maybe bp and dr. strange will be in phase 3.

maybe bp and dr. strange will be in phase 3.

Meh. I don't really look at the movies as some kind of eventual perfect outcome for comic-book characters. It's hard for me to get upset about characters that do and do not appear in the movies.

@FuZySLiPeRz said:

I don't count Blade because right before the beginning of each Blade movie, I never once saw the Marvel logo appear.

This was before Marvel established itself as a film powerhouse. Blade really launched the idea that super-hero films can be good. I haven't seen the film in a while, so I can't tell you if the logo is there or not, but it still counts.... However, I also want a Black Panther movie... but more importantly, a Powerman movie.

I don't think Black Panther can hold a movie on his own. I mean none of his series have ever been very popular, so if we see him on the big screen it will probably be in avengers 2.

@Teerack: If blade can hold a movie then BP can hold a movie

Since no one clicked this link or listened to this interview http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/podcast-the-playlist-talks-wbs-planned-justice-league-movie-and-the-future-for-marvel-movies-post-avengers-20120625

Black Panther may be being consdered for the next Hulk Movie as a part of the team that is tasked with taking down the Hulk(not a fan of this idea).

BP>Ant-man any day of the week.

@Mykhael: Those movies sucked and back in the 90s most movies sucked, so that wouldn't hold up anymore.

@Teerack said:

I don't think Black Panther can hold a movie on his own. I mean none of his series have ever been very popular, so if we see him on the big screen it will probably be in avengers 2.

Please Ant-man has never really even had a shot at a solo series. GOTG hardly lit the sales charts on fire. ANd Blade does not get any play in comics and yet still has more shows and movies then any character not named Spider-man, Wolverine or the Hulk. Counting Marvel only of course. Batman and Superman also have him beat. This argument works if your making the case for Captain America, Hulk, Thor and Iron Man going first but after that only other characters with long running solos are not owned by Marvel in Spidey and Wolverine. Also Daredevil not sure who owns the rights to that. Using pure comic sales Black Panther would beat Ant Man and GOTG soundly. GOTG beats Ant-man as well.

Now I will say Ant-man gives you Ultron for the third movie. Plus Vision which are important. Although Vibranium gives you Captain America's shield so advantage Ant-man there.

Still Black Panther provides you with some much needed diversity. Ant-man gives you another white male and his role overlaps with stark pretty heavily since they are both big in Robotics and AI. You could easily have Stark do what Ant-man did. Not to mention the code name is kinda lame. Although I will say I think the biggest factor stopping Black Panther is hollywood does not really think minorities and females sell with a few exceptions.

GOTG at least opens up cosmic. You can have them fight Thanos, Magus and his cult next perhaps, and not sure after that.

Also no a goddamn tree and some green people do not count as diversity. Raccoons and trees don't buy movie tickets at all. and there are no green people in the real world. That arguments really makes me angry.

BP probably doesn't seem to fit into the overall arching plan Marvel plan right now. Maybe in the future. But I would hope to see it sooner than later.

@Vance Astro said:

@Skaddix said:

First not popular is in absurd argument no one know who Ant-man is much less the GotG. Only good thing about Ant-man is Ultron.

Second, Blade got 3 Movies without anyone knowing who he was.

Third, Disappointing sure but not surprised. Its Hollywood they don't do black leads. They do black and female sidekicks for the most part.

Not popular isn't an absurd argument, nobody knows who Ant-Man or the GotG are but with the promise of tie-ins, those films will do well. Those movies are being made so that Marvel can take further steps for other films based on the events that transpire in those films..so those films are a priority. Blade's films involve vampires. Vampires are a popular subject in film and television, it doesn't have to be anything Marvel related to sell. Hollywood does do black leads, unless you are talking specifically about comic related films. That doesn't have anything to do with Hollywood though, that has more to do with comics.

Any Film can have the promise of tie-ins. GOTG is pretty major with Thanos. But Ant-man has never even had a solo lets not pretend he is popular. I could easily tie Black Panther into Captain America or Iron Man. its not that hard. Wakanda and Vibranium are already mentioned anyway.

