Draft talk:Avengers 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Adding Jonathan Majors/Kang

So in the THR article I found this quote:

Kang is being played by Jonathan Majors and was introduced in Disney+ series Loki. Kang, or a version of him, will be re-introduced in Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

It's so simple what this is saying: Jonathan Majors is playing Kang in THIS film, HOWEVER the variant of Kang he is playing is unclear if it's the same one from Quantamania (ex. if in Quantamania Kang dies but is replaced by one of the many Kang variants for The Kang Dynasty). We can still put Majors as Kang, all we have to add in the character description that it's unclear if it's a variant from the previous films.

talk) 17:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

That, to me, reads like "Kang is being played by Jonathan Majors [in the MCU]" but not explicitly that he is in this film. I haven't even seen confirmation that Kang will be in this film, let alone Majors, just speculation based on the title. I think it is very likely, which is why I added background info about Kang to the development section, but we need actual confirmation from a source that isn't speculating and isn't talking about the MCU in general. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:57, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's how I'm reading it as well. Hopefully we get a source specifically stating it soon. -- Zoo (talk) 20:00, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Right, even if obvious, it would be
WP:SYNTH for us to add he'll be in the film. We at least need someone asking Majors about it and him talking about the film in a way it confirms he'll be part of it. —El Millo (talk) 20:01, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
This interview was close to a confirmation. He talked about it and said he was "floaty" after seeing the announcement. Although no denial either. -- Zoo (talk) 20:08, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think that the reason no source stated was because it was incredibly obvious and didn't need to be pointed out in the first place?
talk) 22:59, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Possibly, even then we need to wait for someone to clarify it in a reliable source though. This happens every now and again, it can be frustrating if we think it is super obvious but unfortunately we just have to wait. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:36, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how "truthful" this is or was just in the moment for Majors, but MTV News started talking about this film and he was coy not knowing it had been announced, and then after learning it officially was, says "oh yeah I'm in it". It's only available on MTV News's TikTok here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:50, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like he was truthful. Seemed like he was definitely looking around to make sure he could say something about it. -- Zoo (talk) 15:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New moment in Deadline's article about Loveness' involvement:

Not much is known about the film, but a big character at the center of it is the new super villain set to wreak havoc on the MCU: Kang the Conquer, played by Jonathan Majors.

Come on now. IAmNMFlores (talk) 00:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They still haven’t officially announced casting so I would hold off until they do so. Even going off of Deadline is a bit
WP:SYNTH since it hasn’t been confirmed yet. MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 02:21, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Adding Maslany?

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Ruffalo seems to have possibly spoiled Maslany’s involvement in Kang Dynasty. Full quote: " Joking with Ruffalo to “give me one year” of being the central Hulk after he’s played the character for a decade, Ruffalo agreed, “All right, you can have a year. No, she’s in now, there’s not going to be another Avengers without her.” That seemed a surprise to Maslany, who inquired, “What?” as Ruffalo confirmed, “That’s what I’m hearing.”" Even though Ruffalo has been prone to slip-ups the fact he didn’t retract that statement as soon as he said it and then followed up with “That’s what I’m hearing”, may seem to indicate that she may actually be confirmed for the movie. Thoughts? It kind of seems like the Majors situation above but I wanna see what others think. MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 19:49, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's anything we could go off of, "That's what I'm hearing" is pretty vague. Seems more like a general statement that she is an important character to the MCU now anyway. I would wait for a trade to actually report on it or for Feige to clarify. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:51, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Seems fair, considering Feige might now be forced to clarify and was probably trying to keep it hidden. MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 20:00, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Waldron as writer

@

WP:SYNTH. MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 02:12, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

I took it from what was the most logical interpretation, given Waldron is the SW writer. Loveness' exit was just confirmed by Joanna Robinson, a reliable source. I am well aware the boundaries of SYNTH and have restored the relevant information with adjusted wording. Waldron has never been linked to either as an EP, that would be an assumption. Trailblazer101 (talk) 02:15, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I definitely don't think we can use this source to suggest that Waldron is directly working on Kang Dynasty, all Wright is asked about is future multiverse projects and he says "I know Michael Waldron is working on them". It's a bit of stretch to say that he is writing this film based on that comment. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I realized that after the fact. With the whole creative team seemingly being replaced, it all seems to be up in the air now. Trailblazer101 (talk) 06:50, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, now it's been confirmed. Lucky hunch, I suppose. Trailblazer101 (talk) 21:27, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft_talk:Avengers_5&oldid=1190614835"