It looks like Marvel is setting up another series for Disney+, one that will follow Samuel L. Jackson’s character Nick Fury, according to Variety.
If accurate, the series could reveal more about one of the franchise’s most enigmatic characters.
According to Variety, the series will see the return of Jackson to reprise the character, last seen in Spider-Man: Far From Home. Jackson has played Fury since 2008’s Iron Man, where he appeared in a brief cameo in the very first of Marvel’s well-known tag scenes. At the time, his appearance amounted to a sort of joke in the movie’s coda.
Buy the Book
Attack Surface
That joke spun out into the larger Marvel Cinematic Universe, and saw Jackson return for numerous appearances through the franchise—playing a major role in the first Avengers film, as well as the more recent Captain Marvel.
In many ways, Nick Fury is one of the biggest pieces of connective tissue in the MCU, helping to bring together the original Avengers team. A series about the character could be a useful thing as Marvel begins advancing into its fourth phase with a brand new collection of characters in the years ahead. Fury could potentially help bridge the gap between new and old generations.
Should the series go forward, it’ll be another addition to the larger Marvel franchise that’s soon to appear on Disney+, which includes shows like WandaVision (set to debut sometime this year), as well as The Falcon and the Winter Soldier, Loki, Hawkeye, Ms. Marvel, and She-Hulk.
Sounds good to me. Maybe we could see Maria Hill and some of the characters from the SHIELD TV show. I hope it is not another prequel show, though. I am getting tired of shows full of backstory, and hemmed in by continuity. I would love to see something that picks up on what was happening at the end of the Captain Marvel movie.
I certainly wouldn’t call his appearance in the Iron Man 1 post credits a “joke”
@1 Wouldn’t anything that followed up on the end of Captain Marvel be the prequel you didn’t want?
Can’t really see Nick Fury holding down a show himself. He’s better off as a side character.
I have mixed feelings about this.
There’s potential, but a lot depends on the kind of story being told and when it’s set.
I just can’t help feeling that this is the same as the Loki show — that the MCU’s gotten all the mileage it can out of the Cinematic Fury and it’s time to phase out the character as part of the old guard’s passing with Endgame.
@3 I know Captain Marvel was a prequel movie, but wasn’t the post-credits scene set in the present, with eye-patch wearing Fury in a space station where he was working with Skrulls? Now I am doubting my memory, and need to go back and watch the movie again.
@6, pretty sure that was the tag in Spider-Man, IIRC, the tag in CM was Fury getting the idea for the Avengers.
@7 Thanks. I need to rewatch that last Spider-Man movie also. It was a fun one.
I’ll probably watch it. I tend to give any DC or Marvel series a try. It’s just a matter of how quickly I fall off. It’s lower on the list in terms of interest, though; below Loki, Moon Knight, She-Hulk, and maybe Hawkeye.
@7 that was the end of the Captain Marvel movie proper. The tag scene was the remaining Avengers watching the high tech 90s beeper die, then Captain Marvel appears behind them asking, “Where’s Fury?” Although that was actually mid credits… the final final scene was Goose spitting up the Tesseract
I’m against it. In part because I’m not sure Sam Jackson as Nick Fury is something that would work in a series and in part because Nick Fury himself isn’t a series character. He’s the glue and there’s nothing wrong with being the glue.
That said I’m also against the Black Widow movie it’s a pointless prequel that should have happened BEFORE [spoiler] and serves no purpose now. Also I don’t like Black Widow as a standalone character either.
Last but not least however is that the trailers for Black Widow look better than I could have imagined. I’ll watch the movie and I’m willing to be convinced of course. I’ve certainly been wrong so many many times before
Think they’ll dump Black Widow on Disney+?
I’m looking forward to a Nick Fury show on Disney+ – David Hasselhoff could use the work.
Maybe Dolph Lundgren would be available to cameo as the Punisher too.
@12. felix: they’ll resist it. They should, but studios are still clinging to the theater model. During the past 2 or 3 years, I’ve largely stopped going to the movies as it’s become an expensive proposition as a family outing, setting aside the risk of exposure to pathogens.
Many, if not most, folks/families these days have adequate entertainment setups in their homes. In some cases, they can get better sound and picture. So the only two aspects left to a theater experience is screen size and communal experience. Neither of those is essential to enjoying a good movie.
Spielberg a couple years ago made a big sour deal about Netflix’s Roma being nominated for an Oscar because it premiered on a streaming service. This while he put out mercenary shlock like Ready Player One. Roma was a work of art. That he couldn’t recognize that was sad and showed how out of touch the old Hollywood dinosaurs have become.
So yeah, releasing BW on streaming is perfectly acceptable.
Added to say: Tenet is an interesting case in the effort to reopen movie theaters. Nolan’s heart may have been in the right place to aid owners who are struggling and/or may have to close their venues.
But he seems to have banked to much on Tenet being an irresistible draw. I haven’t seen the film, but it seems that while it has some very good set pieces, it is otherwise a “frustrating, convoluted mess” (according to one report).
It’s certainly confusing.
BLACK WIDOW would’ve been a better choice to re-start theaters. The MCU brand is so strong that people may take the chance to catch this. Even if it flopped, Disney’s loss would be minimal. The international numbers would probably save it.
Pretty sure MULAN’s Disney+ experiment was a failure. Disney would be crowing out loud by now if was otherwise.
@14:
That is laughably untrue. Theaters have state of the art surround sound and projection equipment that costs many, many thousands of dollars.
@17
I think it is quite true that many people have adequate home theater setups and can definitely get better sound and picture than some theaters.
One of the reasons theater systems cost many thousands of dollars is that they have more ,and larger, speakers. A larger screen, and a brighter projector to fill the larger screen. Once you scale down to a living room the costs decline substantially. A $2000 4k HDR TV plus a $500 7.2 receiver plus $1000 of speaker gear can give a home theater experience that is as good or better than most movie theater experiences. And with better and cheaper food,too.
@18 – Try replicating the IMAX experience at home.
@19
No one is talking about that. We’re talking about adequate home theater setups that can definitely get better sound and picture than some theaters.
Getting a bit off-topic here–let’s move on. Thanks!