Avengers Movie *Spoilers*

[hugh45]

It was really all great. I'm sorry, its trivial, but my family just lost it with some of the Hulk scenes. When he kicked the living crap out of Loki while the latter was spewing "I'm a god", it had me in tears I was laughing so hard. What great cinema.

I also especially liked how they really used the "normal" Avengers, BW, Hawkeye and even Cap (and Fury and Hill) as almost believable while fighting with a man in a suit, a god and a green rage monster.

"I'm always angry" -Dr Bruce Banner

The part that reminded me so much of a Avengers comic,is when Cap 1st engage Loki,then IM making an appearance. It seems to me w/that scene, I felt the audience were saying "yay!" in IM coming in like the cavalry.(Boy! This movie had so much going)

[hugh45]

I assumed the Shadow Council was headed by Powers Booth and therefore of no real consequence.

So now we have Thanos and Shadow Council, any other dangling threads, real or perceived?

Did anyone know that the S.C. Brit was the famous Jenny Agutter (Jessica 6) of Logan's Run?

[carabas]

Nevermind...

[ImpulseUCF]

I don't think the narrative ride required the Avengers to follow up on the nuke in this movie. The post-crisis catharsis was viewed from a distance, and the political fallout and any other issues are left for a future film. It worked just fine with the pacing and vibe of the movie, so it's not an omission or fault. Just not necessary.

[Alan Smithee]

Since Life Model Decoys got a shout out, there is a chance that Coulson's death was somehow faked to give the Avengers motivation.

Coulson is the breakout character of the Marvel movie franchise. I can see why they'd bring him back.

As for movie Hill, she is tough, she looks damn good in a jumpsuit and that is all we know about her.

High on my list of movie priorities. Charlize Theron and the other chica's spacesuits in the "Prometheus" teasers are testing my resolve not to read or watch anything about the movie. (I read every spoiler from overseas about "The Avengers" and I think it hurt my enjoyment of the movie. Never again).

[HeroxMatt2.0]

<<<<< And Hill also looks damn gorgeous with blood and cuts on her face.

[Death by Mime]

I don't think the narrative ride required the Avengers to follow up on the nuke in this movie. The post-crisis catharsis was viewed from a distance, and the political fallout and any other issues are left for a future film. It worked just fine with the pacing and vibe of the movie, so it's not an omission or fault. Just not necessary.

You can't just keep deferring all unresolved problems until the next sequel. The point of a sequel hook is to get the audience interested and excited for whatever challenge our heroes are going to be facing next. Batman's been informed of Joker's existence and is going to be fighting him the next movie. Sherlock Holmes realizes that Professor Moriarty escaped, so he's going to spend the next movie tracking him down. Instead, all the Avengers go their separate ways, there is no indication of what they are going to be doing in the interim beyond getting back together once Thanos shows up.

Besides, a major part of this movie was already the Avengers' repeated clashes with Authority, which they forgot about and put aside by the ending. With a track record like that, what's the point in seeing it repeated in a sequel?

[RDMacQ]

You can't just keep deferring all unresolved problems until the next sequel.

This would make sense if it is an unresolved issue and not something you made up to bitch about.

The point of a sequel hook is to get the audience interested and excited for whatever challenge our heroes are going to be facing next.

Did you miss the bit with Thanos?

Oh, wait, you never saw the movie in the first place. Never mind.

Batman's been informed of Joker's existence and is going to be fighting him the next movie. Sherlock Holmes realizes that Professor Moriarty escaped, so he's going to spend the next movie tracking him down. Instead, all the Avengers go their separate ways, there is no indication of what they are going to be doing in the interim beyond getting back together once Thanos shows up.

Yeah. That's enough.

Besides, a major part of this movie was already the Avengers' repeated clashes with Authority, which they forgot about and put aside by the ending.

You're confusing "setting aside their differences" with "forgetting about their clashes with Authority."

You're also confusing "Reading about the film on Wikipedia" with "Actually seeing it firsthand."

With a track record like that, what's the point in seeing it repeated in a sequel?

Because this film was awesome, and there's no reason to believe that the next film won't have plenty of other ideas to explore other than your unfounded negativity and strange focus on bizarre, imaginary plot points.

[Death by Mime]

This would make sense if it is an unresolved issue and not something you made up to bitch about.



Did you miss the bit with Thanos?

Oh, wait, you never saw the movie in the first place. Never mind.



Yeah. That's enough.



You're confusing "setting aside their differences" with "forgetting about their clashes with Authority."

You're also confusing "Reading about the film on Wikipedia" with "Actually seeing it firsthand."



Because this film was awesome, and there's no reason to believe that the next film won't have plenty of other ideas to explore other than your unfounded negativity and strange focus on bizarre, imaginary plot points.

Give it up man, I have managed to have civil conversations with a bunch of other people despite our disagreements, and been treated to some insightful points. You are the only one still spoiling for a fight.

[Will.S]

You can't just keep deferring all unresolved problems until the next sequel. The point of a sequel hook is to get the audience interested and excited for whatever challenge our heroes are going to be facing next. Batman's been informed of Joker's existence and is going to be fighting him the next movie. Sherlock Holmes realizes that Professor Moriarty escaped, so he's going to spend the next movie tracking him down. Instead, all the Avengers go their separate ways, there is no indication of what they are going to be doing in the interim beyond getting back together once Thanos shows up.

Besides, a major part of this movie was already the Avengers' repeated clashes with Authority, which they forgot about and put aside by the ending. With a track record like that, what's the point in seeing it repeated in a sequel?

What is the complaint here again?

Because ImpulseUCF's post is pretty spot on.

[turtletrekker]

What is the complaint here again?

Because ImpulseUCF's post is pretty spot on.

Yup. Sounds like complaining for the sake of complaining to me.

[Death by Mime]

I'm saying "the political fallout and any other issues" of the near-nuking of New York city aren't being set up for resolution in a sequel. They're not important in this film, why should they be important in the next one?

[jackolover]

I've just seen it again for the 3rd time and this time what struck was two things:

One - When Stark acknowledged Rogers authority and said to Cap - "It's your call cap". It was a hallmark moment because it represented an appreciation of Captain America's experience in the field of battle, as a field leader, and reflected Cap as in the books. A milestone moment, considering how bitter they both attacked each other as, "Everything you are comes out of a bottle", and, "You'll never be a hero because it's always about yourself". They got over that, and Starks heroism in taking the Nuke into another dimension, proved Stark as well.

Two - Captain America telling Hulk to Smash. We've never seen this in the books for as long as I've read comics. These two characters have never interacted before together, and to just see the Hulk stand there with that group on 6th Avenue, and Cap deal out the assignments to everyone until he came to the Hulk, was one of the greatest moments in the movie. It's something that still has to happen in the books.

[carabas]

Give it up man, I have managed to have civil conversations with a bunch of other people despite our disagreements, and been treated to some insightful points. You are the only one still spoiling for a fight.

Dude, you're the one who brought this whole mess up again after it being shelved for a few pages.

All of your questions have been answered in a bunch of different way in conversations that were not very civil at all, at least not from your end. Just keeping on and repeating the same few (self-contradicting and made up) issues over and over again, no matter how many people have replied and explained everything to you, that's just not civil, that's obvious troll behaviour.

[Death by Mime]

Dude, you're the one who brought this whole mess up again after it being shelved for a few pages.

All of your questions have been answered in a bunch of different way in conversations that were not very civil at all, at least not from your end. Just keeping on and repeating the same few (self-contradicting and made up) issues over and over again, no matter how many people have replied and explained everything to you, that's just not civil, that's obvious troll behaviour.

So what is the answer as to why the Avengers didn't react to nearly being nuked at the end? Because Joss Whedon couldn't find the time to fit it in the movie? That seems like a major oversight on his account! At first people were telling me it didn't matter at all, now they have progressed to making excuses for it. If I keep raising the same objections, it is because I am making progress with them, inch by arduous inch.

For example, here is a scene that could have been cut to give the Avengers time to react to nearly being nuked: after the Avengers capture Loki, Nick Fury makes the suggestion to Thor that he may have to torture his own brother. Instead of proclaiming 'NO I'M NOT GOING TO TORTURE MY BROTHER, HOW DARE YOU, GET OUT OF HERE!" Thor looks pensive; he's considering it.

But this scene is a narrative dead-end. The Avengers do not torture Loki, do not attempt to torture him, do not threaten him with torture. Thor is not forced to hurt his brother for the greater good, his final fight scene with Loki is less vicious than his initial fight with Iron Man and Cap. So why does this scene even exist? Why does the film feel the need to bring up torture, to let us know that Thor is considering torture as an option, and then go absolutely nowhere with it?

This is what I was talking about earlier when I claimed the Avengers was amoral. It likes to bring up 'real-world' issues like torture and nukes and wiretapping, and then abruptly push the issues aside without making any sort of meaningful statement on them. You claimed the Avengers was a moral film, what moral system is it promoting?