‘Civil War’ Almost Featured Red Hulk & A Very Different Spider-Man


Fans were pleasantly surprised enough that Spider-Man was able to swing his way into Captain America – Civil War earlier this year following an unprecedented deal between Sony Pictures and Marvel Studios, but the version that made it to screen may not have been the original plan. The revelation that Spider-Man would be on Iron Man’s side along with the news that William Hurt would be reprising his role as General Ross, despite the absence of Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk, sparked some debate over whether or not Peter Parker would utilize the Iron Spider suit in the film. Turns out he almost did.

Civil War co-director Joe Russo sat down with ComicBook.com and revealed that Iron Spider as well as General Ross transforming into Red Hulk were considered for the film, but scrapped.

“We had so many characters in that movie as it was. We consider everything, obviously, but with so many characters in that movie as it was to try and entertain adding another character and to get to the Red Hulk, you have to add a back story. You have to substantiate the narrative to get to that. [Thaddeus Ross], on our list of priorities, he was there sort of as the government’s agenda and not to add another complicated super powered character to the mix.”

Can’t argue too much with Russo there. Civil War certainly was bursting to the brim with characters and adding in more, no matter how cool, would most certainly have pushed the picture dangerously close to overkill. But fear not Marvel fans, as Russo also didn’t rule out the possibility of seeing either character incarnation down the road.

“We had a board when we started this process of the movies with these Avengers characters that have ever graced the screen in a Marvel film and a list of characters that we have at our disposal that haven’t graced the screen. We spent the last six to eight months crafting stories around the cornucopia of characters at our disposal so anything is possible.”

With the Russo Brothers at the helm of the upcoming Avengers – Infinity War, one can assume they most certainly haven’t ruled out any option.

Captain America – Civil War arrives on Blu-ray/DVD on September 13.

Sources: ComicBook.com


Josh Setchel

Josh Setchel

I love movies. All types of movies of which I have many opinions. You may or may not agree with them, but they are mine.

  • AbelLSUjr

    Man. I was so close to finally seeing Red Hulk on the big screen. Maybe in the future. One of my wishes is to get a Red Hulk vs Hulk on screen fight.

  • G-Man

    I was really expecting Red Hulk to make a showing, but I get it. Hoping he pops up later though.

  • Fenix

    This is the difference between marvel and dc. In the DCEU they would have tried to shoehorn Red Hulk in with no backstory.

    • AbelLSUjr

      They did that with Spider-Man and Black Panther, LOL.

      • Antonio

        But there purpose served the overall story of the film and they weren’t there simply for shock value. We’ve were given slight intros into Spider-Man’s and Black Panther’s origins, which also served the overall purpose of the story

        • AbelLSUjr

          They were no more or less shoe horned in than anything DC has done. That’s the point.

          • Antonio

            No, that’s your point. Black Panther and Spiderman didn’t have their origins told because they have solo films coming out just like Wonder Woman. Black Panther served a huge purpose because the death of his father is what essentially led them on the manhunt for Bucky and Spiderman served the purpose of being someone who wanted to fight for the people who can’t fight for themselves and also being someone who Tony felt would help his team, not to mention, Spiderman is in the damn Civil War graphic novel. It could’ve been more thorough, but they both served a purpose. Wonder Woman wanted to get her photos back from Lex but it was never explained how and why Lex wanted her photos or how her getting those photos added anything to the plot.

          • AbelLSUjr

            I was replying to someone who said that DC would have “shoe-horned” Red Hulk in the movie. I have no problem with the way any of the characters on DC or Marvel have been handled. But if someone is going to call out DC for “shoe-horning” in characters, they need to look in the mirror.

      • Rob

        Spider-Man, yes. Black Panther, not really. Black Pather had a significant role in the movie. He clearly wasn’t shoe-horned in.

        But Spider-Man’s scenes worked. His scenes were actually some of the best in the movie. Maybe the guy should have said Marvel doesn’t shoehorn in characters unless they make it worthwhile for the audience.

        • AbelLSUjr

          Black Panther had no back story before the movie and he did not have a significant role, IMO. It was a Cap, Iron Man, and Winter Soldier story. He was no less shoe horned in than Wonder Woman in BvS. And you admitted that Spider-Man was.

          • Rob

            First, when did having no backstory prior to the movie mean that he was shoe horned in. His backstory was fleshed out during the movie.

            Second, Black Panther was actively involved in the main plot and his involved was important to the overall movie. Winter Soldier was set up to look like he killed Black Panther’s father. His desire to get Bucky was a significant part of the second act. His involvement was central to the plot.

            On the other hand, they had a contrived reason why Wonder Woman was in BvS. She had no real reason to be in the movie other than they wanted to include her. They could have removed her completely and the overall plot wouldn’t change.

            Third, of course Spider-Man was shoehorned in. He is the far better comparison to Wonder Woman. He only appeared in several scenes and his involvement or lack of involvement wouldn’t have changed the plot one iota.

            I don’t know you can compare Black Panther to Wonder Woman. He had more screen time. He is far more involved with the plot. And he was far more fleshed out than Wonder Woman.

          • AbelLSUjr

            “First, when did having no backstory prior to the movie mean that he was shoe horned in. His backstory was fleshed out during the movie.” That was the OP, LOL. I was responding.

          • Rob

            I think you are misunderstanding what the OP was saying. The article talks about that if they included Red Hulk they had to add a significant back story for him in the movie and there was no room. What the OP is trying to imply is that if it was WB, they would have just thrown Red Hulk in because he was cool and never explain how he became Red Hulk during the movie.

            Black Panther’s back story gets a decent amount of time In Civil War. So they didn’t include him with no back story.

          • AbelLSUjr

            This was OP’s statement: “This is the difference between marvel and dc. In the DCEU they would have tried to shoehorn Red Hulk in with no backstory.”

            This is not a true statement as Marvel has introduced characters with no backstory. His statement is flawed and hyperbole. Don’t blame me. LOL

          • Rob

            Again, you are misunderstanding the OP. He is responding to this comment from one of the Russo Brothers:

            “We consider everything, obviously, but with so many characters in that movie as it was to try and entertain adding another character and to get to the Red Hulk, you have to add a back story.”

            So, in other words, the Russos pulled Red Hulk out of the movie because they would have had to dedicate time to the movie to explain his back story and there just wasn’t enough time.

            The OP is implying WB would have had him show up with no explanation or backstory given during the entire movie.

            The OP was not saying that wouldn’t introduce a character with no backstory. He is saying Marvel wouldn’t introduce a character with no back story and not give him one in the movie.

          • Rob

            But again. You are taking it that he was saying that they wouldn’t put in a character with no backstory prior to this movie at all while it seems pretty clear that he is saying that they wouldn’t put a character with no backstory in the movie and not give him/her a backstory in the movie and if they couldn’t give that character a proper backstory, they would not put them in.

            He is talking about a Spider-Man or Wonder Woman cameo where they just show up and have no backstory explained and are inserted into scenes where they add very little to actual narrative of the movie. Of course those two characters don’t need a backstory because most people beyond comic book fans know who they are already.

          • Rob

            I answered the shoehorned comment of the OP in another post. I just don’t think you are understanding his intent of that comment.

            And I absolutely think Wonder Woman was shoehorned in. So was Spider-Man. Neither did much of anything to advance the plot and both could have been removed from the movie and not affected the narrative one iota.

            And Marvel usually doesn’t introduce characters with no backstory. That is a fact. If a character needs a back story BEFORE they are introduced, when can you add a new character ever? Does every minor character have to have their own solo origins movie just to get a backstory?

            There have been a few minor characters who got very little back story like Sharon Carter in Winter Soldier, but that is about it.