Marvel's The Avengers |OT| (Dir. Joss Whedon) [Spoilers unmarked]

Status
Not open for further replies.
4104504_700b.jpg
 
Yeah it's not like the comics didn't have goofy plotlines or awful bits...

No, they certainly do. I mentioned this in my initial review. Joss Whedon's source material is not particularly any good to begin with, so I didn't really expect much. I had low low expectations and they exceeded those. But that's not saying much.

Unlike Evilore I felt the last action scene was actually well done, that tracking shot traveling between heroes really impressed me. But outside of that spectacle, there are so many problems with the movie it's impossible for me to love. It's worth a movie ticket, but not a Blu-Ray purchase... for me anyway.

Man, I thought we were friends. But it's over. It's OVER. :((

You like Cap America as a hero or in the movie?

I hate what Captain America stands for as a hero. It's such a lazy concept. But that's just me.
 
Flaws dont make a movie awful if the whole point is to be fun.

No, they do.

Bad writing is bad writing, bad acting is bad acting, a bad film is a bad film regardless of subjectiveness.

People watch B movies knowing that flaws are part of the experience.

That's not why people like B movies.

Sometimes its OK to turn your brain off for a bit and just enjoy the spectacle before you.

You want to know what I fucking hate? It's when people tell me it's okay to turn off my brain. You're fucking telling me how to watch things.
 
It's actually symptomatic of how ridiculous it would be to have "the most important intelligent base in the world" be a "Helicarrier" to begin with. It has huge fucking weakspots that make it absurdly easy to take down, if it existed in real life the way it did in the film. I mean, those giant helicopter blade things were like shining red weakpoints, like the giant crabs of yore. I mean sure they could scurry some jets to protect the thing I suppose, but any good sneak attack with an even remotely sufficient force of any size would likely be able to cripple the beast.

I'll file it next to giant limitless energy cubes and alien flying seadoos on silly crap that can't exist for the simple fact they're so silly.

Agreed on all points. But the movie makes such a big deal out of it, so much so that as the viewer you feel compelled to ignore the glaring weaknesses of the idea. You immediately think "No way would this movie make such a big deal out of this bad ass intelligence base if it could be taken down so easily. This thing is going to be a beast in action." And like half an hour later, a dude shoots an arrow at it and everything goes to hell.

Once again, I understand it's a big dumb action movie, but the absurd logic behind certain parts beg the question. Often it goes out of the way to cement a very odd notion that seems to run antithetical to what it's trying to accomplish.
 
if you have so much money to spend on movie tickets, and there are so many movies that don't require you shut off your brain, why would you waste your time?

I'm not saying Avengers isn't worth a movie ticket, I thought it was decent enough to deserve that, I'm just saying how much I hate this saying.

No, it's not OK to have to shut off your brain for a movie. That disengages your critical faculties and makes you prone to ridiculous assertions about the quality of said film. If the movie is actually any good, you won't have to disengage your brain.

It really depends on what you look for in a movie. In this kind of movie, the characters are already superheroes. They have entirely unrealistic powers of all kinds. I wouldn't expect to come into a movie like this expecting it to be even remotely realistic. Thats part of why its fun. Helicarriers are a fucking stupid idea. Thats why one existing in this movie is interesting to me. The Hulk being able to smash an alien ship's face in is fucking amazing. Captain americas vibranium shield is amazing. It doesnt matter if its not realistic or makes much sense. Its a comic book movie.
If this was some high class movie that was supposed to be judged on the merits of its writing I could see why it would be bad, but this is a blockbuster popcorn flick that is solely trying to entertain the audience, while obviously providing Marvel fans a bunch of fanservice. I dont see anything wrong with that.If this kind of movie isnt for you, thats fine. If people want to spend hard earned money on it, thats fine too.
 
Captain America sucks anyway, and I thought his movie was lame too, but man they went above and beyond the call of duty in making him a pussy.

I must be the only one that loved how they portrayed him in the Avengers. Part of the point of Captain America is this quote

captain-america-no-you-move-700x559.jpg


This is a character that isn't the biggest dog in the yard, and that's a part of the point. The fact that he does not compromise his beliefs or his integrity in spite of this makes is convictions all the more powerful. Captain America isn't about being the strongest, or the fastest, he's about doing the right thing and giving it your all no matter what.

He is far from useless, it was his tactical orders that in part allowed everything to play out like it did in this film. He's the leader/tactician, not the biggest gun.
 
So I had my second viewing yesterday and it was so weird. I couldn't enjoy the movie at all. And despite the theatre being packed (which is quite impressive for the UK given it's early release here), it was the quietest crowd in the world. On the opening night, everyone understood the jokes, laughed at the right parts, and cheered during some of the fight scenes - I imagine that was the nerd crowd, who like me, had waited for this movie forever. So gushing emotion just poured out without restraint.

But yesterday's showing was eerily quiet. There were a few chuckles here and there, but people seemed to be getting restless. And that's the problem with the movie - it's essentially two long action sequences tied by a knot of shoddy character interactions.

Anyone else have a similar experience on their second viewing?

It's certainly not something I'd ever watch again. Enjoyed it the first time but once you've heard the jokes and seen the explosions, what's left? I think it works well as an event (and Marvel should always market it that way) but I won't be buying the BD or anything.

Unlike, say, Spider Man 2.
 
Duckroll made a good post about Captain America in this thread somewhere, like 100 pages back. About how even though he's the weakest he still keeps fighting on, that's why he's awesome. I like that about Cap.
 
It really depends on what you look for in a movie. In this kind of movie, the characters are already superheroes. They have entirely unrealistic powers of all kinds. I wouldn't expect to come into a movie like this expecting it to be even remotely realistic.

That's not what is being argued at all.

Realism has nothing to do with good writing.
 
That's not what is being argued at all.

Realism has nothing to do with good writing.

I really don't see what about the writing you thought was bad. It wasn't *just* a series of wisecracks and action scenes, there were some genuinely great lines in there, particularly from Nick Fury and Captain America.
 
I really don't see what about the writing you thought was bad. It wasn't *just* a series of wisecracks and action scenes, there were some genuinely great lines in there, particularly from Nick Fury and Captain America.

I never said I thought it was a badly written film. I thought, aside from the beginning and the obvious inaccesibility as a standalone film, it was very, very well written.

I'm arguing against the concept of "turning off your brain". Not The Avengers.
 
That's not what is being argued at all.

Realism has nothing to do with good writing.

I'm talking about the existence of the helicarrier in this case, which I was both surprised and entertained by. I loved that thing. It was completely absurd and I loved seeing things like that. The writing in this show actually didnt seem too bad. I was never confused, outside of not knowing who characters were at first or their backstories. I think the movie made as much sense as it could given all the stuff it had to accomplish. For me, that means the movie was good. If I wasn't confused as hell by it, it was a good movie. I dont mind complex stories or scripts, I just want to be able to make sense of a movie, and this one delivered that for me.

I do kind of agree that this is the sort of movie that you should go into relatively blindly, be surprised by the events that occur, and then bin it for perhaps years until youve forgotten about some of it. But its a REALLY fun ride.
 
Spiderman 2 has aged really poorly, haven't seen it since it came out on DVD but it was hard for me to watch again. Cgi is awful and the train sequence made me cringe.
 
You want to talk about things being different on a second viewing, try actually watching S2 objectively. It's a very average film, with a good villain.

I'm afraid I'm on the same boat as you. People wet their pants talking about Spiderman 2. I found it to be a fun movie but it wasn't as spectacular or mind-blowing as it seemed after the first viewing.
 
Spiderman 2 has aged really poorly, haven't seen it since it came out on DVD but it was hard for me to watch again. Cgi is awful and the train sequence made me cringe.

For me the vastly inferior Spiderman 3 retrospectively diminished the other two films, and made me see Raimi's directing style... I didn't like it. The whole obsession with villains redeeming themselves, the cringeworthy romantic writing. Go back and watch again, it's near "Attack of the Clones" levels of cringe. The CGI isn't really Raimi's fault, but there are numerous other problems with that sequence.


I'm afraid I'm on the same boat as you. People wet their pants talking about Spiderman 2. I found it to be a fun movie but it wasn't as spectacular or mind-blowing as it seemed after the first viewing.

I really liked it back in the day, but I recently purchased the first two films (I refuse to buy the third on principle), and they really don't stand up in the way I feel the Marvel Studios films will.
 
I actually havent seen Spiderman 2 or 3. I enjoyed the first one, but that seemed enough.
Hes not one of my favorite superheroes so thats probably why.
On the other hand I thoroughly enjoyed Batman Begins and TDK so Im looking forward to the next one very much.
 
You like Cap America as a hero or in the movie?

I hate what Captain America stands for as a hero. It's such a lazy concept. But that's just me.

Captain America represents a man from a different time and place who is proud of his country and everything it stands for and isn't ashamed of it. He is larger than life and iconic. I think that's a great concept. I'm not even American, and I don't care for the American government of today or what the country stands for, but I can respect a man like Steve Rogers.
 
I actually havent seen Spiderman 2 or 3. I enjoyed the first one, but that seemed enough.
Hes not one of my favorite superheroes so thats probably why.
On the other hand I thoroughly enjoyed Batman Begins and TDK so Im looking forward to the next one very much.

The first one is decent. I found Tobey to be cringe worthy in 2 and 3 for some reason.
 