No they really don't like I said a few exceptions like Will Smith and Denzel Washington past that they do not.

@Teerack said:

@Mykhael: Those movies sucked and back in the 90s most movies sucked, so that wouldn't hold up anymore.

Those movies were hits, so clearly not everyone thought they sucked. Most movies in the 90's sucked? seriously?

@Mykhael: You must not be much of a movie buff. What was good in the 90s sucked. Scream for example was the most successful horror movie of the 90s and it sucked, but back then people didn't think it sucked. Now it's considered more comical because of how bad it is. This actually can actually be said about almost all horror and action flicks from the 90s quiet easily. With the exception of a hand full of actual good movies.

@Skaddix said:

@Teerack said:

I don't think Black Panther can hold a movie on his own. I mean none of his series have ever been very popular, so if we see him on the big screen it will probably be in avengers 2.

Please Ant-man has never really even had a shot at a solo series. GOTG hardly lit the sales charts on fire. ANd Blade does not get any play in comics and yet still has more shows and movies then any character not named Spider-man, Wolverine or the Hulk. Counting Marvel only of course. Batman and Superman also have him beat. This argument works if your making the case for Captain America, Hulk, Thor and Iron Man going first but after that only other characters with long running solos are not owned by Marvel in Spidey and Wolverine. Also Daredevil not sure who owns the rights to that. Using pure comic sales Black Panther would beat Ant Man and GOTG soundly. GOTG beats Ant-man as well.

Now I will say Ant-man gives you Ultron for the third movie. Plus Vision which are important. Although Vibranium gives you Captain America's shield so advantage Ant-man there.

Still Black Panther provides you with some much needed diversity. Ant-man gives you another white male and his role overlaps with stark pretty heavily since they are both big in Robotics and AI. You could easily have Stark do what Ant-man did. Not to mention the code name is kinda lame. Although I will say I think the biggest factor stopping Black Panther is hollywood does not really think minorities and females sell with a few exceptions.

GOTG at least opens up cosmic. You can have them fight Thanos, Magus and his cult next perhaps, and not sure after that.

Also no a goddamn tree and some green people do not count as diversity. Raccoons and trees don't buy movie tickets at all. and there are no green people in the real world. That arguments really makes me angry.

 Thank You !!

Any Film can have the promise of tie-ins. GOTG is pretty major with Thanos. But Ant-man has never even had a solo lets not pretend he is popular. I could easily tie Black Panther into Captain America or Iron Man. its not that hard. Wakanda and Vibranium are already mentioned anyway.

No they really don't like I said a few exceptions like Will Smith and Denzel Washington past that they do not.

@Vance Astro said:

@Skaddix said:

Any Film can have the promise of tie-ins. GOTG is pretty major with Thanos. But Ant-man has never even had a solo lets not pretend he is popular. I could easily tie Black Panther into Captain America or Iron Man. its not that hard. Wakanda and Vibranium are already mentioned anyway.

No they really don't like I said a few exceptions like Will Smith and Denzel Washington past that they do not.

I'm not PRETENDING he's popular, Black Panther really isn't either. Tying Black Panther into Cap or Iron Man would be silly. He's bigger than that. Ant-Man HAS TO tie-in to Avengers because he a big part of the Avengers history. If you take Black Panther out of Cap or Iron Man's timeline and almost nothing would be different.

I don't say you have to but you can if everything needs to tie-in.

Well, if you really take some time to think who the second villain will be, Black Panther would not make sense yet. Black Panther has no business fighting Thanos. We need the Skrull Empire as the main bad guy for Black Panther to make sense.

I don't say you have to but you can if everything needs to tie-in.

Over acting much? BP will get his movie it's not like they're just pumping out random characters, they all fit into the story BP isn't apart of that yet. Falcon is supposedly in Cap 2 so there's your black hero for the moment. and I'm not too familiar with GotG but there is a female member is there not? Also is Black Widow not a woman?

Please Ant-man has never really even had a shot at a solo series. GOTG hardly lit the sales charts on fire.

 ANd Blade does not get any play in comics and yet still has more shows and movies then any character not named Spider-man, Wolverine or the Hulk. Counting Marvel only of course.

Still Black Panther provides you with some much needed diversity. Ant-man gives you another white male and his role overlaps with stark pretty heavily since they are both big in Robotics and AI. You could easily have Stark do what Ant-man did. Not to mention the code name is kinda lame. Although I will say I think the biggest factor stopping Black Panther is hollywood does not really think minorities and females sell with a few exceptions.

and I'm not too familiar with GotG but there is a female member is there not?

@Vance Astro:

Well there you go with Tony Stark (Iron Man), Hank Pym (Hopefully) or Scott Lang (Ant-Man), Thor, Sif and the Warriors Three, Steve Rogers (Captain America), Clint Barton (Hawkeye), Natasha Romanoff (Black Widow), Bruce Banner (Hulk), James Rhodes (War Machine), Maria Hill, Nick Fury, Sam Wilson (Falcon) and Guardians of the Galaxy and I say we're looking pretty diverse. As the universe grows I'm sure we'll see a lot more characters popping into it.

@Vance Astro said:

@Skaddix said:

Please Ant-man has never really even had a shot at a solo series. GOTG hardly lit the sales charts on fire.

He's important to a bigger franchise.

@Skaddix said:

ANd Blade does not get any play in comics and yet still has more shows and movies then any character not named Spider-man, Wolverine or the Hulk. Counting Marvel only of course.

Blade wasn't a priority for Marvel. His films came out before Marvel was making their own films.

@Skaddix said:

Still Black Panther provides you with some much needed diversity. Ant-man gives you another white male and his role overlaps with stark pretty heavily since they are both big in Robotics and AI. You could easily have Stark do what Ant-man did. Not to mention the code name is kinda lame. Although I will say I think the biggest factor stopping Black Panther is hollywood does not really think minorities and females sell with a few exceptions.

What makes you think Marvel NEEDS diversity? If you look at the movies that Marvel is putting out themselves it's all for their most popular characters. Marvel doesn't have any very popular Black or female characters, which is why their films aren't a priority.

He is really not all he does is make Ultron who makes vision. You can make 3 Avengers without that contribution at all. Black Widow is hardly a critical Avenger character and she is the movie. Hulk was a founder but quit pretty early and never really came back. My point being there is no standard Marvel is following for the movie.

Blade proves the point popularity in comics matters little. Most of your audience is not going to know who any of these guys are.

They did their most popular characters. Hulk, Thor, Iron Man and Captian America guys with long running solos that marvel owns. Ant-man does not have solo comics therefore the standard no longer applies. There is no way you can argue Ant-man is popular. Honestly, Pym is widely hated thanks to his spousal abuse.

@Skaddix: No one is saying he's super popular, he's just a key part for Ultron and Vison pretty big parts for the Avengers where as like @Vance Astro: said Black Panther isn't a major part of the team and is more of a stand-alone type guy. Personally I think he will get his own movie, just not as soon as you probably want it.

@FearTheLiving said:

@Skaddix: No one is saying he's super popular, he's just a key part for Ultron and Vison pretty big parts for the Avengers where as like @Vance Astro: said Black Panther isn't a major part of the team and is more of a stand-alone type guy. Personally I think he will get his own movie, just not as soon as you probably want it.

My point is neither is Black Widow.

@Skaddix: I'd say more so then Black Panther. Though I don't think anyone would want to see BP in that smaller role compared to doing him justice with his own movie behind him.

He is really not all he does is make Ultron who makes vision. You can make 3 Avengers without that contribution at all. Black Widow is hardly a critical Avenger character and she is the movie. Hulk was a founder but quit pretty early and never really came back. My point being there is no standard Marvel is following for the movie.

Blade proves the point popularity in comics matters little. Most of your audience is not going to know who any of these guys are.

They did their most popular characters. Hulk, Thor, Iron Man and Captian America guys with long running solos that marvel owns. Ant-man does not have solo comics therefore the standard no longer applies. There is no way you can argue Ant-man is popular. Honestly, Pym is widely hated thanks to his spousal abuse.

We're probably getting Doctor Strange after Ant-Man and GotG. I'm more than fine with BP having to wait because of that.

@Vance Astro said:

@Skaddix said:

He is really not all he does is make Ultron who makes vision. You can make 3 Avengers without that contribution at all. Black Widow is hardly a critical Avenger character and she is the movie. Hulk was a founder but quit pretty early and never really came back. My point being there is no standard Marvel is following for the movie.

Blade proves the point popularity in comics matters little. Most of your audience is not going to know who any of these guys are.

They did their most popular characters. Hulk, Thor, Iron Man and Captian America guys with long running solos that marvel owns. Ant-man does not have solo comics therefore the standard no longer applies. There is no way you can argue Ant-man is popular. Honestly, Pym is widely hated thanks to his spousal abuse.

Hank Pym is a founding Avenger. You say all he did was make Ultron and The Vision when one of them is one of the Avengers greatest enemies and the other is a long time Avenger. Almost like that's nothing major. The point you are making using Black Widow has NOTHING to do with Pym and why they chose to give him his own film. Blade doesn't prove anything. Popularity in comics may not matter to whether a film can be successful or not, but that's not the point. The point is what importance a character has to have to get their own film while Marvel Studios is making the films and not other companies. You can clearly see where their focus is at, Black Panther doesn't fit into that. Maybe in 2015 we will see Black Panther on the big screen, right now Marvel is doing more IMPORTANT stuff. Nobody is arguing that Ant-Man is popular. What i'm arguing is that Ant-Man's film ties into something bigger than himself, something that Marvel is focused on and deems important, therefore it makes more sense for him to be getting a film than Black Panther.

He is founding in comics but he is not in the movies. Therefore that argument is irrelevant. They are not following the comics order. So once you get past the most popular characters Cap A, Stark, Hulk and Thor (that Marvel Owns). There is no standard. Black Widow is not significant to Avengers History and she is in the movie. Now I will agree that Ant-man can tie into some useful stuff. That is the only part of your argument that is legit.

@Teerack said:

@Mykhael: You must not be much of a movie buff. What was good in the 90s sucked. Scream for example was the most successful horror movie of the 90s and it sucked, but back then people didn't think it sucked. Now it's considered more comical because of how bad it is. This actually can actually be said about almost all horror and action flicks from the 90s quiet easily. With the exception of a hand full of actual good movies.

Opinion.

Regardless of whether YOU Thought the movies sucked, they were made and were successful, meaning that Blades and by extension, Black Panther's comic popularity means nothing.

@Mykhael: Lol Blades' movie success doesn't by extension mean Black Panther could make a good movie.

Ant-Man is a while american man, Blade was a urban black american man. Both of these things are relatable to an american audience. Black Panther is an African prince. Name one single movie that stars African people in Africa or even a movie about African people that weren't in Africa that was a successful in america.

Regardless of weather or not blade sucked people like characters like blade in movies. Why do you think they deiced to go with black nick fury and not classic fury? Because a bad ass black guy with guns is a popular movie character type in america . Call it racism or what ever you want, but Black Panther really isn't the kind of character they would make a movie about because he doesn't really appeal to the main demographic.

@FearTheLiving said:

and I'm not too familiar with GotG but there is a female member is there not?

Yes, Gamora.

I love that there will be a Ant-Man movie because that would be interesting but the GOTG one doesn't look that interesting or we neither need it.

@Teerack said:

@Mykhael: Lol Blades' movie success doesn't by extension mean Black Panther could make a good movie.

Ant-Man is a while american man, Blade was a urban black american man. Both of these things are relatable to an american audience. Black Panther is an African prince. Name one single movie that stars African people in Africa or even a movie about African people that weren't in Africa that was a successful in america.

