AVENGERS: Grade, Reviews, Discuss, DVD & Sequel **SPOILERS**

[indianatrekker26]

Sagart wrote:

---

I don't want to sound antagonistic but why would you visit and post a comment in a thread you have no interest in?
I know it's your right to do so but why bother? Just curious, that's all.

just throwing my 2 cents in, just as if i joined a conversation amongst friends who are talking about a subject.

[indianatrekker26]

Ethros wrote:

---

Just for the record, I thought the 3D was great, in the big action scenes at the end it made it even more phenomenal.

I don't think i'll ever be sold on 3D. I've seen a few movies in 3D, but every time, the movie is too dark to see. Star Wars in 3D looked like garbage. So i don't know if that's just how 3D is, or if the theatres i went to just don't light up the screen well enough.

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

negative review with ending spoiled

[Pauln6]

I'm not a fan of the Avengers but I enjoyed the movie. It had a decent amount of character development, decent pace, they didn't allow it to turn into a special-effect brain-scramble like Transformers, and no one character was allowed to dominate (unlike the X-men movies). My issue with the movie is my issue with the Avengers, namely that the gulf between the super-powered characters and 'non-powered' characters is just ludicrously large. I was also a bit disappointed that Widow didn't seem to use any of her iconic equipment like her grapple line, wall-crawling gloves, or Widow's Bite but overall, I though she had an enjoyable development arc. I love Loki and the Hulk's story arc was well done too. Maria Hill seemed like a bit too much of an underling but maybe they though having two bad ass agents might lead to too much friction on screen. I think I prefer Cap's WWII outfit but his costume wasn't as hideous as it could have been.

Overall A-

[Zaku]

Pauln6 wrote:

---

I was also a bit disappointed that Widow didn't seem to use any of her iconic equipment like her [...] Widow's Bite [...]

She used the Widow's bite several times! But I can understand that in the heat of the battle...

[Ethros]

Just got back from second viewing. Sweeee

It is great, but its not the greatest movie ever made is all, but it sure is a heck of a lot of fun. Can't wait to see what all the deleted scenes stuff is like (who's betting the DVD ends up an almost vanilla release, with all the extras going on to the Bluray? As all DVDs seem to be like nowadays. Not that I'm complaining, I upgraded a while ago, but it is a bit unfair.)

I'd still say the second half is a lot better than the first half. Although I think in my initial viewing, my lack of full enjoyment at the beginning may have been to us sitting slightly too close to the front, and having to strain my neck looking up too much



"And there's someone else you managed to piss off..."

"His name was Phil."

[Nowhere Man]

sojourner wrote:

---

Jesus, do we really need 5 Avengers threads?

I think there should be a thread grading the grading and review.

[SalvorHardin]

I just got back from viewing it, another happy customer here.
I never would have thought that Whedon would handle this movie so well.

Not much else for now, A-

[Captain Craig]

More talk about when and how another solo Hulk film might happen. This time it's not Kevin Feige talking but Paul Gitter(President of Consumer Products) at Marvel.

As THE AVENGERS climbs towards $200 million in international box office, early reviews are already proclaiming it to be a success. Along with that, everyone seems to be saying how much they love The Hulk.

With two mediocre films released already, Marvel had no plans on returning Hulk to a solo film any time soon. But, Marvel's Paul Gitter had different things to say in a recent interview: If Hulk’s successful turnaround continues, Gitter says Marvel “will spin him off to a stand-alone program next year,” supported by a big budget franchise movie in 2015. The entertainment studio is also exploring ways to promote Hulk as a “corporate icon,” similar to MetLife’s usage of Peanuts’ Snoopy, where The Hulk’s image conveys a message about channeling strength to overcome workplace challenges.Looks like we will know after this Friday when THE AVENGERS opens in the US if Hulk will smash his way back to an adventure of his very own.

Word is that Hulk is something of a scene stealer a few times in the film. This was something I'd hoped for and it seems that for all the naysayers who said another solo Hulk film was a lost cause are being shown that actually it's not.

Man I can't wait to see this in 3 days!!

[Klaus]

Here's a look at future plans, w/some of the same quotes as above...

Marvel's Five-Year Plan For The Avengers To Rescue The Movies

[Aldo]

Here's my question (and no, I haven't seen the movie yet).

How can we ever take a solo film seriously again? If they know there are other heroes out there why bother taking on any future supervillain alone? Why not just Assemble again and do it as a team?

Obviously the real world reason is because they can make more money off of multiple movies, but I'm curious what the in-universe reasoning would be.

[DAYoung]

Aldo wrote:

---

Here's my question (and no, I haven't seen the movie yet).

How can we ever take a solo film seriously again? If they know there are other heroes out there why bother taking on any future supervillain alone? Why not just Assemble again and do it as a team?

Obviously the real world reason is because they can make more money off of multiple movies, but I'm curious what the in-universe reasoning would be.

It's partly a matter of perspective. You still have multiple characters in a solo story (film, comic, TV episode), but you do it from the perspective of one (or perhaps two).

So in a Captain America tale, he's still alongside friends, colleagues, comrades, but it's chiefly his story. Falcon drops in, says a few things, then goes away. Likewise for Iron Man, and so on.

[Aldo]

It's not a big deal for me, since they do it in the comics all the time. I was wondering if they'd go out of their way to explain anything in the film.

[Nowhere Man]

Aldo wrote:

---

Here's my question (and no, I haven't seen the movie yet).

How can we ever take a solo film seriously again? If they know there are other heroes out there why bother taking on any future supervillain alone? Why not just Assemble again and do it as a team?

Obviously the real world reason is because they can make more money off of multiple movies, but I'm curious what the in-universe reasoning would be.

Couldn't they just establish that some enemies are local and can be handled by one guy or are unique and specific to one guy, while others are more national or global. You wouldn't call the Army to deal with a bank robber would you?

For example, it's rumored that the sequel with feature Skrulls and one or more of our heroes will be a Skrull. I would guess Cap. and Tony would be Skrulls, so there would be a huge problem that would require the whole team.

OTOH, if there is a villain that is only making a bad day for one guy, then no need for the team. They will probably just make a joke, like Jarvis saying, "why don't you ask for help sir?", "I can handle it myself," or " Cap is off fighting so and so, Thor went back home, Banner is on the run and Cap is doing blah, blah, blah, I'm going to have to do this one alone."

[SalvorHardin]

Aldo wrote:

---

It's not a big deal for me, since they do it in the comics all the time. I was wondering if they'd go out of their way to explain anything in the film.

Well, they do take a few minutes in the end of the movie to say & show how every hero leaves and goes his/her own way, far away from each other.
But they will still be there if Earth needs them again for some huge threat.