'Avengers' fans the world over were recently saddened to learn that Tom Hiddleston's fan-favorite fiend Loki wouldn't make an appearance in 'The Avengers: Age of Ultron' after 'Thor: The Dark World,' but that doesn't mean the "Asgardian Mussolini" couldn't put in appearance in Marvel's upcoming 'Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.' TV series on ABC! So, what does Hiddleston have to say about the prospect of Loki popping up for some small-screen mischief?
Joss Whedon's announcement at San Diego Comic-Con that his 'Avengers 2' takes its official title from the 'Age of Ultron' comics sent an explosion of excitement throughout the buzzing Hall H, but apparently this plan was in the works for months prior. As Marvel Studios head Kevin Feige reiterated a point Whedon made, the movie won't follow the classic storyline and Ultron origin, instead utilizing plot points from various 'Avengers' adventures.
In the early days of the Marvel movie universe, Clark Gregg's Agent Coulson was the glue tying all of the films together. It all culminated with 'The Avengers,' where his links to each team member helped drive the story and connect each hero together. However, with the Marvel movies now sustaining themselves, he's become a luxury, not a requirement: everyone's favorite government official will not be in 'The Avengers 2,' now titled 'Age of Ultron.'
Originally popularized by Alfred Hitchcock, the term "MacGuffin" refers to an object, person or location that drives the plot of story, with characters generally struggling to obtain said object, person or location before the opposition
Other than the fact that they're both expensive, large-scale superhero movies, they couldn't be more different. Joss Whedon's 'The Avengers' represents the Marvel Studios' modus operandi in every way: it's scrappy, witty, silly and charming; coasting on cool and making it look easy. Zack Snyder's 'Man of Steel' is cut from the same cloth as Christopher Nolan's 'The Dark Knight' films: it's moody, cerebral, intense and big on dramatics, demanding that you take every frame very, very seriously.
In short, one is The Beatles and the other is a symphony. They're both terrific in their own special ways, and putting them side-by-side seems kind of silly. Comparing two films with such divergent styles and intent just seems a little unfair. But ...