The Avengers (Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Hulk et al) - Page 5

aprout · 25-07-2010, 15:00

Ruffalo as Banner?

It's either going to be the greatest superhero movie ever, or the most disappointing.

RomerojpgX · 25-07-2010, 15:01

Sexy Time indeed!

JimDriver2 · 25-07-2010, 15:18

At worst it will be a mildly disappointing 3/5 film because they fall into the familiar traps of too many characters/subplots, doing an origin story just to set up a final 20 mins of action, watering down their characters and story-lines to make them acceptable to a mass market.

At best it will be an entertaining 4/5 film that doesn't outlive it's 110 minutes and gives a bit of a spectacle and is pretty good fun. With Wheadon involved it will probably involve the odd funny quip as well.

The problem with all these Marvel films is they're playing it safe and don't have enough ambition. Chris Nolan has shown with The Dark Knight what you can do if you go all out and try to make grown-up, layered and substantial blockbuster comic film. But Marvel are still all freaked out by the first Hulk which had similar aims but didn't entirely work. The problem there though is because Ang Lee is one of the most hit or miss directors ever, and the fairly with Hulk was more down to him than trying to really do something with a comic book property. There's a lot of money on the line so Marvel are playing it safe, so will ultimately make a lot of decent but forgettable films.

SIMON ADEBISI · 25-07-2010, 15:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimDriver2

The problem there though is because Ang Lee is one of the most hit or miss directors ever.

Eh?

JimDriver2 · 25-07-2010, 15:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by SIMON ADEBISI

Eh?

I didn't put that terribly well. Basically I mean for every Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon or Brokeback mountain (great films) there's a Hulk or Taking Woodstock which aren't.

SIMON ADEBISI · 25-07-2010, 15:41

According to IMDb he's made 12. 2 out of 12 dont a hit and miss director make.

LooNaTiK · 25-07-2010, 15:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimDriver2

Basically I mean for every Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon or Brokeback mountain (great films) there's a Hulk or Taking Woodstock which don't.

don't ... what?

I dont think the avengers will have too much character development to do, given that the only new character by then will be Hawkeye. The rest of the characters will have had their own films by then, and their back stories will be established for the most part.

The first 45 minutes of The Avengers will be spent with bad guy exposition (Loki and Hulk, whos origins we already know) and then a fairly lengthy montage of Fury, Coulson, Black Widow and Stark recruiting The Avengers and digging Captain America out of a glacier at some point. With 10 minutes thrown in for Hawkeye exposition.

LooN

JimDriver2 · 25-07-2010, 15:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by SIMON ADEBISI

According to IMDb he's made 12. 2 out of 12 dont a hit and miss director make.

In the last 13 years he's made 7 films.

Of those 7 films on Rotten Tomatoes 2 of them have 90% + ratings, (clearly he's capable of hits).

Of the other 5, there's one with a 48% rating and two with 60%ish ratings. One of however is Hulk, maybe one of the more controversial blockbusters of recent years and a really polarizes people in their opinion of it. The remaining two have ratings in the 70's and 80's. The one in the 80's is The Ice Storm, which personally I found rather tiresome the second time round. The other is Lust/Caution which again i've heard very strong opinions either way.

Yes he's got two highly rated films earlier than in the last 13 years, so I'm happy to revise my opinion to be "he's now a hit or miss director"

Disappearer · 25-07-2010, 15:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimDriver2

The problem with all these Marvel films is they're playing it safe and don't have enough ambition.

Combining several superhero franchises into one mega-franchise? That's never been done before, I can't see how you can say they don't have enough ambition. It's the most ambitious superhero movie so far.

RomerojpgX · 25-07-2010, 16:04

JimDriver2 did you ever see little films called Serenity or X Men 2.

Big casts in a group, worked perefectly in every way.

JimDriver2 · 25-07-2010, 16:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disappearer

Combining several superhero franchises into one mega-franchise? That's never been done before, I can't see how you can say they don't have enough ambition. It's the most ambitious superhero movie so far.

It's essentially a superhero film with lots of superhero's in it. Boiled down like that I can't see the difference between it and X-Men. All the main individual characters in that could hold their own film.

I'd say starting with nothing and putting them all together as the first film was more ambitious. Additionally given that all the characters will have had the own films out before Avengers, with their characters set up, [i]and/[i] they've been hammering in the Avengers set up into all those films with the set up scenes, should mean they can get straight into it with The Avengers.

Thing is I just don't see that happening. The Incredible Hulk was a big misfire, and the Iron Man films, whilst good really don't have me expecting anything as good as The Dark Knight, or even Spider-man 2.

Iron Man 2 is the best thing to point to. They had a massively successful film, which overachieved in my opinion. (The last act was rather dull.) Everything was set up for them to really try and do something with number 2, and while it's not bad it's clear they just aimed for a solid B.

I'd loved to be proved wrong, and it would be great to see Wheadon make a great and really successful film, but I can't see it happening. Serenity is his ceiling, it's a very good, lots of fun, but it's no classic and if push comes to shove it's a little slight.

Disappearer · 25-07-2010, 16:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimDriver2

I'd say starting with nothing and putting them all together as the first film was more ambitious.

No, because that wouldn't entail the massive financial gamble Marvel are undertaking. Thor and Captain America could tank, and they are both costing millions to make. Avengers starts shooting before either is released. Marvel have to have supreme confidence that this will work to shovel that kind of money into creating this huge universe on the big screen. I still contend it's the most ambitious superhero project so far.

RomerojpgX · 25-07-2010, 16:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disappearer

I still contend it's the most ambitious superhero project so far.

Putting it mildly

its all or nothing for Marvel.

Just think of the second, third, fourth, etc... films. Each time adding in new cast, the amount of cameos that may pop up in the first film alone could be daunting. I just hope they kill a few cast members

Spectre07 · 26-07-2010, 09:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disappearer

Combining several superhero franchises into one mega-franchise? That's never been done before, I can't see how you can say they don't have enough ambition. It's the most ambitious superhero movie so far.

Not as ambitious as Superman II given the limitations with hardware and SFX etc.

Roberto · 26-07-2010, 10:17

For me Iron Man is the strongest character amongst them, it will be interesting to see if they can make the movie without RDJ basically stealing it.

Disappearer · 26-07-2010, 17:11

Video of Joss Whedon assembling his Avengers.(Downey Jr's stabbing crack is a reference to this: http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/164...24/story.jhtml)