THE AVENGERS (2012) Post-Release - Page 25

This film shows just how lacking in focus Warners is with DC...I mean they pretty much own all the JLA characters and have done fuck all to build toward a cohesive DC comics universe.  Look at Man of Steel for fuck sake...it's pretty much Dark Knight with a different costume in terms of the style.  Supernan is supposed to be the antithesis of Batman.  And Green Lantern, we all know how well that worked out.  I guess I don't blame them in having looked at each character as a separate film.  That's how studios think.  But now they need somebody like Marvel's guy to oversee the properties.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

This film shows just how lacking in focus Warners is with DC...I mean they pretty much own all the JLA characters and have done fuck all to build toward a cohesive DC comics universe.  Look at Man of Steel for fuck sake...it's pretty much Dark Knight with a different costume in terms of the style.  Supernan is supposed to be the antithesis of Batman.  And Green Lantern, we all know how well that worked out.  I guess I don't blame them in having looked at each character as a separate film.  That's how studios think.  But now they need somebody like Marvel's guy to oversee the properties.

I agree. When you think about it, Marvel Studios' accomplishment with their MCU is even more impressive since they don't even have the #1 Marvel superhero (Spider-Man), the most famous mutant character (Wolverine), or the most famous Marvel team (Fantastic Four) that they can use. It's like telling WB to make a JLA movie without either Superman or Batman and see how they manage. WB has nearly everything from DC they can use, but they chose to make Batman movies instead. Debacles like GL proves that people over at WB are clueless, that's why they gave Chris Nolan so much power with his Batman movies and even let him grandfather MOS, which seems more and more like Batman Begins from the look of it.

I'm way late to the party, but I finally saw this at the last show of the evening (10:30ish) to a half-full theater, and I have to say it fell really flat.

I'm not taking anything away from the (apparently) many that had a great time at this film, but I think that a big part of the experience might be getting wrapped up in the excitement with a theater full of comic book junkies.  I have a suspicion that this film is not going to play well at all in a home viewing situation.

To be fair, I am not a comic book fan and I've only seen a handful of the prequel movies, so I had pretty much no expectations or preconceptions.  But I thought there were some serious problems with the movie.

1) Pacing:  Some have mentioned that the first 20mins kind of drag, but if anything I think that's being incredibly generous.  I was seriously close to falling asleep after the first hour (that's not hyperbole; it was a late show so I was actually tired; the movie has to be really engaging a la The Raid to keep me up).  To me the movie didn't really start moving until the attack on the airship.  It seemed really unnecessary the way they dragged on the introduction of each character.  Since they didn't do traditional character intros (i.e. it's assumed that you know who they are from their prequel movie), there was no interesting character building going on during that time, and the team is not fully together yet so you don't get any group dynamic stuff either.

2) No Suspense:  There was practically no element of danger in the entire film.  I'm not sure why people thought it was so exciting.  All of the main superheroes prove to be practically indestructible while the Black Widow and Hawkeye prove to be indestructible by proxy.  The only time that anyone showed any fear was in the beginning when Banner fake-rages on Black Widow and she pulls a gun on him.  The only time I actually felt the slightest amount of suspense was when the Hulk rages out on the carrier and there's actually the possibility he might take down the entire thing single-handedly (of course, the heroes would still survive, but a lot of regular humans would die).

3) Humor: I'm not a big Whedon fan, but I did think Cabin in the Woods was hilarious, so I'm not immune to his charms.  This time though, most of the jokes fell flat with my audience.  For my part, I thought a lot of it was very obvious and plumbing from the same tired "dysfunctional family" tropes that we've seen a million times.  There were some parts that got big laughs (Hulk vs Loki being an obvious one) so my audience wasn't asleep.  But it was not even close to as funny as Cabin; unlike a lot of you, I never missed any lines because the audience was laughing so hard.

These things are all subjective.  But if you're seeing it with regular people who aren't amped up on excitement, I don't think the movie plays nearly as well.  If I were watching this alone at home I honestly probably wouldn't have finished it.  There are so many great movies this year that there's no reason to sit through a mediocre movie.

I'm way more excited about Iron Man 3 than any sequel to this because Shane Black + RDJ = Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.

Right...must be only comic book geeks being turned on by this thing.

