THR (Borys Kit) confirms that Doctor Strange will appear in Spider-Man 3, which is an easy, lateral move by the MCU to have Benedict Cumberbatch take the place of RDJ's Iron Man. After this news dropped, Daniel floated the idea of Spider-Man appearing in Doctor Strange 2 (which I take as speculation, but it's plausible). He followed this up by talking about Venom possibly appearing, which is a popular rumour on the fringes (without better information I don't buy it; LotLB, via their original source, were the first to suggest it that I'm aware of).
Speaking of Daniel, the former made an odd statement:
Since they [MCU] can't have too many cameos in Doctor Strange 2 and because Sony wants more money out of Spider-Man 3 they [MCU] have a plan to include lot of cameos and supporting roles for characters from other Earths in [Spider-Man 3] as well.
What baffles me is "they can't have too many cameos"--why? Marvel has shown no reluctance packing actors into their films, so why would Doctor Strange 2 have a limitation? It's an odd comment to justify the idea of an overstuffed Spider-Man 3. The general idea seems to (again) be derived from Sutton (given how much Daniel hates on him on social media, it's funny to see him continue copying his material).
[I]t’s based on the graphic novel of The Mighty Thor. She’s going through cancer treatment and is a superhero on the side.
Is this confirming the cancer element, or is she just describing the story? Most of the fan sites jumped to the former conclusion and that's the simplest interpretation, but just in front of that quote Portman said she couldn't reveal any details about the film, so I don't think we can be definitive (granting that we've had many actors over the years accidentally spill info in interviews).
We recall the confusion over Hailee Steinfeld's participation in Hawkeye--are grids showing her confirmed in the role old, or has Marvel made an arrangement with Amazon? This remains unclear, as Variety reports that her show on Amazon (Dickinson) has been renewed with her included. Keep in mind, it's not that an actor can't handle multiple shows, but does mean she hasn't been bought out of her contract (so something else would have to be negotiated for her to appear in Hawkeye, which begins filming soon).
The Direct (Tom Drew), via Daniel, dropped a casting list for nine characters for Hawkeye (see below). Murphy commented on this after the fact without adding any significant information (for some reason he says 'it appears' the filming date is November, which is puzzling as that date is listed on casting information itself). Another point of interest for me is that Murphy seems to have seen this casting sheet in June, since he reported on elements from it at that time. From other things we've heard it looks like June is when all the various Disney+ shows started (or resumed) casting, which gives us an idea for how long people like Daniel wait to spread the information. As for the cast list:
[MISHA]
20s – 40s, Male or Female, Eastern European henchman. Speaks with an accent. Strong Supporting/Recurring. [Drew says this is presumably for the Tracksuit Mafia--Eastern Europeans=bad not only fits the source material, but seems to be where the American entertainment is leaning these days]
[BELLA]
Female, white, 8 years old. Precocious, daring and confident with a sense of humor. [It seems clear there is some sort of flashback or series of flashbacks in the show, so this is either the younger iteration of a present-day character or someone purely from Kate Bishop's past; Drew doesn't share this opinion, believing they are present-day kids living in Hawkeye's apartment ala the comics]
[BRADY]
Male, white, 9 years old. Energetic and sweet. [See above]
[HEATHER]
Female, white, Midwestern, 26 years old. Smart & scrappy, does what she needs to in order to survive. [Drew thinks this is attached to the younger characters--I wonder if she's part of what I think are flashbacks]
[ROSE]
Female, 8 years old, Deaf, Indigenous. Independent, athletic & bright. Small supporting. Please note that the dialogue in the audition scene can be spoken in English or signed in ASL (American Sign Language) if the actor knows that language. [Everyone assumes this is Echo in flashbacks]
[RICHARD]
40s - 50s yr old male, Indigenous, American. A loving father and fierce protector. [Assumed to be Echo's father, although Drew speculates he's Red Wolf from the source material]
[MARY]
Female, late 30s - early 40s, open ethnicity. Highly professional & ambitious career woman. No nonsense. Recurring [Drew speculates she's Madame Masque; what's really strange about this is his colleague claimed the role was confirmed in the show a week or so ago--if that's the case, surely they saw a casting list that was unambiguous, meaning this couldn't also be that character. So, either the previous article was using poor information or Drew isn't reading the posts on his own site before speculating (neither is a good look for The Direct)][DETECTIVE SHERMAN]40s, Male, Open Ethnicity, New York City Detective. Recurring [No guesses for this one]
[ALEX]
Female or Male, 30s–50 [Contextually it seems like Murphy believes this is Grills, Clint's neighbour]
The production dates are listed as November to May. Most interesting to me is that the show is listed as episodic--I hope that's not the case, as I generally despise episodic television (granting that I don't think they mean it in the way it used to be done, where every episode was groundhog day as previous events didn't matter).
Something I find interesting--and its a common phenomena--is that even though Clint's life in the MCU is very different from his life in the comics, most of the fan coverage is copy-pasting the source material without much thought. How can Clint go from his happy family life to his single living in an apartment? While his wife wouldn't be pleased with his Ronin activities, Clint was frankly killing bad guys for SHIELD long before that and he has kids in the MCU, so it's difficult to simply shift the character from a state of happy family life (thanks Joss Whedon) to the bachelor pad of Fraction's run. Marvel is all about simplifying when they translate stories, so I'm curious to see what they do with this translation from source to film (or, in this case, TV). I'd actually be happy to lose Clint's family entirely, but I don't think Marvel will go that way.
Social media activity has people speculating that comedian Alyssa Limperis is in Loki. On the heels of this, an article about Sasha Lane seems to confirm speculation via IMDB that she'll appear in the series. I have no strong reactions to either.
Fandom Wire (Devin Colson) is claiming Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield are in talks to appear in Spider-Man 3. This seems unlikely given that filming begins this month (if real it would suggest only cameos). Again, I don't know what including the older iterations really does for the MCU, but certainly Sony would want it. This idea echoes frequent rumours (Sutton was the first that I'm aware of).
Sutton says Taskmaster will be a Deadpool villain and be R-rated with him. I have no idea what the point of that would be, granting that I think little of Taskmaster (I also believe Deadpool has a limited shelf-life as its own IP). That doesn't mean I'm dismissing the rumour out of hand, just expressing my disinterest if it's true.
4chan claims Millie Bobbie Brown is joining Thor 4, but fans have put her in every Marvel production under the sun, so this amounts to nothing more than speculation.
More 4chan (I've kept the poster's writing as-is):
Spider-Man 3, is going to be similar to John wick 3, where it’s Peter vs everyone. It’s also going to be one of the darker movies in the MCU. [This sounds preposterous]
Squirrel girl is being developed as a Disney plus show. Alison Brie and Anna Kendrick are 2 of the actors that marvel wants, but they aren’t definite choices. [Kendrick has been a popular fan choice for Squirrel Girl forever]
Marvel Max, Marvels R rated brand is real, and Disney wants John landgraf to be in charge of it. However he’s hesitant to leave FX.
Aaron Paul got approached by marvel
Brie Larson will show up in Ms marvel at some point. [I have no idea why anyone--and that includes reputable scoopers--thinks this is news]
Deadpool vs predator is an idea that’s been thrown around, since Disney wants to revive the franchise.
Marvel wants morbius to be in a blade movie. [Why? Unless the film is a success no one knows who or what Morbius is]
Sony wants to create a kraven the Hunter tv series. It would tie into the SUMC, as well as the MCU Spider-Man movies. [There's literally nothing preventing them from doing this, but given how leaky Sony is and we haven't heard this idea from anyone else, it's clearly a product of the poster's imagination]
Moon knight is going to make Marc the first MCU character that is truly flawed.
Marvel wants to bring the punisher back as a Hulu show. [This is an old LotLB rumour]
Marvel wants Keith David to voice a big villain, but they can’t think of who.
Just like the post below, this looks is a fan's wishful thinking. The same poster put up something very similar a day or two later, but it's all the same kind of thing so I haven't included it.
Even More 4chan:
Shang Chi: Ronny Chieng is playing Clive Reston. Fala Chen and Florian Munteanu are playing Leiko Wu and Black Jack Tarr as rumored. Benedict Wong is returning as Wong. Michelle Yeoh is playing Shang Chi’s mother.
Eternals: Dan Stevens is playing Kro. Harry Styles and David Strathairn are playing Eros and Zuras.
Spider-Man: subtitle is Home Invasion, villains are the Sinister Six which include Vulture, Mysterio, Shocker, Scorpion, Electro, and Kraven. Keanu is the top choice for Kraven, no deal finalized yet. J.K. Simmons is coming back as JJJ. [Pretty hard to have no one signed for Kraven when you're about to start filming....]
Love and Thunder: Christian Bale is playing Gorr. Goldblum and Dinklage are coming back. Ryan Gosling voices Beta Ray Bill. Guardians are only in the beginning.
Multiverse of Madness: Wanda is the main villain, as she’s controlled by Mephisto, who Evan Peters is playing in WandaVison. Anne Hathaway and Yahya Abdul-Mateen II are the top choices for Clea and Voodoo.
Captain Marvel: Secret Invasion is subtitle. Jude Law is coming back. Monica Rambeau, Rhodes, Kamala, Hill, Talos, and Fury are supporting characters. Abigail Brand is introduced. Keira Knightly and Kate Winslet are being looked at for the role.
Ant-Man 3: Jonathan Majors is playing Kang of course. Emma Fuhrmann is back as Cassie, as is Luis and Janet. Reed Richards is being cast for a supporting role.
This is someone's fan casting (the obsession that Reddit and 4chan have for Ryan Gosling is amazing). One of the mistakes these posters make is thinking that Marvel only casts A-listers, which is actually something they steer away from often (presumably to keep costs down and make it easier to get long term commitments).
One of the stranger things to happen of late is that Grace Randolph has begun to parrot Sutton's old headlines (eg), which Sutton see's as verification for his own material. For those who don't know, or need a refresher, Randolph is a bitter ex-employee of Marvel and has repeatedly floated unsubstantiated rumours about the MCU that have been wrong (eg). She is not a reliable Marvel source, despite the fact that her DC information is sometimes credible. Is Sutton aware of this issue with her? I don't think he is--from what I've seen, he's shown little awareness of the predilections of the various scoopers and news-peddlers in this arena and he's strongly impacted by personal bias (eg; I'll go through this example below). Midnight's Edge has also made this mistake with Randolph, assuming that if she was credible in one arena, she must be generally credible. Andre also has Sutton's lack of sophistication when it comes to sources (he infamously used WGTC once).
Let's go back to that Sutton example I referenced to go over what I mean. First, Sutton sets up a strawman (this term has become a meme, but it means what it means):
The theory is this: Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige will recast any Marvel character that was originally handled by another company or producer. Therefore, Daredevil and the Punisher will have to return with different actors. Apparently, Feige is so egocentric and petty that he needs actors of his own choosing, no matter if they excelled previously. Wrong.
Sutton is framing it this way because it suits his subsequent argument (the reasoning offered is frankly ridiculous--no one has suggested Feige's ego is why he does what he does). Sutton says the above is refuted by the use of J. K, Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson, Ryan Reynolds as Deadpool, and Jamie Foxx as Electro. He then transparently shows his cards by showing a picture of Chloe Bennet at the bottom of his post, someone he's convinced will appear as Quake in the MCU. So what's wrong with the above? It ignores context.
Agents of SHIELD began production in 2012 and Marvel Entertainment (the TV shows under Jeph Loeb) continue to this day in Helstrom. Feige has ignored the ME material completely, despite the ease of which it could be acknowledged (particularly in the early days of Netflix's booming popularity). Feige ignoring them isn't a theory, it's a fact--it's an intentional snub and evidence that Feige wanted nothing to do with anything Loeb had his hand in. Secondly, when the deal was cut with Sony for Spider-Man, Feige made it abundantly clear that anything made by Sony (ie Venom) had nothing to do with the MCU--that's why we have that delightful interview with he and Amy Pascal that's become a meme. That decision doesn't involve Loeb, leaving you with one of two conclusions: 1) he was ordered by either Alan Horn or Bob Iger to maintain that separation, or 2) that's what he wanted for his own reasons. Thirdly, he's said he wants to do something completely different with the Fox IP--he said it in 2019 when no one was telling him what to do creatively. While his comment is about story, it also means he does not want to lean on what Fox has done already (otherwise it's not different). What does this tell us? Feige doesn't want to repeat what's been done before and he doesn't want to acknowledge anything Loeb has done. How does this translate into the actors above?
There's three important factors in the reprising actors Sutton is referring too: 1) Two of them involve Sony's impute (for those who think they have no say in casting, they picked Tom Holland as Spider-Man when he was the MCU's second choice; other choices like Batalon, Zendaya, and Harrier fit Amy Pascal's tendencies), 2) While the actors are the same, the characters are not (the lighthearted Jameson from the Raimi films is not the Alex Jones-clone in Far From Home), 3) Deadpool is Bob Iger's decision--Iger couldn't stop going on and on about it as he pitched the purchase of Fox to stockholders--you can see how difficult following this has been for Feige, as nothing of substance has come out about that IP since the purchase (a third film hasn't even been teased with a logo like Blade).
So, to dovetail back to Sutton's point: could Feige re-use actors in the same role from the hands of another creative team? Of course he could. Is it likely? No. Thus far we've only seen reprisals in a Sony context. Could that change? Sure (there are good economic reasons to try to connect the Fox IP to the MCU, as I discussed last time), but until it does it's speculation with poor foundations. What none of this does is suggest a warming from Feige towards anything Jeph Loeb had his hand in (ie, the incessant Quake rumours). The issue has never been whether its possible, but if its probable. Scoopers love Bennet and that seems to be the real reason so many push her future involvement.
This mental Olympics is something I've seen before (and I'm not picking on Sutton specifically, as Murphy and others are guilty of doing this as well)--where a piece of evidence fits the person's desire so strongly they ignore anything that works against it (classic confirmation bias). We've seen this when people discuss the rights to Namor or the the direct return of the Netflix characters (there's evidence to argue one way, but the predominant and better evidence goes against what they want). In the latter case the argument being made has changed considerably, but you still hear the former repeated.
The news that the inherited Marvel Fox IP are going to be rebranded to 'Marvel Legacy' opens one of two doors. Let me first admit my own personal preference: I don't want the MCU to associate with the inconsistent mess that are the Fox films. Here are the options: 1) This is as far as Feige will go to 'associate' the IP with the MCU without connecting it to the Fox films (providing 'added value' to what Disney purchased), 2) This is a hint about the Multiverse connecting things to the Fox films (being a more direct 'added value' to what's seemingly redundant IP). Normally I would land heavily on option #1 given Feige's approach (described above), but he worked on every Marvel project from 2000-07, regardless of the company behind it, so had his hand in the original three X-films (this applies to the Raimi trilogy as well). Before anyone gets too excited, that applies to Ang Lee's 2003 Hulk film, which despite Universal's involvement in Edward Norton's loose sequel has been utterly ignored. Whatever connections Feige had to these earlier films, I still think the most likely answer is #1 (particularly if, as we've heard, Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart weren't open to reappearing as their iconic characters in the MCU), but a tiny door remains open for #2.
This is tangential, but was eye-opening to me so thought I'd share it. For about 24-hours Murphy's home page was set-up incorrectly so that the view counts for articles was visible. This was quite shocking for me because, outside of select scoops from Murphy himself, the counts are incredibly low given his high profile (my own site hits those numbers--keep in mind his overall traffic is higher). The mistake has since been fixed, but I've often wondered just how much viewership the various fansites get and what this makes clear is just how niche written coverage is.
I'm getting concerned with Marvel's casting approach in Phase Four. I'm not saying it's conclusively bad, just that I'm seeing a lot of choices that have no chance to get casual fans interested--casting that's leaning entirely on the brand. This approach is playing with fire and I wonder when the MCU will get burned for doing it. I can't help but think about recent failures like Julian Dennison in Deadpool 2, Natalie Reyes in Terminator: Dark Fate, Isa Briones in Star Trek: Picard, etc. These were actors no one was familiar with who, in these particular titles, showed little to no acting ability and weighed down the IP around them. It's worth noting none of these actors were leads. I should be clear that, at the moment, the Disney+ casts are where the alarm bells are ringing, as other than The Eternals the film casting remains much safer (your opinion of the popularity of the Eternals cast may vary from mine and if the film was made ten years ago I'd have a different opinion). It's much easier to fail on a streaming service (where numbers aren't public and you can pretend all is well), but I am curious to see if this trend continues in Phase Five.
A final tangent: it's pretty crazy that Disney is going to eat another bomb on Disney+ by putting Soul on the streaming service. The Pixar film cost over 150 million and will recoup virtually none of that. Both it and Mulan are coming from the core of Disney's production and speaks poorly to those in charge--you have to wonder if internal shakeups are on order following those failures.
This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)
No comments:
Post a Comment