or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Marvel's The Avengers
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Marvel's The Avengers - Page 3

post #61 of 463
Christopher Reeve was good... but a lot of that Superman movie falls flat except for the Williams score to the movie.

The whole Lex Luthor wants land thing never worked for me... Reeve sold Superman and that + the music made it work... but I would love to have seen Reeve do the role in modern times with the higher production values and better scripts we have seen in some of the other movies.
post #62 of 463
superman the movie was made before the mtv audience took over.

I know that many people like the batman begins series, they are good. I dont consider them comic book movies. its too serious and also set in the real world. the reason that I like the burton batman movies is that he made a world where batman could live. I also enjoy the first hulk movie, the spiderman movies. I am not even interested in the new one that much either. I did enjoy the avengers for what it was. it was fun, but not dumb. certainly didnt think that I was insulted or lost some IQ points by watching it. unlike the other crap that is out there (transformers). I am surpise on how successful it was. my other movie this year that I am very interested is the hobbit.

Jacob
post #63 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_danger View Post


Are you saying that you don't want any of those films? Are those characters unworthy of cinema? Are you a long-time super Avengers nerd and just don't like how Disney/Marvel is treating your favorite team? I can understand if that's the case - I HATED the newest X-Men film despite being an X-Men nerd for the past 30 years.

You must have been looking for something that wasn't there. I've seen the movie three times in the theater so far (and I'm going a fourth time this weekend) and each time the film has been only about the threat at hand and the team coming together to defeat it. I'll look for those ads this time.

If Black Widow gets her own film, it would probably be pretty good. I thought she was a completely bland character in Iron Man 2, but her role in Avengers has me wanting more. As for Hulk... I would gladly accept a third film as long as they don't use a 4th actor to portray him - Ruffalo makes a great Banner. I'm not sure where you're getting the vibe that Fury will get his own film, though. If anything, he'll continue to have cameos in other films and probably a strong supporting role in a Black Widow film (if they make one).

I'm saying that it made the film seem incomplete as its own stand alone entity and characters were lacking and not very well fleshed out. It's a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth, as in too many characters and too many side stories jammed together... and this happened with The X-Men movies as well.

They knowingly do this so you HAVE to plunk down more money to watch all the other Marvel films to have it make sense. And yes, I've seen all the others and I found them completely lacking. The first Iron Man was kind of fun because of Robert Downey Jr.'s tongue in cheek delivery.

So far, Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 2 was the best of the new breed of Marvel "comic book" movies and it had nothing to do with the Avenger films.

I hope The Amazing Spider-Man reboot doesn't fall into the same trap.
post #64 of 463
I also want to see an epic, well written and well acted film even if it is a summer film... I want the action and special effects to serve the story and not the other way around like today's films.

I want my brain somewhat engaged... and I can't stand it when they pander to the ADD crowd.
post #65 of 463
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob305 View Post

superman the movie was made before the mtv audience took over.

I know that many people like the batman begins series, they are good. I dont consider them comic book movies. its too serious and also set in the real world. the reason that I like the burton batman movies is that he made a world where batman could live. I also enjoy the first hulk movie, the spiderman movies. I am not even interested in the new one that much either. I did enjoy the avengers for what it was. it was fun, but not dumb. certainly didnt think that I was insulted or lost some IQ points by watching it. unlike the other crap that is out there (transformers). I am surpise on how successful it was. my other movie this year that I am very interested is the hobbit.

Jacob

They are good thrillers with a guy called Batman in them, they are not great Batman movies tho imho
post #66 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

I'm saying that it made the film seem incomplete as its own stand alone entity and characters were lacking and not very well fleshed out. It's a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth, as in too many characters and too many side stories jammed together... and this happened with The X-Men movies as well.

They knowingly do this so you HAVE to plunk down more money to watch all the other Marvel films to have it make sense. And yes, I've seen all the others and I found them completely lacking.

I know next to nothing about Black Widow and Hawkeye, but that didn't detract from my enjoyment of the movie at all. What fleshing out does Hulk need? As for Captain America, Iron Man, and Thor, it's not a legitimate complaint to say that ONE movie didn't cover their back stories, any more than an Avengers or Justice League comic needs to flesh out all the back stories of the characters.

If you're not interested in these characters, why did you bother to watch the movie?
post #67 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

I know next to nothing about Black Widow and Hawkeye, but that didn't detract from my enjoyment of the movie at all.

Yeah, I also knew next to nothing about Hawkeye and Black Widow going into this movie. I thought the first 20 minutes or so were clunky as they were setting it up and introducing all of them, but then I loved it after that.

I found it remarkable that they managed to work in a character arc for all of the Avengers. This movie actually made me want a Black Widow standalone movie, and that's something I didn't think would be possible after Ironman 2.
post #68 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

If you're not interested in these characters, why did you bother to watch the movie?

Hype!
post #69 of 463
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by benes View Post

I won't disagree with your opinion of the film but this is not a valid criticism. The whole *point* of this series was to establish the characters in their own films and then lead in to a team-up. That is like saying Return of the King or HarryPotter7 Part 2 didn't stand on its own.

Having said that I happen to think the movie worked just fine without any prior knowledge of these characters.

+10000
I hate people saying that there is no character development Iron Man had 4+ hours Cap 2+ Hours and Hulk 4+ hours, BW and NF are meant to be elusive.
post #70 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMe2 View Post

Christopher Reeve was good... but a lot of that Superman movie falls flat except for the Williams score to the movie.

The whole Lex Luthor wants land thing never worked for me... Reeve sold Superman and that + the music made it work...

Superman is one of my favorite movies, but I have always felt the same way about the Lex Luthor stuff. Though Hackman had his moments of charm, the film tended to stall when setting up all the land/Luthor stuff and it never really worked for me either.

For me the power of Superman is mostly in it's 1st 1/2 - the myth-building portions, pretty up to the point were Luthor shows up.
post #71 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

+10000
I hate people saying that there is no character development Iron Man had 4+ hours Cap 2+ Hours and Hulk 4+ hours, BW and NF are meant to be elusive.

This times infinity.
post #72 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

Superman is one of my favorite movies, but I have always felt the same way about the Lex Luthor stuff. Though Hackman had his moments of charm, the film tended to stall when setting up all the land/Luthor stuff and it never really worked for me either.

For me the power of Superman is mostly in it's 1st 1/2 - the myth-building portions, pretty up to the point were Luthor shows up.

Exactly... or if you watch the extended version there are more Brando scenes that got cut.

The helicopter scene was about where the movie "ended" in the sense of being interesting to me. Reeve does a great job at the end of expressing sadness at Lois' "death" but everything in the middle kind of loses me.

I also like Hackman in almost everything else I've seen him in... and he could have been a seriously evil Lex Luthor... but they went for camp instead. I wish we could have gotten a more serious Hackman version of Luthor instead of the camp. The casting wasn't wrong, but the script/plot weren't good enough for the actors involved.

Superman 2 still holds up much better for me over the course of the whole movie, though it has its flaws... as does Superman III. You will note I stopped at III

I liked both of the Burton Batman movies... that series should have ended there.

I also like the 1960s Batman series. Not all movies and not all characters have to be serious all the time to make a good movie. There are different ways of doing it to make it work.

I've posted in other forums about Spider-Man... I like Spider-Man more than most... but have to agree Spider-Man 2 was the best film. But I also add that Spider-Man 3 wasn't as bad as some think it was.

Tobey was a little campy... but the Sandman story was actually pretty solid... the Venom story wasn't bad either... The real problem was trying to do both in the same movie!

If you isolate either Sandman or Venom and don't split the plot... either of those actually works as a pretty solid Spider-Man movie...

The Harry Osborn third plot was also good... and could have worked either with Sandman OR with Venom... but having all 3 going really made for a mess in terms of pacing and involving the audience.

A smarter movie would have been Sandman only with the setup at the end for Harry and the Venom plotline. That way we get to see more reasons for Eddie Brock to hate Spider-Man/Parker than just the one thing.

They could have had Spider-Man with the alien costume going bad for a while and the Sandman story... then Sandman actually parallels with Spidey's redemption as Spidey stops himself from hurting Sandman and lets the Sandman plot resolve itself.

The ending then sets up for Harry to go nuts + Venom in the 4th movie... and the redemption of Harry can go there as Spidey has to deal with two villains that he essentially created from his own personal mistakes.

But I digress.

I'm waiting to see the Avengers when the Blu-ray comes out... but haven't heard anything that makes me think I won't be a fan.
post #73 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

I also want to see an epic, well written and well acted film even if it is a summer film... I want the action and special effects to serve the story and not the other way around like today's films.

Luckily, that's exactly what The Avengers is: an epic well written well acted summer film with action and special effects that serve the story.
post #74 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMe2 View Post

I'm waiting to see the Avengers when the Blu-ray comes out... but haven't heard anything that makes me think I won't be a fan.

I'm sure you will... But please stop torturing yourself and go! go see it now!
post #75 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by morpheo View Post

luckily, that's exactly what the avengers is: An epic well written well acted summer film with action and special effects that serve the story.

+1
post #76 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

I'm saying that it made the film seem incomplete as its own stand alone entity and characters were lacking and not very well fleshed out. It's a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth, as in too many characters and too many side stories jammed together... and this happened with The X-Men movies as well.

I won't argue with you about the X-Men films - they were all pretty sloppy. I can sort of agree with you about Avengers. You don't HAVE to see the other films to enjoy it, but it does HELP. There were only a few scenes that my dad (68) asked me about, but other than that he followed it well and enjoyed it immensely - he's only seen Iron Man 1. To me, the biggest failing of Avengers is
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
the introduction of the Chitauri or whatever the alien threat is. I don't remember seeing or hearing anything about them in any other film. They also aren't discussed except for vague references to "an army" that Loki intends to bring through a portal. All we find out throughout the movie is that Loki is willing to give them the cube in exchange for ruling Earth. Also, how are Stark and Banner so dumb as to not realize that the arc reactor in Stark Tower will be Loki's jumpstart power source to open the portal?

The film is not without its issues, but for it to be as fun and entertaining as it is under the immense pressure and hype it had to overcome says something about the skills of everyone involved.

Hmm, I wonder if I can get a free Blu-ray for seeing it so many times in the theater?
post #77 of 463
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_danger View Post

I won't argue with you about the X-Men films - they were all pretty sloppy. I can sort of agree with you about Avengers. You don't HAVE to see the other films to enjoy it, but it does HELP. There were only a few scenes that my dad (68) asked me about, but other than that he followed it well and enjoyed it immensely - he's only seen Iron Man 1. To me, the biggest failing of Avengers is
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
the introduction of the Chitauri or whatever the alien threat is. I don't remember seeing or hearing anything about them in any other film. They also aren't discussed except for vague references to "an army" that Loki intends to bring through a portal. All we find out throughout the movie is that Loki is willing to give them the cube in exchange for ruling Earth. Also, how are Stark and Banner so dumb as to not realize that the arc reactor in Stark Tower will be Loki's jumpstart power source to open the portal?

The film is not without its issues, but for it to be as fun and entertaining as it is under the immense pressure and hype it had to overcome says something about the skills of everyone involved.

Hmm, I wonder if I can get a free Blu-ray for seeing it so many times in the theater?

As to the spoiler, did you need all of that signposted? I was happy that the movie ticked along.
They already made a 2:30 movie feel like 90 mins.
post #78 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

As to the spoiler, did you need all of that signposted? I was happy that the movie ticked along.
They already made a 2:30 movie feel like 90 mins.

Other than drinking too much soda and being unable to hold it, you wouldn't know it's 2:30. It's very impressive how snappy the movie feels despite its long runtime. I didn't need my hand held, but I can see how others might think, "who the fsck are these guys?"
post #79 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

But please stop torturing yourself and go! go see it now!

I too was going to wait for the BD, but my wife was insistent we see it (we are ancient geeks; she's 62, I'm 60) on the big screen. First time in a theater since Avatar, which taught me to avoid 3D.

Loved the movie. Maybe a trifle too self-aware, a little too much "winking at the camera" (not literally, of course), but IMO a grand slam by Whedon.

I thought Ruffalo's Banner was very different from Norton's, but that his characterization stood up to being in the same room with the other Avengers better than Norton's would have.

What I didn't love: three feet of image being projected onto the matte at the top of the screen because apparently this AMC has decided to projecto all movies onto a 1:2.0 screen. No hint whatsoever of surround sound. A room full of people narrating their own versions of the story.

I guess I should be happy it was in focus and that I could hear the dialog. That puts this show in the top 10% of my theatrical movie experiences of the last decade.

Mrs. Geek didn't notice, and was happy. So I'm happy, and will wait for September to see and hear the movie properly for the first time.
post #80 of 463
My only criticism is that the Skrull leader that Loki was liaising was a cooler villain than him.
post #81 of 463
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fanboyz View Post

My only criticism is that the Skrull leader that Loki was liaising was a cooler villain than him.

They weren't Skrulls
post #82 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post


They weren't Skrulls

The Shitari Army are Skrulls, that's what they are called in The Ultimates, however their appearance was like the 616 normal. Pointy ears, chins, a love of purple uniforms.
post #83 of 463
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fanboyz View Post

The Shitari are Skrulls, that's what they are called in The Ultimates.

Chitauri and they are kin to the Skrulls but not Skrulls.
Ultimates does not exist it was a fever dream of people with no imagination
post #84 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post


Chitauri and they are kin to the Skrulls nut not Skrulls.
Ultimates does not exist it was a fever dream of people with no imagination

I also hate the Ultimate Universe, but the alien army in the movie looked like Skrulls -in my expert opinion.
post #85 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fanboyz View Post

in my expert opinion.

lol
post #86 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

For Marvel geeks, this movie had an intense interest unlike any of the other flicks.
The fact it was pulled off so well is little short of a miracle.

Agreed. It was a very, very difficult task even to pull off Avengers even slightly; yet they did it extremely well. I also like how it reinforced and gave fair time to each character. All in all, the movie felt like a comic book coming to life (phenomenal CG too) - looking forward to the BD.
post #87 of 463
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

Agreed. It was a very, very difficult task even to pull off Avengers even slightly; yet they did it extremely well. I also like how it reinforced and gave fair time to each character. All in all, the movie felt like a comic book coming to life (phenomenal CG too) - looking forward to the BD.

The CGI was some of the best blended yet, it really had weight to it for the most part.
Also loved the details like the god rays coming from the Iron Man suit in dark areas.
post #88 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdclark View Post

I too was going to wait for the BD, but my wife was insistent we see it (we are ancient geeks; she's 62, I'm 60) on the big screen. First time in a theater since Avatar, which taught me to avoid 3D.

Bad theater experience.

That's a bummer. I'm a decade less ancient of a geek than you, and also made a rare venture out to see this, (might be first since Avatar, can't remember ). Went to the only 2D screen at our mall, and they somehow loaded up the 3D stream for our theater. Only messed up the previews (which was too bad, wanted to see the Prometheus trailer). They managed the actual movie showing more or less comparably. A change for that theater.
post #89 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

The CGI was some of the best blended yet, it really had weight to it for the most part.
Also loved the details like the god rays coming from the Iron Man suit in dark areas.

I was also impressed with the use of atmospheric effects like smoke, contrails, and the lighting and shading of said effects. Just saw it for the fourth time today; went with the whole family. At this point, the only CG "uncanny valley" that stands out each time I see it is when Cap makes the first leap from the exterior catwalk to the circuit control panel. It sticks out like a sore thumb. I give the chitauri animations a pass only because they aren't human and I don't know how they should move.

It was cool to learn that Ferrigno voiced Hulk even though Ruffalo did all the mocap.
post #90 of 463
did not realise this but Avengers comes out here (Australia) on the 29 August 2012.

http://www.ezydvd.com.au/blu-ray/ave...15987/10552965
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Marvel's The Avengers