Avengers: Age Of Ultron - Official Thread *Spoilers*

[MooseMouthMthafuga]

I was reading on tumblr how the hulk looks like he's crying when he see's the hulkbuster. Not out of fear but out of hurt feelings Tony is such a scumbag.

profound.

 

[NV-ME]

gotta go back and watch that shytty animated (but great story) avengers cartoon from a few years ago. anybody have links to it? I think I had it on a deceased external.

 

[MartyMcFly]

Kind of disagree with you there, breh.

Both the hero and villain are important, but they don't have to be equal sides. Like RDJ completely outshined every villain he had in his movies, but Joker completely outshined Batman in TDK. Rambo outshined his villians, John Matrix did as well, etc.


To me, it depends on what kind of story you are trying to tell. I feel like a lot of cats are either limiting their perspective on what a good movie could be or completely biased to what they like in a movie. We all have different preferences, but the movie I choose to watch is what it's billed as. When I go see an Iron Man movie, I want to see IRON MAN, fukk a villain. TDK was basically a Joker movie, which was great but Batman was close to a non factor in it. When I go see a Rocky movie, I want to see a movie about ROCKY, not specifically about everyone else.

And keeping it real, I had absolutely no problem with Loki, Ronan, Winter Solder, Iron Monger or most of the marvel villains, but they mostly all pale in comparison to the Joker, but each and every one of Marvel's heroes outshine Baleman too. I think its more about what you are looking for in the movie.

Ok here's where I agree with you on the fact: Rambo did outshine his villains but that's also the function of the movie. Rambo was set up as a symbol. His villains could be faceless people as he was the military man righting the wrongs of Vietnam etc. And I never said a movie couldn't be good with a weak villain. I love Guardians but the villain is weak as hell to me, didn't take away my love of the movie one bit. If you're movie is going to be a character study, like Iron Man 3, then the villain is kinda superfluous in my mind because you're really trying to break this character down and understand what makes them tick but if it's something like Iron Man 2 or The Avengers, you need a dope villain and Loki is the best villain they've created so far.

And breh, Bale's Batman shyts on Thor and Incredible Hulk by a mile, and Hawkeye even though I love the character. So not every one of their heroes outshine him not at all. Batman isn't supposed to be a charismatic guy, he's a detective first and foremost who is presumably always the most capable and smartest person in the room

 

[TNC]

all fair points, but I believe the exception has to be made when it comes to certain characters. of the characters in marvel cinematic universe lineup none of them have a villain that is so essential to their mythos like joker is to batman's.

joker is more iconic as a villain than those guys are as heroes, so naturally he's more likely to share centerstage with his movie's lead hero than the villain in a iron man or cap movie.

when it comes to the "arch nemesis" villains, the jokers, the luthors, the magnetos, etc... an exception needs to be made. they are too essential to the mythology.

I hear what you are saying man, but that's exactly why none of those Marvel villains should be held to the same standard as Joker is. If the Marvel villains are not as integral and impactful to their respective heroes as Joker is to Batman, why even attempt to hold them to the same standards? That's a futile endeavor to begin with.

And Keeping it 100%, The Avenger's most iconic villain is probably Ultron, not Loki. That's why people complaining should just wait and see IMO. Marvel hasn't even gotten a chance to show their best villians yet, I don't see why the standards is made off of lesser known guys.

 

[MooseMouthMthafuga]

"Is it just me, or is Hulk/Bruce crying here? Like he really doesn’t want to do this? Like he’s trying so hard to be good but is breaking anyway? And the only person who he wants to turn to, is currently suiting up to put him down. Why? Why are you doing this Tony? I just want peace. Let me be in peace. I don’t want to hurt you, but the Hulk will, I know the Hulk, I am the Hulk."


I guess that's what Mark Ruffalo meant when he said "Not only is banner going to hulk out...The Hulk is going to hulk out"

Joss Whedon about to drop his career masterpiece

 

[MartyMcFly]

I hear what you are saying man, but that's exactly why none of those Marvel villains should be held to the same standard as Joker is. If the Marvel villains are not as integral and impactful to their respective heroes as Joker is to Batman, why even attempt to hold them to the same standards? That's a futile endeavor to begin with.

And Keeping it 100%, The Avenger's most iconic villain is probably Ultron, not Loki. That's why people complaining should just wait and see IMO. Marvel hasn't even gotten a chance to show their best villians yet, I don't see why the standards is made off of lesser known guys.

I'd never compare any of them to the joker because none of the villains they have in their stable in the marvel universe as a whole, comics included, can measure up to Joker save Green Goblin, Doc Ock and possibly Kingpin. And Magneto of course, guys who are the antithesis to the main hero and who push them beyond their limits and cause great loss in the hero's lives. But I just feel like a lot of their villains could be written better that's all. Give the dudes a bit more to do. Loki has killed it and he's been developed greatly and allowed to flourish. I don't want to be in a movie where you're telling me how dope Ronan is and how threatening he is and then it ends up being a It's a lot of telling rather than a lot of showing

 

[TNC]

Ok here's where I agree with you on the fact: Rambo did outshine his villains but that's also the function of the movie. Rambo was set up as a symbol. His villains could be faceless people as he was the military man righting the wrongs of Vietnam etc. And I never said a movie couldn't be good with a weak villain. I love Guardians but the villain is weak as hell to me, didn't take away my love of the movie one bit. If you're movie is going to be a character study, like Iron Man 3, then the villain is kinda superfluous in my mind because you're really trying to break this character down and understand what makes them tick but if it's something like Iron Man 2 or The Avengers, you need a dope villain and Loki is the best villain they've created so far.

I liked Ronin and felt he was more than capable bad guy. Phyiscally he was a threat beyond anything the heroes could match individually or as a team. They literally had to him with a spaceship, a cannon and the infinity gem just to beat him, I don't think him NOT being a threat on that level is valid. As far as his character, I felt they explained his motivations as a religious fanatic and ties with the "ultimate evil" in the universe were explained well. I'm at a loss as to what people actually wanted from him.

The movie is called "Guardians of the Galaxy" not "Ronin The Accuser". Unless you wanted a 4 hour movie, they didn't have time to explain each of the Guardians' backstories AND give Ronin a large fleshed out background too. Using other Marvel villains as a standard, outside of Loki and MAYBE Winter Soldier outshines him? Just to continue the Joker comparison, I loved his portrayal in TDK, but because Joker was so expanded on, I felt like we didn't get much Batman, and I still feel Baleman wasn't a great representative of the Batman character (WHERE were the detective skills?!?) but that's an argument for another day...

And Loki has been in 3 Marvel movies thus far, he's the best villain because he's had the most time to be fleshed out so far.

And breh, Bale's Batman shyts on Thor and Incredible Hulk by a mile, and Hawkeye even though I love the character. So not every one of their heroes outshine him not at all. Batman isn't supposed to be a charismatic guy, he's a detective first and foremost who is presumably always the most capable and smartest person in the room

Umm.. I kind of disagree here. I felt Bale's Batman was kind of weak overall. My main issues were that he didn't embody most of the characteristics that Batman is defined by. Almost ZERO detective skills (Fox had to find Joker, not Batman, Talia played him and Batman walked right into Bane's set up), was a complete simp and attached to every woman he'd met, Being ok with the killing of his enemies (Batman has mercilessly beaten other heroes for trying to kill villians), No unwavering commitment to justice, fighting crime or GOTHAM in general (Batman leaving Gotham for a broad ), etc. Hemsworth's Thor captured Thor's character MUCH MORE than Bale's Batman did IMO. This does not mean the TDK trilogy is not good, but I think it failed to capture the spirit of Batman and his character. You could have easily put James Bond, Hawkeye or another street level hero and the exact same stories could have been told.

And Batman is not supposed to be charismatic but Bruce Wayne is. Maybe I'm nitpicking here myself, but as a fan of the characters in the comics, I often get disappointed when the character that translates to the big screen is nothing like the character I read about. To me, it defeats the point of using the character.

 

[TNC]

I'd never compare any of them to the joker because none of the villains they have in their stable in the marvel universe as a whole, comics included, can measure up to Joker save Green Goblin, Doc Ock and possibly Kingpin. And Magneto of course, guys who are the antithesis to the main hero and who push them beyond their limits and cause great loss in the hero's lives. But I just feel like a lot of their villains could be written better that's all. Give the dudes a bit more to do. Loki has killed it and he's been developed greatly and allowed to flourish. I don't want to be in a movie where you're telling me how dope Ronan is and how threatening he is and then it ends up being a It's a lot of telling rather than a lot of showing

Well Joker is a top 5 villain in comics IMO, but there are quite a bit that can measure up to him IMO, most notably Doom, Magneto, Thanos and Luthor. Whom I hope we get to see all on the big screen.

But I hear you on maybe their villains could be better. I feel like Marvel has yet to even show their full hand when it comes to the catalogue of villains they have at their disposal. They are still universe building right now and we are in the middle of phase 2, by the time phase 3 rolls around all these villain complains should be put to rest.

 

[MartyMcFly]

I liked Ronin and felt he was more than capable bad guy. Phyiscally he was a threat beyond anything the heroes could match individually or as a team. They literally had to him with a spaceship, a cannon and the infinity gem just to beat him, I don't think him NOT being a threat on that level is valid. As far as his character, I felt they explained his motivations as a religious fanatic and ties with the "ultimate evil" in the universe were explained well. I'm at a loss as to what people actually wanted from him.

The movie is called "Guardians of the Galaxy" not "Ronin The Accuser". Unless you wanted a 4 hour movie, they didn't have time to explain each of the Guardians' backstories AND give Ronin a large fleshed out background too. Using other Marvel villains as a standard, outside of Loki and MAYBE Winter Soldier outshines him? Just to continue the Joker comparison, I loved his portrayal in TDK, but because Joker was so expanded on, I felt like we didn't get much Batman, and I still feel Baleman wasn't a great representative of the Batman character (WHERE were the detective skills?!?) but that's an argument for another day...

And Loki has been in 3 Marvel movies thus far, he's the best villain because he's had the most time to be fleshed out so far.




Umm.. I kind of disagree here. I felt Bale's Batman was kind of weak overall. My main issues were that he didn't embody most of the characteristics that Batman is defined by. Almost ZERO detective skills (Fox had to find Joker, not Batman, Talia played him and Batman walked right into Bane's set up), was a complete simp and attached to every woman he'd met, Being ok with the killing of his enemies (Batman has mercilessly beaten other heroes for trying to kill villians), No unwavering commitment to justice, fighting crime or GOTHAM in general (Batman leaving Gotham for a broad ), etc. Hemsworth's Thor captured Thor's character MUCH MORE than Bale's Batman did IMO. This does not mean the TDK trilogy is not good, but I think it failed to capture the spirit of Batman and his character. You could have easily put James Bond, Hawkeye or another street level hero and the exact same stories could have been told.

And Batman is not supposed to be charismatic but Bruce Wayne is. Maybe I'm nitpicking here myself, but as a fan of the characters in the comics, I often get disappointed when the character that translates to the big screen is nothing like the character I read about. To me, it defeats the point of using the character.

We agree on the last point although I felt he made a good Bruce. But his batman wasn't written to be as dope as he should be but I'd still take him over Thor but that's me. And most of the marvel heroes on the marvel studios side minus cap and iron man.

And I know it's about the guardians breh but I just prefer stronger written antagonist when I'm hearing about how dope they are. The funny thing is I made your argument when it comes to the spider man movies all of them even the recent ones, that because of the nature of Peter Parker, the villains will never be the main attraction nor always be that compelling because what Peter is going through should always be the most compelling part of the story but I'd also argue that the spider man movies have been wiling to go to certain places that the marvel movies haven't been willing to go yet in terms of loss and tragedy and inner conflict played straight not for laughs. So you and I agree for the most part I just think that it's the separation between a good movie and a great movie in most respects.

 

[Monoblock]

"Is it just me, or is Hulk/Bruce crying here? Like he really doesn’t want to do this? Like he’s trying so hard to be good but is breaking anyway? And the only person who he wants to turn to, is currently suiting up to put him down. Why? Why are you doing this Tony? I just want peace. Let me be in peace. I don’t want to hurt you, but the Hulk will, I know the Hulk, I am the Hulk."


I guess that's what Mark Ruffalo meant when he said "Not only is banner going to hulk out...The Hulk is going to hulk out"

Joss Whedon about to drop his career masterpiece

Spoiler

I think Scarlett Witch takes over and has him fighting Tony against his will

 

[Dillah810]

 

[TNC]

We agree on the last point although I felt he made a good Bruce. But his batman wasn't written to be as dope as he should be but I'd still take him over Thor but that's me. And most of the marvel heroes on the marvel studios side minus cap and iron man.

And I know it's about the guardians breh but I just prefer stronger written antagonist when I'm hearing about how dope they are. The funny thing is I made your argument when it comes to the spider man movies all of them even the recent ones, that because of the nature of Peter Parker, the villains will never be the main attraction nor always be that compelling because what Peter is going through should always be the most compelling part of the story but I'd also argue that the spider man movies have been wiling to go to certain places that the marvel movies haven't been willing to go yet in terms of loss and tragedy and inner conflict played straight not for laughs. So you and I agree for the most part I just think that it's the separation between a good movie and a great movie in most respects.

I felt Bale made a good Bruce, maybe not a GREAT one, but it didn't really detract from the film tho. Out of Marvel's movies, I think Evans, RDJ and Hemsworth have all greatly captured the characters they are playing at their core and probably why they are the focus of the Marvel Cinematic Universe atm. But that's just a personal preference, we might have different preferences and that's ok, I'm not trying to take shots, its good to have various opinions IMO.

Ultimately my man, all these comics movies are a GOOD thing IMO, even if we get a load of shytty ones and some amazing ones. I respect the fact they are all doing different styles as well because its gives the genre variance. Nobody is going to do what Marvel does better than Marvel, so I'd rather they not try because it would just come off as a cheap imitation. DC is going a different route with their franchises and I think that's good for their universe because it makes them stand out from what Marvel is offering. And even the Fox and Sony movies are doing something different too, the more variance we get, the more data we get to see what works and what doesn't. Which should lead into overall better movies for everybody.

 

[MartyMcFly]

I felt Bale made a good Bruce, maybe not a GREAT one, but it didn't really detract from the film tho. Out of Marvel's movies, I think Evans, RDJ and Hemsworth have all greatly captured the characters they are playing at their core and probably why they are the focus of the Marvel Cinematic Universe atm. But that's just a personal preference, we might have different preferences and that's ok, I'm not trying to take shots, its good to have various opinions IMO.

Ultimately my man, all these comics movies are a GOOD thing IMO, even if we get a load of shytty ones and some amazing ones. I respect the fact they are all doing different styles as well because its gives the genre variance. Nobody is going to do what Marvel does better than Marvel, so I'd rather they not try because it would just come off as a cheap imitation. DC is going a different route with their franchises and I think that's good for their universe because it makes them stand out from what Marvel is offering. And even the Fox and Sony movies are doing something different too, the more variance we get, the more data we get to see what works and what doesn't. Which should lead into overall better movies for everybody.

Word. I prefer different. Which is why I'm glad dc is doing something different entirely. I don't want to see carbon copies just like I don't want to read the same comic over and over and over. I appreciate sony and fox thinking outside of the box as well. I said it before: just keep feeding me that's all I ask

 

[Norrin Radd]

Kevin Feige confirmed a rumor that's been going around the last few weeks.

Spoiler

New Avengers team at the end of the movie.

That fractured storytelling portends a momentous shake-up in what we’ve come to know as the Marvel Cinematic Universe, a sense that’s made all the more palpable in the trailer for the film. “The Avengers films, ideally, in the grand plan are always big, giant linchpins,” says producer and Marvel Studios chief Kevin Feige on the Age of Ultron set. “It’s like as it was in publishing, when each of the characters would go on their own adventures and then occasionally team up for a big, 12-issue mega-event. Then they would go back into their own comics, and be changed from whatever that event was. I envision the same thing occurring after this movie, because the [Avengers] roster is altered by the finale of this film.”

http://www.buzzfeed.com/adambvary/thor-captain-america-avengers-age-of-ultron-set-visit

 

[R=G]

Scarlet Witch is gonna snap her fingers and beat Ultron..lol