THE CBR REVIEW: "The Avengers"

[CBR News]

CBR reviews Marvel Studios' highly-anticipated "The Avengers," an uproariously fun and funny film that proves a worthy successor to "Iron Man" and the Marvel movie franchise.


Full article here.

[Movieartman]

yeah seriously the scene where (NOT REALLY A SPOILER UN LESS YOU WISH TO KNOW ABSOLULTY NOTHING PERIOD) Black widow is trapped down in the bowels of the Helicarrier with banner and she is begging him not to loose control and when he does its Freaking Terrifying.

and her scene with loki is amazing both actors put in amazing preformences :)

here is my rating for the hulk actors

Edward Norton's Banner - 9 of 10
Edward Norton's Hulk - 9 of 10
Mark Ruffalo's Banner - 8-9 of 10
Mark Ruffalo's Hulk - 9-10 of 10 (his skin like the 2003 hulk is a little too bright, my singular complaint)

NOTE: i havent watched the 2003 hulk in a long while

Eric Bana's Banner - 3-5 of 10
Eric Bana's Hulk - 3-5 of 10

[joeshan]

I love how you have managed to write a review that clearly conveys your feelings for the film, as well as what you feel are its strengths/weaknesses, without spoiling anything. This is a feat that apparently very few "professional" movie reviewers are capable of anymore. The reviewer for the NY Times spolied at least two of the Hulk's awesome moments, for no real reason.

I saw the film earlier this week and share your enthusiasm! Can't wait to see it again.

[BeastieRunner]

The reviewer for the NY Times spolied at least two of the Hulk's awesome moments, for no real reason.

I'm sure his reason was along the lines of the following Sheldon Cooper quote: "There’s an economic concept known as a Positional Good in which an object is only valued by the possessor because its not possessed by others. The term was coined in 1976 by economist Fred Hirsch to replace the more colloquial but less precise ‘neener-neener’."

Modern reviewers are d***s.

[Aljira]

with Whedon's obvious success - i'm guessing WB will start reconsidering that Wonder Woman film no?

[custodes]

with Whedon's obvious success - i'm guessing WB will start reconsidering that Wonder Woman film no?

Who knows. I'll go see it though.

Important message of this thread: The Avengers movie is great! Go see it!

[Whitster]

One of the first things I said to the missus after leaving the cinema last weekend was "I guess no one saying no to Joss Whedon anymore" that's how good it is!

[An Ear In The Fireplace]

How did I know this would be a positive review before I read it? Nothing against the reviewer, but I think I'll trust reviews by critics that don't have a stake in the success or failure of what they're reviewing.

[SupaHood]

Most of the critics like it too. So you really ain't saying nothing .

[joeshan]

How did I know this would be a positive review before I read it? Nothing against the reviewer, but I think I'll trust reviews by critics that don't have a stake in the success or failure of what they're reviewing.

Yeah, I don't think he really has a "stake" in it, unless he has Marvel stock or his last name is Whedon. Also, as a subsequent poster pointed out, the film is over 90% positive on Rotten Tomatoes. Finally, if you were going to discount the review just because of where it was posted, why did you bother reading it in the first place?

[RolandJP]

No review of Sam Jackson's performance. Really?

not that its your fault..so far in every Comic FAN review Ive read..Sam gets no mention.

There must be something to this comic fan thing.

[An Ear In The Fireplace]

Of course CBR has a stake in the success of Avengers. The success of comic book movies means more interest in comics, more interest in comics mean more traffic to the CBR site, more traffic on CBR means more revenue. So CBR has a stake in being an Avengers cheerleader.

I have read other reviews from neutral sources--and they seem to be positive on the whole, but even-handed in weighing the good with the bad.

[joeshan]

I seriously doubt the interests of CBR and the Avengers film are linked in any way whatsoever. It's not like the site is linked to Disney or Marvel. By your rationale, no film critic would ever give a negative review, since the more people who see a film the more secure the reviewer's job will be. Your logic would be more sustainable if you could point to superhero films everyone else thought were shit that CBR gave a glowing review to. But again, I am curious why you even bothered reading the review if you were going to immediately discount the reviewer's opinion.

[hugh45]

Of course CBR has a stake in the success of Avengers. The success of comic book movies means more interest in comics, more interest in comics mean more traffic to the CBR site, more traffic on CBR means more revenue. So CBR has a stake in being an Avengers cheerleader.

I have read other reviews from neutral sources--and they seem to be positive on the whole, but even-handed in weighing the good with the bad.

I looked at some negatives on RT.Some of those critics didn't like it because it was comic book (super hero) movie.

BTW: What's a "REAL" movie? I never seen a "REAL" movie other than a documentary.

[Hrist]

I think a slammingly negative review of this movie would get CBR more traffic, honestly.