Badmovies.org Forum

Movies => Good Movies => Topic started by: HappyGilmore on October 11, 2011, 06:54:51 PM



Title: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on October 11, 2011, 06:54:51 PM
So, this was released today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zatgnqdIefs&feature=youtu.be

It's an official 'sneak peek' at the upcoming, long-awaited Avengers film from Marvel Studios.  It features Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, The Hulk, Nick Fury, Hawkeye and Black Widow coming together as a team, seemingly going after Loki.

Marvel's had a couple misses (Fantastic Four 1&2, Spider-Man 3), but I've enjoyed the previous couple of films (Iron Man 1&2, Thor, Hulk, Captain America), and all of them have been leading to this moment. 

I'm wondering how they're gonna have Iron Man and Captain getting along, and by the looks of this, there's potentially some friction.  Also like Stark's comment to Hulk: "Dr. Banner, your work is unparalleled, and I'm especially a fan of how you lose control and turn into an enormous green rage monster."


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: InformationGeek on October 14, 2011, 11:07:30 AM
Dear god, this movie better rock!  After seeing Thor & Captain America, I am more excited than ever to see this movie.  I want it badly to succeed, I really do, but can it do it and live to this insane amount of hype than is surrounding the film?  I hope so; next to The Dark Knight Rises & Battleship (Seriously, I must see that), this is my most anticipated movie to come out next year.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: tracy on October 14, 2011, 02:18:59 PM
I am pumped big time for this movie....what a cast! I just wish Ed Norton was involved.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on October 14, 2011, 05:02:08 PM
The Avengers can't possibly live to the hype, but I hope it does. Lifelong fan, so I won't be disappointed.

Dark Knight Returns looks great so far, but I'm not quite sure it can be as good as Dark Knight.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Mr. DS on October 15, 2011, 06:44:31 AM
I'm sold.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: The Burgomaster on October 15, 2011, 07:49:14 AM
I'm wondering how they're gonna have Iron Man and Captain getting along, and by the looks of this, there's potentially some friction.  

Back in the earlier days of the AVENGERS comic books when I was a kid, Captain America and Hawkeye were the ones that had a lot of friction.  Hawkeye was a loud-talking hot-head and he resented taking orders from Cap.



Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on October 15, 2011, 08:35:59 AM
I'm wondering how they're gonna have Iron Man and Captain getting along, and by the looks of this, there's potentially some friction.  

Back in the earlier days of the AVENGERS comic books when I was a kid, Captain America and Hawkeye were the ones that had a lot of friction.  Hawkeye was a loud-talking hot-head and he resented taking orders from Cap.


Yeah.  Maybe they do that in this movie as well.  Hawkeye wasn't featured much in the footage released.  Could be that Captain is having problems with everyone.  At one point he tells Iron Man: "Take away your suit of armor, what are ya?"


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: The Burgomaster on October 16, 2011, 11:01:49 AM
I always liked the fact that Captain America was the leader of the Avengers even though he was usually the physically weakest (or at least one of the weakest) members of the team.  For instance, Thor could have killed Cap in an instant, yet he always followed Cap into battle and didn't resent him.  Cap was a true leader.  Ah, the good old days . . .



Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Ed, Ego and Superego on October 18, 2011, 03:56:37 PM
This is based more on the Ultimates... The Ultimate Marvel version of the team.  In this Hawkeye is a smaller player but still part of the team in a more covert way.  However he is more interesting to me.  He's more of a "person" (he admits that he feels outgunned by all the superpowered folks) and less of a figure.

Yes, I'm stoked too!

-Ed 


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: WingedSerpent on October 18, 2011, 06:45:03 PM
A must see for me.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on October 18, 2011, 07:04:27 PM
Wondering how much time Hulk'll get in the film.  I'm assuming we'll see more of Downey Jr. and Sam Jackson as they're essentially the 'biggest' stars.  Same for Hawkeye as it's his character's film debut.

Overall, I'm counting down.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Mr. DS on October 18, 2011, 08:17:51 PM
^ I just watched a bio movie on Jeffery Dahmer, the guy playing Hawkeye played Dahmer.  Odd


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on October 18, 2011, 08:21:58 PM
^ I just watched a bio movie on Jeffery Dahmer, the guy playing Hawkeye played Dahmer.  Odd
Ha.   :teddyr:

I find that kinda funny.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: The Burgomaster on October 19, 2011, 01:04:22 PM
Wondering how much time Hulk'll get in the film.  I'm assuming we'll see more of Downey Jr. and Sam Jackson as they're essentially the 'biggest' stars.  Same for Hawkeye as it's his character's film debut.


Not true.  Hawkeye was in THOR!  They just didn't mention his name.



Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on October 19, 2011, 05:07:40 PM
He was in Thor?

Haven't seen it yet. Trying to watch it over the weekend.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: InformationGeek on October 19, 2011, 08:40:56 PM
He was in Thor?

Haven't seen it yet. Trying to watch it over the weekend.

He won't be hard to miss since he is the only guy who uses a bow.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on October 19, 2011, 09:11:47 PM
Wow.

That piece of info passed right by me.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Archivist on October 21, 2011, 10:06:55 PM
Yeah, this is (hopefully) going to rock.  I have been uniformly impressed with Marvel Studio's releases over the last few years, and if this plays out well, it is going to be awesome.  It will so p**s me off if they kill Loki at the end, though.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: tracy on October 22, 2011, 11:43:31 AM
He was in Thor?

Haven't seen it yet. Trying to watch it over the weekend.

He won't be hard to miss since he is the only guy who uses a bow.
My daughter had to point it out to me....she and my husband are the comic experts. :wink:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Jim H on October 24, 2011, 08:50:42 PM
Wow.

That piece of info passed right by me.

It's really minor, and feels a bit shoehorned in (I'm betting it was a late script addition, probably after principle photography finished), but he's there.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on October 24, 2011, 09:01:27 PM
Wow.

That piece of info passed right by me.

It's really minor, and feels a bit shoehorned in (I'm betting it was a late script addition, probably after principle photography finished), but he's there.
I'll have to look when I watch it.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: The Burgomaster on October 25, 2011, 09:27:36 AM
I'm glad they aren't using the "classic" Hawkeye costume . . . the purple thing with the pointy mask.  One of the worst comic hero costumes ever.

(http://www.spinoffonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/hawkeye.jpg)



Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Ed, Ego and Superego on October 25, 2011, 02:51:39 PM
I'm glad they aren't using the "classic" Hawkeye costume . . . the purple thing with the pointy mask.  One of the worst comic hero costumes ever.

([url]http://www.spinoffonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/hawkeye.jpg[/url])



I fully agree, even is the world of Archer Superheores, this is lamer than Green Arrow even!


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: tracy on October 26, 2011, 12:29:16 PM
I'm glad they aren't using the "classic" Hawkeye costume . . . the purple thing with the pointy mask.  One of the worst comic hero costumes ever.

([url]http://www.spinoffonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/hawkeye.jpg[/url])



Thank goodness! That's more than a bit goofy.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Ed, Ego and Superego on November 01, 2011, 05:58:16 PM
(http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/3133/108917-138190-hawkeye_super.jpg)
More like this I do hope.
Whats funny, is out of uniform he wears thick glasses.

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-sDp9eJD9jEE/TefDnhVhVaI/AAAAAAAAAHY/ruIySHhLdGw/s320/kitchen.jpg)
(not a great pic, sorry)
-Ed


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Jim H on November 03, 2011, 11:44:11 AM
I'll always remember Hawkeye as the guy who lit a school or hospital (forget which, it was in the Defenders in the 1970s) on fire in order to divert Ironman.

And that was when he'd already become a good guy.   :teddyr:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on November 03, 2011, 07:35:46 PM
Hawkeye is pretty awesome.

Problem is I want the movie out now. :teddyr:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: The Burgomaster on November 04, 2011, 01:23:56 PM
I have (or had . . . not sure if I sold it on eBay . . . ) the first appearance of Hawkeye when he was a villain way back in TALES OF SUSPENSE in the 1960s.  He's gone through a lot of changes since then.  But he's still going strong considering in "real years" he'd probably be about 70 years old now.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on November 04, 2011, 05:23:52 PM
That always kills me in the comics.

Spider-man was an 18 year old back in '62...should be around 68 now. They age a few years here and there, then reboots back to the origin years.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Doggett on November 04, 2011, 10:52:44 PM
Wherever the Hulk goes, I go.
So, yep, count me in!


 :cheers:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Jim H on November 06, 2011, 04:39:03 PM
That always kills me in the comics.

Spider-man was an 18 year old back in '62...should be around 68 now. They age a few years here and there, then reboots back to the origin years.

That was one of the fascinating things about the Punisher - he aged correctly, meaning he was a highly skilled 60 something human towards the end.  Frankencastle isn't the same thing though.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on November 06, 2011, 11:15:55 PM
That always kills me in the comics.

Spider-man was an 18 year old back in '62...should be around 68 now. They age a few years here and there, then reboots back to the origin years.

That was one of the fascinating things about the Punisher - he aged correctly, meaning he was a highly skilled 60 something human towards the end.  Frankencastle isn't the same thing though.
Never really read Punisher...he did age?  That's pretty cool.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: The Burgomaster on November 07, 2011, 03:43:13 PM
Peter Parker aged for awhile.  In the first few Spider-Man stories, he was a goofy teenager in high school.  Then he grew into a college-aged guy.  50 years later, he still seems to be in his 20s.



Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on November 08, 2011, 09:01:13 AM
I recall a point where Peter Parker seemed to be in his mid 30s or so and...not sure, but Aunt May died.  Then it was revealed at another point that Peter wasn't Peter, but was in fact his clone, Ben Reilly, and had a somewhat updated costume.  Then Peter came back and Reilly left. 


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: The Burgomaster on November 08, 2011, 09:30:39 AM
I recall a point where Peter Parker seemed to be in his mid 30s or so and...not sure, but Aunt May died.  Then it was revealed at another point that Peter wasn't Peter, but was in fact his clone, Ben Reilly, and had a somewhat updated costume.  Then Peter came back and Reilly left. 

I was out of touch with comics when a lot of this stuff happened.   :bluesad:

 


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on November 08, 2011, 01:13:33 PM
It was pretty sweet. It had been about five years since he had been cloned and most forgot. I think Marvel wanted to boost sales and toys, so when the costume came in they said he was the clone. Peter had a kid with MJ and moved to Connecticut.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Archivist on April 25, 2012, 04:21:04 AM
We pre-bought tickets for today, the official release date in Australia, which coincided with Anzac Day.  Movies normally open on Thursdays, but probably for reasons of a public holiday, The Avengers opened on a Wednesday here.  My cousin was one of the lucky ones who got to see a preview screening of The Avengers two weeks before it opened here, as he was one of the winners of a Facebook ticket giveaway competition, but he was made to sign a non-disclosure agreement and could not tell me anything!  Not that I wanted to know anything, anyway, as I wanted it to be as fresh as I could get it.

I will not reveal anything about the plot, but I will say that I was very, very impressed.

All main characters are given strong representation throughout the movie.  Each one of them gets to show their personality, both of the character and the way the actor plays them.  

Loki is much darker than in Thor, although I found him a little more one dimensional than his first movie.  If Tom Hiddleston comes back as Loki in a future movie, I would love to see him explore more of his sense of desertion and perceived betrayal, and a bit less of the grandiose mania. It's great to see Chris Hemsworth's Thor again.  He's has less of the swagger but more 'solidity' to the role, if that makes sense.  I would have liked to have seen some more swagger, though.  That part of Thor was tres cool.

Captain America is less innocent than in his movie, and is striving to catch up with the modern world.  Cap assumes something of a leadership role at many stages of the movie, which is as I remember in the comics.

Black Widow is played less for looks, as she was in Iron Man 2, and much more for character, intelligence and physicality, which I thought was great.  Hawkeye's character made me think of something from Alias!  Not kidding!  His archery rig is very impressive and smoothly integrated into the actions scenes, rather than made to stand out.

The biggest surprise for me was how Ruffalo handled Bruce Banner.  I think he had the most interesting character of the lot.  He did it with a kind of modesty and near-shyness, like he was afraid of touching things lest they make him blow up!

Samuel Jackson's character was interestingly low-key compared with everyone else.  Kind of like Mace Windu in the Star Wars movies in terms of screen time and involvement.

The special effects and fight scenes were spectacular.  The Hulk going nuts was awesome.  I've never been a fan of the Hulk, not in the comics nor in movies, but this portrayal of Banner/Hulk was both convincing and exciting.  The Hulk is actually scary.  And there is a lot of humor in the movie, often at times and from characters from whom you would not expect it.  Watch out for Agent Coulson and Captain America.  The audience laughed a lot at those scenes.  And there is one scene involving Loki toward the end that had the audience in absolute stitches.

And I am really, really impressed with how Joss Whedon handled such a large scale production with an ensemble cast.  There are obvious limitations with how much character development or even screen time each character can get in a movie with so many 'stars', and Joss did incredibly well to show them as they are, as well as give fans of each what they wanted.  I'm also very impressed that he's helmed one of the most anticipated movies of the year.  Apart from The Dark Knight Rises and Prometheus, I cannot think of anything else this year that has had this kind of eager attention prior to launch.

DEFINITELY go see this movie in the cinema.  It is big, loud and fast, and will benefit most from big-screen viewing.  Don't wait for the DVD or blu-ray.  Go see it in the theatre.  :thumbup:

Edited to add: unlike the other recent Marvel movies, this one departs from the usual practice of having a vignette after the credits have concluded.  There is, however, a vignette after the first section of the end credits.  We stayed all the way to the end, just in case they showed something else, but there was nothing.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: dean on April 25, 2012, 08:40:54 AM

^ As above, a very solid movie and Whedon's history as a Marvel writer shone through as he was able to really give it the comic-Avengers feel but well adapted to the movie-Avengers universe.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: tracy on April 25, 2012, 12:08:16 PM

^ As above, a very solid movie and Whedon's history as a Marvel writer shone through as he was able to really give it the comic-Avengers feel but well adapted to the movie-Avengers universe.
Hot dog! :wink:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Archivist on April 26, 2012, 02:48:54 AM
The reports of the first day's takings are coming in.  The Avengers had the second highest opening day box office earnings of any movie in Australia, EVER.

http://www.deadline.com/2012/04/marvels-the-avengers-breaking-records-overseas-already-after-todays-early-release/

I spoke to someone who said that she tried getting tickets but sessions were sold out all over the place.  Someone else said that larger cinema complexes were actually cancelling other movies so they could screen The Avengers instead!  As they were standing in line, the electronic schedule signs blinked, three movies disappeared, and three more cinemas opened up with The Avengers.  I've been told that by lunchtime, the larger cinemas were so packed that the lines spilled out through the shopping centres and into the streets!

I am so happy for Marvel that one of their movies has had this kind of response.  Who ever thought that a superhero movie would be so widely anticipated and seen?  I'll bet that the investment group that put all that money into Marvel are clapping right now, too!

Go, Marvel!  Go, Joss Whedon!

It does make me wonder what is going to happen when The Dark Knight Rises opens!  That is the only movie I can think of that has had such long and eager anticipation.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on April 26, 2012, 06:39:27 AM
I've watched some trailers online again, recently.

This movie CAN'T suck from what I've seen.  I've been waiting since I was a kid for a live-action Avengers flick, and after getting a few Iron Man flicks, Captain America, Hulk and Thor...ahhh. :twirl:

I'm just glad it's getting released now, cause I have a huge feeling that Dark Knight Rises will completely TROUNCE it when it comes out later this summer.

That's one I'm waiting for as well.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Archivist on April 26, 2012, 07:26:46 AM
One suburban cinema complex that I sometimes visit has 14+ screens.  This Saturday they are screening 14 sessions of The Avengers 3D and at least 12 sessions of the 2D version.  At least three pairs of sessions start at the same time, so you'll get two sessions of The Avengers starting at 2pm, for example.  This is insane, that's up to 24 screenings of one movie in a single day.  I'm just glad we got tickets early and went to a little independent cinema.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Archivist on May 02, 2012, 01:50:50 AM
A friend pointed out something very funny and quite unexpected today.  He said that when he saw the posters for The Avengers, he saw almost every period of history represented.

Hulk = caveman / neanderthal man
Thor = Viking era / barbarian times
Hawkeye = bow and arrow = primitive tribes -> iron age
Cap America = shield = medieval knights
Black Widow = modern firearms age
Iron Man = space age / the future

I had never thought of it that way, but he is right!


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on May 04, 2012, 05:48:11 PM
Hawkeye's character made me think of something from Alias!  Not kidding!  His archery rig is very impressive and smoothly integrated into the actions scenes, rather than made to stand out.

The biggest surprise for me was how Ruffalo handled Bruce Banner.  I think he had the most interesting character of the lot.  He did it with a kind of modesty and near-shyness, like he was afraid of touching things lest they make him blow up!


The special effects and fight scenes were spectacular.  The Hulk going nuts was awesome.  I've never been a fan of the Hulk, not in the comics nor in movies, but this portrayal of Banner/Hulk was both convincing and exciting.  The Hulk is actually scary.  And there is a lot of humor in the movie, often at times and from characters from whom you would not expect it.  Watch out for Agent Coulson and Captain America.  The audience laughed a lot at those scenes.  And there is one scene involving Loki toward the end that had the audience in absolute stitches.

I'm off to see this tonight.  In about twenty minutes I'm leaving actually. 

I'm excited to see this.  Big fan of Hawkeye, so that should be interesting.  He was played well in the film?

As for the Hulk...personally he's my favorite of the Marvel characters.  I'm a big fan of the comics, and loved the '70s Bixby show.  The '03 film by Ang Lee didn't appeal much, although I did like the one starring Ed Norton.  I heard recently that Mark Ruffalo was actually signed to a multi-film deal recently for The Hulk.  Not sure if they're doing very many solo-Hulk films, but I'm assuming that he'll play into a likely Avengers sequel, as well as potentially future sequels for Iron Man, Captain America or Thor.  If response to The Avengers is good, I could see Hulk getting one more shot at a feature, although longtime fans may be let down, as they might give it another 'reboot' instead of just carrying on from the last one in '08 despite a cast change.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: trekgeezer on May 04, 2012, 07:37:13 PM
Saw it this afternoon, it was great!   It's very fun movie and all the characters get their due.   I think the character that was the most surprising is Mark Ruffalo  as Banner /Hulk.      I think this was the best portrayal of the big guy.

It really is a good movie, has the right amount of laughter and there was even applause at the end.

I may go see it again.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on May 04, 2012, 10:50:35 PM
I LOVED it. Should be seeing it again soon, maybe next weekend.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: tracy on May 05, 2012, 10:55:14 AM
We all went to see it yesterday....LOVED IT! And as in all Marvel films,stay through the credits.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: A_Dubya on May 05, 2012, 01:25:22 PM
I LOVED this movie. I am definitely picking up the blu-ray.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: A_Dubya on May 05, 2012, 01:33:06 PM
I also just want to add how much I loved the relationship and character development between Banner/Hulk and Stark/Iron Man throughout the second half of the film. Purely awesome storytelling and continuity I can appreciate.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: The Burgomaster on May 06, 2012, 08:22:26 AM
I thought the first half of the movie was pretty good, but the second half was great.  I will try to see it again in the theater and will definitely buy the 3-D blu-ray when it gets released.

 


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Silverlady on May 07, 2012, 07:45:30 AM


Loved it!   :teddyr:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Zapranoth on May 07, 2012, 11:28:25 PM
How do you do the spoilers thing?


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Rev. Powell on May 08, 2012, 05:28:01 PM
I'll be the stick in the mud here. From the chatter I was expecting something fantastic and game-changing in the superhero genre. I got something well-done but predicable, relying on action sequences. It might have helped if I'd seen any of the previous movies, but honestly the only character here that was interesting enough for me to want to spend 1.5 hours with was Iron Man (well, I guess I could look at Black Widow for 90 minutes). It all felt very slick, soulless and over-marketed to me. Honestly, I'm afraid I don't get it, but then again I'm not a fan of any superheroes besides Batman. 3/5 stars.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Zapranoth on May 08, 2012, 11:19:04 PM
I'll be the stick in the mud here. From the chatter I was expecting something fantastic and game-changing in the superhero genre. I got something well-done but predicable, relying on action sequences. It might have helped if I'd seen any of the previous movies, but honestly the only character here that was interesting enough for me to want to spend 1.5 hours with was Iron Man (well, I guess I could look at Black Widow for 90 minutes). It all felt very slick, soulless and over-marketed to me. Honestly, I'm afraid I don't get it, but then again I'm not a fan of any superheroes besides Batman. 3/5 stars.


I'll permit you to be wrong three times per calendar year, Rev.  So you've used up one and it's early May now.   Watch yourself.
And... I've been saving this one, I'm so appalled no one else had posted it yet:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8Ow1nlafOg


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on May 08, 2012, 11:22:03 PM
I'll be the stick in the mud here. From the chatter I was expecting something fantastic and game-changing in the superhero genre. I got something well-done but predicable, relying on action sequences. It might have helped if I'd seen any of the previous movies, but honestly the only character here that was interesting enough for me to want to spend 1.5 hours with was Iron Man (well, I guess I could look at Black Widow for 90 minutes). It all felt very slick, soulless and over-marketed to me. Honestly, I'm afraid I don't get it, but then again I'm not a fan of any superheroes besides Batman. 3/5 stars.
I can understand that to a degree, and can't really argue.  Black Widow should be getting a spinoff film soon.  Iron Man is probably the most thought out character of the bunch, but he's already had Iron Man 1&2.  Not sure if you saw them, but they're worth it.  Downey Jr. is great in the role.

Personally I'm looking forward to Dark Knight Rises, out later this summer.  Huge Batman fan myself.  Granted, Batman is one of two DC books I read...big Marvel fan here.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Jim H on May 09, 2012, 12:32:47 AM
I'll be the stick in the mud here. From the chatter I was expecting something fantastic and game-changing in the superhero genre. I got something well-done but predicable, relying on action sequences. It might have helped if I'd seen any of the previous movies, but honestly the only character here that was interesting enough for me to want to spend 1.5 hours with was Iron Man (well, I guess I could look at Black Widow for 90 minutes). It all felt very slick, soulless and over-marketed to me. Honestly, I'm afraid I don't get it, but then again I'm not a fan of any superheroes besides Batman. 3/5 stars.

It's just very enjoyable and generally very true to the comics.  So the fans and general public will love it.  I can understand your complaints.

That said, I quite enjoyed it.  Solid characterizations, very good acting, and good action sequences. 

Also, for those not in the know (major post-credit reveal spoiler)

***SPOILERS***



Thanos, the villain revealed during the credits, is in love with Death in the comics (who's personified by a female avatar in the Marvelverse).  I was fairly surprised to hear a line like that, as it doesn't have nearly the same meaning to non-comics fans. 



***END***



Also, there is a second scene for most markets at the VERY end of the credits.  So stick around for that.

Overall, an 8/10.  I'd say this is just barely the best of the Marvel films, edging out Iron Man (which I like, but not as much as many others do). 


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Ted C on May 09, 2012, 12:50:48 PM
I was fairly surprised to hear a line like that, as it doesn't have nearly the same meaning to non-comics fans. 

Ah, but now all the non-Marvel fans will be asking the Marvel fans "Who the hell was that guy in the stinger?" and generating buzz for the next movie. Useful marketing ploy, actually.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Saucerman on May 11, 2012, 04:19:31 PM
I loved it.  I'm not a huge comics fan, I'm on-and-off with them and tend to favor Dark Horse over either Marvel or DC, but I've been really enjoying the last few years' worth of Marvel movies, much more so than the DC films (I enjoyed Batman Begins, but I was sort of meh towards the Dark Knight.  Additionally, DC's animated features have been better than Marvel's animated features, but I digress). 

The Avengers gave me everything I could ask for from a superhero movie, and then some.  But the real highlight for me were the scenes emphasizing the heroics of the ordinary man.  When Loki's in Germany and commands the crowd to kneel, and the elderly man refuses.  When Agent Coulson knows he's severely outmatched, but places himself between Loki and the rest of SHIELD regardless.  Those scenes, more than anything with Cap, Iron Man, the Hulk, etc., made my heart pound. 


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: tracy on May 12, 2012, 11:53:51 AM
Went to see it again yesterday....this time in 3D. Must admit that not only did it not add to my enjoyment of the film but at times it was actually annoying..Plus I realized that after the film I had a pretty good headache. I've come to the conclusion that I do not need 3D to see a movie.....call me old fashioned like Captain America. :teddyr:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Zapranoth on May 13, 2012, 01:19:33 AM
Yeah, I don't do 3D movies either for the most part.  It was helpful in Avatar.  But I have seen the Avengers 3 times now, just regular 2D.  :)    I get a sense of visual strain watching them in 3D as well.  Same for my wife, so that makes it simple.

That scene between Loki and the Hulk... that never, never, ever gets old.     :thumbup:  I'd say more but I don't remember how to hide a line as a spoiler.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Archivist on May 14, 2012, 06:11:32 AM
I've seen in twice now, once in 2D and once on a larger screen in 3D.  The second time around it is even better.  I didn't mind the 3D at all, I thought it was very well done.  I am so buying this movie when it comes out on blu-ray.

I am interested in the final scene that is being shown at the very end of the credits, because when I saw it (Australian version) we stayed all the way to the end until the lights came on and the curtains were drawn, and didn't see a thing.  Is that the scene to do with shawarma or whatever it is called?

It is quite thrilling to see that this movie has already brought in over USD$200m, which is more than Iron Man made in its entire cinematic run.  DVD and blu-ray sales are going to be massive.  It is said that at this rate it will beat Avatar's takings, and I cannot think of another movie that I would like to see beat Avatar.  Fingers crossed for the team to smash Pandora!  Take that, cliched movie-maker!


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Pacman000 on May 14, 2012, 11:05:16 AM
I saw it Friday, in 2D.  :thumbup:

So you want to know about the scene after the credits? O.K.

SPOILERS
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not much happens; the Avengers are at a fast food place eating burgers. They don't talk. They don't do any thing cool.  They don't set up the next movie.  They just sit around eating until the screen goes black.  Surprisingly, it wasn't a letdown; it was kinda funny. 


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: The Burgomaster on May 14, 2012, 11:15:49 AM
I saw it Friday, in 2D.  :thumbup:

So you want to know about the scene after the credits? O.K.

SPOILERS
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not much happens; the Avengers are at a fast food place eating burgers. They don't talk. They don't do any thing cool.  They don't set up the next movie.  They just sit around eating until the screen goes black.  Surprisingly, it wasn't a letdown; it was kinda funny. 

This is not the same after-the-credit sequence I saw.  The one I saw DOES set up the next movie.





Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: tracy on May 14, 2012, 12:45:39 PM
Yeah, I don't do 3D movies either for the most part.  It was helpful in Avatar.  But I have seen the Avengers 3 times now, just regular 2D.  :)    I get a sense of visual strain watching them in 3D as well.  Same for my wife, so that makes it simple.

That scene between Loki and the Hulk... that never, never, ever gets old.     :thumbup:  I'd say more but I don't remember how to hide a line as a spoiler.
That's so true....that scene is awesome! :wink:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Pacman000 on May 14, 2012, 01:33:52 PM
I saw it Friday, in 2D.  :thumbup:

So you want to know about the scene after the credits? O.K.

SPOILERS
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not much happens; the Avengers are at a fast food place eating burgers. They don't talk. They don't do any thing cool.  They don't set up the next movie.  They just sit around eating until the screen goes black.  Surprisingly, it wasn't a letdown; it was kinda funny. 

This is not the same after-the-credit sequence I saw.  The one I saw DOES set up the next movie.




There was a scene midway through the credits, which was more significant.  Could that be the scent your thinking about?


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: SynapticBoomstick on May 14, 2012, 04:06:40 PM
I saw it Friday, in 2D.  :thumbup:

So you want to know about the scene after the credits? O.K.

SPOILERS
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not much happens; the Avengers are at a fast food place eating burgers. They don't talk. They don't do any thing cool.  They don't set up the next movie.  They just sit around eating until the screen goes black.  Surprisingly, it wasn't a letdown; it was kinda funny. 

They're eating shwarma. :tongueout:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on May 14, 2012, 05:48:37 PM
Yeah, the very final scene, they're eating shwarma, as by their disgusted faces.

The 'mid-credits' scene sets up the next couple films.

Interestingly enough...people in the theater I was in walked out scratching their heads not knowing who it was...


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Zapranoth on May 14, 2012, 11:57:56 PM
Yeah, the very final scene, they're eating shwarma, as by their disgusted faces.

The 'mid-credits' scene sets up the next couple films.

Interestingly enough...people in the theater I was in walked out scratching their heads not knowing who it was...

If you read a couple of comics but not the right ones, you'd wonder if that were a Skrull at the end.

But it's pretty understandable that a fair number of people wouldn't recognize him.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: dean on May 15, 2012, 03:38:02 AM
Yeah, the very final scene, they're eating shwarma, as by their disgusted faces.

The 'mid-credits' scene sets up the next couple films.

Interestingly enough...people in the theater I was in walked out scratching their heads not knowing who it was...

If you read a couple of comics but not the right ones, you'd wonder if that were a Skrull at the end.

But it's pretty understandable that a fair number of people wouldn't recognize him.

Funnily enough I was hoping the 'aliens' in the trailer would be Skrulls rather than that other group they used [it sets up more tension later] but I was informed by a friend that Fox has the rights to the Skrulls since they have the Fantastic Four franchise rights still, so it may be a while until we see the Skrulls in action in a Marvel produced picture.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Ted C on May 15, 2012, 08:44:55 AM
Interestingly enough...people in the theater I was in walked out scratching their heads not knowing who it was...

The buzz will be created by them having to ask all their nerd friends who the hell that was. Brilliant marketing!


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: The Burgomaster on May 15, 2012, 10:20:21 AM
Yeah, the very final scene, they're eating shwarma, as by their disgusted faces.

The 'mid-credits' scene sets up the next couple films.

Interestingly enough...people in the theater I was in walked out scratching their heads not knowing who it was...

If you read a couple of comics but not the right ones, you'd wonder if that were a Skrull at the end.

But it's pretty understandable that a fair number of people wouldn't recognize him.

Funnily enough I was hoping the 'aliens' in the trailer would be Skrulls rather than that other group they used [it sets up more tension later] but I was informed by a friend that Fox has the rights to the Skrulls since they have the Fantastic Four franchise rights still, so it may be a while until we see the Skrulls in action in a Marvel produced picture.

That doesn't bode well for a Captain Marvel movie . . .  :bluesad:



Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: tracy on May 15, 2012, 12:30:22 PM
Yeah, the very final scene, they're eating shwarma, as by their disgusted faces.

The 'mid-credits' scene sets up the next couple films.

Interestingly enough...people in the theater I was in walked out scratching their heads not knowing who it was...
I was lucky...I had my daughter and husband with me and they're the experts on who is who in Marvel. :wink:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: ChaosTheory on May 15, 2012, 04:57:07 PM
Yeah, the very final scene, they're eating shwarma, as by their disgusted faces.

The 'mid-credits' scene sets up the next couple films.

Interestingly enough...people in the theater I was in walked out scratching their heads not knowing who it was...

If you read a couple of comics but not the right ones, you'd wonder if that were a Skrull at the end.

But it's pretty understandable that a fair number of people wouldn't recognize him.

Yeah, I didn't get a very good look but, if it's who I think it is, I can see how it would cause some confusion.  Potentially exciting setup though.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Archivist on May 16, 2012, 10:55:39 PM
After that end scene, I turned to the stranger sitting next to me and said, "That's Apocalypse ... I think ..."

While I didn't get the name right, I knew the connections.  I'm hoping that in the sequel the gloves come off for a gem of a story. ;)


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Zapranoth on May 17, 2012, 11:57:08 PM
Urgh.  I didn't read Infinity Gauntlet, but was that any good?  if so will have to snag a copy.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Ted C on May 18, 2012, 04:23:42 PM
Urgh.  I didn't read Infinity Gauntlet, but was that any good?  if so will have to snag a copy.
Pretty standard "villain acquires all-powerful superweapon and must be stopped" sort of thing. Marvel's been doing it for years, starting with the Cosmic Cube.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: BoyScoutKevin on May 27, 2012, 01:44:20 PM
What interests me about this film is not the artistic side, but the business side of the film. And while Paramount, along with Marvel, is the production company on this, I never hear it refered to as a Paramount picture, but as a Disney film, as in "This is the highest grossing film from the Walt Disney Company, surpassing the old record held by 'The Lion King,'" even though Disney is only the distributor, though, the worldwide distributor. Of course, Marvel is a subsidiary of the Walt Disney Company, so Disney may be raking in the money with both hands. Both through the production side and the distribution side.

"How much dough to go?"

The last figure I saw was $1,200,000,000 at the box office. Not only surpassing "The Lion King," but also surpassing "The Dark Knight," which would make "The Avengers" the top grossing superhero film of all time, so far. It is also expected to surpass at the box office "Star Wars: Episode IV" and "Star Wars: Episode I." And people are not betting against it surpassing both "Avatar' and/or "The Titanic," which are the two top grossing films at the box office.

The Oscars

Another surprise for me is not only how well it is doing among audiences, but also how well it is doing among the critics. One of the few recent films to appeal to both groups.
So, we will have to see what "Oscar worthy" films come out at the end of the year, but I can see, with all the films that can be nominated for Best Picture, there is an outside chance that "The Avengers" will be nominated for Best Picture. And while the cast is too much of  an ensemble for any actor to be nominated for an Oscar, there is the possibility that Joss Whedon will be nominated for Best Director as alot of people hold the success of the film to the director. And, of course, there are all the technical Oscars.

I have alot of free time on Memorial Day, so I may go see it then.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: indianasmith on May 27, 2012, 01:58:11 PM
I saw this over the weekend and loved it!!


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on May 27, 2012, 03:27:50 PM
A lot of critics are praising Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner/Hulk.

Unfortunately, as an ensemble, you can't focus on one guy. But if he gets his own Hulk film he could get a nomination.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on May 28, 2012, 02:13:53 PM
So, Men in Black 3 knocked The Avengers down to number 2 after close to a month at 1.

I can see Avengers staying in the top 5 for a bit, but with school letting out soon and a ton of movies coming, how much longer will it bring in cash?

By all accounts, it's surpassed The Dark Knight as the highest grossing 'comic book film' and is likely to be in the top 3 highest grossing films, ever.

Dark Knight Rises has a LOT to live up to. The Dark Knight was amazing, had so much press, awards, and Avengers comes in, makes more in seemingly less time.

DC/Warner Bros. may be disappointed if comparing receipts.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: ulthar on May 28, 2012, 11:56:36 PM
Saw it today and have two words:

Holy Crap.

Let's add three more:

Joss Whedon Rules!

That dude knows how to make a movie.  It is my fervent hope that he continues with successes like these and makes enough money to buy Fox, renaming it to The Firefly Network.

What an awesome movie.   It fulfilled exactly what I want a movie like this to be:  FUN!

Even with all I've heard about it, with expectations high, it delivered.  How often does THAT happen?


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on May 29, 2012, 07:38:45 PM
Rarely do they deliver, sir.

I had high expectations as a longtime fan of both Avengers and Whedon. But, a part of me felt that, possibly, it'd fail to deliver.

I'm so glad it did.

Only thing is...the sequel.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: SynapticBoomstick on June 01, 2012, 02:09:36 AM
5 Best Points about Avengers:

1. Thor making several sudden stage exits.
2. Any scene wherein Stark acts like a d!ck.
3. Thor and Hulk going Deathwing on the back of the space whale. (Warcraft ref)
4. "I watched you while you slept."
5. "Puny god."


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Kaseykockroach on June 01, 2012, 02:04:58 PM
I had to be out of the house for a few hours yesterday, and I found myself at our classiest local multiplex, watching The Battle of the Visual Effects Houses—I'm sorry, I mean The Avengers—in the company of exactly two other moviegoers. After watching this very expensive, very loud, very long, and ultimately very boring spectacle, I wondered how best to express my opinion of it.
I was made most aware of just how noisy and empty The Avengers is at precisely those moments when it tries to be a little more than noisy and empty. As when Iron Man and Captain America are chewing on each other, and especially when the No. 2 man to Nick Fury is murdered by the villain, Loki. I could tell that we in the audience were supposed to feel something when this man—what was his name? Colson? Carlson? Carbuncle?—was skewered, but I felt only mild disappointment that he had not turned out to be a mole in the service of the bad guys. It's hard to feel anything when what you're watching is so obviously a precision-tooled industrial product that can be called a "movie" only because a comparably compact and far more accurate descriptive noun is considered rude in polite company.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Zapranoth on June 01, 2012, 10:56:25 PM
Since I don't know you at all Kasey, I'll give you FOUR times to be completely wrong per calendar year.  (I gave the Rev only 3 because that's all he deserves, and you get the benefit of a doubt.)   :cheers:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Rev. Powell on June 02, 2012, 06:52:46 AM
Since I don't know you at all Kasey, I'll give you FOUR times to be completely wrong per calendar year.  (I gave the Rev only 3 because that's all he deserves, and you get the benefit of a doubt.)   :cheers:

Heck, I probably only really deserve two chances. Thanks for the extra pass!


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: ChaosTheory on June 03, 2012, 03:06:14 PM
The Good -
Tony Stark  being cocky and hot and awesome
The Thor/Hulk throwdown
Mark Ruffalo was great as Banner
Banner and Black Widow were both written considerably better than in their last appearances

The Bad -
Hawkeye continues to be lame
Thor and Loki felt really underwritten compared to the THOR movie
Thanks for killing my second favorite character in the series, Whedon. Jagoff.
Konk on the head, really??
While Selvig was brainwashed he magically installed a magic self-destruct button on the Tesseract that the Goddammed Trickster God magically doesn't know about.   Yeah.......

So, basically I liked everything but the plot.
8/10


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: ulthar on June 03, 2012, 11:49:45 PM
I had to be out of the house for a few hours yesterday, and I found myself at our classiest local multiplex, watching The Battle of the Visual Effects Houses—I'm sorry, I mean The Avengers—in the company of exactly two other moviegoers. After watching this very expensive, very loud, very long, and ultimately very boring spectacle, I wondered how best to express my opinion of it.
I was made most aware of just how noisy and empty The Avengers is at precisely those moments when it tries to be a little more than noisy and empty. As when Iron Man and Captain America are chewing on each other, and especially when the No. 2 man to Nick Fury is murdered by the villain, Loki. I could tell that we in the audience were supposed to feel something when this man—what was his name? Colson? Carlson? Carbuncle?—was skewered, but I felt only mild disappointment that he had not turned out to be a mole in the service of the bad guys. It's hard to feel anything when what you're watching is so obviously a precision-tooled industrial product that can be called a "movie" only because a comparably compact and far more accurate descriptive noun is considered rude in polite company.

The movie was fun.  I liked it, my wife liked it and my two children liked it. We laughed, we cheered, we got lost in the moment for a couple of hours.

You didn't like it?  Fine.  Cool.  No problem.

Technical issues or otherwise above-it-all criticism of a popcorn flick?  Who cares about that crap.  It's a movie based on a comic book.  It's supposed to be over-the-top.

This movie succeeds at being what it's supposed to be.  If only more movies were so humble...


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Zapranoth on June 04, 2012, 09:40:38 PM
A good friend pointed out that the second-favorite character who is thought to be dead may not be dead.

It would be possible that he isn't dead, given the way Fury lies and given the way comic books storylines twist.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Hammock Rider on June 05, 2012, 03:40:25 PM
I thought it was a blast. It was just what I wanted. They were true to the characters and it was fun. What more could you ask?

My nephew can't decide whether to be Cap or Shellhead for Halloween. Two of my nieces want to be Black Widow( She kicks those bad guys butts!) and the little baby girl wants to be the Hulk. As an uncle I'd say it was a good day's work.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on June 05, 2012, 07:03:01 PM
A good friend pointed out that the second-favorite character who is thought to be dead may not be dead.

It would be possible that he isn't dead, given the way Fury lies and given the way comic books storylines twist.
I could've sworn I saw him walking on the HelliCarrier towards the end.

And, those cards were from the locker, not on him.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: ChaosTheory on June 06, 2012, 10:55:51 AM
A good friend pointed out that the second-favorite character who is thought to be dead may not be dead.

It would be possible that he isn't dead, given the way Fury lies and given the way comic books storylines twist.

Urgh.  That just makes it that much more stupid.   Killing him to unite the team was already a really dodgy premise given that the only characters he has any established rapport with are Stark and Fury. The whole thing just came off as a forced Whedon trope.

Okay, I'll stop obsessing over it now.   :tongueout:  I honestly did enjoy this movie for the most part.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on June 06, 2012, 04:09:28 PM
Well, not sure if it should go here or not, but Iron Man 3 is in production. Filming started.

Mandarin is involved, as is the organization A.I.M.

Wondering if establishing A.I.M. is to setup the character M.O.D.O.K, who was involved with Captain America, Hulk, and Iron Man.

Considering Avengers success, there's sequels galore for every character.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: BoyScoutKevin on June 06, 2012, 05:51:55 PM
Well, not sure if it should go here or not, but Iron Man 3 is in production. Filming started.

Mandarin is involved, as is the organization A.I.M.

Wondering if establishing A.I.M. is to setup the character M.O.D.O.K, who was involved with Captain America, Hulk, and Iron Man.

Considering Avengers success, there's sequels galore for every character.

And for the other Marvel characters.

Rumour has it, that Black Panther is to star in his own stand-alone film. Sometime in 2014
or more likely 2015.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on June 06, 2012, 07:15:55 PM
Heard about Black Panther this morning on the radio.

