Listen, I hate to get all "headcanon" on Sup Forums, but based on recent set pictures, it's pretty obvious that the next Avengers film will be an adaption of Avengers Forever, at least in part. (Though the jury's still out on whether they'll have the balls to call it Avengers 4Ever).
But it seems pretty clear they're adopting the shtick of having a team formed of Avengers from throughout the timeline (2012 Cap, Dark Future Tony, present Scott).
So this is where the theory goes a little nuts...
Now, we all know cape films don't ever adapt stories 1/1, but assuming Thanos doesn't get a bitch death in IW, and has the Time Gem by Avengers 4, so Dr Strange isn't the one behind this time travel, the obvious answer is Kang The Conqueror, who has long been held up as the next Big Bad after Thanos, and who appeared prevalently in the original Avengers Forever series
The problem with that was always that because of his various time-travel personas, one as Reed Richards father, another a contemporary of En Sabah Nur, and another as an Avengers villain, this would be impossible. But not since the Fox buyout that's not the case.
So that's my theory. Kang and his lifespan is likely going to be something that gets implemented through time-travel after IW, and this mass-retcon is what will tie the X-Men movies, the Fantastic Four movies, and the MCU.
Where's my No-Prize, Marvel?
Cool beans.
>assuming Thanos doesn't get a bitch death in IW
He won't, my prediction is IW will be the Empire Strikes Back of Avengers movies.
>Empire Strikes Back of Avengers movies.
I have no idea what this means. Bleak, dark? I'm thinking that too, the only thing that would necessitate a time-travel plot for 4 is if they lose big in IW.
It's already been confirmed that he's the villain of Avengers 4 too.
Sauce me, brother?
They only just got the rights to Kangaroo with the Fox deal
They got the rights to Spider-Man when Civil War was mostly done, and he was still there.
They got the rights to Rama-Tut and Nathaniel Richards, Kang was an Avengers villain first.
>I have no idea what this means
Incestual undertones
...
They also had 2 scripts based on if or if they didn't get and Peter didn't have major role in CW, it just introduced him.
Having 2 scripts for a villain is an entirely different story espacially when filming finished only 2 or 3 weeks after the deal.
Also if OP is correct I guess that explains how Carol will show up
>Also if OP is correct I guess that explains how Carol will show up
Oh?
Maybe they have a script where the time gem does the time-travelling for them. Since as you say, they were gonna have to do it anyway to bring Carol in.
Carols film is set in the 90s and she's nowhere to be seen before hand in any other films
Oh damn son, I hadn't thought of that. This just confirms my theory more. Time travel up in this biiiitch.
lower point in the story, the moment tht everything goes to shit
They don't have shit yet. The merger still hasn't gone tgrough and might not even go through, it'll be too late by the time this comes out
Nice to see others anons liked my Avengers Forever theory.
>The merger still hasn't gone tgrough
if is a year or less they could have some reshoots and cameos at the end of the year, I suppose the cast of the main characters is already done by Disney, just in case they have time to introduce Wolverine, Professor X, Richards, Silver Surfer or Doom.
all that matters is the russos will use time travel to fix whedon's hackery
how can one site of siblings be so based
there's no sauce for you to be sauced by
Since we are tossing theories out there here are some of mine. Warning, not original.
>Gems/gauntlet-fuckery will be used to bring in FF and/or X-Men.
OR
>Xavier could have been masking mutants presence perhaps trough Cerebro this whole time.
>FF could have been lost in space this whole time, would clash with the whole "first-family" and all that jazz but eh.
well, they'd technically be the first, but they'll have been in space when they became first
It probably won't but then again Republicans in Congress have surprised me. I don't see in any way of them trying to let Disney control 30% of the movie market.
But at the same time these are the guys who extended copyright to 75 years + after creator dies.
Its going to go three ways. The merger turns out to be a monopoly and isn't accepted. As a result Fox is probably bought by some faggot with a more sinister agenda.
Disney lawyers sucessfully argue that Disney does not have a monopoly over content. As a result Disney slowly bullies small cinemas and websites etc to promote disney related content and relegate everyone to the backburner. They also make people sign a NDA so no one complains.
One day a brave newspaper complains about their shady practise and disney boycotts them. Threatening to boycott everyone. All the other papers cave in because unlike last time Disney controls a significant portion of the market.
Third scenario, above happens but newspapers grow some balls. Air their grievances of Disney's practise and people get pissed. Disney caves in. Not only that but the gov probably introduces laws to protect small bussinesses from being bullied or breaks them up.
Wolverine will be on the back burner for awhile I imagine. There's enough big names i the MCU as it i that I could see them waiting him out
>I don't see in any way of them trying to let Disney control 30% of the movie market.
Diney usually lobby hard in order to get what they want, I can't see them getting the approval before this september, for the streaming service but who knows...
>Wolverine
Will be recasted asap according to them, he sell lots of toys and merchandising, I suppose that if they can he will be at least in the postcredits in Avengers IV