cap_ironman | Spoilers For Cap Film

Entry tags:

Spoilers For Cap Film

March 1, 2010 is the deadline for casting Steve Rogers. According to wired.com:

Johnston expects to name the film’s star within the next couple weeks, drawing from a short list of six actors up for wielding Cap’s shield. “The youngest is 23,” Johnston said. “The oldest is 32. Most of the guys in the war are just kids, 18 or 19, but we want to go a little bit older.”

BigShinyRobot.com has reported that:

According to MY studio guy, the rumors about Chad Michael Murray (One Tree Hill), Ryan McPartlin (Chuck), Jensen Ackles (Supernatural) and other unknowns/television actors reading for Cap are true.

Apparently, when the script came in with World War II sequences (featuring the Invaders), the studio heads decided it was beyond their means to make this movie AND afford A-listers like Brad Pitt and Matt Damon.

Sure sounds like everyone’s high on McPartlin, who evidently just lost out on the Superman role to Brandon Routh.

Folks should take the Big Shiny Robot information with a grain of salt. It actually came out before Johnston's interview. McPartlin is 34; meaning if we take Johnston's comments as The Word Of God, McPartlin is out. Moreover, this is the first confirmation I've seen that's Jensen Ackles read for the role. ~~I'm trying to withhold my SQUEEEEEEE~~. The three all have contractial obligations with television shows, so regardless of who they cast, they will have to work around their tv schedule. Murray and McPartlin would be easier to write out of their respective shows. Jensen and Jared are in every scene of every episode of Supernatural. Working around Jensen's schedule will be most problematic. But, like my friend in the business says, "if Marvel wants him badly enough, they will make it out."

Now... Now onto script spoilers.

The LA Time's Hero COmplex blog interviewed Joe Johnston. Johnston revealed how Steve Rogers gets his mythic costume:

"The costume is a flag, but the way we're getting around that is we have Steve Rogers forced into the USO circuit. After he's made into this super-soldier, they decide they can't send him into combat and risk him getting killed. He's the only one and they can't make more. So they say, 'You're going to be in this USO show' and they give him a flag suit. He can't wait to get out of it."

"So he's up on stage doing songs and dances with chorus girls and he can't wait to get out and really fight. When he does go AWOL, he covers up the suit but then, after a few things happen, he realizes that this uniform allows him to lead. By then, he's become a star in the public mind and a symbol. The guys get behind him because he embodies something special."

There will be more than one costume in the film, too.

In the first USO sequences, the frustrated patriot will be wearing a version that is closer to the classic Jack Kirby-designed costume, but then later as the super-soldier hits the war zone he will be wearing a sturdier, more muted version that he makes himself that is more like battle togs. The stripes across his mid-section, for instance, will be straps, not colored fabric.

"He realizes the value of the uniform symbols but he modifies his suit and adds some armor, it will be closer to the Cpa costume in some of the comics in more recent years . . . this approach, it's the only way we could justify ever seeing him on a screen in tights, with the funny boots and everything. The government essentially puts him up there as a living comic-book character and he rips it off and then reclaims some of its imagery after he recognizes the value of it. We think it's the best way to keep the costume and explain it at the same time."

~~Steve Rogers never wore tights you asshat.~~

Johnston confirmed there will be tie ins to Iron Man and Thor, and the modern will have modern day book ends. IGN (and multiple other sources) are reporting the director revealed that The Invaders will "be in the entire second half" of the film. IGN is also reporting that Red Skull will be the Big Bad.

On a happier note, Robert Downey Jr is awesome. Downey Jr recently told SFX Magazine:

"The Avengers" [is] a culmination of the first four years of movies from Marvel Studios. It's the pinnacle, but only if it's done in the smartest and best and most creatively sound way possible. And I'm not saying we can't get there. I'm just saying it would be better to get there and not stay on schedule than to get everyone what they were hoping for in terms of a release date but not do it correctly. And by correctly, I mean my way," laughed Downey.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I already spent many hours raging with you in AIM, so... posting to use the icon.

I don't even... (goes into a corner to ~~bitch~~ complain stridently)

“The youngest is 23,” Johnston said. “The oldest is 32. Most of the guys in the war are just kids, 18 or 19, but we want to go a little bit older.”

Well, seeing as they want to do an ensemble movie with the Avengers, and their already cast, well-established, and much-loved Tony Stark actor is in his forties, I do hope they don't go with the 23-year-old. I doubt it would stop me from slashing (with that source material how could I not slash), but the one being old enough to be the other's father would change the chemistry and balance of their relationship.

Apparently, when the script came in with World War II sequences (featuring the Invaders), the studio heads decided it was beyond their means to make this movie AND afford A-listers like Brad Pitt and Matt Damon.

Well, good. I'd love a new (or at least not too well-known) face in the role. And, as much as I love Jensen Ackles in Supernatural, I do not want him as Steve Rogers. Sure, hair and eye colour can be changed, but whoever they cast, I want him to be built, as in huge, muscles and height.

He doesn't really look like he's in his forties, though. I suppose the difference might be more obvious if he was standing right next to someone in his twenties, but I don't think it would change the dynamic that much. I see RDJ!Stark as being somewhere in his mid-thirties.

RDJ is a great actor, and depending on whom they cast as Cap the both of them could pull it of fine, but I'd still prefer less of an age gap. Just because imo this is difficult enough to get right just so, and there's no reason to complicate it further.

Well, seeing as they want to do an ensemble movie with the Avengers, and their already cast, well-established, and much-loved Tony Stark actor is in his forties, I do hope they don't go with the 23-year-old. I doubt it would stop me from slashing (with that source material how could I not slash), but the one being old enough to be the other's father would change the chemistry and balance of their relationship.
My thoughts exactly. Having Steve in his early 20s would be... upsetting. :/

And, as much as I love Jensen Ackles in Supernatural, I do not want him as Steve Rogers.
He would do an awesome job, but... no.
I'd really, really, really like to see him as Bucky, though. I realise that he's too old for the role, but... hell. He would be perfect. (Maybe in the Avengers?)
Anyway, some months ago at a Spn convention he said he wasn't interested in the role - if he did read for Cap it was a nice bluff. Smart move.

And with SPN about to come to an end (presumably), entering the Marvelverse would set him up for several movies... But, yes, he's not suited for Cap, and too old for Bucky (and I don't think they'll cast two different actors for Bucky if they can avoid it).

"He realizes the value of the uniform symbols but he modifies his suit and adds some armor, it will be closer to the Cpa costume in some of the comics in more recent years . . . this approach, it's the only way we could justify ever seeing him on a screen in tights, with the funny boots and everything. The government essentially puts him up there as a living comic-book character and he rips it off and then reclaims some of its imagery after he recognizes the value of it. We think it's the best way to keep the costume and explain it at the same time."

I think this is a good idea. I could totally see the government doing something like that (it even makes a certain amount of sense -- they wanted an army of supersoldiers, but if they only have one, obviously he's too valuable to put out in the field. So they need to get their money's worth out of him another way) and to be frank, Cap's costume is silly. He has little wings on his head. I'm not trying to be a hater here. My favorite costumed hero of all time, the Flash, has little lightning bolts on his head, and wears red pajamas. I kind of like the silly. But it's not a very practical look for live combat, and I like the idea of an exploration of that conflict between showmanship and practicality.

I don't know any of the possible casting choices from Adam (not even Jensen, though I guess he must be doing something right if he has this many rabid fans) so I'll be waiting until we see some trailers to comment on that. I don't mind that they're thinking about casting a slightly older actor for Cap, though -- considering his backstory, I think it could be made to work. And I totally agree with RDJ that they should let the deadlines take care of themselves and focus on making some awesome movies. XD

My major complaint about the USO angle is that it's like spending 50 million dollars on a one-of-a-kind, shiny new gun and then... not using it when someone breaks into your house, because then it wouldn't be shiny. If he grows old and dies without seeing battle, they're getting exactly as much use out of him as they could Bob Hope.

I just don't get it. :\

Like the US government hasn't done stupider things in the comic books. Which I'm not saying is right (or even necessarily accurate) I just said it makes a certain amount of sense, given the context.

Also I was kind of assuming that, while they're turning him into this national icon of awesomeness, they'll also be continuing to take blood samples and conduct tests or whatever. If they just give up on reproducing the serum, that would be incredibly stupid. But if they continue doing tests, and at the same time figure, "we might as well get some use out of this guy, it's no good just leaving him to rot away in some bunker" I think that would make sense. I should have said that in my first post, sorry.

Oh yeah, if they're just keeping him busy while they play with his blood, that makes absolute sense to me (though personally I'd just keep him locked up somewhere, but politicians have indeed done dumber things). But the way the director phrased it ("He's the only one and they can't make more. So they say, 'You're going to be in this USO show' and they give him a flag suit.") made it sound like they'd given up.

Oh yeah, I can see where you get that impression. I hope they don't do that, my theory makes so much more sense. XD

It does! ♥ Maybe we'll get lucky and someone will tap sense into a head or two.

Well, I have to admit turning your one super soldier into a specimen and guinea pig does make more sense than risking to lose your blue print, but I see them either using him mainly as a soldier, or mainly as a scientific tool, but the symbol factor only makes sense to me if he does go out and fight. Otherwise any mascot would do the trick, and a funny plush-costumed one probably better than some guy who's never seen battle but wants to tell you who has seen it all to be brave and strong.

No, don't like the USO storyline. I know that the experimenting on humans is canon, but this sound s too much as if they'd want to reduce him to that.

Anyone who thinks Cap's costume is impractical and too gaudy for a battlefield has never investigated what the forces of the British Empire used to wander about in.

I do not like this at all.

Really? What did they used to wear?

This is just supposition on my part, but didn't the British Empire, for the most part, fight people with less advanced technology? If you have gatling guns, and the other side has rifles if they're lucky, an impractical costume wouldn't make as much difference as it would if you were fighting a technological equal, like the Allies were.

Redcoat re-enactors. Note the natty waistcoats and stylish hats. The British Empire went on for quite a while, and while it did its fair share (more than its share) of colonizing less advanced places, I suggest checking out the wars with Napoleon - whose forces also wore novel uniforms.

Oh yes, a uniform that puts a big, white "X" right in the middle of the chest. It's like painting a bull's-eye on the soldier. I can see how that might be counterproductive.

If only we'd had sensible uniforms! We might have had the largest empire in history. ;)

Right you are! Although, the guns and ships might have helped more than the uniforms in empire-building. *g*

Some guy said it was "the playing fields of Eton," but what does he know?

Wow. Somehow I'd never realized that the redcoats were quite that ornate.

Okay, so people have fought in impractical costumes in the fast. But given the choice between that and something better, wouldn't most people go for something more practical? I'd rather wear what the rest of the guys were wearing, if I was in Cap's place, rather than a blue jumpsuit that makes me stand out from a mile away.

Of course, if done right, that could make that sequence in the film even more awesome, since he'd be deliberately turning himself into a target for the sake of the moral of his men...Insert something deep and thought provoking about symbolism here.

I just don't think the filmakers are really on the wrong track, here. That's all.

Well, that's like saying a monarch on the field shouldn't cart a flag around with him, but they all did it. It's a rally point for your troops; and more, it's a privilege to wear the mark of command and be a target - see the panache in Cyrano de Bergerac, where the commander is criticized for dropping the scarf signifying his rank to avoid being targeted.