So I had my second viewing yesterday and it was so weird. I couldn't enjoy the movie at all. And despite the theatre being packed (which is quite impressive for the UK given it's early release here), it was the quietest crowd in the world. On the opening night, everyone understood the jokes, laughed at the right parts, and cheered during some of the fight scenes - I imagine that was the nerd crowd, who like me, had waited for this movie forever. So gushing emotion just poured out without restraint.

But yesterday's showing was eerily quiet. There were a few chuckles here and there, but people seemed to be getting restless. And that's the problem with the movie - it's essentially two long action sequences tied by a knot of shoddy character interactions.

Anyone else have a similar experience on their second viewing?

Oh and on a sidenote, did anyone else think it hilarious just how easily the Helicarier was compromised? I mean jesus christ, it's one of the most important intelligence bases in the world, and the whole thing almost goes crashing down because some dude shoots an explosive arrow at it.



Yep, don't think I'll ever understand the logic behind that. There's a part where he blindly sprays bullets at one of Loki's gunmen for like 10 minutes while Stark is trying to repair the damage done to the Hellicarier. This is fucking Captain America, unable to actually shoot some random soldier, and he's ducking and running and sweating throughout the encounter. The movie really goes out of its way to drive home the point that Cap's only advantage is his shield.

For the first part: I still enjoyed a lot my second time, and I'm planning a third with my parents (my father is dying to see it). The crowd was pretty much like the first time, quite possibly they were new viewers mostly. I don't care for crowd moods though, just recently I faced a horrible 'crowd' for 'Shame', people making loud jokes, others leaving.

About the Helicarrier:

It is compromised by a threat that is inside it, controlling others outside and signalling its position. And they arrived in a SHIELD plane. And every mechanical (flying!) vehicle is subject to explosions (especially when it's not just 'some explosive arrow', but I guess the scene happens fast and the explosion scale is not well shown) , and even so they were trying to re-enter ocean zone to 'land'. If the argument a heliboat should logistically be a tank too, then ok.

And I read the Cap scene as a contrast by Fury nonchallantly popping compromised (mind controlled) agents, and Cap shooting the agent as cover fire. Especially since he was in awful position and without his shield.
 
I really don't see what about the writing you thought was bad. It wasn't *just* a series of wisecracks and action scenes, there were some genuinely great lines in there, particularly from Nick Fury and Captain America.
It wasnt just great character interaction either, this is the best Bruce Banner we're going to see. The action makes a good case for what motivation the characters have into the final battle which was written and shot in a spectacular fashion. In no way was this comparable to the action in Transformers which was always an unwatchable mess. I never felt lost during a scene and everything felt natural as an extension of what each character would do.
But I'm sure I'm just wrong and in two months I will hate the movie because someone on GAF sad its bad.
 
It wasnt just great character interaction either, this is the best Bruce Banner we're going to see. The action makes a good case for what motivation the characters have into the final battle which was written and shot in a spectacular fashion. In no way was this comparable to the action in Transformers which was always an unwatchable mess. I never felt lost during a scene and everything felt natural as an extension of what each character would do.
But I'm sure I'm just wrong and in two months I will hate the movie because someone on GAF sad its bad.

The fact people are even comparing it to Transformers is laughable.
Also, I loved Mark Ruffalo. Had no real interest in Hulk before this film, will definitely see the new Hulk film if he's in it.
 
Captain America represents a man from a different time and place who is proud of his country and everything it stands for and isn't ashamed of it. He is larger than life and iconic. I think that's a great concept. I'm not even American, and I don't care for the American government of today or what the country stands for, but I can respect a man like Steve Rogers.

Yeah isn't he supposed to be like the epitome of a 40's American soldier or something? I thought he fit that character description rather well. Especially that line "There's only one God and he damn sure doesn't dress like that" or something to that effect. It was so perfect for Captain america to say as he was jumping from the plane.

I really want to watch the other movies these characters are in now and I definitely need to see Iron Man 2 despite not being intially interested. I guess I just fell out of wanting to see superhero movies for a while. Now My interest has been rekindled.
 
When was it decided that the Transformers series has badly directed action scenes? Apart from the terrible character designs, the action itself is very fluid, easy-to-follow and often quite impressive.
 
Captain America represents a man from a different time and place who is proud of his country and everything it stands for and isn't ashamed of it. He is larger than life and iconic. I think that's a great concept. I'm not even American, and I don't care for the American government of today or what the country stands for, but I can respect a man like Steve Rogers.

Same here.
Captain America is my favorite hero and while I think he could be better in the movie, it's a lot of exageration to say his character was bad. He gives the orders, he stay on the ground and fights his ass off to the breaking point and beyond, when he thinks SHIELD is up to no good, he challenges them, he even say that they have the same blood on their hands as Loki (or something to that effect). And as much as he was manipulated by Fury, it's his initiative to steal a jet to go to New York.

