Avengers Film

The big thing I caught the first time I saw the movie outside of a theatre was that the movie often stopped dead so that either a character could make a one-liner or do something awesome looking but ultimately pointless. It's great when there's a theatre full of people there to laugh or cheer at it at face value and distract you from how it works consistency-wise, but when you're looking at it by yourself these moments seem... flatter, and more like unnecessary distractions.

The best example I can think of (off the top of my head) being the "he was adopted" line, which on repeated viewings seems less like a great gag and more like an awkward pause - probably because there is an awkward pause there that's otherwise taken up by audience laughter in the theater.

The "put the hammah down" moment is another one.

edited 19th Jan '13 7:48:20 PM by KnownUnknown

I thought of it slightly differently. This movie is so obvious, why hasn't it been made before now.

Strange though that may sound.

edited 19th Jan '13 8:44:54 PM by UltimatelySubjective

,Sounds like Avengers is a movie that falls apart outside of the theater setting. That's not a good thing at all. If I saw it at home, my bias against Joss Whedon would probably overcome the experience.

edited 19th Jan '13 8:44:15 PM by maxwellelvis

I haven't found that at all.

I can assure you as a non-fan of that Joss guy, that The Avengers is more than a passable movie. That it's ground-breaking is icing in the cake.

Whatever else you can say about Whedon, he does get this genre.

So yeah, what they are saying is true, just don't blow it out of proportion.

edited 19th Jan '13 8:53:23 PM by UltimatelySubjective

I'm allowed to blow it to whatever proportion I deem necessary as a fan. But there will be a way I'll rewatch it.

It doesn't fall apart, but its flaws do become more obvious when outside of a theater context. It's very one-liner-y, for instance.

edited 19th Jan '13 9:07:48 PM by KnownUnknown

@ Ultimately Subjective- That's why the premise of the movie is so ambitious while the movie itself simply just delivers on what everyone wanted, nothing more. Whedon himself suggested as much on his personal feelings regarding the final product. Avengers 2 will be interesting if they can improve on that.

I personally felt that Thor was the weakest of the previous movies, while it was well acted the movie felt like a sitcom rather than a true "two worlds colliding" type of story that needed to be told. By the end I simply didn't believe in either Thor's character development or the fact that Loki stood any chance at an even fight, it was dead drama. And that part was translated almost directly into The Avengers, Loki vs. Thor was the most boring fight of the movie and it is sad that two gods going at it is less exciting than the two Badass Normal's beating the snot out of each other.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/MarvelFreshman/news/?a=72940

It seems like a bit of a reach but it seems like Anthony Mackie may have just alluded to or confirmed being in the sequel. The interviewer states that Mackie is going to be in both Winter Soldier and Avengers 2 at two separate points and he doesn't correct them either time.

It's funny because he was repeatedly joking about "Marvel snipers" ready to shoot him everytime an interviewer tries to trick him into revealing Winter Soldier plot points and that seems like a pretty big one.

And the clues towards the antagonists of Avengers 2 being the Masters Of Evil just keep going up. If Winter Soldier's involved, I'd bet Zemo's involved. And if Zemo's involved, then bam! Masters.

I like it, too. I was started to get a bit worried that the only real threats the Avengers would have would be aliens. It's the same with Superman - I'd like there to be terrestrial threats faced as well.