The Official Rate/Review Thread for Marvel's The Avengers! (TAG SPOILERS!!!) - Part 3

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Xmen first class was a much better film. A lot of characters but with actual depth.

[El Payaso]

Originally Posted by \S/JcDc\S/

Xmen first class was a much better film. A lot of characters but with actual depth.

I also liked that one better.

[Whiskey Tango]

depth is rapidly becoming another meaningless buzzword people like to throw around when they want to sound like film critics. Sadly depth alone does not make a movie great.

[Webfoot Hero]

Originally Posted by Whiskey Tango

depth is rapidly becoming another meaningless buzzword people like to throw around when they want to sound like film critics. Sadly depth alone does not make a movie great.

Agree on that. A lot of movies that supposedly have depth actually have a false intellectualism masquerading as depth.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Avengers synopsis:Marvel Studios presents 'Marvel's The Avengers'--the Super Hero team up of a lifetime, featuring iconic Marvel Super Heroes Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Hawkeye and Black Widow. When an unexpected enemy emerges that threatens global safety and security, Nick Fury, Director of the international peacekeeping agency known as S.H.I.E.L.D., finds himself in need of a team to pull the world back from the brink of disaster. Spanning the globe, a daring recruitment effort begins.

Xmen First Class snyopsis: Before mutants had revealed themselves to the world, and before Charles Xavier and Erik Lehnsherr took the names Professor X and Magneto, they were two young men discovering their powers for the first time. Not archenemies, they were instead at first the closest of friends, working together with other Mutants (some familiar, some new), to prevent nuclear Armageddon. In the process, a grave rift between them opened, which began the eternal war between Magneto's Brotherhood and Professor X's X-Men.


>>>>> I mean half the Avengers synopsis is just throwing out character names lmao

[Baneis8feettall]

6/10

[Webfoot Hero]

Originally Posted by \S/JcDc\S/

Avengers synopsis:Marvel Studios presents 'Marvel's The Avengers'--the Super Hero team up of a lifetime, featuring iconic Marvel Super Heroes Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Hawkeye and Black Widow. When an unexpected enemy emerges that threatens global safety and security, Nick Fury, Director of the international peacekeeping agency known as S.H.I.E.L.D., finds himself in need of a team to pull the world back from the brink of disaster. Spanning the globe, a daring recruitment effort begins.

Xmen First Class snyopsis: Before mutants had revealed themselves to the world, and before Charles Xavier and Erik Lehnsherr took the names Professor X and Magneto, they were two young men discovering their powers for the first time. Not archenemies, they were instead at first the closest of friends, working together with other Mutants (some familiar, some new), to prevent nuclear Armageddon. In the process, a grave rift between them opened, which began the eternal war between Magneto's Brotherhood and Professor X's X-Men.


>>>>> I mean half the Avengers synopsis is just throwing out character names lmao

Two different franchises at different points in their development as films. The Avengers already had a build-up of characters from previous films that people instantly recognized; X-Men: First Class was a reboot/prequel to the previous X-Men that had an entirely new cast with almost no name recognition. You can't gleam too much from the synopsis of each film to judge quality then.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Was I the only one who wanted to give the movie a 9 or ten? cause I wanted to and found out the poll was closed But anyway, I really enjoyed the movie and I hope we get a S.H.I.E.L.D movie cause I like to learn more about Agents Coulson and Maria Hill...maybe we'll get some early backstory on Black Widow and Hawkeye. that'd be awesome.

[Baneis8feettall]

Originally Posted by DarknessOfDeath

Was I the only one who wanted to give the movie a 9 or ten? cause I wanted to and found out the poll was closed But anyway, I really enjoyed the movie and I hope we get a S.H.I.E.L.D movie cause I like to learn more about Agents Coulson and Maria Hill...maybe we'll get some early backstory on Black Widow and Hawkeye. that'd be awesome.

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

Isn't Coulson dead?

You mean prequel?

[DarknessOfDeath]

Something like that.

[Baneis8feettall]

I wouldn't mind to see more Maria Hill next time. She was more attractive than Black Widow.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Yeah...I'd have to go with Robin Scherbatsky.

[El Payaso]

Originally Posted by Whiskey Tango

depth is rapidly becoming another meaningless buzzword people like to throw around when they want to sound like film critics. Sadly depth alone does not make a movie great.

I remember that XMFC had more things other than depth?

[Crimson King]

Originally Posted by \S/JcDc\S/

Xmen first class was a much better film. A lot of characters but with actual depth.

Man, I couldn't stand the characters in XMFC (outside of Magneto and Charles, who were great). I cringed every time the X-teens were on screen. I hope they're better in the sequel.

Avengers was a much better movie. XMFC was far too rushed and it showed in the final product.

[xeno000]

Originally Posted by Crimson King

Man, I couldn't stand the characters in XMFC (outside of Magneto and Charles, who were great). I cringed every time the X-teens were on screen. I hope they're better in the sequel.

Avengers was a much better movie. XMFC was far too rushed and it showed in the final product.

I completely agree. The characters in X:FC were little more than cardboard cutouts beyond the two leads. And even Charles was a tad on the ridiculous side. He came off as the mutant Uncle Tom, constantly pushing accommodation and trying to get the government to use his abilities to help rein in other mutants. Moira McTaggert was inexplicably downgraded from a pioneering geneticist and Charles' equal to a bumbling junior g-woman whose first scene had her stripping off on the flimsiest of pretexts. Her last scenes showed her being mind-****ed by Charles and ridiculed by her superiors. The script badly screwed up the X-films' chronology, to what end it's hard to fathom.

[Whiskey Tango]

Originally Posted by El Payaso

I remember that XMFC had more things other than depth?

Maybe. Consistency wasn't one of them, unfortunately.

[spider-neil]

Originally Posted by Webfoot Hero

Agree on that. A lot of movies that supposedly have depth actually have a false intellectualism masquerading as depth.

*cough* Inception *cough*

[El Payaso]

I didn't know Inception was intellectual?

[Flemm]

Originally Posted by xeno000

I completely agree. The characters in X:FC were little more than cardboard cutouts beyond the two leads. And even Charles was a tad on the ridiculous side. He came off as the mutant Uncle Tom, constantly pushing accommodation and trying to get the government to use his abilities to help rein in other mutants.

I think Magneto is the only character in the film who is really handled well. As you say, Charles comes across as far too weak and unsympathetic, when in reality the path he represents requires more strength than the one Magneto represents (speaking in abstract terms). There needed to be more balance. Certain details, such as Charles being repelled by Mystique's natural appearance, border on character assassination.

It seems to be a perpetual problem with the X-films (a bit like Cyclops was sacrificed on the alter of Wolverine).

First Class is X-Men Origins: Magneto, with some other stuff grafted on to it.

The Avengers is a groundbreaking film, so it's on a completely different level. It's not deep, but it's impactful. How impactful can only be measured over time, but I think time will confirm this.

[Rock Sexton]

Originally Posted by \S/JcDc\S/

Xmen first class was a much better film. A lot of characters but with actual depth.

Originally Posted by Webfoot Hero

Two different franchises at different points in their development as films. The Avengers already had a build-up of characters from previous films that people instantly recognized; X-Men: First Class was a reboot/prequel to the previous X-Men that had an entirely new cast with almost no name recognition. You can't gleam too much from the synopsis of each film to judge quality then.

Stop making sense.

Originally Posted by Crimson King

Man, I couldn't stand the characters in XMFC (outside of Magneto and Charles, who were great). I cringed every time the X-teens were on screen. I hope they're better in the sequel.

Avengers was a much better movie. XMFC was far too rushed and it showed in the final product.

I had the same issue with XMFC .... but it's always been like that for me with the XMEN films. I roll my eyes when they're flirting and coming up with names for each other or when Angel Salvadore switched scenes. The scene was so bad. January Jones also needed a personality injection in that movie ... fun to look at though. As usual Fassbender was better than everyone in the cast.

[Kane52630]

Originally Posted by Rock Sexton

[JustSomeGuy]

Originally Posted by \S/JcDc\S/

Avengers synopsis:Marvel Studios presents 'Marvel's The Avengers'--the Super Hero team up of a lifetime, featuring iconic Marvel Super Heroes Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Hawkeye and Black Widow. When an unexpected enemy emerges that threatens global safety and security, Nick Fury, Director of the international peacekeeping agency known as S.H.I.E.L.D., finds himself in need of a team to pull the world back from the brink of disaster. Spanning the globe, a daring recruitment effort begins.

Xmen First Class snyopsis: Before mutants had revealed themselves to the world, and before Charles Xavier and Erik Lehnsherr took the names Professor X and Magneto, they were two young men discovering their powers for the first time. Not archenemies, they were instead at first the closest of friends, working together with other Mutants (some familiar, some new), to prevent nuclear Armageddon. In the process, a grave rift between them opened, which began the eternal war between Magneto's Brotherhood and Professor X's X-Men.


>>>>> I mean half the Avengers synopsis is just throwing out character names lmao

Man, this is some of the most half-assed way to a judge a film I have ever seen, no offense. The Avengers, I thought, was so far and away better than XFC, that you can't even compare them. And what you listed has nothing to do with why Avengers was good.

Yeah, on the surface, it's a movie about an alien invasion with lots explosions. But the characters of the film were portrayed so much better in The Avengers than in any movie I've seen recently. Look at how it is laid out: Loki steals cube, and Fury needs to go get the Avengers together. So we then a get an incredibly varied introduction to each character who is essential to the plot. Black Widow is a super spy in Russia toying with mobsters. She has then has to go get Bruce Banner, who is in a shack in Kolkata, away from society. Fury then goes to Cap, who is up in the middle of the night hitting punching bags in an old timey gym. Coulson goes to Tony Stark's penthouse, interrupting the personal life of a billionaire playboy to throw some work on him because he has to. Boom. It's such a brilliant setup to these characters. Then Thor comes and shows that this is actually the most personal to him, because it is his brother, someone he thinks he can still save.

At no time in this movie did I stop and think "wow, this scene has no business being in this movie," or that one of the characters felt flat, or said something that didn't sound organic. XFC is FILLED with moments like that. One that stands out in particular is that terrible, awful scene on the boat where that general confronts Shaw, WITH A GRENADE? That scene is literally only in the movie to show the audience what Shaw's power is. There is absolutely no reason for that scene to be in the film, no reason at all for that character to think it is a good idea to confront a bunch of mutants on a boat with only a grenade, other than to simply show the audience something which the writers wanted to the audience to know, but weren't talented enough to weave it into the movie naturally.

He even just blatantly says what his power is! He says it, verbatim, that his power is he can absorb energy. That is such lazy filmmaking. The #1 rule of writing a movie, for me, is you need to show me, not tell me. Perfect example in The Avengers: it would have been terrible storytelling, if someone just flat out said that Captain America is the leader of the Avengers. Because there is no reason for any character to say that in the film. Instead, what does Joss Whedon do? He shows the audience Cap giving off orders to the Avengers. He doesn't talk down to the audience, which happens in so many superhero films, he just shows them. And Joss Whedon understands this important part of making a film, it's why the movie is being so well received, his skill is in telling a story, regardless of what that story is. Yeah, maybe the story of XFC is better than the story of Avengers, but the entertaining bit comes in how the story is told, not necessarily because of what the story is.

Someone said it above that people like to talk about "depth." I will go even further. People confuse a plot that is complicated with being quality. The Avengers may have had a simple plot, but the movie was pulled off flawlessly. Most movies try to go for something with more meaning and end up falling flat on their face in the process. I will take something simple done well over something complicated done poorly every single day. It's why Disney animated films are great. It's why Pixar movies are great. The story itself doesn't matter all that much. It is how the story is told.

But yeah, there is my drunken superhero rant.

[Webfoot Hero]

Originally Posted by JustSomeGuy

Man, this is some of the most half-assed way to a judge a film I have ever seen, no offense. The Avengers, I thought, was so far and away better than XFC, that you can't even compare them. And what you listed has nothing to do with why Avengers was good.

Yeah, on the surface, it's a movie about an alien invasion with lots explosions. But the characters of the film were portrayed so much better in The Avengers than in any movie I've seen recently. Look at how it is laid out: Loki steals cube, and Fury needs to go get the Avengers together. So we then a get an incredibly varied introduction to each character who is essential to the plot. Black Widow is a super spy in Russia toying with mobsters. She has then has to go get Bruce Banner, who is in a shack in Kolkata, away from society. Fury then goes to Cap, who is up in the middle of the night hitting punching bags in an old timey gym. Coulson goes to Tony Stark's penthouse, interrupting the personal life of a billionaire playboy to throw some work on him because he has to. Boom. It's such a brilliant setup to these characters. Then Thor comes and shows that this is actually the most personal to him, because it is his brother, someone he thinks he can still save.

At no time in this movie did I stop and think "wow, this scene has no business being in this movie," or that one of the characters felt flat, or said something that didn't sound organic. XFC is FILLED with moments like that. One that stands out in particular is that terrible, awful scene on the boat where that general confronts Shaw, WITH A GRENADE? That scene is literally only in the movie to show the audience what Shaw's power is. There is absolutely no reason for that scene to be in the film, no reason at all for that character to think it is a good idea to confront a bunch of mutants on a boat with only a grenade, other than to simply show the audience something which the writers wanted to the audience to know, but weren't talented enough to weave it into the movie naturally.

He even just blatantly says what his power is! He says it, verbatim, that his power is he can absorb energy. That is such lazy filmmaking. The #1 rule of writing a movie, for me, is you need to show me, not tell me. Perfect example in The Avengers: it would have been terrible storytelling, if someone just flat out said that Captain America is the leader of the Avengers. Because there is no reason for any character to say that in the film. Instead, what does Joss Whedon do? He shows the audience Cap giving off orders to the Avengers. He doesn't talk down to the audience, which happens in so many superhero films, he just shows them. And Joss Whedon understands this important part of making a film, it's why the movie is being so well received, his skill is in telling a story, regardless of what that story is. Yeah, maybe the story of XFC is better than the story of Avengers, but the entertaining bit comes in how the story is told, not necessarily because of what the story is.

Someone said it above that people like to talk about "depth." I will go even further. People confuse a plot that is complicated with being quality. The Avengers may have had a simple plot, but the movie was pulled off flawlessly. Most movies try to go for something with more meaning and end up falling flat on their face in the process. I will take something simple done well over something complicated done poorly every single day. It's why Disney animated films are great. It's why Pixar movies are great. The story itself doesn't matter all that much. It is how the story is told.

But yeah, there is my drunken superhero rant.

Long rant but exactly what most of us are thinking on here.

[Savage]

Here here!

[terry78]

There are only a handful of plots in existence (to quote ASM) but what makes each version great is how it's told. Point taken, man.