Ant-Man is still planned, with Edgar (SHAUN OF THE DEAD) Wright attached, but no release date is set.

The double-feature of the First Avenger: Captain America followed by the Avengers is interesting -- I've always thought that the recovery of the Man Outta Time (Cap) is the compelling launch point for the Avengers movie. I would just skip the First Avenger and go right to the present in the first Avengers movie.

It would be interesting to see if they could make a compelling superhero as war movie and whether anyone would show up.

Apparently, word on the street is they are somewhat worried Capt. A. won't appeal to international audiences.

Tough to pull off. On the one hand, if he's too "jingoistic", it's a foreign turn off.

On the other hand, if he's too "America sucks" then it's a General Steinbrenner turn off

He has to be the living embodiment of what America should be, not what it is. Even that will turn off international audiences though, IMO. Frankly, to do a Cap movie right you really need to go the Stallone route and say "America, hell yeah", and not care about foreign gross. But then you run into problems when you want to make an Avengers movie including Cap.

That's why I think it would be perfect to just start with the Avengers movie, and have Cap pulled out of suspended animation. As we learn his backstory, the different character reactions can embody all different types of responses. We see Cap at first as a relic from a bygone era (when most people agree America was on the right side), and then we are challenged as an audience (by the plot of the film) to wonder "Does that generation have anything timeless that we can apply today?"

If they start with Cap in WWII, it seems like it will just about have to be jingoistic. Which is nice. But I prefer having it mixed in as a complex layer in the first Avengers film.

Good, bad or indifferent, I love the movie approach. That's how all the old mainstream characters should be done today. Make movies of them with regularity and consider that the main media for them, leaving the paper publications to new and marginal creations. R&D, if you will.

As long as Cap has wings on his head, the movie will do well.

OK....wings and real ears.

I think that is the best way to introduce Cap - you can get away with the costume more in a period piece, and if it ends on a cliffhanger with him in Suspended Animation, the "dated" costume can add to the man out of time element when he is revived in the Avengers flick.

I've already bought up stock in these movies on the Hollywood Stock Exchange.

Well, except for IM2...but that's just because they haven't posted a listing for that movie yet....

OH, YEAH, that reminds me. A couple of years or so ago, I bought up Iron Man movie stock at about ten bucks a share.

When I sold it a few days ago (which is quite often the best way to do things - dumping stock a day or two before the release date), it had been around $260 or $270 a share.

I do wish that was real money

Don't forget, though not produced by Marvel films

Punisher War Zone in December

and X-Men Origins: Wolverine next May

And good acting.

And a budget over $20,000.

IIRC, and I usually do, they had problems with the Captain America movie head gear. They tried to have his real ears stick thru the headpiece, but they said it looked awful. So they opted for the foam ears.

In actuality, I don't have a big problem with the Ultimate looking Captain America, but they could at least put decals of wings on the helmet. That would make me feel better.

Perhaps one day Hawkeye will be in a Marvel movie.

Pope Clint I.

I actually wouldn't mind if they went for his WWII Ultimates costume for the WWII stuff and then something between Epting's Cap and Ultimate Cap for the modern stuff.

Loved this as a kid.

I....did not. Even as a kid I thought, "Why is he throwing a giant frisbee and wearing a dorky helmet?".

Sometimes I just like a b-movie, but yes, the shield was awful.