I'm sure there's a topic about this already, somewhere in the bowels of this forum, but I thought since reviews have already started to surface, we might as well talk about it.
Rotten Tomatoes currently has it at a 96%, which is pretty good for 27 reviews. IGN posted a review, which is how I first discovered that the movie had already been screened.
Very slight SPOILERS below (from the reviews):
According to some, the Hulk is one of the best parts of the film. Other areas of interest are the writing, the action, the sets, and the dialogue. However, with Joss Whedon directing and writing, we all kind of expected the dialogue to be awesome, so that part might not be so surprising. What is surprising, for me at least, is the part about the Hulk. Black Widow apparently also has some solid scenes, which are supposed to be much more fulfilling than her stint in Iron Man 2 (which felt forced, if you ask me).
I'm really excited, possibly moreso than before, now that I know they've done justice by the Hulk. His last film was solid, but I still didn't feel like he received the best treatment. It's good to hear that he now has something solid behind him.
According to some other reviews, Hawkeye didn't get much to work with, which is kind of sad, but I expected as much, considering the fact that he hasn't been in any of the other movies (other than that 5 second cameo in Thor). Hopefully they expand on him in a sequel (or give him his own franchise).
Just 11 more days!
[ May 01, 2012, 01:02 PM: Message edited by: Jeff C. ]
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
Just eleven days you say? JUST ELEVEN DAYS!!!
Eleven more days, and then about a month for Batman. After that... do we even need comic book movies anymore? it seems like the bar has been raised higher and higher, Spiderman just can't keep up.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
I've also heard they were able to do a lot more with The Hulk in this movie succesfully than they faltered in doing in his previous big screen outings, and that pleases me quite a bit. The Hulk/Bruce Banner is a much more complex character than most people assume, so I'm glad they were able to give him some depth in this one. Though, as you said, I expected nothing less from a Joss Whedon script.
As for Hawkeye, I've felt since they began advertising The Avengers that his character has been nothing but tacked on in every sense of the word. His cameo in the Thor movie didn't really contribute much to the film, so I wasn't really sure how they'd be able to give his appearance much meaning in the ensemble film to follow that cameo.
Frankly, that is a bit of shame because Jeremy Renner is a very talented actor, and it would've been interesting to see him really get to stretch out his legs in the Marvel Universe. He seems to radiate suave more so than some of his contemporaries.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
quote:Originally posted by SteveRogers: I've also heard they were able to do a lot more with The Hulk in this movie succesfully than they faltered in doing in his previous big screen outings, and that pleases me quite a bit. The Hulk/Bruce Banner is a much more complex character than most people assume, so I'm glad they were able to give him some depth in this one. Though, as you said, I expected nothing less from a Joss Whedon script.
As for Hawkeye, I've felt since they began advertising The Avengers that his character has been nothing but tacked on in every sense of the word. His cameo in the Thor movie didn't really contribute much to the film, so I wasn't really sure how they'd be able to give his appearance much meaning in the ensemble film to follow that cameo.
Frankly, that is a bit of shame because Jeremy Renner is a very talented actor, and it would've been interesting to see him really get to stretch out his legs in the Marvel Universe. He seems to radiate suave more so than some of his contemporaries.
Now that you mention it, I believe he is the Jason Bourne replacement in the next Bourne film. He'll be playing a new character, of course, but he'll be the star. After his Mission Impossible 4 role, plus all of these, I'd imagine Marvel will be amped to give him his own film (they'd be stupid not to).
I'd really like to see a Hulk movie with Whedon writing/directing it. I really enjoyed the last one, but from what everyone keeps saying, his take on the character is the best. I shall wait to judge for myself, though.
I wonder what the end credits scene will be..? Maybe something for Iron Man 3, since that's the next movie in their line up. Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
You are correct, sir.
Jeremy Renner is in The Bourne Legacy, and he looks like a pretty good replacement for Matt Damon as the figurehead for the Bourne franchise.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jeff C.: I wonder what the end credits scene will be..? Maybe something for Iron Man 3, since that's the next movie in their line up.
I've heard from a very reliable source that the first mid-credits scene has more to do with Avengers 2 and possibly
*spoilers*
*spoilers*
*spoilers*
*spoilers*
*spoilers*
*spoilers*
*spoilers*
The guardians of the galaxy movie.
*end spoilers*
I am so pumped for this movie.
Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
The sad thing for me is that I was within spitting distance from the U.K. premiere (over here it is called "Avengers Assemble", interestingly enough), but I had other responsibilities and wasn't able to go and star watch and try to sneak my way in.
Posted by T:man (Member # 11614) on :
Also its interesting that the lowest review for Avengers is 3/5 which is normally counted as fresh.
Posted by Sa'eed (Member # 12368) on :
It looks a bit pedestrian but I am excited by the reviews and Whedon's involvement.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
quote: The sad thing for me is that I was within spitting distance from the U.K. premiere (over here it is called "Avengers Assemble", interestingly enough), but I had other responsibilities and wasn't able to go and star watch and try to sneak my way in.
It seems rather weird to me that a movie made in America, set in America, with mostly American actors and a character called Captain America, would come out in America two weeks after nearly everywhere else. Such is globalization.
I'm so looking forward to this movie. I think I'll go see it on Friday, so I'll be avoiding spoilers until then.
Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
Yeah. I actually ended up seeing it a couple of days ago in Paris. I won't spoil anything, but I thoroughly enjoyed it. I was left scratching my head about a few things, but the good parts pretty much overwhelmed any qualms I had. I will say that I didn't stay for any scene after the credits (I got the mid-credits one), so if someone sees it and wants to fill me in, I'd appreciate it.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
Saw it last night. It was excellent, easily the best of the Marvel Studios movies. It was at least as good as X-Men 2 and Spiderman 2, maybe a little better.
The Hulk's first transformation was actually scary - a claustrophobic scene with Black Widow. Other times, the Hulk made the audience laugh loudly.
The two main action set pieces, one set on the helicarrier and the other in New York, were excellent. Captain America is much more aerobatic than he was in his own movie.
Hawkeye and the Black Widow are actually of value in the battles; she doesn't rely on her tiny handgun like the trailer suggests.
There's some Whedon-y humor that made all of us laugh.
Spoilers for the final credit scene:
This does not spoil the plot of the movie, it's just an ad for the next one.
. . . . .
The alien race that supports Loki turns out to be under the control of Thanos. His Lieutenant, the one who was directly involved with Loki, says "to confront them is to court death." Thanos silently smiles. .. . . . end spoilers Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
*spoilers* - - - - - - - (someone should just add spoilers to the thread title) - - - - Ok, so I saw a scene where that guy said "to confront them is to court death", but to my non-Marvel universe attenuated eyes, I thought that was Red Skull or whatever from the Captain America movie who presumably got blasted into space by the tesseract, if I remember correctly. I guess I may have missed something though, since as I said I didn't stay all the way till the end (just the middle of the credits)... - - - - - - - - End Spoilers
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
It was definitely the guy I said it was. I speak from nerd knowledge.
Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
I willingly bow to your superior nerdness . Is the introduction of .... that guy (I'm too lazy to put spoiler tags in) a good thing? Loki was a pretty awesome bad guy. Even if he was just a pawn in the grand scheme of things, he was a perfect type of guy to get a lot of screen time.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
I can't decide if it's a good idea or not. "That guy" certainly ups the ante well beyond Loki. We'll just have to wait and see how they alter his character. I expect they'll de-power him, relative to the comic book version of the character.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I don't know that they need to, since Thanos is only ever defeated by cheap deus ex machina anyway. He's a dumb character concept hobbled by dumb character design and dumb dumbness.
In general, Marvel and DC both do "cosmic" plots very badly, and suffer every time they think they can pull it off.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
God, I'm really about to show my true colors, but I think Annihilation was the best big Marvel storyline of the last 10 years.
I don't think he's fundamentally flawed, it's just hard to write a character who's own greatest enemy is himself without making him seen incompetent. I can think of a few good Thanos stories.
Maybe I just can't get past my 11 year old self thinking the original Infinity Gauntlet series was unbearably cool.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
3 more days!!!!!!!!
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
quote:Originally posted by Foust: Maybe I just can't get past my 11 year old self thinking the original Infinity Gauntlet series was unbearably cool.
The Gauntlet was in Odin's treasure chamber in Thor. Just sayin'... Posted by T:man (Member # 11614) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I don't know that they need to, since Thanos is only ever defeated by cheap deus ex machina anyway. He's a dumb character concept hobbled by dumb character design and dumb dumbness.
In general, Marvel and DC both do "cosmic" plots very badly, and suffer every time they think they can pull it off.
Hey! Marvel has had some AMAZING cosmic books out there!
I won't comment on the quality of DC though, as I don't read 'em.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
There's an additional scene on top of the existing one at the end of the credits. It hasn't shown overseas and is being released for the first time this Friday. It takes place at the very end of the credits, so make sure if you are watching it this weekend that you stay all the way to the end!
You can read about the second extra ending scene here.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
I loved the Black Widow/Hulk scene, it was like a little horror movie inside of the action movie.
Tom, I think the Blackest Night/Brightest Day books not only did cosmic right but pulled all the franchises together well. The one big thing that always bugged me about the DC universe was the Green Lantern Corp and all its frayed strings, why haven't the Guardians taken out Brainiac? why are there four Earth GL's? why are each of them better than almost all other GL's? why does everything happen on Earth like its the center of the universe and all creation?
So in the end they just kinda said "it is the center of the universe, it was created by the White Lantern Battery (god) before all other life ever, and this is why humans are just so awesome in contrast to all these other life-forms that fill the universe. The White Lantern Battery likes humans better and it is god."
They put some finality into their canon, I've never seen that kind of definition given to the Marvel universe.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
I think the whole audience at the showing I went to fell in love with the Hulk. People were clapping whenever he smashed something - it was rather lovely.
Hawkeye is definitely expendable, sadly. He's cool but he doesn't really seem to do anything that someone else can't do, and they probably can't kill the other black-clad character because she's the only woman - which means if they're going to kill someone next time around, it'll be him.
Josh has certainly still got it. It was a beautifully choreographed film, with the action building on itself so just when you thought it had reached a peak, something else even bigger would come along. And he still knows how to build character relationships where they all love each other and pick on one another in equal measure like siblings - which is so enjoyable to watch.
I adore this film to tiny little pieces. It's everything it should have been. I've seen it twice in two different languages. It's gorgeous.
Posted by GaalDornick (Member # 8880) on :
*SPOILERS* *SPOILERS* *SPOILERS*
Why didn't the army just a launch a nuke into the portal instead of at Manhattan? Or better yet, just launch the nuke into the portal right when it opened?
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
Real answer: Comic books are exempt from real military logic. They have to be: in real life, if superheroes existed, they would be conscripted instantly. There's no way we could let somebody like Spiderman just exist freely.
Movie answer: The nuke might not close the portal.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
Oh, and the other reason comic books are exempt from real military logic: it is very difficult to come up with a villain that could not actually be defeated by conventional weapons. So we preteeeeeend that the army can't handle it.
In other words Gaal, it's called suspension of disbelief.
Posted by GaalDornick (Member # 8880) on :
I know that, but they won the war using a nuke anyways. I just don't understand why the council decided to shoot the nuke at Manhattan instead of the portal. What exactly would nuking Manhattan have accomplished anyways? Wiped out our best defense and still have aliens pouring through the portal? That makes sense.
Other than that gripe, this is easily the best superhero movie and one of the most fun movies I have ever seen.
Posted by GaalDornick (Member # 8880) on :
One more thing..why were the rest of the Avengers so quick to close the portal instead of waiting to see if Iron Man would come back down? The threat was over, at least give Stark a minute to see if he could make it back.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
I wasn't totally sold on it being a great movie until the climax. I was sad that Hulk had so few scenes in hulked out form, etc.
However, the climax was really quite good and sold me on the whole film. Also in that 30 minutes Hulk had two of the best movie moments ever .
I'm glad I wasn't disappointed.
I did think Hawkeye was pretty superfluous. I'd rather he find something else do when Thanos shows up, personally. Then again I always thought he was lame in the comics.
I also loved the Infinity Guantlet saga as a kid, and can still tell you what each gem did off the top of my head. I have a few dozen Silver Surfer comics, and I quite enjoyed the Annihilation saga (well, most of it). So I'm all for the big purple guy .
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
quote: One more thing..why were the rest of the Avengers so quick to close the portal instead of waiting to see if Iron Man would come back down? The threat was over, at least give Stark a minute to see if he could make it back.
I think it was because the shockwave and bits of debris from the blown-up mothership were heading out of the portal along with Stark. They saw the explosion and didn't want it coming any closer.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
quote:Originally posted by Foust:
Movie answer: The nuke might not close the portal.
Or, the nuke could have reacted with whatever the portal could be made up of and blow up to the extent that no one on Earth could estimate. The Council had no way to know or understand the volume of alien troops in the city already let alone the armada we saw on the other side, so to prove that Fury is smarter than them the Council does something that almost undoes everything The Avengers had done.
Posted by Vasslia Cora (Member # 7981) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bella Bee:
quote: One more thing..why were the rest of the Avengers so quick to close the portal instead of waiting to see if Iron Man would come back down? The threat was over, at least give Stark a minute to see if he could make it back.
I think it was because the shockwave and bits of debris from the blown-up mothership were heading out of the portal along with Stark. They saw the explosion and didn't want it coming any closer.
There would be massive amounts of radiation in that shockwave, if they hadn't closed it, it would have likely killed everybody in Manhattan.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
A LURKER! quick, box it in! don't let it get away!!!
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Spoiler .\. . . . . . . . . . . . . You're sure that's Thanos and not a skrull?
My bro and I enjoyed it. I thought the heroes won a bit too easily. The only time Loki was really dangerous was when he was trying to bully the Black Widow. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
... I'm too lazy to put in spoiler tags, so I'll just apologize to anyone in advance who doesn't get the *spoilers* feel from the title. But my main problem with the movie is that Loki getting captured and being on the flying carrier thing didn't make a ton of sense to me. Presumably it was so that he could eliminate the Avengers in a surprise attack before the big opening of the portal, but his plan was to provoke the Hulk, crash the carrier, and then run away? Maybe I missed some of the motivation or master plan in that part, but if felt to me like the purpose was solely to set up a few midway action sequences.
But all told, that's a minor complaint, and I probably wouldn't even mention it if it wasn't Joss Whedon behind it and I just expected a little more depth. Which is why I wonder if I'm missing something.
Same as everyone else, I loved the Hulk scenes, but I think my favorite funny part was when Loki tried to mind control Iron Man. Brilliant.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
quote:You're sure that's Thanos and not a skrull?
Yes. For one he was purple. Second, Thanos is one of the top "big bads" of the marvel universe, which makes sense as someone who can be Loki's boss.
Most convincingly though, the "to attack humanity is to court death" caused him to smile. Thanos' big character motivation is to get Mistress Death (death personified) to fall in love with him.
[ May 05, 2012, 07:22 PM: Message edited by: Xavier ]
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
I'm still lost on the whole "stealing an eye" thing. Hawkeye says something about needing an eye so Loki goes and takes one from some German guy. And then its never mentioned again.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shanna: I'm still lost on the whole "stealing an eye" thing. Hawkeye says something about needing an eye so Loki goes and takes one from some German guy. And then its never mentioned again.
That was actually one of the cooler moments in the movie for me: Loki basically places a camera on top of the guy's eye, and then hawkguy uses a projection of that eye-image to open a retina scanning door. It didn't come up again because that was all they needed it for.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
great movie. A few holes...for instance if the point was to crash the air carrier, then why now use 2 arrows on the same side of the carrier.
Without letting Loki get captured....
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold:
quote:Originally posted by Shanna: I'm still lost on the whole "stealing an eye" thing. Hawkeye says something about needing an eye so Loki goes and takes one from some German guy. And then its never mentioned again.
That was actually one of the cooler moments in the movie for me: Loki basically places a camera on top of the guy's eye, and then hawkguy uses a projection of that eye-image to open a retina scanning door. It didn't come up again because that was all they needed it for.
Forgot about the retina scan. What was so important behind the door? I honestly can't remember.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
The brain washed doctor needed something radioactive to complete his thingamajig, and with SHIELD on high alert it was better for them to draw Fury and crew to Loki so they wouldn't notice that SHIELD personnel just stole something commonly used to make nuclear bombs.
Now I have a question, this is not a hole as much as it is a wasted opportunity. Thor's hammer can apparently recharge Iron-Man's suit, we saw this in the forest fight and never again. Why? why put it there at all and not bring it back as a trump card when Tony runs out of juice?
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
I didn't there was ever a problem with the armor running out of power? After the helicarrier fight, the armor was physically damaged. After he fell out of the portal, the armor didn't have power, but that wasn't related to Stark being unconscious (if it was, Hulk's roar wouldn't have woken him up).
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
Yes, but they put in a trump card to recharge Iron-Man and never had him run out or at least have thor funnel lightning into Iron-Man who's hand blasters are much more focused. It was a great thing to slip in, but they never brought the idea to fruition.
Also it was unclear as to whether Iron-Man ran out of power on the other side of the portal or if that place was open space and too cold for his electronics to function. His suit would have enough insulation to protect for a short while but seeing as that model was not meant for space travel his O2 must have stopped as well, making him pass out. Add the questionable level of radiation he took on his way out and the suit wouldn't turn on automatically as he was falling to Earth on the NYC side of the portal.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
Just saw the movie last night. I thought it was brilliant. Every single moment of it.
I was particularly intrigued by the fact that the director chose to include a baby crying for most of the film. It was very strange to hear at first, and a little unexpected, but as I listened and watched the massive battles unfold in the city, I thought that it actually made sense. After all, there were probably babies in that city, and they'd probably all be crying. And then, to my surprise, two other babies started crying, encompassing the theater, probably because of the awesome surround sound system that was present. I believe at one point I thought I could hear three distinct babies crying.
The crying caused me to feel both agitated and annoyed---feelings I'm sure the people of the city felt as they were getting bombed repeatedly by alien forces.
What confused me, however, were the scenes that weren't very action-packed, but instead were filled with quiet talking. Why would the director include the sounds of babies crying in scenes like that? While I'll admit that such a sound enhances the feeling of being in a horrible situation, I just didn't understand the point in having a baby cry through the scene where Tony Stark is talking casually to Bruce Banner about their research. Then again, I don't pretend to understand the business of making films, so maybe I simply missed the purpose behind it.
Anyway, the movie was great and I can't wait to see it again. Maybe I'll understand the baby-crying a little better on the next go-around.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Originally posted by Xavier:
quote:You're sure that's Thanos and not a skrull?
Yes. For one he was purple. Second, Thanos is one of the top "big bads" of the marvel universe, which makes sense as someone who can be Loki's boss.
Most convincingly though, the "to attack humanity is to court death" caused him to smile. Thanos' big character motivation is to get Mistress Death (death personified) to fall in love with him.
I know who Thanos is...but didn't the talky guy's hand transform from being an alien claw to a human hand while he spoke? Shapeshifting is a Skrull ability.
I'd be much more interested in a fight between the Skrull and the Avengers than in a fight between Thanos and the Avengers.
Posted by T:man (Member # 11614) on :
I think the 'Other' is a skrull. He was grey, but he had the wrinkly chin going on, and it looked like pointy ears too.
Posted by GaalDornick (Member # 8880) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jeff C.: Just saw the movie last night. I thought it was brilliant. Every single moment of it.
I was particularly intrigued by the fact that the director chose to include a baby crying for most of the film. It was very strange to hear at first, and a little unexpected, but as I listened and watched the massive battles unfold in the city, I thought that it actually made sense. After all, there were probably babies in that city, and they'd probably all be crying. And then, to my surprise, two other babies started crying, encompassing the theater, probably because of the awesome surround sound system that was present. I believe at one point I thought I could hear three distinct babies crying.
The crying caused me to feel both agitated and annoyed---feelings I'm sure the people of the city felt as they were getting bombed repeatedly by alien forces.
What confused me, however, were the scenes that weren't very action-packed, but instead were filled with quiet talking. Why would the director include the sounds of babies crying in scenes like that? While I'll admit that such a sound enhances the feeling of being in a horrible situation, I just didn't understand the point in having a baby cry through the scene where Tony Stark is talking casually to Bruce Banner about their research. Then again, I don't pretend to understand the business of making films, so maybe I simply missed the purpose behind it.
Anyway, the movie was great and I can't wait to see it again. Maybe I'll understand the baby-crying a little better on the next go-around.
