• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

New 90 second Clip of Avengers: Age of Ultron

Status
Not open for further replies.
Did you even read what I posted before opting to fire off another empty rebuttal?

Re-read exactly why Superman's moments of pure recklessness are as such. It has absolutely nothing to do with Zod's power. Zod's power wasn't the reason Superman pile-drived his adversary right through a populated area and into a gas station, causing it to detonate; it wasn't the reason Superman casually hopped over a truck full of oil as it careened straight into a parking garage.

It's because of his negligence. Plain and simple.



Ah, see, I don't have to take you seriously after all.

Listen here, Tony 'making jokes' isn't = allowing innocent lives to perish as a result of your bizarre disregard for them, as Clark in Man of Steel depicted in the scenes I was talking about. Just because Tony isn't gritting his teeth in concentration against Hulk doesn't mean he doesn't care about the collateral damage that's resulting from the fight.

In any case, any potential civilian injuries caused in Tony vs. Hulk are actually because of Hulk's overwhelming power, unlike Superman vs. Zod in both the cases I mentioned, where Zod's power was irrelevant to Superman's decisions.

All that happened because Superman was a rookie against a superior warrior who was equally powerful. He literally just put the suit on.
 

BadAss2961

Member
I don't get where you're seeing the truck moving. It's stationary.

You're forgetting one key factor in this: Hulk is considerably superior to Hulkbuster.

Even in this small clip, it's obvious. What would Tony have done with Hulk relentlessly hammering at his armor, shredding it apart like it was paper? He had to put distance between them, and punching him off was, literally, the only option otherwise.

Superman had about a hundred options at his disposal when the oil truck came swerving his way. First and foremost, actually stopping it. :lol

Hulk is also much faster than your average human being; taking into account reaction time, there's only so many ways Tony can process where to deflect Hulk's full-speed charge (referring to the scene where he lasers him into a truck) before the green rage monster reaches him.
That truck is moving dude. Stark just killed that man.

And I don't know where you're getting that Hulk is considerably stronger than the Hulkbuster. Not in this clip. They trade spots, and it ends with an even fist clash. If anything, Hulk was the one fighting the uphill battle dealing with all of Stark's gizmos.
 

Sojgat

Member
It felt like Tony had grown as a person by the end of Iron Man 1, but then he comes back even more abrasive than he was to begin with. It actually reminds me of how Murphy was handled in the RoboCop sequels. People like how he acted in the first movie, so they just did that again. Even though it was annoying and made very little sense.
 
It felt like Tony had grown as a person by the end of Iron Man 1, but then he comes back even more abrasive than he was to begin with. It actually reminds me of how Murphy was handled in the RoboCop sequels. People like how he acted in the first movie, so they just did that again. Even though it was annoying and made very little sense.

That's my problem with Iron Man in the MCU every movie he seems to change but then goes right back to being an douche in the next movie.


MCU Cap is the best character. Dude's growth has been the best part of the series. Black Widow is up there too.
 

theWB27

Member
Everytime I read about someone being concerned about collateral damage in a superhero movie I chuckle. The day I can't suspend belief will be a sad day indeed.
 
All that happened because Superman was a rookie against a superior warrior who was equally powerful. He literally just put the suit on.

Superman casually jumping over an oil truck, which subsequently erupted and obliterated an entire structure happened because of Zod's experience? LOL

Do you also think Zod's magical experience also forced Superman's hand in spearing him into a gas station?

That truck is moving dude. Stark just killed that man.

I'm not seeing where it's moving. It's stationary.

And I don't know where you're getting that Hulk is considerably stronger than the Hulkbuster. Not in this clip. They trade spots, and it ends with an even fist clash. If anything, Hulk was the one fighting the uphill battle dealing with all of Stark's gizmos.

Hulk was ripping Hulkbuster apart with that pole; the latter's arm was torn. You have to agree with me that there was little Tony could do while the former was pounding away from above, yes?

What would you have him do to get Hulk off of him?
 
Superman casually jumping over an oil truck, which subsequently erupted and obliterated an entire structure happened because of Zod's experience? LOL

Do you also think Zod's magical experience also forced Superman's hand in spearing him into a gas station?

You mean the part of the city that had been already destroyed by the world engine? Why should he care about that when there is someone that is just as powerful as him but more skilled wrecking shit?
 

BadAss2961

Member
Hulk was ripping Hulkbuster apart with that pole; the latter's arm was torn. You have to agree with me that there was little Tony could do while the former was pounding away from above, yes?

What would you have him do to get Hulk off of him?
Tony did what he had to do. But again, that fight clearly wasn't one-sided. Hulk is outsized and outgunned in that clip.

Thinking about it, I didn't even have a problem with the scene until the MoS bickering got started. That's when I got in nitpick mode and actually noticed a legit problem with the destruction in showing people getting hurt by Tony's offense. Again, with all the heat Man of Steel got for shit going down, it never went there.
 

Renekton

Member
That's my problem with Iron Man in the MCU every movie he seems to change but then goes right back to being an douche in the next movie.
I don't think he ever de-douched in the manner you described.

He was always snarky and rude (e.g. to the kid in IM3 or to Avenger members), but willing to do the good stuff at the end (gave kid a tech lab, took the bomb out himself). That has been arguably consistent including this trailer.
 

guek

Banned
You mean the part of the city that had been already destroyed by the world engine? Why should he care about that when there is someone that is just as powerful as him but more skilled wrecking shit?

No, he's referring to the Smallville fight where he flies directly into a 7-Eleven and explodes a gas station full of people.

Ugh. Since you've got me talking about it anyway, the "he was a novice at the time" reasoning doesn't excuse him from responsibility. You can sympathize with his actions, sure, but that doesn't make him any less guilty of involuntary manslaughter.
 
No, he's referring to the Smallville fight where he flies directly into a 7-Eleven and explodes a gas station full of people.

Ugh. Since you've got me talking about it anyway, the "he was a novice at the time" reasoning doesn't excuse him from responsibility. You can sympathize with his actions, sure, but that doesn't make him any less guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

The same could be said for all the people confirmed dead during the incident in the MCU. The Avengers are also guilty of involuntary manslaughter.
 
Hopefully civil war is about the war crimes trial that tony is put on for killing millions of people by creating ultron then

And to think he'll likely crack jokes while a bunch of evil robots kill so many civilians

/s

Man of steel was a messy movie but when you get into shitty reasoning like that it kind of brings to light the problem with the ENTIRE genre tbh. Either they address the situation in sequels or they ignore it
 

benjipwns

Banned
Hopefully civil war is about the war crimes trial that tony is put on for killing millions of people by creating ultron then

And to think he'll likely crack jokes while a bunch of evil robots kill so many civilians

/s

Man of steel was a messy movie but when you get into shitty reasoning like that it kind of brings to light the problem with the ENTIRE genre tbh. Either they address the situation in sequels or they ignore it
I'm still disappointed Bruce Wayne was never brought to trial for supplying Batman with the tank car he ran over a bunch of cops with likely killing them in Batman Begins. Should have had that movie instead of The Dark Knight which was completely nonsensical.
 

guek

Banned
The same could be said for all the people confirmed dead during the incident in the MCU. The Avengers are also guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

Yup. If so, absolutely. I actually haven't watched the clip so I wont be able to comment on whether it is or not until I see the movie.

edit: whoops, you mean in Avengers. It's harder to say because we don't see any actions the Avengers directly take that kills people. Like if Thor at some point zapped a bunch of people on accident while frying the chitauri. What I mean is no direct action by the any Avenger produced, from what I recall, a definite collateral fatality. So basically there's no evidence, though the probability of it happening is not negligent. Conversely, we know Clark was in control of their trajectory and we know the 7-11 was open because there was a car fueling up and people around it.
 
Look up. Yeah, tons died, how many directly due to the actions of an Avenger? Maybe there was, maybe there wasn't. None found in evidence as far as I can remember.

It's because the movies ignores that type of stuff. You're not supposed to think about that type of shit. Every superhero movie is full of people we don't see dying all over the place while the characters duke it out.

EDIT: One thing I want to mention about this clip is that color grading is bad and it doesn't match anything we've seen from the film.
 

guek

Banned
Now it's no longer about the quality of either film. Yall are debating the ethical practices of superman and thor lmao

Yeah, it's dumb. But if we're going to argue ethical implications in a movie at all, might as well do it logically.

It's because the movies ignores that type of stuff. You're not supposed to think about that type of shit. Every superhero movie is full of people we don't see dying all over the place while the characters duke it out.

Yeah, I agree, except in MoS where we actually see that shit happen. You're trying to invalidate the argument now. I say we just drop it and get back on topic.

Sorry for the derail, y'all.
 
They should do a series about a lone vigilante in the aftermath of the Metropolis attacks attempting to take down a mysterious crime lord who seeks to seize control of the city.

...

I really enjoyed Man of Steel
 

benjipwns

Banned
They should do a series about a lone vigilante in the aftermath of the Metropolis attacks attempting to take down a mysterious crime lord who seeks to seize control of the city.

...

I really enjoyed Man of Steel
Give me a black guy who's half robot and I've got $300 million for you.
 

Dabanton

Member
Tbh this looks fairly early in the film. If we remember that clip where Captain America and Stark are arguing about the morality of finishing wars before they begin, that seemed a lot more serious business.

I think we should enjoy these Stark snarks as they'll probably be pulled back by the time we get to Civil War.
 
I am a big MCU fan and I was very critical of Superman's recklessness in Man of Steel. I do have an issue with this clip and Iron Man's actions. Hulk is a mindless beast and the Hulkbuster suit can fly, right? Why not provoke the Hulk and then fly away to a location with less chance of civilian casualties? Yeah, yeah, suspension of disbelief and all that, but I expect heroes to act heroically and give a damn about protecting innocents.

Maybe in the full movie we see the others evacuating civilians while Stark keeps Hulk occupied, so my complaint would be meaningless, we'll know soon enough. I hope it is so.
 

benjipwns

Banned
...


What the hell is going on in here?
People are actually caring about the criminal negligence of superheroes. And for one it's a good thing, they've gotten away with it for too long. And people even cheer them on, all while the small business man whose life is ruined, his shop destroyed, probably his apartment is forgotten.

If we don't hold them accountable, who will?
 
No doubt movie Hulk is weaker than what he could do in comics.

In the comics, Hulk is wolverine invincible and probably could take a dunk in the sun and live. Coupled with infinite power, Hulkbuster should do nothing but be a distraction.

But since Avengers 1, a few of those crappy ships were shooting hulk down...
 
People are actually caring about the criminal negligence of superheroes. And for one it's a good thing, they've gotten away with it for too long. And people even cheer them on, all while the small business man whose life is ruined, his shop destroyed, probably his apartment is forgotten.

If we don't hold them accountable, who will?

Hello Lex.
 
People are actually caring about the criminal negligence of superheroes. And for one it's a good thing, they've gotten away with it for too long. And people even cheer them on, all while the small business man whose life is ruined, his shop destroyed, probably his apartment is forgotten.

If we don't hold them accountable, who will?

Are you referring to Civil War?
 

- J - D -

Member
I think AoU will address to some extent the gravity of civilian casualties in cataclysmic events such as those that may unfold in this film. At least, they'll go as far as they can without actually showing people explicitly dying a la Man of Steel's gravity machines smashing people into the ground (you really do see bodies being lifted and then smashed down, complete with screams!).

This might all be tenuous hopeful thinking, but there's a line in one of the past AoU trailers wherein Cap says "I'm sick of watching people pay for our mistakes" , and you see him fail to save people in cars falling off of a bridge. This coincides with the general tone of the early AoU trailers, which skewed more towards pensive remorse and downbeat "we've failed, the people deserve better" introspection.

And that's fine with me, that the heroes acknowledge that people have indeed perished due to their failures without having the film wallow in the ethics of its heroes. Save that for Civil War, but I can see the seeds being planted in AoU for that inevitable conflict later.
 

Renekton

Member
I think AoU will address to some extent the gravity of civilian casualties in cataclysmic events such as those that may unfold in this film.
I think it's heavily implied by trailer that
the collateral damage of hulkbuster vs hulk fight leads to Ultron, Avengers disassembled or Civil War
(unless Whedon punks us)
 
I think AoU will address to some extent the gravity of civilian casualties in cataclysmic events such as those that may unfold in this film. At least, they'll go as far as they can without actually showing people explicitly dying a la Man of Steel's gravity machines smashing people into the ground (you really do see bodies being lifted and then smashed down, complete with screams!).

This might be tenuous hopeful thinking, but there's a line in one of the past AoU trailers wherein Cap says "I'm sick of watching people pay for our mistakes" , and you see him fail to save people in cars falling off of a bridge. This coincides with the general tone of the early AoU trailers, which skewed more towards pensive remorse and downbeat "we've failed, the people deserve better" introspection.

And that's fine with me, that the heroes acknowledge that people have indeed perished due to their failures without having the film wallow in the ethics of its heroes. Save that for Civil War, but I can see the seeds being planted in AoU for that inevitable conflict later.

This one's different for me because, as far as we know, Ultron is Tony's fault. Unless a Vanko-like villain is to blame for hijacking Tony's machines, he really should be taking this tragedy more seriously.
 

- J - D -

Member
This one's different for me because, as far as we know, Ultron is Tony's fault. Unless a Vanko-like villain is to blame for hijacking Tony's machines, he really should be taking this tragedy more seriously.

We don't know yet when exactly in the film's timeline that this particular fight happens.

Also, if someone were to try to convince me that humor as a coping mechanism was intrinsic to Stark's fragile, neuroses-ridden personality, I'd believe it.
 
We don't know yet when exactly in the film's timeline that this particular fight happens.

Also, if someone were to try to convince me that humor as a coping mechanism was intrinsic to Stark's fragile, neuroses-ridden personality, I'd believe it.

Fair points. I'll reserve judgement until after seeing the movie! :)
 
We don't know yet when exactly in the film's timeline that this particular fight happens.

Also, if someone were to try to convince me that humor as a coping mechanism was intrinsic to Stark's fragile, neuroses-ridden personality, I'd believe it.

One thing for sure this scene is
after Ultron saves the twins
. It's probably the mid-movie battle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom