Iron Man 2 End Credits (major spoiler alert)

[ArtherEld]

If you want to make a thread discussing the Iron Man 2 movie itself, go ahead. This is specifically about the end credits of Iron Man 2 that seem to hint at another movie.

Spoilers beyond this point.




So...

At the end of the closing credits of the film Iron Man 2, a car is driving through the New Mexico desert and stops on a cliff. Soon after, S.H.I.E.L.D agent Phil Coulson steps out of the car and looks over at a huge crater in the ground. Coulson calls Nick Fury and says "Sir, we found it," and Thor's hammer Mjolnir is shown on-screen.

Here's the thing. It should be known to anyone who's either a comic geek or movie geek that the Thor movie is well on its way. It's coming out next year. They've already got pictures online.

What I want to discuss is what they're seemingly leading up to here. This is the second crossover that officially links 3 of the 5 original Avengers (Captain America shows up a wee bit later) in three films. The first Iron Man film comes out, than The Hulk film with an ending that links The Hulk to Iron Man. Now Iron Man 2 comes out and its ending links itself to Thor.

So when Thor comes out next year what will its end credits show? A hint at Ant-Man? The Wasp? Or even Captain America? Or will they go with a later version of the Avengers and link to someone else?

Or... is it all a big tease?

[mystima]

from what i have read online...and just for reference i don't believe everything i see there. they are in the works for an avenger movie. so that looks like it might be hinting at that.

[Philzilla]

Yeah, it's all a set up for the Avengers movie in 2012

[turtlex]

Yup... it's the Avengers movie set-up. Without a doubt.

[ArtherEld]

From the Marvel website (this was posted March 2009 so any updates may have changed beyond that):

Get out your calendars Marvelites and get ready to mark them up—with the film release dates associated with the continuous story arc (YES!) on the road to "The Avengers!" Plus, if your Spidey senses are tingling, that's because "Spider-Man 4" now has an official release date!

Paving the way for the production and release of "The Avengers," Marvel announced today an adjusted release pipeline for its self-produced feature film properties that reflects the first time individual super hero characters and story arcs will be inter-woven and culminate in a multi-character motion picture.

Separately, Marvel Studios confirmed today that Sony Pictures Entertainment will release "Spider-Man 4" on May 6, 2011. Additionally, Marvel Studios has revised the release dates for "Thor" and "The First Avenger: Captain America" as part of its release strategy for an uninterrupted road to "The Avengers," now debuting May 4, 2012.

A Marvel character-based film will now launch the summer box office season for three years in a row, from 2010 through 2012.

"This new schedule strongly sequences Marvel's movie debut dates, big screen character introductions and momentum. It maximizes the visibility of our single character-focused films, leading to the highly anticipated release of the multi-character 'The Avengers' film in 2012," said David Maisel, Chairman, Marvel Studios.

Sony Pictures' and Marvel Studios' "Spider-Man 4" is slated for May 6, 2011. To date, all three motion pictures in the phenomenally successful "Spider-Man" franchise have generated nearly $2.5 billion worldwide theatrically.

Below is Marvel Studios' 2010-2012 updated release schedule for its slate of self-produced and financed feature films:

IRON MAN 2 - Current Release Date May 7, 2010
THOR - Current Release Date May 20, 2011
THE FIRST AVENGER: CAPTAIN AMERICA - Current Release Date July 22, 2011
THE AVENGERS - Current Release Date May 4, 2012

The release date for IRON MAN 2 remains unchanged. IRON MAN 2 is the sequel to the blockbuster film, IRON MAN, which has grossed nearly $600 million worldwide.

Original Article (http://marvel.com/news/.7214.Marvel_Movie_Update~colon~_New_Release_Sched ule)

There's a lot of movie news in there.

Here's the thing. I'll have to find out more, I don't see any indication that Antman or The Wasp will show up in The Avengers film. They might be inserting Spiderman instead which would be a good reason they're going for a fourth film here. Antman and the Wasp may still show up in film, but it doesn't look like they're getting their own film like the other characters.

In the comic book series Spiderman doesn't show up as an "Avenger" until 2005 with "The New Avengers". Me not being a huge comic book fan, I don't really have an opinion on Antman or The Wasp being in the film or not.

I will say this is turning out to be the most creative and most nerdiest film series I've ever seen. Each character getting their own film leading to a sequel to all their films bringing them all together as a team. I could be wrong, but I know I've never seen this done before.

[feverishparade]

Don't know about you guys , but all this Avengers set up crap really irritates me. Instead of wasting Gan knows how much screen time setting up the Avengers movie, Favreau should have given some more screen time in an effort to further develop some of his key characters such as Pepper Potts, or Venko.

[demorgan]

From the Marvel website (this was posted March 2009 so any updates may have changed beyond that):

Get out your calendars Marvelites and get ready to mark them up—with the film release dates associated with the continuous story arc (YES!) on the road to "The Avengers!" Plus, if your Spidey senses are tingling, that's because "Spider-Man 4" now has an official release date!

Paving the way for the production and release of "The Avengers," Marvel announced today an adjusted release pipeline for its self-produced feature film properties that reflects the first time individual super hero characters and story arcs will be inter-woven and culminate in a multi-character motion picture.

Separately, Marvel Studios confirmed today that Sony Pictures Entertainment will release "Spider-Man 4" on May 6, 2011. Additionally, Marvel Studios has revised the release dates for "Thor" and "The First Avenger: Captain America" as part of its release strategy for an uninterrupted road to "The Avengers," now debuting May 4, 2012.

A Marvel character-based film will now launch the summer box office season for three years in a row, from 2010 through 2012.

"This new schedule strongly sequences Marvel's movie debut dates, big screen character introductions and momentum. It maximizes the visibility of our single character-focused films, leading to the highly anticipated release of the multi-character 'The Avengers' film in 2012," said David Maisel, Chairman, Marvel Studios.

Sony Pictures' and Marvel Studios' "Spider-Man 4" is slated for May 6, 2011. To date, all three motion pictures in the phenomenally successful "Spider-Man" franchise have generated nearly $2.5 billion worldwide theatrically.

Below is Marvel Studios' 2010-2012 updated release schedule for its slate of self-produced and financed feature films:

IRON MAN 2 - Current Release Date May 7, 2010
THOR - Current Release Date May 20, 2011
THE FIRST AVENGER: CAPTAIN AMERICA - Current Release Date July 22, 2011
THE AVENGERS - Current Release Date May 4, 2012

The release date for IRON MAN 2 remains unchanged. IRON MAN 2 is the sequel to the blockbuster film, IRON MAN, which has grossed nearly $600 million worldwide.

Original Article (http://marvel.com/news/.7214.Marvel_Movie_Update~colon~_New_Release_Sched ule)

There's a lot of movie news in there.

Here's the thing. I'll have to find out more, I don't see any indication that Antman or The Wasp will show up in The Avengers film. They might be inserting Spiderman instead which would be a good reason they're going for a fourth film here. Antman and the Wasp may still show up in film, but it doesn't look like they're getting their own film like the other characters.

In the comic book series Spiderman doesn't show up as an "Avenger" until 2005 with "The New Avengers". Me not being a huge comic book fan, I don't really have an opinion on Antman or The Wasp being in the film or not.

I will say this is turning out to be the most creative and most nerdiest film series I've ever seen. Each character getting their own film leading to a sequel to all their films bringing them all together as a team. I could be wrong, but I know I've never seen this done before.

I highly doubt that Spiderman is going to be in THE AVENGERS movie..spiderman movie rights is owned by sony.

[demorgan]

Don't know about you guys , but all this Avengers set up crap really irritates me. Instead of wasting Gan knows how much screen time setting up the Avengers movie, Favreau should have given some more screen time in an effort to further develop some of his key characters such as Pepper Potts, or Venko.
Well, the biggest complaint is tht this movie wasnt even about anything. Lacked focus.

[turtlex]

Don't know about you guys , but all this Avengers set up crap really irritates me. Instead of wasting Gan knows how much screen time setting up the Avengers movie, Favreau should have given some more screen time in an effort to further develop some of his key characters such as Pepper Potts, or Venko.

Thank you !!!

THIS !!!

[ArtherEld]

Don't know about you guys , but all this Avengers set up crap really irritates me. Instead of wasting Gan knows how much screen time setting up the Avengers movie, Favreau should have given some more screen time in an effort to further develop some of his key characters such as Pepper Potts, or Venko.

Barely a minute.

But I sort of agree with you. About Venko specifically. I actually liked Pepper's character in this film. But Venko's story lacked depth and that really hurt the main plot. There was a plot here, but it lacked the depth of the first film in which Stark is betrayed by his friend.

I know I wasn't going to turn this into a thread reviewing the movie, but oh well here it is. I was kind of disappointed in this film. I thought it was... alright. My girlfriend and I both agreed that the Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johanson) fight with the security guards, while it was kickass, it did way too many close ups of her fight poses.

It was like, fight, take down a guard, she pauses and does a fight pose, camera closes in on her as she poses and looks intense for her next fight. That sort of thing is okay, especially in a movie like this based on a comic book where they do that thing all the time, but they did it almost after every guard she took down. I would have been happy if they had did one after the first guard she took down, then one at the end after her last fight. Still a little cheesy but comic book cheesy and that's acceptable.

And back to the plot, it was okay but not intriguing. And the end fight scene with Venko was too short.

[turtlex]

Actually, there was a lot of screen time spent setting up the Avengers movie... every scene with Samuel L Jackson was basically a set-up for the Avengers flick.

[ArtherEld]

Actually, there was a lot of screen time spent setting up the Avengers movie... every scene with Samuel L Jackson was basically a set-up for the Avengers flick.

True but he was part of the main plot. And that could have been developed better as well. I think there was some unneeded off screen drama as well, something about him almost not taking the part and then reluctantly agreeing to a 9 picture deal as this Nick Fury character, but don't quote me on that. I'm not up on celebrity news.

[turtlex]

My whole thing is - There was just no point for Nick Fury to be there.... except to push the Avengers film. That's all I was saying ... I'm with Feev on the screen time being used elsewhere - to develope other characters who were sorely lacking.

We didn't need Scarlett or SamLJackson at all. It was too much. They should have used Mickey more and let him interact with Sam Rockwell to build plot.

Oh, and one huge hole in the plot was Pepper ... personal assistant to CEO in four seconds !!! Now, I love Pepper, but come on !

Hey - don't get me wrong, I am going to see the Avengers movie ... but I left Iron Man2 feeling cheated.

[ArtherEld]

I'm really looking forward to seeing Hugo Weaving playing Red Skull in the Captain America movie. He's a show stealer. The Matrix sequels may have been below par, but he really made up for it.

But I'm hoping, turtlex, that the Nick Fury screen time doesn't take away from it. Because he's going to be in that movie too, let's hope they hear yours and other criticisms.

[turtlex]

Hugo Weaving ... V ... I'm a fan, without a doubt. He can pull that off - no worries.

Honestly, I figure the folks at Marvel Studios ... they know they have probably 95% of their audience built in, and can pretty much do what they want.

I mean, I pretty much go see every super-hero film, regardless. I'll go see Cap, and The Avengers, and the new Batman, etc.

Here's another question ... and maybe for a different thread, but isn't Samuel L Jackson getting a little... um ... OLD to be playing Nick Fury?!?!

[ArtherEld]

Here's another question ... and maybe for a different thread, but isn't Samuel L Jackson getting a little... um ... OLD to be playing Nick Fury?!?!

Yeah, those are my thoughts. And if you can believe it, there's supposed to be a movie that's just Nick Fury. I mean I could see if he's supposed to just play some Charles Xavier type character, who's just leader/mentor to the rest of the characters, but... he's getting his own frikkin movie!!!

But anything's possible. Did you see "Book of Eli"? That was all Denzel right there. No stunt double. And I thought the same thing there too before seeing the movie. Then I saw it and was like, damn, alright, he did it.

[Dagavidiab]

Hugo Weaving ... V ... I'm a fan, without a doubt. He can pull that off - no worries.

Honestly, I figure the folks at Marvel Studios ... they know they have probably 95% of their audience built in, and can pretty much do what they want.

I mean, I pretty much go see every super-hero film, regardless. I'll go see Cap, and The Avengers, and the new Batman, etc.

Here's another question ... and maybe for a different thread, but isn't Samuel L Jackson getting a little... um ... OLD to be playing Nick Fury?!?!

He was in the WWII, right? Nick IS old!