#321  
Old 05-17-2012, 12:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by petey View Post
His death means more to fans of the recent line of Marvel films. Sounds like someone did not see IM1, IM2, Thor and I'm pretty much convinced you did not see the short films from Marvel one shots:

The Consultant http://scifimafia.com/2011/08/new-cl...arvel-studios/

Or ďA Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Thorís Hammerď http://scifimafia.com/2011/10/watch-...-thors-hammer/


The only way Agent Coulson can come back without making a fool out of audiences is to bring him back as The Vision. In fact, I actually hope this happens, it just makes sense. They're going to need him if the sequal's villain is as bad ass, as he is in the comics.


I'd love to see it!
Reply With Quote
  #322  
Old 05-17-2012, 03:09 AM
Wow, I just realized I don't think I've made a post in this forum in some time. Well, here's a solid film to break that stretch. I actually just came back from seeing it a second time and it surprisingly holds up really well. As many have said, the characters and respective dialogue are what make the film.

As interesting as the concept of The Avengers was, I had concerns about it being an unbalanced mess with that many major characters in a film. But Whedon pretty effortlessly gives them their respective space equally, even to new and lesser-powered characters like Black Widow and Hawkeye. Of all the characters, I ended up LOVING Mark Ruffalo's rendition of The Hulk. I'm with the rest of the crowd in hoping we see some sort of Hulk vehicle (FIlm or TV Show) starring Ruffalo soon. The film is fun as hell, even with a filmsly plot. There's an element of "fun" that I've felt with this film that I haven't for some time. It knows what it wants to be and doesn't pander nor dumb itself down too much.

As someone who's started watching Buffy recently and read up on Whedon's history, I can't help but feel really happy for the man, who after years of smaller niche work and TV ventures that failed too early (Firefly, Dollhouse), he's finally got a mainstream megahit that can be attributed, at least partly, to him. The pairing of him with the material was practically a perfect match. It was a calculated risk on the part of Marvel to place a guy who's last directing effort (before The Avengers) of any kind was an episode of Glee at the helm of a multi-million dollar franchise film that had been building up for 1/2 a decade...but the risk paid off in spades.

8/10

Last edited by drc5145; 05-17-2012 at 03:44 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #323  
Old 05-17-2012, 03:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeChar4321 View Post
I do favor my Marvel and have never hidden that fact nor would I try. Having a favorite doesn't mean I can't be level headed, however. Intimately knowing the characters may give more depth to what I see and it's hard to factor that out of the equation.


I really think I can fairly judge anything non-Marvel even franchises others deem as competition. I have no overly sentimental attachment to Nolan's Batman yet my thumb was up for TDK. I own that film and paid to see it many times. I grew up reading JLA and Batman 89 was one of my favorite films for years. I've just grown to enjoy what Marvel has done more.

Spider-Man is as Marvel as it gets yet I've stayed away from that board and have my doubts about that new film. I'll see it and judge it for what it is.

TDKR looks a lot like Spider-Man 3 to me and I actually enjoyed a lot of that film but acknowledge its short-comings. If TDKR lands in or below that territory I'm going to say so. If it's great, I'll say that as well. It will have NOTHING to do with anything Marvel or the rivalry. If Battleship is crap, I'll say so only because of its own merit and quality.
I really don't know why you think TDKR looks anything like Spider-man 3. The only thing that those two movies seem to have in common is the fact that they're both a third film in a trilogy. TDKR doesn't look to have any of the overcrowding issues concerning subplots or villains that plagued Spidey 3. Nolan has had complete control over these films and he's going to execute an ending he's had planned for years now, while Raimi was forced by the studio to include Venom in the storyline. Raimi had too many story elements that ran parallel to each other instead of connecting like Nolan's films. For example, Nolan has Catwoman working with Bane while Raimi had to deal with 3 unrelated villains who all had separate agendas with Spider-man. Personally, I wish Raimi would of omitted Sandman from the film. His story as a villain was weak and forced and his origin was laughable. It was also a terrible decision on the part of the writers of Spidey 3 to make Sandman the one responsible for the death of uncle Ben; that's a classic example of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
Reply With Quote
  #324  
Old 05-19-2012, 11:14 AM

Well, here's one movie so far this year that hasn't disappointed (Unlike movies that let me down like The Raven, Dark Shadows, Battleship, The Grey, Haywire, Ghost Rider, etc.)

