Frank Grillo Talks KINGDOM, His Involvement in THE RAID Remake, the Potential for More Rumlow / Crossbones in CAPTAIN AMERICA 3, and More

by     Posted 164 days ago

captain-america-3-frank-grillo

The world needs more Frank Grillo.  Not only is he a top-notch actor and kick-ass action star, but he’s also a super nice guy and absolute pleasure to interview, too.  He’s delivered quality material throughout his career, but the past three years have marked one standout success after the next with Grillo going from Warrior to The Grey then End of Watch, Zero Dark Thirty and he keeps tacking on more.

While talking to Grillo about his next big release, The Purge: Anarchy, he also took the time to update Collider on a number of upcoming projects.  He gave us some details on his character in the new DirecTV series, Kingdom, confirmed that he’s officially attached to Patrick HughesThe Raid remake, discussed the status of his seemingly long-lost horror movie, Demonic, and also hinted at Rumlow’s return in Captain America 3. You can check out the video of Grillo talking about all four projects and read his comments after the jump.

frank-grillo-KingdomFirst we hit his new TV show, Kingdom, formerly titled Navy St., which is due to premiere October 8th at 9pm on Audience Network.  Grillo leads as a guy named Alvey, the owner of a mixed martial arts gym in California.  Grillo further explained:

“He’s an ex-fighter who kind of came into his own before the UFC and went as far as he could, so now my life is like most of their lives, unglamorous.  I compare it to Donnie Brasco, like the low-level mafia guys.  I run a gym, I try to lure some professionals so they can represent the gym and I can train them to fight and they can be successful.

My sons happen to be fighters, but they’re not the reason why I do this obviously.  I’m the reason why they do it more, you know?  And it’s really a dysfunctional relationship with everybody around me.  So it’s very dark, it’s very visceral, it’s very authentic.  The language is really rough.  I think it kind of turns TV upside-down a little bit.  It should be good.”

Sticking with the more physical roles, Grillo also has plans to shoot the remake of The Raid when/if it goes into production in early 2015 as recently reported.  When that news broke, Grillo, Luke Evans, Anthony Mackie and Ethan Hawke were all named frontrunners for roles, but now Grillo confirmed he’s snagged himself an offer:

“Well, yeah.  I mean, we were officially offered the film, and so that was gonna go in September and now that doesn’t go until January.  So, you know, that’s the way the movie business is.  You’re officially attached until there is no more movie, you know?  But yeah, this is something that I’m planning on doing.  Yeah.”

the-raid-remake-frank-grilloWhen asked about the stigma associated with remaking and Americanizing foreign films, and especially mere years after the original versions come out, Grillo recognized the pitfall, but also insisted:

“You know, the script is great. Patrick Hughes, now that he has this time – who just directed The Expendables 3 – he’s tweaking it a little bit.  Sony really is behind the project and I loved it.  [I’m] one of the three main characters and, you know, I’m excited about it. I can’t wait to actually go do it because it’s gonna be Americanized, but not overtly Americanized.  It’s really gonna keep a lot of what made the first Raid so great.”

The Purge: Anarchy is hitting theaters very soon after wrapping production, but that’s certainly not the case for another one of Grillo’s film, Demonic. That one was previously titled House of Horror and grew from a story created by James Wan, but after wrapping quite some time ago, not much happened. Even Grillo himself isn’t clear on what’s going on with it:

“Yeah, I did that years ago, like two years ago and it was me and Bello.  I was always a big Maria Bello fan.  That’s more of a horror movie.  Half of it was the found footage, and I have no idea what that is even or what it looks like or when it’s coming out or if it’ll come out.  I know it’s Bob Weinstein’s company, so who knows?”

Frank-Grillo-Captain-America-3One thing that is definitely coming our way is more Captain America, and on May 6th, 2016 to be precise. But a big question is, will Grillo’s Brock Rumlow be part of it?  Spoiler alert for those who haven’t seen Captain America: The Winter Solider, Rumlow winds up in pretty rough shape at the end of the movie, but he is alive and when you consider that and the fact that Grillo’s got himself a multi-picture deal with Marvel, there’s a pretty good shot he’ll be back.  Grillo was a little hesitant to flat out confirm it, but he certainly suggested Rumlow might return and then even specified when:

“I mean, I’m cautiously optimist that you will see me in the not too distant future in the next installment of Captain America.”

Even though there were no guarantees that Rumlow would make his way into multiple films, Grillo was prepared for the possibility the moment he was brought on:

“Very early on the Russos said, ‘Look, this is an origin film for this character.  We’re gonna discover who this is and this is a big movie with a lot of moving parts, but we’re gonna discover you in this film and, you know, here’s the information about who Brock Rumlow turns into and blah, blah, blah.’  And so we’ve had multiple discussions about what comes after that, that thing.  So, you know, it’s obvious Rumlow is covered in rubble and burned to crisp at the end, but you see he’s still there.  They don’t do that for no reason.”

After proposing that a costume might help cover those nasty battle scars right up, Grillo laughed and said:

“He needs a costume!  Coincidentally it could be a mask with a crossbones on it.”

You can catch him talking about all four projects in the video below and be sure to keep an eye out for our full conversation with Grillo closer to The Purge: Anarchy’s July 18th debut.


Please enable Javascript to watch this video

the-purge-anarchy-poster




Like Us


Comments:

FB Comments

  • Steven Ray Morris

    Brock Rumlow was one of the coolest little side characters in all the Marvel films so far. Hope they bring him back.

    • Aquartertoseven

      It’s a shame they didn’t give him enough, and instead focused on the Falcon, who had absolutely no logical reason to be in the story and was shoehorned in because of his skin colour.

      • Lance Kemal

        not really if you knew anything about comics you would know the falcon is one of caps closest friends on the planet in the civil war the falcon was one of the first heroes to side with cap over iron man and they have teamed up tons of times so it made sense that if the were gonna introduce the character they do it in a cap movie rather than an avengers or anything else stop acting like you know what your talking about.

      • Aquartertoseven

        The comics are irrelevant, what I’m talking about is the movie character’s place within the story, and he didn’t fit at all. Some guy Cap met five minutes ago is trusted more than anyone else, even Tony Stark? Absurd. Learn to distinguish the difference between comic and film.

      • Grayden

        Tony Stark was in ‘The Winter Soldier’? Strange….

        Also, it’s called setting up a character for future films, or a plan! Too much Rumlow and people would think HE was main antagonist, thus diminishing the reveal of Hydra taking over S.H.I.E.L.D. from the shadows and completely ruining the feeling of Cap going up against an entire organization.

      • Aquartertoseven

        No, I’m saying that he should’ve been in it, that of all the solo films, this is the only one where having another Avenger was essential.

        Rumlow was completely underutilised, even with more screen time, he was still a secondary villain, he just would’ve been more fleshed out I suppose. Every film has that intimidating soldier, we all still know who the big boss is.

      • Guest

        he did the same with the majority of the avengers he met them that day and gave them his trust same with nick fury when he first met him so its always been consistent with the movie captain america so nice try dumb fuck (claps slowly)

      • ozzie96

        they connected together as veterans. as for being shoehorned, he was cap’s first post-war partner since the 1970′s. comics and movies are different but marvel made it clear that comics are their direct influence, which is why they set up loki as the villain in the avengers. He was the villain that got the comic started

      • Aquartertoseven

        Was he so awkwardly and weakly introduced into the comics as well, do you know? Or was it better done than it was in the film?

      • Lance Kemal

        So why is it he gave most of the avengers his trust almost instantly on their first mission together 5 mins before thor was fighting them yet he never questioned him being on the helicarier or spoke up?and what about nick fury he trusted him enough to join the avengers after barely knowing nick for a year willing to work with him and then with shield in captain america 2. So his trust is easy to earn this has already been established with movie captain america nice try though stupid (claps slowly)

      • Aquartertoseven

        I’m not surprised that you deleted your other, embarrassing comment.

        How do you know that he gave the Avengers his trust? They were a team working together, he had their backs and they his. He didn’t meet them randomly and say ‘I’ll trust you over anyone else, even those I’m closer to and more capable of helping me.

        “after barely knowing nick for a year”

        Emphasis on the year bit, rather than five minutes. He learned about SHIELD and eventually became a part of it, he didn’t entrust them with his life straight away like he did with Falcon.

      • Steven Ray Morris

        Gross, don’t reply to anything I post anymore. Just stop posting actually.

