These days, an actor or actress starring in two or more comic book movies is becoming more and more common. Everyone from Scarlet Johansson to Tommy Lee Jones, Chris Evans to Idris Elba has more than one comic book film on their resume. Now, we might just have to add Tom Hiddleston to that list.

The English actor, who made such a memorable performance as Loki in Thor  and The Avengers, might be taking the lead in one of the most iconic heroes from the world of independent comics–The Crow.

The Wrap is reporting that the actor is in talks with producers of the remake of the 1994 Brandon Lee film, which in itself was an adaptation of James O’Barr’s 1988 graphic novel. The website even states that Hiddleston sent in a make-up test he did on his own in order to show his interest in the part.

Hiddleston follows Bradley Cooper, Mark Wahlberg and James McAvoy, among others, who were rumored to be considered for the part.

Let me just say that I consider pretty much all remakes to be pointless. And second to the RoboCop remake, I consider The Crow remake to be the most pointless. But that being said, the idea of Tom Hiddleston in the lead role excites me. He’s a great actor, and one I think would bring a lot to the role. Hopefully, these talks go well and he gets the part.

Marvel Studios’ has announced that production on Captain America: The Winter Soldier has started today in Los Angeles. Further shooting will take place in Cleveland, Ohio (Perhaps doubling for Manhattan they way it did for parts of The Avengers?) and Washington DC.

To note the start of filming, Marvel has released the first production photo from the project – a simple behind-the-scenes shot showing Chris Evans as Steve Rogers/Captain America at some SHIELD office/installation/helicarrier. Click on the picture for a larger version. Marvel’s press release is below.

Following in the footsteps of the record-breaking Marvel Studios’ release, “Marvel’s The Avengers,” production on the highly anticipated release, Marvel’s “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” has commenced in Los Angeles, Calif., with production also including locations in Cleveland, Ohio, and Washington D.C. Directing the film is the team of Anthony and Joe Russo (“Welcome to Collinwood”) from a screenplay written by Christopher Markus (“Captain America: The First Avenger”) & Stephen McFeely (“Captain America: The First Avenger”). Marvel’s “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” returns Chris Evans (“Captain America: The First Avenger,” “Marvel’s The Avengers”) as the iconic Super Hero character Steve Rogers/Captain America, along with Scarlett Johansson (“Marvel’s The Avengers,” “Iron Man 2”) as Black Widow and Samuel L. Jackson (“Marvel’s The Avengers,” “Iron Man 2”) as Nick Fury. In addition, film icon Robert Redford has joined the all-star cast as Agent Alexander Pierce, a senior leader within the S.H.I.E.L.D. organization. “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” is set for release in the U.S. on April 4, 2014.

“Captain America: The Winter Soldier” will pick-up where “Marvel’s The Avengers” left off, as Steve Rogers struggles to embrace his role in the modern world and teams up with Natasha Romanoff, aka Black Widow, to battle a powerful yet shadowy enemy in present-day Washington, D.C.

Based on the ever-popular Marvel comic book series, first published in 1941, Marvel’s “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” features an outstanding supporting cast that includes Sebastian Stan (“Captain America: The First Avenger,” “Black Swan”) as Bucky Barnes/Winter Soldier, Anthony Mackie (“The Hurt Locker,” “Million Dollar Baby”) as Sam Wilson/Falcon, Cobie Smulders (“Marvel’s The Avengers,” “How I Met Your Mother”) as Agent Maria Hill, Frank Grillo (“Zero Dark Thirty”) as Brock Rumlow and Georges St-Pierre (“Death Warrior”) as Georges Batroc. Rounding out the talented cast are Hayley Atwell (“Captain America: The First Avenger”) as Peggy Carter, Toby Jones (“Captain America: The First Avenger,” “The Hunger Games”) as Arnim Zola, Emily VanCamp (“The Ring 2,” “Revenge”) as Agent 13 and Maximiliano Hernández (“Marvel’s The Avengers,” “Thor”) as Agent Jasper Sitwell.

