Man, I love Robert Downey Jr., but I have to say that this is the worst suit I have ever seen. Not even he can pull it off. Especially not with a bow tie and sneakers. Bow ties are cool, but not that cool.
Apparently you people missed the memo where it was explained RDJ is part honey badger.
0
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
What I'm liking is that the action scenes do not seem to suffer from the shakey-cam action sequences that infest so many movies. I don't get why so many directors decide to blow wads of cash on choreography and special effects, then jam the camera so close to the action that's it's easier to count nostril hairs than see what the hell is going on.
0
Linespider5ALL HAIL KING KILLMONGERRegistered Userregular
What I'm liking is that the action scenes do not seem to suffer from the shakey-cam action sequences that infest so many movies. I don't get why so many directors decide to blow wads of cash on choreography and special effects, then jam the camera so close to the action that's it's easier to count nostril hairs than see what the hell is going on.
They do that to be realistic. Avengers seems like it doesn't give a shit about that. 8-)
But when asked about Hulk 3 (or 2?), Feige said Hulk hasnt worked in solo movies twice now, and they like him in Avengers, and like that people are real happy with him there. So lets keep him in the universe and keep him around, but use him in those roles where he's around but not the focus.
I thought Norton Hulk worked pretty well, honestly. Wish we could see more of that.
But when asked about Hulk 3 (or 2?), Feige said Hulk hasnt worked in solo movies twice now, and they like him in Avengers, and like that people are real happy with him there. So lets keep him in the universe and keep him around, but use him in those roles where he's around but not the focus.
I thought Norton Hulk worked pretty well, honestly. Wish we could see more of that.
But when asked about Hulk 3 (or 2?), Feige said Hulk hasnt worked in solo movies twice now, and they like him in Avengers, and like that people are real happy with him there. So lets keep him in the universe and keep him around, but use him in those roles where he's around but not the focus.
I thought Norton Hulk worked pretty well, honestly. Wish we could see more of that.
Yeah. It wasn't my favorite movie in this continuity but it was perfectly enjoyable.
Though if they decide to just increase overall involvement between movies instead with Hulk/Banner as a semi regular supporting character I won't complain either.
0
Linespider5ALL HAIL KING KILLMONGERRegistered Userregular
I can definitely understand the Hulk's appeal as a character foil. For all his reputation of being a loner, Hulk works best with others.
What I'm liking is that the action scenes do not seem to suffer from the shakey-cam action sequences that infest so many movies. I don't get why so many directors decide to blow wads of cash on choreography and special effects, then jam the camera so close to the action that's it's easier to count nostril hairs than see what the hell is going on.
They do that to be realistic. Avengers seems like it doesn't give a shit about that. 8-)
My understanding is that while it can give the effect of making a fight feel closer and more intense the purpose it to cut cost.
What I'm liking is that the action scenes do not seem to suffer from the shakey-cam action sequences that infest so many movies. I don't get why so many directors decide to blow wads of cash on choreography and special effects, then jam the camera so close to the action that's it's easier to count nostril hairs than see what the hell is going on.
They do that to be realistic. Avengers seems like it doesn't give a shit about that. 8-)
My understanding is that while it can give the effect of making a fight feel closer and more intense the purpose it to cut cost.
Yeah some people have been talking about how they don't have to edit out mistakes, wires and bad cg if everything is to frantic to understand. They can probably do less choreography and take fewer takes too.
Yeah some people have been talking about how they don't have to edit out mistakes, wires and bad cg if everything is to frantic to understand. They can probably do less choreography and take fewer takes to.
Makes sense. Those things don't mean that much since you can just ignore them unlike normal shots.
But when asked about Hulk 3 (or 2?), Feige said Hulk hasnt worked in solo movies twice now, and they like him in Avengers, and like that people are real happy with him there. So lets keep him in the universe and keep him around, but use him in those roles where he's around but not the focus.
I thought Norton Hulk worked pretty well, honestly. Wish we could see more of that.
Agreed.
Yeah, I liked it as much as Thor, and more than Iron Man 2.
I would have really liked to see the Leader as the villian, and have one of the plot points being the Leader capturing Hulk to study his mutation and experiment to further his own ends, and one of the results is that Banner gets turned into a smarter, but less strong Grey Hulk. End result of the movie would be the return of the green hulk, but with an average intelligence (like the Hulk from the current Avengers toon).
But when asked about Hulk 3 (or 2?), Feige said Hulk hasnt worked in solo movies twice now, and they like him in Avengers, and like that people are real happy with him there. So lets keep him in the universe and keep him around, but use him in those roles where he's around but not the focus.
I thought Norton Hulk worked pretty well, honestly. Wish we could see more of that.
Agreed.
Yeah, I liked it as much as Thor, and more than Iron Man 2.
I would have really liked to see the Leader as the villian, and have one of the plot points being the Leader capturing Hulk to study his mutation and experiment to further his own ends, and one of the results is that Banner gets turned into a smarter, but less strong Grey Hulk. End result of the movie would be the return of the green hulk, but with an average intelligence (like the Hulk from the current Avengers toon).
Great idea. That film really made me want to watch a sequel revolving around
The Leader.
They set him up excellently. Perhaps in a few years time when Marvel is willing to have another shot with the Hulk we'll get the sequel.
Heh, I forgot my favorite part. As the now-smarter Green Hulk finally smashes the Leader, I'd adapt the dialog from the Hulk vs Abomination fight from Ultimates 2 that Hulk has after the Abomination explains that he's keeps his genius level intellect when he transformers and thus the Hulk is "screwed."
"What's the square root of six million, two hundred and eleventy? What's the capital of Texas? How many legs has spiders got? Can you tell Hulk the formula for Coca-Cola? Ho ho ho. NOT SO CLEVER NOW EH?!" all while the Hulk lays a massive beatdown.
EDIT: I found some scans, thanks to JoeUser on the SE forums.
So what page do I have to go to for Captain America thoughts? I just finished it and, well, I'm just hoping Thor is more fun now that I'm catching up to them.
Yeh, I just watched it too. Jumped to p30 and found some talk, don't know where it starts properly though.
0
Linespider5ALL HAIL KING KILLMONGERRegistered Userregular
Thor has some honest to god funny bits working for it. Asgard needed a little more development because it still felt like a golden future city, which it is, but it didn't get to assert its own identity very much.
The final battle on the Rainbow Bridge between Thor and Loki is quite awesome.
Some spoilers for Thor, Iron Man 2, Captain America:
I watched Thor in bits because I had people staying and let them change the channel mid-film. So I saw the bit where he finds Mjolnir a lot and didn't get much further. Perhaps because of that I didn't find the story particularly interesting. Nothing really happened and the pacing felt very slow. That might just be the problem with origin stories (but I didn't notice it as much with Cap Am). I wasn't at all invested in Thor needing to get his hammer back, it took the majority of the film and then he auto-wins everything. The main trouble is the issue I had with Iron Man 2 (though in hindsight 1 had some of the same issues); I have no idea what the limits are on their abilities and they seem to get new powers to get them out of situations.
Stark in his suit is essentially invulnerable; it deflects bullets, has tons of weapons built in, including insta-kill beamy things, can withstand crushing and laser weapons that melt through everything else, but not his suit. My main issue is the race track fight; why introduce weapons that can cut through everything, only to have them not be able to damage him? It's anticlimactic.
I never got the sense Thor was in peril with the hammer. When he lost it he had his campy friends to distract the beamy-metal guy, and then he had it back and everything was cool.
On the other hand, Cap Am was pretty sympathetic to me. Why I'm not sure, perhaps because it was easier to empathise with him having seen him before his transformation, or because he was still very human and not ridiculously powerful. I liked that the end was so tragic for him too.
It it strange because having no knowledge of the comics, I was most skeptical of Cap Am, and yet he's ended up being the character I'm most interested in seeing in the Avengers.
There were a number of parallels that I can draw between Thor and Cap Am - loss of their love interests, their manner of fighting, their appearances, but the latter works better for me.
What was it that everyone liked so much about Thor?
Just rewatched Thor and it has some good stuff but is quite lacking in comparison. Cap am is currently free onnmy movie package and I have no inclination to rewatch. Both of these movies have some great performances and obviously the universe building is great but imo they just can't stand up to iron man, hulk or avengers.
I'm sure that opinions will differ in all of the marvel movies so far but I'm quite confident that avengers will be universally ranked as one of if not the outright best of the marvel movies to date.
I'm just so excited for more people to see it so I can talk moreabout it.
Adda and I turned 30 yesterday and got a Thor and Cap helmet as presents, they are actually much better than i would have thought for store Bought merch
In finding that picture i saw avengers eau de toillete! Anyone tried them?
What was it that everyone liked so much about Thor?
Thor is second only to Iron Man for my favorite Marvel films.
You've got a extremely sympathetic villain, and a deeply flawed hero. The juxtaposition between the high fantasy of Asgard and small town middle America. Hemsworth brings a terrific and varied performance: an entitled, haughty prince that bringing his feast hall carousing to a diner; a warrior trained from birth who defeats all comers, then crumbles when his birthright rejects him; and having enough sense of self to learn from his mistakes while not abandoning who he is.
It has a classical epic feel to it. I felt more like I was watching an adaptation of The Odyssey than "a comic book movie." The cast was epic, and JMS' writing coupled with Kenneth Branagh's directing did an amazing job of taking the borderline ridiculous concept of Thor and making it work as a story and as a film.
You summed up my feelings on Thor pretty well. I know some folks didn't care for it, but I loved it.
I loved Cap Am too though...more because it felt like an old WW2 serial in some ways. And like others said, he's very sympathetic.
So far, out of the newest Marvel movies, Iron Man 2 was my least favorite. I still enjoyed it, but I felt it was definitely weaker compared to the first one.
What was it that everyone liked so much about Thor?
Thor is second only to Iron Man for my favorite Marvel films.
You've got a extremely sympathetic villain, and a deeply flawed hero. The juxtaposition between the high fantasy of Asgard and small town middle America. Hemsworth brings a terrific and varied performance: an entitled, haughty prince that bringing his feast hall carousing to a diner; a warrior trained from birth who defeats all comers, then crumbles when his birthright rejects him; and having enough sense of self to learn from his mistakes while not abandoning who he is.
It has a classical epic feel to it. I felt more like I was watching an adaptation of The Odyssey than "a comic book movie." The cast was epic, and JMS' writing coupled with Kenneth Branagh's directing did an amazing job of taking the borderline ridiculous concept of Thor and making it work as a story and as a film.
You summed up my feelings on Thor pretty well. I know some folks didn't care for it, but I loved it.
I loved Cap Am too though...more because it felt like an old WW2 serial in some ways. And like others said, he's very sympathetic.
So far, out of the newest Marvel movies, Iron Man 2 was my least favorite. I still enjoyed it, but I felt it was definitely weaker compared to the first one.
What was it that everyone liked so much about Thor?
Thor is second only to Iron Man for my favorite Marvel films.
You've got a extremely sympathetic villain, and a deeply flawed hero. The juxtaposition between the high fantasy of Asgard and small town middle America. Hemsworth brings a terrific and varied performance: an entitled, haughty prince that bringing his feast hall carousing to a diner; a warrior trained from birth who defeats all comers, then crumbles when his birthright rejects him; and having enough sense of self to learn from his mistakes while not abandoning who he is.
It has a classical epic feel to it. I felt more like I was watching an adaptation of The Odyssey than "a comic book movie." The cast was epic, and JMS' writing coupled with Kenneth Branagh's directing did an amazing job of taking the borderline ridiculous concept of Thor and making it work as a story and as a film.
You summed up my feelings on Thor pretty well. I know some folks didn't care for it, but I loved it.
I loved Cap Am too though...more because it felt like an old WW2 serial in some ways. And like others said, he's very sympathetic.
So far, out of the newest Marvel movies, Iron Man 2 was my least favorite. I still enjoyed it, but I felt it was definitely weaker compared to the first one.
Iron Man 2 has definitely been the weakest film Marvel has released. Thankfully it seems they've learnt not to interfere to much or do it without unintentionally sabotaging the project. Thor & Captain America's connections make them better films without over-riding the plot.
I never felt the SHIELD bits in Iron Man 2 were detrimental to the movie.. In fact, they were some of hte more enjoyable bits. A weak villian duo and an unneccasary dying plot brought down the movie much more for me.
I never felt the SHIELD bits in Iron Man 2 were detrimental to the movie.. In fact, they were some of hte more enjoyable bits. A weak villian duo and an unneccasary dying plot brought down the movie much more for me.
IIRC they did alter Tony's alcoholism into being a sickness. Black Widow was better than expected but as others have already said she could have been given something more to do than beat up Hammer security guards. Coulson was great as always. Vanko's thin personality was another hit from the studio. According to Rourke they wanted him to be a 2 dimensional super-villain, not a complex villain.
I wasn't talking about Vanko for the most part, I was talking about Hammer, and Hammers interactions with Vanko.
Hammer was fine to me. That said, they spent too much time on him over Vanko. Their alliance was short lived any way. Hammer had no way to really control Vanko which blew up in his face as expected.
What was it that everyone liked so much about Thor?
Thor is second only to Iron Man for my favorite Marvel films.
You've got a extremely sympathetic villain, and a deeply flawed hero. The juxtaposition between the high fantasy of Asgard and small town middle America. Hemsworth brings a terrific and varied performance: an entitled, haughty prince that bringing his feast hall carousing to a diner; a warrior trained from birth who defeats all comers, then crumbles when his birthright rejects him; and having enough sense of self to learn from his mistakes while not abandoning who he is.
It has a classical epic feel to it. I felt more like I was watching an adaptation of The Odyssey than "a comic book movie." The cast was epic, and JMS' writing coupled with Kenneth Branagh's directing did an amazing job of taking the borderline ridiculous concept of Thor and making it work as a story and as a film.
You summed up my feelings on Thor pretty well. I know some folks didn't care for it, but I loved it.
I loved Cap Am too though...more because it felt like an old WW2 serial in some ways. And like others said, he's very sympathetic.
So far, out of the newest Marvel movies, Iron Man 2 was my least favorite. I still enjoyed it, but I felt it was definitely weaker compared to the first one.
Iron Man 2 has definitely been the weakest film Marvel has released. Thankfully it seems they've learnt not to interfere to much or do it without unintentionally sabotaging the project. Thor & Captain America's connections make them better films without over-riding the plot.
We're striking Spiderman 3 from the record, right?
I hope the new Spiderman improves on the first movie, rather than on the sequels. The original managed to feel like more of a fully realized story to me, rather than a smaller set piece with some cool action like Iron Man 2 and Cap. At least that's how they felt to me.
LavaKnight on
0
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
What was it that everyone liked so much about Thor?
Thor is second only to Iron Man for my favorite Marvel films.
You've got a extremely sympathetic villain, and a deeply flawed hero. The juxtaposition between the high fantasy of Asgard and small town middle America. Hemsworth brings a terrific and varied performance: an entitled, haughty prince that bringing his feast hall carousing to a diner; a warrior trained from birth who defeats all comers, then crumbles when his birthright rejects him; and having enough sense of self to learn from his mistakes while not abandoning who he is.
It has a classical epic feel to it. I felt more like I was watching an adaptation of The Odyssey than "a comic book movie." The cast was epic, and JMS' writing coupled with Kenneth Branagh's directing did an amazing job of taking the borderline ridiculous concept of Thor and making it work as a story and as a film.
You summed up my feelings on Thor pretty well. I know some folks didn't care for it, but I loved it.
I loved Cap Am too though...more because it felt like an old WW2 serial in some ways. And like others said, he's very sympathetic.
So far, out of the newest Marvel movies, Iron Man 2 was my least favorite. I still enjoyed it, but I felt it was definitely weaker compared to the first one.
Iron Man 2 has definitely been the weakest film Marvel has released. Thankfully it seems they've learnt not to interfere to much or do it without unintentionally sabotaging the project. Thor & Captain America's connections make them better films without over-riding the plot.
We're striking Spiderman 3 from the record, right?
I hope the new Spiderman improves on the first movie, rather than on the sequels. The original managed to feel like more of a fully realized story to me, rather than a smaller set piece with some cool action like Iron Man 2 and Cap. At least that's how they felt to me.
Oooohhhhh, interesting. Hrrrmm, I guess I don't know what I want from Marvel Studios, then. I guess I should see Thor to round out my knowledge of how good their own properties have been before making comparisons!
I never felt the SHIELD bits in Iron Man 2 were detrimental to the movie.. In fact, they were some of hte more enjoyable bits. A weak villian duo and an unneccasary dying plot brought down the movie much more for me.
I liked the SHIELD parts too. I thought the whole dying thing was stupid...they should have gone into his alcoholism instead.
That and like you said, the villain duo sucked. Mainly I thought Vanko could have been fleshed out a lot more. I guess Rourke felt the same way, but was shot down.
I never felt the SHIELD bits in Iron Man 2 were detrimental to the movie.. In fact, they were some of hte more enjoyable bits. A weak villian duo and an unneccasary dying plot brought down the movie much more for me.
I liked the SHIELD parts too. I thought the whole dying thing was stupid...they should have gone into his alcoholism instead.
That and like you said, the villain duo sucked. Mainly I thought Vanko could have been fleshed out a lot more. I guess Rourke felt the same way, but was shot down.
Personally, I don't put too much weight behind what Rourke says regarding the Vanko role when it was his decision to have the character speak Russian for almost the whole movie thus leading to a disconnect when the audience has no idea what he is saying.
Posts
Man, I love Robert Downey Jr., but I have to say that this is the worst suit I have ever seen. Not even he can pull it off. Especially not with a bow tie and sneakers. Bow ties are cool, but not that cool.
and something like that is all about swagger anyway, and we all know RDJ has that and then some
besides, he's in russia, whats the worst that could happen?
The Crimson Dynamo?
Omega Red?
:^:
Honey Badger don't care. Honey badger wears what it wants so people will notice it.
They do that to be realistic. Avengers seems like it doesn't give a shit about that. 8-)
I thought Norton Hulk worked pretty well, honestly. Wish we could see more of that.
Agreed.
Yeah. It wasn't my favorite movie in this continuity but it was perfectly enjoyable.
Though if they decide to just increase overall involvement between movies instead with Hulk/Banner as a semi regular supporting character I won't complain either.
My understanding is that while it can give the effect of making a fight feel closer and more intense the purpose it to cut cost.
That I didn't know.
Makes sense. Those things don't mean that much since you can just ignore them unlike normal shots.
I would have really liked to see the Leader as the villian, and have one of the plot points being the Leader capturing Hulk to study his mutation and experiment to further his own ends, and one of the results is that Banner gets turned into a smarter, but less strong Grey Hulk. End result of the movie would be the return of the green hulk, but with an average intelligence (like the Hulk from the current Avengers toon).
Great idea. That film really made me want to watch a sequel revolving around
EDIT: I found some scans, thanks to JoeUser on the SE forums.
The final battle on the Rainbow Bridge between Thor and Loki is quite awesome.
I watched Thor in bits because I had people staying and let them change the channel mid-film. So I saw the bit where he finds Mjolnir a lot and didn't get much further. Perhaps because of that I didn't find the story particularly interesting. Nothing really happened and the pacing felt very slow. That might just be the problem with origin stories (but I didn't notice it as much with Cap Am). I wasn't at all invested in Thor needing to get his hammer back, it took the majority of the film and then he auto-wins everything. The main trouble is the issue I had with Iron Man 2 (though in hindsight 1 had some of the same issues); I have no idea what the limits are on their abilities and they seem to get new powers to get them out of situations.
Stark in his suit is essentially invulnerable; it deflects bullets, has tons of weapons built in, including insta-kill beamy things, can withstand crushing and laser weapons that melt through everything else, but not his suit. My main issue is the race track fight; why introduce weapons that can cut through everything, only to have them not be able to damage him? It's anticlimactic.
I never got the sense Thor was in peril with the hammer. When he lost it he had his campy friends to distract the beamy-metal guy, and then he had it back and everything was cool.
On the other hand, Cap Am was pretty sympathetic to me. Why I'm not sure, perhaps because it was easier to empathise with him having seen him before his transformation, or because he was still very human and not ridiculously powerful. I liked that the end was so tragic for him too.
It it strange because having no knowledge of the comics, I was most skeptical of Cap Am, and yet he's ended up being the character I'm most interested in seeing in the Avengers.
There were a number of parallels that I can draw between Thor and Cap Am - loss of their love interests, their manner of fighting, their appearances, but the latter works better for me.
What was it that everyone liked so much about Thor?
Just rewatched Thor and it has some good stuff but is quite lacking in comparison. Cap am is currently free onnmy movie package and I have no inclination to rewatch. Both of these movies have some great performances and obviously the universe building is great but imo they just can't stand up to iron man, hulk or avengers.
I'm sure that opinions will differ in all of the marvel movies so far but I'm quite confident that avengers will be universally ranked as one of if not the outright best of the marvel movies to date.
I'm just so excited for more people to see it so I can talk moreabout it.
Adda and I turned 30 yesterday and got a Thor and Cap helmet as presents, they are actually much better than i would have thought for store Bought merch
In finding that picture i saw avengers eau de toillete! Anyone tried them?
Twitter - discolouie PSN - Loupa Steam - Loupa
You summed up my feelings on Thor pretty well. I know some folks didn't care for it, but I loved it.
I loved Cap Am too though...more because it felt like an old WW2 serial in some ways. And like others said, he's very sympathetic.
So far, out of the newest Marvel movies, Iron Man 2 was my least favorite. I still enjoyed it, but I felt it was definitely weaker compared to the first one.
This sums up my feelings exactly.
Iron Man 2 has definitely been the weakest film Marvel has released. Thankfully it seems they've learnt not to interfere to much or do it without unintentionally sabotaging the project. Thor & Captain America's connections make them better films without over-riding the plot.
IIRC they did alter Tony's alcoholism into being a sickness. Black Widow was better than expected but as others have already said she could have been given something more to do than beat up Hammer security guards. Coulson was great as always. Vanko's thin personality was another hit from the studio. According to Rourke they wanted him to be a 2 dimensional super-villain, not a complex villain.
Hammer was fine to me. That said, they spent too much time on him over Vanko. Their alliance was short lived any way. Hammer had no way to really control Vanko which blew up in his face as expected.
We're striking Spiderman 3 from the record, right?
I hope the new Spiderman improves on the first movie, rather than on the sequels. The original managed to feel like more of a fully realized story to me, rather than a smaller set piece with some cool action like Iron Man 2 and Cap. At least that's how they felt to me.
All Spidermen are from Sony, not Marvel films.
I liked the SHIELD parts too. I thought the whole dying thing was stupid...they should have gone into his alcoholism instead.
That and like you said, the villain duo sucked. Mainly I thought Vanko could have been fleshed out a lot more. I guess Rourke felt the same way, but was shot down.
Personally, I don't put too much weight behind what Rourke says regarding the Vanko role when it was his decision to have the character speak Russian for almost the whole movie thus leading to a disconnect when the audience has no idea what he is saying.