What parts of the Avengers film come from the Ultimate Universe?

[wyokid]

How so? In Ultimates they are formed by the government from the beginning. Nick Fury goes around gathering up heroes. How is that more 616 than Ultimate?

There's a very famous cover from The Avengers that I'm thinking of, I just wish I could find it. It's not so much that it''s not an Ultimate thing, but rather that 616 did it first.

[Plawsky]

Her name might not be Gail, but this is clearly an Ultimates moment. Hopefully we get that great scene from Ultimates in Cap 2 with Peggy.

[Milla4Prez66]

No...that is just what Nick Fury said. It has no basis in reality. It was Banners' hook ( line and sinker for getting him onboard) As Tony and Cap later realized, Nick Fury will do or say anything or tell any lie for National and/or World security.He wanted Hulk first and ...goody,goody... Banner can be very useful.

I disagree. They needed Banner to track down the cosmic cube, they didn't want the Hulk because they didn't think Banner could control him. They even had that cell to contain him just incase (Loki hinted at it several times). Tony was the only one who seemed to think Hulk could fight alogside the Avengers, IMO.

We all know Fury will lie to get what he wants, but I don't think he and SHIELD trusted Hulk enough to let him roam free.

[MrV]

Her name might not be Gail, but this is clearly an Ultimates moment. Hopefully we get that great scene from Ultimates in Cap 2 with Peggy.

Had they used this scene and the alternate opening with Maria Hill/Robin the Avengers film wouldn't have been the lousy film it was. Those two scenes added so much context. People who say "Wah, it makes it depressing!" can't appreciate a good movie.

[wyokid]

Had they used this scene and the alternate opening with Maria Hill/Robin the Avengers film wouldn't have been the lousy film it was. Those two scenes added so much context. People who say "Wah, it makes it depressing!" can't appreciate a good movie.

Joss actually talked about the alternate opening recently and while I haven't seen it I think he has an excellent point.

Two factors. One: The movie was three hours long. Two: Audiences didn't respond to it as well in the movie as I think they would as a DVD extra. Most of them didn't know who this character was or what the context was, and they were like, Uhhh, I don't know why I'm supposed to be personally involved in this character I don't know. The rollout to the Avengers getting to Loki was so gradual that people were getting restless. I thought Cobie nailed it, and the reason I thought it was necessary is because I was trying to make a war movie and I wanted to give context that something bad had happened in the past. In a war movie, you don't know who's going to live or die, but you do know that this war happened and that [the characters] are going to be in a dire circumstance, and I wanted to create that atmosphere.
I was able to get what I needed without doing that. It was tough. I hated cutting it. I hated cutting the Captain America stuff with the waitress. At least I was able to call Ashley Johnson [who plays the waitress] and tell her that all her stuff was still in Much Ado About Nothing, since she had been cut out of Dollhouse, she had been cut out of The Avengers: "I swear you're still in the Shakespeare movie!" You know, those bits had seemed very personal to me, and part of doing Much Ado was that I could go back to The Avengers and say, "Oh, it's not about me. Even though its my film, it's about the Avengers. I am less important than the needs of the film."

SOURCE

[MrV]

Joss actually talked about the alternate opening recently and while I haven't seen it I think he has an excellent point.

Excellent point my tush. Moviegoers being restless about a 3 hour film are being ungrateful bastards! Heck, I work at a movie theater and for a 1 hr 20 minute flick like Ice Age 4 I have seen people leave the theater 30 minutes before the movie ended! WTF?!

The LOTR films were each 4 hours long (6+ in the DVD) and people still ate them up and the movie won Oscars and made millions at the box office!

[Balfro]

The LOTR films were each 4 hours long (6+ in the DVD) and people still ate them up and the movie won Oscars and made millions at the box office!

Except for the fact that each of those god awful movies were 7 hours too long! (They each get an extra hour added to them because of the time it took after watching each one to wish I had gotten the previous 6 hours of my life back)

[MrV]

Except for the fact that each of those god awful movies were 7 hours too long! (They each get an extra hour added to them because of the time it took after watching each one to wish I had gotten the previous 6 hours of my life back)

So? With Avengers or any film more entertaining than LOTR those 3-4 hours would have been blissful.

Also, you're only one person. Where all those billions of people who made the trilogy a box office success masochists then?

[Plawsky]

Also, you're only one person. Where all those billions of people who made the trilogy a box office success masochists then?

Well, aside from the fact that no movie has been seen by a billion people at the box office, the Avengers made far more money than any of the LOTR films did. Also, none of the LOTR films were 4 hours in the theaters. The first two were just minutes under three hours, and the third was 3 hours 20 minutes; even the with the extended editions, on the third reaches four hours, certainly not six.

The two deleted scenes just didn't fit the tone of everything else. Well, I like the Cap scene, but I can see why it was taken out. The scene with Maria Hill would not have been the right way to open up the movie at all. And if you think the movie was lousy, then I don't see how an extra minute or so at the beginning would change that.

[MrV]

The two deleted scenes just didn't fit the tone of everything else. Well, I like the Cap scene, but I can see why it was taken out. The scene with Maria Hill would not have been the right way to open up the movie at all. And if you think the movie was lousy, then I don't see how an extra minute or so at the beginning would change that.

You just answered your question in the first sentence. One scene has the power to change everything in a movie, even the quality.

[wyokid]

Excellent point my tush. Moviegoers being restless about a 3 hour film are being ungrateful bastards! Heck, I work at a movie theater and for a 1 hr 20 minute flick like Ice Age 4 I have seen people leave the theater 30 minutes before the movie ended! WTF?!

The LOTR films were each 4 hours long (6+ in the DVD) and people still ate them up and the movie won Oscars and made millions at the box office!

You missed the most important part

Most of them didn't know who this character was or what the context was, and they were like, Uhhh, I don't know why I'm supposed to be personally involved in this character I don't know.

[MrV]

You missed the most important part

That's what people who lack imagination would say. If they come to a movie, unwilling to suspend their belief and ponder about even the most insignificant characters--without doing that thing of "why should I care?"--then they don't know how to watch a movie.

[wyokid]

Maria Hill ISN'T insignificant though.

Except for the fact that each of those god awful movies were 7 hours too long! (They each get an extra hour added to them because of the time it took after watching each one to wish I had gotten the previous 6 hours of my life back)

Godawful!!? GODAWFUL!!? Not even the 70's versions were bad!

[Plawsky]

You just answered your question in the first sentence. One scene has the power to change everything in a movie, even the quality.

If a movie is lousy, it's not going to become good because of an extra 30 seconds, unless it's something that drastically changes the story or fills in some big plot hole. It could make it a little better, maybe - or, rather, a little less lousy. But what in that Maria Hill opening changes anything about the rest of the film?

You're entitled to your own opinion, obviously. But there's no need to pretend that you're somehow better at watching movies than the rest of us. The Avengers is an objective success, both critically and commercially. Or maybe those people just "don't know how to watch movies."

[Balfro]

Godawful!!? GODAWFUL!!? Not even the 70's versions were bad!

You, sir, are an Orc Sympathizer.