Marvel Studios’ President Kevin Feige is producing the film. Executive producers on the project include Alan Fine, Louis D’Esposito, Victoria Alonso, Michael Grillo and Stan Lee. The creative production team on the film includes director of photography Trent Opaloch (“Elysium,” “District 9”), production designer Peter Wenham (“21 Jump Street,” “Fast Five”), editors Jeffrey Ford, A.C.E. and Mary Jo Markey, A.C.E. (“Star Wars: Episode 7,” “The Perks of Being a Wallflower”) and three time Oscar®-nominated costume designer Judianna Makovsky (“The Hunger Games,” “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone”).

Marvel Studios’ upcoming release schedule includes “Iron Man 3” on May 3, 2013, and “Thor: The Dark World” on November 8, 2013. The studio most recently produced the critically acclaimed “Marvel’s The Avengers,” which set the all-time, domestic 3-day weekend box office record at $207.4 million. The film, which shattered both domestic and international box office records, is Disney’s highest-grossing global and domestic release of all time and marks the studio’s fifth film to gross more than $1 billion worldwide.

In the summer of 2011, Marvel successfully launched two new franchises with “Thor,” starring Chris Hemsworth, and “Captain America: The First Avenger,” starring Chris Evans. Both films opened #1 at the box office and have grossed over $800 million worldwide combined. In 2010 “Iron Man 2,” starring Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Don Cheadle, Scarlett Johansson, Sam Rockwell, Mickey Rourke and Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury took the #1 spot in its first weekend with a domestic box office gross of $128.1 million.

In the summer of 2008, Marvel produced the summer blockbuster movies “Iron Man” and “The Incredible Hulk.” “Iron Man,” in which Robert Downey Jr. originally dons the Super Hero’s powerful armor and stars alongside co-stars Terrence Howard, Jeff Bridges, Shaun Toub and Gwyneth Paltrow, was released May 2, 2008, and was an immediate box office success. Garnering the number one position for two weeks in a row, the film brought in over $100 million in its opening weekend. On June 13, 2008, Marvel released “The Incredible Hulk,” marking its second number one opener of that summer.

Okay, do you want the good news first, or the bad news? Bad news? Okay, then.

The bad news is that Variety is reporting that Marvel is negotiating with Fox to extend the studios rights on Daredevil, which are set to expire if Fox doesn’t start a Daredevil film by October 10 of this year.

The good news is that in exchange for the rights being extended, the Marvel will get the right to use some Fantastic Four characters, which Fox owns the rights to for the foreseeable future, in order to use said characters in the cosmic themed Phase II of the Marvel film franchises.

Don’t get your hopes up too high. Variety suggests that the FF themselves aren’t the characters Marvel wants, so we won’t be able to see Chris Evans play Captain America and Human Torch in the same film (darn it!).  The industry journal states that Marvel wants Galactus and Silver Surfer from Fox to use in the new “cosmic” path the Marvel films are taking.

While the space-faring Silver Surfer and the planet-eating Galactus would definitely fit in with the intergalactic films Marvel will be making, they don’t seem to be that great of a fit with the direction the films are taking. Galactus is as, if not more, powerful than Thanos, so including him and Thanos in The Guardians of the Galaxy or Avengers 2 might be a bit of overkill. And having the character simply make a cameo probably wouldn’t be worth this much effort. However, there are two other Fantastic Four supporting characters that Marvel might have their eye on that would be a better fit.

Annihilus is a villain who first appeared in Fantastic Four Annual #6 and fought the team numerous times over the years. He is an alien being who lives in an antimatter universe called the Negative Zone. Fanatical about staying alive, he is fixated with killing anything that he considers a threat to his life. Unfortunately, this means just about every other living thing.

Annihilus was the main villain in the Annihilation miniseries, the series where members the current version of the Guardians of the Galaxy united to stave off his invasion of our universe. Since he played a part in the origin of the team in the comic books, it seems natural that Marvel might want him to serve the same role in The Guardians of the Galaxy film as well, considering many of the same characters have been carried over.

The next character might not be part of the Fantastic Four characters that Fox owns, but his not being included in the plans for Phase II leads me to believe his rights are owned by someone other than Marvel, and if not Fox, then who?

Adam Warlock made his first appearance in Fantastic Four #66 as “Him,” a genetic creation of a cadre of mad scientist called The Enclave, who were endeavoring to create the ultimate humanoid life form that they could clone into an army and use to conquer the Earth.   Unfortunately for them, their creation was imbued with immeasurable cosmic power and was too powerful control. “Him” eventually left Earth for the stars, took the name Adam Warlock, and fought to make the galaxy safe.

If Thanos has an arch-nemesis, it would be Adam Warlock. Many a legendary comic book arc feature those two going at it, often times with one of both characters dying (or being brought back). Having Thanos in the the films without Warlock is like having a movie with Laurel but not Hardy. Just doesn’t seem right. By the way, Warlock was also a member of the Guardians of the Galaxy.

Of course, Deadline is reporting that their sources at Fox are denying the talks of the trade, and that they are really excited about the Josh Trank take on the Fantastic Four characters and that the talks are about Fox and Disney co-financing the Daredevil film, yada yada yada. I wonder if they are the same sources that told Deadline that Jessica Biel was a lock for Viper in The Wolverine, a fact that I’ll repeat with every Deadline news item because it was totally wrong.

I guess we’ll have to see which news organization’s sources are more connected. As they say, the story is developing.

In this day and age, if you are a form of media that covers another form of media, eventually you will come up with a list. Rolling Stone has put out special, oversized volumes about what songs, albums and guitarists are the best in their eyes. Entertainment Weekly can be counted on at least one issue a year feature a list of some kind, most recently it was the “50 Best Films You’ve Never Seen” and “25 Best Cult TV Shows From the Past 25 years.” And VH1 and E! have made it a staple of their programming.

The reason why they turn to list making is simple–because it’s popular. In a world full of opinionated people, any collated list  that represents the authoritative ranking of anything will get attention. People want their tastes validated. Or, they want to see how wrong these media outlets are. These lists sell copies.  They garner high ratings. They get shared on Facebook. They get linked to. And the more controversial the better, For example, take Sight and Sound‘s yearly poll’s swapping of Citizen Kane with Vertigo and the furor that kicked up.

But sometimes, it appears that there’s more that goes into constructing these lists than just picking the best or worst of a particular medium. Some lists seem to be compiled just to garner controversy. Yes, there will be “no brainer” items on the list, but there will also be notable omissions as well. There will be items included that seems to serve no other purpose than to make people angry. And even if you agree with every item put on and left off, you have the rankings themselves to quarrel over.

A sterling example of this are two lists that have appeared on Newsarama.com, one of the oldest comic book news sites on the Internet, over the last week. One was the “10 Best Comic Book-Based Movie PERFORMANCES Of All Time” and the “10 Worst Comic Book-Based Movie PERFORMANCES of All Time.” Both lists were compiled by the “Newsarama Staff,” and both are controversial in their own right. At best, the lists were sloppily compiled with mind-numbing gaps of logic, at worst, the list were compiled deliberately to anger comic book movie fans and generate controversy.

Here is Newsarama’s 10 Best List:

1. Heath Ledger, The Joker, The Dark Knight
2. Robert Downey, Jr, Tony Stark/Iron Man, Iron Man, Iron Man 2, & The Avengers
3. Gary Oldman, Commissioner Gordon, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises
4. Hugh Jackman, Wolverine, X-Men, X2: X-Men United, X-Men: The Last Stand, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, X-Men First Class
5. J.K. Simmons, J. Jonah Jameson, Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2, Spider-Man 3
6. Tom Hiddleston, Loki, Thor & The Avengers
7. Chloe Grace Moretz, Hit-Girl, Kick-Ass
8. Andrew Garfield, Peter Parker/Spider-Man, The Amazing Spider-Man
9. Anne Hathaway, Selina Kyle, The Dark Knight Rises
10. Chris Evans, Jensen, The Losers

The lists are “best comic book-based performances” not “Best SUPERHERO comic book-based performances”: Granted, Newsarama focuses mostly on the mainstream superhero genre, and adding another word to the already gangly title would have made it even ganglier, but we have to take the titles of these articles to heart. That means, this should be the definitive list of ALL performances from ALL movies based an ALL kinds of comic books. Yet, there is no Paul Giamatti from American Splendor on this list. Nor is there Thora Birch or Steve Buscemi from Ghost World or Tom Hanks, Paul Newman or anyone else from Road to Perdition. 

