Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Source

Paul Bettany, best known in the Marvel world for voicing Jarvis, Tony Stark’s helpful A.I. system, will be playing the Vision in Marvel’s “The Avengers: Age of Ultron.”

Production starts next month, with director Joss Whedon and cast members like Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Evans. The Vision was an android created by the robotic villain Ultron, who was meant to be one of Ultron’s henchmen but who instead turns against him and becomes a hero.

I forgot he had been doing the voice of Jarvis.

So, in the movie, is Jarvis going to be hijacked to make vision?

OUTRAGE!!!

 Mr Nobody wrote:
So, in the movie, is Jarvis going to be hijacked to make vision?

That would sound like a pretty good guess, as he's supposed to have Simon's (Wonder Man's) persona. This will allow the personality to have already been built without adding a new face. Seems like a good call to avoid adding too much extra.

YES! I'd been hoping they'd throw Vish in here. Like everything else, though, I hope they don't butcher his fluff too much. I can see the Jarvis-hijack route working, and would be happy with it. I'm just worried about things like them making Ultron a Hydra weapon or something crazy like that.

It seems as though Avengers 2 will have a LOT of characters to juggle. Whedon did a good job smoothing over some things in the first film with his trademark banter and a healthy helping of RDJ, but they'll be up to what, 9 or 10 Avengers in this one? Some of the characters in the first one almost have to see their screen time drastically reduced. Again, a funny line here or there can smooth that over somewhat. But it really will be a lot to juggle.

 Paradigm wrote:
YES! I'd been hoping they'd throw Vish in here. Like everything else, though, I hope they don't butcher his fluff too much. I can see the Jarvis-hijack route working, and would be happy with it. I'm just worried about things like them making Ultron a Hydra weapon or something crazy like that.

My theory is that Stark's tech will be the base for ultron's creation. Ultron, being familiar with Stark tech, will obtain Jarvis to repeat the process and create Vision.

This all depends on whether there will be an Antman movie or not.

 Mr Nobody wrote:
This all depends on whether there will be an Antman movie or not.

There will be, but not until after Avengers 2. Marvel Studios has also said that Capt America 2 will be an important lead into Avengers 2, so we may get some hints there.

But wait, there's more (Avengers, that is).

We're rapidly approaching over-crowded territory. We haven't quite hit peak Days of Future Past levels yet, but we're getting there.

 gorgon wrote:
OUTRAGE!!!

Ok. I'll bite:

Why outrage?

There has been a hypothesis that Agent Coulson was to in some way- due to his being rebuilt bit- to become the Vision. Some people are attached to the idea.

Yeah but we know for a fact that that's not happening.

1. Coulson isn't dead.
2. Paul Bettany is playing Vision.

I don't disagree. I'm just telling you why some people are upset- not in any way defending the logic of it.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah but we know for a fact that that's not happening.

1. Coulson isn't dead.
2. Paul Bettany is playing Vision.

Apparently. the source everyone is using is the Daily Mail. So, yeah...

Kojiro wrote:There has been a hypothesis that Agent Coulson was to in some way- due to his being rebuilt bit- to become the Vision. Some people are attached to the idea.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yeah but we know for a fact that that's not happening.

1. Coulson isn't dead.
2. Paul Bettany is playing Vision.

I have no idea how people could possibly believe that Coulson is Vision, especially not now.

Personally I think Ultron will be portrayed a sympathetic villain with a father complex directed at the morally dubious Hank Pym (with wife beating references to up the sinister quota) and considering Vision and JARVIS are being played by the same people I think we can expect to see Ultron "corrupting" JARVIS to create Vision, complete with Ultron talking to JARVIS about creators not being there for them and android rights.

Though by the same token I could see Ultron building Vision just to understand what it's like to be a creator, due to the father complex.

 Grimtuff wrote:
Apparently. the source everyone is using is the Daily Mail. So, yeah...

There's more than one report now.

 Corpsesarefun wrote:
Personally I think Ultron will be portrayed a sympathetic villain with a father complex directed at the morally dubious Hank Pym (with wife beating references to up the sinister quota)...

1. Ultron is set to be the creator of Tony Stark, not Pym.
2. Pym isn't even being introduced until Phase 3, which is after Avengers 2.

You're kidding?

Name and shame the vicious rock you're been stuck under Corpsesarefun?

From the top:

1. Original teaser for Age of Ultron showed an Iron Man mask morphing into Ultron's face.
2. Ant-Man isn't set 'til Phase 3. Age of Ultron is the end of Phase 2.
3. The Ant-Man movie's main character is Scott Lang, not Hank Pym.
4. Hank Pym will be in the Ant-Man film (played by Michael Douglas, of all people), and we might get flashbacks to him being a hero during the 70's.
5. It is likely that if Janet Van Dyne is included, she'll be re-worked as a love interest for Scott Lang (or they may go with a different female lead).
6. Captain America is meant to lead directly into Age of Ultron, long before we even hear of Hank Pym or Ant-Man.

Apparently I've missed a lot. I knew Hank Pym wasn't going to be ant man, that's why I thought he would be cast in a more sinister light.

But seriously? Stark building ultron is stupid.

 Corpsesarefun wrote:
Stark building ultron is stupid.

Considering the info we have it makes more sense in the Marvel cinematic universe. Tony is part of the Avengers and it has been shown that he has been working on suits that work without a pilot. I think Marvel also said that Ant-man will have a role in the design, but it won't be obvious until after the new movie comes out.

After Regular Man (aka Iron Man 3), it's pretty clear that Tony is superfluous to the whole "Iron Man" thing. He doesn't need to be in the suit, and he doesn't even need to run the suit - Jarvis can do that - so the next step is full AI suits. Then one goes rogue, and we get Ultron.

So yeah, thanks to Iron Man 3, it makes sense, so in the end something good did come of the bad.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:
Apparently. the source everyone is using is the Daily Mail. So, yeah...

There's more than one report now.

Well, the Daily Mail reported an accurate story for once. Well they know what they say about if you chuck enough gak...

Vision is awesome news, always been a fan of him, wonder if this means they'll tie him in with Scarlett Witch early. Would love to see her being the reason he changes sides.

Also the Captain Marvel news is very good, if true, really hoping it is; as Its been too damn long waiting on seeing a female Superhero fly into something at full speed and kick nine bells of gak out it.
Sadly been waiting three X-Men films to see Rogue do it to no avail.

Spoilersish rumoury spoilers

 Ahtman wrote:
Spoilersish rumoury spoilers

Spoiler:

Tony Stark builds Vision as an Iron Man with no pilot, like the drones from IM3, but with greater durability and improved AI. Baron Von Strucker builds Ultron as a response using Stark and Scott Lang (we find out about that later) research and tech, which in turn turns on everyone and reprograms Vision. Might be true, could be baseless lies. Seems plausible.

See that would also make sense.