Gotta pipe in and agree with the score complaints, but I'm of the mind (like someone far earlier in the thread) that Marvel missed a huge opportunity.  They should've hired someone (Could've been Silvestri, could've been someone else) to oversee the scoring for ALL the Marvel films. Now, I could see that not including Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk as they were the genesis of this not-so-little experiment, but by the time Iron Man 2 rolled around  I'm pretty sure Marvel knew where they were going and that Avengers was pretty much guaranteed to get made.

Now imagine you have a composer who gets to define a unique, recognizable leitmotif for each individual character.  After that, the score for the Avengers practically writes itself!  The score could've been just as much a "team up" of character themes as the movie was of the characters themselves.

Heck, Silvestri didn't even include the Captain America theme that he wrote (though I thought the music when Cap first appears in-costume in Berlin did seem to echo it slightly)!

Anyway, just feels like a huge missed opportunity and a big disappointment all-around, especially as a big fan of film scores.

Sometimes I feel dead inside because I don't have the same appreciation for scores as most do on these boards. I recognize when a score is great or terrible, but good-middling-uninspired all run together. Unless it's bad enough to take me out of the moment, I usually don't notice at all.

My point is, I know I didn't walk out of the Avengers humming anything.

I do not get the...Disappointment with Alan Silvestri's Avengers Score!  To me it is the most...MARVELous Score, for a Marvel Superhero film.  The Themes of the...Helicarrier, and the Avengers...Assembled are...Awesome!

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeI 

Sometimes I feel dead inside because I don't have the same appreciation for scores as most do on these boards. I recognize when a score is great or terrible, but good-middling-uninspired all run together. Unless it's bad enough to take me out of the moment, I usually don't notice at all.

 

My point is, I know I didn't walk out of the Avengers humming anything.

I think that's nothing to be ashamed over.  I think the "style" these days is for scores to generally be more ambient and in the background, with a few exceptions.  You don't see too many movies these days like say, the original Conan the Barbarian, where the score is just about as important as the dialogue for telling the story.  That, and sadly the John Williams-esque rollicking and rousing style of (many of) our youth is often considered "dated" now.

The general lack of distinct movie scores over the last 10+ years has bothered me greatly.  Not that the 2000s hasn't had very good scores, but really what was the last action movie in the last ten years that had an amazing score, I'm talking about one you will be listening to in 30 years?  I can't think of one.  I could easily name a dozen or more off the top of my head in the 80s and 90s.  And I don't mean "good", I mean excellent, something memorable that sticks with you long after you've left the theater and might catch yourself humming.  Some movies you can't even picture without the damn score (Burton's Batman, etc)...and that score is so incredibly integral to the movie's success.

A movie is nothing more than the sum of its parts.  And each part affects the whole.  If Avengers had a great, memorable score, my opinion of the overall film would've been much greater, since a great score can literally be 50% of a movie's success (Jaws comes to mind...so does E.T., Seven, Robocop, Star Wars, Poltergeist, Basic Instinct, Back To the Future and so on).  

Movie scores seem to be something people give a pass on these days.  Like they will say a movie is amazing, but it has a completely lacking, unmemorable score...when the score can be just as important as the performances.  It's certainly possible for a movie to be great with a lacking score if other elements greatly make up for it, but I'm of the opinion that a mediocre score drags the movie down.  The scores now are more like sound design, background noise...just filler.  Even once reliable hit makers like Silvestri and Eflman are just churning out mediocrity.  Shame.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anger Management 

 

I agree. When you think about it, Marvel Studios' accomplishment with their MCU is even more impressive since they don't even have the #1 Marvel superhero (Spider-Man), the most famous mutant character (Wolverine), or the most famous Marvel team (Fantastic Four) that they can use. It's like telling WB to make a JLA movie without either Superman or Batman and see how they manage. WB has nearly everything from DC they can use, but they chose to make Batman movies instead. Debacles like GL proves that people over at WB are clueless, that's why they gave Chris Nolan so much power with his Batman movies and even let him grandfather MOS, which seems more and more like Batman Begins from the look of it.

It could be said that Marvel managed to do this partially BECAUSE they didn't have full access to those MARQUEE characters.  They really had to focus and not coast on the now easy awareness of characters like Spider-Man, Wolverine, Batman, and Superman.  Turning a seeming disadvantage into an advantage and all that.