I could go on. But what these titles are doing is advertising one thing and selling us another. And that is a recipe that is custom made to generate the kind of “you left XXX of the list” controversy that builds up links.

The Green Hornet? The Phantom? Comic Book-Based?: You’d think a news website with 10 years of independent coverage of the world of comic books would be able to tell what films were made from comic books and which ones weren’t. Baring that, you’d think they’d be able hire writers with an active connection to the Internet and the ability to access Google from it. Newsarama apparently is able to do neither.

The Green Hornet was based on a radio program that began in January1936. The Phantom was based on a comic strip that began in newspapers a few weeks after the Hornet made his first broadcast. . While both were adapted into comic books, neither originated there nor were their comics their most remembered incarnations. Calling The Green Hornet and The Phantom “comic book-based” would be like calling Star Wars and Star Trek comic book-based. And you can find far worse actors than Seth Rogen and Billy Zane in those franchises.

This might seem to be just a matter of semantics. But I believe it is indicative of the hap-hazard way these lists were constructed. Because you don’t have to look too hard to find two more bad performances in a film that was actually based on a comic book.

To Newsarama, “all time” means “within the last 12 years”: With the exception of The Phantom, the Schumacher Batman films, and the early Superman movies, all the films on the list were made after 2000. That means out of over 70 years of comic books being made into films, only a little over a decade of films were being seriously considered.

Yes, there have been a whole lot more comic book films to chose from in the last 12 years. But, as I realized doing my History of the Comic Book Film feature, the comic book film did not begin with X-Men. What? Newsarama couldn’t find a top ten worthy bad performance in Sheena, Red Sonja, Howard the Duck or in Dolph Lundgren’s Punisher? And on the good side, what about Brandon Lee’s Crow, Jack Nicholson’s Joker or Wesley Snipes’ Blade? The fact that there wasn’t one performance from the above that made either list is a disservice to what Newsarama was trying to create. It shows tunnel vision, something that handicaps any attempt at creating a comprehensive list.

Their selection process is dubious and abitrary at best:  They pay lip service to the quality work Chris Evans has done in a number of comic book films, yet make a point of telling us that they can pick only one performance of his for the list (and the pick his least well-known role at that). Yet, Hallie Berry gets slammed for playing both Storm and Catwoman. They lump the combined casts of two films as one entry, and two actors who had played the same role almost 20 years apart as another selection.

You get the feeling they were making up the rules as they went along. Or, rather, constructing the rules of selection so that it suited them best.

Take, for instance, this “ground rule” from the introduction to the worst list.

…it would be way too easy and frankly not all that much fun to pick-on a lower class of Hollywood actor in barely feature-quality train wrecks like Roger Corman’s Fantastic Four or the 1980s Captain America. So yes, Shaquille O’Neal, you get immunity this day.

Okay, I’m no fan of Shaquille O’Neal, and I’m sure he would want his being left off a list of bad actors argued, but the reason Newsarama left him of the list just doesn’t make sense. When Shaq made Steel, he had already made two feature films (Blue Chips and Kazaam). And Steel was a $16 million dollar film made by Warner Brothers, not some film made for $200 and a bag of potato chips in someone’s basement. Could Shaq be considered a “lower class of actor”? Probably. But so could Billy Zane, king of the B-movie. Maybe if Shaq had a small part in Titanic, then Newsarama would have considered him worthy of inclusion.

This is how they defend their position:

Well, Tobey’s Peter Parker was naive and earnest enough, but he just didn’t have Parker’s inner beauty.

Yes. Really.

Putting Christopher Reeve on the list of worst actors might have been done just to anger people: I’m trying not to believe that they’d do something so wrong just to generate site hits, but Newsarama is not making it easy by how they open their defense of their opinion:

Yes, we’re going there, and in advance, we’re genuinely sorry you’re upset.

Yes, they went there, but did they go there thinking their opinion would be controversial, or knowing it would be controversial and get a lot of reaction?

Listen, whenever you have a list like this, there will be items on it that butt up against conventional wisdom. But seldom has there ever been a case where something flew in the face of overwhelming public opinion like Newsarama is is doing here.

If you are going to “go there,” then you’d better have an incredibly strong argument to back up your position. Unfortunately, Newsarama doesn’t.

…Reeve just wasn’t that accomplished a film actor.

In defense of this position we could point to his lack of much of a post-Superman resume, but the truth is now 30-plus years later with a more critical eye we simply don’t find his portrayal of Superman and Clark Kent very much like any Superman or Clark Kent we know… or like, for that matter.

His Clark wasn’t mild-mannered, he was a cartoonish buffoon. His Superman far too earnest and eager-to-please for someone with the power of a god. In short, he was a mild-mannered Superman, frankly lacking in the charisma you’d expect from an actor playing a cultural icon. A more theatrical rather than natural actor, Reeve’s Superman was a caricature of a comic book Boy Scout superhero and not a fully developed character.

Where to begin. Hmmm.

I wonder who this editorial “we” is? Perhaps it is someone who  is 12 and has only known the John Byrne interpretation of Superman. But, the character was around for 50 years before Byrne revamped him. Back when the film was made, the comic book Superman was a more staid version of the one found in the film. The mental image the editorial “we” has of Superman is so contrary to what the character’s image really is that it makes it seem that this entry came from a website that wouldn’t know a comic book if it fell in their lap, not a “respected” comic book news site.

I’m so glad they didn’t use Reeve’s lack of a post-Superman career as their only defense for their position, because is a defense that could be swatted away with one word–typecasting. Typecasting is the reason why Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher had less than stellar careers after Star Wars, and why Harrison Ford’s post-Star Wars career is so extraordinary. It is what the cast of the Harry Potter films are struggling with now, and what the cast of Twilight is working hard to avoid. Once you become so associated with such an iconic character, it’s hard for Hollywood to see you in any other role. This was the reason for Reeve’s lackluster post-Superman career, not lack of talent.

But Reeve’s performance was pitch perfect as Superman. I don’t know what the editorial “we” was thinking, but Superman doesn’t stand “Sarcasm, Bullying and Badassery”, he stands for “Truth, Justice and the American Way.” Yes, Reeve’s Superman was earnest–and honest and forthright–but that IS Superman. And Reeve played him in such a way that he never was hokey or corny.

As for Clark Kent, Reeve played Kent as a role Superman was himself playing. Superman portrayed Kent as an awkward and bumbling fool so no one would see through the flimsy disguise and put two and two together. It’s a brilliant piece of acting, and if you aren’t able to pick that up, then you have no business talking about acting performances whatsoever.

I have to laugh at the  ”30-plus years later with a more critical eye” part. Like that is supposed to win us over, that they’re looking at the performance in a serious manner as an adult, and therefore, he is right. That might have held more water if Chris Sims and David Uzumeri didn’t take a similar look back on the first Superman back in March for rival comic book news site Comics Alliance.  They ripped the film to shreds, but still called Reeve’s performance, and these are direct quotes, “amazing” and “darn near perfect.” So much for that argument.

Taking this into consideration, it’s hard to not believe the trashing of Reeve was done purely to garner controversy. If so, at least it worked. Not only am I talking about it, but also many comic book professionals, the people Newsarama make a living covering, took umbrage with the list as well.

Creators like Amazing Spider-Man writer Dan Slott:

Marvel Comics editor Steve Wacker:

And legendary comic writer Mark Waid:

That tweet set off a Twitter war between Waid and Newsarama editor Lucas Siegel,which is not the behavior you expect from an editor who should be keeping a journalistic distance from one of people he would be covering, but it is the kind of behavior you’d expect if you want add more controversy to the already controversial matter.

Another sign that this whole thing might be hit bait is that they spun of the controversy to another article on the site, an OP/ED piece by frequent Newsarama contributor Vaneta Rogers , glorifying Reeve’s performance and giving yet another page full of ads for Newsarama from the controversial list.

I hope this isn’t the case, that Newsarama is manipulating the popularity of lists to gain hits for itself. Presenting honest, well-formed and well-thought out opinions is always something that should be striven for. But putting out incendiary opinions in a clumsy and hap hazard manner isn’t. And it looks like Newsarama did the latter and is trying to pass it off as the former.

Well, I am thrilled to report that the gamble that Marvel took with this plan has paid off and paid off big. The Avengers is a hell of a summer blockbuster film and definitely is much more than the sum of its individual franchises.

Asgardian god Loki (Tom Hiddletson) is anxious to get revenge on his brother Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and aligns himself with a mysterious benefactor for the services of an alien army to lay waste to Thor’s favorite place, Earth. Naturally, this doesn’t sit too well with Nick Fury (Samuel L Jackson), the head of the super spy agency SHIELD, who assembles the world’s most powerful superheroes to stop him including the aforementioned Thor, billionaire Tony Stark aka Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr), World War Two supersoldier Captain America (Chris Evan) only recently reawakened from seven decades in suspended animation, scientist Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo) who has a rather powerful alter ego and to SHIELD assassins (Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner). However, with that many Type-A personalities in the room together, Loki has little trouble in goading them into quarreling with each other rather than uniting against his plans. But the arrival of Loki’s army in the skies above midtown Manhattan galvanizes our heroes to action against the invading hordes in a finale that is one of the best sustained action sequences seen in quite some time.

Outside of J J Abrams’s recent Star Trek franchise reboot, I can’t think of a writer/director who had a tougher remit than what Joss Whedon faced with this film. He had to balance the concerns of several franchises as well as their stars as well as pick up several pre-existing story threads while still make the film accessible to audiences who haven’t seen the previous installments. Whedon does it in a way that makes it look remarkably easy. (Although not necessary, one will get a greater appreciation of some story elements if they’ve seen last summer’s Thor and Captain America.)

Of course, Whedon is able to draw on his experience as the creator of the television series Buffy, The Vampire Slayer, Angel and Firefly, all of which excelled at character group dynamics. Our heroes aren’t necessarily inclined to play well together and that comes from how well Whedon’s script handles each character, which roots each conflict in their various backgrounds and personality and never for the need just to have a clash between characters.

Surprisingly, the advertisements for the film have heavily featured footage form the film’s climactic and action-packed third act. But all of those cool moments that are highlighted are only a small fraction of what that twenty-five minute sequence has to offer. Staging a battle sequence like this one takes a lot of work and Whedon brings the goods. Michael Bay mounted a similar urban battle between science-fiction heroes in the recent Transformers 3, but his battle in downtown Chicago was a messily conceived affair. Here, Whedon delivers a sequence with much cleaner action, including a couple of shots that place us in the action in markedly different ways. And of course Whedon demonstrates that he is the master of punctuating the drama with just the right amount of comic relief.

Now granted this is not high art, though now that I think of it, if anyone were to make a superhero version of My Dinner With Andre, I would want it to be Whedon. It is however, great popcorn and perhaps the most perfect summer movie we’ve seen in quite a long time.

But for all the things that The Avengers get right, there are a few minor missteps. Whedon gives Cobie Smulders a nice action scene at the beginning of the film but then relegates her for the rest of the film to standing around in the background shouting information from and reacting to readouts on computer displays. The 3D is serviceable enough for a post-production conversion but doesn’t really add too much to the proceedings. Perhaps the biggest disappointment is Alan Silvestri’s score, which is not very memorable. And when a movie like this gets the adrenaline pumping, you want something to hum on your way out of the theater. Unfortunately, the score doesn’t provide that.

Quibbles aside, The Avengers is just wall-to-wall action, thrills and fun. Marvel is going to have to work hard in the next phase of their cinematic plans to build off of what they’ve given us here. And as any comics fan can explain to you if you didn’t get it, the tease at the end of the film promises that they are certainly going to swing for the fences again with the inevitable Avengers 2. And this time I have absolutely no doubt that they will hit it out of the park.

So, were you home today around noon? Near a computer? I was. And if you were like me, you were hitting refresh at the iTunes Movie Trailers site, eagerly awaiting the second trailer for The Avengers to make itself known to the world. If you haven’t seen it, click the link above and watch and then come back here, because I am about to break it down.

Seen it? Great wasn’t it? Granted, a lot of it was stuff we already saw before. But it was arranged in such a way that we get a better idea of what the film has in store for us. And the new stuff? Wow.

First off, we get our first look at Nick Fury in command of S.H.I.E.L.D.:

The set is not new to anyone who was at last years New York Comic Con or seen pictures from the event.

Next is the “gathering of the players” time. Here is Steve Rogers, a.k.a. Captain America (Chris Evans) meeting Bruce Banner, a.k.a. Hulk (Mark Ruffalo).

I was wondering how they are going to get all the characters in one place. For instance, Thor, who at the end of his film was trapped in Asgard with no way to get to Earth. The trailer doesn’t answer this, but we do see him controlling the weather, a power that was underused in his own film.

Another player with an issue in how he would be involved was Iron Man. At the end of Iron Man 2, Nick Fury told Tony Stark that he didn’t want him to be an Avenger because he was too much of a loose cannon. The trailer lets us know that this will become a plot point in this film, and will probably go to show why Tony is such a rhymes-with-pick in all the footage we’ve seen so far. We get a better look at the Stark Tower and how Tony manages to change out of his Iron Man suit.

The trailer also gives a look at Agent Maria Hill (Colbie Smulders) and good old Agent Coulson (Clark Gregg). Their scene comes in the middle of what seems like a battle between Thor, Iron Man and Captain America, and their comments lead me to believe it is the real deal fighting, not any alien duplicates.

Here’s a shot that would make any fan of the Avengers comic book squeal–the Big Three:

Another tidbit we can gain from the trailer is how Loki will be portrayed. Well, it looks like we get Loki classic…

And a new, spiffy, GQ-model Loki as well!

Another question mark that the trailer doesn’t quite answer is how the Hulk will be portrayed in this new film. The scene where Black Widow (Scarlet Johansson) collects Bruce Banner that made the rounds of the convention circuit is at the beginning of the trailer, with an emphasis on the Widow’s line “I’ll persuade you” when Banner brings up the idea of saying no. This could be taken as flirtatious, but the scene shifts to armed soldier right outside Banner’s hut.

This is further complicated by the scene this screen grab is taken from:

Now, are the Hulk and Black Widow escaping an attack on their headquarters, or did Banner “Hulk-out” and want to discuss the widow’s persuasion techniques with her. Could be seen either way. Or, maybe, she’s an impersonator? Hmmm.

However, later on in the trailer, in a moment that made me squeal, the Hulk saves Iron Man in a spectacular scene after Shellhead gets whacked by some of the aliens that he is fighting.

So it appears that the Hulk eventually comes around to be a team player is a sense.

Another personal favorite scene from the trailer is this one:

I just love the fact that Cap is shielding the Widow with his shield. That is totally something Cap would do.

We get a look at the aliens again, and they appear to be riding on some kind of flying steed kind of thing.

Hawkeye is a character that we don’t know much about, so we have to look at what they gave us to see if he’ll make the transition to film okay.

Getting in a last shot as he falls to his almost certain doom. Why be worried? He’ll figure something out. Yep, that’s the Hawkeye I know and love.

Another thing that gives me confidence that the film will be great is that is seems they will be playing up the fact that the human Hawkeye and Black Widow are in over their heads and outclassed by monsters, gods, super soldiers and hi-tech armor-wearing geniuses–and that they know it.

That is a great angle to play and gives their characters an arc to work through.

And leave it to Marvel to give us a button scene on a trailer. Right after Iron Man says “I’m bringing the party to you,” we get this:

Oh, man, you just know that party is going to suck!

I don’t know about you, but May 4th can’t get here soon enough.

A new photo from Marvel Studio’s upcoming The Avengers has popped up. It spotlights Captain America (Chris Evans) and SHIELD Agents Clint Barton/Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) and Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) doing a hero’s walk through what I am guessing is either a SHIELD base or the spy organization’s Heli-Carrier. I know that some folks aren’t really thrilled with the look of Captain America’s modern day uniform, I think it looks pretty darn good here.

The picture comes courtesy of Empire magazine, though so far it has only appeared in their print edition so we only have scans so far.

The Avengers opens May 4.

This evening at the New York Comic Con’s panel for Marvel Studios The Avengers, studio chief Kevin Feige unveiled a newly completed scene from the movie featuring Mark Ruffalo’s Bruce Banner and a meeting he has with an unexpected visitor. Spoilers ahead.

The scene starts with a young Indian girl racing through a market place until she reaches a house. Going inside she finds Bruce Banner (Ruffalo) who is tending to a sick person. She implores Banner to follow her home where her own father is sick. Reluctant at first, Banner follows her to the outskirts of town and a small shack. He follows the girl inside just in time to see her duck out a window. He realizes that he has been suckered and has probably walked into a trap of some kind.

Before he can react further, Black Widow (Scarlett Johanson) steps out from the shadows. The two verbally spar for a moment. Black Widow says that it has been two years since Banner has had an “incident” and explains that SHIELD had been keeping tabs on Banner all this time, watching him and “even help keep some interested parties off your scent.” She states that the world is facing “a possible global catestrophe” and SHIELD needs his help in tracking down an object called the Tesseract, the powerful cube-like object we saw this past summer in Thor. The object emits gamma radiation and Banner is the leading authority on gamma radiation.

Banner seems reluctant and suspicious at first (“What does Fury want me to do? Swallow it?”) but he agrees to help. That’s when Black Widow orders the SHIELD troopers that she said weren’t surrounding the house to stand down from their position of surrounding the house.

The scene was a pretty good balance of tension, undercut with a few moments of comedy – hallmarks of the film’s writer/director Joss Whedon. Interestingly, Banner continually referred to his Hulk alter-ego as “the Other Guy,” and Ruffalo brought an air of real menace to Banner in the scene.

Following the scene was a montage of footage from the film. Much of it has been seen before the post-credits tag on Captain America: The First Avenger, but among the new shots were a view of Stark Tower in Manhattan and some additional action sequences. It ends with Chris Evan’s Captain America asking Robert Downey Jr.’s Tony Stark, “Is everything a joke to you?” In typical fashion, Stark quips back “Funny things are.”

We’ll be back with more from the Avengers panel.

I have to give the folks at Marvel Studios credit. The trailer which they released today for next summer’s The Avengers is certainly exciting enough. But if you’ve been following the production of the film all summer long, a lot of the images are ones we’ve already seen. But now, we’re getting to see them in motion. Salted between many of these familiar sights are some new things including Iron Man flying and Mark Ruffalo transforming into the Hulk. But what it doesn’t have, is a shot of all the Avengers together. Perhaps in the next one.

You can count on Entertainment Weekly for two things regarding comic book films. One, at least once or twice a year they’ll take a pot shot at the film genre, either through an opinion column, a snide throw-away comment in a news article, or in the text of an interview. Second, they will shamelessly promote each and every comic book movie that comes out with a big cover story, sometimes even a year before the comic book film comes out.

This love/hate relationship is exemplified by the cover of this week’s issue, which focuses on next year’s The Avengers.

I’m no expert at Photoshop, but then again, neither is the person who composed this cover. it’s blatantly obvious that these are six publicity stills stitched together. Did they have an intern work on the cover? Because they should have been told to work at trying to get the light sources to match up. I mean, really, there is a shine on the left side of Scarlett Johansson’s hair and on the right side of Chris Hemsworth’s head and that defies the laws of physics. Yeah, I know it might have been tough to get a picture of all six together, but you got to do better than this. This is the cover of the magazine for goodness sakes.

The rest of the pictures are of a better quality, and show Black Widow (Johansson) and Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) in action, a good look at Captain America’s (Chris Evans) new costume, and a behind the scenes of the cast and director Joss Whedon during a break.

Subscribers should be getting this issue tomorrow, and it should be on most newsstands by Monday.