Now don't get me wrong, I too am geeking out in anticipation over
The Avengers. But some recent thoughts and concerns after re watching
Iron Man 2 lead me to believe it could end the cycle of Marvel's individual superhero movies. Iron Man 2 was met with largely mixed views from critics and fans alike, with it being noted that it did not capture the ground breaking essence of the original.
Some key arguments of FAR less action and too much focus set on other characters worried fans and moviegoers alike.
Iron Man 2 seemed to be a sequel that focused less on Iron Man himself, which was the key to success with its superior predecessor.
As the buzz on
Iron Man 2 passed, Marvel would go on to focus on their next adventures,
Thor &
Captain America: The First Avenger, which would all lead up to the multi-hero team up in 2012's
The Avengers.
So what was my problem with
Iron Man 2? The lack of action? The lack of focus on Tony Stark/Iron Man? No, it was that after setting up Iron Man in the prior movie, they used the characters sequel more as a prequel to
The Avengers, who required at least some set up instead throwing the team together in the movie too fast.
But with many set ups and Easter Eggs for The Avengers thrown in, we hardly got a film focusing on Iron Man's solo adventure at all. It seemed Marvel was more concerned with setting up more of The Avengers than giving us a sequel. Sure Thor and Caps first big screen outing will focus on setting them up as their own hero, but do you really think sequels to Thor, Cap, Iron Man 2, and The Avengers wont focus on bringing as many superheroes as possible to set up more movies?
While talking to MTV, Director of the first two Iron Man films, Jon Favreau had this to say regarding Iron Man 3:
"In theory, 'Iron Man 3' is going to be a sequel or continuation of 'Thor,' 'Hulk,' 'Captain America' and 'Avengers,'" he said. "This whole world... I have no idea what it is. I don't think they do either, from conversations I've had with those guys."
Now only weeks later Favreau would walk away from the directors chair for another Iron Man, and I believe Marvel wanting to include other heroes without focusing on Iron Man as much is what creatively separated them. People like to blame Favreau for Iron Man 2's problems, but the lack of focus on Iron Man and his hints on the Blu-Ray commentary that led us to believe Marvel meddled and threw in all the other hero references that over clouded the movies, is why I believe Favreau walked on the threequel.
With the plot for Iron Man 2 basically setting up the Avengers, whose to say the sequels to Marvel's other movies won't be used to set up the big screen adventures of other heroes they have been waiting to introduce.
Now people (myself included) have been hoping for years that Marvel will be making a Doctor Strange movie. But with the use of a whole cinematic shared universe to set up other characters, why wouldn't they include Doctor Strange in another movie to set up just who he is before taking a gamble and throwing a character not well know outside of the fan-boy community.
Now I know some of you are thinking that Thor, who isn't extremely well know outside of our fan-boy group either, is getting his own solo film. But notice that outside of the tiny reference in Iron Man 2, Thor promotions have banked off Iron Man's success by mentioning that it is the same studio. Hell they even threw Iron Man and Hulk in a TV spot for Thor.
So if Iron Man was used to set up Thor and The Avengers, that leaves it to be totally realistic for any other successful superhero movie to set up a lesser known character, diverting some time away from the star of the show.
Powered By Vistaprint