The dj's, however, hadn't heard of the character.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Pacman000 on June 07, 2012, 05:12:58 PM
Quote
I had to be out of the house for a few hours yesterday, and I found myself at our classiest local multiplex, watching The Battle of the Visual Effects Houses

Really!? Where is that playing, and what visual FX houses are battling?  I might be interested if it's ILM vs. Apogee.  A Viper/X-wing dogfight would be rather cool....


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: tracy on June 09, 2012, 12:21:16 PM
Well, not sure if it should go here or not, but Iron Man 3 is in production. Filming started.

Mandarin is involved, as is the organization A.I.M.

Wondering if establishing A.I.M. is to setup the character M.O.D.O.K, who was involved with Captain America, Hulk, and Iron Man.

Considering Avengers success, there's sequels galore for every character.

And for the other Marvel characters.

Rumour has it, that Black Panther is to star in his own stand-alone film. Sometime in 2014
or more likely 2015.

My daughter,Sarah,will be thrilled....she's a big fan of Black Panther. :wink:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on June 13, 2012, 08:53:51 PM
Well, not sure if it should go here or not, but Iron Man 3 is in production. Filming started.

Mandarin is involved, as is the organization A.I.M.

Wondering if establishing A.I.M. is to setup the character M.O.D.O.K, who was involved with Captain America, Hulk, and Iron Man.

Considering Avengers success, there's sequels galore for every character.

And for the other Marvel characters.

Rumour has it, that Black Panther is to star in his own stand-alone film. Sometime in 2014
or more likely 2015.

My daughter,Sarah,will be thrilled....she's a big fan of Black Panther. :wink:
Should be good.

Fingers crossed.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: BoyScoutKevin on June 17, 2012, 01:37:10 PM
You have asked, and they have responded.

There are already plans for another stand-alone film for Captain America in 2 to 3 years.

While the film is not suppose to be out till 2014 or 2015, it is already creating controversy.
(1) The quality of the script.
(2) The person chosen to direct it.
(3) That unlike the first film, it takes place not in the past, but in the present.

I can see why the first two reasons might create controversy, but the third? It is not like, with "The Avengers" that we have not seen Captain American in the present.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on June 17, 2012, 02:19:51 PM
Who is directing?

Not having seen the first Cap film, when does it take place?


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: BoyScoutKevin on June 17, 2012, 03:03:44 PM
Who is directing?

Not having seen the first Cap film, when does it take place?

It is the brother duo Joe and Anthony Russo. What may be controversial about the choice is that most of their directing gigs have been for TV shows and TV movies. They have--apparently--directed only two theatrical films: "Welcome to Collinwood" and "Pieces." And the last theatrical film they directed was a decade ago.

Frankly, I haven't seen the first Captain American film neither, but I believe it was set during WWII.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Ted C on June 29, 2012, 10:12:27 AM
Yes, the first Captain America movie is a WW2 period piece, but it does end with Cap being frozen in arctic ice and then awakening in the present.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on July 08, 2012, 09:20:04 PM
From what I've been able to gather, The Avengers grossed almost $1.5 Billion, coming in at this number:
$1,452,230,000

Question: Is there a chance that The Dark Knight Rises will equal this?

The Dark Knight grossed a billion or so in '08.  Granted, there was the hype about The Joker as well as Heath Ledger's death.  Will a 4 year wait in between movies hurt it?

I'm waiting patiently for it as a Bat-fan, but I don't hear as much 'hype' like the last one.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: BoyScoutKevin on July 09, 2012, 04:41:04 PM
From what I've been able to gather, The Avengers grossed almost $1.5 Billion, coming in at this number:
$1,452,230,000

Question: Is there a chance that The Dark Knight Rises will equal this?

The Dark Knight grossed a billion or so in '08.  Granted, there was the hype about The Joker as well as Heath Ledger's death.  Will a 4 year wait in between movies hurt it?

I'm waiting patiently for it as a Bat-fan, but I don't hear as much 'hype' like the last one.

That is an interesting question.

I do know that "The Avengers" is already the third highest grossing film of all time. Behind only "Avatar" and "Titanic." Whether "The Dark Knight Rises" will reach those rarified heights is anybody's guess. Though, I do know people were already crunching the boxoffice numbers before either film was released to the general public, and while "The Dark Knight Rises" was expected to do well, it was not expected to do as well as "The Avengers." And I have seen nothing since, that changes my mind.

If anything hurts "The Dark Knight Rises," I don't think it will be the timelag between the films, but the films' villains. The Joker being a more popular villain in the last film than Bane in this film. Though, I do give props to the filmmakers for trying someone new as the villain. But, we will see what we will see.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on July 09, 2012, 06:03:21 PM
I am a huge fan of Bane.

However, he's a less popular villain than say Riddler, Joker or Penguin.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Archivist on July 10, 2012, 12:05:54 AM
I only know Bane from the Knightfall sequence; not even sure why I have those issues, maybe I have a graphic novel or something.  The last issue I read had Bane defeated by Azrael posing as a souped-up armoured Batman.

Whether TDKR will do as well as The Avengers is anyone's guess.  Funny that two superhero movies are the most anticipated movies of 2012!  Both movies have well known and acclaimed directors at the helm.  Both have had years of 'prequels', and both have decades of comic reading fans behind them.  The Avengers had the benefit of an overall forward strategy of teasers and connections, whereas the Batman trilogy was never intended to go past the first, according to an interview with Christopher Nolan.  Fortunately, Nolan has a very clever abiility to incorporate previous characters and events into related movies, so they should all gel together in the end.

As for the upcoming Iron Man 3: W. T. F!!! is the idea of casting Ben Kingsley as the Mandarin???  When I think of the Mandarin it is of an extremely fit and agile martial arts master, not exactly easy to played by an actor who is pushing 70!  Sure, stick some makeup on him and he will look Chinese like Peter Sellers in the Fu Manchu movie, or Joel Grey in Remo Williams. But come on!  Ben Kingsley as the Mandarin???  They had better do this right, or they risk spoiling the wonderful winning streak that Marvel Studios has enjoyed for the past several years.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on July 10, 2012, 06:15:49 PM
I have read that both Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul play a part in DKR, so that ties it to Begins.

As far as Iron Man 3: odd choice, yeah, as far as Kingsley. Good actor and all, still.

I did read that IM3 has something to do with A.I.M., so I wonder if that sets up an appearance by M.O.D.O.K in a future Marvel film.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Jim H on July 13, 2012, 12:05:27 PM
I have read that both Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul play a part in DKR, so that ties it to Begins.

As far as Iron Man 3: odd choice, yeah, as far as Kingsley. Good actor and all, still.

I did read that IM3 has something to do with A.I.M., so I wonder if that sets up an appearance by M.O.D.O.K in a future Marvel film.


As much as I'd love it, I really doubt we'll ever see a live-action MODOK.  He's just too ridiculous.  For those who are not comic book fans, here is MODOK:

(http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f232/ninjangulo/modok.jpg)

Yes, he is basically a head with limbs and a rocket sticking out of it.

I also suggest for your reading pleasure MODOK's Eleven, which is basically an Ocean's Eleven type story where MODOK recruits a bunch of seriously C-list (at best) villains to rob one of the most powerful groups in the universe.  It's very amusing.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on July 13, 2012, 06:30:19 PM
MODOK even shows up in Howard The Duck comics a bunch.



Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: El Misfit on July 14, 2012, 12:01:42 AM
MODOK looks like a villain from Megus-XLR, Magnanimous (voiced by Bruce Campbell) the Wiki page said that it could be a reference to MODOK.
I am a huge fan of Bane.

However, he's a less popular villain than say Riddler, Joker or Penguin.
I am a huge fan of Bane as well, but the mask for TDKR looks...a bit stupid, it's not the lucha lebrae(?) mask found in the comics. That's not to say I won't go see it, oh no, I'm going see it! :smile:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Jim H on July 14, 2012, 01:34:18 PM
MODOK looks like a villain from Megus-XLR, Magnanimous (voiced by Bruce Campbell) the Wiki page said that it could be a reference to MODOK.
I am a huge fan of Bane.

However, he's a less popular villain than say Riddler, Joker or Penguin.

I am a huge fan of Bane as well, but the mask for TDKR looks...a bit stupid, it's not the lucha lebrae(?) mask found in the comics. That's not to say I won't go see it, oh no, I'm going see it! :smile:


I'm not a big fan of it, but there's no way we'd get a real lucha libre mask in the Nolan-verse - it's just too out there and silly for its tone.  More disappointing than the mask is the rest of his look - it's very generic and blah, much like the Catwoman outfit.  The Joker looked great costume-wise, regardless of what you thought of the makeup.

(http://www.clickthecity.com/img2/articles/CTC-3234-image5.jpg)
(http://www.retrocrush.com/archive2008/darkknight/the-dark-knight-joker_002_1197658742.jpg)
Compare him to Bane.

(http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/4e36e9096bb3f7fc3a000009/bane-dark-knight-rises.jpg)

I just find his costuming underwhelming.  Maybe it'll fit with his character, which is far less over-the-top than the Joker.  Maybe I shouldn't be making a big deal out of it, but honestly the visuals are a significant part of any superhero story.  I do have some faith in Nolan after the Dark Knight though.  We'll see....


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on July 14, 2012, 08:45:37 PM
Well, the costumes, I assume, are meant to be 'realistic', so they're toned down a smidge.

'Realistic' as it may be to have a billionaire dressing as a bat and becoming a vigilante...etc.



Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on July 14, 2012, 08:46:48 PM
I don't mind a small alteration though, long as the story is faithful to the characters.

No Bat credit cards, etc.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: El Misfit on July 14, 2012, 09:36:51 PM
MODOK looks like a villain from Megus-XLR, Magnanimous (voiced by Bruce Campbell) the Wiki page said that it could be a reference to MODOK.
I am a huge fan of Bane.

However, he's a less popular villain than say Riddler, Joker or Penguin.

I am a huge fan of Bane as well, but the mask for TDKR looks...a bit stupid, it's not the lucha lebrae(?) mask found in the comics. That's not to say I won't go see it, oh no, I'm going see it! :smile:


I'm not a big fan of it, but there's no way we'd get a real lucha libre mask in the Nolan-verse - it's just too out there and silly for its tone.  More disappointing than the mask is the rest of his look - it's very generic and blah, much like the Catwoman outfit.  The Joker looked great costume-wise, regardless of what you thought of the makeup.

([url]http://www.clickthecity.com/img2/articles/CTC-3234-image5.jpg[/url])
([url]http://www.retrocrush.com/archive2008/darkknight/the-dark-knight-joker_002_1197658742.jpg[/url])
Compare him to Bane.

([url]http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/4e36e9096bb3f7fc3a000009/bane-dark-knight-rises.jpg[/url])

I just find his costuming underwhelming.  Maybe it'll fit with his character, which is far less over-the-top than the Joker.  Maybe I shouldn't be making a big deal out of it, but honestly the visuals are a significant part of any superhero story.  I do have some faith in Nolan after the Dark Knight though.  We'll see....


I actually was going for this mask:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/95/Bane-comics-DCAU-TNBA.jpg)
But that could be somewhat s&M style. :lookingup:


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: ChaosTheory on July 15, 2012, 02:04:47 PM

I am a huge fan of Bane.

However, he's a less popular villain than say Riddler, Joker or Penguin.
I am a huge fan of Bane as well, but the mask for TDKR looks...a bit stupid, it's not the lucha lebrae(?) mask found in the comics. That's not to say I won't go see it, oh no, I'm going see it! :smile:

You know, I like the Nolan Batman movies but his insistence on real-world (albeit heightened) reality as opposed to comic-book reality does tend to undermine them, the costumes for Bane (and Catwoman too) being a prime example. 


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: BoyScoutKevin on July 20, 2012, 04:55:40 PM
A little something to whet one's appetite to "Avengers 2" is released.

"Phinea and Ferb: Mission Marvel"

The first character crossover between Marvel and the Walt Disney Company. To be shown on TV sometime during the summer of 2013. Most probably on Disney XD and the Disney Channel.

When Captain America, the Hulk, Ironman, and Thor loose their powers to one of Professor Doofenschmirtz's -inators, they seek the help of Phineas and Ferb to regain their powers. But, the Avengers are not the only ones to be seen in the TriState area. Also seen there are Marvel villains M.O.D.O.K., the Red Skull, Venom, and Whiplash.

Marvel is also working on an animated TV series "Avengers Assemble" and "Hulk and the Agents of S.M.A.S.H." Most likely to play on Disney XD, as that is where the animated "The Ultimate Spiderman" plays already.

And Marvel and the Walt Disney Company are also working on the animated film "Big Hero 6" featuring Baymax, Go-Go Tamago, Hiro, Honey-Lemon, the Silver Samurai, and Sunfire.

And there is good news on the Ant-man front. If anyone remembers a couple of years ago, there was talk of Marvel doing a film with Ant-man in it. That idea never went anywhere, but the idea is back on the table with the film being released sometime in 2014.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on July 20, 2012, 05:51:50 PM
Kinda curious why M.O.D.O.K was chosen...


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: BoyScoutKevin on July 21, 2012, 03:14:23 PM
Kinda curious why M.O.D.O.K was chosen...

No idea, but if I do hear anything, I'll post here.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Chainsaw midget on July 25, 2012, 09:44:25 AM
Kinda curious why M.O.D.O.K was chosen...
Because MODOK is awesome. 


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on July 25, 2012, 06:02:25 PM
I like M.O.D.O.K., but he is a random character to throw out there.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: Chainsaw midget on July 25, 2012, 06:20:47 PM
I don't think he's any more random than Arnim Zola or Iron Monger.


Title: Re: The Avengers (2012)
Post by: HappyGilmore on December 04, 2012, 10:08:25 PM
So, 2015 is the projected sequel to this. Not quite sure what Downey's contract states, but I think he only owed Marvel IM3 left, which is out soon. If so, that could give him some bargaining power if they want him for cameos in Avengers spinoffs upcoming as well as Avengers 2.

Ruffalo impressed Marvel enough they gave him an 8~film deal (I assume this includes at least one Hulk only film, Avengers 2, and possibly cameos in CA2, Thor 2, etc.)