NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9706379" data-attributes="member: 6799660">I agree with Paul that this only occurred because Hank Pym is not necessary for the MCU (there are plenty of other inventor/smart exposition-characters to fill whatever role he might otherwise fill in a movie). Likewise with Aco that it is specific to certain characters, as we see with Rhodes.Anyways, this is only coming about because they are treating the specifics of the MCU. Batman and Spider-man were re-cast, but the previous movies only supported the new one in a general 'you like seeing movies about Batman/Spider-man, right?' kind of way*. With the MCU, they are attempting to evoke a grand continuity where the viewing audience's investment in previous movies is supposed to carry over into the new movie being made. *caveat: it's likely that the Batman of the '89-'97 movies were theoretically the same Batman, but tonally they don't seem to be the same universe. Even before such things, it has always been hit-or-miss when an actor gets replaced in a role for movies which are supposed to be direct sequels. Sure it worked for James Bond (and few would say the problems with Terminator sequels was the recasting of John Connor), but the 90s Inspector Gadget and George of the Jungle movies recast peak Matthew Broderick and Brendan Fraser with French Stewart and Thomas Haden Church for their sequels and the results were... honestly I have no idea, I didn't see them. Yes, people would get it, but would they show up? I jump ship the instant people start mewling about the SW sequels. However, I will posit that a better overall story to tell would have been the immediate aftermath of the death of the emperor (be it Timothy Zahn's original trilogy, or simply the same timeframe/subject matter). I wish that is what Lucas did rather than the prequels, and that would have required re-casting*. That's my internal feeling, but at the tend of the day I don't know that it would have actually been a good choice. I don't know that new actors playing Luke, Leia, and Han would have put tickets in hand and butts in seats. For Rogue One, honestly if they don't have Fisher in the role, I'm not sure why she should be there at all. It breaks the continuity of the original movies (her ship was supposed to receive the plans as a transmission, not a data card, and no known Bothans died in the process) to have that scene -- it only existed so we could see her there.*regardless of whether makeup could have made 15-20 years older Hamill, Fisher, and Ford look only 0-5 years older, Ford would not have signed on.</blockquote>

Verification