As most would agree, Marvel Studio's first movies were both impressive and were a good break to the bland comic book movies that were released in the past few years. All seemed good, and the idea of having the cast reprise their role in not just numerous sequels to the movies - but join up together in the Avengers (I could have skipped this last bit, Mr.Favreau made this point very clear in his latest Iron Man film).
I'd also like to point out that I don't not consider myself to be an expert on comic book lore as I own very few comics and tend to get most of my knowledge of these characters from the 90's TV cartoons. However, in the past years, I got to know some more details through you at CBM, so I'm going to assume I have a rough idea of what goes on with the marvel characters.
Changing Terrance Howard in Iron Man 2 ticked me off quite a lot, why did they replace possibly one of the best actors in the movie? I don't think Howard's acting is stellar, but I connected with the character and I found his relationship with Stark to be quite believable and natural.
All in all, to me, Iron Man 2 was Marvel Studios worst film. But I know studios may make mistakes, or I didn't click with the story and movie as a whole so I let the event pass bye, waiting eagerly for Thor which is due to be out next year.
Next we get to know that Chris Evans is Captain America. I wasn't a big fan of the Fantastic Four movies, nor did I enjoy watching Push. I though Marvel Studios was slightly more adventurous in trying to find the best talent to represent one of their most iconic characters. Once again, this might have been my opinion and we haven't seen anything from the film apart from some concept suit artwork (which didn't impress me, but things always look different on screen - a point which I will address after I discuss some more continuity...
Today I saw the 1st decent image from Thor. Erm, as far as I know, he is the God of Thunder - not the son of some supernaturally-powered alien. If this was being done by another studio I might have let it go and forgotten all about the movie, but Marvel?
For starters, the eye patch looks totally out of place and they all seem too clean. Was I hoping too much when I though Thor would be a comic-styled Lord of the Rings? Please, those that know Thor's history well enough, correct me if I'm wrong on this bit. The armour looks too futuristic. Was this direction taken to make Thor, Cap and Iron Man look good on screen and not look out of place? From my point of view, that's the fun part of The Avengers - they've all got their 'different walks of life' and somehow, need to work as a team.
I haven't given up on Thor till now, I'll judge once i see the trailer. After all, the image might have been simply part of a photo shoot and Mr. Hopkins had just arrived from the Hair Salon.
Finally.
Replacing Ed Norton... this is where I begin to hope that Marvel's just playing one big joke. Norton brought something new to the Hulk (at least to the silver screen). It wasn't too light hearted like Iron Man, and wasn't as dark as the Dark Knight - to me, Hulk had the perfect balance when it came to presenting the story in movie format. Sure, there were bits I didn't like, I would have rather seen a less hulk-like enemy but once again, it might be down to personal preference.
But RE-CASTING the person who probably made the movie the masterpiece it is today? Sure, they'd let RDJ meddle with the script and act all natural - he's something of a Sex Symbol now - who would want to piss Downey off? Could it be that Norton thought that the Avengers script was too childish and lacked any emotion what so ever?
I hope I didnt sound like i'm ranting but I cant see how, from my point of view, Marvel's screwing up it's own products. I'd rather see films which capture the essence of the period they're in rather than see these characters blended to fit into the Avengers.
Here's hoping that Comic Con sheds more light onto these projects, and that I won't have to give up on Comic Book Movies by Marvel.