• I really WISH DC Studios would rush Wonder Woman into production already. Come on, when are we going to have a big budget female superhero movie already?

  Comment by Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist! — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 5:52am PDT  Reply to this post

• THOR: formerly July 16, 2010, now June 17, 2011
  CAPTAIN AMERICA: formerly May 6, 2011, now July 22, 2011

  Wha??? Releasing Thor & CA within about a month of each other? Sorry, I think that’s insane. I also think Marvel has for years been really loosey goosey about the actual members of The Avengers. So will Hulk be in this iteration? I see the current A. line-up includes Spider-WOMAN (!!) As for talent, is Downey a lock? Will Cap & Thor’s castings blow our minds? Me smell PR stunt to keep shareholders/investors happy. Most of all, will the world audience finally get off this superhero wetdream by 2012? God, we need our mythology, but this well is running dry!

  Comment by Irving Thalberg's Ghost — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 6:32am PDT  Reply to this post

• Sounds like Marvel realized they needed Favreau on Avengers after all…

  Comment by Somebody — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 9:00am PDT  Reply to this post

• You can’t blame Marvel for trying to milk the golden goose while it’s hot, but sooner or later they’re going to saturate the market with this stuff. Westerns were once the hottest thing around too.

  Comment by Josh — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 9:25am PDT  Reply to this post

• I think it is possible that these announcements are just a PR stunt. I’m also a little bit cautious about the run up to an Avengers movie. Iron Man was great. But that’s because Robert Downey Jr. was great in it. As far as The Hulk, I found it a little bit flat. I’m a demographically important ( ridiculous Spider-Man fanboy) part of the audience for these movies and I’m getting a little bored. Who knows how interested I’ll be come 2012.

  Comment by Sam — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 9:57am PDT  Reply to this post

• @ Irving Thalberg’s Ghost:

  A couple of months ago, Marvel announced that Robert Downey Jr. and Don Cheadle would be in “The Avengers” and that Favreau would executive-produce it, but nothing else. Downey signed a four-pic deal which includes two IM sequels and “The Avengers” when he signed on for “Iron Man,” and Cheadle signed a similar contract when he replaced Terrence Howard.

  Edward Norton is a big factor of whether Bruce Banner/the Hulk will appear in “The Avengers.” Whoever signs on to play Captain America and Thor will have sequel clauses that include an option to appear in “The Avengers.”

  Comment by Matt C — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 10:26am PDT  Reply to this post

• “when are we going to have a big budget female superhero movie already?”

  – don’t worry, it’s in the works. from the same mind that brought you many (almost ALL) of the characters mentioned in this article. And it won’t just be one… it’ll be THREE.

  Comment by 123go — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 10:47am PDT  Reply to this post

• I admire Marvel’s ambition but all it’s going to take is one of these films to ‘under perform’ never mind flop and Marvel is going to go into a blind panic.

  If these are all Iron Man sized hits then Marvel are laughing all the way to the bank.

  If not, we might just see a domino effect that topples their ‘mega event’ Avengers movie into nothing more than an Iron Man sequel.

  But in saying that, at least they are doing rather than saying. C’mon Warners!

  You puff our your chest at any given opportunity to claim you’re the biggest players in town. Then let’s see you give us these epic Wonder Woman and Superman trilogies you’ve been making noises about.

  Comment by Warner Borg — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 10:55am PDT  Reply to this post

• @ Matt C

  Wow, you really know your shit! No, I’m not being a wiseguy, i’m impressed! Is the dude from Rome Kevin McKidd still on as Thor? What about the Cap? I do know Sam Jackson is in ALL of them. But won’t all this work interfere with his golf game? THAT is what’s really important in Hollywood, Matt!

  Comment by Irving Thalberg's Ghost — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 11:04am PDT  Reply to this post

• Thor is not going to work – there’s not enough interest in that character, and there’s no way to rework it to make it interesting. Even Captain America doesn’t have enough built-in interest to succeed, though with the right script and director, it could perform. And I’m not talking about opening weekend numbers; “Might Mouse” could do $40 million on its opening weekend, but most comic book movies can’t make it to the second week without a 70% drop.

  Comment by Johnny Marshall — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 1:23pm PDT  Reply to this post

• I have to admit this makes me kinda excited.. that a studio/production group could get it together to coordinate storylines for multiple movies featuring some of the same stories/characters over a few years.

  The caution though is what someone said up above, if one tanks, the rest are done for.

  As for DC.. as a lifelong fan, I was hideously disappointed with the recent Superman and think they’re sitting on a gold mine of movie opportunities if only someone over there at Warners would look at the bigger picture of a Justice League movie. I think there’s a Green Lantern pic in the works, no?

  Comment by Andrew — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 1:44pm PDT  Reply to this post

• “Thor is not going to work – there’s not enough interest in that character, and there’s no way to rework it to make it interesting. Even Captain America doesn’t have enough built-in interest to succeed”

  Tell that to the people who are making Iron Man 2. Funny how these unknown properties make over a half billion worldwide.

  Comment by Somebody — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 2:33pm PDT  Reply to this post

• This idea that a “comicbook” movie can only be a success if it’s based on one of the characters that has already achieved household name status has been disproven again and again (Indeed, Marvel’s recent string of hits was kicked off by BLADE and X-MEN, who were trivia questions before their first movies).It’s also been Warner’s biggest mistake (forget about “rebooting” Superman; he’s been too successful on TV for the past couple of decades-LOIS AND CLARK, SMALLVILLE- to generate much interest as a big- screen draw right now). The only thing that has EVER mattered is THIS: will a comicstrip actually translate well into film form? Everything else- fidelity or name recognition- is secondary to making a film that looks interesting enough to draw an audience, and entertaining enough to bring ‘em back for more…

  Comment by cst — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 4:44pm PDT  Reply to this post

• cst said it better than I did, but my point was, the character has to either have a large native audience, or be interesting. Iron Man is interesting. Blade was interesting (but more importantly, at its core Blade is a vampire movie). Thor is an uninteresting character, as is Captain America (too Jingoistic for today’s post-modern, post-Western world; think foreign audiences will warm to a idol to American hegemony?). Its a mistake to deploy these two characters to warm up audiences to an “Avengers” movie (though the “Avengers” movie will do well).

  Comment by Johnny Marshall — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 5:35pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Thor “uninteresting”? Nordic Mythology is the heart of LORD OF THE RINGS- and a movie that replaces whiny Hobbits with a Berzerker Thunder God is a big step up, in my opinion.(Not to mention that they’ll probably put Led Zep on the soundtrack, just like Ozzy was used in IRON MAN!) More importantly,Marvel’s films tend to harken back to their original 1960′s roots-at least, for the origins- and Kirby-era THOR comics were packed full of spectacle that’ll look good on the big screen… Trust me, there’s a LOT more potential for a hit here than there ever was with the Hulk!

  Comment by cst — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 8:53pm PDT  Reply to this post

• cst, I don’t know what universe you live in, but in this universe X-Men has always been a household name.From the comic book geeks, to the people like me who grew up watching the cartoon, X-Men has a large and faithful built in audiences all over the world.

  As for Blade, which started the comic book to movie craze,Johnny Marshall said it best…It’s more fangs than F.I.S.T.

  Comment by redmenace — Thursday March 12, 2009 @ 9:24pm PDT  Reply to this post

• I think Captain America & Thor will be definitely harder sells than Iron Man but Thor as cst pointed out could be Lord Of The rings on steroids and as for Cap being “too Jingoistic for today’s post-modern, post-Western world” that is a risk for sure but I think in the more recent books and especially in the Ultimates they present him more as a man out of time who struggles to cope with modern society as opposed to just being a super patriotic guy who blindly follows orders.

  I think one reason the Avengers is being pushed back is the possibly that Jon Favreau will direct it. He was interested before but the previous schedule with Iron Man 2 out the year earlier would have made it impossible – now he might be able to do the Avengers as well which I’m sure he could pull off well and apparently the Marvel guys are very high on him. If he follows Millar & Hitch’s Ultimates Vol 1 & 2 we are in for a treat!

  Comment by Sumit — Friday March 13, 2009 @ 4:23am PDT  Reply to this post

• X-MEN was the top comic for years (although it was the least popular of the original Marvel line-up for years before that), and it’s 1990′s cartoon was fairly popular- but it wasn’t until the movies that the general public (the ones Hollywood want- the non-comics and cartoon crowd) ever heard of them. Of course, my whole arguement WAS that relative popularity with fans was irrelevant in the first place! All those saying that so-and-so character isn’t “well-known” enough to support a hit are using that “mainstream” standard- by which they mean only material that has ALREADY had a tv show or movie is well-known enough for them.(Try applying that standard to NOVELS and you would never see another adaptation of a book …)

  Comment by cst — Friday March 13, 2009 @ 4:24am PDT  Reply to this post

• Not ANOTHER lame comic book movie, PLEASE!! Hollywood, when are you going to get a clue and do some great movies again about love, redemption, and drama? Meh.

  Comment by TJ — Friday March 13, 2009 @ 4:38am PDT  Reply to this post

• Uh TJ, Hollywood does have a clue. People (generally) go to the comic book movies. They’re fun and often relatively light escapism (Yes, I do know that Dark Night isn’t “light.”) I have enough drama in my own life what with the crappiness that is our economy. So I guess I’ll continue to see the comic book movies.

  Comment by Laura — Friday March 13, 2009 @ 2:18pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Household names. Built-in audience. Bah.
  Make a good movie, it will sell. Iron Man: good (various reasons, foremost, but not only Mr. Downey).
  Superman Returns: not so good.
  So never mind the big names, the “big properties”, whaddayacallit. If they manage to make a good Thor movie, Brasilians and Germans will see it – not only the Nordic countries.
  If Captain America is bad, expect the fan crowd from NY to LA to stay home.

  There is way to much stress – in more than one sense of the word – on ‘safe bets’ and ‘safe film managing’ and not enough on film making.

  Comment by Mertel — Monday March 16, 2009 @ 7:11am PDT  Reply to this post

• I hope the Avengers movie is done like the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

  2012 the Avengers, 2013 Avengers Unite and top it off in 2014 with Avengers Assemble

  Comment by sam sierra — Monday January 11, 2010 @ 7:07pm PST  Reply to this post