Welcome to the main discussion thread for the Marvel Cinematic Universe! This pinned post is here to establish some basic guidelines. All of the Media Forum rules
still apply.
- This thread is for talking about the live-action films, TV shows, animated works, and related content that use the Marvel brand, currently owned by Disney.
- While mild digressions are okay, discussion of the comic books should go in this thread
. Extended digressions may be thumped as off-topic.
- Spoilers for new releases should not be discussed without spoiler tagging for at least two weeks. Rather, each title should have a dedicated thread where that sort of conversation is held. We can mention new releases in a general sense, but please be courteous to people who don't want to be spoiled.
If you're posting tagged spoilers, make sure that the film or series is clearly identified outside the spoiler tagging. People need to know what will be spoiled before they choose to read the post.
Edited by Mrph1 on Jul 29th 2024 at 3:09:00 PM
Wouldn't work. We have a hard time to keep spoilers out of the Ao S threat, there is no way people would stop discussing the movie here
![]()
Ronan was a fun villain. I don't care what other people claim, I couldn't get enough of his hamminess.
I feel like Ronan was essentially the Malekith idea, but done well. His aims were similarly dogmatic, his plan was very similar and he came off as 2D as a result, but his reasons were more understandable, he had more of an overall presence (with more airtime and direct connections to other characters) and his antagonism with Thanos only added to that.
I was watching Guardians during one of those "countdown to Ultron" marathons, and one of the things really liked about Guardians was how you actually got a feel for how Ronan's actions actually effected people: day to day people (as apposed to merely the protagonists) were furious at what he had done, petrified at his presence, heartbroken and in despair at the waste he's laid, etc. He really had an effect on the world.
But mostly, "YOU STAND ACCUSED."
It helps that Lee Pace hams it up to appropriate levels whereas Christopher Eccleston played it weirdly subdued.
Y'know, the weirdest thing about The Dark World (among many baffling decisions) is the scale of it. The Avengers save New York. Iron Man stops Guy Pierce from having an army of lava-powered super soldiers. Thor saves the entire goddamn universe. Cap temporarily sets back HYDRA. It's really jarring.
Well, "New York" would have very quickly become "the Earth" if the Avengers hadn't been there, so I think it counts for something.
And Hydra's setback was a pretty big one - Insight was their master plan, and now their cover's blown.
Still, surprisingly low key for such a threat. In the end, it all comes down to Thor and a few human scientists. Malekith and Thor have a brief (if entertaining) fight, and the Dark Elves tromp around London like they were a squad of Doctor Who villains, then they get done in. That might work on its own, but the tone doesn't really do it any favors.
I mean, they don't really have the time to get the Avengers together, but still, it's a little weird.
edited 3rd May '15 2:03:54 AM by KarkatTheDalek
Oh God! Natural light!Thinking back to AOU, I feel it might have been stronger if the higher ups at Marvel Studios actually did more in terms of telling Whedon what to do and the like. Here, they gave him much more free reign to do whatever he wanted, and I feel that that is where some of the problems come up (the overusage of Buffy Speak, the Hulk/Black Widow romance, the characters not feeling as much like their previous solo films in terms of characterization, etc).
Basically, for all the problems that people like to associate with Executive Meddling, they are there for a reason. Heck, the Protection from Editors page even has this which I feel summarizes the film:
"A common pattern that occurs, especially with recent comic book adaptations is that the first film is either deemed great or at least decent considering the demands made by Executive Meddling. Because the first film was a success, the second movie is given more open range to experiment with. This either reveals that the executive meddling was what made the first movie good or it manages to top itself and be even better."
edited 3rd May '15 2:17:22 AM by LDragon2
![]()
Well, they're up against Iron Man, Thor, and the Hulk this time, so perhaps that was inevitable.
I still think that the problem with Malekith wasn't screentime, but the way he was written. But let's compare him with Ronan.
What is the first thing we see of Malekith? Getting defeated by Bor and hearing a voice-over explanation what elves want.
What is the first thing we see of Ronan? Him bathing in the blood of his enemies and then killing some random guy while ranting about his motivations himself.
What happens when Malekith encounters the heroes the first time? He first looses a fight against Frigga and then gets scarred by Thor's hammer. In short he is presented as less competent than his henchmen, who actually does manage to get stuff done and kills a character we care about. And neither of them manage to actually get the aether.
What happen when Ronan encounters them? Gamora gets blown up into space and Drax nearly drowns. Not only that, but for Ronan Drax is barely a fly he swats on his way to what he wants. And what he wants (the stone) he gets.
How do other characters react to the name of Malekith? Isn't he this guy from the legend who got defeated a long time ago?
And how do they react to Ronan? With fear. That's the guy who is slaughtering children. Who killed Drax family. Who keeps the Brooker from making a transaction. That is the guy who dares to oppose Thanos himself.
In the end it comes down to Malekith being a very pathetic villain on every level who never felt like a true danger to me while with Ronan I never doubted that he could and would destroy the Galaxy and that the heroes have an off-chance at best to defeat him. And yes, the "You stand accused!" is very memorable. Certainly more memorable then some subtitled rambling.
Quicksilver's death in Ao U didn't really miff me all that much. At least s/he had a chance to really shine and the event was meaningful. Now, the REAL crime was what they did with Von Strucker. Potential utterly and hilariously wasted.
edited 3rd May '15 2:52:19 AM by nervmeister
I felt Quicksilver's death was kind of out of nowhere. I suppose it was really shocking and unexpected because I felt I knew nothing about him, but... well, I knew nothing about him.
I feel Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver had characterization issues. They are established as twins and, while the film builds Scarlet Witch up slowly, Quicksilver... kind of ends up defined by where she is, or at least that's how I saw him. We don't get much of a sense on how he feels about things; 'Hey, if my sister is cool, I am too' and nothing more. Quicksilver is defined in relation to Witch rather than his own character.
Now, as someone who hasn't read many of the comics, Age of Ultron and Days of Future Past were my introduction to the character of Quicksilver. While I acknowledge that his powers were vastly exagerated in Days of Future Past, I felt he had just a tad more personality, or at least texture, to him than in Age of Ultron. He was immature and impulsive and a teenager in Do FP and it contrasted nicely with the more serious nature of, well, everything else in the film.
In Age of Ultron, we have moments of that; "What? You didn't see that coming?" and the brief moment where he decided to try and grab Thor's Hammer and gets dragged away by it were funny and interesting character moments, but there isn't enough to really endear me to him. In conversations, he's stoic and quiet and defer's to his sister's judgement rather than his own without so much as a word or discussion on the matter. I don't want to say it was a bad portrayal, I just think the actor wasn't given a ton to work with. He exists to be 'The Brother of Scarlet Witch' and die for her character development.
Which, though I find it funny because that's usually a female character's role in these films, it just didn't make his death impactful besides 'Oh my god, that was not what I expected'.
But that's my two cents on him.
Wait, is Age of Ultron really a Contested Sequel? Because I thought it was an improvement over the first one, except for the villain.
Never trust anyone who uses "degenerate" as an insult.I'm amazed at just how TALL Lee Pace is. Looking at him at a distance he looks like he's got a really slight frame, but then he walks up to you and HOLY SHIT HE'S SIX FOOT SIX!?
I do regret him dying in Guardians, mostly because who will be the face of the Kree now? But really, considering the ethos of the team, there's no way the villain of Guardians could be allowed to live.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
You should really use spoiler tags.
Cracked even pointed that out when asking how could he be the head of major weapons manufacturing corporation when by all accounts the tech he comes up with completely sucks.
Rockwell was at least funny in the role. I can appreciate that he's basically like the anti-Tony Stark.
edited 3rd May '15 7:17:29 AM by comicwriter
Here's the thing about Ronan: He was a flat, not very interesting villain, but that was okay because the movie had enough going on with it's leads that all we needed was a sufficiently dangerous threat to pull them together.
Thor 2 had very little going on with it's leads, or on any other level, so having a weak main villain stood out much more.
Age of Ultron has entirely too much going on, overcomplicates its villain anyway, and doesn't even do that right.
And about the thing that we should still be spoilering: Quicksilver's death was a pure Whedonism. It's the big climax, so somebody has to die semi-randomly. Not because that character's arc has lead them there, not because it benefits anyone else's character arc, not because the overall plot needs a death there, just because. He does it every movie/series finale. It's like Anya being killed in the Buffy series finale- no fucking point at all, but Whedon thinks that he needs to do it.
There are clearly a lot of people contesting that. It's got a 75% on Rotten tomatoes compared to the first one's 92%.
edited 3rd May '15 7:28:36 AM by Bloodsquirrel
So I think the problem with Black Widow is a combination of Overshadowed by Awesome plus not really having any storylines unique to her yet. She and Hawkeye are probably literally the two most dangerous baseline humans on the planet, but that still makes them weaker than everyone else, and she didn't have an opportunity to show off her manipulation skills again here. They were able to give Hawkeye a very important storyline of his own based around his family, but that probably wasn't going to happen with Black Widow even before we found out she was sterile. So she was left re-purposing her manipulation skills into calming down the Hulk, and her storyline was a romance with Bruce.
I don't think they did the romance terribly, in fact in a lot of ways I think it was well done. I just didn't have strong feelings about it, because we haven't seen the three years these two have been spending together since the first movie.
Writing a post-post apocalypse LitRPG on RR. Also fanfic stuff.If Zemo is HYDRA then I imagine they could still play some part in Civil War. I don't think they necessarily said Strucker's base was the last HYDRA facility, just the one that was the most important because of the scepter.
They are so last movie
Cap uncovered them in Winter Soldier and derailed their biggest plan.
Coulson's group has been slowly whittling them down until the two remaining heads are hiding in the same hole.
And then the Avengers kick those heads in the throat.
Forever liveblogging the AvengersDidn't Litt get away? Considering he's the last Hydra head we saw in Ao S, and we didn't get a scene of him being captured, I thought he got away.

Should we have a separate thread for Age of Ultron? Something to keep this one more spoiler-free?
I saw the movie tonight. Definitely one of the weakest of the MCU; probably second only to The Dark World. The movie was an unfocused mess with too many ideas and too little follow-through. Ultron himself felt half-assed. There was too much time spent explaining his psychology and motivations without there being any real substance to his psychology or motivations. He was a trite AI Is Evil bad robot guy, which would have worked if the movie had admitted it and spent it's time focusing on an already crowded roster. But instead the movie tries to pretend that he's a real live character with real live ideas behind him and wastes our time trying, unsuccessfully, to figure out what those ideas are.
Moments that should be dramatic and should have had narrative momentum behind them wind up feeling purely mechanical. Characters seem driven more by author fiat than by solid characterization. There's no central theme, idea, emotion, or arc to tie anything together.
Some of these are things that I felt were weak about the first Avengers movie, and with more time and freedom for Whedon to make 'his' movie they've gotten a little out of control. It's clear that he can't keep a project of this scale cohesive, and it's even more clear that he simply can't write densely enough to support the number of characters these movies are accumulating in the running time of a movie. Some people have been wondering when the MCU would come crashing down, and this movie had a lot of the signs of that breaking point coming into sight. I really hope whoever does the next major MCU movie can turn things around.
I also have to say that the overall visual design of the movie was terrible. A lot of scenes were too dark and the CGI and set design were often overly busy to the point of being tiring. A lot of extremely fake-looking stunt-work didn't help either. The action was decidedly inferior to the first movie's.