Age of Ultron Age of Ultron SPOILER thread, DO NOT enter if you don't want to be spoiled!!! - Part 5

[PunyGod]

...

 

[Keehar]

I thought Loki was a pretty good foe. Better than Ultron.

 

[marvellover]

Forget Thanos! A traffic jam is the true enemy of the MCU

Unfortunately,that is still way better than what the threat have shown in the movie
Much bigger threat than all of Avengers could handle
In the movie,it took Nick Fury to solve all the problems in a handful of minutes

Read the comments there
Looks like guys that do not even care about comic books know that is way better showing than in movie

You have Ivan Vanko controlled War Machine or Tony hacked the quinjet but a superior AI can't even do anything to planes?

 

[TeeKay]

Unfortunately,that is still way better than what the threat have shown in the movie
Much bigger threat than all of Avengers could handle
In the movie,it took Nick Fury to solve all the problems in a handful of minutes

Read the comments there
Looks like guys that do not even care about comic books know that is way better showing than in movie

You have Ivan Vanko controlled War Machine or Tony hacked the quinjet but a superior AI can't even do anything to planes?

WHAT?!!! Are you serious? Now you're just trolling smh.

 

[ironman_rick]

The only way they can make IW2 an event movie like TA is to kill most of the "new avengers" in IW1.

So war machine, falcon (deputising for cap) and vision (Thanos rips the IS from his head) do the deed in the first movie, and the threat level immediately goes up for the final movie.

And when the original avengers come back with captain America being brought back to life (after the events in CW).... the audience level is gonna sky rocket.

The thing is marvel has to take risk. They took risk with IM. It paid massive dividends. They took risk with GOTG, the Avengers and TWS and those movies grossed way above what was expected for them.

 

[metaphysician]

Because the only worthwhile risk is "killing a bunch of people off." *rollseyes*

 

[PunyGod]

...

 

[vaultoutfielder]

A lot of people raised their eyebrows when Cap said he went under "75 years" ago. It was actually exactly 70 years before 2015 so this is a pretty big goof.

Later Natasha says she recruited Bruce "way back when". That seems a strange way to refer to an event that was only 3 years ago.

Is it possible this film is meant to take place a few years in the future? Probably not but just thinking out loud.

I didn't even notice that when I watched the movie probably because the film is full of good looking people I wasn't able to concentrate

 

[Silvermoon]

A lot of people raised their eyebrows when Cap said he went under "75 years" ago. It was actually exactly 70 years before 2015 so this is a pretty big goof.

Later Natasha says she recruited Bruce "way back when". That seems a strange way to refer to an event that was only 3 years ago.

Is it possible this film is meant to take place a few years in the future? Probably not but just thinking out loud.

I took Natasha's comment as being kind of sarcastic - not too unusual to refer to something that took place not too long ago as 'way back when' in a teasing/sarcastic type manner.

As for Steve's comment, personally I just write it off as a goof in the script. To me it would seem odd - when almost all of the previous Phase 2 films have taken place pretty much 'real time' (when the films came out - IM3 as a spring release even though it took place during Christmas, being an exception) to have AOU suddenly jump forward 5 years from when the film came out (which it would roughly have to in order to make his quote 'work') seems kind of off to me. It also feels like it would throw the timing of everything before it off (I mean, IM3 we know takes place 13 years (dialogue spoken multiple times in that film - so not a similar case as here when it's mentioned once) after December 1999 - so December 2012, does that mean we're saying that AOU takes place 8 years after the events of IM3? That just doesn't feel right). And how does it affect the others like TWS where we were told it happens 'real time'/when the film came out - that the time since the Avengers film is what's passed in world. Does that mean that 6 years pass between it and AOU? Which in turn affects the time between Season 1 and season 2 of Agents of SHIELD (doesn't feel like 6 years have passed between the end of one and the beginning of the other)? Also, it's implied that it was the fall of SHIELD that prompted the Avengers to begin looking for the scepter in the first place - so I don't think more than a year has passed between the two and to me it just feels like it sticks with the others and occurs 'real time'

There's just too much you would have to adjust and shift in order to make his '75 year' quote feel like it rings true. That's why I think the more likely (and simplest) explanation is that it was a script goof/error - indeed, perhaps a "big one" - but a goof/error nonetheless.

(hope that all made sense, apologies if it didn't - and yes, I tend to think about the timeframes of the films probably way too much *lol*)

 

[crapcom]

A lot of people raised their eyebrows when Cap said he went under "75 years" ago. It was actually exactly 70 years before 2015 so this is a pretty big goof.

Later Natasha says she recruited Bruce "way back when". That seems a strange way to refer to an event that was only 3 years ago.

Is it possible this film is meant to take place a few years in the future? Probably not but just thinking out loud.

Wow I didn't even notice this.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

A lot of people raised their eyebrows when Cap said he went under "75 years" ago. It was actually exactly 70 years before 2015 so this is a pretty big goof.

Later Natasha says she recruited Bruce "way back when". That seems a strange way to refer to an event that was only 3 years ago.

Is it possible this film is meant to take place a few years in the future? Probably not but just thinking out loud.

75 years since he was frozen? or 75 years since he became a super soldier? he was in the war for a few years.. and was frozen during the end of the war... because if he's talking about when he "went in" as in becoming a super-soldier.. that was indeed about 75 years ago...

 

[Silvermoon]

75 years since he was frozen? or 75 years since he became a super soldier? he was in the war for a few years.. and was frozen during the end of the war... because if he's talking about when he "went in" as in becoming a super-soldier.. that was indeed about 75 years ago...

Ohh... that could be a way of looking at it, 'went into the ice' being more figurative instead of when he literally went into the ice. That gives it enough wiggle room, I think. Nice thinking spidey

 

[PunyGod]

...

 

[Keehar]

A lot of people raised their eyebrows when Cap said he went under "75 years" ago. It was actually exactly 70 years before 2015 so this is a pretty big goof.

HA never noticed that. Some people are sharp observers.

 

[Stevie2020]

He says "the guy who wanted all that went in the ice 75 years ago". Its pretty clear what its referring to.

I think what happened was someone heard the line in TFA "You've been asleep for almost 70 years". But somehow they must have ignored the almost part. And since AoU is 4 years later they added it to 70 and rounded up to 75.

Its still strange that fanboys like Feige and Whedon would let this slip thru.

Very clear. This is the one thing that took me completely out of the movie. Good thing it was at the end of the movie. Cap could have said "the guy who went into the ice..." period. Or "...all those years ago". Or "...at the end of the war". Whatever. Be vague and there's no issue; the audience knows it was ages ago. If they are trying to play with the timeline, then don't give people numbers. You give some people numbers and they will do some math.

If/when I ever watch this movie again, I will watch that part on mute without captions. Unless it is addressed in the commentary.

 

[JB33]

What nobody has mentioned yet is that maybe the character is simply generalizing the amount of years - something we all do from time to time in real life. It felt realistic to me that he wasn't really considering or calculating in his head exactly how many years ago it was. He was just trying to make a point to Tony.

 

[PunyGod]

...

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Complaining about them using 75 years instead 70 feels like a nitpick versus an actual problem with the film.

 

[PunyGod]

...

 

[Stevie2020]

Sure, it's a nitpick but it's a nitpick that involves information within the dialog that is either incorrect and in conflict with other movies in the series, or is meant to tell the audience something that doesn't make sense and isn't supported by anything else that happens in the movie.

That 75 years reference bugs the **** out of me.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Who said it was a problem? No need to be so defensive.

These are the kind of things we discuss here in case you aren't aware.

I know but it just gets old after awhile. Nitpicking his statement being 5 years off just feels silly and small. To me, it doesn't make or break anything in the film.

 

[metaphysician]

What nobody has mentioned yet is that maybe the character is simply generalizing the amount of years - something we all do from time to time in real life. It felt realistic to me that he wasn't really considering or calculating in his head exactly how many years ago it was. He was just trying to make a point to Tony.

One of my pet peeves: assuming every statement made by every character must be 100% factual and precise, unless ( very ) explicitly shown otherwise ( and sometimes not even then ). Most often seen in threads involving the sentence fragment "But Loki said. . ." or "But the Joker said. . ."

 

[spideyboy_1111]

When we generalize we tend to round to the nearest 10 so he would have said 70 years. And in fact that is the exact value in this case.

There was no reason for him to say 75. It seems awfully specific.


Its not a big deal or anything but it is curious as to why they picked that number. Was it a mistake or something more.

haha are you kidding me? with years... no one rounds to the nearest 10... it's always by 5's...

it's 2015 this year.. but by 2017 people will say the decade is almost over... 2013 and 2014 people said it was near mid decade..

when you're 23 you say you're approaching 25... when you're 26 you say you're approaching 30...

10 years is a hellllll of a long time.. no one rounds to the nearest 10 on years.. the year ending in 5 is always a checkpoint.

it's pretty believable for a 75th anniversary to be celebrated for more than a year as well... so it'd be logical for him to be frozen for 74 years.. but really say 75

 

[PunyGod]

...

 

[Just_Human]

Complaining about them using 75 years instead 70 feels like a nitpick versus an actual problem with the film.

" but Stark's heads up display showed more than 400% !"


Speaking of which, there was a missed opportunity when Thor overloaded the cradle ... the screen could have displayed 400% instead of 100% ...

That would have been a nice touch