As some may recall, Latino Review dropped a major bombshell back in the beginning of this month with what seemed to be a detailed run-down of where Mark Ruffalo's version of The Hulk from The Avengers winds up throughout Marvel Studios' continuity-connected Phase Two and Phase Three set of films. Well, according to a report from Ain't It Cool News, that whole thing may have been an illusion concocted by Loki, as their sources say it is "1,000% inaccurate."
To briefly recap, the LR rumor implied that Ruffalo's Hulk would start to lose control of his destructive rage, culminating in a moment in Marvel's Phase Two denouement, The Avengers 2 in 2015, where members of a movie version of Marvel's team of powerful super-thinkers, The Illuminati exile Hulk in space. He eventually lands on the war-torn planet, Sakaar, setting things up for a solo film that would be a take on the popular comic book storyline, "Planet Hulk." This would allegedly culminate in Phase Three with The Avengers 3 where Hulk, bitter over his exile, returns to Earth with an invading army of aliens; a take on the comic book storyline, "World War Hulk." -- So, all of that, at least, according to AICN, is NOT happening.
AICN's "debunking" (if you will) of the LR story also brings up the infeasibility of a "Planet Hulk" solo movie being rooted in the idea that the Bruce Banner character was not in the storyline. While it is true that you can't just have an all-CG Hulk movie without a human protagonist, it's an aspect that could easily be fixed by simply tweaking the story and having Hulk turn to Banner when he's not doing his "Alien Gladiator" thing in the arenas of Sakaar. (After all, The Avengers introduced the idea that Banner CAN change into Hulk at will, since he's "always angry.") While we don't know for sure what kind of Hulk solo movie could be in the works, it is all but inevitable that we are getting one, considering that Ruffalo signed a six-picture deal with Marvel. (And they can't all be cameos and Avengers sequels.)
Of course, Marvel Studios, who prefer to keep their secrets close, aren't likely to step in and settle the debate. That leaves these conflicting reports as fodder for a potential (albeit gentlemanly, given the AICN report's civil language) battle of Internet entertainment journalists. At this point, there's no substantive evidence leading one to conclude who is right or wrong.