The Cap costume isn't impractical, it's just colourful. He's supposed to be clearly identifiable. He's Captain America, "these colours don't run", standing up against the black-clad Nazis with skulls on their collars.

I think the movie will waste far too much time on - on song and dance routines! Movies are not long, and I do not want to see this frittered away. It also seems like they're doing this to set him up as a lone operator, whereas Cap is very definitely a team player, and is usually Government sanctioned.

I think you're putting the cart before the horse, just a little. This is an origin film; Steve is going to spend most of it thinking of himself as just plain ol' Steve Rogers, who joined Project Rebirth so he could serve his country. So he goes through all those experiments, all that pain and suffering, and becomes something he never though he'd ever be, not even in his wildest dreams -- and then the politicians make him put on this silly costume and sing for people. This is just guessing, but I don't think he'll even like the Captain America persona. He might see it as a mockery, as disrespectful to the men he actually wants to serve with. So then he goes AWOL and ditches the costume. But people still recognize him; they still want him to be Captain America.

(and I'm trying really hard not to quote V for Vendetta here, because wow, talk about inappropriate, but the theme of symbols versus people is so apt right now.)

So he decides to make the symbol his. He makes a new costume, one that's a closer match to his own sensibilities (probably he'll have to modify a set of BDUs or something, which would be a great in-story justification for the new look) and becomes Captain America, this time by choice. Now he's the kind of person who says things like "these colors don't run," and means it.

And then hopefully once the politicians find him again they'll have gotten their heads out of their asses and realized that, if nothing else, he's a far more powerful morale booster if he's actually out there killing Nazis. Cue iceberg.

I think that Cap, as a cultural icon, has the same problem as Superman -- people see him as this perfect, larger than life force, and lose interest in him as a result, because he doesn't seem relatable. This is just my interpretation of the OP, but I think Johnston is trying to make him seem more relatable, more like a three dimensional person with his own hopes and dreams and imperfections. It's a good idea, as long as he doesn't loose sight of Steve's ideals, the things that also make him Captain America. And I have yet to see anything that would indicate that anyway.

But that whole origin makes no sense - you don't create an amazing weapon and then... look at it. You use it or study it. And it's not like Allied forces didn't understand propaganda; they'd likely use him like Ult Cap was used, sent on specific, dangerous missions, where just knowing Captain America was there would be a boost for morale and dismay the enemy.

I don't see what's unrelatable about a kid whose dreams are bigger than his body, who wants to do good but doesn't know how, and who gets the opportunity to do something amazing. And I don't see what's particularly relatable about being forced into the chorus line.

I do actually agree with you to a certain extent, but some reason Johnston doesn't seem to want to go that route. Maybe he realizes how unpopular Ult Cap is, and doesn't want to his movie to be associated with that version of the character. Or maybe he just wants to try something new.

My point, though, is that a lot of people outside comics fandom don't seem to be aware of those facts about Cap. They don't really know who he is, who he used to be -- they just see this blond Adonis is a flag suit. I think Johnston is trying to create a character development arc that takes those facts about Steve, makes them explicit, and then explores his transformation into the Cap most people know, while still keeping his human side. But that's just a guess. In any case, I think we can all relate to the themes of disappointment and humiliation, though I'm with you in hoping they won't dwell on the USO stuff too long. A few establishing shots, maybe a montage, would be more than enough.

Hm... Ult Cap is not that unpopular, really. The Ultimates sold well, and he was a central character in that.

It's an origin story! It's supposed to make people aware of those facts. I don't see why they need to bolt on a chorus line to explain his costume. How about "Here is your somewhat gaudy costume, for propaganda purposes." There, no need for dancing girls. OH WAIT I know why, it is their only chance for scantily clad girls in a WWII piece.

Honestly? I just found this. "Johnston, who prefers Ed Brubaker's current run on the series to the Cap stories of the 1960s and 70s, admits he wasn't a huge fan of the character or of comic books in general. But he believes that will serve him well on this project."

Dude doesn't like comics and he doesn't like Captain America. In fact, he prefers Bucky as Cap, not Steve.

So we could potentially be getting a Bucky as Cap movie, only he'll look like Steve. Okay.

Okay, that wasn't my impression, but fair enough.

I don't see anything in that article that says he prefers Bucky to Steve. He said he prefers modern comics to the stuff from the 60s and 70s -- so do I. I'd rather read a Flash trade from the early 2000s or the late 90s than a trade from the 60s or 70s, but that doesn't mean I like Wally West more than Barry Allen. (Actually, most of the time I kind of want to punch Wally in the face.) He also says that he doesn't really like comics in general, but I agree with him that the Biggest Captain America Fan Ever might not be a good candidate for directing this movie. You can't make a good adaptation by following the source material to the letter. Christopher Nolan realized that while making Batman Begins, and look at how well that turned out. A True Fan would probably be reluctant to make any changes at all. I still don't see any reason to expect anything other than a good movie out of this guy.

And god forbid we have fanservice in a movie based on a comic book.

Well, there are certainly people who don't like Ult Steve, and they are vocal, but he doesn't sell badly, and he certainly has fans.

He specifies Brubaker's run, which is largely focused on Bucky. While I don't think Cap's Biggest Fan should make a movie about him, I think creators should like and understand the characters they work with. He doesn't like Cap, he doesn't like his costume, he doesn't like his origin.

Honestly, fuck fanservice. I have an internet connection. I can see all the boobs I want at the click of a mouse. I can buy a magazine. I do not need my narratives mutilated and derailed so some jiggling tits can be crudely shoehorned into the movie. The story works well with fanservice? Fine! Tony has dancing girls, Mystique is arrogantly naked. Enhances the mood of the story. But fanservice for the sake of it just leads to "Oh, Jessica Alba's clothes have fallen off again. It wasn't that funny the first time. Now can we get back to the story? I didn't realise I was watching Carry On Superheroing."

Okay, but I don't see how the British wearing gaudy costumes and succeeding in pre-modern warfare times has anything to do with this.

The British won *despite* those costumes, not because of them. Having ridiculously superior firepower to all the less advanced places probably was the key victory point.

The World Wars are a different game - by then they knew more about camouflage, and practical battle wear for industrial battles. War had advanced past the idea of "dress up in colorful costumes with flags and march off to the battlefield with a little band", so reverting to that idea doesn't really make any sense.

Yeah, we may claim the French are primitive natives, but Napoleon and his forces were not exactly wielding pointy sticks. Your European history could use a little work.

and practical battle wear for industrial battles.

What are you trying to say here? Heavy leather, with a shield to cover the lower torso and steel scale over the upper body and arms, is actually pretty damn good armour by the standards of the day. (Adding the helm, as per Ults, was actually very sensible.) I'm sure it didn't take until the twentieth century for people to figure out bright colours were noticeable.

I never claimed that colourful costumes were some kind of magic key to victory - just that they're certainly not an obstacle to such. The point is that, ultimately, he will be wearing the costume on the battlefield, and it's a waste of precious screen time to spend time coming up with a ludicrous 'justification' for it.

My European history's fine, thanks! I was just quoting you irt: "colonizing less advanced places."

Given the point of the comment was that they also fought people of similar technology levels with success, I'm not sure what your point was.

I think it's a matter of Cap not being any of the other soldiers. He's not one of the countless faceless men fighting in the trenches. He's one of a kind, he's a deliberately visible symbol of hope and encouragement for his allies, encouraging them to follow his example and fight bravely, and at the same time the sight of him standing out amongst a crowd of soldiers, standing proud and tall, fearless, strong, and unbeaten, will also strike fear in the heart of his enemies. Impractical? He's not a sniper, he's supposed to be visible! What's the point of having a super soldier and putting him in a flag costume if you don't use him? Yes, his costume is ridiculous, and I do not like it one bit, but there's a reason for it loking like that, and it is part of who Captain America is.

I agree with you, with the caveat that my impression based on the OP, is that the filmmakers want Steve to explore that idea for himself, in the film. That's where I think they're going with idea of him taking off the costume when he goes into the field, only to end up making one for himself once he realizes just how valuable that symbol is. Which is a pretty cool idea, in my opinion.

I don't like the starting point of him not being in the field to begin with though. It sounds as if they originally wanted to use their one super soldier not for soldiering, and in that case his main use would be as a lab rat. Yes, this is an origin movie, and it's good to have Steve Rogers do some soul-searching and self-finding before truly becoming Captain America, but, while I'm not very familiar with canon, I always had the impression that he was, and was always meant to be, a soldier. He became a symbol because he was the 'perfect' role model, but he was always meant to be out in the field. All of this, him changing his role, against what is expected of him, from a pedestalled picture of perfection into that of someone going out and doing things, is enough to take up the whole movie, and then there won't be much seeing him as Cap in action in WWII unless they do another movie set before he's frozen.

I'm rather sick of the notion that superhero movies need to be grounded in some sort of reality. Is his costume cheesy? Fuck yes (they can always run with his Ultimates one, if they're that pressed over the issue), but he was - essentially - a propaganda tool. He's supposed to be larger than life.

And the way it's being talked about..makes it seem like they'll have Steve be reluctant to take on the title of Cap. Which, I dunno, doesn't sit well with me. I like Steve as the super patriotic frail kid-turned-hunk of burning ~~love~~justice.

I'm tired of jaded heroes.

Although, I'm not sure that they have to be mutually exclusive. The way I'm understanding this is that Steve is a patriotic soldier at heart here. Being a showdog has got to be galling to a man whose deepest desire is to fight and die for freedom and his country, and he conflates Captain America with a show personality that (he believes) is fairly shallow and a mockery of the lives these good men are selling dearly to the night. It takes him seeing what the men believe about him to finally understand that Captain America is more than just glitz and empty platitudes to these men, that he's a symbol of hope, freedom, and justice.

THIS! This is exactly what I've been trying to say! Thank you so much. ♥

I think this has the potential to become an absolutely beautiful character evolution from an angry, jaded soldier railing against what he sees as a useless waste to the kind, noble, and genuinely good hero we all know and love. The inclination and personality are there, it just takes people depending on him and looking up to him to make him blossom into a man who can truly shoulder and understand the responsibility that comes with embracing who he is to everyone else. That's one of the things I love about Steve - he's comfortable enough with the reality of his person that he can use that to inspire others to be better people.

From a story point of view, this makes total sense. It's a static character that steps onto the screen, fully fledged, with no internal conflict. It's what makes Iron Man so effective - you see RDJ's Tony develop from an irresponsible genius into this man with an inhuman drive to correct the mistakes he's made in the past because deep down, he's a good person, as much as his Tony would love to tell you otherwise. Everyone has to start somewhere, even Cap.

THIS. Exactly this. You've made me so happy with this comment, I could cry.

Oh, I totally get the approach they're going with. It's just, for me, I don't always want to relate to a hero. The "Let's show he's a man under all that gear" gets to be a dull watch after nearly every cape movie does it.

Oh, I'm totally in the opposite boat. XD As a Classics major, I'm so tired of heroes I can't relate to. Mythology is a finicky, finicky thing.

You can't relate to Achilleus' pissy rampage of grrr after his boyfriend got killed? I'll give you Heracles, though. He's...a bit of a prick. OK, and Zeus is a douche. Aeneas is OK, aside from the 'If I had my way I'd be tending graves in Illion' thing.

I dunno, I've always found it fairly easy to get where they're coming from.

Achilles is tough to relate to, at least for a modern audience, because he takes the slight to his honor from Agamemnon (hoo, boy, don't even get me started on that man) so, so seriously, seriously enough that he demands the gods turn the tide of the war against the Greeks so he can have his Big Damn Hero moment to assuage his wounded pride. The issue with Patroklos is easier to relate with, I'd agree, who again gives this remote, godlike hero his humanity back. Odysseus is a smooth-talking snake, whom none of the Greeks can trust further than they throw him and betrays his obligation of guest-friendship to Hekabe. Iason married a woman, then abandoned her when a shiny newer model came along, even though Medea sacrificed everything for him. Numerous Greek heroes raped young girls, and the Atreidai are just a general mess.

Sorry for the word vomit. I'm actually writing a thesis on the changed meaning of heroism between Greek legends and modern-day comic books, with a focus on the Dark Age and Modern Age of comics and the Trojan War.

I do love the differences between the modern day hero and the ancient model.

Yeah, Odysseus is a prick. Telemachus isn't so bad though, must get it from his mother.

I've always kind of though of the majority of Greek heroes as having severe impulse control problems, they do tend to exhibit the extremes of human behaviour.

I can kind of see where Iason is coming from, I mean, Medea's fine until he gets home and all of a sudden he's being looked down on for having a foreign, barbarian wife. Doesn't mean I agree with him and it certainly doesn't stop me from cheering on her (rather extreme) vengance.

Kephalos...I have no idea what he was thinking, he's one of the ones I totally fail to get. I adore Prokris to a slightly ridiculous degree, though. For a mysogynistic society, they had some awesome heroines.

Well, the entire concept of the Greek hero is that of a man who is more than a man - larger than life. They're caricatures of Greek society, intricately connected to the whole concept of hubris and atys. It's a weird mix of morality tale and superhero story.

By the time the Avengers' movie comes out, RDJ is going to be old, but that could work.

I already spoke at length in tsukino's LJ, but to be fair, the original Captain America story is pretty hokey, and what with Cap's patriotism, it can be taken as jingoism to an international audience - and this movie isn't just for a domestic audience but an international one. Note the fact that GI JOE the movie had the team as an international fighting force instead of US based. So yeah... I can see why the powers that be are doing what they do.

I like the aspect of the USO "you gotta get up, you get up this morning... " and having Captain America as a branching out for that.

Personally, I'd have made it a mashup of Ults and 616. Or just do his origin story like they did in Ultimate Avengers the cartoon.

As much as I like Steve Rogers, I don't know if I'd sit down for a Captain America movie at all.

I see why people are getting upset. But it is a comic book movie, so of course it's going to go out and butcher canon and everything we know as much as possible.

Maybe it's because I've only been in comics fandom for a year, but I just don't understand this attitude.

That's what I was trying to say sorry. I mean that it's not going to be exactly like in the comics.

No, I'm sorry. I think I need to step away from the page for a while -- spending two hours arguing with doom and gloomers is apparently making me oversensitive. Looking back over your comment, I should have realized you weren't being serious.

Its not just a comic thing. Anything that's long running, and has a decent following will always have this sort of mix bag of reactions if/when a movie is adapted.

For me, part of it is the notion that if they have to change a character too much to appease the general audience, then they've failed in attracting new people to said character. So what's the point, then?

But how much is too much? What's wrong with taking a character (especially one like Cap that most people outside fandom consistently misunderstand?) and making him more accessible? As long as the core values that make the character who they are remain the same, I don't see anything wrong with it. A new take on his origin story and character development might even revitalize him and make him better in both mediums. Comics have a long history of stealing cool ideas from the adaptations, so it's not that unlikely a possibility.

And considering that we've had a long string of successful adaptations since 2000, with only a handful of flops, I think there's a huge amount of room for optimism.

It's a balancing act, at the end of the day. Hell, they haven't even cast him, so who's to say? Though I'm inclined to disagree with the whole successful adaptations part. X-men trilogy (and Wolverine) did well in theaters, and I thought they were utter tripe. Same for Spider-Man 3.

