Avengers 5 General News and Discussion Thread

[Spider-Fan]

Depends if Avengers 5 is now going to be a film like Infinity War and Endgame or if it's more like Avengers 1 or Age of Ultron now and Marvel goes back to basics. In the Avengers, Loki only appeared in 1 film prior to that. In AOU, Ultron only appeared for the first time in that film. If Avengers 5 is a relatively smaller film in that vein, then it might not need a big bad as such. And if a big bad is operating behind the scenes like Thanos was in Avengers in the end credits then it won't feel as rushed as he can appear later.

Maybe at this stage with Marvel not doing as well, they need to aim for something successful like the Avengers instead of Infinity War and Endgame.

They needed a movie like Avengers or AoU in Phase 4. Not Phase 6. Come Phase 6, they need to be moving toward this Saga coming to an end and building toward something new. Doing a back to basics movie at this point just makes this Saga keep going longer. Does anyone want that? Especially Marvel at this point? So I don't see them doing that

 

[Drizzle]

Moving on from the story he was writing doesn't mean Kang is dropped. That could mean that, or it could mean retooling the Kang story and taking it a different direction. I'll believe Kang is dropped when I see it. I don't think they can add a new big bad at this stage and have it not feel rushed

That's what I'm thinking as well. Kang wasn't the problem in Quantumania, the script and shoddy VFX were where the issues arose. Kang as a character can and should still be salvaged even if it means recasting Majors.

 

[Superhero 101]

Anyone know When Majors’ trial going to start?

 

[Arachnerd]

I think it's the 29th, right?

 

[Venom 1988]

Anyone know When Majors’ trial going to start?

I think it's the 29th, right?

Correct

Jonathan Majors Assault Trial Set for Nov. 29 After Judge Denies Motion to Dismiss the Case

A judge has denied a motion to dismiss the domestic violence allegations against Jonathan Majors, and the case is headed to trial on Nov. 29.

variety.com

 

[psylockolussus]

I wouldn't mind if Kang doesn't return but I still remember that ending scene for Quantumania... it looked intriguing. And I would like to see Kang in a better movie as well.

I hope Marvel fast tracks this film and Secret Wars. Including Deadpool and the Fantastic Four, these are the films I want to see. I have no eXcitement for Sam Wilson and Thunderbolts. My interest for Blade dwindled a lot after reading the Variety report. An Avengers film (a good one) could really do a lot to bring back the public interest.

 

[Spider-Fan]

If they're starting at a page 1 rewrite, it ain't being fast tracked. That much is very clear

 

[psylockolussus]

When I meant by fast track, rather than putting their effort to Thunderbolts, Blade and those Disney+ shows that have yet to start filming. This could be in their priority list after Deadpool, Brave New World, Fantastic 4 and Spider-Man - on track for its May 2026 release.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I get that, but chances are far more likely if they're doing a page 1 rewrite, then a delay is far more likely than ditching other projects and getting this out in 2026

 

[NewYorkSpider]

I really hope they continue with the Kang storyline and just recast the role. I think you've invested too much into the character to not really finish something properly. With the multiverse it can easily be explained. I really don't want them to jump into Doom right away because of all this.

 

[Arachnerd]

This. Not sure if this a minority opinion or not, but I am really interested in the multiversal war angle with Kang that Loki introduced. I feel like scrapping it at this point would just be severely anti-climactic and leave the MCU more directionless than it currently is.

I also don't want Doom to be ruined as an incredibly rushed replacement.

 

[psylockolussus]

If there's a replacement, I hope they are looking to other characters instead of Doom. Beyonder I guess?

After Quantumania, The Marvels and Loki series finale, I think there's a big chance Kang is getting replaced. I don't think the public would care if Kang doesn't comeback, as long as Avengers 5 is good.

 

[Arachnerd]

I mean, the general audience didn't exactly give a crud about Thanos pre-Infinity War either. Kang can definitely be interesting and the foundation is there, but Quantumania did not help matters because in the end they fumbled with having Kang defeated in that manner and refusing to end with Ant-Man losing (like the trailers hinted at).

I'd much rather a recast than a complete overhaul of an entire plotline and removal of a big character that's been set up only for Feige to scramble to come up with something else. Not exactly good storytelling.

 

[psylockolussus]

Is it a good idea to have a villain of one of the worst reviewed films (a film that also underperformed at the boX office) to be the lead villain of the neXt Avengers?

I'm thinking how would the audience react when Kang show up as the main villain for Avengers 5. Also its not like Marvel Studios have been completely faithful with their villains, they could easily take someone from the comics, and give him the Kang role, without the baggage from Quantumania.

 

[Venom 1988]

As someone who watches these movies with people that could give could give a crap about comics in general let alone the MCU, I would say you'd be surprised. Most people don't care who the villains are, they just care if the movie is good. My sister in law can't remember most of the stuff that goes on in between watching these movies. By the time Avengers comes out, I doubt most people will remember Quantumania. They just care if the movie a.) looks exciting enough for them to see it and b.) it actually ends up being a good movie.

 

[Arachnerd]

Is it a good idea to have a villain of one of the worst reviewed films (a film that also underperformed at the boX office) to be the lead villain of the neXt Avengers?

I'm thinking how would the audience react when Kang show up as the main villain for Avengers 5. Also its not like Marvel Studios have been completely faithful with their villains, they could easily take someone from the comics, and give him the Kang role, without the baggage from Quantumania.

It's almost as if there are many variants of the character you could bring in, different in their own ways, that could serve as the main Kang from now on that could be written and acted well.

Quantumania's problems did not revolve around Kang as a character. Heck, he's still considered one of the few highlights of that movie. To me, Quantumania didn't do well due to its shoddy directing, terrible execution and writing (Spider-Fan, please don't kill me for expressing this).

And what Venom said. Ditto.

 

[psylockolussus]

It's almost as if there are many variants of the character you could bring in, different in their own ways, that could serve as the main Kang from now on that could be written and acted well.

Quantumania's problems did not revolve around Kang as a character. Heck, he's still considered one of the few highlights of that movie. To me, Quantumania didn't do well due to its shoddy directing, terrible execution and writing (Spider-Fan, please don't kill me for expressing this).

And what Venom said. Ditto.

Kang is still the villain of that film. And Avengers is much a bigger deal. If replacing Kang will bring in more viewers/sold tickets, Disney isn't going to be thinking about Marvel's plan about Kang, when Marvel's plan about Kang already backfired in the first film he appeared in.

 

[Arachnerd]

You're assuming replacing Kang will automatically bring in more viewership and ultimately turn out for the better in the long run, which is uncertain and you have no way of knowing that. Also for someone reason you ignored what Venom pointed out, and what I said about Quantumania's failings not being connected to Kang at all (minus how he was defeated which is a criticism of the writing)?

I feel like this discussion will just go around in circles so I'll just say I severely agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Also, this can be easily avoided by just not calling him Kang. Even if the main villain is a variant of Kang, call him something else and it will be basically like having a new villain. Your average movie goer is not meticulously keeping track of every Kang variant

 

[Pennywise]

 

[Venom 1988]

On one hand that's a shame, but on another, I hope it's so he can direct Shang-Chi 2.

Edit just read it, looks like it's possibly so he can focus on Shang-Chi 2, so that's promising.

 

[OrbOfConfusion]

On one hand that's a shame, but on another, I hope it's so he can direct Shang-Chi 2

Hopefully he was always attached for whenever that gets officially announced. The fact that the article says he's in talks for other projects is promising. Doesn't hurt to take a step back and not have too much on your plate. Heck, it's a smart idea.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I imagine it's cause it is going back to a page 1 rewrite and complete reworking. So maybe he can no longer do it and Shang-Chi 2 concurrently

 

[Arachnerd]

Hopefully. I'm still fearful they're likely doing away with Kang.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Well complete rework could mean doing away with Kang or not. What's clear is Kang Dynasty or whatever next Avengers ends up being if they do away with Kang....it ain't coming 2026