FinalGwen
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Particularly fond of muffins.
Posts: 16,462
|
Post by FinalGwen on May 5, 2015 19:55:15 GMT -5
I'll take the 'he was chased off Twitter' stuff with a grain of salt. People said the same about Steven Moffat and it turned out he left for totally different reasons. And given Joss got in trouble with the studios lately for trashing Jurassic World on Twitter...
(Also Whedon's 'feminism' is such a myopic view of feminism that excludes all notions of intersectionality and allowed him to justify to himself that he fired Charisma Carpenter from Angel for getting pregnant, told her she wouldn't get killed off if she returned for a story, then killed her off once she'd signed on...)
|
|
andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,084
|
Post by andrew8798 on May 5, 2015 20:00:12 GMT -5
Also seems Joss and Marvel didn't get along during the editing of the movie
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2015 20:44:14 GMT -5
Joss sounds like a college student that wrote a C research paper and blamed the professor.
|
|
wisdomwizard
King Koopa
Too Salty
Watching you.
Posts: 11,087
|
Post by wisdomwizard on May 5, 2015 20:49:34 GMT -5
Don't want this going off-topic, but pro-Gamergate people are supporting the director using #ComeBackJossWhedon. Mind you, this was the same group he compared to the KKK. That's all I'll say in regards to GG in this thread.
For myself, I think people over there went way too far. I thought Black Widow's backstory made her feel a lot more human.
|
|
AFN: Judge Shred
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wanted to change his doohicky.
Member of The Bluetista Buyers Club
Posts: 18,221
|
Post by AFN: Judge Shred on May 5, 2015 21:25:22 GMT -5
Sometimes the only one you can trust is yourself.![](http://cdn.tss.uproxx.com/TSS/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/ixgBnY7iZe4jb.gif) On the movie: Personally I loved it. I also think my perspective on it is different than the average person. A lot of people tend to compare the MCU movies to what happens in the comics and debate on how close it got to certain things or how it deviated too far, but I look at the movies not only as stand alone "Story-Archs/Issues/Trade Paper back in motion" but something akin to the Ultimate Universe where it's yet another realm where origins of characters and the characters themselves are presented differently. I think it's a bit silly to say "It should have been like this" or "If character x or storyline y were more like how they were presented in book z" because this is yet another place to explore. Now I'm not justifying going insane and completely eradicating the fundamentals of how characters are but having different interpretations of certain events in regards of who did what is okay in my book. I'm super pumped for what's to come and will collapse in the theater during Avengers: Infinity War Parts 1&2 due to the sheer joy of seeing Thanos/Infinity Gauntlet in a live action setting. I think a whole lot of those complaints have died off though. I haven't heard a single thing about how this stacks up to the comics aside from casually mentioning Wanda and Pietro's heritage. I haven't really heard it with any of the Marvel movies since phase 1. Dc flicks and X-men/Spider-man on the other hand... Hooo doggy. But I think we expect a certain level of quality as far as story and character go and we get that so the whining has largely stopped.
|
|
|
Post by Sparvid on May 5, 2015 22:32:08 GMT -5
I'll take the 'he was chased off Twitter' stuff with a grain of salt. People said the same about Steven Moffat and it turned out he left for totally different reasons. And given Joss got in trouble with the studios lately for trashing Jurassic World on Twitter... And Whedon himself has previously complained that Twitter takes up too much of his time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2015 22:47:33 GMT -5
I think a whole lot of those complaints have died off though. I haven't heard a single thing about how this stacks up to the comics aside from casually mentioning Wanda and Pietro's heritage. I haven't really heard it with any of the Marvel movies since phase 1. Dc flicks and X-men/Spider-man on the other hand... Hooo doggy. But I think we expect a certain level of quality as far as story and character go and we get that so the whining has largely stopped. It wasn't long ago that people were debating that the movie would have been better/worse had Hank Pym created Ultron instead of {Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}Tony Stark. Meanwhile I can't help but think to myself: "That's not really the point here." This is a whole new take on existing properties. You have 616, The Ultimate Universe, Marvel MAX, Marvel Knights etc.. and now the Movieverse. Wanting the movieverse to operate exactly like 616 is like saying the Ultimate Universe should be the same as 616 when the whole concept is that it's supposed to be a different interpretation. The whole MCU (which exception to Phase 1 since that was an establishing phase) is transitional. I think that is why people tended to enjoy phase 1 movies more. They could operate as stand alone Avengers 1 included. Avengers 1 was the capstone to everything that happened thus far. Phase 2 has all been about moving the narrative towards Civil War/Infinity War. To get a full picture of everything you have to keep up with all the movies. Allow me to give an example. Thor 2 took some criticism for the main villain. He wasn't memorable, he wasn't a good villain. ( You hear a lot for that for phase 2. Even with Ultron. ) In my opinion the Dark Elves as a whole where the villain, that guy was just the leader. Phase 2 focuses more on the events than a singular person and each movie is the next subsequent entry on the whole over-arching story. Some are tie-ins ( i.e. only minimally related to the over all arch but pushes forward character development which will be important later on ) or they have a more significant connection. Some people wanted Ultron to be this really menacing villain that is really tough to defeat ( comparing his prowess to that of the comics, which again, he's a different interpretation )but in my opinion that wasn't the intention. The intention was to use Ultron to further illustrate Stark's disconnect between what he wants for the world and what he's actually doing ( And the madness you in turn create for yourself along the way due to that) and use that to lay the foundation for Civil War. Civil War will be used similarly. I think the movies are not stand alone by design and while it may prove to be a issue in the short term, I think the long term plan of having a 20 something movie franchise with an over-arching plot will pay off in the end. This is the first time anyone really has done that. We aren't used to that. And if someone prefers stand alone movies, that's cool too. I certainly want the movies to be strong enough to stand on their own. I just think that all to often people see an error in what was actually intent.
|
|
|
Post by Ryback on a Pole! on May 5, 2015 23:03:25 GMT -5
I enjoyed Age of Ultron more than the first Avengers movie. The first one was good, but it seemed to go on too long and it got to the point where I was checking my watch and waiting for it to end. This one was just right, although Ultron wasn't as cool a badguy as Loki.
I also agree with the 9 year old kid who was posted earlier. If they've got Thor and Hulk why do they need Hawkeye? I actually like Hawkeye, he's one of my favourites but he kinda sticks out as the team's weak link.
|
|
|
Post by Bang Bang Bart on May 5, 2015 23:23:39 GMT -5
I enjoyed Age of Ultron more than the first Avengers movie. The first one was good, but it seemed to go on too long and it got to the point where I was checking my watch and waiting for it to end. This one was just right, although Ultron wasn't as cool a badguy as Loki. I also agree with the 9 year old kid who was posted earlier. If they've got Thor and Hulk why do they need Hawkeye? I actually like Hawkeye, he's one of my favourites but he kinda sticks out as the team's weak link. The film did kinda answer that by having him be a family man. He's the most down-to-earth out of the bunch that includes a super-soldier from the 1940s, a rich jerk with a heart of gold and a suit of armor, a literal Norse God, a master assassin, and a doctor who turns into a giant green monster thing.
|
|
AFN: Judge Shred
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wanted to change his doohicky.
Member of The Bluetista Buyers Club
Posts: 18,221
|
Post by AFN: Judge Shred on May 5, 2015 23:42:00 GMT -5
I enjoyed Age of Ultron more than the first Avengers movie. The first one was good, but it seemed to go on too long and it got to the point where I was checking my watch and waiting for it to end. This one was just right, although Ultron wasn't as cool a badguy as Loki. I also agree with the 9 year old kid who was posted earlier. If they've got Thor and Hulk why do they need Hawkeye? I actually like Hawkeye, he's one of my favourites but he kinda sticks out as the team's weak link. The film did kinda answer that by having him be a family man. He's the most down-to-earth out of the bunch that includes a super-soldier from the 1940s, a rich jerk with a heart of gold and a suit of armor, a literal Norse God, a master assassin, and a doctor who turns into a giant green monster thing. I think he may have saved more lives than anyone too. Plus he was killing drones left and fricken right. I actually felt he may have come of a bit over powered.
|
|
Johnny B. Decent
Patti Mayonnaise
Had one once
Everybody's Favorite Arizonian.
Posts: 31,108
|
Post by Johnny B. Decent on May 5, 2015 23:55:39 GMT -5
I also agree with the 9 year old kid who was posted earlier. If they've got Thor and Hulk why do they need Hawkeye? I actually like Hawkeye, he's one of my favourites but he kinda sticks out as the team's weak link. When me and my dad, an Army veteran, saw the first Avengers together, we had a talk about that, and he worked out the squad like thus: He compare The Hulk to a tank, Iron Man to a aerial fighter/bomber, Thor as a Gunship, Hawkeye and Black Widow as the infantry and Captain America as the CO. I don't know if that works for others, but it did make a good amount of sense to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2015 0:37:42 GMT -5
The problem is that Ultron being a menacing, challenging villain but also being the dark reflection of Stark's ambitions aren't mutually exclusive things. He could have been both, and the trailers made it seem like he was going to be that, especially the first one. But he wasn't that much of a physical threat or mental threat either. If anything, the Avengers themselves, as they are presented in these films, are their own biggest villains. Which works on the page, but maybe doesn't work as well on-screen. Or, Marvel hasn't yet made that work on-screen. But on the flipside, the antagonists are either forgettable or interchangeable. I mean, people love the Winter Soldier but the real bad guy of that movie is an old white man in a suit. Aldrich Killian was a younger white man in a suit (and douchey dragon tattoos). Daredevil is receiving a lot of praise but even the Kingpin is another guy in a suit. Malekith is an elf with magical powers but we didn't really see much of that in Thor 2. Ultron taps into the kind of 'comic book' aspect of these movies, and I liked Ultron, and I liked Spader's performance, but he wasn't the kind of existential threat I had hoped after seeing the trailer last year. I agree, Ultron could have been both. I think that is a valid argument to make/discuss. The trailers certainly did not show any comedic sensibilities in Ultron at all and for it was a bit misleading. - Honestly I remember Winter Solider more for Winter Solider than that guy, so I will give you that. - I thought Aldrich had a good arch and while he wasn't a costumed villain persay he was a villain. - Kingpin is absolutely a guy in a suit. That is his character. I wouldn't fault their interpretation on that one. ( I have watched the series yet so I don't know how he is handled ). I suppose you would want to see a larger more imposing Kingpin ( to have that comic feel ) - Malekith as I mentioned was just a leader. In my opinion the Dark Elves as a whole were the villain. Did they do a good job emphasizing that? Not really. - Ultron is a tough one. You need the team to come together to beat him and yet still remain fragile afterwards. Ultron can't be a pushover, but he can't be ultra tough because you need the Avengers to come out with a win. I think it would have been beneficial to have a hollow victory. The Avengers win, but at what cost. They weren't cohesive and due to that a lot of lives were lost in the process. I agree there were several ways you could go and arguably it would have been a better film for it. I still enjoyed what we did get though. Even Thanos, the biggest bad in the universe, is kind of blah as a villain. He's very lazy. It's taken him 5 movies just to get the gauntlet, and he's actually lost an Infinity Gem since his first appearance in these movies. So he's both lazy and ineffective. And I think Thanos is a great character, but he too isn't that interesting on-screen. HOW DARE YOU!, nah I'm kidding. I don't think I would call him lazy. Ineffective? Maybe. But not lazy. Thanos gets hands on when it's absolutely necessary otherwise he is carefully scheming the rest of the time. From what we know from Kevin Feig there are two gauntlets. As as he pointed out [/quote] {Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}The one Thanos equips in the mid-credits scene is not on Asgard. So it seems to suggest Thanos had the gauntlet the entire time and the one in Asgard is just a jewelry piece with no actual power at all. As for the gems, he probably should have some by now, but since Infinity War is split up into two movies I wonder if Part 1 will involve him collecting them, or at least the rest of them. I would like to see Thanos Quest play out on the big screen. However I have always advocated using the end credit scenes through the phases to show that, and use the two parter as one epic space battle. I'd like to think that Thanos expects these people to fail when it comes to the gems, because maybe for him where they end up after these hero's take them makes it ultimately far easier to obtain than their natural locations. Let everyone else do the work for him and then collect them when they are in positions of easy pickin's. But that is just my hope and there isn't much to go on at the moment. Marvel's formula is to produce fun, but ultimately disposable, entertainment. And it's worked thus far and it will continue to work. But the assembly line model of these movies means that they're kind of forgettable. When Age of Ultron was compared to The Empire Strikes Back, Whedon has said that he actually wants his movie to have an ending. But instead of making something like The Empire Strikes Back, but better, he's made something like Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom at best and The Matrix Reloaded at worst (depending on what reviews you're reading). If you treat them as stand alones then yes they are ultimately disposable, but as we have seen for a while now their formula has been for a progressive transitory narrative. One that is constantly being added to. If you view a movie in only the terms of a stand alone it will almost always be disappointing to some extent because you are forcing yourself to omit a perspective they intended you to view it in.
|
|
|
Post by sternrogers01 on May 6, 2015 4:28:44 GMT -5
Bollocks to that. People should be able to sit down, get something out of the one experience, and not feel stupid for missing out on a component from the last one or feel enslaved to the later installments and giving away your top buck for what will continue to be "fun and disposable" (aka a polite way of calling something crap filler) outings just so you can skim to the end of the book and read the "To Be Continued" label. Some people are not interested in seeing every damn movie. I did not go to see Thor II and I think I'll skip out on Doctor Strange too.
|
|
|
Post by Ryback on a Pole! on May 6, 2015 6:33:30 GMT -5
The film did kinda answer that by having him be a family man. He's the most down-to-earth out of the bunch that includes a super-soldier from the 1940s, a rich jerk with a heart of gold and a suit of armor, a literal Norse God, a master assassin, and a doctor who turns into a giant green monster thing. That's one of the main reasons I liked him but, it didn't explain why the Avengers would decide to fill the final space in the team with what is essentially a regular guy albeit a skilled one. I dunno, I think it would have worked more if Widow and Hawkeye were used as the Avengers spys. Sneaking into bases, gathering information, carrying out assasinations and that sort of thing rather than been in the thick of the fighting. I mean, spys in real life don't pull out an M16 and join the troops on the frontline.
|
|
|
Post by 'Foretold' Joker on May 6, 2015 6:51:35 GMT -5
Bollocks to that. People should be able to sit down, get something out of the one experience, and not feel stupid for missing out on a component from the last one or feel enslaved to the later installments and giving away your top buck for what will continue to be "fun and disposable" (aka a polite way of calling something crap filler) outings just so you can skim to the end of the book and read the "To Be Continued" label. Some people are not interested in seeing every damn movie. I did not go to see Thor II and I think I'll skip out on Doctor Strange too. Yet this is how TV series work currently, miss an episode o Shield,f GoT, 24 or walking Dead and it's hard to catch up. No stand alone episodes.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on May 6, 2015 6:55:17 GMT -5
I thought Ultron served his purpose to the narrative well. I liked the "evil Tony Stark" vibe they went for, I was initially afraid he was just gonna be Robo Ledger Joker.
It's a big stretch to brand the team their own villains, but AoU is more or less a story about the Avengers trying to clean up a mess they accidentally started, and becoming closer in the process. On that level I think Ultron is a pretty good obstacle for them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2015 9:26:40 GMT -5
Bollocks to that. People should be able to sit down, get something out of the one experience, and not feel stupid for missing out on a component from the last one or feel enslaved to the later installments and giving away your top buck for what will continue to be "fun and disposable" (aka a polite way of calling something crap filler) outings just so you can skim to the end of the book and read the "To Be Continued" label. Some people are not interested in seeing every damn movie. I did not go to see Thor II and I think I'll skip out on Doctor Strange too. If you go into a movie fully knowing that it is part of a larger story and expect it to be self-contained 100% and then come out of it disappointed that not all the information was right there, or that it is hinting at something that won't be in that movie even thought they go out of their way in their presentation to make that clear, than the onus is on your own expectations. You can't expect something to cater to you and then when it doesn't claim that THAT'S the reason why it was bad. I'm not saying it's impossible to enjoy these movies by themselves, but the Phase 2 movies have ALL been pushing a large story. That's a fact. [ Insert Tyson Kidd here ] So by design the movie will be about more than just the immediate threat. And if you actively omit the bigger picture [ insert Wade Barrett here ]you are unfortunately by the nature of how Marvel decided to do their storytelling, not getting the full experience. They have movies until 2019 for a reason. I am in no way telling you how to enjoy a Marvel movie. I'm just illustrating what Marvel is presenting us.
|
|
Crimson
Hank Scorpio
Thank you DWade
Posts: 6,511
|
Post by Crimson on May 6, 2015 15:35:34 GMT -5
I dunno, a lot of these "sexism" complaints mirrors the backlash that Hunger Games got because Katniss ends up with Peeta instead of Gale. Like, I'm pretty sure there are some legitimate complaints out there but "My Ship didn't become Canon" isn't one of them.
|
|
|
Post by Hakumental on May 6, 2015 16:34:02 GMT -5
On the Whedon backlash:
Whedon is the same class act who not 30 days ago decided to rip Jurassic World for its "70s-era sexism" over one clip of two characters bantering. The complaints are silly, but I always like seeing a jerk get a taste of his own medicine.
On the movie:
- Absolutely a fun movie you'll be able to watch any time it's on...with a frictionless plot and way too many characters. I'm not surprised to hear Whedon was mentally and physically depleted after this one - when you look at the size of the cast he had to juggle and secure into the plot, it's a wonder his ashes aren't raining from the sky. (Obviously, I don't have the loftiest opinion of the guy, but after AoU, you really can't dismiss his talent. Two Avengers movies would have driven other directors to alcoholism. Whedon's good enough that he just walks away burned out and grumpy.)
- Cap is awesome. Tony is awesome. Hawkeye is really awesome.
- Paul Bettany is a perfect (and underused) Vision.
- Scarlet Witch is a perfect future psychotic ex-girlfriend.
- Spadertron was amusing, but written too much like Loki in terms of the team whaling on him. Hopefully Thanos makes up for it in Infinity War and goes Full Lesnar.
- The ending (i.e., last line) is stupid. Even petty.
- I think an extended cut is probably in order. The final cut works, but it feels stitched-up and bandaged. So many things occur offscreen that it's dizzying. (Somehow I imagine the amount of creative compromise this implies has more to do with Whedon's ragequit than any sloganeering social justice B.S.)
I'll probably catch it again when it hits the dollar theater, but as it is, I had a good time and think it keeps the momentum going for Cap 3/Thor 3/IW. Still...I want a bad guy who legitimately has the heroes on the ropes and puts absolute dread into their guts. Come on, Thanos.
|
|
AFN: Judge Shred
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wanted to change his doohicky.
Member of The Bluetista Buyers Club
Posts: 18,221
|
Post by AFN: Judge Shred on May 6, 2015 16:41:09 GMT -5
Bollocks to that. People should be able to sit down, get something out of the one experience, and not feel stupid for missing out on a component from the last one or feel enslaved to the later installments and giving away your top buck for what will continue to be "fun and disposable" (aka a polite way of calling something crap filler) outings just so you can skim to the end of the book and read the "To Be Continued" label. Some people are not interested in seeing every damn movie. I did not go to see Thor II and I think I'll skip out on Doctor Strange too. No, there should be different types of experiences for different people to enjoy. I love the interconnectedness, but I get not wanting to keep up. So don't. But fans like me do deserve to be serviced as well.
|
|