Ooh, that's a good point, nooj. What does that say for The Amazing Spider-Man's prospects, I wonder?

The Harry Potter films have a pretty great, iconic score.  And while the movie apparently underwhelmed, Daft Punk's score for Tron: Legacy is fantastic.  But generally, yeah, it's sort of head-scratching that all these superhero films have failed to produce a really memorable bit of bombast a la Raiders.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 

 

It could be said that Marvel managed to do this partially BECAUSE they didn't have full access to those MARQUEE characters.  They really had to focus and not coast on the now easy awareness of characters like Spider-Man, Wolverine, Batman, and Superman.  Turning a seeming disadvantage into an advantage and all that.

Credit should go to Whedon in that the Hulk does have that marquee position in pop culture, but he kept him as a supporting player because that's what was right for this story.  If someone less suited takes over for Avengers 2, the first biggest mistake I expect to see is overdoing the Hulk stuff rather than treating him as a topping on the sundae.

Great movie, other than missing the middle because I had to deal with security guards after my six-month pregnant wife was threatened for asking the selfish, inconsiderate assholes next to her to please stop talking through the entire thing. This is why I hate going to movies and typically wait for the Blu-Ray. It's depressing how miserable the cinematic experience has become. But yeah, fun movie otherwise.
 

Hulk definitely has a marquee position in terms of awareness, but it's also had 2 movies that audiences haven't cared for.  It could be considered a liability if you look at it a certain way.  In either case, Whedon's use of the character was narratively AND culturally savvy.

Oh man, that's probably exactly what'll happen in Avengers 2.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwartz 

The Harry Potter films have a pretty great, iconic score.  And while the movie apparently underwhelmed, Daft Punk's score for Tron: Legacy is fantastic.  But generally, yeah, it's sort of head-scratching that all these superhero films have failed to produce a really memorable bit of bombast a la Raiders.

Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard's scores for the Nolan Bat-films are memorable, methinks, but they're not always going for the heroic bombast thing. Which is appropriate.

Elfman came up with a good theme for Spidey as well.

Avengers have crossed 1 billion WW in just 19 days...amazing. And 103 mil in its 2nd week as well. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Spider 

 

Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard's scores for the Nolan Bat-films are memorable, methinks, but they're not always going for the heroic bombast thing. Which is appropriate.

 

Elfman came up with a good theme for Spidey as well.

I find the Nolan bat films to have fairly generic scores, nothing really distinctive, except for maybe the Joker's theme in TDK...but one theme does not a score make.

I didn't even care for Elfman's Spider-Man scores.  I wont argue with anyone who likes them though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwartz 

The Harry Potter films have a pretty great, iconic score.  And while the movie apparently underwhelmed, Daft Punk's score for Tron: Legacy is fantastic.  But generally, yeah, it's sort of head-scratching that all these superhero films have failed to produce a really memorable bit of bombast a la Raiders.

I forgot about Daft Punk's Tron Legacy score... a pretty amazing piece of work that went criminally ignored oscar time. Still the last decade has been incredibly slim pickin's. 

I really like the TDK score, but do agree that it suffers from being Zimmer-generic aside from the Joker's grinding theme.

There's the theme for Pirates of the Caribbean which really connected with audiences, but I didn't like its cheapness and the fact that it sounds like it could be applied to almost any movie.  It wasn't till the sequels where I warmed to it (it sounded much richer by then too, since the first film's score was a rush job).

...

...

JOKER GRINDING THEME???

I'd argue that Iron Man has joined the A-list since the films came out, the Hulk is embedded in pop culture, and everyone has at least HEARD of Captain America. But yes, it's always been interesting to me that while the JLA consists of all the DCU's biggest names, the Avengers is lacking most of the really well-known Marvel characters. Even Hulk splits pretty quickly.

Completely random point: a big deal is being made out of Kirby's credit for creating the Avengers, but I'd like to point out that poor Don Heck, who created Iron Man, Black Widow and Hawkeye, deserves his props too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 

 

the fact that it sounds like it could be applied to almost any movie.  

Thank you for nailing what I couldn't in my initial movie scoring post.  It's like the scores are interchangeable these days.  It's generic thriller score, or generic action score and so on, just add water, etc...not that this didn't happen in the 80s and 90s, but there was enough greatness being achieved despite this.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slim 

I'm not so sure about your read on this. 

 

For starters, you've neglected the fact that the Commie-fighting Cap published in the '50s was only later ret-conned not to be the same Golden Age Steve Rogers, after Lee and Kirby reintroduced Cap as a man-out-of-time in the Marvel Age. Which is fine-- as I wrote above, having been in suspended animation for x number of years is his secondary defining characteristic, and drives a great deal of Cap's stories. But all that is to say that Cap hasn't had a specific political position "right from the beginning".

 

Conversely, Tony Stark has often been portrayed as having the kind of adversarial relation to the government that you attribute to Rogers, when Stark felt "it was doing wrong". When Stark took it upon himself to dismantle armor (a lot of it employed by the government) based on his technology in the "Armor Wars", for instance, Cap tried to stop him... And I certainly don't remember any story line that presented Stark as an Objectivist, even of the "pseudo" variety.

 

I suppose I'm saying that it's folly to view these characters in the context of time-specific American politics-- that's all changeable. And for the most part, I'd say that Marvel's writers have done a good job of not digging into those particular weeds. These are nigh-mythic characters dealing individually with issues of humanity, heroism and responsibility that are much bigger than all that. Politics, especially partisan politics, are a crude diminishment of the larger themes.

Yes, the various characters have passed through dozens if not hundreds of hands in the course of decades, so claiming any kind of bedrock consistency for them is impossible. And OK, wise guy, I wasn't technically correct when I said "from the beginning" for Cap (I meant from the beginning of his 60s run). But my point is there's an obvious political context for Cap and Iron Man which can be used, and has been on occasion. Of course I primarily expect them to get along, but in their very first appearance both characters had an obvious political bent--and here I AM talking about the WWII era Cap as well as his relaunch in the 60s--that would seem to make for opposing worldviews. As a writer, you CAN ignore this stuff, but the groundwork is undeniably there.

And I don't want my comics to become partisan shoutfests...but I honestly CAN see the value in both Steve (old-fashioned patriot, believes in the social contract and the need for free people to stand up for others' rights) and Tony's (futurist, capitalist, believes in the power of the individual human spirit) viewpoints, and I think there could be something inspiring in watching the two of them come together despite their differences. Indeed, I think it's the kind of message we could use right about now.

Random shit after seeing the movie:

• Bah, you spoiled brats complaining about Maria Hill and/or Fury. They're supporting cast and they need to stay there, especially for this one. How many main characters can a movie have and how long does it need to be? You got like 7 packed into 140 minutes of running time. Remember when just having more than one main character and one villain was guaranteed to drop the quality of your funny book movies?
• My theory is Hulk hits it big but Cap gets the short end of the stick because of the number of other characters they get to play off of. Thor gets the Hulk rivalry and the adversary in Loki. Iron Man gets the disagreements with Cap, the Banner friendship, and some nice human moments with Pepper. Black Widow gets the relationship with Hawkeye and the tension with Hulk. Hawkeye just gets the comrade in Black Widow but he's elevated a bit more than Cap as far as character tie-ins go for a reason I get into in a moment. Hulk/Banner gets the most out of the interactions with other characters through Thor, Widow, Iron Man and the villain. The poor Captain just has Tony Stark to play off of (which makes sense being that the two are rivals in recent comics, the juxtaposition of the old timey ways and the modern era the two characters represent, and Cap being a man who hasn't acclimated to the present day). But the other thing is that every single Avenger, except for Cap, has a key moment with the main villain. Even Hawkeye's role, which puts him out of making more connections with the other Avengers, ties him squarely in with Loki. Cap doesn't get a big Loki scene and that ultimately makes him seem shut out.
• That unbroken camera sequence during the final act following Widow after she jumps onto that flying machine and then weaves in and out to highlight all the other characters? That shit is pure cinema. To mention something else I think no one else has, that bit where Thor is fighting the Hulk and Thor holds out his hand, waiting for Mjollnir to return and then finally uppercuts the Hulk with it...goddamn great.

Captain America had the scene with Loki in Germany.  I believe he Godwin-ed him in fact.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

 Even once reliable hit makers like Silvestri and Eflman are just churning out mediocrity.  Shame.

Elfman's score for Dark Shadows is great. Take a listen.

And it's funny because I remember feeling underwhelmed at the time with his scores to Spider-Man and Hulk but considering what we're getting now, they're actually both pretty great and much better than any superhero score of recent.

The Marvel movie with the most memorable and hummable score so far is Thor, by a large margin. IMO.

Other recent films with great scores in this century: Tron: Legacy, Sunshine ... The LOTR films of course. I'm sure I'm forgetting some.

But while we remember the great scores from the 70's, 80's, 90's - weren't there also a bunch of bland stuff as well? We just tend to forget it and remember the great stuff, which naturally colors our memory.

Quote:

Originally Posted by neoolong 

Captain America had the scene with Loki in Germany.  I believe he Godwin-ed him in fact.

Cap is allowed to Godwin. He can win every argument by saying, "Yeah, but I PUNCHED HITLER." (Well, in the comics anyway.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by neoolong 

Captain America had the scene with Loki in Germany.  I believe he Godwin-ed him in fact.

The old guy beat him to it with "There are always men like you."

Also, does everyone in Germany speak English?

Did Loki have a Babelfish?

Quote:

Originally Posted by PMR 

• That unbroken camera sequence during the final act following Widow after she jumps onto that flying machine and then weaves in and out to highlight all the other characters? That shit is pure cinema. To mention something else I think no one else has, that bit where Thor is fighting the Hulk and Thor holds out his hand, waiting for Mjollnir to return and then finally uppercuts the Hulk with it...goddamn great.

I also love the shot of Thor and Cap back-to-back, simultaneously catching their respective flying weapons.

Translation convention, nooj. Plus don't a lot of other countries try and teach English now that there's so much international dealings with us? I know Japan does it...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

 

Thank you for nailing what I couldn't in my initial movie scoring post.  It's like the scores are interchangeable these days.  It's generic thriller score, or generic action score and so on, just add water, etc...not that this didn't happen in the 80s and 90s, but there was enough greatness being achieved despite this.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hyperspace 

The Marvel movie with the most memorable and hummable score so far is Thor, by a large margin. IMO.

 

Other recent films with great scores in this century: Tron: Legacy, Sunshine ... The LOTR films of course. I'm sure I'm forgetting some.

 

But while we remember the great scores from the 70's, 80's, 90's - weren't there also a bunch of bland stuff as well? We just tend to forget it and remember the great stuff, which naturally colors our memory.

I think the last great, bombastic, action movie score was Zimmer's for Gladiator, but then I'm an old fogey who doesn't get out much. The shine even came off that when I realised he had recycled the main battle theme for Pirates of the Caribbean.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by PMR 

• My theory is Hulk hits it big but Cap gets the short end of the stick...

Really? Because I thought Cap was a really big presence in the movie, second only to Stark. To me, Thor was the one who got somewhat shafted. I think part of the problem is that Whedon just didn't seem to connect with the character -- Thor's emotional moments feel somewhat stilted and underwritten, especially the one with Loki that comes nearer the climax; he's introduced forty minutes into the movie; and he appears only for brief segments/is given almost no dialogue during the entire last half-hour of the film. Indeed, I'd say Whedon's approach to Thor during the major dialogue scenes treats him almost like a wallflower, which, obviously, is very un-Thorlike.

A few of my friends noticed something similar, and suggested that maybe the problem isn't with Whedon -- they said that perhaps Hemsworth just isn't a large enough screen presence to stack up against actors like Downey or Ruffalo. I don't really agree, considering how good he was in Thor, but I am somewhat inclined to believe that without Branagh's close tutelage, the quality of Hemsworth's performance might take a downturn in subsequent Thor solo films. I hope that doesn't happen, needless to say.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Spider 

Translation convention, nooj. 

Oh, was that really what it was?  3 times, and I missed that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhp1608 

 

 

 

I think the last great, bombastic, action movie score was Zimmer's for Gladiator...

So catchy, that even the villain will dance to the hero's theme!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hyperspace 

But while we remember the great scores from the 70's, 80's, 90's - weren't there also a bunch of bland stuff as well? We just tend to forget it and remember the great stuff, which naturally colors our memory.

I never said there weren't bad scores in the 80s and 90s...there is always bad shit.  I'm saying there were far more instances of amazing, memorable scores back then, especially for genre films.  I mean, off the top of my head:

Conan, E.T., Robocop, Poltergeist, Total Recall, Rocky, Back To The Future, The Indy films, The Silence Of The Lambs, Basic Instinct, Die Hard, Speed, Predator, Batman '89, Explorers, Star Trek 1 and 2 (and to a certain extent, the other sequels), Seven, Jurassic Park, Terminator, T2, Jaws, Star Wars, The Fly, Close Encounters, First Blood, The Last Starfighter, Gremlins, Ghostbusters...

I know am missing tons...I can name memorable scores for the 2000s maybe on one hand...and even those I find nothing to write home about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 

 

Oh, was that really what it was?  3 times, and I missed that.

I think you misunderstand me, good sir. When I say "translation convention", I mean that, in-universe, they're speaking their language. But for the benefit of the audience, we get them in English.

NO.

I'm surprised none of the Michael Giacchino fans have chimed in on this. He pretty much does nothing for me (all colors, no picture), but still.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hammerhead 

I'm surprised none of the Michael Giacchino fans have chimed in on this. He pretty much does nothing for me (all colors, no picture), but still.

WAAAAAAT???

Though... I suppose I kinda understand the 'all colors, no picture' remark.

Giacchino can definitely fall into the trap of sounding interchangeable from movie to movie (or LOST).

Yeah, Giacchino makes a real effort to have memorable themes in his scores. I love him, personally.

I don't think the problem with Thor is Hemsworth.  I think it's more that he's a utterly absurd, one-dimensional character.  I actually like him much better on screen than the page, which is almost entirely down to the performance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 

 

So catchy, that even the villain will dance to the hero's theme!

 

I always thought that was such a brilliant 4th wall moment, along with him poking out his tongue when something gorey happens to reflect the audience's thirst for blood.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeI 

Sometimes I feel dead inside because I don't have the same appreciation for scores as most do on these boards. I recognize when a score is great or terrible, but good-middling-uninspired all run together. Unless it's bad enough to take me out of the moment, I usually don't notice at all.

 

My point is, I know I didn't walk out of the Avengers humming anything.

I must be more dead than you because I couldn't follow a single score conversation around here if I tried.  I don't remember music at all when I watch films.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMulder 

Really? Because I thought Cap was a really big presence in the movie, second only to Stark. To me, Thor was the one who got somewhat shafted. I think part of the problem is that Whedon just didn't seem to connect with the character -- Thor's emotional moments feel somewhat stilted and underwritten, especially the one with Loki that comes nearer the climax; he's introduced forty minutes into the movie; and he appears only for brief segments/is given almost no dialogue during the entire last half-hour of the film. Indeed, I'd say Whedon's approach to Thor during the major dialogue scenes treats him almost like a wallflower, which, obviously, is very un-Thorlike.

In complete agreement. Despite AVENGERS being, for intents and purposes, THOR 2, Thor is pretty one-note in the film and, despite having a great fight with Hulk, simply isn't much of a presence in the film. Cap is definitely all over, and the film plainly (though not shovel-to-the-face) shows us him coming into his own in command and respect, both within the AVENGERS (Stark himself defers to Cap in the battle) and with civilians.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hammerhead 

I'm surprised none of the Michael Giacchino fans have chimed in on this. He pretty much does nothing for me (all colors, no picture), but still.

Giacchino's score for STAR TREK is ridiculously great, and very much deserves to be mentioned among the best action scores of the last quarter century.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMulder 

 

A few of my friends noticed something similar, and suggested that maybe the problem isn't with Whedon -- they said that perhaps Hemsworth just isn't a large enough screen presence to stack up against actors like Downey or Ruffalo. I don't really agree, considering how good he was in Thor, but I am somewhat inclined to believe that without Branagh's close tutelage, the quality of Hemsworth's performance might take a downturn in subsequent Thor solo films. I hope that doesn't happen, needless to say.

I agree with you not agreeing J. I'm sure i already yapped about it somewhere in this thread but I thought Hemsworth, reduced screen-time and all, more than stood toe to toe with the others and even stole scenes here and there. The only other thing I'd seen him in was the beginning of Star Trek 11 and I thought he was a zero as George Kirk but as Thor in The Avengers he held his own with the more experienced peeps 100%.