"I don't think Marvel has many GREAT villains to pull from ..."

Well, I couldn't help but notice that they hung the "LMD" gun on the wall early on (Tony's reply to Coulson on the phone), and then never did anything else with it. Could have been just an in-joke for fans, but... hmm.

Except, by all reports, that's exactly what is happening. It's definitely not on any of the existing international prints. It's definitely on the North American prints. Whether it will be added to the international prints after tomorrow, who knows.

Yeah, I felt like Zep hit the list a bit low... but then I got to the Holst listing and forgave them everything.

Indeed, I know better. ;-)

Haven't seen 'em yet. I'd have to assume that the animated Ultimates aren't quite as ADULT, though?

I think "Velvet Belly Lantern Shark" may win for "best shark name ever".

I didn't write my post for the "extremely confused", though; I wrote it to address the writer of the piece, who seems more knowledgeable, and my point is — telling folks to get background for this movie by reading The Ultimates is only going to confuse them MORE.

I agree, it was really interesting stuff for the comics to do. But I just don't see them taking a chance on making one of the film heroes THAT incredibly unlikeable. Just like they skirted/adapted the hell out of "Demon in a Bottle".

"Marvel Cinematic Universe" — the movies. Which aren't quite 616 and definitely aren't quite Ultimates.

I have a thread below discussing the differences between the Ultimates and the MCU... and Pessimippopotamus's caution is well-taken, because there are a few things about the Ultimates version that are very "adult" in nature. (Spousal abuse, profanity, threats of rape, etc.)

Largely, agreed. I kind of enjoyed the first two volumes of Ultimates (hate vol.3 with a red-hot passion), but mostly because I viewed it as an interesting exercise in a certain kind of over-the-top storytelling. But yeah, the only character I really "liked" was Thor, who was also kind of a douche, but in a way I…

You COULD film Ultimate Hulk, if that's what you wanted to do. But it would result in a really, REALLY different movie, that wouldn't fit the tone of the MCU at all.

Yeah, same. And even the story elements they're taking from Ultimates are not all that overwhelming. If you went by Ultimates vol.1, then the big bad wouldn't be Loki, but Hulk. etc.

But he doesn't have those episodes in every incarnation of the character, and there's nothing to say that an MCU version of him will, or needs to, have those traits.

I don't know, I keep seeing people recommending that folks read The Ultimates vol. 1 (sometimes along with 2, because of the Loki connection I assume) as prep for seeing this movie, but I feel like that needs to come with a lot more disclaimers.

It has 1 rotten review, which has made a lot of people scratch their heads... well, okay, it has made a lot of commenters on RT lose their shit in an embarassing fashion, but those who are more level-headed are just scratching their heads over it, since it dings the movie for a number of things that the other 30+…

I mostly don't get the "outrageous beard" description. It's... a regular beard. One of the guys from ZZ Top, he ain't.

Ah. :) See, Chiwetel Ejiofor has been my other top choice for BP for a while now. And I agree with you about Hounsou; I think casting him as T'Chaka would be a nice compromise. But, if they were going to overlook the age thing, then I'd be very interested to see Hounsou in the lead role. (He and RDJ are the same…

Djimon Hounsou? Because I'd be deeply interested in seeing him as Black Panther. (There's others I'd be happy to see in the role too. And overall, it's nice to be in the position of having multiple fantastic actors you'd be happy to see in such a role. I think Hounsou's actually said he's interested in it?)