Both here and in his own movie, I think he does a lot of stuff that genuinely defines him as a man who deserves respect.
 
Ive only seen one of the Transformers movies, and it was the one that involved the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center. I watched that AT the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center. That was worth the ludicrous price to watch in IMAX. But I havent really been interested in that movie franchise much. It was more like "Im with family on vacation and theres a blockbuster movie involving the very place we are visiting so lets watch it" and I havent been too much into the movies since then. This felt a lot more exciting to me for some reason. Im not sure why.
 
When was it decided that the Transformers series has badly directed action scenes? Apart from the terrible character designs, the action itself is very fluid, easy-to-follow and often quite impressive.

You are about to be eaten alive by the GAF's finest "Cinematography Scholars".
I too always found Transformers scenes easy to follow and telegraphed even with the amount of pyrotechniques, coreography and camera movement. My only problem is that the robots lose a bit of their distinctive traits amidst all that, leading to questions like "Was that Ratchet or Ironhide"
 
The problem with Transformers action isn't the way Bay shoots it (although, truth be told, I can't stand it- I fucking hate Bad Boys II too), it's that it shows how daft the robot designs are. There's too much going on with them, too many moving parts to follow, and ultimately it's hard to tell what's what. Also, all the robots are the fucking same anyway.

Avengers benefits from calmer shots, sure, but even if it was a Bay film it'd still look better by virtue of the characters being completely distinct and, well, it's inherently not as hard to tell dudes apart as it is to tell these crazy complex machinery apart. I'm just regurgitating Spoony's points, though.

Transformers: fine action, if it was anything else, but they shoot themselves in the foot with the Transformers themselves.
 
I must be the only one that loved how they portrayed him in the Avengers. Part of the point of Captain America is this quote

captain-america-no-you-move-700x559.jpg


This is a character that isn't the biggest dog in the yard, and that's a part of the point. The fact that he does not compromise his beliefs or his integrity in spite of this makes is convictions all the more powerful. Captain America isn't about being the strongest, or the fastest, he's about doing the right thing and giving it your all no matter what.

He is far from useless, it was his tactical orders that in part allowed everything to play out like it did in this film. He's the leader/tactician, not the biggest gun.

Dat Comic Sans
 
Is the live action Hulk tv series worth watching? Ruffalo's performance makes me want to consider watching it.
 
When was it decided that the Transformers series has badly directed action scenes? Apart from the terrible character designs, the action itself is very fluid, easy-to-follow and often quite impressive.

It WOULD be easy to follow if the action was at all distinct. Instead you're just presented with a bunch of explosions centered around what look like to very generic big robots fighting in a generic down town setting with nothing distinct about any of the battles. The direction may be fantastic but for the trees you can't see it.

This is the exact opposite with Avengers where for the last 40 minutes of the film you're presented with six distinct points of action that converge and split apart in a fluid and easy to identify and follow way. Never once did I not understand where someone was or why they were doing the thing they were doing. (Okay, to be fair, I didn't understand why Hawkeye didn't happen to think that 20 arrows might not be enough to stop an invading army, but fuck Hawkeye). This is how you direct and shoot and write a big stupid CG Alien battle, Transformers is nothing compared to this.
 
It's a popular plot convenience. Nolan used the same one in The Dark Knight.

I have to admit I'm finding it entertaining to watch people who bend over backwards to defend Nolan's films are so quick to nitpick things in Avengers which Nolan himself does.
 
They probably haven't even thought about the home video release yet. Youre getting ahead of yourself.

I've heard the Blu-Ray has 2 hours of deleted scenes and comes with a small piece of Whedons ass for you to kiss everyday.

CAN'T WAIT
 
The fact people are even comparing it to Transformers is laughable.
Also, I loved Mark Ruffalo. Had no real interest in Hulk before this film, will definitely see the new Hulk film if he's in it.

same. ruffalo is one of my absolute favorites. did you watch YOU CAN COUNT ON ME? just fantastic.
 
You can tell this movie is really good as reading through this thread, concerning the negative points, they sound more like nitpicking then people being more critical.
 
It's gonna be really interesting to see how Whedon will split up the screentime of each character in Avengers 2 which will most likely have a bigger cast of heroes. I thought he hit a good balance but purely mathematically speaking total screentime will suffer with more members.
 
It's gonna be really interesting to see how Whedon will split up the screentime of each character in Avengers 2 which will most likely have a bigger cast of heroes. I thought he hit a good balance but purely mathematically speaking total screentime will suffer with more members.

Which is precisely why there shouldn't be any more members. If they need to bring in Ant Man and Black Panther (for example), fine. But then they should bench Hawkeye and Black Widow (for example).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom