Producer Nate Moore Says It’s Possible Marvel Studios Television & Film Properties Could Cross Over

agents-of-shieldEver since Marvel Studios began launching their television projects, fans wondered if we would see characters from the different mediums crossing over. While numerous characters from the films have popped up on Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D., we’ve yet to see any of the television characters make their way to the big screen. While speaking with /Film, producer Nate Moore was asked about the possibility of seeing this happen and had the following to say on the subject.

I think it’s possible for sure. It’s interesting that the TV timeline and the film timeline moves so differently because they tell stories so quickly because they have 10 to 22 episodes. So sometimes it’s just hard for those things to line up perfectly. But we love that idea of ultimately, say a Luke Cage, Jessica Jones, Daredevil, Punisher, Agents of SHIELD, maybe there’s a way to get ‘em back in there as long as it makes sense for our storytelling and doesn’t prohibit them from telling a story.

We say ‘oh, this happened to Daredevil somewhere in the future’ and they go ‘Well, that’s not what the TV show wants us to do.’ We don’t want that to start to feel like there’s friction so we haven’t figured out how to do it but we’d love to do it.

Fully agree with Moore’s comments. One of the issues I have with the constant complaint is that while I would like to see these characters on the big screen, it might conflict with the stories that these series are telling due to the concurrent timelines. I’m glad that they aren’t ruling it out but would prefer that they don’t do it unless they can find a way to make it work just right. While I understand the urge to see certain characters interact, it really all comes down to how it works for the story.

Do these characters need to show up in order to “prove” that “it’s all connected”? Does an Avenger have to make a cameo in Daredevil in order to establish that he is a part of their universe? Not at all. Look at the comics for example. We know these characters all exist in the same universe and work on their own. Crossovers are fun and a great treat but as long as we’re getting solid stories, let’s not force things for the sake of fan service.

In my eyes the point of a shared universe isn’t crossovers. I see it as a way to make a richer universe for these characters to live in. I’ve been more than happy with the content that Marvel television has been delivering which allows fans to venture into different corners across the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Sometimes you just need to sit back and enjoy the ride people. Sound off with your thoughts on the subject in the comment section below.

Source: /Film

Shawn Madden

Shawn Madden

I write stuff. Sometimes.

  • capwulf

    “…we’ve yet to see any of the television characters make their way to the big screen.”

    That’s not true. Jasper Sitwell crossed from tv to big screen.

    • Shawn Micheal Madden

      While I so wish that was true in order to kill this topic, Sitwell actually appeared in Thor & The Avengers prior to AOS.

    • SgtMAD

      sitwell is in the Avengers in the control center of the helicarrier

      • capwulf

        I stand corrected. Thanks

  • Gabe323

    damage control

  • Worldmind

    I would love to see Wrecking Crew in AoS! Not only would it be a cool team of villains to square off against, but would also re-establish the show’s connection to Asgard

  • breakerbaker

    I’m cool with no Netflix crossovers with the movies. I think the Netflix shows are at their worst when they try to tie the narrative into the MCU continuity. AoS presents more of a problem, as the connection between the two narratives is meant to be so much more direct, and of course Coulson is the dead elephant in the room. Whereas the Netflix shows can focus on street level threats and small time stuff, AoS is fighting Hydra and supposedly collecting intelligence that make the movies possible. Or that’s what the show relies on us believing. But until the crossover happens (and apparently Civil War won’t have any mention of the word Inhuman), those two narratives will only function as one to the most devout of the MCU fans–and nobody else. And for AoS, that’s a problem. For the MCU, it’s less of a problem.

    • Axxell

      Can someone explain to me why people are asking for the Inhumans to be mentioned in Civil War? I read the comic story, and don’t remember there being a moment where they played a significant part.

      • Shawn Micheal Madden

        Because people are impatient and want everything in everything.

        [insert xzibit meme]

      • breakerbaker

        I’m not saying Civil War should address the Inhumans. I’m saying that AoS, moreso than Daredevil or Jessica Jones or (presumably) Luke Cage and Iron Fist, is narratively bound to the cinematic events of the MCU. This is season 3 of the show. In seasons one and two, the events of the films played a key role in the plot dynamic of the show. We can safely assume (and interviews have confirmed as much) that this season will have similar Civil War related consequences.

        Given the narrative tether binding the movies to AoS, it becomes more and more glaring that it’s only ever AoS that acknowledges the events of the movies, and not the other way around. Now that Marvel has allowed AoS to use the Inhuman concept, and the show has created this dynamic in which people across the country (the world?) have been randomly exposed to terrigen crystals, it seems odd that a movie that is about establishing a command structure to people with powers will make no mention of the fact that for the previous year since AoU, new people with powers have been showing up on nearly a daily basis.

