PDA

View Full Version : Avengers: Age of Ultron.


inflatable dalek
2015-04-25, 06:56 PM
Because it's been a while since we had a thread for a movie!





Spoiler ahead.



















Yeah, I liked that. It wasn't up to the same level as The Winter Solider but was ahead of Guardians of the Galaxy (which I thought was fun but not nearly as "Brave" as a lot of people made out. As unusual as the characters were, riffing on Star Wars isn't that risky and the end was just a rehash of the first Avengers down to the-incredibly dull in the case of Ronan Keating- baddy having a magic stick. It was a film made by the cast) and unlike the first one it didn't peak in the middle.

Lots of great lines, some fun action scenes, a great almost Shatner-esque performance from Spader and a nod at Jocosta from everyone's favourite Marvel comic, Machine Man 2020. The Vision was huge fun, and in a screening where everyone was clearly very up for the film him casually grabbing Thor's hammer got the biggest laugh/cheer of the whole film.

I went into expecting Hawkeye to die (as the actor clearly wasn't happy with the first film and hasn't been shy in saying so), so him being written out with a retcon of a happy family life he's going back to- that'll throw a new light on the scenes between him and Natasha in the first one, they were just pals after all?- was surprising.

Instead Quicksilver got to be the sacrificial lamb, which considering he'd barely been established just felt like a "**** you" to the X-Men movies (who did the character better anyway, despite the similar effect none of his stuff here was as awesome as his big scene in Days of Future Past). Scarlett Witch was entertainingly hammy though and gave good cleavage.

It was odd, in a film full of motion capture, to see Andy Serkis playing an actual person for a change. Though apparently he's a villain from the comics so presumably he'll have a chance to put on the green body stocking and tennis balls in future.

The main flaw, and it's not a huge one because I suspect most general audiences don't go and see these films for the plot, is that it's getting to the point where if you haven't been paying attention to all the films it's going to get confusing. I mean, if you missed Cap 2 you'll be as baffled as to why the guy from the party at the start suddenly shows up as an Avenger with wings in the last scene and that's basic stuff (presumably actor availability is why Falcon didn't show up with War Machine and the Hellicarrier despite that sequence being tailor made for a bloke who flies?).

It was kind of a shame that in the destruction of SHIELD and exile of Fury lasted for (to all intents and purposes as Galaxy was entirely off-Earth) exactly one film, but the dusting off of the Hellicarrier was actually an awesome moment.

Cyberstrike nTo
2015-04-26, 05:22 PM
Yeah, I liked that. It wasn't up to the same level as The Winter Solider but was ahead of Guardians of the Galaxy (which I thought was fun but not nearly as "Brave" as a lot of people made out. As unusual as the characters were, riffing on Star Wars isn't that risky and the end was just a rehash of the first Avengers down to the-incredibly dull in the case of Ronan Keating- baddy having a magic stick. It was a film made by the cast) and unlike the first one it didn't peak in the middle.

I think the reason why Guardians of the Galaxy was a "risk" was it's cast of characters before the movies were all the characters in it like Drax, Gamora, and the Nova Corps are c-listers at best. While characters Star-Lord, Rocket, Groot, the Ravangers, and Ronan were all pretty much D-listers at best. Also considering a cast that including 2 CGI characters and 2 in extreme make ups and it taking a more "fun sci-fi" approach to the material with an unlikely soundtrack to boot. It was a risk, but a well marketed risk.
Honestly I wouldn't even compare it to Star Wars, I would say Guardians of the Galaxy is more like to very under-rated Farscape.


The main flaw, and it's not a huge one because I suspect most general audiences don't go and see these films for the plot, is that it's getting to the point where if you haven't been paying attention to all the films it's going to get confusing. I mean, if you missed Cap 2 you'll be as baffled as to why the guy from the party at the start suddenly shows up as an Avenger with wings in the last scene and that's basic stuff (presumably actor availability is why Falcon didn't show up with War Machine and the Hellicarrier despite that sequence being tailor made for a bloke who flies?).

It was kind of a shame that in the destruction of SHIELD and exile of Fury lasted for (to all intents and purposes as Galaxy was entirely off-Earth) exactly one film, but the dusting off of the Hellicarrier was actually an awesome moment.