      • Aquartertoseven

        “Gross”?? For pointing out the shallow attempt they made at appealing to a certain demographic rather than have the character naturally fit into the story? Grow up, you embarrassing, pathetic little man. You think that what I said was some sort of racism? Yep, pathetic is the apt description of you I think. Don’t worry, I won’t be going anywhere near someone like you, you’re a joke.

      • Leo Spaceman

        You blamed race for the reason he was brought in, that had nothing to do with it. No one at all was thinking race with Falcon. Anthony Mackie is a great actor and earned the role. I have no idea if Falcon is black in the comics, but I know that I don’t give a damn either way because Mackie was good in the role.

        Just go away.

      • Aquartertoseven

        No-one like you noticed, it seems. Are you saying that race doesn’t play a part? So every tv show for instance has a set number of black, hispanic even asians by chance? It’s a simple goal; to broaden the appeal. I have no qualms about him other than his inclusion into the story; were his place within the film more organic, like if he was an agent or something so, you know, he had a good reason to be there, I’d have no problem. Notice how I have no problem with Fury, as he had a purpose, a natural place within the plot. It’s just childish and racist in and of itself to essentially shout ‘racism!’ to any criticism, when I’m not even being remotely racist. It’s the mark of a leftie liberal douche quite frankly.

      • Concord Dawn

        Woah. I nearly thought it was worth arguing there, for a minute. Step away.

      • Polarboy

        They wanted to introduce Falcon because he is Cap’s main ally in the comics, Falcon happens to be black. You are mistaking shoehorning with introducing a character, why you are doing this, well I’ll leave that up to the people reading these comments.

        Oh and you lose the right to be involved in an adult conversation when you cuss out someone with little provocation, grow up.

      • Aquartertoseven

        I know he’s an ally in the comics, I’m simply saying that his inclusion in TWS was so awkwardly done, that throughout the film it felt like he was just this shoehorned in black guy, and it shouldn’t have felt like that, the writers should have done a better job to make the character slot into the events more naturally rather than appearing so out of place, random almost.

        When people imply that I’m being a dick, a racist dick, for making the above point, which is an entirely valid one, damn right I’m going to get offended. And you ask me to grow up lol, instead of the people crying out racist, pretty much. That’s rich.

      • Polarboy

        Well even if you were right that it felt awkward, it didn’t to me, then that still doesn’t mean that they only had him in the film to have another black character in there. It could be that the writers dropped the ball at smoothly introducing a new character regardless of their race.

        The point of the Falcon being in the movie was to have someone who Cap could turn to when he had SHIELD after him, a character of this type was needed.

        And for arguments sake if they wanted to be more diverse why not have someone who was Hispanic, Asian etc. when they already have Samuel L Jackson as a big part of the movie.

      • Grayden

        If in the comics his character is black, then even if he was shoehorned into the movie, there is no reason to keep saying that he’s black. We know his ethnicity, and most don’t care about. The only people who have a problem with his skin color, keep bringing it up. So basically you. I’m not going to say you’re a racist, but you seem pretty zeroed in on making his skin color a part of your argument that I don’t blame others for calling you out.

        Also, the reason why he’s included in the story is that Cap can’t trust anyone in S.H.I.E.L.D. He barely trusts Natasha at first. Sam Wilson is a soldier, like Cap, and he understands what it’s like to come back and try to reintegrate into society, much like Cap had to do after 60 years on ice. He’s there as a emotional and narrative beat for Cap. Soldiers rely on each other, and for the sake of the story, Cap needed someone on whom he could rely, even if they never served together or knew each other for five minutes. Soldiers are brothers. That’s what makes ‘The Winter Soldier’ such a compelling film. It’s why he doesn’t give up on Bucky either.

      • Aquartertoseven

        And they could’ve done a much, much better job of making him someone to trust, rather than a minute long conversation. Plus his ridiculous wings, they were completely out of place, even in a film with flying aircraft carriers. When you remove reason from a character’s point within a story, there’s usually only one purpose of their existing in the film. And I’m fine with that, all I want is it to appear less shallow and so obvious. Shoehorn in black characters all you like, I don’t care, as long as they’re like Sam Jackson as Fury, Idris Elba as Heimdall in Thor, where their characters HAVE A POINT, that’s all I care about.

      • Michelle Kirkwood

        Honestly, I’m sick of folks likr you calling someone a “liberal leftist douche” every time someone disagrees with you. That’s just so juvenile,immature, and stupid. Grow the hell up and learn to have a disagreement without resorting to ignorant name-calling. Nobody’s calling you a silly,ridiculous Tea close-minded Party nut, so get the hell out of here with that BS. The discussion has nothing to do with politics at all–which you basically shoehorned into it,despite the fact that it’s not even about that. What you said was racist because you’re claiming the character only got into the film because he was black—despite the fact that according to the other posters,he’s been an ongoing character in the comics. Get over it already.

        And,yeah, you’re racist because you’re the only one whining about the character’s skin color—no one else it, so why the hell are you? Ask yourself that, please.

      • Aquartertoseven

        So if no-one else has a problem with the weakest aspect of the film, arguably, I can’t either?

        When someone cries racist about something like that, they are being a liberal leftist douche, it’s not about disagreeing with me at all, it’s about implying that I have an issue with race rather than character. If the character is poorly conceived then it probably has something to do with race. But ultimately, it’s all about the character. Why do you think there’s such an emphasis on diversity in casts? They want to broaden the appeal to all races, in this case, black people. I have no issue with that, as long as the character fits the story, and the writers (Thor 2, so I shouldn’t be surprised that they’re hacks) failed completely at that, so that in turn makes it glaringly obvious that he’s only there, regardless of comic history, to appeal to a group of people without deserving to be IN THE STORY ITSELF.

        Perhaps I needed to explain myself better, I hope I have, but if you still think I’m being racist, then that’s, by your own words, juvenile, immature and stupid.

      • Grayden

        ” If the character is poorly conceived then it probably has something to do with race.”

        This is the absolute biggest turd of unsubstiated “opinion presented as fact” I’ve ever read on this site. There is zero evidence you can bring forward to prove this is even remotely true. You will never prove to anyone that Falcon was poorly conceived as a character because he was cast to an African-American man. If he was poorly conceived, it was because he was poorly conceived. End of story. It has nothing to do with who got the role. If he was shoehorned into the movie, he’d have been shoehorned in whether he was caucasian, african, hispanic, asian, or arab. The central tenet of your argument is he was shoehorned. You should have stuck with that, and not brought his race into it; With such fallacious logic that has only succeeded in making me laugh.

      • Aquartertoseven

        IN THE FILM.

        In the film, as a character, he was so poorly implemented into the narrative that the only remaining reason for his inclusion seemed to be his appeal to black people. Emphasis on “seemed”. Although I don’t know why you find it so difficult to understand that execs want to broaden their potential audience, it’s like you’ve never seen a film or tv show before lol. Why else would the screenwriters/network people include someone that doesn’t belong in the story? It’s a very simple point.

      • Grayden

        They already had their “appeasement” with Jackson’s ‘Fury”. Are you saying the studio wanted to “blacken up” TWS by adding another black actor? (Whose character is already established as a black man, btw.) I understand studio motivations, that doesn’t bother me. But I will call a spade a spade.

        If Falcon sucked in this film, it was because he was poorly implemented. That isn’t Mackie’s fault, neither is his skin color, so why don’t you try to rationalize another reason why the character was poorly implemented and stop bringing race into it.

        And if most of the population who don’t care about race or aren’t racist are the one’s who rarely, if ever, bring it up…what does that say about those who bring it up all the time?

      • Aquartertoseven

        He was established in the comics and could further appeal to that audience, that’s just a good idea.

        I am saying that he was poorly implemented, not because of his skin colour (still on the racism thing, Jesus Christ…). Because he was such a failure as a character, you could only see him as being there for the appeal to black people now, rather than appeal AND being a vital comic character with a point in the story. When you take away one of the two benefits of having him included, that only leaves one benefit, see? And I am simply acknowledging that benefit. Race and character. Take away character and you’ve only got race. Simple. Not racist (lol), just a simple point being made.

        It says that people are terrified of being called racist, that’s our current culture. We’re gutless and terrified, it’s a thing all over the western world, white guilt is a huge thing now, especially in America, white people even voted in a black president, twice, who, let’s face it, after all of the things he’s done that deserve impeachment or a strong call to resign, all were brushed aside and wouldn’t have been done so if he was white, just look at history, Nixon, Clinton etc., they were chucked out with far less cause (Clinton I mean). I have a problem with what was done in this film, a very valid problem, and the reaction I’ve received has been, frankly, disgraceful, and very clearly the reason why people never mention this problem. Because of the cries of ‘racism!’. All now we’ve come full circle- you ask why people never mention this, it’s because even you yourself have basically called me racist, undeservedly so.

      • Aquartertoseven

        He was established in the comics and could further appeal to that audience, that’s just a good idea.

        I am saying that he was poorly implemented, not because of his skin colour (still on the racism thing, Jesus Christ…). Because he was such a failure as a character, you could only see him as being there for the appeal to black people now, rather than appeal AND being a vital comic character with a point in the story. When you take away one of the two benefits of having him included, that only leaves one benefit, see? And I am simply acknowledging that benefit. Race and character. Take away character and you’ve only got race. Simple. Not racist (lol), just a simple point being made.

        It says that people are terrified of being called racist, that’s our current culture. We’re gutless and terrified, it’s a thing all over the western world, white guilt is a huge thing now, especially in America, white people even voted in a black president, twice, who, let’s face it, after all of the things he’s done that deserve impeachment or a strong call to resign, all were brushed aside and wouldn’t have been done so if he was white, just look at history, Nixon, Clinton etc., they were chucked out with far less cause (Clinton I mean). I have a problem with what was done in this film, a very valid problem, and the reaction I’ve received has been, frankly, disgraceful, and very clearly the reason why people never mention this problem. Because of the cries of ‘racism!’. All now we’ve come full circle- you ask why people never mention this, it’s because even you yourself have basically called me racist, undeservedly so.

      • Steven Ray Morris

        You’re racist. End of story dude.

      • Aquartertoseven

        Yeah…. I’m not. Not even remotely. You’re a leftie liberal piece of shit that throws around words when they’re not at all applicable. A character thrown in to appeal to demos is fine as long as he/she fits into the story. If they don’t fit, then all they have is a shallow appeal. That’s a simple truth.

      • http://www.marcjwrzphoto.com/ Marc J.

        Actually, based on that initial comment? Yeah, you kind of are dude. Take a step back and re-examine what you said. You brought race into the discussion first thing. I’m going to go out on a limb and guess you’re not black either.

      • Aquartertoseven

        No. What is wrong with people today? What’s wrong with you? In every film and every show, people of all races are shoehorned in, how is it racist to say that? If he was a white guy in a black movie, I’d be saying the same, and it still wouldn’t be racist to say that. People need to stop throwing around words when they clearly don’t understand the appropriate time to use them. Hint hint.

      • Fire Whale

        “If he was a white guy in a black movie,” Yeah, keep those black people out of white movies and white people out of black movies. Maybe they can show the white and black movies in separate theaters, too? Yeah, not racist at all.

      • Aquartertoseven

        Hyperbole makes everything seem worse than it is, that’s the point of hyperbole.

        If they don’t belong within the story, then sure, they shouldn’t be there. I’m making a pretty basic point, it’s alarming how many people are so quick to shout ‘racist’ at anything remotely around race, even when I’m not actually being racist, it’s shocking.

      • http://www.marcjwrzphoto.com/ Marc J.

        Well first off– The Falcon wasn’t shoehorned into the story at all, his character has an arc and plout purposes as seen in the film. Furthermore, in the comic run of Captain America that this is based on? Falcon is in it. Plus y’know, the Falcon has been one of Cap’s most consistent allies and friends since he was introduced in the 1970′s.

        Your viewpoint that “Marvel shoved a black guy in” without taking any time to do y’know, 30 seconds of googling to see that the character had a history and existed in the initial story? That’s what made your comment strike many people as racist.

        You also pointed out that the villain (who in the comics is a typical Nazi henchman btw….) should have received way more focus and development — Ummm he was a second tier bad guy who got set up pretty well to come back for another movie. Yeah, Grillo made out well. Especially compared to the majority of Marvel movie villains.

        Not expecting this to change your mind but hey, take a few minutes and just reflect/self-examine/whatever — you may not be an overt racist at all, but then again a lot of people are. I know plenty – and anyone who ever comments that they haven’t made a racist remark or even had a thought in their life? They’re full of shit.

      • Aquartertoseven

        He was completely shoehorned in, he met Cap, had a 30 second long chat and was suddenly trusted over other Avengers. Oh my God, yet another that can’t differentiate comic from film!!!! How he was in the comics HAS NO BEARING ON THE FILM. If he’s badly introduced, he’s badly introduced, it’s as simple as that. Was he as poorly implemented in the comic as well? As I’ve said 8000 times already, film =/= comic.

        Frank Grillo is a much, much better actor than Anthony Mackie and his character was more interesting. So yeah, he should’ve had far more focus.

        I think people like you are racist, for calling me such. You’re basically saying that I can’t criticise a black character, which is racist. If he is incredibly awkward within the narrative and seems shoehorned in, which is also racist on their part, that’s somehow racist to point out. Absurd.

        I never said that I haven’t had a racist thought in my life (see my point?), just that this single character was poorly done and seemed shoehorned in, regardless of comic lore. The leftie liberals have destroyed freedom of speech in the Western world, good Lord, if this is the treatment I get for raising a valid point.

      • milo

        “trusted over other Avengers”

        Funny, I don’t remember a scene in the movie where Falcon was standing next to Iron Man and Cap had to pick one or the other. He was on the run and didn’t know who involved with SHIELD could still be trusted, Falcon was someone he could reach out to given the situation. Cap was desperate and as far as he knew Falcon had no SHIELD connection. It also seemed that the film made it pretty obvious that the two had encountered each other many times during the morning runs, not just one thirty second encounter.

        Not to mention that it gets back to the constant audience question with any solo Marvel movie of “well why didn’t all the other Avengers just show up and help out”? They can make some excuse for it but at some point the audience just has to accept that they’re watching a Captain America/Thor/Iron Man movie and suspend that one bit of disbelief.

        “You’re basically saying that I can’t criticise a black character”

        Nope, you just don’t get it. Nothing wrong with criticizing a black character. Where people take offense is insisting that the filmmakers didn’t care if his character is any good or not and only put him in for the sake of tokenism and pandering. If the criticism is of how the character is written there’s no reason to even mention race at all, that’s irrelevant to the criticism. And trying to repeatedly throw around “leftie!!!” as some sort of insult says way more about you than about anyone else in the discussion.

      • Aquartertoseven

        Let’s have a reasonable discussion without hyperbole, he knew the others, especially Stark, would be reliable and he was shown to be close, a few hours away in New York. They went on a road trip in the film, why couldn’t they drive to Tony? Rather than trust a guy he’s just met? It’s idiotic.

        This is the only movie where another Avenger appearing was vital, presenting an all consuming threat, rather than the Mandarin, who was just after Tony Stark, the executioner after Thor etc.

        A 5 minute or less cameo was all that was necessary, nothing more. Focus could still be on Cap.

        “Where people take offense is insisting that the filmmakers didn’t care if his character is any good or not and only put him in for the sake of tokenism and pandering”

        But that’s exactly what happened!!!! If they cared, they would’ve written his more naturally into the story. So the issue isn’t the problem, the problem is mentioning the issue. So racism basically; you’re not allowed to criticise a shallow character if they’re black. Got it. That’s the mark of a leftie ^^ though, simple as that. Tokenism is completely relevant, it’s in everything, tv shows, film etc.

      • milo

        Did the movie say that Stark was in NYC? I don’t remember if he was mentioned at all. Even if he was there, isn’t it possible he was allied with HYDRA?

        I don’t buy that another avenger was needed at all, much less vital. It sounds like you really just wanted to see more of the other avengers and are bummed it didn’t happen.

        “If they cared, they would’ve written his more naturally into the story.”

        Back to your opinion, many other people thought he was perfectly naturally written into the story. And to me that shows that the writers did care and weren’t just going for tokenism. Again you’re using your own opinion, something that other people aren’t going to necessarily agree with, and using that to insist that YOU KNOW WHAT THE WRITERS WERE THINKING. You don’t see how that’s an asshole move?

        “you’re not allowed to criticise a shallow character if they’re black”

        Get your head out of your ass and go back and read where I just said the opposite of that.

        “leftie”

        And now we’re back to the political name calling. Since it was so effective the first five times you pulled that out.

        I’ll ask you again, can you think of an example of a movie or TV show with a black supporting character who isn’t “token”. Or do you think they all are, by definition.

      • Aquartertoseven

        Yes it did, when he was one of the helicarrier targets. New York is very close to DC, so it made sense.

        No, there’s no way that he would be allied with HYDRA. That’s absurd.

        Stark having destroyed his suits and sworn away from superhero life could be a factor expanded in future films. He could’ve regretted his inactivity in Cap 2 and decided to build Ultron to take his place on the team. Plus there would be tension between Cap and Stark as Cap would feel abandoned. I wanted to see another Avenger, Stark, because it made too much sense not to.

        Many other people aren’t objective, calling it the best solo film when there was no character development and an underdeveloped, half baked story.

        It is a typical leftie move to shout ‘racist!’ when criticising a black character. If I complained about the Chinese actress shoehorned in to the IM3 China release, would I be called racist then? I don’t think so. That’s why the whole black thing is a factor, as I said. Which it shouldn’t be, as that’s racism.

        I would say that execs would have probably added pressure, and appealing to demos as well as having an effective character is a win-win.

        There are so many examples, I don’t even know where to begin. Sam Jackson in these films for example, Lando in Star Wars is another big one. Shepard Book in Firefly (good character, so you don’t think about tokenism, same with Gina Torres). Do you need more?

      • milo

        “If I complained about the Chinese actress shoehorned in to the IM3 China release…”

        A character who appears ONLY in a special edit of the film released in one country? I hope you can see that’s an entirely different situation.

        “Many other people aren’t objective, calling it…”

        It’s a movie, so yours and everyone else’s opinions about it are by definition subjective.

        “no character development and an underdeveloped, half baked story”

        All your opinions. You are entitled to those opinions but they are still opinions and disagreeing opinions are no less valid.

        “It is a typical leftie move to shout ‘racist!’ when criticising a black character.”

        Are you unable to read? I’ll make it real fucking simple.

        I have no problem with criticizing a black character. Absolutely zero objection from me. The objection is to you insisting that you can read the filmmakers’ minds and that they didn’t care about the character and only put him in for the sake of meeting a race quota.

        But of course like an idiot you’re going to ignore that and keep insisting that it’s about criticizing the character. Whatever.

      • Aquartertoseven

        Character development is not opinion based, it either is or isn’t. None of the characters really changed by the end, Cap was the same, Widow was the same, Fury was the same etc.

        If they cared, they would’ve written him in a lot better than they did. Now every appearance he makes in future films will be undeserved, because he doesn’t deserve to be in the film or any after, due to his poor introduction.

      • milo

        Falcon was one of the highlights of the movie for me and probably my favorite new character in a recent Marvel movie.

        My only complaint about Falcon is that it sounds like he won’t be in Avengers 2.

        And if you’re worried about people thinking you’re racist, maybe think twice about bringing up race in the first place.

      • Aquartertoseven

        That’s just the worst kind of attitude, that you can’t make a valid criticism when in this case, he was the weakest part of the film, awkwardly added and jarringly out of place throughout.

      • milo

        You can make any criticism you want. You thought he was the weakest part of the film, awkwardly added and jarringly out of place throughout. Nothing wrong with that. The part that gets you in trouble is insisting that the filmmakers didn’t honestly believe he added to the film and only added him with the intention of having a token black guy. Honestly in general I’m not a fan of people not being satisfied with just giving an opinion and insisting on mind-reading sinister motives on the part of the creators.

        And you are entitled to your opinion about whether the character works or not but declaring your own criticisms “valid” doesn’t make them any more so than anyone else’s opinion.

      • Aquartertoseven

        He was thrown in to appeal to black people and to be a character within the story. And considering how odd he is within the story, all that’s left is a shallow appeal. That’s valid. It’s a basic point. Token+good character. Take away the good character and you’re left with the token. Simple point.

        I’m fine with a token black guy as long as he’s a good character. A hundred films or more probably have token black guys, but when they work, there’s no problem, they just fit.

        You think it’s sinister to appeal to demographics? Did I take a wrong turn? When did I enter the nuthouse?

      • milo

        “He was thrown in to appeal to black people”

        And you can’t figure out why some people might think your comments are a bit racist?

        “how odd he is within the story”

        Your opinion, obviously plenty of people don’t agree.

        “That’s valid”

        Well, it’s your opinion but I’m not sure why it would be any more “valid” than the opinion that he’s not odd within the story and actually adds something meaningful.

        “I’m fine with a token black guy”

        Again, your opinion that he’s “token”, obviously others don’t agree. I’m not sure how you’re making the distinction between a black character being “token” or not. Seems like filmmakers are damned if they do, damned if they don’t – no minority characters, that’s bad, include minority characters and someone complains “token”! So what’s an example of a movie that has a minor character who is black who isn’t a token?

        “You think it’s sinister to appeal to demographics?”

        No, I think in this particular case they’re not doing it for the sake of appealing to demographics. I think it’s douchey to insist that you can read the minds of the filmmakers and know they are doing it for the cynical possibility as opposed to that they actually like the character and the actor and think he makes a significant contribution to the movie. Considering that’s how I feel about the movie, it’s not hard for me to imagine that’s how the filmmakers felt as well.

      • Aquartertoseven

        “”He was thrown in to appeal to black people”

        “He was thrown in to appeal to black people and to be a character within the story. And considering how odd he is within the story, all that’s left is a shallow appeal. That’s valid.”

        It’s still valid.

        If you have a minority character that has no real purpose other than to be there, then yes, that’s token. It’s happened 1000 times, this shouldn’t be news to you.

        If the character is good, the fact of whether he’s token or not is meaningless, all that matters is if they have a function in the film, one that doesn’t take you out of it, which will happen if there’s poor execution.

        Examples? Sam Jackson as Nick Fury. Lando in Star Wars, do I need to give you more because there are loads of examples out there. Here’s an example of a token white guy; Tom Cruise in Last Samurai. He was sent there to train Japanese recruits using American techniques and technology, sending them to fight the samurai. You see? He fits into the story. You don’t watch it thinking ‘why is that white guy in this film?’, you accept him because his being there makes sense.

        Like I said, they can do it for both reasons, the appeal (added income potentially) and the character. It’s a win-win. Why do you not think that’s why films work? Look at IM3, it had a pointless scene featuring a Chinese actress that was only shown in China, to appeal to the Chinese. She was completely shoehorned in. Why is it okay to say that and not this? Something to think about.

      • milo

        “It’s still valid.”

        Well there’s a convincing defense of your point.

        “no real purpose other than to be there”

        Your opinion, not a fact, and others disagree.

        “If the character is good…”

        Your opinion, not a fact, and others disagree.

        Enough time wasted feeding the troll. Cheers, I look forward to doing anything other than reading your inevitable reply.

      • Aquartertoseven

        Yep, pretty convincing. 2-1=1. I don’t know how much more I can dumb this down.

        He was a badly written in character, so his only remaining purpose is to appeal to a demographic. See above.

        Others see Cap 2 as the best MCU film, despite no character development (who changed by the end?) and an underdeveloped, half baked story.

        Thank you then, for sparing me from dumbing my point down for you even further. I don’t even think I can anyway!

  • Grayden

    Grillo is just an interesting guy all around to watch on screen. I’m all for him getting more roles.

  • Pingback: Frank Grillo confía en volver en Capitán América 3

  • Pingback: Crossbones May Return in 'Captain America 3' - SC NATO

  • Pingback: M.A.A.C. – FRANK GRILLO Confirmed For One Of 3 Main Roles In THE RAID Hollywood Remake

  • Pingback: Grillo Returns For "Captain America 3"? » myhavens.com

  • Pingback: The Wrap Up: ‘The Nest’ Will Reunite Tina Fey, Maya Rudolph and Amy Poehler | ratermob

  • Pingback: Movie News: Crossbones Not Set For Captain America 3, Yet | First Appearance Comics and Games

  • Pingback: Frank Grillo vai estrelar o remake americano de The Raid | Supernovo.net

  • Pingback: Remake casting: Teresa Palmer joins “Point Break” and Frank Grillo to lead “The Raid” | The Random Reel

  • Pingback: I’m Still Confident That Crossbones Will Be Seen In Captain America 3 | Social Ferocity

  • Pingback: Expect More Crossbones In 'Captain America 3' - ScienceFiction.com

  • Pingback: Expect Frank Grillo To Suit Up As Crossbones in 'Captain America 3'

  • Pingback: Expect Frank Grillo To Suit Up As Crossbones in ‘Captain America 3′ - Musings Of A Mild Mannered Man

  • Pingback: Frank Grillo Talks The Purge: Anarchy and Kingdom on Directv

  • Pingback: Unsung Hero: THE PURGE: ANARCHY’s Frank Grillo | The Today Online

Click Here