I just love The Avengers. I thought it was smart and the impressive cast really delivered! This movie works on so many levels and makes you draw on just about all of your emotions. I donít remember when I enjoyed a movie this much! Such cool fantasy but what makes it extra special is following this film after all the other solo efforts from each character. I enjoyed the others films quite a bit but they all delivered something different. Seeing them blend together in Avengers and the sparks that resulted was the extra special treat. Example: They blended the grounded futurist (Tony Stark) with the Norse thunder god and his angry brother in a perfect way. Same could be said for every other character. It all works. In fact, it doesnít just fit, itís an exciting symphony and that dichotomy and difference in characters and how they interact are what makes it truly great. Itís why this movie stands so tall above any other franchise at the moment. Things like Transformers, GI Joe and even Star Trek all operate with monotone restrictions. Avengers covers all angles and delivers depth of character with its fun and amazing action sequences.

9.5/10
Reply With Quote
  #325  
Old 05-19-2012, 11:53 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Digifruitella View Post
this pic should be quoted on every page
Reply With Quote
  #326  
Old 05-20-2012, 11:54 AM
Damn that scarjo pic is sexy.

TDKR is also giving me spidey3 vibes. Midget Bane from south america but has an english accent is Venom. Cat Women is Sand Man, just an un-necessary character. Ras is Green Goblin, the guy that keeps showing up but doesn't really do anything interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #327  
Old 05-20-2012, 03:25 PM
I understand the Spidey 3 vibes coming from TDKR. It looks a little too busy, and even kinda... silly.

But I have faith that Nolan won't allow it to fall off the way Spiderman and X-Men did in their 3rd installments. This is on comprehensive story, and Nolan knew how he wanted it to end from the very beginning. With Spiderman, there was no clear direction.

I don't know what TDKR will make in the box office, but I doubt it will surpass Avengers simply because it's not as fun. Maybe it could be a better movie, but I don't anticipate as many repeat viewers or casual fans checking it out because of its tone.
Reply With Quote
  #328  
Old 05-20-2012, 04:14 PM
Saw this at the Drive-In with a bunch of people, ton of munchies and a good amount o' green.

Never really was anticipating this film at all. Solid, and quite entertaining.

8/10
Reply With Quote
  #329  
Old 05-21-2012, 12:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by petey View Post

TDKR is also giving me spidey3 vibes. Midget Bane from south america but has an english accent is Venom. Cat Women is Sand Man, just an un-necessary character. Ras is Green Goblin, the guy that keeps showing up but doesn't really do anything interesting.

Regarding Bane: If you've seen the first two movies in Nolan's trilogy then you should be aware of how he depicts the villains in his movies. I think his approach on Bane will work just fine. He doesn't need to be a ridiculously oversized behemoth to be threatening and strong.

Regarding Catwoman: She's always been an integral part of the Batman universe and to call her unnecessary is ridiculous, especially in the context of TDKR. The trailers have pretty much confirmed that she symbolizes the angst of the middle and lower classes in the film and that she'll add a layer of complexity to it all by playing the middle ground between Batman and Bane. She's the gray area between the idelogies of the hero and villain.

Regarding Ra's: He'll probably only show up in a flashback for a quick scene or two. You say he didn't do anything interesting? What about mentoring and guiding Bruce Wayne? What about his plan to destroy Gotham through fear?

Regarding Spidey 3: The main reason Spidey 3 didn't work was because the main plot and the various subplots had no flow whatsoever, it was complete chaos. I could see they were going for a meditation on revenge and forgiveness, but they just couldn't balance the various arcs and characters to make it work. Also, there was no respect for the character of Eddie Brock/Venom concerning his treatment in the film. Nolan may change the appearance of the Batman villains from the comics, but he manages to keep their essence intact in his films. I can't say the same for Venom in Spidey 3.

Anyways, to get back on topic, I really enjoyed the Avengers, but as a Batman fan I have to say that I'm annoyed that some people are using its tremendous success to make claims that suggest Batman won't be nearly as good or enjoyable.
Reply With Quote
  #330  
Old 05-21-2012, 09:17 AM
FINALLY, saw this last night. WOW! 10/10 The best super hero movie of all time!

Amazing how it only cost like $250 million. I have seen movies cost nearly as much as that did not give half of what The Avengers gave us. Awesome how all the heros worked to fit in so perfectly. I would normally think some would get lost, but that was not the case at all. They really did a great job writing this. Great bad guy.

Best super hero/villian fight since Superman 2. So many fights have not lived up to my expectations. Transformers has come close, but Iron Man / Thor was the best fight EVER.

I loved the Hulk. Finally, they got the Hulk right!


I was not in any way bored with the lesser heros, which I thought I would be.

Funny jokes throughout, especially by Iron Man. There were so many one liners, it was awesome. Best joke was with Lokey and the Hulk near the end.

Really, really fun, great story. 10/10 Better than The Dark Knight by a mile, which was the #1 Super Hero movie.
Reply With Quote
  #331  
Old 05-21-2012, 01:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erroneous View Post
Behind The Dark Knight by a mile, which is the #1 Super Hero movie.
Fixed.

Reply With Quote
  #332  
Old 05-21-2012, 01:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AspectRatio1986 View Post
Fixed.


Not even close. I loved TDK, but there are huge holes I ignored for the sake of enjoyment. I am hoping the new one tops TDK. #1 and #2 are miles ahead of #3, but The Avengers was head and shoulders better than TDK. Only once in the last 10 or so years have I been about 60 mins into a movie and thought, "This fucking movie is just awesome!" The first pirates was like that. TDK and the LOTR 3.
Reply With Quote
  #333  
Old 05-21-2012, 02:00 PM
Hey I really enjoyed The Avengers...I fully agree with all this best "Super" hero film talk going around. TDK isn't really a super hero film - its a crime epic. Simple as that. I said it before and I'll say it again, the emotional weight and the thought provoking dialogue is what elevates it above the rest.

But other than that I was just being an ass....we need more Super Hero films that have the quality of The Avengers...crossing my fingers for Man of Steel.
Reply With Quote
  #334  
Old 05-21-2012, 03:31 PM
Just watched this. First two-thirds were alternately entertaining and mind-numbingly boring. As I feared, while Whedon has a good handle on balancing the characters and does a successful Hulk, he has no style and the film feels like every other generic big-budget Hollywood movie with an extremely lame villain (and I liked Loki in Thor). I felt like tuning out through much of the middle portion of the movie. It's only in the last act that the film really becomes thrilling and fires on all cylinders.

I *just* like, rather than love Dark Knight - I have a few issues with it but the comparison isn't even close. Dark Knight actually had some substance to it and a fully developed storyline. Avengers was a lot of fan-service (x fights x) and noise with almost no story (characters get rounded up, fight each other for at least half the movie, Loki has a device to bring war to the world, they stop him, the end, no surprises, no twists, no other plot developments whatsoever), especially for a nearly two and a half hour runtime. Competent enough to work as Hollywood tentpole entertainment, not developed enough for it to be remotely close to a great movie.

As far as superhero movies go, off the top of my head, I'd put Batman Begins, Dark Knight, Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, X-Men, X2, X-Men: First Class, Spider-man, and probably several more superhero movies ahead of this one. Of the Marvel films leading up to this, Thor/Iron Man/Captain America all had far more developed stories than Avengers did. I find it hard to get invested in something with the thinnest of stories and a whole lot of bang, which seems to increasingly be Hollywood's idea of a summer movie. I don't care whether there's pyrotechnics or not and I don't need it to be serious or to have thematic depth like TDK, etc, but I do want an actual story that I can be interested in or else a sense of visual inventiveness or atmosphere to keep me stimulated. And this didn't have either.

Best part of the movie: when my 3-year-old nephew stood up and put his arms out, palms up, like he was Iron Man shooting lasers at the aliens on screen.

Last edited by JCPhoenix; 05-21-2012 at 04:22 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #335  
Old 05-21-2012, 04:13 PM
Not to make this a TDK/Avengers pissing contest but the thing that was vastly superior about TDK is the villain. Ledger's Joker is flat out ICONIC. While Loki is just a little bitch that got his ass handled rather easily.

