or Connect
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › THE AVENGERS (2012) Post-Release
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

THE AVENGERS (2012) Post-Release - Page 14

post #651 of 2727

Oh and the Hulk sequel should introduce She-Hulk. It's about damn time. Paging Gina Carrano?

post #652 of 2727

I got the impression at the end, that Tony and Bruce were going to start a serious Bromance. 

 

"You saved me, Bruce"

 

"You would have done the same, Tony, I'll always be your wingman"

 

"And I'll always be your Iron Man"

 

Handshake, into a MAN HUG.  LOL

 

She-Hulk would just muck that up, but hey, write Iron Man 3 about Tony having to deal with Bruce's new found love and how he doesn't have a best friend anymore... could be right up Shane Black's alley!!!

post #653 of 2727

One thing I'm curious about, did Thor just stop shaving in Asgard?  

post #654 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diva View Post

my favorite Hulk moment is him catching Iron Man as he fell from the sky. It saddened me a little that not one person cheered that. But I get that fighting gets more cheers than helping.

 

I think part of the reason is that the catching shot was highlighted in the trailers.  Then there's the fact that it looked like Thor was about to fly up and save him.  So Hulk's gesture doesn't come across as particularly heroic (more like, "HULK FIRST!" heheh).  Now, maybe if Thor had his hands full with something else...

post #655 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoonBaseNick View Post

One thing I'm curious about, did Thor just stop shaving in Asgard?  

 

Bifrost is broken, so maybe he had to catch a flight back to earth.  TSA doesn't allow razors on board.

post #656 of 2727

Hulk catching Iron Man got applause at my theater.  

 

Really my only gripe is I wanted a line from Stark saying "Magic is technology we don't understand yet."  Because when Dr. Strange, or some of the other really magical characters get movies, it would be good to make a distinction, I think.  Just to make those characters more unique.

post #657 of 2727

What's the story about Thor not shaving?  I thought we always saw him with facial hair?  Was he extra scruffy in The Avengers?

post #658 of 2727

Not to derail, but this time 10 years ago the first Spider-Man was released. Oh how far we've come!

post #659 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

What's the story about Thor not shaving?  I thought we always saw him with facial hair?  Was he extra scruffy in The Avengers?

 

Had a beard in Thor, and in The Avengers, it looked like he was ready to listen to some WHAM!

post #660 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3nnui View Post

you summed it up well, I had the same feeling sitting during the credits watching the joy on my kids faces. Whedon made a goddamn SUPERHERO movie. Singer made movies about people who were different and oppressed trying to deal with being outcasts from society and find their way. That's why he got good reviews but the films never really felt alive or fun...the subject matter was too goddamn heavy, whether is was the holocaust callbacks, the right wingers who wanted to cure or kill the mutants, or the closeted mutants. Those films feel like lifetime movies that feature superheros, not the damn good time the audience was looking for.

 

Here's the thing, though: there's got to be a happy medium. I love Singer's X-flicks precisely because they're using pop culture blockbusters to say something substantial; the Avengers (and, indeed, all the Marvel Studios movies) avoid having anything to say at all costs, which bugs me. It's one thing to make Brokeback Mountain, an art movie for the already-converted; it's another thing to slip a message of tolerance with a very strong emphasis on gay rights into a slam-bang movie that everyone will see with their kids. In some ways I feel like huge blockbusters have a shot at being the kinds of "social change" movies so many politically engaged filmmakers dream of making. (Which is why the move towards ultraconservativism in blockbusters, with even women and minorities having the spotlight taken away from them, is dispiriting.)

 

I'd like it if the X-movies popped more as action/superhero flicks, but I'd like it even more if Whedon reverses himself and releases his director's cut with, from all appearances, more substance to it.

post #661 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerhead View Post

Oh and the Hulk sequel should introduce She-Hulk. It's about damn time. Paging Gina Carrano?

 

Perfect. I've always had a thing for She-Hulk. Not in that way.

 

...

 

Well, OK, yes, in that way. Which is why you need someone feminine yet ass-kicking in the role.

 

Though that does raise the question...would She-Hulk not be CGI? Wouldn't you cast a tiny waif as Jennifer Walters and then swap her out with CGI? I mean, Im all for painting Carrano green and watching her tear out of her clothing, but it would look a little weird next to a CGI Hulk.