Me, personally, I like the idea of an unabashed patriotic hero. I liked the idea that Steve was already gun-ho for America before the serum, and saw nothing wrong with putting on a silly outfit and going to the front lines. It didn't need to be rationalized or made cool. And seeing some of the crazy stuff that all the countries did during WWII to boost morale, Cap is hardly the most outlandish idea.

I have to admit, the though of Ryan McPartlin, Mr. Awesome, would be... well, Super Awesome! XD

This might really change one of the most fundamental relationships in comics - the relationship between Cap and his shield.

If the shield is part of the 'act' that he is trying to desperately leave, will he initially hate the shield? Will he throw the shield? I have to admit, throwing a shield in combat is something that works in 616, but not in the real world. If they're trying hard to make this not feel comic-booky, will Cap throw his shield?

I'm puzzled about the shield. I mean, I could perhaps grit my teeth and accept that they send their supersoldier out to dance around in tights (seriously, I don't think a male entertainer in that period would even wear tights) but I don't believe they'd hand him a marvelous, unique piece of metal to do it with.

Oh, probably he has the kite shield in this? And then in the future he gets the awesome one. Possibly after, in the finale of this, chucking his shield to gain advantage at a key point.

Very belatedly saying that I like the idea of him chucking the kite shield spontaneously and then getting his iconic shield after that.

Guys, why don't we actually see the movie come out before we complain about it? I personally don't see what the big fuss about it is. I'm just glad there's going to be a movie, because if Watchmen showed anything, that means the fandom is going to see a large increase in the number of people.

Delurking just to say YES I am glad someone else is thinking this. Agreed!

Is Bucky going to be a part of this? I haven't really looked into it.

Per dude at comic con who I forget, yeah, they're pushing Bucky, but at the time it wasn't formal. It's probably formal one way or the other now, but I don't know what.

Given there are the Invaders though, thinking yes Bucky.
Not that I think any of the other Invaders will resemble themselves.

Murrrghhhh, I shouldn't have looked.
This is one of those things that sounds GOD AWFUL in writing, but if I tune down my freaking out, I can almost see the logic in it AND it's all concepts they've used in comics to some degree, even if it was one-shots like The Chosen (in that AU the military did have major issues allowing Steve into combat and he basically went AWOL. actually the idea was in another four part comic too, and that wasn't AU).

He's never been in the USO, but it does explain the outfit, IMHO a lot better than the idea that the military would ever create it. Granted in the four part mini, it was based on Steve's art doodles, but they could still keep that and go with the USO.

Sooooo given that's not much of the plot at all really, I might live with it as a set up.

I'm actually more upset about the Invaders. They won't do them right, so why bother (and by they won't I mean they already said they wouldn't)

Cap never wore tights

you're damn right. he wore ridiculously tight leather pants. <3 MUCH better than tights.

ffff

not sure how i feel about the majority of the news, here, but you should post this over at

ontd_comicbooks, too.

Feel free to repost it if you want.

Blargh. The way I always imagine Cap is much older and way beefier than what they're casting him as. Like, circa Oliver Coipel NOW (omg so much hotness in The Seige mini they've got running at the moment with Cap coming baaaaaaaack). But that just may be my love of Coipel's beefy guys. *sniffles* ;_; Bill, oh why did you have to go and get your arse killed by evil!Asgardians. You were so deliciously beefy and awkward and red-haired.

I hope they do like they did with nu!Kirk and get a relatively unknown in the role. That would be cool and cause less problems with casting, methinks.

Jensen Ackles as Hawkeye though... that I am all over like a bad rash in a weird place, oh yeah. Unf.

JENSEN ACKLES. OH GOD, IF THEY COULD MANAGE TO BEEF HIM UP ENOUGH THAT IT LOOKS REALISTIC, YES~!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Spoilers For Cap Film

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Oh, RDJ

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject