The Avengers: News and Speculation - Part 27A sub-se - - - - Part 13

[BobbyCorwin88]

Originally Posted by xeno000

Hawkeye/Barton is not a "random MCU character" by any stretch of the imagination. In the plot of the movie he is a member of SHIELD tasked with tracking and, if necessary, containing Thor. As a longtime member of The Avengers in the comics, Hawkeye was Thor's teammate and friend, which presumably will be his character arc in the movies. His presence did nothing to lessen the impact of that scene, in my opinion.

Yeah, but only WE know that. The general public does not, and they certainly don't know that information based on his very small cameo in the movie. It's like I said, if they wanted to introduce Hawkeye within Thor and give him any sort of relevance, then they should have showed him helping in the fight against the Destroyer. Then Thor would have recognized his heroism and it would have tied in nicely to the Avengers. Of course he isn't "random" but to anyone watching the movie who isn't familiar with the MCU, he's just some agent with a bow and arrow.

I feel like we've run this topic into the ground now. I think it's safe to say most of our points have been made clear? Maybe?

[GoblinWhirlwind]

Originally Posted by xeno000

Hawkeye/Barton is not a "random MCU character" by any stretch of the imagination. In the plot of the movie he is a member of SHIELD tasked with tracking and, if necessary, containing Thor. As a longtime member of The Avengers in the comics, Hawkeye was Thor's teammate and friend, which presumably will be his character arc in the movies. His presence did nothing to lessen the impact of that scene, in my opinion.

Definitely, that scene is one of my favorites in the entire movie. Coulson watching silently from above, thinking that just maybe there could be more than meets the eye to this man. The way Thor smiled at the sight of Mjolnir, fully expecting to pick it up, then his mounting disbelief when he can't lift it at all... and then his despair. The cut to Heimdall with Thor's failure reflected in his eye was perfect if you ask me.

[Iceman]

At least once we get the full Avengers film noone will be worrying about too much crossover crap.

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by Alexei Belyakov

Then you'd imagine wrong. The mere asking of that question, of "what is he doing here?" was enough to compromise the emotional weight to Thor's breakdown. It was a scene about Thor losing his last schred of immortal pride, paving the way for some human emotion to come in. Listen, Chewy, you realize you don't have to swallow everything Feige feeds you, right? When I read your posts I get the feeling that Marvel Studios can do no wrong in your eyes, and while you're entitled to that complete approval of their methods, it never hurts to be a little objective when those methods are starting to compromise the very thing they're trying to do which is to bring these beloved characters to the big screen. That cameo really did hurt THOR.

Did you also complain about that big guy who stood between Thor and the hammer Mjolnir about robbing his moment? Look, Thor is a part of a MCU, and with that we'll be having some cameos and even guest-appearances here and there, otherwise why even create a shared universe if no one makes any appearances? Marvel has wanted references to the Avengers, yet they also want those solo movies to stand on their own, and while none of them are perfect Marvel has done exactly what they set out to do. Hawkeye's cameo was small, lasted for probably less than a minute, and the fact that he did not pull the trigger shows that Agent Coulson (who was giving the order) was in control all this time, but he was curious enough about this stranger's whereabout that he ordered Hawkeye NOT to fire. I'm not sure why you keep harping on this, however. I'm not saying that Thor is a perfect film; far from it. But Hawkeye's cameo should not be considered a problem.

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by BobbyCorwin88

Yeah, but only WE know that. The general public does not, and they certainly don't know that information based on his very small cameo in the movie. It's like I said, if they wanted to introduce Hawkeye within Thor and give him any sort of relevance, then they should have showed him helping in the fight against the Destroyer. Then Thor would have recognized his heroism and it would have tied in nicely to the Avengers. Of course he isn't "random" but to anyone watching the movie who isn't familiar with the MCU, he's just some agent with a bow and arrow.

I feel like we've run this topic into the ground now. I think it's safe to say most of our points have been made clear? Maybe?

Your solution is also the basis of the complain about Fury's cameo in IM2, because supposedly he was involved "too much", and people think it makes IM2 seems more like an Avengers movie than an Iron Man movie. If they not only have Hawkeye making a cameo, but also fought together against Destroyer, do you know what those people will be saying right now? In other words, there is no pleasing everyone in this MCU issue.

[spideyboy_1111]

Originally Posted by BobbyCorwin88

Yeah, but only WE know that. The general public does not, and they certainly don't know that information based on his very small cameo in the movie. It's like I said, if they wanted to introduce Hawkeye within Thor and give him any sort of relevance, then they should have showed him helping in the fight against the Destroyer. Then Thor would have recognized his heroism and it would have tied in nicely to the Avengers. Of course he isn't "random" but to anyone watching the movie who isn't familiar with the MCU, he's just some agent with a bow and arrow.

I feel like we've run this topic into the ground now. I think it's safe to say most of our points have been made clear? Maybe?

they didn't want him to be anything more than a teaser. They wanted the audience to go "who was that guy?" "that bow looks awesome" etc...

these minor easter eggs don't ruin a movie, infact, they strengthen the MCU movies... because for instance, like the harry potter movies, you will be able to go back and go "o yeah! that was there and I ever noticed!" much like the Captain America's Shield, Comic, and Cosmic Cube all showing up in the Iron Man films... and the Infinity Gauntlet showing up in Thor. Hawkeye shouldn't have had a Widow like role in Thor. That would have been far more distracting.

[spideyboy_1111]

Originally Posted by Raiden

Your solution is also the basis of the complain about Fury's cameo in IM2, because supposedly he was involved "too much", and people think it makes IM2 seems more like an Avengers movie than an Iron Man movie. If they not only have Hawkeye making a cameo, but also fought together against Destroyer, do you know what those people will be saying right now? In other words, there is no pleasing everyone in this MCU issue.

i think there's a decent argument however about Nick Fury in Ironman 2.. because for the majority of the audience who didn't see the after the credit's scene, have no clue who nick fury is.. and they really don't help fill that gap about him in Ironman 2.. he just sorta shows up and the audience is suppose to just know who he is when they didn't see that scene. that imo was a mistake on marvels part... But they seemed to realize that and fix it with ironman 2's thor after credit scene showing up in thor.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Originally Posted by Chewy

Hahahaha. There's your fanboy cliche, Wolvie. I completely approve of everything in every Marvel Studios film and I'm not being objective. Because I'm dissagreeing with someone who very clearly hates Kevin Feige, and is therefore completely objective.

The only Marvel Studios film I've seen you knock here on the boards is TIH which is ironically the only MCU film Feige hates and wishes everyone would forget (despite him being the reason it underperformed). I have plenty of warranted reasons for disliking the guy, but I'm not gonna get into that right now. The subject at hand is your seemingly absolute seal of approval for everything done in the MCU films that have not been the most well-received (Cap, Thor, IM2). But maybe I'm wrong and you don't approve of every move Feige makes. If so, would you mind telling me a thing or two you didn't like in the aforementioned titles? You yourself said they're not perfect.

[R_Hythlodeus]

Originally Posted by Alexei Belyakov

I have plenty of warranted reasons for disliking the guy, but I'm not gonna get into that right now.

Oh please, I'd like to read your reasons.

[jadejaws]

Originally Posted by RealIrOnMaN

I've been going through my SDCC'11 pics today & I've totally forgot about this Avengers package at Hasbro's booth (it's really big - 3968x2232):

Man I hope Hulk looks like that in the movie...he's perfect!!!!

RIM, is one Hulk more accurate than the other? (Poster vs this pic) : )

[BobbyCorwin88]

Originally Posted by spideyboy_1111

they didn't want him to be anything more than a teaser. They wanted the audience to go "who was that guy?" "that bow looks awesome" etc...

Maybe it's what they wanted, but it's not what I wanted.

these minor easter eggs don't ruin a movie, infact, they strengthen the MCU movies... because for instance, like the harry potter movies, you will be able to go back and go "o yeah! that was there and I ever noticed!" much like the Captain America's Shield, Comic, and Cosmic Cube all showing up in the Iron Man films... and the Infinity Gauntlet showing up in Thor. Hawkeye shouldn't have had a Widow like role in Thor. That would have been far more distracting.

I don't think I ever said it ruined the movie. I just thought it was distracting to put him in a scene that should have been mostly about Thor. Sure I want to see his cameo, it was just an odd place to put him is all.

*guess we aren't done with this one*
You know why I think it would have been cool to have Hawkeye help in the Destroyer fight? Let me paint ya'll a picture with my mind-brush...

-The Warriors 3 are locked in combat with the Destroyer. They're getting pummeled as the Destroyer continues rampaging.... THE TOWN. As the struggle continues, Coulsen arrives on the scene, steps out of his car and observes the damage. He yells into his com, "Barton, do you have eyes!?" A chopper flies overhead with a clear view of Destroyer down below. Hawkeye is poised in firing position, an explosive arrow taut and ready to fire. "Just say the word Coulsen!" "Give him everything you've got!" Says Coulsen. Hawkeye fires and the arrow sticks firmly into Destroyers helmet. A couple of beats until a small light starts flickering inside the helmet, accompanied by a series of beeps.....BOOOOM!!! A large explosion surrounds Destroyer, a thick cloud of smoke covering its body. Coulsen looks on, "was that a hit?" "He's not getting back up from that buddy," replies Hawkeye. Suddenly a blast emerges from the smoke and hits Hawkeyes chopper. It loses control and crashes to the ground, with Hawkeye just barley managing to jump out in time to avoid the crash. The chopper tumbles in a heaping pile of steel and metal, while Coulsen yells in his com, "Barton! You still with me?" Hawkeye, shaken up, stumbles to his feet, and breathing heavily replies, "I think we're gonna need your Stark buddy on this one pal."
-Then the scene continues with Thor confronting Destroyer.

How's that for a cameo!!! URGGGGGHHHH!!! And that was just off the top of my head!

[xeno000]

Originally Posted by BobbyCorwin88

Yeah, but only WE know that. The general public does not, and they certainly don't know that information based on his very small cameo in the movie. It's like I said, if they wanted to introduce Hawkeye within Thor and give him any sort of relevance, then they should have showed him helping in the fight against the Destroyer. Then Thor would have recognized his heroism and it would have tied in nicely to the Avengers. Of course he isn't "random" but to anyone watching the movie who isn't familiar with the MCU, he's just some agent with a bow and arrow.

I feel like we've run this topic into the ground now. I think it's safe to say most of our points have been made clear? Maybe?

For the people in the GA who don't know who Hawkeye/Barton is, naming him in a brief cameo will make no difference. If/when those same people watch The Avengers and see Hawkeye in that movie, they will be able to connect the two appearances. Also, if he had helped Thor out in the battle, we'd be treated to even more arguments about how his appearance distracted certain individuals and detracted from Thor's big moment.


Having said that, I agree that the topic has run its course. People simply have different views, and that's fine.

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by BobbyCorwin88

Maybe it's what they wanted, but it's not what I wanted.


I don't think I ever said it ruined the movie. I just thought it was distracting to put him in a scene that should have been mostly about Thor. Sure I want to see his cameo, it was just an odd place to put him is all.

*guess we aren't done with this one*
You know why I think it would have been cool to have Hawkeye help in the Destroyer fight? Let me paint ya'll a picture with my mind-brush...

-The Warriors 3 are locked in combat with the Destroyer. They're getting pummeled as the Destroyer continues rampaging.... THE TOWN. As the struggle continues, Coulsen arrives on the scene, steps out of his car and observes the damage. He yells into his com, "Barton, do you have eyes!?" A chopper flies overhead with a clear view of Destroyer down below. Hawkeye is poised in firing position, an explosive arrow taut and ready to fire. "Just say the word Coulsen!" "Give him everything you've got!" Says Coulsen. Hawkeye fires and the arrow sticks firmly into Destroyers helmet. A couple of beats until a small light starts flickering inside the helmet, accompanied by a series of beeps.....BOOOOM!!! A large explosion surrounds Destroyer, a thick cloud of smoke covering its body. Coulsen looks on, "was that a hit?" "He's not getting back up from that buddy," replies Hawkeye. Suddenly a blast emerges from the smoke and hits Hawkeyes chopper. It loses control and crashes to the ground, with Hawkeye just barley managing to jump out in time to avoid the crash. The chopper tumbles in a heaping pile of steel and metal, while Coulsen yells in his com, "Barton! You still with me?" Hawkeye, shaken up, stumbles to his feet, and breathing heavily replies, "I think we're gonna need your Stark buddy on this one pal."
-Then the scene continues with Thor confronting Destroyer.

How's that for a cameo!!! URGGGGGHHHH!!! And that was just off the top of my head!

And I thought people don't want the Avengers to be intrusive in the movie. How is this not considered to be intrusive? Personally, I have no problem about giving Hawkeye even more screentime than he received in the Thor movie, but I think the criticism will be shifted from "Hawkeye has a pointless cameo" to "he's robbing Thor in his big moment!" or "Thor is just a 2 hr trailer for the Avengers!" Anyway, I think the problem is that some people think the cameos and references went overboard, and others think they are too minor and not integrated to the movie & story enough. Maybe all of them have a valid criticism, but who can say there's a solution re: MCU that would please everyone?

[Chewy]

Originally Posted by Alexei Belyakov

The only Marvel Studios film I've seen you knock here on the boards is TIH which is ironically the only MCU film Feige hates and wishes everyone would forget (despite him being the reason it underperformed). I have plenty of warranted reasons for disliking the guy, but I'm not gonna get into that right now. The subject at hand is your seemingly absolute seal of approval for everything done in the MCU films that have not been the most well-received (Cap, Thor, IM2). But maybe I'm wrong and you don't approve of every move Feige makes. If so, would you mind telling me a thing or two you didn't like in the aforementioned titles? You yourself said they're not perfect.

That's not the subject at hand. The subject at hand was the Hawkeye cameo. That's what I've been discussing.

Iron Man 2 is a boring film with a bunch of meandering plotlines that never connect into an interesting whole. Black Widow in the film is pointless. Whiplash is underdeveloped. War Machine is underused.

I am not a fan of how short the fight between Thor and the Destroyer was. I am also not a fan of how underused Sif and the Warriors Three were.

The montage in Captain America is introduced in a rather jarring way. The characters are never allowed to breathe after Captain America has been introduced in his final suit.

I have not mentioned any of these things in here because this is an Avengers thread, and we were discussing another topic. Sorry that I don't complain about them at every possible turn. I am, for the most part, satisfied with the films we got.

PS: You keep acting as though TIH was better received than Cap or Thor. It wasn't. Not by critics. Not by fans. Not be general audiences.

[Iron_Stark]

Complaining about Hawkeye's 5 second cameo again? Really? Really?

[RealIrOnMaN]

Originally Posted by jadejaws

Man I hope Hulk looks like that in the movie...he's perfect!!!!

RIM, is one Hulk more accurate than the other? (Poster vs this pic) : )

They're different in each promo, lol. I haven't seen some actual stills with the Hulk in action, so it's really hard to tell or to judge, man.

[spideyboy_1111]

Maybe it's what they wanted, but it's not what I wanted.

then they were successful... because you wanted MORE.

[Iron_Stark]

Originally Posted by Chewy

Iron Man 2 is a film with a bunch of meandering plotlines that never connect into an interesting whole. War Machine in the film is repetative and pointless. Whiplash got screwed over and is underdeveloped. Black Widow is underused.

There, fixed for you.

[SerendipityWas]

Considering the multiple uses of the word 'assemble' we've seen in the promotion, the phrase 'Avengers, Assemble!' is basically confirmed. Although the 'Some Assembly Required' in the trailer is kind of forced.

The real question is: Who will say it? Traditionally it's been Cap, but Iron Man may say it too.

It's basically down to those two.

[BobbyCorwin88]

Originally Posted by Raiden

And I thought people don't want the Avengers to be intrusive in the movie. How is this not considered to be intrusive? Personally, I have no problem about giving Hawkeye even more screentime than he received in the Thor movie, but I think the criticism will be shifted from "Hawkeye has a pointless cameo" to "he's robbing Thor in his big moment!" or "Thor is just a 2 hr trailer for the Avengers!" Anyway, I think the problem is that some people think the cameos and references went overboard, and others think they are too minor and not integrated to the movie & story enough. Maybe all of them have a valid criticism, but who can say there's a solution re: MCU that would please everyone?

The reason I added my amazing Thor/Hawkeye Slash-fic, wasn't to make him seem more intrusive. I said a couple of posts back that I take a "nothing wasted" mindset when it comes to film making. Hawkeye's cameo, was ultimately, a wasted cameo because he didn't do anything. He just showed up. Yes it's an easter egg, yes it's more of a nod to the fans, but why waste a perfectly good actor and character?

I don't quite understand the arguments against SHIELD's presence in IM2. We all knew they were going to play a role one way or another because they did in the first IM. They were a group of supporting characters who helped advance the plot and support our main character and were properly set up for future films without feeling intrusive. Many say that Whiplash was underdeveloped because they were a focus in the film, but I felt that him operating from behind the scenes was a much more devious use of his character. I mean, we shouldn't have really heard him talking about his master plan if he was trying to keep it under wraps right? Whiplash wanted his operation to stay secret so he could launch a surprise attack and everything he did worked to that effect. So these arguments I don't understand as much.

I am sympathetic to the idea that Hawkeye's cameo disrupted Thor's moment when he was trying to reclaim Mljonir, because it was a serious moment for Thor and probably shouldn't have been cut away from. Like I've said, I love that we can get cameos in our Marvel movies, but they have to be done correctly or they fall flat and hurt the film. That is what I think everyone should try and understand. We love our Marvel characters, but throwing them in just so we can see their faces for a few seconds, isn't really doing them justice. That kind of stuff hurts these kind of films, when really they can, and should help them.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Originally Posted by R_Hythlodeus

Oh please, I'd like to read your reasons.

Where do we begin? In a nutshell, Kevin Feige is the reason the MCU films have not been all that they could have been since 2008. I came to that realization when he pretty much butchered TIH in an effort to make it more popcorn-driven rather than character driven. Ever since TIH the films have just gotten lighter & safer & because of that we lost Jon Favreau along with a huge amount of quality in the storytelling for every subsequent film after IM & TIH. Next up is his massive cheapness & disregard for the importance of talent. Poor ideals that cost us Ed Norton & almost cost us ScarJo, Sam Jackson & Mickey Rourke. Finally, there's the complete lack of concern for making a great film & excelling in the genre in favor of setting up potential sequel/crossovers that don't even guarantee numbers higher than Iron Man's (the one solid movie that had ZERO crossover interference). Yeah, I really don't like the guy, justifiably.

[spideyboy_1111]

Originally Posted by BobbyCorwin88

The reason I added my amazing Thor/Hawkeye Slash-fic, wasn't to make him seem more intrusive. I said a couple of posts back that I take a "nothing wasted" mindset when it comes to film making. Hawkeye's cameo, was ultimately, a wasted cameo because he didn't do anything. He just showed up. Yes it's an easter egg, yes it's more of a nod to the fans, but why waste a perfectly good actor and character?

I don't quite understand the arguments against SHIELD's presence in IM2. We all knew they were going to play a role one way or another because they did in the first IM. They were a group of supporting characters who helped advance the plot and support our main character and were properly set up for future films without feeling intrusive. Many say that Whiplash was underdeveloped because they were a focus in the film, but I felt that him operating from behind the scenes was a much more devious use of his character. I mean, we shouldn't have really heard him talking about his master plan if he was trying to keep it under wraps right? Whiplash wanted his operation to stay secret so he could launch a surprise attack and everything he did worked to that effect. So these arguments I don't understand as much.

I am sympathetic to the idea that Hawkeye's cameo disrupted Thor's moment when he was trying to reclaim Mljonir, because it was a serious moment for Thor and probably shouldn't have been cut away from. Like I've said, I love that we can get cameos in our Marvel movies, but they have to be done correctly or they fall flat and hurt the film. That is what I think everyone should try and understand. We love our Marvel characters, but throwing them in just so we can see their faces for a few seconds, isn't really doing them justice. That kind of stuff hurts these kind of films, when really they can, and should help them.

1) you do know what "slash fiction" means right?

2) while your cameo idea sounds alright, it just simply isn't needed, though like most superhero films, of course us fans can think of a million more things to add to them

3)if you rewatch the scene, Clint's cameo imo actually added to the tragedy.. "trying to shoot a man while he's down" kinda deal.

[RealIrOnMaN]

Adi Granov: Out of the three of my favourite elements of the new Iron Man design for the Avengers, two made it into the movie and one didn't. I might have to reuse that one in the future as I really like it.

I still can't quite understand, where's the new version of the triangular armor & why Stark is wearing Mark VI in the movie (since it got trashed by Vanko in IM2). Hasbro & Marvel keep calling that circular RT armor from the movie - Mark VII. Kinda weird, especially after seeing some of the designs from the film.

[Chewy]

Thor doesn't have any more crossover material in it than Iron Man does. So much for objectivity, eh?

[SerendipityWas]

Originally Posted by RealIrOnMaN

Adi Granov: Out of the three of my favourite elements of the new Iron Man design for the Avengers, two made it into the movie and one didn't. I might have to reuse that one in the future as I really like it.

I still can't quite understand, where's the new version of the triangular armor & why Stark is wearing Mark VI in the movie (since it got trashed by Vanko in IM2). Hasbro & Marvel keep calling that circular RT armor from the movie - Mark VII. Kinda weird, especially after seeing some of the designs from the film.

They could be using the Mark VI model as a stand-in for the trailer, if the VFX aren't done on the actual model. In the trailer all he does is really stand there, so just putting in an old model and posing it wouldn't be hard, especially for a split-second shot.

The circle is an interesting bit, though. Could be a de-facto Mark VII, like how the Mark V wasn't an upgrade from the Mark IV, but was a model that came after it.

Then again, you're the one who works in Marketing at Marvel. (I'd assume, giving how that's basically all the stuff you get exclusives on).