Talk:Marvel Cinematic Universe/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

spiderman?

isn't spiderman in the same universe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.242.143.194 (talk) 18:32, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

No. The Spider-Man rights are owned by Sony and therefore they are not allowed to cross-over characters with the those films produced by Marvel Studios (see Louis Leterrier's comments on being unable to call the university Empire State University as Sony have the Spidey rights). While this may change in future, for the time being they are not in the same universe. Planewalker Dave (talk) 23:58, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Likewise a similar problem (movie rights not owned by marvel) with including the x-men and the Fantastic 4. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.96.34.77 (talk) 01:07, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Interesting to note, the movie Incredible Hulk follows up the story from Hulk, albeit with a different cast (except for Ferrigno). Does this make the first Hulk film part of the Marvel Cinemaverse?

Um, no it isn't. Watch the beginning of Incredible Hulk again. They changed the origin story, the events of the first movie, and the personality of General Ross. Its a reboot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.48.173.49 (talk) 14:15, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Also, I for one would like to see the Daredevil (director's cut, mind, not the theatrical release) and Elektra movies tie into the Marvel Cinemaverse, but I'm patient enough to wait to see what they do post-Avengers

It's a shame they won't tie Spidey's films or the F4 films into the Avengers films - officially at least. (The X-films can stand on their own - they practically do in the comics anyways) Easter eggs would greatly help, though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.231.173.225 (talk) 18:49, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Would it be wise to include a section of the article to explain why Spiderman, Fantastic 4, and X-Men are NOT part of this cinematic universe? My first thought after reading this article was "Why no mention of X-Men?" I think the casual Wikipedia reader wouldn't look to the discussion panel. This might also fend off erroneous edits. Brendanmccabe (talk) 16:30, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

that dosent sound bad, mmm why dosent anybody do an articule abotu it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eagc7 (talk • contribs) 21:21, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

The lead is clear, "superhero films developed by Marvel Studios". We do not have to list every film not developed by Marvel Studios.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 23:58, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I added the word "independently" to further clarify this point.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 00:01, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I still disagree that the lead is sufficiently clear. I will concede that my edit may have been too wordy, though. Is there a happy medium? How many other articles have clarifying statements like "For the original 1994 movie, see..."? I just think a brief statement is needed. Also why was the "see also" section removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brendanmccabe (talk • contribs) 01:13, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

The see also section was removed becuase it imples that the linked article is related (or "in the same universe") to this article. The "for" template used in some articles are for unrelated topics of the name. Neither approach is applicable here.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 02:20, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Cast box

The custom for these kind of charts (with, say, List of frequent Coen Brothers collaborators or Brat Pack (actors) seems to limit the chart to people that appear in at least two productions, which makes sense: the article is about the overlap between these films. So I've eliminated the characters who only appear in a single production. -leigh (φθόγγος) 20:52, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Phil Coulson

I don't think it's needed yet, but I have created a userspace draft for Agent Phil Coulson from Iron Man, Iron Man 2, and Thor. Feel free to edit it.  :) --Boycool42 (talk) 03:13, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Coulson's role in Marvel's media is growing. He is set to appear in the [[Ultimate Spider-Man (TV series}|Ultimate Spider-Man]] TV Series, and Marvel's Chief Creative Officer said he wanted to find a way to get Coulson into the comics at some point. I think its time he got his own page, but I don't know how to propose to make one. That page Boycool142 has, though, would be perfect for an official page. -- 99.126.137.220 (talk) 13:57, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Unlikely But Perhaps Worth Mentioning

Could Ivan Vanko be Col. Rhodes's "wrong call" (also named "Ivan") mentioned in Iron Man? --Boycool42 (talk) 15:35, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Unless cited by a reliable source it would be considered original research and not premitted.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:40, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

I was mostly joking. But, it could be a reference to Iron Man 2 like Whiplash 1 and Whiplash 2. --Boycool42 (talk) 16:13, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Where does the name come from?

Why is this article called "Marvel Cinematic Universe" in the first place? Are there sources that call it as such? What about the fact that it only encompasses movies released by Marvel Studios, and not other film adaptations like those of X-Men, Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, etc.? WesleyDodds (talk) 00:54, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

This is all explained and cited in the article but heres the refereced that is used [1] a long with a quick google search other uses of the phrase [2]. Regarding your other edits, the information is presented in the best format possible for the readers to obtain in way that is focused on the shared universe as a whole rather than individually which is the focus of this article. Simply writing out the same information in prose would not benefit the reader.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 09:45, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Just a note the name "Marvel Cinematic Universe" also appears on the back cover of the Iron Man 2 blu-ray.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:23, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Character suggestion

I have heard many complaints regarding both the amount of tables on this page, and differentiating between recurring and non-recurring characters. Therefore I propose that we link a new page Entitled List of characters and cast in the Marvel Cinematic Universe This would both allow us to sort by recurring and non-recurring characters, and lower the dependency on tables on this main page. --Dann135 (talk) 14:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

First off... Where are the complaints? It doesn't look like they've been posted to this talk page or your user talk. Could you provide a link to those discussions?

Beyond that, as it stands the article seems fine. The character table is limited to the topic at hand - the interlinking of the Avenger's related films. A secondary "combined "full" cast lists" table seems to be overkill. - J Greb (talk) 18:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm just saying that by only showing Recurring characters, important characters may be left out while lesser characters that have been shown only in sequels to their respective films are included. There has to be a better way to organize than simply "recurring" --Dann135 (talk) 14:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

The focus of this article is the universe as a whole, not individual films. For the full cast list of characters appearing in specific films you should see their respective articles.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:13, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Something like this? userspace draft, (anyway gusy feel free to edit and add speuclated actors and filsm there :)) —Preceding undated comment added 23:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC).

That is overkill and not truly notable enough for its own article.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 03:02, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Also, why does JMS get listed as a cameo but Walt Simonson, his wife, and Ralph Macchio don't? Whydoibotherwiththis (talk) 03:07, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Order of Cast

With the most screentime in MCU, most appearances in films (soon to be tied with Clark Gregg and Samuel L. Jackson), and protaganist Chris Evans stating that "no one tells [him] what to do"*, shouldn't "Tony Stark / Iron Man" (Robert Downey Jr.) be listed at the top? --Boycool42 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I changed the order to reflect the order of apperance with the four leads of each film followed by the rest.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 10:41, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Also put characters first appearing in Iron Man in alphabetical order. So the order of the cast box is this: Leads of each movie by film order followed by the rest by film order and alphabetical order within that film.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:19, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Hulk 2 Shield and Iron man 3

i Know they have been onyl Annocued and arent on develoemt nor production, But sicne these pages arent gonig to Made Until 2012 or 2013, but i decided to make an userspace draft for Both films, So Yeah, Feel free to edit and add Speucalted Actros and characters until Offical confriamtion shwos up User:Eagc7/S.H.I.E.L.D (film), User:Eagc7/Iron Man 3. --Eagc7 —Preceding undated comment added 22:26, 4 August 2010 (UTC).

made oen for the planend sequel to the incredible hulk User:Eagc7/The Incredible Huk 2 --Eagc7

Origin of the term

The article had credited Marvel Studios had Kevin Feige as the coiner of the term. He may well be, but not according to the two citations given here. The first cite here uses the term "Marvel Cinematic Universe" as one of the subheads between Feige quotes. Feige himself does not actually use the term:

"Iron Man" and "The Incredible Hulk" wound up being the first films we produced at Marvel Studios by ourselves. It was great to get those titles back in our own hands. When you know the characters as well as we do, it's great to look at their cinematic potential. We had a lot of names on the list when it came to casting Tony Stark, but Robert Downey Jr.'s quickly rose to the top. Then, getting Samuel L. Jackson to make a cameo as Nick Fury was also huge. After that, Robert was nice enough to stop by the "Incredible Hulk" set. This set up that Marvel Studio films are really going to bring the Marvel Universe to the big screen-the films are no longer their own separate island, and you never know what to expect.

The second cite here, an article by Alasdair Wilkins, uses the term once, and not in a Feige quote. Wilkins writes: "Indeed, with so many of their preceding projects in the newly dubbed Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) underway, Feige is now ready to begin serious work on...."

If Feige himself verifiably coined the term, we should say that. But we need verification, and these two citations show only journalists using the term, not Feige himself. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Found verification — and Feige doesn't call it this

I found this source, MovieWeb.com, for a direct Kevin Feige quote referring NOT to the "Marvel Cinematic Universe" but to the "Marvel Cinema Universe":

Feige continued, telling his enraptured audience, "Now at least we can talk about Hulk being onscreen and Hulk being in a movie. I think we can go to something that isn't a surreal experience and is more a Marvel movie experience. It can tie into and be a part of this Marvel Cinema Universe that I've talked about."

I considered that MovieWeb.com might have transcribed his spoken statement incorrectly. But at least one other site recorded it as "Marvel Cinema Universe" as well, MovieGuys. The original MovieWeb article refers to an "enraptured audience," giving the impression of a press conference, so presumably others have reported on this as well.

If the fan press has entrenched the term "Marvel Cinematic Universe," then so be it. Our choices are to call it what the company itself calls it, which requires moving this article; or nothing that Feige and Marvel call it the "Marvel Cinema Universe" and that the fan press subsequently dubbed it the "Marvel Cinematic Universe." What does the Comics Project say?

The articles wording might need some correcting as far as the origin is concerned but the articles name should remain per WP:COMMONNAME. The Marvel Cinematic Universe is the common name now used by fans, the media and the company as stated in your first link as well by its inclusion on the Iron Man 2 blu-ray that I pointed out above.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:50, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Feige uses the term

Heres a quote from Feige from SuperHeroHype.com

Listen, I never say never. Anything's possible. If you asked me five years ago, I wouldn't have thought we'd be talking about "The Avengers" now. For the time being, there's only one place for connective tissue within the Marvel Universe and within this new MCU, Marvel Cinematic Universe that we're building and those are in the Marvel Studios movies.

--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:30, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Great! Nice piece of researching! I'll readjust the article to reflect. Nice work, TripleT! --Tenebrae (talk) 22:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Child actor

Should Davin Ransom be added to the cast list under Tony Stark in Iron Man 2. He played the young Tony in the flash back scene. link: http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/Poniverse/news/?a=16633 -- 81.149.142.178 (talk) 14:30, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I think so. Is he listed in the credits? If so, then we don't really need the link. --Boycool (talk) 14:52, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

He is actually credited as "young Tony Stark" so unless young Tonk Stark appears in another MCU film, I would decline to include him.--[[UZ--Boycool (talk) 21:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)ser:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] (talk) 17:34, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

This just seems like a technicality to me. We aren't dealing with alternate timelines/universes (yet), so I don't think it's any different than having Ransom listed as "Tony Stark, age 7", "...8", "...9", etc. They're obviously the same character. --Boycool (talk) 18:47, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Agreed we dont make the distinction between the different age portrayals of Howard Stark. As long as there is star/note stating that he was playing a child/young Stark then i can see any harm. --- Paulley (talk) 18:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

To the best of my knowledge there isn't any precedent here, so to say "we dont make the distinction between the different age portrayals of Howard Stark" seems misleading. My concern is that only one of the roles is of note and avoiding undue weight. However these are only minor concerns of mine and if consensus is to include the information then I will not object.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I'd have to go along with TriiipleThreat. There are countless movies where someone plays the character as a child in a minor role, and such actors aren't considered the character as primarily known. A child actor had a minor supporting role as the young Charles Foster Kane in Citizen Kane, but no one says that Kane, as the movie's protagonist, was played by anyone other than Orson Welles. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:41, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

If we wish to remain encyclopedic, then it would be wrong not to include Ransom as a portrayor of the character. It's sourced and credited within the film, so there is no reason not to include him. --Boycool (talk) 21:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

A encyclopedia by definition as a compendium does not retrain every bit of knowledge only what is determined to be notable information. And per our own notability guidelines this information does not seem to meet that criteria.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:22, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Here is a precedent. The implication that Robert Downey, Jr. is the only portrayor of Tony Stark is entirely false. This place was designed to help people, not lie to them. --Boycool (talk) 23:55, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

It's been several weeks and no one has objected. I'm adding it. --Boycool (talk) 12:28, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

No, editors have objected. The matter had appeared settled by consensus. If you want to open an RfC, please do. What I see is a matter divided, and in that instance, we err on the side of not including contentious information. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:20, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

And in any event, the line says "Tony Stark/Iron Man". The child actor doesn't play Iron Man. Including him is misleading.--Tenebrae (talk) 15:22, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Edward Norton never played the Hulk, but he is still listed as such. Besides, "/" usually indicates "or" rather than "and". --Boycool (talk) 12:22, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually a virgule stands for "and-or", but that's beside the point. You are' right about Norton — the Hulk was CGI, and if we're saying Norton played the Hulk, rather than Bruce Banner, that needs to be adjusted. At Iron Man (film), the question is: Who is playing Iron Man — the protagonist, title character and point of the whole thing? (While there';s some CGI, Downey is indeed in an Iron Man suit throughout.) Whereas whoever played Tony Stark as a child in a bit part is beside the point and muddles the issue. I don't believe that's helpful: When someone is looking up who plays the superheroes, having two names does not tell you that, and takes away from, rather than contributes to, clarity. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:31, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

The fact that Robert Downey, Jr. is the main portrayer of Tony Stark/Iron Man is included several times in the article, and a change in one slot of a cast and characters table will not affect this clarity. Rather than scroll through pages on IMBd or endure the film's six minutes of end credits, people can come to this article and learn in the simplest of ways that Davin Ransom played a young Tony Stark. Besides, it's not hurting anything. How do we clarify that although Robert Downey, Jr. is the main portrayer of Tony Stark and/or Iron Man in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, a young version of the character was played by Davin Ransom in Iron Man 2?

Robert Downey, Jr.

Davin Ransom (young Tony)

--Boycool (talk) 02:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC):

Then the place for that level of specificity about one particular movie is at Iron Man 2, not in a general article about the entire Marvel movie universe. In the interest of cooperation, I have found an RS newspaper citation for Davin Ransom and included it in the Iron Man 2 cast section. -- Tenebrae (talk) 03:02, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

A Few More

Wikipedia has gotten really picky about what info can be put up in the last few years, so I'm going to ask very cautiously: is anyone going to burn me at the stake if I add a few characters to the list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigfatcarp93 (talk • contribs) 02:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think anyone would mind at all if an editor added notable characters with proper reliable-source citation. And while the humorous hyperbole of "burn me at the stake" might be taken as perhaps a little needlessly sarcastic, I, for one, applaud the collaborative quality that led you to bring your point up on the talk page. Bigfatcarpe diem! : ) --Tenebrae (talk) 03:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Marvel Cinematic Universe comics

Joe Queseda confirmed that Marvel is working on making comic books based within the MCU to expand the universe. http://www.dailyblam.com/news/2010/11/01/marvel-cinematic-universe-expanding-with-its-own-comic-book-stories Should this be added? Along with titles of the comics already published that's based in the MCU such as Iron Man: Viva La Vida, I Am Iron Man, Iron Man: Agents of SHIELD (I think that's what it's called?) and other titles based in the MCU. JAR Head 02:50, 14 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foretboy3000 (talk • contribs)

Hawkeye claim

While The Wrap is a reliable source, the claim that Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye has a cameo in Thor is anonymously sourced, and the most we could say is "the trade-news site The Wrap said an anonymous source claimed to have seen an early cut of the film, which included Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye." When we express it like that, we can see how tenuous a claim that is. Even if it's true and not studio misinformation, anything can happen between a January cut and a May cut after test screenings, trims for lengths, etc. Finally, I think the fact that Renner forcefully denied it in the same article injects enough doubt that an encyclopedia cannot report his appearance as solid fact, which is all an encyclopedia should contain. He may well be in the film, but at this stage it's just an anonymously sourced claim whose reliability is unknown. We're on no WP:DEADLINE to report breaking rumors; we should only report solid fact. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Would it be encyclopaedic to discuss the rumour as something that had frequently been a question which would come up, before wrapping up that situation when the release of the film has happened? There are various cast interviews where the question springs up. Maybe we can discuss it like "despite sources such as <source a>, <source b etc> stating that Renner has a cameo, Renner has denied it, while Chris Hemsworth states not having done a scene involving Renner, and Feige choosing not to comment on it." And should it be the case that there is such a cameo scene, it would be just a case of adding "However, upon release of the film..." Just an idea, if it is such a issue. Thoughts? -- Harish (Talk) - 18:19, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia inst the place to address rumors, just the facts.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:28, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the claim is not worth including at this point. I think the fact that it is a cameo makes it relatively unimportant, where such discussion about an actor for a starring role may have some merit. It is worth waiting this out and seeing if this cameo really will happen. Erik (talk | contribs) 21:11, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I concur. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 15:30, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Natalie Portman as Jane Foster in The Avengers

http://www.badtaste.it/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19324&Itemid=86

Chris Hemsworth states that Natalie Portman will be in the Avengers. I recommend updating the recurring characters page for that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.75.125 (talk) 15:24, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

• The source is in Italian, but Google Chrome translated it to English for me. Still, I'm not sure this BadTaste.it is reliable.

And where do we stand with the Avengers?

Hemsworth: "I'm going to get the final script, while I have read many drafts. We start shooting in May. "

He read comic books to prepare?

Hemsworth: "Yes, I gave them to Joss Whedon, and the strangest thing is that they gave me before I came to know that he would be directing the film"

There will also be Natalie Portman?

Hemsworth: "Yes, Natalie will be playing"

--Boycool (talk) 15:43, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm also not familiar with badtaste.it, in these cases its best to wait it out. If it is true then a RS we're more familiar with will pick it up. Remember WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NORUSH.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:13, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Remove Thor References

the film is already out on Australia so why dont we removed the references sicne its have been already released?

References from third party reliable sources are always good and never hurt.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 23:49, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Okie Dokie, Then why dont you or anybody try to put some sources for The actors apeprances in Iron Man 1, 2 and hulk?

Proposal for a new table to replace Marvel Cinematic Universe#Films

I had a go at developing the table a little, adding in producers and removing distributor as I believe producer to be more important than who is releasing it. Tried to remove all the excessive white space, neaten it out and generally improve it on an aesthetic and organisation level. I don't claim it to be perfect, may need some tweaking but I think it would be an improvement, but I thought I'd get input rather than just go change it Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:27, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Film	Release date	Director	Writer(s)	Producer(s)	Distributor
Released films
Iron Man	May 2, 2008 (2008-05-02)	Jon Favreau	Art Marcum, Hawk Ostby, John August, Mark Fergus and Matt Holloway	Avi Arad and Kevin Feige	Paramount Pictures
The Incredible Hulk	June 13, 2008 (2008-06-13)	Louis Leterrier	Zak Penn and Edward Norton (uncredited)	Avi Arad, Gale Anne Hurd and Kevin Feige	Universal Pictures
Iron Man 2	April 26, 2010 (2010-04-26) (Los Angeles Premiere) May 7, 2010 (2010-05-07) (United States)	Jon Favreau	Justin Theroux	Kevin Feige and Susan Downey	Paramount Pictures
Thor	April 21, 2011 (2011-04-21) (Australia) May 6, 2011 (2011-05-06) (United States)	Kenneth Branagh	Screenplay: Ashley Edward Miller, Don Payne, Zack Stentz Story: J. Michael Straczynski and Mark Protosevich	Kevin Feige
Future films
Captain America: The First Avenger	July 22, 2011 (2011-07-22) (Post production)	Joe Johnston	Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely	Kevin Feige	Paramount Pictures
The Avengers	May 4, 2012 (2012-05-04) (Filming)	Joss Whedon	Joss Whedon	Kevin Feige	Walt Disney Pictures
Proposed films
Iron Man 3	May 3, 2013 (2013-05-03) (Proposed)				Walt Disney Pictures
List indicator(s) A dark grey cell indicates information is not available for this film.

Looks good, I would change it to a more neutral color though.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:35, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Very welcome and ambitious work! Some comments: The red banners seem a little overpowering and can probably be smaller. The Shane Black item needs to be footnoted unless the Iron Man 3 article verifies it there. "Screenlay" and "Story" may not need to be boldface; could we see how it looks regular font. Finally, I myself would like to see the distributor, since between Fox, Paramount and who-knows-who-else, it's been a mix, and there does seem to be room. Overall, though — nice work! --Tenebrae (talk) 15:38, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Suggestions? I used red in most of the tables I've done just because it strikes me but I'm open to anything. Is there a central Avengers colour? Gold? Gold seems like it'd be pretty ugly in practice. Oh yeah, Gold looks bad. I like the blue though. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:40, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

The blue is nice, and you're right, the white-letters-on-gold don't really work. Actually, and my fault for not being clearer, it's not so much the bold red that seemed overpowering, but the sheer size of the banners. Perhaps they could be not as tall? --Tenebrae (talk) 15:49, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Also, by footnote for Shane Black, I mean to a reliable-source WP:citation. Additionally, we can't say "currently," as it's a WP:DATED vio; it'd have to be "As of [date of reliable-source citation], ..." --Tenebrae (talk) 15:50, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Changed to more neutral format, made some other minor changes for indention and capitalization.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:54, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Y'know, I think TriiipleThreat is on to something — it's more staid and serious-looking now. I've taken the liberty of subduing a couple of pieces of boldface text. Thoughts? --Tenebrae (talk) 15:58, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

As far as I've been able to tell through experimentation, the only way to shrink the size of the headers is to remove the header "=" turning it into regular text. If you move the text onto the same line as the code for the row it stops working for whatever reason. And on a personal level, I think the colour other than grey makes the information more presentable. Not something that should become a cacophony of rainbow, a nice, dark, subdued colour makes an article more interesting in my opinion like the addition of photos. See List of Scream cast members. On a personal level, the aesthetic of that is vastly improved by the colour addition to what would otherwise just be a long table of grey and darker grey. It's purely an aesthetic decision mind. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:14, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

I like the divisible headers, though not really needed at his point, it makes navigation easier. I really don't mind the previous color just be wary of WP:COLOR and MOS:BOLD issues. I think that's one reason WP:COMICS went back to all neutral navboxes. I also added the distributor column per Tenebrae's suggestion.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 16:27, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Well I'm happy for colour to be accepted by consensus. I definitely don't think it'd be like a comic situation. When combined with pictures and such as this article grows and more information on the avengers becomes available, I think the colour will work. Distributor column looks fine though I think each entry should be it's own row even if it does have the same distributor, I can't think of a specific examples at the moment but even films that have the same director seem to have separate entries for each rather than rowspanning them. I will try to find a nice subdued colour that adds a little life to the table. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:34, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Just clarifying, I don't mean to indicate it would have separate colours in practice, just showing different colours for demonstration purposes. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 17:05, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

The first color is fine.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:31, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

I also threw this together for the cast section if you fancy it, they seem to have them on a lot of tv shows with core casts...You know, if you arranged the photos properly, it'd be like a flip animation moving their head from left to right. Think it'd be...Ruffalo>Jackson>Evans>Hemsworth>Downey... EDIT You could probably add Johanson and Remmer to it if Ruffalo is in it. Possibly Hiddleston too since he's the only recurring major villain.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 20:34, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Moved to here to avoid the talk page updating every time I edit something. --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Darkwarriorblake/Sandbox

I don't think we need a Main cast section, it really doesn't add anything not already stated in the current recurring cast section. TV series articles tend us that table on the main article then go into detail with additional cast members in a separate article as not to let the main article become bogged down with minor roles. Also it doesnt really apply here because were dealing with multiple works not a single work.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:02, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't mean create a new section, I would've just put it above the cast table.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:08, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

I know I must sound like Pollyanna, but every tweak being made so far just makes this thing better. I love the black-on-grey/blue banners. This kind of fruitful collaboration makes me feel so good about being a part of Wikipedia. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Since no-one seems to have any issues with it I'm going to transplant it onto the main page. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:58, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey, is Punisher War Zone not part of this universe? I thought that was done by Marvel. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:05, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

That's a really good question. So far, I don't think Kevin Feige or others at Marvel have talked about the Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, X-Men and Punisher movies as part of the Marvel Cinematic canon, so far as I know, which doesn't mean they won't be considered as such in the future. And the Spider-Man reboot and planned FF reboot just add to the confusion. What to do? I dunno! Hence, "really good question"! --Tenebrae (talk) 22:49, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

I think since Sony own Spider-Man film rights and Marvel can't include him in their films he doesn't count, same with X-Men and Fantastic Four which i think are both owned by Fox. But I THOUGHT Punisher reverted back to Marvel, maybe I am wrong. I think the big decider is that the films here all take place in the same universe where they are able to meet each other.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:53, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Marvel Studios didnt acquire the rights to The Punisher until July 2010, Punisher: War Zone was released in 2008. So it is not apart of the MCU but any future punisher films will become a part of this universe. Its detailed in the Future plans section of the article.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 01:45, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Proposed films

Should this be changed to "In development" to distinguish between films that are in active development from films whose ideas have only been discussed at this point?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:08, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Sounds fair to me. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 13:47, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Spider-Man?

Why aren't the Spider-man films included in this?69.134.221.93 (talk) 04:11, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Try looking at the FIRST POST IN THE DISCUSSION PAGE! Seriously, how can you miss that? --Chaos Indy (talk) 05:32, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Seriously, how can you not, SHUT-UP?69.134.221.93 (talk) 14:56, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

2 nerdraging tools^^ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.179.63 (talk) 03:54, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Spider-man is not in the lsit, becuase it dosent take place in the same continuty as the iron man, hulk, thor and cap films WHY? well because sony hodl the rights for the character and as long they hold the rights, Sony will nto allwo marvel include spider-man in the avnegers films so spdier-man movies are not part of the marvle cinematic universe

Maria Hill

Shouldn't the character of Maria Hill, played by Colby Smothers, be added the table? She is a well established character in the Marvel Universe and appears to be a signifcant chacter in the upcoming Avengers film. She's got to be at least as important as the reporter from the Iron Man films. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.141.192.252 (talk) 22:12, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

The table is for recurring characters only as this is ab article for film universe as a whole not any specific film.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 22:56, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Christine Everhart / Leslie Bibb

Is she really worth listing in this section? Unless I'm remembering wrong she's a fairly minor character. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:52, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

In Iron Man, she's the one that points Tony to the Ten Rings group in Gulmira. --Boycool (talk) 16:09, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

related source update.

http://marvel.com/news/story/16344/visualizing_the_marvel_cinematic_universe Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:58, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

One-shots

shouldnt this page mention the consoltant, and A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Thor’s Hammer…’ — Preceding unsigned comment added by NTC TNT (talk • contribs) 21:43, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Erik Selvig

For those who would like to contribute, I've created a sandbox for the character Erik Selvig at, you guessed it, User:Boycool42/Erik Selvig. I doubt this can be made into an article anytime before the release of The Avengers, though, as the notability just isn't there. --Boycool (talk) 21:58, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Just to be sure, did Erik Selvig originate in the comics? --Boycool (talk) 14:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Idris Elba for thor 2

Elba has confirmed his returnn to thor 2(http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/Wolvie09/news/?a=43821) shouldnt he now be added to the table — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.204.57.238 (talk) 15:39, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

In the video Elba just responds with "Yes" when asked if he has plans for Thor 2. That is too vague for a confirmation and could literally mean anything. Also please remember to trace back your sources, IGN did all the work and deserves the credit, Comicbookmovie.com just ripped it from them.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:55, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

missing table details

this page 2012 and beyond in film has a thor 2 director and an iron man 3 screenwriter listed. ive seen these names else where, but left them out cus i didnt know if that source was reliable. u guys might check that out.NTC TNT (talk) 20:37, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Clark Gregg in Iron Man 3

An interview with Clark Gregg at CraveOnline reveals that he will be in Iron Man 3 http://www.craveonline.com/film/articles/173736-clark-gregg-on-the-avengers-marvel-one-shots-iron-man-3-and-more. Maybe someone could add it to the "Recurring cast and characters" section because I would likely add it incorrectly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anythingspossibleforapossible (talk • contribs) 04:31, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry. Forgot about signing in. It's a rarity, not that it probably makes any difference to you anyway. -- Anythingspossibleforapossible (talk) 04:40, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Source doesn't state that he will be in the film, just that he is talking to "them" about it.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 11:58, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

do the ant-men and the black panter exist on the marvel cinematic universe

Reply: No, at least not yet. --Boycool (talk) 01:42, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Actually Iron Man(Film) Director Jon Favreau has stated numerous times, that the map at the end of Iron Man 2 does have a reference to Black Panther in it.

Edit request from , 4 November 2011

In the last paragraph under the section titled "Development", Kenneth Branagh's quote has a repetition of the word "think" that should be corrected. ("Branagh expounded, 'When he [Loki] falls into that wormhole, a rip in the fabric of space at the end of our picture, and then shows up in an unknown location, possibly with the idea of a new and cunning plan, I think think it's a interesting way to indicate how he might be involved in another story from another part of the Marvel Universe'")

132.170.89.100 (talk) 13:52, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done. And thanks for pointing that out.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:59, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Article should be moved

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 03:10, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Marvel Cinematic Universe → Avengers cinematic universe –

Proposed by: ArtistScientist (talk · contribs)

The name "Marvel cinematic universe" is misleading because it implies that there is one unified film universe of Marvel characters. There are actually several, one of which is the X-Men film universe. Specifying that the topic of this article only pertains to characters involved in The Avengers is simply more accurate. ArtistScientist (talk) 08:38, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose. The term "Marvel Cinematic Universe" is the term coined and used by Marvel/Disney and adopted by the mainstream press. It is the common name. --Tenebrae (talk) 11:18, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose. What Tenebrae said. --Boycool (talk) 13:02, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose as per above, they are the FOX Cinematic universe or New Line, Marvel properties do not by right exist in the Marvel produced cinematic universe. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 13:45, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose. Per WP:COMMONNAME.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:54, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
• Tenebrae I'm not disputing what you're saying but could you provide a reference for that? ArtistScientist (talk) 05:58, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

  There are references for that in the article already. [1] and (as Marvel Cinema Universe) [2], for example. -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

  Certainly. As JHunterJ notes: "In 2005, Variety reported that Marvel Studios would start producing its own films and distribute them through Paramount Pictures. Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige in 2009 initially referred to the shared narrative continuity of these films as the 'Marvel Cinema Universe', but later used the term 'Marvel Cinematic Universe'. --

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

AKA Jessica Jones

I believe the developer of the TV series "AKA Jessica Jones", Melissa Rosenberg, has confirmed that, although it's a TV series, the show is a part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Here's a source: [3] -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by ProfessorKilroy (talk • contribs) 23:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Okay, something went wrong with this post. When I saved the page, it wouldn't appear below the previous post, and my signature didn't work, so Sinebot came along to sign my post that was already signed but wasn't shown... I just tried moving it above the previous post, which worked in the preview, but after an edit conflict, the original post appeared. Anyone know why that would have happened? --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 04:07, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, I added a television section, under the comic book and short film sections. I dont know what was the problem with your original post.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:43, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

there was an open ended ref tag in the previous section which broke everything Mark (talk) 20:07, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Thanks. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 21:58, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Continuity Section

I want to add a section that explains the minute connections the the other films. I am arguing with somebody on another page about the teseract in Thor and Captain America, and putting it here may be a compromise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.244.73.96 (talk) 23:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC) ... I'm gonna put it in, if there is any contradiction, please delete it and give a reason here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.244.73.96 (talk) 00:06, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

There is already a development section if you have a reliable source from someone involved in the development of either film confirming that they are infact one and the same, and I am not talking about some blogger's personal opinion.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 00:12, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

That is completely unrelated. I want a breif section for how the films connect. It's not some bloggers opinion or whatever, I'm talking about the facts, like Nick Fury mentioning a team being developed in the Iron Man tagclip. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.244.73.96 (talk) 00:21, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

The development section does contain such continuity information from the filmmakers in detailed prose. Keep in mind Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 00:36, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Unblocking

Any of you notice how this page is blocked from editing? I want to add the continuity section, but I won't be able to. How is new info supposed to be put on it, like if a new movie comes out!

Editing has been restricted to registered users due to high-levels of IP vandalism and inappropriate edits.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 00:14, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Don't care, I know people messed up the page, but is it really necessary to keep it blocked. If this type of vandalism returns, be my guest to re-block it. But until then, I believe we should have it un-blocked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.244.73.96 (talk) 00:18, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

You are always welcome to make an edit request.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 00:22, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you.

Edit request on 21 January 2012

Tagclip Continuity

In the end of Ironman, a tagclip is seen with Nick Fury mentioning a team in development, refering to the Avengers.

In the tagclip following The Incredible Hulk, Tony Stark talks to General Ross, also refering to the team.

A small clip from Thor is shown in the end of Iron Man 2.

A mysterious object, presumably the one seen in Captain America: The First Avenger, is shown to Selvig by Nick Fury. An invisible Loki gets Selvig to research it after Nick Fury says that it could hold unlimited power. This is also, presumably, the Cosmic Cube, which will play a part in the Avengers.

At the end of Captain Americ: The First Avenger, Nick Fury says he has a mission for him, which is saving the world. This is followed by a Trailer for The Avengers.

98.244.73.96 (talk) 00:35, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

 Not done Most of this information is already present and properly sourced in the development section. You need to provide reliable sources for the rest.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 00:44, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Once Avengers is actually out, some reliable source will probably detail the connections and we could possibly create a "Connections" section, but as it is when I think about it I just think of each film as a sequel, starting with (I think) Iron Man and ending so far with Thor or Captain America and we don't go to The Terminator and say "The hand left over when he is crushed appears in Terminator 2". Details filled in by a later film don't alter the facts presented in the past film, but if such a thing ever exists to document the rather loose connections between each film following the Cube subplot, it would probably only be acceptable in this article Darkwarriorblake (talk) 01:00, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

...Until then, the Captain America DVD has a decent bonus feature video showing all the connections. --Boycool (talk) 15:40, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Does it have a specific name that could be youtubed? Darkwarriorblake (talk) 00:16, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

"The Assembly Begins". It's basically an Avengers trailer but it has clips of several of the Easter egg scenes from the other movies (e.g. Captain America's blood being drawn, Blonsky being injected in The Incredible Hulk; Red Skull looking at the painting of the Asgard tree of life, cut to Thor and Loki fighting in front of the actual tree). --Boycool (talk) 00:57, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Boycool, I will look it up when I get time Darkwarriorblake (talk) 00:38, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem. --Boycool (talk) 00:48, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Should Expended Universe material get its own section

I know there is a sub section regarding the Marvel One-Shots but shouldnt all the extra expanding material that is part of the universe be put in one section together.

There are alot more things from Marvel which are specifically part of the MCU, and i can understand information regarding all the Comics (18 of them i think), games (well as far as i know only Captain America: Super Soldier is considered canon).. and other Blu-Ray extras like the Thunderbolt Files, SHIELD Data Vault etc --- 212.139.103.233 (talk) 11:40, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

i think its a good idea. i have yet to find a list of mcu comics, and that would be so handy. please make one.NTC TNT (talk) 05:15, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Well there is..

• Captain America: First Vengeance 1-4
• Fury Files: The Incredible Hulk 1 & 2
• Iron Man: Fast Friends 1 & 2
• Iron Man 2: Public Identity 1-3
• Iron Man 2: Agents of SHIELD 1-3
• Iron Man 2: Fist of Iron
• Captain America - Thor - Avengers
• I Am Iron Man 1 & 2 (movie adaptation, but features extra scenes involving SHIELD)

As for video games

• Captain America: Super Soldier (according to writer Christos N Gage)

---212.139.103.233 (talk) 20:14, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

there is also the road to the avengers. Road to the Avengers includes I Am Iron Man, Iron Man Security Measures, Iron Man 2: Public Identity, Iron Man 2: Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D. and Captain America: First Vengeance.174.253.196.73 (talk) 22:26, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

A number of military-themed New Avengers comics have been published by Marvel and released by the Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES [ay-fees]) in the past few years. The eleventh and most recent is tied into Captain America: The First Avenger. --Boycool (talk) 23:24, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

As is the twelfth. --Boycool (talk) 19:28, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Ghost Rider

Sorry if this has been asked, I did a CTRL+F and didn't find anything. This is apparently under the Marvel Knights label, so is it a marvel film? Is the new Ghost Rider taking place in teh same universe? I haven't followed it so I don't know if anyone has seen any news concerning that. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 02:03, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Marvel co-produced Ghost Rider, all the MCU films are independently produced by Marvel. Hope this helps.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 02:15, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

K thanks 3Threat. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 02:22, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Official Comic Book List + Merger of One Shots

I think in the comic book section we need an official list of the canon MCU comic books. This list caontains: -Captain America: The First Avenger: First Vengeance -The Avengers Prelude: Fury's Big Week -Black Widow Strikes -Iron Man 2 Public Identity -Iron Man 2 Agents of SHIELD -Iron Man: I am Iron Man I understand that there are more comics, but a friend on a forum spoke to Will Corona Pilgrim (Creative Manager, Research & Development @Marvel Studios) on Twitter, he listed these comics as the official list whilst the rest of the comics should be understood as 'inspired by' MCU. Could someone please add these and make a list. Also i think the MArvel One Shot page should be merged into this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.222.15.45 (talk) 00:13, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Gwyneth Paltrow in The Avengers and Iron Man 3

Japanese trailer of The Avengers show a clip of Paltrow in an airplane. Check the photos in this article from comicbookmovie. http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=56376 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.5.241.139 (talk) 04:41, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Comicbookmovie.com is not a reliable source and we do not use trailers as sources of information; they can often be misleading. She may not appear in the final cut of te film. We need a reliable source explicitly stating that she indeed appears.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 06:14, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

And using an article from Entertainment Weekly describing the trailer is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.5.241.139 (talk) 01:11, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Independently

"The Marvel Cinematic Universe is a shared fictional universe that is the setting of superhero films independently developed by Marvel Studios ..." The word "independently" links to independent film. The independence here is obviously from Marvel, not that the movies are films "produced mostly or completely outside of the major film studio system".126.25.73.82 (talk) 07:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Marvel Studios was once an independent film studio when it received its financing directly from Merrill Lynch but is no longer after being acquired by Disney.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:11, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

FeatureFilmCasting

Several websites are reporting information found on FeatureFilmCasting. FeatureFilmCasting is hosted by Blogspot, and appears not to be a reliable source.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 07:17, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the RfC was for? Just our POV on the source? I personally don't trust it, I found it while researching Burt Wonderstone and just didn't feel it meshed with any other sources I had found and didn't use it, so I personally agree that it is not a reliable source. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:39, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

The site seems to belong to AB Media Publishing, belonging to an actor named Alan Baltes and, judging from its website, is a one-man operation that posts fan-site material (Brittany Murphy, Michael Jackson) and various types of casting notices. His sites tend to have a biographical capsule with some variation of this sentence from Feature Film Casting: "I decided to create and maintain this blog in my spare time to help people who are interested in becoming a professional actor for Disney." So it appears to be a self-published site not being maintained as a professional enterprise.

While the site seems sincere, anything involving casting is historically prone to scams. I don't personally believe that's the case here — I certainly cast no aspersions whatsoever on Mr. Baltes — but the fact remains that there is no professional editorial vetting of this information. As well, it certainly would not appear that Mr. Baltes is reporting and writing this material — it clearly seems to be boilerplate casting notices copied from elsewhere. If that elsewhere is a public, professional site, such as Backstage magazine, we should link there instead. If Feature Film Casting or its sister sites are using material taken from copyrighted sources, however, we can't link to a copyvio site.

For these reasons, I don't believe we should use Feature Film Casting as a reference source. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:36, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for input, that was quite a bit of research. I figured we shouldn't use it but did not want to act unilaterally.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:14, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

cast box

I know that others have said that the table doesnt represent one movie or whatever, but i happened to find 11 movie series pages that have characters that only appear in one film, so i think that the more main characters that appear in only one movie(Maria Hill, Whiplash, Iron Monger, Abomination, Red Skull, Peggy Carter, Jane Foster, etc.) should be added to the table, but minor characters, unless in two movies, should be left out(Darcy, heimdall, the Howling Commandos, etc.). The 11 pages i found are The Fast and the Furious (film series) and List of Harry Potter cast members and Star Wars and The Lord of the Rings film trilogy and Pirates of the Caribbean (film series) and Shrek (film series) and List of Batman films cast members and Spider-Man in film and Indiana Jones (franchise) and Toy Story (franchise) and Ice Age (film series) NTC TNT (talk) 06:04, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I would support that. --Boycool (talk) 17:21, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I am still inclined to disagree, the table isn't meant to simply list characters appearing in the MCU but to show the relationships between these films and how they cross-reference each other. What makes this article unique is that it isn't a mere film series article but it is also an article on fictional universe. Also limiting the table to recurring characters also limits the amount of subjectivity.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:12, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I think the cast box needs to be organized much better than it is. Certain characters that are minor are higher in the order than they should, while recurring characters are not. I believe the first four should definitely belong to the Big 4 of Iron Man, Hulk, Thor and Captain America. Then, follow with who appeared in Iron Man. If that person appeared in The Incredible Hulk, they should be listed next. If they appeared in Iron Man 2, they should be bumped for characters appeared in just the first two. Then repeat that with Thor and Captain America. Also, minor repeats should be listed near the bottom in accordance to when they appeared and how many . Here is how I think it should look.

Tony Stark/Iron Man Bruce Banner/The Hulk Thor Steve Rogers/Captain America Nick Fury Phil Coulson Howard Stark Pepper Potts JARVIS James Rhodes Happy Hogan Christine Everhart Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow Clint Barton/Hawkeye Loki Dr. Erik Selvig Jane Foster Sif Fandral Volstagg Heimdell

This order should make the list much more organized and list them more coherently. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.5.241.139 (talk) 04:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request from , 26 April, 2012

The Avengers was released in Australia yesterday. Can the table be updated to reflect this (and the current sequence of general release in Austrlaia prior to general release in the US)?

 Not done The table reflects the earliest release (April 11, 2012) and the release date in the country of origin (May 4, 2012) per WP:FILMRELEASE.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:06, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Earth Designation

Marvel has officially designated this earth as Earth-199999. http://marvel.wikia.com/Earth-199999. I tried to edit the page but had trouble citing references and the like. Any help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lokier (talk • contribs) 20:35, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Chart

I made this chart for the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I am not sure where to put it. Please give feedback.

Iron Man (2008)

The Incredible Hulk (2008)

Iron Man 2 (2010)

Thor (2011)

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

The Avengers (2012)

Iron Man 3 (2013)

Thor 2 (2013)

Oldag07 (talk) 19:39, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Captain America was 2011.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:48, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Oldag07 (talk) 19:59, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

For where it goes I guess it depends what you're using it for. Are you going to include the TV series and other things or is it just for films? I guess it would go in the films section. Is it at all possible to center it? Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:13, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Obviously just the films. It was between this page and the Avengers movie page. I played around more with the template, and was able to center it, link the standard franchises, and and add color. Oldag07 (talk) 01:53, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Iron Man (2008)

The Incredible Hulk (2008)

Iron Man 2 (2010)

Thor (2011)

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

The Avengers (2012)

Iron Man 3 (2013)

Thor 2 (2013)

Captain America 2 (2014)

Version 2.0 Oldag07 (talk) 01:53, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Italicized movie titlesOldag07 (talk) 02:01, 30 April 2012 (UTC

Added proper proposed date for Captain America 2. Oldag07 (talk) 02:54, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

I question how this chart will work if some of the new Marvel movies are announced. How can you connect an Ant-Man, Black Panther, Dr. Strange, Guardians of the Galaxy or Luke Cage/Iron Fist movie? Maybe you can, but because they were in the first Avengers movie it will be confusing to have a movie that stands alone by itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.5.241.139 (talk) 06:31, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

I guess the question is what constitutes the "Marvel Cinematic Universe". Clearly Spider-man and X-Men are not part of that same "universe". There is no cross continuity between those movies. Would a Dr Strange movie be part of this "universe"? I was under the impression that just the franchises going into the Avengers would be in this "universe". If they were connected would a chart make even more sense? But at the moment, the more I think about it, the more I realize, that this is not the right place for this chart (see reasons below) Oldag07 (talk) 17:46, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

The chart does look nice, but I am not quite sure what it represents or if it really adds anything that isn't already expressed in prose.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:29, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

My original idea was just to show sort of a family tree to what is going on in the movie "Avengers". I think the current chart idea strays from that idea, and really is not so useful. I will try a skimmed down version for the Avengers movie page. Honestly, a chart might be more useful after more films come out, just not now. Oldag07 (talk) 17:46, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

So basically it shows that five films preceded The Avengers and three more are to follow, I think that this is well enough covered already.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:26, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I could see this chart being really helpfull in say 10 or more years, but for now, I dont see a pointNTC TNT (talk) 06:25, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Addition of One-Shots to the Cast Box?

They are short films, and many charts for series' include short films. They also help tie the movies together, soon my opinion we should add The Consultant and A Funny Thing Happened On the Way to Thor's Hammer, and then just have the link for them leading back to the Marvel One-Shots page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orcson11 (talk • contribs) 13:45, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

TV section

There were several other shows in development other than AKA Jessica Jones, such as a Punisher show, Hulk, and Cloak and Dagger. Of these, I'm fairly sure the Hulk show is still in development. However, I'm not sure if it's confirmed as part of the MCU. Might be worth looking into. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 14:03, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Future Section

MMMMMM i was thinking. Should we Add Info of the Possible Hulk Sequel There? sicne the Hulk reboot ocnintuy are part of marvel cinematic unvierse so i think the sequel needs to be mentioend there.--Eagc7 (talk)

It'd be best if it was put in the "future" section since nothing on the sequel is confirmed. Kevin Feige hopes to release a sequel for 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.28.169.105 (talk) 01:59, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

2003 Hulk Film in MCU

I think it makes sense to add the 2003 film Hulk to this article. While the 2008 film The Incredible Hulk was not billed as a sequel to Hulk, the plot of the second film is mostly a continuation of the first. The first ends in Brazil, the second begins there. There might be some minor continuity issues, but this is common across several other film series as well. Different actors, but again this is not uncommon. To be consistent overall, should include all films that are about the characters featured in The Avengers, which would obviously include Hulk.Brandonlee25 (talk) 03:16, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

The 2008 film is not a direct sequel to the 2003 film, and it has been confirmed that they do not share continuity, so therefore the 2003 film should not be included in a page that is specifically about the continuity shared only by the 2008 film with Iron Man, Thor, Captain America and the Avengers. If you are to include the 2003 Hulk film, by the same logic, you would include the 90s Captain America film as well. The only films that are included in the MCU are ones produced entirely by Marvel Studios. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 07:55, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I know that this is the official line from the suits at Marvel Studios, but they are kind of full of it when they say that. They obviously made the 2008 film to be a continuation of the 2003 film. The opening montage shows highlights from the first, though with the 2008 actors. I'm pretty sure that the Marvel execs just said at the time that it was a reboot because that way they could get away with having a Hulk movie that has different actors, tone, pacing, and themes. I acknowledge that the two are not 100% consistent on every detail, but I don't think the 2008 film and Avengers is either with regard to the Hulk character. My point for arguing this is that if someone who has not seen any of these films wants to see the series, I would certainly tell them to start with the 2003 Hulk film in order to understand the origin story of Hulk. Now, regarding the previous Captain America film, that one gives a completely different origin story that cannot be reconciled with the 2011 film nor the Avengers. Really the only reason for leaving the 2003 Hulk film out of this article is because the suits are Marvel Studios didn't like it and want to kind of pretend it doesn't exist, despite the fact that they continuity of the 2008 film and the Avengers does actually acknowledge those events. I say that the most reasonable thing to do is to expand the article to take into account the first Hulk film.67.187.246.130 (talk) 16:23, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

It has been stated by many involved with the Incredible Hulk film that it was a reboot/sequel, a sort of "requel", in that they borrowed SOME ideas from the Ang Lee film and incorporated them into the new one. However, to say that it is in the SAME continuity would be out-right wrong considering the origin stories are SLIGHTLY different. In The Incredible Hulk, it is explicitly stated that Banner was used in tests by General Ross to unlock the secrets of creating more super-soldiers by using Gamma Radiation testing. Banner thought it was for the benefit of mankind, and so when the experiment went wrong (and after nearly killing Betty), Banner ran for it and was now a fugitive on the run from General Ross, who calls Banner property of the US Government/a weapon. In the 2003 Hulk film, Banner's transformation was purely by accident when he protected his lab-partner from the dangerous Gamma Rays that irradiated the test room when Banner was caught in the machine. Because of Banner's genetic manipulation from his father, his DNA underwent a big change due to the Gamma Rays. He was not on the run from General Ross until Ross found out that Banner was the monster that destroy the lab where Betty and Bruce worked. It helped that I just recently watched BOTH films back-to-back last week, so both films' plots are fresh in my mind. And as far as I care, anything that SHOULD belong in the MCU would be at the word of Kevin Feige and Marvel Studios. Just because some fans want to try and squeeze the 2003 Hulk into the MCU doesn't mean it belongs in this article. People directly involved with the Incredible Hulk and Marvel Studios have stated that it was a reboot and the 2003 film is not part of this multi-film continuity that started with Iron Man. (MarkyMarc413 (talk) 21:44, 28 May 2012 (UTC))

To the casual viewer, The Incredible Hulk is just Hulk 2 with different actors. But while TIH mostly skips the origin story, the style of the two films are distinctly different. Also, the question isn't really if TIH is a sequel to Hulk, but if Hulk is part of the universe. While TIH has references to connect it to the MCU (I think Stark Industries and/or S.H.I.E.L.D. appears on a monitor; the allusions to Captain America; the appearance of Tony Stark), Hulk the movie is simply a stand-alone movie about Hulk the character. --Boycool † (talk) 03:28, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I get what you guys are saying, and I concede that it makes sense that the 2003 film is not technically a part of MCU. I do think that at the very least this article should briefly explain why this film is NOT a part of MCU. The fact that someone at Marvel said it was a "reboot/sequel" means that it could be considered a part of MCU in a broad sense. As was mentioned above, this is what it would seem like to many casual viewers. I myself was confused about this, which is why I started this discussion. Please briefly explain why the 2003 Hulk film is not a part of MCU in the article. This might prevent some future confusion by others.Brandonlee25 (talk) 05:17, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I think any discussion regarding "Hulk" and it's relation to "The Incredible Hulk" and the MCU should be done on THOSE pages (for the Hulk films), and not here. The MCU page is to discuss the films that are indeed a part of that continuity, and how they connect and interact (with cross-over characters, ideas, plots and so on). If someone wants to put a blurb about "Hulk" they could, but I think any notes one might make here about it's relation to "The Incredible Hulk" can be done on either of those two Hulk pages. (MarkyMarc413 (talk) 05:10, 30 May 2012 (UTC))

The question is, do any reliable sources include the film? - SudoGhost 03:31, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

No, because it is not part of the MCU. There are reliable sources that state that it is a separate film, but as MarkyMarc413 already stated that should be discussed in those articles. Stating that the 2003 Hulk movie is not part of this group of films would be like stating in each article of the many Spider-Man television series that they are unrelated to the other ones; which is obviously unnecessary.

The casual viewer has actually forgotten about Hulk and only barely thinks about Incredible Hulk as it relates to The Avengers. Kurt Parker (talk) 18:45, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Guardians of the Galaxy (Film)

On the 29th June 2012, Latino Review revealed that Guardians of the Galaxy is Marvel's other 2014 movie. Variety has now confirmed this rumour (adding further credibility to the initial claims) and says that the studio are indeed planning to release it on May 16th, 2014. They mention that their reason for travelling back in time from the 31st Century is to, "help to battle the Badoon, an evil alien race that attempts to conquer Earth's solar system." However, it is not made clear whether or not this is the exact direction in which the film will go, although it matches up with what we heard earlier today. Apparently, Marvel are very happy with the script written by Nicole Perlman, a relative unknown who came out of Disney's screenwriting program. Their sources also tell them that the studio has prioritized this over Black Panther, although Marvel Studios is also said to be working on Ant-Man, Dr. Strange and The Inhumans (as well as The Avengers 2 in 2015).

UPDATE: The Hollywood Reporter also claims to have heard from reliable sources that a Guardians of the Galaxy movie will be announced at this year's San Diego Comic-Con and reveal that, "Those in the know say the project is in line with Avengers in tone in the sense there is plenty of comedic elements on display." Nicole Perlman has written two drafts of the screenplay (she also impressed Marvel with a Black Widow solo script) and worked on Thor. Marvel is said to be on the hunt for a director. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jazza815 (talk • contribs) 03:47, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

San Diego is in two weeks, so let's just wait for that. These rumors are a little iffy, in my opinion, and probably don't pass WP:RS. Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 04:36, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I concur with Evanh2008, its only two week. What's the rush?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 11:23, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorting????

Respected Sir i decided to order neatly the future section of this page so that everyone can easily view which movie is coming but my editing is constantly reverting why??????? can u tell me why,it would be a help.
The format in which i am printing is

• Iron Man 3: Iron Man 3, the sequel to 2010's Iron Man 2, has recently entered production, with a budget of $200 million and a release scheduled for May 3, 2013.Based on the "Extremis" story arc by Warren Ellis,the film will have Robert Downey, Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, and Don Cheadle reprise their roles as Tony Stark / Iron Man, Pepper Potts, and James Rhodes / War Machine, respectively, with Ben Kingsley having entered negotiations to play an unspecified villain in April 2012. Guy Pearce will also co-star.
• Thor 2: Also currently in pre-production is Thor 2, the sequel to the 2011 film Thor, in which Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Natalie Portman, and Idris Elba reprising their roles as Thor, Loki, Jane Foster, and Heimdall, respectively. It is set for release on November 8, 2013.
• Captain America 2: Sequel to Captain America: The First Avenger is also planned.
• Guardians of Galaxy: Feige has also indicated that Marvel Studios is planning to work on a film version of the Guardians of the Galaxy franchise. Marvel Studios is expected to announce a May 16, 2014, release date for the film according to Variety magazine. Members Feige has mentioned specifically to appear in the film include Star-Lord, Drax the Destroyer, Gamora, Rocket Raccoon and Groot.
• Ant-Man: Other possible future films include a live-action Ant-Man film, directed by Edgar Wright. The script has been written by Wright and Joe Cornish, who plan to include Henry Pym and Scott Lang as major characters, with Pym as Ant-Man in the 1960s a style similar to Tales to Astonish, and a flashforward to Lang as Pym's successor in the 1980s or '90s.
• The Avengers 2: Sequel to The Avengers is also planned.
• Incredible Hulk 2: Samuel Sterns, played by Tim Blake Nelson in the 2008 film The Incredible Hulk, was introduced to set him up as a villain in a future Hulk film, where he would become the Leader. Nelson hopes Marvel will ask him to reprise the role. Cast member Tim Roth, who co-starred as the Abomination, was contracted to return for a possible sequel. While Marvel Studios chief Kevin Feige said in 2008 that The Incredible Hulk met Marvel's expectations and that Hulk would return after The Avengers, he amended in April 2012 that "with the Hulk we're gonna play it very carefully. We had varying degrees of success on those first two movies, so we're not gonna say, 'Oh we did it! Another one!' We’re gonna be smart about it and play it out. There are no plans right now to do another Hulk [movie]. Hulk might be just the special guest in Avengers movies; who knows?" However, Marvel later suggested a possible 2015 release for a sequel due to the positive audience reaction to Mark Ruffalo's portrayal of the character in The Avengers. Should a future Hulk film be made, Edward Norton will not return as the title character. Instead, Ruffalo is set to portray the character in any future adaptations.
• Black Panther: In January 2011, Marvel Studios hired documentary filmmaker Mark Bailey to write a script for a Black Panther film with Marvel's Kevin Feige producing.
• Inhumans: A trade report in March 2011 said Marvel Entertainment is developing an Inhumans film and described it as "in the vein of 'X-Men' about aliens who were put on Earth as a sleeper cell to eventually call back their race to take over the planet."
• S.H.I.E.L.D: In addition, in May 2010, Samuel L. Jackson, who portrays Nick Fury in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, said that a S.H.I.E.L.D. movie is likely to be released after The Avengers.
• Hawkeye: A Hawkeye film is also being considered, with Jeremy Renner in talks to reprise his role as the character.
• Black Widow: In September 2010, during a press conference for the Iron Man 2 Blu-ray and DVD release, Kevin Feige confirmed that discussions about the possibility of a Black Widow solo film have taken place. "We've already started discussions with Scarlett [Johansson] about the idea of a solo movie and have begun putting together concepts," said Feige. "But The Avengers comes first."
• Runaways:In July 2010, it was reported that filming would begin in March - July 2011. On August 5, 2010, casting for the film began. In October 2010, the brakes were put on production, due to Marvel focusing on The Avengers. With production of The Avengers well underway, The Runaways project is just waiting for the Green Light. The film could be scheduled for release sometime in 2014.
• War Machine: In January, Iron Man 2 actor Don Cheadle, confirmed that a War Machine spin-off film was in development.
• Warriors Three:In 2011, Kevin Feige says that there could be a Thor spin-off of The Warriors Three.
• Punisher: In July 2010, at the San Diego Comic-Con International, company head Kevin Feige revealed that another Punisher reboot is in the works. Feige said that the rights to the character have reverted back to Marvel Studios, and they want to take their own shot at it. He also said that he is aiming for a "Frank Castle" movie rather than a Punisher film.
• Note:
  • Marvel has also attempted to hire a team of writers to help come up with creative ways to launch its lesser-known properties, including
    • Black Panther
    • Cable
    • Iron Fist
    • Nighthawk
    • Vision,
  • And in April 2010, Marvel began meeting with filmmakers to discuss small-scale, $20–40 million movies based on these lesser-known characters and others. Properties considered for development includes
    • Dr. Strange
    • Ka-Zar
    • Luke Cage
    • Dazzler
    • Power Pack

In June 2012, producer Avi Arad said he is open to the idea of having Spider-Man from the upcoming 2012 reboot appear in a future Avengers sequel, thus creating a crossover between the Marvel Cinematic Universe and Sony's Spider-Man franchise, but no deal has been made as of now.

Now what is the problem in this??????

Well, I would support some kind of revamp of this section, because there's a lot of information, completely in prose, and it's kinda hard to totally understand it. There's a lot of old reports and new reports, so the focus of the section is not quite clear, and a little interesting. However, I think the dot points on the characters that are being discussed is probably too excessive. That could be handled with a short paragraph. As could the "Spin-offs" that haven't had much publicly documented discussion or press... (Such as SHIELD, Hawkeye, Black Widow, War Machine, and Warriors Three) I would also make a clear distinction between which projects are confirmed, and which are being discussed. As to why your edits are being reverted, it's probably because a change like this is pretty bold, and discussing it here is probably a good idea. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 14:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

ok Sir actually now the changes have been saved and that portion has become dotted so now please check that portion and edit that as you like but it would be great if you dont remove dotts.but just write which are confirmed and which are only discussed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shoxee1214 (talk • contribs) 17:06, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey, I really don't like that so many changes were made to the Future section with no discussion. But I'm just going to say, I'm cool with how the Future section is now. Keeping it in prose, but cutting it down. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 00:46, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

ok you are the boss what can i do.regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shoxee1214 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 8 July 2012 (UTC)