LOL I'm right there with you. Hopefully when it comes out on DVD there will be an option to mute the crying. It would make the movie more enjoyable. Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
It's official, folks. The Avengers now holds the number 1 spot for largest opening weekend ever in the United States. The grand total is $200 million.
Now it just needs to bring down Avatar's highest overall gross and it will be King of the World (golf clap if you get the reference).
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
A movie, that Joss Whedon directed and wrote the screen play for is now the highest grossing opening in U.S. history.
Don't bother with the golf clap, geeks should be slow clapping Whedon's well deserved success.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I v much enjoyed it in quite a few ways. Even the unavoidable-in-this-kind-of-film dumbness (quick! Let's recuse one building of civilians instead of stopping the Earth-threatening constantly-growing invasion ASAP!) wasn't too bad, which is saying something for my liking of the film. Many of the individual moments were great-Hulk stole the screen, as well as Banner in fact:) The action was rock-solid, and right now I can think only of two glaringly-absurd moments that I remember that were central not just to the overall story or a whole fight, but that were absurd in and of themselves:
One, Black Widow is able to successfully lie to Loki, in a case where he has obviously studied her and in which it's vitally important he game her. Throw on some quick breathing, some fear-stricken eyes, and some tears, though, and the God of Mischief is successfully conned? Now it could be said he really gamed HER given what happened, but if so they should've thrown in a sneer as she walked away or something-instead of his baffled, disbelieving expression.
Two, the scene repairing one of the engines, where Cap is held off for, man, like five minutes? By a single goon with an assault rifle. Now I could possibly buy that if he was disarmed, even then it's a stretch, but not after he got a gun, too.
They did what I felt was a great job characterizing quite a few people, impressive to me given how many characters there were. Even knowing Colson would be a red shirt in this one, it still had some oomph. Liked how Fury motivated everyone. Oh-and it was v peculiar that SHIELD'S plan to get Hulk on board centered around...Black Widow and a human strike team-THAT hasn't been tried dozens of times, right?
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
I generally ignored most of Johanson's performance, she only impressed me twice despite my low expectations. First was when she pulled the gun on Banner, and when she was being chased by Hulk. I don't really remember anything else she did of any note, but that woman whose red wig was always covering her face was awesome.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I actually thought Black Widow was one of the better developed characters in the movie, (which surprised me, given that she was completely irrelevant in Iron Man 2)
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
I also really liked Black Widow, and I thought the scene with her and Loki was very well done. Considering that I didn't know very much about her, and not a ton about Loki - Whedon only needed to fool me - and when he did, the fact that she was playing him was pretty awesome.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
Black Widow's reverse interrogations were interesting. She showed that she isn't as worthless as the trailers made her out to be.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: I also really liked Black Widow, and I thought the scene with her and Loki was very well done. Considering that I didn't know very much about her, and not a ton about Loki - Whedon only needed to fool me - and when he did, the fact that she was playing him was pretty awesome.
Agreed.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
With the Whedon connection and the two actress's similar tone of voice and attitudes, Black Widow really reminded me of a grown-up Faith.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
*nod* Aside from the silliness mentioned above, I also really enjoyed her portrayal. The whole 'red on my ledger' bit, although it does tie in with some tellings of Black Widow, just smacked of Whedon.
Posted by Tarrsk (Member # 332) on :
The Black Widow/ Loki scene worked for me, and it's because what I took away from it wasn't a diminishment of Loki, but a payoff for the development of Black Widow, who enters the film as something of a cypher. It's telling that a lot of folks, myself included, were openly wondering why she's even included as one of the main Avengers, before seeing the film.
We see in the opening scenes that Black Widow is an expert manipulator, but up until her confrontation with Loki, she's been manipulating humans (and not particularly clever ones, for the most part). On the other hand, we've already spent a full film, as well as the first act of Avengers, establishing that Loki himself is powerful, intelligent, ruthless, and of course, as the Trickster (demi)God, one hell of a manipulator in his own right. As his confrontation with Black Widow begins, we already understand the power Loki brings to the table - that's WHY we believe that he's "turning" Black Widow during the confrontation in the first place.
By flipping the scene on its head at the end, Whedon is now establishing what makes Black Widow a worthy Avenger in her own right - that despite her lack of physical superpowers, she brings something every bit as remarkable as Hulk's strength or Iron Man's technology to the team. She's the one with the acting skills and the ability to hone in on an opponent's mindset and exploit every tiny mental misstep he or she makes. She's the one human who can trick the freaking Trickster God himself.
That's how the scene came off for me, and is why Black Widow ended up being one of my favorite characters in the movie. It's something I sort of wish we'd gotten to see for Hawkeye, as he remains the biggest cypher of the bunch, IMO.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Now, see, that's the thing that soured that scene for me. It would be as if, I don't know it's tough to find an analogue, Banner were able to out-science the god of science or something. Bad example, because I can't think of another one, but however extraordinary BW's ability at mindgames is, even if we're to take it as a super-power, it still doesn't fit.
And it didn't, as it turns out: even with a bit of his plan still known, Loki's deception still worked, to the extent that several of the Avengers were directly antagonizing Bruce Banner, hardly a wise decision in any event. And even her deception, while brilliantly acted, was still pretty straightforward. I just don't believe that the God of Lies would be deceived even by a superhuman deceit from someone he was watching carefully and had been briefed on by one of the people who knew her best. It just doesn't fit, and they used it as, like you say, a way to highlight her skills and utility.
Posted by lem (Member # 6914) on :
It worked for me because I saw her working off of Loki's arrogance.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
It didn't bother me much, but I did have a "yeah right" go through my head when that scene unfolded. There's a reason Loki is Thor's main villain, despite him not being a tenth as strong or powerful. It's because he's the manipulator of all manipulator's.
But it wasn't something I got hung up on, for whatever reason.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Bear in mind that this is not the "real" Loki from Norse mythology. He's a powerful being from another dimension, but not a literal God. (As far as we can tell, the Asgardians are near-invulnerable to human weapons and have some magic powers, but mentally they're not much different from humans)
So I saw the scene as a) establishing that Black Widow is meant to a powerful manipulator in her own right, but also b) taking Loki down a peg, showing us that he's not actually omniscient. He has psychological flaws (as lem says, arrogance), that can be taken advantage of. Even if he's still a master by human standards.
quote:Hawkeye
I was pretty sold on his awesomeness when he fired an arrow into the wind, and it swooped around, clicked neatly into a socket, and then installed a virus onto the helicarrier's computer system.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: I just don't believe that the God of Lies would be deceived even by a superhuman deceit from someone he was watching carefully and had been briefed on by one of the people who knew her best. It just doesn't fit, and they used it as, like you say, a way to highlight her skills and utility.
Could it be that we're giving Loki too much credit? Yes, he's a trickster god. But until recently, who has he been tricking? Thor and friends? Not exactly the peak of mental prowess.
It makes me think of a line (I will paraphrase) from Doctor Who -
Rory: He's a Time Lord. He can handle it! Amy: You know that's just what they're called, right? It doesn't actually mean he knows what he's doing.
Sure, Loki is the Norse god of tricks. But if you look at it another way...he's just a very intelligent extra-terrestrial who thinks too highly of himself for his own good. Which is demonstrated in his interactions with Black Widow, but also Hawkeye and the Hulk.
Very intelligent and dangerous? Yes. Infallibly so? Certainly not.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
Something that really caught my interest was Banner saying "I'm always angry." A big part of the Bruce/Hulk dynamic in comparison to the other gamma infected characters of the Hulk franchise, is that Hulk is a wild monster while all the others keep complete control. Since they started expanding the gamma powered characters fans have been theorizing on the exact reason why Hulk is a rage monster and Banner is perpetually overcome by it. It seems as if the rage of the Hulk comes from a part of Banner that was always there, he hates that part of himself and refuses to accept it. It comes out through his powers so he lets it become a second identity on which he blames all of his problems.
In this line of thought, the idea of Banner admitting that he is perpetually angry and then showing a profound level of control when hours before he had attacked Thor after recognizing he was not an enemy, Banner would have a greater than normal level of personal growth and ability. Word is they already have Ruffalo on contract for a bunch of Hulk stuff, I'm very interested in seeing how they play him after that.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Not sure what I think about the deleted scene, since it may ruin my current interpretation: That Banner was deliberately living in destitute, warn torn areas as part of a "perpetual anger" strategy, adjusting the baseline for when his body goes into flight-or-flight mode and activates the hulk.
Posted by Tarrsk (Member # 332) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: Bear in mind that this is not the "real" Loki from Norse mythology. He's a powerful being from another dimension, but not a literal God. (As far as we can tell, the Asgardians are near-invulnerable to human weapons and have some magic powers, but mentally they're not much different from humans)
So I saw the scene as a) establishing that Black Widow is meant to a powerful manipulator in her own right, but also b) taking Loki down a peg, showing us that he's not actually omniscient. He has psychological flaws (as lem says, arrogance), that can be taken advantage of. Even if he's still a master by human standards.
Yeah, exactly. As a non-comics reader, this was my big takeaway from the "Thor" film (which I really enjoyed) - in this universe, the Norse gods are aliens from another world whose powers came off as godlike to the primitive humans they first met. Beneath the superpowers, though, they're still people, with all the emotional and mental frailties that entails. Loki and Thor are exceptional even among the Asgardians, but Thor's defining trait early on in his movie is not his strength, but his recklessness - which is only matched by Loki's arrogance and massive inferiority complex. The difference between the two, at the end of "Thor," is that Thor overcomes his weakness, while Loki embraces his.
What brings Loki down in his confrontation with Black Widow isn't a lack of preparation; as Rakeesh pointed out, he clearly got the full dossier on Romanov from Hawkeye. It's Black Widow's understanding of Loki's nature. He can't help but put himself on a pedestal above the humans - it's why he spends the whole movie demanding that they kneel before him, even as he gets the crap smacked out of him afterward each time. And he tries to do the same thing to Black Widow, because as deeply as he knows her history, he simply cannot conceive that he would not be able to frighten and intimidate her into submission. It is simply how the universe should work, in his mind. She's just a puny human, after all.
(Also, I don't think Black Widow was 100% acting during her quiet breakdown in front of Loki. I think he hit her where it hurt, but she subsumes that pain and turns it into the steel she needs to turn the manipulation back upon Loki.)
quote:I was pretty sold on his awesomeness when he fired an arrow into the wind, and it swooped around, clicked neatly into a socket, and then installed a virus onto the helicarrier's computer system. [/QB]
Oh, I totally bought Hawkeye's badassfulness, to borrow a phrase from "Mass Effect 3." Every one of his action beats was fantastic. But I didn't get the full sense of him as a person that we got with virtually every other character.
That being said, sketchily-drawn Hawkeye (no pun intended) from Joss Whedon still has more depth of character than 99% of the title heroes in other summer blockbusters.
[ May 07, 2012, 05:28 PM: Message edited by: Tarrsk ]
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
Definitely. The highlight characters were The Hulk, Iron Man, Captain America, Nick Fury, Agent Coulson, Black Widow, and Thor. In that order. I only put Thor last because he just didn't do much in the way of character development. I'm sure that will change in Thor 2, however.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
I figure Thor got less of the spotlight because its his villain that is showcased. When examining the movies that would be considered recommended viewing to understand this movie (Incredible Hulk, Captain America, Iron Man 1 & 2, Thor), the main one you shouldn't miss is Thor. Not just because you won't know who Thor is, but because you won't know who Loki is.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
They all sort of provide necessary information, with the exception of The Incredible Hulk. But yes, Thor was definitely something you'd want to watch.
Captain America also provided backstory for the cube (tesseract), too. And Iron Man 1 and 2 gave insight into SHIELD and Black Widow.
I think this movie could have been another 30 minutes in length, honestly. They should have shown how Thor came to Earth again, at least. I would have also liked to see Captain America living in the real world for at least one or two scenes. Apparently there was another 30 minutes originally and it mostly involved Captain America doing exactly that, but all of it was cut (after it was shot) because they didn't want to focus too much on one character. Apparently this 30 minutes of footage will be bonus material on the DVD.
Posted by stacey (Member # 3661) on :
I didn't understand why Hulk was so out of control in the scene on the aircraft with Black Widow but so much more in control in the main fight scene? Is it because the first time he changed, it wasn't on his terms and the second time he was in control right from the start?
Posted by aeolusdallas (Member # 11455) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: Spoiler .\. . . . . . . . . . . . . You're sure that's Thanos and not a skrull?
My bro and I enjoyed it. I thought the heroes won a bit too easily. The only time Loki was really dangerous was when he was trying to bully the Black Widow. . . . . . . . . . . . .
The court death comment and his smile made it pretty clear it was Thanos. After all he literally courts death.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by stacey: I didn't understand why Hulk was so out of control in the scene on the aircraft with Black Widow but so much more in control in the main fight scene? Is it because the first time he changed, it wasn't on his terms and the second time he was in control right from the start?
That's the impression I got. The inciting incident behind his transformation seems to be important to how much control he has.
Not permanently, as when he fell off the helicarrier he calmed down enough to aim himself to an empty warehouse.
There seems to be a big difference between 'losing' his temper and 'releasing' his anger, if that makes sense.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
quote:Originally posted by stacey: I didn't understand why Hulk was so out of control in the scene on the aircraft with Black Widow but so much more in control in the main fight scene? Is it because the first time he changed, it wasn't on his terms and the second time he was in control right from the start?
I would refer you to a post I made earlier, but I'll answer this question directly. The Hulk persona is a creation of Bruce Banner because he hates his violent and aggressive nature, so when he ended up with a power tied to his emotions he used it as an outlet for those long suppressed urges. Hulk is savage because so long as Banner doesn't accept that he is Hulk, he doesn't have to take personal responsibility for what are essentially super-powered tantrums, instead he views himself as a victim. What we see at the end of the movie was more like the very capable mind of a violent genius in control of an endless power.
Hulk is a monster, but when Banner admits that he has control he becomes the most powerful thing in the Marvel Universe.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
quote:Hulk is a monster, but when Banner admits that he has control he becomes the most powerful thing in the Marvel Universe.
Wow, nerd bait much?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Originally posted by Foust:
quote:Hulk is a monster, but when Banner admits that he has control he becomes the most powerful thing in the Marvel Universe.
Wow, nerd bait much?
Eh. Squirrel Girl could take him out.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:Originally posted by Foust:
quote:Hulk is a monster, but when Banner admits that he has control he becomes the most powerful thing in the Marvel Universe.
Wow, nerd bait much?
Eh. Squirrel Girl could take him out.
True story.
Posted by T:man (Member # 11614) on :
quote:Originally posted by stacey: I didn't understand why Hulk was so out of control in the scene on the aircraft with Black Widow but so much more in control in the main fight scene? Is it because the first time he changed, it wasn't on his terms and the second time he was in control right from the start?
I think he was in much worse shape the first time because of the stress during his transformation, and also because Loki's staff was still messing with everyone's minds.
He also wasn't in that much control in the final battle. He just seemed aimed. While he was definitely fighting the aliens, he also seemed to be just fighting. Remember when he punched thor?
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
To me that just seemed like a joke. Between saving Iron-Man's life by catching him and the fact that Hulk actually paid attention to Capt. America and smiled. He recognized friend from foe, this is not the normal Hulk.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
He often is that way in the comics, which of course varies by writer. It did seem to conflict with him trying to kill Natasha, but most viewers don't seem to mind coming up with their own rationale for the difference.
Posted by Tarrsk (Member # 332) on :
Long-ass analysis of the Hulk ahead. This is one of my favorite plotlines from the movie, and I've spent quite a lot of time thinking about it since.
The read I took away from "The Avengers" - which is supported from what I've read in interviews - is that, from the start of the movie, Banner has the aptitude to control the Hulk. This stemmed from his realization sometime before the film begins that acknowledging his constant inner anger is necessary to do so. I haven't seen "The Incredible Hulk," but my impression is that film ends with him learning that lesson.
So at the beginning of "The Avengers," we have a Bruce Banner who is capable of repressing the Other Guy via his understanding of his own anger. He could Hulk out voluntarily at any moment. But what's important is that that's not something he'd ever choose to do at this point. Banner is still striving purely to repress the Hulk - hence Black Widow's line about how it's been more than year between "incidents." Banner accepts this wording because, to him, each Hulk-out is still just that - an unfortunate incident, a loss of control. For all his newfound ability to keep that part of himself under wraps, he still ultimately views the Hulk as a frightening expression of what he hates about himself - hence calling it the "Other Guy."
The conversation Banner has with Tony Stark aboard the Hellicarrier is his first step towards realizing true control over the Hulk. Even then, we see how dedicated Banner is to repressing that part of himself, as demonstrated by his deadpan response to being zapped by Stark. Stark urges Banner to embrace the Hulk as a gift as much as a curse, implying that doing so will also help clear Banner's head in a more general sense. Banner seems unconvinced, but doesn't reject the notion outright.
Unfortunately, a few hours later, Banner is thrown into one of the most chaotic and terrifying moments of his life, as he learns that SHIELD has been lying to him and the giant flying airship he's on comes under violent attack. All of this while being psychologically warped by Loki's staff, which he picks up and seems prepared to use without even realizing it.
As the lab explodes underneath him, all of Banner's careful repression of the Other Guy disintegrates in that moment of betrayal, mental torment, and physical pain, and the Hulk emerges. Uncontrolled. Untethered. And most importantly, against Banner's will. The circumstances are beyond anything Banner had prepared himself for, and his method of controlling the monster up to this point utterly fails. The last bit of Banner we see in this scene is the horror and apology in his eyes directed at Black Widow as he is subsumed by the Other Guy.
Everyone knows the Hulk best as the id of Bruce Banner, and the following scene is the pure expression of that mode. The Other Guy is unrestrained fury, but it's not mindless - it just acts on instinct. And its instinct right now is this: "Destroy everything that is hurting me/ Banner." Nothing in this moment embodies that more than Natasha Romanov, the representative of SHIELD that recruited him into this ridiculous scheme in the first place. Hence the Hulk's single-minded pursuit of Black Widow through the corridors of the Hellicarrier... until other things start showing up that direct pain against him in an even more visceral manner. First Thor and his bloody hammer, then the fighter jet and its pilot ("TARGET ANGRY! TARGET VERY, VERY ANGRY!").
Of course, here's where the uncoordinated instinct of the id kind of fails as military strategy - if you're a landbound being, even a monster capable of jumping hundreds of feet in the air, it's not the best plan to leap onto an airplane and then proceed to demolish it. Hulk plummets out of the sky. But in our (and what will be Banner's) first hint that even the Hulk maintains some of Banner's mind, the Hulk avoids populated areas in his descent and crashes into an unoccupied warehouse.
Cut to several hours later. Bruce Banner wakes up, confused and instantly horrified. He assumes that he's had another catastrophic "incident" (which is pretty much exactly what happened). But for the first time, he's approached by someone who saw what he was and doesn't fear him it. It helps that it's Harry Dean Stanton. HDS accepts Banner with some dry humor, and informs him that even as the Hulk, he seemed to be making some effort to avoid killing innocents.
This is the most important moment of the film for the character of Bruce Banner - not, as most people seem to assume, the "I'm always angry" line (that's a defining moment for the rest of the Avengers in understanding and accepting Banner, not for Banner himself). It is here that Banner truly comes to understand what "controlling the Hulk" means - not just burying the Other Guy ever deeper, but accepting his anger as part of himself and learning to direct it in a proactive and useful way. He must choose to use his anger as a tool.
When Banner finally arrives at the battle, he exudes a sense of peace we haven't seen in him before. He's still got that wry, quiet humor, but it's missing the nervousness from earlier in the film. It reflects the epiphany that he reached during his conversation with HDS, and reaches its culmination seconds later as he finally Hulks out on purpose for the first time in his life. His acceptance of his anger finally gives him the means to control that anger - and its expression in the Hulk.
That's why the Hulk takes orders in the final battle. That's why the Hulk only goes after the bad guys (Thor suckerpunch aside). And that's why the Hulk is able to deliver the best one-liner in the whole damn movie after pulverizing Loki.
tl;dr version: Bruce Banner could have voluntarily Hulked out at any time in the movie, because he's always angry. But until the last 30 minutes of the film, it's a decision he would NEVER MAKE, because he viewed the Hulk as something bad to be repressed. Which means, when it happens against his will on the Hellicarrier, he's incapable of stopping the Hulk from trying to turn Black Widow into a fine paste.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Right, what he said.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
Very well put, actually, and a very interesting read.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
.