I was under the impression in The Winter Solider that SHIELD wasn't disbanded or shut down forever. What it was they were under heavy investigation by the US Government and the media for the events in that movie, and that some members were going to the private sector or the FBI because they had to eat. I never got that SHIELD was out of business idea until I saw the end of season 1 of Agents of SHIELD of what was going on.

Going forward I think Marvel should consider how many characters are going to be in their movies because while I like the "shared movie and tv show universe" as concept it can be used to make it harder for people who either can't or don't want to watch every movie and TV show to follow along.

Skyquake87
2015-04-27, 06:58 AM
I saw this last night and right enjoyed it. Its long, but fills its screen time without sagging. My only niggles were the usual 3D scenes, which seen in 2D, really stand out and you can see the 'join' between the CGI/ actors/ explosions etc.

I didn't feel the film was too continuity heavy - the ongoing background arc of all Marvel's films (the Infinity Gems) was explained succinctly, which just left the appearance of War Machine and Falcon (which I enjoyed) as a potential head-scratcher. The vision/ flashbacks that added focused on the various heroes backstories worked well too. I do agree that Weddon's 'light touch' to what's been going on in other Marvel films is where this sort of thing should stay. Much more than this and they will start drowning under their own references. I do really like how this sort of thing does properly apply comic-book story-telling (and in particular Marvel's approach to comics) to film and marries the two together very well indeed. Its like you're following a particular comic book and there's a nod to something going on in a book that you're not reading.

Other rambly thoughts - enjoyed the send off for Hawkeye, Hulk - less so Iron Man - but I did enjoy they kept up Stark still struggling with anxiety over space aliens and whatnot.

Wanda and Petrio were good, if slightly under-developed, but I didn't mind this with so many other characters to handle and give screen time to.

I'll be interested to see how the new line up takes shape in the third film :)

inflatable dalek
2015-04-27, 07:40 PM
I've a feeling the new Avengers are put into place specifically so as not to have an insanely expensive and top heavy cast for Civil War (the "Biggies" by the look of it- other than Cap of course- will be Iron Man and a new cheap Spider-Man. I suspect Black Widow will be off looking for Hulk), for the next proper Avengers film, which is looking to be a big grand final to this era of the MCU, I'd be amazed if the big boys all weren't back in it. Though it being a two part film means there should be room for the little fellows as well.

I suppose if I were to have another criticism, it's that it follows a lot of the plot beats of the first one, except with Wanda boobage causing everyone to fall out rather than loki's staff (though that does fill that role once in the film). But the Bay films all have the same basic plot and I still love'em so equally here it being done well helps to negate that problem.

Speaking of how the films flow into each other, it says a lot about how memorable Thor 2 was I've no idea how Hydra got hold of Loki's stick.

Unicron
2015-04-27, 08:55 PM
Speaking of how the films flow into each other, it says a lot about how memorable Thor 2 was I've no idea how Hydra got hold of Loki's stick.

Hydra having Loki's Glowstick of Destiny was a reveal in the mid-credits scene from Winter Soldier, not Thor 2. So I guess Thor 2 really was inconsequential.
I guess the implication is that Shield took custody of it after the battle against Loki and Chitauri, with it being passed off to Hydra by someone like Sitwell. That or a Hydra-loyalist Shield goon was the one who found it and handed it off without informing Shield it was found (which seems the more likely thing, as it seems like the kind of thing Fury would keep tabs on if he knew Shield had it).

Denyer
2015-05-04, 06:13 PM
Decent standalone caper. Can't say I'm particularly up for Civil War in film form, the only interesting angle on that stretch of the comics was Ellis's run on Thunderbolts.

Knightdramon
2015-05-06, 11:31 AM
Not a bad film, but I liked the first one more. Apparently I didn't get the message that the first team is more or less disbanded--I thought that it was just excuses to send them all their merry way until the next movie, which is more or less what happened in the first film.

It will be interesting to see a relatively new team. Being military men themselves, I think Captain America will make a much tighter team with War Machine and Falcon.

I believe Quicksilver was offed so there's no potential future mismatches with any Xmen films.

Don't know how Civil War will work, because, to be honest, there's just not enough heroes to pull it off.