 

Anyway, I would want a She-Hulk movie to be based on Dan Slott's run and have her working as a lawyer, so clearly I'm asking for a little too much here.

post #662 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post

 

Here's the thing, though: there's got to be a happy medium. I love Singer's X-flicks precisely because they're using pop culture blockbusters to say something substantial; the Avengers (and, indeed, all the Marvel Studios movies) avoid having anything to say at all costs, which bugs me. It's one thing to make Brokeback Mountain, an art movie for the already-converted; it's another thing to slip a message of tolerance with a very strong emphasis on gay rights into a slam-bang movie that everyone will see with their kids. In some ways I feel like huge blockbusters have a shot at being the kinds of "social change" movies so many politically engaged filmmakers dream of making. (Which is why the move towards ultraconservativism in blockbusters, with even women and minorities having the spotlight taken away from them, is dispiriting.)

 

While not as deep as X2, Iron Man did bring up some interesting issues with weapons.  I saw the Stark weapons used by the "Taliban" guys, to represent the weapons used against US troops today, namely the weapons we supplied them to fight the Soviet Union.  Iron Man 2, even as a weaker film (imo), did have some things to say when Tony was on trial with our own government.  Escalation, Weapons Race, etc.  Like I said, not as deep as what was shown in X-Men, but it's not like it was going out of it's way NOT to say anything.  There's stuff there.

post #663 of 2727

The Iron Man movies do dance around some political ideas, true (maybe it's considered safer to pander to right-wing politics these days?) but they don't really connect to the actual story. Plus, you know, as a Dukakis-hugging moon maiden, I would have liked to see them draw a distinction between the basically altruistic Tony Stark and the real-world asshole Objectivists who THINK they're Tony Stark. Not to mention having Cap smack him down a little politically.
 

post #664 of 2727

Quote:

 

Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post

 

 

- Stark's character arc, while simply a repeat of what's gone before, was really well done. Whedon and Downey managed to make me a bit misty-eyed for Tony at the end, despite knowing he would live. The shots of Downey's eyes when falling away from the Chitauri ship were perfect.

 

 

Reminded me of SUNSHINE.

 

"KANEDA!  WHAT DO YOU SEE????"

post #665 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post

Though that does raise the question...would She-Hulk not be CGI? Wouldn't you cast a tiny waif as Jennifer Walters and then swap her out with CGI? I mean, Im all for painting Carrano green and watching her tear out of her clothing, but it would look a little weird next to a CGI Hulk.

 

You could do what they did with Chris Evans as pre-serum Steve Rogers and scrawny-ize a buff actress with CGI, then color her green when she hulks out.

 

I don't remember She-Hulk being particularly beefed-out anyway, just taller and stronger, some obvious musculature but not Chyna levels of beef.

post #666 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post

The Iron Man movies do dance around some political ideas, true (maybe it's considered safer to pander to right-wing politics these days?) but they don't really connect to the actual story. Plus, you know, as a Dukakis-hugging moon maiden, I would have liked to see them draw a distinction between the basically altruistic Tony Stark and the real-world asshole Objectivists who THINK they're Tony Stark. Not to mention having Cap smack him down a little politically.
 

 

Oh, I think Rhodes being part of the government and trying to secure a suit to sell off to a competitor is very much a plot point of Iron Man 2.   Iron Man 2 is just as much about arm's dealers and there place in the world, then Tony solving the mystery of his arch poisoning.

post #667 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Blank View Post

 

You could do what they did with Chris Evans as pre-serum Steve Rogers and scrawny-ize a buff actress with CGI, then color her green when she hulks out.

 

I don't remember She-Hulk being particularly beefed-out anyway, just taller and stronger, some obvious musculature but not Chyna levels of beef.

 

I'm just saying, a live-action actress standing next to a CGI Hulk would look weird. And keep in mind there's really only about ten minutes of screentime, tops, of Scrawny Rogers. That kind of shit is expensive.

post #668 of 2727

My point is, the casting of Ruffalo as Banner puts the lie to "We have to cast someone skinny as the person who hulks out". Start with someone like Carrano (or, say, Jessica Biel) who has a physical presence, and build from there.

post #669 of 2727

One thing this thread is making me appreciate more is how many great one-liners there were in the movie (mostly from Stark). I don't know how much I'd enjoy watching the whole thing again since the action gets a bit excessive for my tastes, but I imagine the crackling dialog will never get old.

 

Stark was always charming in the Iron Man movies, but his wit was brought to a new level here. When I think back on the movie fondly, Stark's remarks (haha, that rhymes) are the first things I remember...each one was such a delightful surprise because of how simultaneously random and apt it sounded. From "Shakespeare in the park" to the big punchline of Tony's theories about how Banner keeps himself in check:"A big bag of weed?"....that stuff's gold. The sarcasm and playful mockery was so endearing.

 

Some of those quips were so good that even the audience I saw it with (most of whom probably didn't speak English) just ate them up. The best written comedy is easily translatable, methinks. I don't much care for LOTR, but I got a big laugh along with everyone else over "Legolas". Loved Tony calling Thor "Point Break" too, but "Reindeer Games" was one weirdass obscure reference.

post #670 of 2727

Shades of Keanu calling that big guy 'Gigantor' in Speed, another Whedon contribution.

 

My favorite exchange (for now):

 

"We need a plan of attack."

"I have a plan. Attack."

post #671 of 2727

One thing I don't think is getting enough play is the weird aesthetic of the Chitauri. They're just faceless mooks and don't do a whole lot  in the movie, but I actually wish they'd gone more in-depth on them, because their weird magi-bio-tech was interesting to me. I mean, on the one hand they're just high tech dudes with Stargate weapons, but on the other they have actual dragons (who have an oddly Gears of War look to them) covered in armor. They're clearly not the Skrulls or even the Chitauri from the Ultimate Universe, so a little more introduction besides "they are a badass army" would have been nice, in my opinion. Maybe even just a quick montage of them conquering a planet. Then again, that might have bloated the movie too much.

Also is that actually Alexis Denisof playing the cenobite guy? I couldn't make out his particular voice or anything, and obviously his face was covered.

post #672 of 2727

One particularly HUGE laugh from Stark's antics?  That little look he gives Banner as he leans in right after jabbing him at the side with the shocky thingy.  Oh god...

post #673 of 2727

I think the "reindeer games" jab was meant to be a knock against Loki's big-ass horn helmet. Otherwise it makes no sense as a film reference.

post #674 of 2727

DISCLAIMER... I LIKE THE FILM, IT'S GOOD.

 

 

I seem to take issue with people saying "Yeah, the plot is barely there, but it's not about the plot".  Really?  Would a better story and plot have hurt the film?  Wouldn't a slightly stronger story help create a movie with better character moments (since many are saying it's about the characters, not the plot)?  I like the Avengers, it's a solid B film for me, but what held it back from greatness was the lack of plot and let's be honest, the Skrull like bad-guys were pretty lame.  They really are the Battle Droids of the movie; No motivation, not really a threat, and they way there are defeated isn't all that exciting (I mean, the are kept alive by a battle station?).  I like Loki as a villain, but him just appearing in the beginning and working with this army wasn't all that involving.  When going into this film, the one thing I wanted was there to be a reason why all these Hero's got together.  Some huge threat that made you think they had no chance of winning, even when working together.  We barely got that, I'd even argue that Hulk and Thor could have handled the whole thing on their own.   In the end, a bunch of "cool" scenes can only equate to so much.  Much of the reaction, the calls of greatness, seems to remind me of the love Episode III got out of the gates.  How Lucas rediscovered himself, and how Episode III was a return to form.  Well, that love came and went, and Episode III is now lumped right into the disappointment that is the prequels.  Not to say the Avengers is bad, no, it's very good.  It's the pure definition of the whole being great then the sum of it parts. 

 

But hey, ignore me, I'm just nitpicking.  I liked the movie, and will probably see it for a third time next weekend. 

 

 

tumblr_ll9pv9jboy1qixleeo1_400.gif


Edited by Monster Pete - 5/6/12 at 2:27pm
post #675 of 2727

The movie *has* a plot, but it's kept purposefully simple. It's designed to show these characters clashing and then overcoming their differences to work together against a major threat. I would say the story does that beautifully. This is not Transformers, where the writing is beyond sloppy in getting from Point A to Point B or where the characters are stupid and annoying. This has much more of a throughline, and for the most part makes sense on its own terms.

 

Sure, the Chitauri don't have much in the way of motivation beyond "we like to conquer shit", but they're at least a formidable foe in their sheer numbers and destructive capabilities. Besides, the movie's really not *about* them, it's about the heroes (and Loki). How they respond to the threat is, I think, more important in this film than how personal the threat actually is. Thanos will probably be a more engaging enemy on a personality level, so we have that to look forward to.

post #676 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Spider View Post

The movie *has* a plot, but it's kept purposefully simple. It's designed to show these characters clashing and then overcoming their differences to work together against a major threat. I would say the story does that beautifully. This is not Transformers, where the writing is beyond sloppy in getting from Point A to Point B. This has much more of a throughline.

 

Sure, the Chitauri don't have much in the way of motivation beyond "we like to conquer shit", but they're at least a formidable foe in their sheer numbers and destructive capabilities. Besides, the movie's really not *about* them, it's about the heroes (and Loki). How they respond to the threat is, I think, more important in this film than how personal the threat actually is. Thanos will probably be a more engaging enemy on a personality level, so we have that to look forward to.

 

I agree the plot was simple, but a more complicated plot is not was I wanted.  I was just expecting the plot to demonstrate something a little more, threatening.  I never felt our Hero's were ever in real danger.  But then again, that is a issue I have with all the Marvel Avenger films. 

 

I think an expanded plot of Loki controlling the Hulk would have been exciting.  Maybe even to add that element in at the end, The Avengers NEED The Hulks help, but they aren't sure if he can be trusted due to Loki's control.  We get Hulk going on a rampage earlier, then it's all but forgotten at the end.  "Oh, you can control it, okay, let's do this."

 

I'm just nitpicking at this point, I sort of like that this film is really accessible to all ages, and for me, the best part of the film is how much my son LOVED it.  So, on that note... I'll just go "Yeah, it was AWESOME!"

post #677 of 2727

Sebastian OB, If you have...HULK, Dr. Strange, and Son Of Satan, how about adding Valkyrie, and Hellcat too, and you would have a...Dynamic Defenders Film!  Also, they could be opposed by...The Headmen!

post #678 of 2727

Given that Hulk was saving their asses at that point, you can't blame them for letting it slide.

post #679 of 2727

Untill the movie, it never occured to me that Stark and Banner could be friends. I don't think they were ever that close in the comics.

 

Baron Zemo for CAP 2 please.

post #680 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post

Given that Hulk was saving their asses at that point, you can't blame them for letting it slide.

 

I actually find that sort of interesting.  If I was SHIELD, and seeing how Hulk is owning this group, I'd start to worry about his control and what if Loki did some how get control of him.  Or, if he just LOST it completely.  I know he said "I'm always mad" and that is supposed to correspond to him having control, or near control.  I just think it was something that could have added a threat at the end.  Just my opinion.

post #681 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monster Pete View Post

 

a) I think an expanded plot of Loki controlling the Hulk would have been exciting.  Maybe even to add that element in at the end, The Avengers NEED The Hulks help, but they aren't sure if he can be trusted due to Loki's control. 

b) We get Hulk going on a rampage earlier, then it's all but forgotten at the end.  "Oh, you can control it, okay, let's do this."

 

 

a) Do you want to bet how many people would be complaining his turnover in the middle of the film as trustworthy was rushed?

b) He is their only choice, they can't afford to even cast doubt on this. He is the only leverage on their side, remember the Stark and Loki exchange at Stark's tower.

post #682 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andres View Post

 

a) Do you want to bet how many people would be complaining his turnover in the middle of the film as trustworthy was rushed?

b) He is their only choice, they can't afford to even cast doubt on this. He is the only leverage on their side, remember the Stark and Loki exchange at Stark's tower.


But is it too much to ask, for the characters to express that?  That Hulk is like playing with fire.  Couldn't have Thor asked Captain "You sure about this?".  For Captain to go "He's are only chance".  Couple extra lines would have went a long way.  Even the "heads" wanting to Nuke the city, they could of said "You are playing with a Nuke right now with the Hulk, we can't risk either side winning".

post #683 of 2727

Also, as has been pointed out already, the "rampage" was instigated by Loki. Banner amply demonstrates he has a good level of control over "the other guy" for the rest of the film.

post #684 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post

Also, as has been pointed out already, the "rampage" was instigated by Loki. Banner amply demonstrates he has a good level of control over "the other guy" for the rest of the film.

 

But why not bring it back?  Why not have them worried, that Loki could tip the Hulk's anger back to the good guys?  It would have been a way to amp up the tension at the end, add a little substance behind the money shots.

post #685 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by duke fleed View Post

felix, Really? There is...Nothing...Exciting?

2013...

 

Parker Jason Statham

 

 

pointblank1.jpg

post #686 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monster Pete View Post

 

I agree the plot was simple, but a more complicated plot is not was I wanted.  I was just expecting the plot to demonstrate something a little more, threatening.  I never felt our Hero's were ever in real danger.  But then again, that is a issue I have with all the Marvel Avenger films. 

 

I think an expanded plot of Loki controlling the Hulk would have been exciting.  Maybe even to add that element in at the end, The Avengers NEED The Hulks help, but they aren't sure if he can be trusted due to Loki's control.  We get Hulk going on a rampage earlier, then it's all but forgotten at the end.  "Oh, you can control it, okay, let's do this."

 

I'm just nitpicking at this point, I sort of like that this film is really accessible to all ages, and for me, the best part of the film is how much my son LOVED it.  So, on that note... I'll just go "Yeah, it was AWESOME!"

More importantly the movie lacks heart.  I wish I cared about them more.  That's why I loved BB and Ironman I cared about them.  

post #687 of 2727

Ah, I don't agree with THAT at all. I cared about everyone in the movie personally. Granted, some of that was because I already liked them... but then that's the genius, isn't it?

post #688 of 2727

So was that blue gem on Loki's staff supposed to be the Mind infinity gem then? I didn't even consider it until the Thanos reveal and then has a "well, duh" moment.    
 

post #689 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monster Pete View Post


But is it too much to ask, for the characters to express that?  That Hulk is like playing with fire.  Couldn't have Thor asked Captain "You sure about this?".  For Captain to go "He's are only chance".  Couple extra lines would have went a long way.  Even the "heads" wanting to Nuke the city, they could of said "You are playing with a Nuke right now with the Hulk, we can't risk either side winning".


Banner consistently saying "I actively try to avoid those situations" or variations thereof wasn't enough?  The amount of tip-toeing around him during all the confrontational scenes and bickering STILL wasn't enough?  Come on, man.  Nitpicking for nitpicking's sake here, I think.

post #690 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by cccc View Post

More importantly the movie lacks heart.  I wish I cared about them more.  That's why I loved BB and Ironman I cared about them.  

 

You see, I don't get that at all. For me, one of the film's strongest aspects is the sheer amount of heart in it. For a start, the sheer amount of love Whedon's put into these characters and the way he brings out all of their most positive and endearing aspects. It's infectious: I haven't seen an audience as visibly fall in love with a bunch of characters as strongly in years. Tony's sacrifice play. "His name is Phil" - in fact, everything around Coulson's death. You can find things to nitpick (And fuck knows people are doing it in this thread), but a lack of heart ain't one of them.

post #691 of 2727

 Speaking of Stark's zingers, I liked when he referred to Loki as Rock of Ages. What else can you call someone with a righteous mullet?

post #692 of 2727
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post

 

Another nit to pick: I never warmed to Cap's uniform. I thought it looked pretty dumb - bordering on silly - most of the movie. I don't know if it's just me and my own lack of "loyalty" to the character, as the daylight shots we've seen from TDKR look great to me, and I have no problem with the Nolan Batsuit in the daylight. 

 

Shrug. Cap's suit certainly didn't ruin the film for me, but it never stopped looking silly to me.

 

They couldn't get that helmet off of him quick enough.  That shot of him, Hawkeye, and Black Widow marching toward the jet looked like two people headed for combat, and one person headed for a kid's birthday party. 

 

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

One particularly HUGE laugh from Stark's antics?  That little look he gives Banner as he leans in right after jabbing him at the side with the shocky thingy.  Oh god...

 

I do wonder what Tony would have done had he Hulked out right then and there...

post #693 of 2727

I'll preface these comments by saying the film is a lot of fun.  RDJ's great here; there's just enough of his trademark smarminess without it becoming a bit grating as in the standalone IM movies.  Additionally, Tom Hiddleston is great.  He's effectively menacing, and the scale of the whole thing feels right.  At no point does it feel like it's going to be a cakewalk for the heroes.

 

However:

1) They mostly blew it with Cap, I think.  We can talk all about how much the team respects him, how they show how much of a leader he is, but from an action hero standpoint he's essentially impotent in the film, apart from a couple of token sequences.  He gets dominated by Loki, helplessly pinned down by some random guy with a machine gun, and then watches while BW basically saves the Earth.  I don't care what her story is in the comics, she shouldn't be the equal of Cap in the ass kicking department, yet that's how she comes across.  You don't really get a sense at all of Cap's effectively superhuman abilites in the movie. It should have been him riding the enemy hovercraft thing up to the Tower and closing the portal.  Not only would it have been more believable than having a mere mortal do it(or merer mortal, anyway), it would have better showcased the character.

 

2) I don't really understand the Hulk's arc in the movie.  Is Banner in control of the transformations and the Hulk the entire time?  If not, what changes after that initial freakout on the helicarrier?  I would have bought him having control from the start, as was heavily implied by the end of the Norton film, but it seems that he was really trying to kill BW on the helicarrier.  It feels like they tried to have it both ways on the Hulk (mindless monster and Banner-controlled team player), and unless there's a bunch of deleted scenes that explain the character's change halfway through, it doesn't really work, in my mind.


Edited by AA85 - 5/6/12 at 5:07pm
post #694 of 2727

I would definitely agree with how de-powered Cap felt.  It was mostly due to Black Widow and Hawkeye seeming to have little trouble taking the Chitauris out.  The new suit making Evans look a bit shrimpy didn't help.  His bulky WWII outfit looked so much better.

post #695 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarleyQuinn22 View Post

I do wonder what Tony would have done had he Hulked out right then and there...


IronManHulk.jpg

post #696 of 2727

Eh, Cap still got to kick a good bit of ass, methinks.

post #697 of 2727
post #698 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Spider View Post

Eh, Cap still got to kick a good bit of ass, methinks.

 

You know that's not the point that's being made.  Hahahah.

 

You don't have to defend against every nitpick on the film's behalf.  You keep that on the Disney threads!

post #699 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbrother View Post

So was that blue gem on Loki's staff supposed to be the Mind infinity gem then? I didn't even consider it until the Thanos reveal and then has a "well, duh" moment.    
 

I actually thought at first that the mind-control and "pushing" the Avengers into a confrontation with each other were just part of Loki's shtick as God of Mischief. I seem to recall there were one or two line's about the staff's provenance, but I didn't catch them clearly. The Thanos reveal certainly makes sense out of that. Has anyone confirmed that it was the Mind Gem?

 

I don't share the fondness people have for the Infinity Gauntlet story line-- but aside from that, going in that direction for the sequel seems to present a problem. I mean, doesn't the Gauntlet essentially do the same thing that the Cube does-- i.e. anything the possessor wants? It would be repetitive to build another picture around another Ultimate MacGuffin like that. Or maybe I misremember how the Gauntlet works.

 

While it's amazing that "The Avengers" even exists in the first place, making a follow-up that's as good as the first, and different, is going to be some task. I don't envy the boys at Marvel on that score.

post #700 of 2727
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

 

You know that's not the point that's being made.  Hahahah.

 

You don't have to defend against every nitpick on the film's behalf.  You keep that on the Disney threads!

 

But what other purpose do I serve?!

 

In all seriousness, that seemed like a really petty nitpick, so that's why I stepped up. I didn't really notice any inconsistency with how Cap's powers were portrayed in his own movie. I think him getting pinned down by that one machine-gun mook was meant to show his unfamiliarity with more modern weaponry.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › THE AVENGERS (2012) Post-Release