Regardless of weather or not blade sucked people like characters like blade in movies. Why do you think they deiced to go with black nick fury and not classic fury? Because a bad ass black guy with guns is a popular movie character type in america . Call it racism or what ever you want, but Black Panther really isn't the kind of character they would make a movie about because he doesn't really appeal to the main demographic.

Coming to America

Amistad

Glory

Hotel Rwanda

The last King Of Scotland

Blood Diamonds

The Gods must be crazy

Cry freedom

Roots (made for tv movie)

You said name one successful movie. I named several (and there are more). These all made profits. They were successful. Not all were blockbusters, but they were successful nonetheless.

Also there are a lot of successful movies that are not about white american males or black american males and some that aren't even about humans. People like good movies, and go to see them because they were marketed well and received good reviews and positive word-of-mouth (along with a myriad of other variables) not just ones they can "relate to". No offense, but your reasoning is faulty.

On topic: It makes me quite sad that there has not yet been a Black Panther movie and that there will be an Ant-man and a Gotg movie and not a BP one.I mean, they (the industry) made Jonah hex, tank-girl, swamp thing, and underdog movies for crying out loud.

What is ant man gonna do in his movie? Fight Janet? Shrink and then grow big which causes sheild to wanna recruit him... Sounds like a boring movie to me. Ant man should just appear in an important avengers movie like Hawkeye and Black widow did. He can be in the next Ironman movie and so could Janet since Antman is noone without the Avengers backing him up as depicted in any Marvel media that feature him. Black Pantther could hold his own movie, but he won't stand out in the Avengers other than being that black guy with no superpowers like Nick Fury. But if Falcon gets on the team first, he really won't have a purpose sense useless black superhero role will be filled to the max and the avengers have 3 street levelers.

There's several other females from the comics, most notably Phyla-Vell. I would honestly rather have her in the film than Gamora.

@FuZySLiPeRz: I think they've been trying to get a BP movie launched since early on. Like, simultaneously with the Blade films. They just kept falling through. Is it possible that some other studio still owns the BP film rights?

As for the other films:

• GotG - Cosmic Marvel is the best Marvel, and I cannot be more excited for this. I just wish they could find a way to work in Carol Danvers as Captain Marvel.
• AM - Don't think of this as an "Ant-Man" film, think of this as a West Coast Avengers film. Pym's superpower is basically "inventing superpowers". There's no reason this film can't be as awesome as Avengers. And even if they just focus on Pym as a solo hero, they can set up for so many other characters in that film that it'd still be awesome.

He is founding in comics but he is not in the movies. Therefore that argument is irrelevant. They are not following the comics order. So once you get past the most popular characters Cap A, Stark, Hulk and Thor (that Marvel Owns). There is no standard. Black Widow is not significant to Avengers History and she is in the movie. Now I will agree that Ant-man can tie into some useful stuff. That is the only part of your argument that is legit.

What is ant man gonna do in his movie? Fight Janet? Shrink and then grow big which causes sheild to wanna recruit him... Sounds like a boring movie to me. 

I'll be skipping Ant-Man

@TheSwordsman: You didn't give any valid examples. If they made a black panther movie it wont be a historical, political or a comedy.

Coming to America - comedy

Amistad - the movie did only okay and is historical

Glory - historical again and still has a lot to do with america

Hotel Rwanda - historical but most successful for political reasons

The last King Of Scotland - historical again

Blood Diamonds - political and historical

The Gods must be crazy - comedy

Cry freedom - haven't seen this one, but it might actually be the only good example you mentioned.

Roots (made for tv movie) - historical

Most of these movies are old and around 7 out of 10 stars and except hotel rawanda and blood diamond they only did okay in the box office.

@daredevil21134 said:

I'll be skipping Ant-Man

You've seen nothing of it yet you are skipping it? Please I can understand seeing a trailer and be like I think I'll pass, but to only know it's a movie with Ant-Man and say your skipping it is pretty messed up. I really don't care for Super Man, but I'll for sure check out Man of Steel.

