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
The thing with Age of Ultron's bad qualities (outside of them being subjective, since some criticisms of it vary depending on the person, like for example Ultron's snarkiness) is that they're really noticeable, but then so are the good qualities. The scene with Cap and Iron Man at Hawkeye's barn? Great. The scenes shipping Bruce and Natasha? Terrible. Ultron's final talk with the Vision at the end? Great. The weird confusing stuff with Thor in the cave? Terrible. Klaw? Good. Quicksilver getting wasted? Not good. The entire fucking party scene? Good. The movie getting stretched out with the final battle just going on and on and on? Not good.
Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?I guess it had more to do with how bloated the film was. Whedon was kinda struggling to balance the characters (can't say I blame him), so for me it was noticeable when stuff was going on that just felt too long and made it feel kinda dull.
At least it was better at it than, say Transformers: Age of Extinction (seriously, that movie is long as hell).
Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?I think The Avengers was an impressive feat and I don't think that many directors would have managed to do it. I will always defend it as the most important movie of the 2010s (and 2000s for that matter), the big game changer the same way Die Hard, Snow White and Toy Story were game changers.
But the movie is not without flaws. Whedon was the right choice for this because he is pretty good when it comes to character interaction, but he does have a preference for certain kind of characters. He was also the right choice for it because he has a clear grasp on how to structure a story, but he is not exactly the best visual director, and he does fib once in a while.
You know what the biggest problem in The Avengers is? That Bruce somehow knew he had to go to New York and Thor apparently stood on a field staring at his hammer while Tony, Cap, Natasha and Clinton decided to assemble.
I hate Joss Whedon for only three things:
1. Killing Tara for no goddam reason
2. The Avengers
3. His attitude towards The Punisher which utterly ruined Frank in an issue of The Runaways.
I don't even hate him for Alien Resurrection. And Buffy is an essential part of both my childhood and teenage years and I still love it to this day even as I'm close to 30 now. It's still a source of pride for me that I actually saw the first episode of Buffy when it aired. Darla scared the living hell out of me.
But he's not perfect and that came through loud and clear to me in The Avengers.
edited 19th Jun '16 12:08:31 AM by Nikkolas
I can't really defend AOU aside from a fair share of really good scenes(Hawkeye's farmhouse, the "He's fast, she's weird" scene with Maria Hill and Cap, the "My evil plan" scene, etc. Overall, besides the movie being horribly paced, like Heaven's Gate level choppy, I really wasn't feeling the character motivations from much of the cast. Also, I hated how HYDRA went from being this terrifying threat during Winter Soldier to cannon fodder during Ultron. These guys have been behind almost every major world event for the last seventy years, and they get beaten by a couple of alcoholic manchildren(Tony and Thor), an archer, and the guy who took out your leader before?
But yeah, I stand by the first movie being brilliant. It gives me goosebumps every time. Civil War was a more worthy follow up to it, but I was disappointed how Whedon kind of left on a down note.
edited 19th Jun '16 12:10:58 AM by DrWillHatch63
That's the movie.
You notice that we never really have all six Avengers on-screen together until that shot? All the previous stuff was build-up to "we actually managed to cross over four separate film franchises and make the world's first superhero crossover film. Now bask in their glory".
You cannot firmly grasp the true form of Squidward's technique!1. Killing Tara for no goddam reason
2. The Avengers
3. His attitude towards The Punisher which utterly ruined Frank in an issue of The Runaways.
- He wanted to bring Tara back, but Amber Benson was busy.
- The Avengers is a great movie.
- Molly punching the Punisher was hilarious. I mean, come on!
Whedon was a great choice for director of The Avengers because he is great at balancing an assemble cast — Serenity had nine main characters (Mal, Simon, River, Zoe, Wash, Jayne, Inara, Book, and the Operative) and it worked beautifully. Even if some characters didn't get much to do, they still had great scenes where they showed who they were — they had Moments with a capital M. Same with The Avengers — of the main cast (Tony, Steve, Natasha, Bruce, Thor, Clint, Fury, and Loki), the character that gets the least development is Clint and even he gets a few scenes where he shows off and shows who he is and what he can do.
Basically: the way he balanced characters and built them through dialogue and interaction made him the perfect choice. Of course, he isn't immune to making bad decisions, like the various bad episodes of Buffy, and the second film had to set up a lot more, plus executive meddling and various other things. After the first Avengers, Joss said that he wanted to make the second one "smaller and more personal," which didn't really happen (something he acknowledged).
edited 19th Jun '16 12:20:54 AM by alliterator
The Avengers is fun, I guess. But to me it's just an Excuse Plot for a mindless beat em up.
edited 19th Jun '16 12:22:15 AM by flameboy21th
Non Indicative Username![]()
![]()
He didn't need to kill her in the first place. He just wanted to turn Willow into a villain so he could copy the same damned scene he did twice already with Faith. (ANGER ANGER ANGER no wait I'M SAD SAD SAD) It worked wonders for Faith in the S4 Buffy episode and the S1 Angel episode because they were both happening to the same character around the same time. She was a mental and emotional wreck and falling apart. Slapping it on Willow did nothing to make Dark Willow not terrible.
I should really have just said "All of Buffy Season 6" for point 1, though. But I don't want to dredge up those painful memories of Buffy fucking Spike outside a Mc Donald's.
As for The Avengers, all I can remember are Loki and Tony, and I hated them both completely and absolutely.] We already had a couple posters agree with me and concede that Loki lost all his complexity in this movie. He was a generic villain wearing Loki's face to sell tickets. You talk about giving characters Moments but why the hell wasn't there more interaction between Thor and Loki? Why wasn't Thor over the moon about his brother's miraculous return? Why wasn't he conflicted about what to do like anyone else would be? "My brother's alive but now he's a Saturday Morning Cartoon Villain so I have to put a stop to him but I just got him back...I can't bring myself to risk losing him again." No no no, can't have any of that .Can't replicate the genuine emotion at the end of Thor 1, we have to have Thor and Hulk fight because............
edited 19th Jun '16 12:56:11 AM by Nikkolas
I don't remember Thor and have no desire to watch it again but Avenger Loki is really predictable (as the rest of the movie) as if he's trying to follow the villain trope checklist.
edited 19th Jun '16 1:18:30 AM by flameboy21th
Non Indicative Username![]()
![]()
Yes, I remember. Most criticisms centered on the love interest as I recall.
Yet, even in mediocre films, you can get standout performances. I'm sure you would agree Tom Hiddleston was seen as exactly that. Although I liked Chris Hemsworth just as much.
But fine, I have long recognized I have weird opinions. For example, I also really dislike The Incredible Hulk. Now THERE was a mediocre film. Absolutely soulless, too. On the flipside, I love 2003 Hulk. No one else does...well, som edo, we're in the minority but some people out there appreciate what Ang Lee was trying to do and the amazing performances from Bana, Connelly and Elliott.
edited 19th Jun '16 1:15:41 AM by Nikkolas

Naw man, I still think the first Avengers is a masterpiece. Most of the criticism I have is towards Age of Ultron, and even then I defend as much of it as I can.
The thing is that Whedon has his share of flaws, ya know?
Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?