        • Axxell

          Well, we haven’t seen the CW movie yet, so it’s too early to start speculating that they wouldn’t make a mention of new people with powers. It’s a stretch to say they won’t, just because they didn’t do it on a trailer.

          • breakerbaker

            It’s true that we don’t know for certain, but Hitfix the other day had an interview (including on-the-record quotes) with Christopher Markus (one of the writers of CW) in which he revealed that he hasn’t seen the show and is generally in the dark about major plot points that go back to the end of last season (e.g., he thought they were joking about the fish oil thing–as I think we all wish they were). Sure, it’s possible that the writer of CW included the concept of Inhumans in the movie but never had the mechanics of how they fit into the universe explained to him. That seems unlikely.

          • Axxell

            I don’t think it should be necessary for the screenwriters to know all the intricate details of the show; as long as they’re aware in a general sense of what’s happening, it doesn’t matter if it’s by fish oil capsules or bottled water or Kool Aid. And they showed how this can be done when they wrote Winter Soldier.

            Eventually we know they’ll introduce Inhumans into the movies because they already announced a movie about them specifically, already in the works, and the comics and the TV show have already established the presence of Inhumans on earth, so it’s not a question of IF, but WHEN.

          • breakerbaker

            I’m not sure what you think they showed with Winter Soldier. The movie has nothing to do with AoS. It was AoS that had to change to fit the movie. Again, I’m not saying they should talk about the Inhumans in the movie. I just think that if they don’t, they continue to devalue the show.

            And until Inhumans goes into production, I’d say it’s still very much an if, not a when.

          • Axxell

            Do you really think Marvel is gonna go into the Inhumans movie without talking about them beforehand? If so, I don’t think you know Marvel Studios. It’s a certainty it’s gonna happen, just as they’ve done for every movie up to now.

          • Shawn Micheal Madden

            Accurate. And the comments about the TV & film division not speaking are a little…off. Especially considering the screenwriters behind TWS, CW and IW also work on Agent Carter as well.

          • breakerbaker

            I think there’s a good chance that no Inhumans movie is coming. I’m not saying a decision has been made, but when they pushed the thing back to after the second Infinity War movie, I don’t think that was a good sign.

          • Axxell

            I think you’re way off…why would they not make the movie after saying they would? Just because they made room for Spiderman and moved the release date? That makes no sense.

          • breakerbaker

            Because they’re not confident in it. Had they not devoted so much time and money to Ant Man’s development, I think they would have considered dropping that. Fundamentally, the Inhumans is pretty minor concept that Marvel gave television to try to flesh out and have something to do. Television has done a pretty poor job with it.

            Now, Marvel has pushed the announced Inhuman movie to a release date that follows the final chapter of the story Marvel has been telling since at least the first Captain America movie. I think just about anything scheduled to be released after the book is closed on the Infinity Gems is pretty uncertain. That is, at least until there’s a director and cast assigned to it.

          • Axxell

            How can any company, be it Samsung, Apple or any other, instill trust in their users and developers when there exists this arena of sniping at each other in court over a “He said, she said” argument over stolen intellectual property? From a customer’s perspective, it seems petty, even if the IP was stolen.

          • Axxell

            Where are you pulling this stuff about them not being confident on Inhumans from? Are we still talking about the same studio that brought GoTG to the big screen when not even Marvel fans knew who they were? You really think Disney would drop their only alternative to the X-Men, their biggest hope to expand the MCU, in order to settle for a TV show?

          • breakerbaker

            The very same! Look, I’m not saying this is definitely how things are going to play out, but look at it this way: You have Dr Strange this year, another GotG and Black Panther coming up close on its tail. Then there’s the Ant Man sequel, and eventually Captain Marvel (we hope). I’ll ignore Thor, Cap, and Iron Man and assume Marvel plans to function on a trilogy format for standalones. I’ll also ignore Spider-Man and assume any fast tracked Sony sequel would not blow up the MCU schedule. That still leaves five standalone features that Marvel has on the schedule for between now and the summer of 2019, when Inhumans is scheduled for release.

            Let’s assume for a moment that Strange and Black Panther do better than expected. What does history tell us would be the likely outcome when a movie outperforms expectations? In the case of Ant Man and GotG, they fast tracked sequels, pushing everything on the schedule back. On the other hand, what has history told us that Marvel does when a movie underperforms? There’s not a ton of data to go on, but when Incredible Hulk underperformed, they basically closed the book on it as a standalone franchise, recast the main character and even after more or less perfecting the character are still adamant that he’s not a character that can carry a movie on his own.

            So in one instance, they get super anxious to maximize profits by prioritizing a sequel over other projects. In the other instance, they panicked and acted to kill a project, and refocus on safety projects.

            A lot can happen between now and July 2019, and yeah, the order of films was selected based on the confidence level Marvel has in the projects themselves. And there’s a reason that Inhumans is dead last.

          • Axxell

            I still don’t see where Marvel would lose confidence on Inhumans…

          • breakerbaker

            The point is that it being the last thing on the schedule, the thing most likely to be pushed back indicates that it’s the thing on the schedule they have the least confidence in. Anything that happens between now and then will happen to a movie they were more certain about than this one.

          • Axxell

            Well something has to be last when you’re making a list. That doesn’t indicate that Marvel has no confidence in it. And it’s not like Marvel decided to bump it out of the blue; we know this was done to make room for the Spiderman film before Infinity War. And again, we’re talking about their only alternative to expand the MCU; I find it difficult to believe they’d be less confident about this than GotG or Antman.

          • breakerbaker

            Yes, something has to go last. When these movies were first announced, Infinity War Part 2 (the movie that theoretically closes the book on so many of the existing narratives of the MCU) was last. The Spider-Man deal and the fast-tracked Antman sequel moved Inhumans to the other side of Infinity War. In and of itself, that might not seem significant. We’ll see.

            I think it is significant. Infinity War Part 2 is almost definitely going to mark the moment in which some or all of the Phase I and II actors walk away. Downey and Cheadle and Ruffalo will be in their early to mid 50s. Renner will be closing in on 50. Evans will be closing in on 40. If you don’t think Marvel (and Disney) is worried about life after those guys, I don’t know what to tell you. There’s having faith in a company to do something well, and there’s the belief that nothing could ever go wrong. Putting any movie on the other side of Infinity War Part II is to put a movie in purgatory.

            I’m not saying they have “no confidence” in Inhumans. I’m saying it’s the one their least confident in, and it currently inhabits a spot on the schedule that coincides with what will be an emerging existential crisis for the studio.

          • Axxell

            Well now you’re suggesting something even more outlandish (the idea that Disney/Marvel will be caught unprepared post-Infinity War). I’d debate that statement, but for the sake of the argument, let’s remember what the original argument was: you said Inhumans was likely gonna get cancelled because Marvel lost confidence in it. And you claim it was placed in “purgatory” as evidence of that.

            To which I say…how do you know it’s “purgatory”? Surely you don’t think Marvel, at this point in the game, is oblivious to their post-Phase 3 plans, do you? No question they’d have to be concerned as they make their first major shift in MCU history…but is that enough to think that anything planned after IW2 is likely doomed or in “purgatory”, especially now as we enter Phase 3? How do you know Inhumans isn’t the bridge Marvel is counting on to shift into the next phase before introducing the new actors?

            Nobody is saying nothing could go wrong, but you’re only making conjectures based on the POSSIBILITY that it could go wrong. It’s like telling your wife not to make dinner because you might get killed in an accident on the way home.

          • breakerbaker

            I’m not saying they’re necessarily “unprepared.” I’m saying they’re almost certainly concerned. And the reason they’re concerned has nothing to do with whether they have a plan or don’t have one. The reason they’re concerned is that in a couple years, they’re going to lose (or be forced to deal with continuity nightmare of recasting) all of their heavy hitters. This is to say that the entire foundation on which the thing was built is about to be pulled out from under them, and they have to hope that a handful of properties that are not as marketable can be as strong a foundation as Iron Man, Captain America, and Thor. Sure, they have a plan. It’s a plan that keeps some of them up at night, but it’s a plan.

            I’ve said for forever that Marvel has actually benefited from its lack of control of blockbuster properties like Spider-Man, the Mutants, FF, and a handful of major Marvel villains–because it allowed them to build a very simple universe using kind of mid-tier heroes. But once that mid-tier group is spent, then you’re hoping the lower tier guys can sustain you. It’s at that point where having access to the Fox properties would really come in handy.

  • unpaidpundit

    The Black Widow character would work beautifully on Netflix. She is a street level character like Daredevil, and she actually had a long term relationship with Matt Murdock. Scarlett Johannson has a thriving movie career, though, so it’s doubtful that she would be interested in doing television. Perhaps when the character gets recast.

    • Well, at least we avoided this! LOL! (That’s the first Mrs. David Bowie, BTW.)

    • Axxell

      Eh, I don’t see BW as much of a street level character; she’s an international spy. It woudn’t make much sense, unless it’s a brief encounter of them crossing paths while she’s on assignment in Hell’s Kitchen.

  • Pingback: ¿Podríamos ver un crossover entre series y películas de Marvel? - Cine de Superhéroes()

  • Nick W.

    The TV shows are terrible apart from Netflix though