Guardians of the Galaxy? I'm there twice if it's good. I love the characters and see huge potential for this to be a hit. Ant Man, meh not really interested, hope it does well but again, meh.
I'm a big BP fan ( apparently one of few according to some of those on this site) and would definitely be excited to ear about a movie being made.

@FearTheLiving said:

@daredevil21134 said:

I'll be skipping Ant-Man

You've seen nothing of it yet you are skipping it? Please I can understand seeing a trailer and be like I think I'll pass, but to only know it's a movie with Ant-Man and say your skipping it is pretty messed up. I really don't care for Super Man, but I'll for sure check out Man of Steel.

Didn't mean to offend you, but I don't care for the character too much

@daredevil21134: Didn't offend me just thought it was an odd way to look at a movie.

How precisely is Blade Urban? Sounds like code for Ghetto which is not.

@Skaddix said:

How precisely is Blade Urban? Sounds like code for Ghetto which is not.

ur·ban

1. Of, relating to, or located in a city.

2. Characteristic of the city or city life.

Where did Whistler first encounter Blade? On the city streets. Where does Blade take place? In the city. Was Blade portrayed as a streetwise character? Yes. Seems pretty self explanatory.

@Teerack said:

@TheSwordsman: You didn't give any valid examples. If they made a black panther movie it wont be a historical, political or a comedy.

Coming to America - comedy

Amistad - the movie did only okay and is historical

Glory - historical again and still has a lot to do with america

Hotel Rwanda - historical but most successful for political reasons

The last King Of Scotland - historical again

Blood Diamonds - political and historical

The Gods must be crazy - comedy

Cry freedom - haven't seen this one, but it might actually be the only good example you mentioned.

Roots (made for tv movie) - historical

Most of these movies are old and around 7 out of 10 stars and except hotel rawanda and blood diamond they only did okay in the box office.

You didn't state any qualifications regarding them being political, historical, having to do with america, comedies, etc you only said name a movie about an african in africa or an african in america that was successful. Most of these movies had very small budgets and made several times their budget back in gross sales making them successful films. I named several proving your point to be invalid. Coming To America costs 39 million to make and grossed 288+ million making it a box office success. There is at least one movie proving you wrong.

You will simply continue to argue even when proven wrong Just as you were proven wrong when you erroneously stated that people needed to relate nationality-wise and pigment-wise to characters. As I stated, even movies about non-humans did well.

You are apparently incapable of being reasoned with. Goodbye.

@TheSwordsman: If you really can't understand that you're comparing it to movies that were successful for reason a black panther movie couldn't be, t

actually I'm going to literally completely stop writing my response and leave this thread. There's not point and I never really cared either way.

@TheSwordsman said:

@Teerack said:

@TheSwordsman: You didn't give any valid examples. If they made a black panther movie it wont be a historical, political or a comedy.

Coming to America - comedy

Amistad - the movie did only okay and is historical

Glory - historical again and still has a lot to do with america

Hotel Rwanda - historical but most successful for political reasons

The last King Of Scotland - historical again

Blood Diamonds - political and historical

The Gods must be crazy - comedy

Cry freedom - haven't seen this one, but it might actually be the only good example you mentioned.

Roots (made for tv movie) - historical

Most of these movies are old and around 7 out of 10 stars and except hotel rawanda and blood diamond they only did okay in the box office.

You didn't state any qualifications regarding them being political, historical, having to do with america, comedies, etc you only said name a movie about an african in africa or an african in america that was successful. Most of these movies had very small budgets and made several times their budget back in gross sales making them successful films. I named several proving your point to be invalid. Coming To America costs 39 million to make and grossed 288+ million making it a box office success. There is at least one movie proving you wrong.

You will simply continue to argue even when proven wrong Just as you were proven wrong when you erroneously stated that people needed to relate nationality-wise and pigment-wise to characters. As I stated, even movies about non-humans did well.

You are apparently incapable of being reasoned with. Goodbye.

The problem with those example is that they are aimed at a COMPLETELY different audience.