What superhero movies are currently being made? And not just "the rights have been purchased", because that doesn't mean anything. I'm looking for movies that have actually made some movement toward production.
Just curious. I have trouble keeping track sometimes, and often see "updates on [X]!", when I didn't even realize [X] was being made at all.
The ones I know of right now that are either "finished" or in production are:
Dark Knight
Iron man
Incredible Hulk
The Spirit
Watchmen
GI Joe
Wolverine
Wanted
Hancock. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0448157/)
Also, Thor has been in limbo, first moving forward, then back, for a couple of years now.
I really hope there's no Thor movie. There's no way to make that concept non-terrible in live action.
Pffft, they'd just look at all those other mythological movies and push forward with it anyway. It'll be fx heavy and probably will have updated speech syntax! Also, Thor won't carry a hammer of mass destruction...but a rod. A lightning rod. Of power. Yeah....yeah, that'll be GQ gold.
I think there is no reason that a Thor movie would have to be terrible........of course, it most likely would be, thanks to just the type of corporate think Prev. is alluding to, but it wouldn't have to be. I'd love to see an Asgard centric Thor movie with Loki as a villain. Heck, I'd even love a straight up 'Thor gets banished to Earth as Donald Blake' movie, provided they played it straight.
It could sort of work if it's done strictly in Asgard, but as soon as they make him into a superhero, the entire movie goes out the window.
Although I've been a fan of Marvel's version of Thor, frankly, for a movie, I'd rather see a well-done streight adaptation of Norse mythology than the Marvel version.
Then again, I was a big fan of Norse mythology as a kid long before I ever read a Thor comic...
I'm with Spud, a Marvel Superhero Thor movie will almost certainly bomb, unless possibly if they pull from the Ultimate version.
A more mythological based Thor would probably work.
QuoteI'm with Spud, a Marvel Superhero Thor movie will almost certainly bomb.
Oh Come on...
The Hulk movie with Thor in it?
Thats Pure gold right there I tell... GOLD!!
And he was great in Adventures in Babysitting...
(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1287/1377231580_3ef3c0af3c.jpg?v=0)
Heh... good stuff...
The thing with Thor is, it has to be made. Marvel has this big plan to do a Captain America movie (I mean a good one, not that one with foam ears and almost no plot), Iron Man (done), Hulk (done- twice), Ant- Man (post- production), and Thor (in limbo), then throw them all into an Avengers movie, so they don't have to do a lot of backstory in the film.
What I'd like to see is a full Asgard film, with Thor being trapped in Donald Blake at the very end. That, I think, would work.
Last I heard Ant-Man was in a holding pattern by Edgar Wright while they were working on a second draft of the screenplay... unless they shot it while I was at work....
Yeah, well, I.... OK, I checked, you're right. I was misinformed. Oopsie.
were also forgetting Hellboy 2 , The Surrogates, Sin City 2, and Speed Racer
Punisher: War Zone (Opens September)
Jonah Hex (Script Complete)
Spider-Man 4, 5, and 6 are still in talks, but Sony is for sure making them.
they're trying to get a Magneto movie made
Shazam
I am a little thrown by some of the movies listed here. What is actually required for a movie to really be underway?
To me, bottom line, that means there is someone funding an actual production budget. Not just interest by an actor to play a part or some form of a script that may or may not end up on screen, but an actual contractual financial commitment to make the movie. I draw the line there because, as far as I can tell, that's the best indicator that a movie will actually be released. People may pay a bit for options to use characters and for preliminary scripts that may never be made and it doesn't cost anything for an actor to say he'd play a part (with the usual provisos about salary and scheduling and so on). In the grand scale of Hollywood movies, those are small potatoes. But, an actual superhero movie in this day and age generally means millions (probably tens of millions) of dollars available to spend on the picture before we can rest pretty well assured that the thing will show up in a theater.
I guess captainspud started the thread, so he can decide what the criteria are supposed to be. I just wonder when a movie is listed here when I've read elsewhere that "Yeah, they have a script, but there is no contract with a studio committed to funding it yet." Without the funding, it just seems like what they have is an idea (maybe a well-fleshed-out idea) for a movie, but no way to buy studio time, no way to lock actors into a shooting schedule, and so on down the line of production. On the other hand, once that money is sitting there, it becomes far less likely that it won't be spent.
a few quick additions:
Death: The High Cost of Living is in development. Del Toro is producing it and Neil Gaiman is directing it himself. Neil was on set of Hellboy 2 learning from Del Toro about "how to direct". Neil is working on a new draft of the script but was set back by the writer's strike.
Sin City 2 and 3 are both being developed. It looks like Rodriquez is working on both at the same time.
Superman: The Man of Steel is in the scripting phase.
Captain America is in the scripting phase and is due out supposedly in 2009 (but will probably be more like 2010).