I still enjoyed the Avengers (gave it a solid 8/10). Its a solid popcorn blockbuster but I feel TDKR will offer more...a lot more actually.
Reply With Quote
  #336  
Old 05-21-2012, 10:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo_bravo View Post
Not to make this a TDK/Avengers pissing contest but the thing that was vastly superior about TDK is the villain. Ledger's Joker is flat out ICONIC. While Loki is just a little bitch that got his ass handled rather easily.

I still enjoyed the Avengers (gave it a solid 8/10). Its a solid popcorn blockbuster but I feel TDKR will offer more...a lot more actually.
right on
Reply With Quote
  #337  
Old 05-21-2012, 11:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo_bravo View Post
Not to make this a TDK/Avengers pissing contest but the thing that was vastly superior about TDK is the villain. Ledger's Joker is flat out ICONIC. While Loki is just a little bitch that got his ass handled rather easily.

I still enjoyed the Avengers (gave it a solid 8/10). Its a solid popcorn blockbuster but I feel TDKR will offer more...a lot more actually.
Loki is a tragic figure. This is not the same as a little bitch.

But agreed Ledger's performance is much more iconic.
Reply With Quote
  #338  
Old 05-21-2012, 11:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
Loki is a tragic figure. This is not the same as a little bitch.

But agreed Ledger's performance is much more iconic.
Loki was a tragic figure in Thor. He was a little bitch in this.

Even the movie basically acknowledges this considering it ends up not really taking Loki all that seriously as his character's final threats are played as a joke (cut off by Hulk smashing him around like a rag doll).
Reply With Quote
  #339  
Old 05-21-2012, 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by petey View Post
Damn that scarjo pic is sexy.

TDKR is also giving me spidey3 vibes. Midget Bane from south america but has an english accent is Venom. Cat Women is Sand Man, just an un-necessary character. Ras is Green Goblin, the guy that keeps showing up but doesn't really do anything interesting.
The thing with me is that I'm not one of those melodramatic people that think Spider-Man 3 was the cinematic abortion some pretend it to be. When I say TDKR is giving off an SM3 vibe I'm talking about a film that tries too hard to jam too much in to the story and tries to tie the entire trilogy together in a grand fashion that's not really necessary. I'm also talking about trying to follow a much loved film and what those expectations mean to the perceptions of the follow up film. SM3 had its moments that I truly enjoy but is flawed and is nowhere near as good as SM2.

Without Ledger's Joker (as mentioned above) delivering another monotone grim film with everything jammed in means that matching TDK's quality at this point seems like a longshot to me.

Am I to blame for steering this thread in this direction?
Reply With Quote
  #340  
Old 05-22-2012, 10:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCPhoenix View Post
Loki was a tragic figure in Thor. He was a little bitch in this.

Even the movie basically acknowledges this considering it ends up not really taking Loki all that seriously as his character's final threats are played as a joke (cut off by Hulk smashing him around like a rag doll).
Ive tried to argue this, thats the whole point of Loki. Coulson said he lacked conviction, he does.
Reply With Quote
  #341  
Old 05-22-2012, 01:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AspectRatio1986 View Post
..crossing my fingers for Man of Steel.
Keep 'em tightly crossed. If Zack Synder can find a way to f&*k it up, he will. I have no confidence in that man, zero. When Nolan was hired to redo Batman, at least he had serious directing chops. When Wheddon was hired to do Avengers, he was every fan boys wet dream. Synder? He's the guy who made a mess of Watchmen, so forgive the fanboys for wanting him as far away from MOS as possible.
Reply With Quote
  #342  
Old 05-22-2012, 01:57 PM
Snyder is the perfect director fo Supes...I am tired of the old boring SM that only has a man with some kryptonite being his Nļ1 threat...I want this movie to be fun and an enemy that challenges SM and brings him close to his death. I can't wait for a slowmo shot of SM punching the shit out of ZOD.
Reply With Quote
  #343  
Old 05-22-2012, 03:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeChar4321 View Post
The thing with me is that I'm not one of those melodramatic people that think Spider-Man 3 was the cinematic abortion some pretend it to be. When I say TDKR is giving off an SM3 vibe I'm talking about a film that tries too hard to jam too much in to the story and tries to tie the entire trilogy together in a grand fashion that's not really necessary. I'm also talking about trying to follow a much loved film and what those expectations mean to the perceptions of the follow up film. SM3 had its moments that I truly enjoy but is flawed and is nowhere near as good as SM2.

Without Ledger's Joker (as mentioned above) delivering another monotone grim film with everything jammed in means that matching TDK's quality at this point seems like a longshot to me.

Am I to blame for steering this thread in this direction?
Spidey 3 isn't a complete abortion, but it does suffer from plot and character overload because of a lack of balance and connection between said elements. TDKR, on the other hand, doesn't look to suffer from the same flaws that plagued Spidey 3, at least I don't think it does. Nolan balanced everything extremely well in the first two installments, so it's a little inane to make the conclusion that this film will have too many elements jammed into it. TDKR has no more major characters than the previous installments, (remember the TDK pulled off the task of having two major villains, the Joker and Two-Face, in one film), so I don't think having Bane and Catwoman in the same film is excessive.

Also, isn't it a little weird to be making comments about an excessive amount of characters and story elements jammed into one movie when you're simultaneously praising Avengers? That film turned out just fine, and it was at a greater risk than TDKR of having too many elements in one film.

And again, this is my opinion, but Nolan's films are neither monotone or dependent upon Ledger to be successful.
Reply With Quote
  #344  
Old 05-22-2012, 09:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuatroDiablos View Post
Snyder is the perfect director fo Supes...I am tired of the old boring SM that only has a man with some kryptonite being his Nļ1 threat...I want this movie to be fun and an enemy that challenges SM and brings him close to his death. I can't wait for a slowmo shot of SM punching the shit out of ZOD.
The problem is the character himself. Which is why theyve changed him so much for this.
Reply With Quote
  #345  
Old 05-23-2012, 12:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
The problem is the character himself. Which is why theyve changed him so much for this.
You and I have had many differences over the years, and Superman might be the #1 one. So, I won't rehash those arguments here. Here is what I will say:

If WB is motivated to get off its ass and do the right thing by its properties in the wake of the Avengers making ungodly amounts of $$$, that's all the better. However, I think there's a better approach. Instead of making a Justice League movie per se (which would be expensive and unpredictable) go the safe route, at first, and make a movie where A) everyone knows the characters and B) you can use as a trial balloon for expanding the DCU on film. Make a movie simply called "Trinity", that's all you need, and for a poster, go with this:



And for a movie logo, go with:



Problem solved. Such a film would avoid overcrowding characters, because there are only three main ones. It would have built in, what the Avengers did in that Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman are three radically different people with different points of view. It also takes advantage of three of the most famous properties in the known universe, puts them in the same movie, and just lets the hype build. Tell me you wouldn't be down for



See? That's just the thing, Superman doesn't look quite so "Super" in that image above, because nobody looks super when you have a horde of immortal parademons swarming around you trying to destroy you, and they all obey their evil master, Darkseid. A movie like this writes itself, no problem, and would easily be the biggest box office taker of all time, done properly.
Reply With Quote
  #346  
Old 05-23-2012, 01:17 AM
Who else did a marathon of all 5 Avengers movies at home before seeing the film? i did for 2 days starting with Captain America then Iron Man then Incredible Hulk then Iron man 2 and finally Thor.

I saw it opening night and saw this 6 times in theaters, one of the best comic based movies i've ever seen and been a fan of the Avengers since the 80s as a kid as someday i knew they would make a movie based on Avengers.

Mark Ruffalo made the best Banner ever and the Hulk looked more realistic this time.
Reply With Quote
  #347  
Old 05-23-2012, 10:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by soda View Post
You and I have had many differences over the years, and Superman might be the #1 one. So, I won't rehash those arguments here. Here is what I will say:

If WB is motivated to get off its ass and do the right thing by its properties in the wake of the Avengers making ungodly amounts of $$$, that's all the better. However, I think there's a better approach. Instead of making a Justice League movie per se (which would be expensive and unpredictable) go the safe route, at first, and make a movie where A) everyone knows the characters and B) you can use as a trial balloon for expanding the DCU on film. Make a movie simply called "Trinity", that's all you need, and for a poster, go with this:



And for a movie logo, go with:



Problem solved. Such a film would avoid overcrowding characters, because there are only three main ones. It would have built in, what the Avengers did in that Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman are three radically different people with different points of view. It also takes advantage of three of the most famous properties in the known universe, puts them in the same movie, and just lets the hype build. Tell me you wouldn't be down for



See? That's just the thing, Superman doesn't look quite so "Super" in that image above, because nobody looks super when you have a horde of immortal parademons swarming around you trying to destroy you, and they all obey their evil master, Darkseid. A movie like this writes itself, no problem, and would easily be the biggest box office taker of all time, done properly.
It's a problem. Wonder woman would work along the same lines Thor did - big, sprawling mythology. An arrogant character who learns to be more humble. Etc. Thats all fine, if you cast it well.

Superman has some of that too. I never liked the crystal city of Krypton. Luthor even talked about in Superman Returns. How is this supposed to support life - there's no water, no vegetation. Its a crystal desert.

So its like they just have to change EVERYTHING about the guy. Most notably, in my opinion, is Superman's identity crisis.

We know, as far as Batman, than as soon as his parents were gunned down, Bruce Wayne died. Over the next years, Batman was born and grew up, into ultimately a legend. Bruce Wayne became the mask.

But with superman, you have Kal-El, the Krypton son. You have Clark Kent, the blue collar farm boy. Then you have Clark Kent, the white-collar reporter. THEN you have Superman, truth justice and the american way.

He has FOUR identities, man. It's no wonder its so hard to get to the root of his character. Like, why would someone who grew up on a farm move to the city to become a reporter for high society like Metropolis? It doesnt make sense. Never has, except in the early days when the character was new and no one asked questions. He was a reporter so he could be close to the action, and he was white-collar because that was the "american dream." You know, 50's bullshit.

If I was writing Superman, Clark would never be a reporter. He would be blue collar. He'd have a big lumberjack beard. And he would stand up for the rights of the underprivileged, like himself.

Avengers worked because everybody, even Thor, is still relatively weak. When Thor lightning-blasts the Chitauri from the tower, you can see he's winded. He has limits.

Superman never did. When he punches someone, they launch into the atmosphere. How can you have a good fight scene, when he's jsut tossing people around like that?

The guy just doesnt work in todays comic world. the writers at DC have known that for a long time. Hence, red/blue Superman and all the rest.
Reply With Quote
  #348  
Old 05-24-2012, 12:06 PM
If there's ever a Vision, it should be Paul Bettany. He's perfect for the role and there's already the convenient element of Jarvis having his voice. Stark could provide the "vocal module" or whatever to explain that if Pym builds it. Whatevs, one way or another Paul Bettany is the perfect vision.

Coulson wouldn't be so bad, but wouldn't be exactly right either.
Reply With Quote
  #349  
Old 05-24-2012, 06:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoPanFan View Post
Who else did a marathon of all 5 Avengers movies at home before seeing the film? i did for 2 days starting with Captain America then Iron Man then Incredible Hulk then Iron man 2 and finally Thor.

I saw it opening night and saw this 6 times in theaters, one of the best comic based movies i've ever seen and been a fan of the Avengers since the 80s as a kid as someday i knew they would make a movie based on Avengers.

Mark Ruffalo made the best Banner ever and the Hulk looked more realistic this time.
Same here! It's three weeks in and I still am going to see it again this weekend. It certainly holds up well over repeat viewing and it still feels like visiting old friends when I'm sitting there watching and enjoying it.
Reply With Quote
  #350  
Old 05-24-2012, 06:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoPanFan View Post
Who else did a marathon of all 5 Avengers movies at home before seeing the film? i did for 2 days starting with Captain America then Iron Man then Incredible Hulk then Iron man 2 and finally Thor.
I thought about it, but I only own the two Iron Man movies and I ultimately didn't get around to watching either of them. Maybe in the future, I'll get some kind of marathon in where I watch all the Marvel movies. I will be getting The Avengers when it's released on blu-ray and depending on the Mrs., maybe the others as well.
Reply With Quote
  #351  
Old 05-24-2012, 08:50 PM
I've seen it twice and I'm going to see it again next week. I'm really excited about going because the girlfriend and I are taking my six year old nephews. I know they'll love it.

I feel like it's time to say that I really did stick my foot in my mouth when someone said a few months that this movie would the biggest film of the year and I said simply no, and that The Dark Knight Rises will biggest money maker of the year. In seeing the numbers, I just don't see how Dark Knight Rises will be able to compete that. I guess it's still a long way until July 20th, I just think it has a really long way to go to beat The Avengers.

Last edited by Frosty_86; 05-24-2012 at 08:59 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #352  
Old 05-25-2012, 06:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erroneous View Post
I loved the Hulk. Finally, they got the Hulk right!
Everybody praises the Hulk, but what made his appearance so great?

In my opinion what made the Hulk work this time is:
He finally is a hero instead of an outlaw on the run for the military. As much as The Incredible Hulk was supposed to be a reboot it, all it actually did was change the Hulk's origin a bit. Ang Lee's Hulk ended in South America and that's where Incredible started. Basically both movies had Hulk being hunted by the military and the military makes a bland enemy especially for two movies.
Hulk finally smashed. He was destroying stuff in Hulk and Incredible, but in Avengers he stomped a giant spaceship to the ground. That is smashing! The way he handled the Chitauri was brutal and of course his pummeling of Loki is already legendary.
And for the first time Bruce Banner was an intriguing character. From the way he talked about the Hulk (the other guy) to the revelations that the Hulk might be immortal and that Banner was able to control his Hulk-outs and the Hulk himself.

I think Hulk works great as a supporting character in a movie, but I just don't see him as a main character. Especially since movie Banner tries to Hulk out as little as possible and comic Hulk is usually just the Hulk. Hulk walking in the dessert and encounters aliens who try to take over the world. Those plots are so outlandish it doesn't work in a movie.
Reply With Quote
  #353  
Old 05-26-2012, 02:58 PM
Who thinks this could be the Star Wars of comic book movies? i believe so, where Batman Begins/The Dark Knight are the Godfathers 1 & 2 of comic book movies.
Reply With Quote
  #354  
Old 05-26-2012, 11:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoPanFan View Post
Who thinks this could be the Star Wars of comic book movies? i believe so, where Batman Begins/The Dark Knight are the Godfathers 1 & 2 of comic book movies.
I've read comparisons of

Avengers = Star Wars
TDK = Aliens

Both in the same genre but different. I can see that.
Reply With Quote
  #355  
Old 05-27-2012, 12:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo_bravo View Post
Not to make this a TDK/Avengers pissing contest but the thing that was vastly superior about TDK is the villain. Ledger's Joker is flat out ICONIC. While Loki is just a little bitch that got his ass handled rather easily.
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
Loki is a tragic figure. This is not the same as a little bitch.

But agreed Ledger's performance is much more iconic.
I didn't mind Loki at all as a villain in the film, he was the first villain the Avengers faced together




But I also agree, Ledger's Joker was much more iconic. The Joker related to Batman on a ono-on-one human level. The only person Loki could really relate to was Thor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JCPhoenix View Post
Loki was a tragic figure in Thor. He was a little bitch in this.

Even the movie basically acknowledges this considering it ends up not really taking Loki all that seriously as his character's final threats are played as a joke (cut off by Hulk smashing him around like a rag doll).
The Hulk beating the hell out of Loki doesn't mean that Loki isn't taken seriously, it's more of a play on how the Hulk doesn't care who you are. The Hulk even stepped to Zeus and hit him first!



But then he got the worst ass-beating ever!





Reply With Quote
  #356  
Old 05-27-2012, 01:43 AM
Hulk is strongest there is. Period.
Reply With Quote
  #357  
Old 05-27-2012, 02:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
Hulk is strongest there is. Period.
Except when going against higher Gods

He's one of my all-time faves, and gets major points for even threatening Galactus lol!
Reply With Quote
  #358  
Old 05-27-2012, 12:22 PM

I'd welcome a Hawkeye/Black Widow film. Anyone else?
Reply With Quote
  #359  
Old 05-27-2012, 01:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo_bravo View Post
I'd welcome a Hawkeye/Black Widow film. Anyone else?
Definitely. I also am really behind a Son of Coul movie.



Because he doesnt exist in the comics they dont have to secure the rights. And they could do whatever zany stuff they want, because there's no expectations for it.

Like, we could open the film in Hell. And have Hela and fallen bad guys. And then Thor and Hulk barge to break his ass out! Battle Hela and escape because they NEED HIS HELP for some reason. Oh glory of glories.
Reply With Quote
  #360  
Old 05-29-2012, 07:52 PM

I saw it at midnight opening day. It was awesome... even in 3-D. Oh, I hate 3-D. Two Thumbs up.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump