Avengers AOU vs avengers?

[spiderman2]

So what movie did you like better? I like AOU slightly better. I find avengers to be a good movie but one of the most overrated CBM ever and far from great. I found AOU to be way way funnier and I liked the action slightly more but I found the villain to be weaker then avengers so I liked AOU just slightly more over all.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Definitely Av1

 

[Human Torch]

I voted slightly better. While I think Avengers succeeds in every category over AOU, To say it's "vastly" better suggests AOU is poor,which I would disagree with.

So,in short. Avengers is the clearly better film,IMO. But AOU is still very good.

It seems in the nature of people to have to have something universally praised or despised. There's no shame in saying a film isn't better than it's predecessor.Iron Man 2 & Thor TDW are similar to this film in that they didn't dethrone the previous film,but they are still enjoyable on their own merits.

 

[Mjölnir]

I think AoU is slightly better. The actors are more comfortable in their roles and the chemistry, both with the actors and the writing, is better within the team. The action is more than a notch higher in quality (I can't think of any superhero movie that beats that) and especially Cap and Thor are used better in this movie.

Both Avengers movies have primarily been about the Avengers themselves so the movie that handles them the best will almost automatically be better for me, and I feel that's AoU.

 

[WBwins]

Avengers was a 9.AOU is a 7

 

[The Joker]

I still think Avengers is better in nearly every way to AOU.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Definitely the first Avengers film.

 

[starscream22]

Both for different reasons.

 

[hafizbat]

I think AoU is slightly better. The actors are more comfortable in their roles and the chemistry, both with the actors and the writing, is better within the team. The action is more than a notch higher in quality (I can't think of any superhero movie that beats that) and especially Cap and Thor are used better in this movie.

Both Avengers movies have primarily been about the Avengers themselves so the movie that handles them the best will almost automatically be better for me, and I feel that's AoU.

This sums it up pretty well for me. I'd also add that the movie looks much, much better in terms of cinematography. TA looked like a TV movie. Also, AoU gets points for being much more ambitious than TA, which was very simple in terms of plot.

All of the main Avengers are better or at least as good in terms of acting, and like you said the team interactions were much better.

The Avengers will always have a special place in my heart; I doubt I'll be as emotionally attached to any other movie. But I like AoU slightly more.

 

[hafizbat]

I still think Avengers is better in nearly every way to AOU.

Funnily enough, I think AoU is superior in every way besides pacing, plot cohesion, and the awe of seeing the Avengers together for the first time.

Also, the third act of The Avengers is pure gold. Overall, I think AoU is superior.

 

[Doc Ock]

I don't know if I can choose between the two at the moment, both are filled with great moments but are very different. In one film we see the Avengers get together for the first time and in the other we see them in pure synergy, seeing both is a wonderful privilege.

 

[Boom]

Avengers.

No contest in my book.

 

[DOBSON10]

The Avengers is much better. The storyline was better, it was more balanced, had better structure and was more fully formed. The Avengers felt much more organic and natural. The pacing and editing in Avengers was alot better. Alot of things in AoU felt forced, rushed and underdeveloped.

Loki was a better written and acted villain and was given the proper time to develop. With Ultron they skipped the reasoning of why he was "born" evil in the first place. I thought they skipped over important parts of his development and left alot of his storyline up to us to piece together instead of showing it. Example being how did he grab the scepter when it was said he escaped the party via the internet, where did he get the material to built his first body, didn't show much about how he built an entire army of robots, didn't do a great job showing how much time had past for him to do all of that, etc. Yes, these are all things that are fairly easy to figure out but I would have liked to see these things play out on screen, it would have given Ultron more texture/depth. Plus he pretty much fails at every turn, doesn't accomplish much and gets defeated relatively easily.

Loki's plan was better planned, better developed, better executed and came closer to being realized. I still think it was Hiddleston's best performance of the MCU by far as well, while James Spader was rather bland to me. Ultron wasn't very intimidating or menacing, and actually came off kind of incompetent half the time. There were two many jokes from Ultron to take him seriously, it felt like he was always trying to make you laugh instead of intimidating you. Couldn't take him seriously.

The Banner/Widow relationship felt extremely forced, illogical and unnecessary. Basically feel the same way about Hawkeye's secret family. Thor's vision quest was silly, sloppy and unnecessary. I don't like that that is how Thor figured out someone is out there behind the scenes manipulating the Infinity Stones, or that he figured that out at all, I would have preferred it be a complete surprise to the Avengers that Thanos is behind it all when he starts to attack people in possession of the Stones. I also thought it was pretty stupid how easily the Twins decided to join forces with Ultron and it was awfully convenient that Nick Fury showed up exactly when they needed a way off the floating City.

Don't get me wrong, AoU is still a pretty cool movie, the Hulkbuster scene looked amazing, Scarlett Witch was a cool addition to the team, the story was good enough that I never lost interest and it had alot of cool moments. But I liked the writing and the acting of the characters better in Avengers, the storyline was better, the villain was better, Loki/Chitari felt like a much bigger threat, tension was higher, the comedy hit it's marks better and wasn't as repetitive or overused and it felt far more natural and developed overall. Avengers is one of my Top 5 favorite comic book movies ever, AoU just makes my Top 5 from the MCU itself, and with Civil War coming up it probably won't last long. AoU is good, Avengers is great.

 

[NealKenneth]

The first film is far superior to the second. The characters were much more defined and the dialogue was more believable/realistic. The Hulk/Widow relationship was excellent, as was Hawkeye's family and The Vision in general.

I really disliked Ultron as a villain because his sarcasm made him seem nonthreatening and it was never clear what his motivation was. The biggest problem with this film for me may seem nitpicky but, in my opinion, the action scenes seemed really lacking because Winter Soldier and Daredevil have raised the bar so high. It just feels cartoony and it's very hard to believe the heroes are actually in danger. This has also hurt the first film for me, although to a lesser degree (because the action was more restrained than AoU and there weren't nearly as many out-of-place jokes.)

Before I saw AoU, I was very disappointed to hear that Wheedon was not going to direct Infinity War, but now I am relieved. Although I'm not convinced the Russo Brothers are perfect for the job (The Winter Soldier did have its own problems), Wheedon failed to prove he was the best man for the job with this sequel.

 

[Infinight888]

AoU.

While I enjoyed Avengers on the first viewing, it really only worked as well as it did due to the novelty of seeing all these heroes together. But even then, we saw no development in any of the characters (unless we count Iron Man sacrificing himself as development) and even Loki was much less interesting and nuanced than he was in the Thor films.

For all the movie's flaws, Ultron is easily one of the most interesting villains in the MCU, rivaling Loki who has had three movies to develop. Meanwhile, it managed to create coherent character arcs for the twins, an impressive romance arc for Natasha and Bruce and expanded Hawkeye's character.

And that's without getting into the action sequences, which were so much funner than
the first installment's. Basically, this was Avengers+. It had everything that made the first film so great, but with more complicated characters and plot.

 

[hafizbat]

The Avengers is much better. The storyline was better, it was more balanced, had better structure and was more fully formed. The Avengers felt much more organic and natural. The pacing and editing in Avengers was alot better. Alot of things in AoU felt forced, rushed and underdeveloped.

Loki was a better written and acted villain and was given the proper time to develop. With Ultron they skipped the reasoning of why he was "born" evil in the first place. I thought they skipped over important parts of his development and left alot of his storyline up to us to piece together instead of showing it. Example being how did he grab the scepter when it was said he escaped the party via the internet, where did he get the material to built his first body, didn't show much about how he built an entire army of robots, didn't do a great job showing how much time had past for him to do all of that, etc. Yes, these are all things that are fairly easy to figure out but I would have liked to see these things play out on screen, it would have given Ultron more texture/depth. Plus he pretty much fails at every turn, doesn't accomplish much and gets defeated relatively easily.

Loki's plan was better planned, better developed, better executed and came closer to being realized. I still think it was Hiddleston's best performance of the MCU by far as well, while James Spader was rather bland to me. Ultron wasn't very intimidating or menacing, and actually came off kind of incompetent half the time. There were two many jokes from Ultron to take him seriously, it felt like he was always trying to make you laugh instead of intimidating you. Couldn't take him seriously.

The Banner/Widow relationship felt extremely forced, illogical and unnecessary. Basically feel the same way about Hawkeye's secret family. Thor's vision quest was silly, sloppy and unnecessary. I don't like that that is how Thor figured out someone is out there behind the scenes manipulating the Infinity Stones, or that he figured that out at all, I would have preferred it be a complete surprise to the Avengers that Thanos is behind it all when he starts to attack people in possession of the Stones. I also thought it was pretty stupid how easily the Twins decided to join forces with Ultron and it was awfully convenient that Nick Fury showed up exactly when they needed a way off the floating City.

Don't get me wrong, AoU is still a pretty cool movie, the Hulkbuster scene looked amazing, Scarlett Witch was a cool addition to the team, the story was good enough that I never lost interest and it had alot of cool moments. But I liked the writing and the acting of the characters better in Avengers, the storyline was better, the villain was better, Loki/Chitari felt like a much bigger threat, tension was higher, the comedy hit it's marks better and wasn't as repetitive or overused and it felt far more natural and developed overall. Avengers is one of my Top 5 favorite comic book movies ever, AoU just makes my Top 5 from the MCU itself, and with Civil War coming up it probably won't last long. AoU is good, Avengers is great.

This is an excellent post. I liked AoU a bit more, but thank you for the very clearly written and well-thought out post. I've seen the majority of people say Avengers was much better, but this is the first post that actually details why. I don't disagree with any of your points, really.

Still, the much improved cinematography, team interactions, action, meatier plot, and Shakespearean feel of AoU make it more enjoyable for me. It was far from being perfectly executed, but I still liked what we got.

 

[Mjölnir]

The Avengers is much better. The storyline was better, it was more balanced, had better structure and was more fully formed. The Avengers felt much more organic and natural. The pacing and editing in Avengers was alot better. Alot of things in AoU felt forced, rushed and underdeveloped.

Loki was a better written and acted villain and was given the proper time to develop. With Ultron they skipped the reasoning of why he was "born" evil in the first place. I thought they skipped over important parts of his development and left alot of his storyline up to us to piece together instead of showing it. Example being how did he grab the scepter when it was said he escaped the party via the internet, where did he get the material to built his first body, didn't show much about how he built an entire army of robots, didn't do a great job showing how much time had past for him to do all of that, etc. Yes, these are all things that are fairly easy to figure out but I would have liked to see these things play out on screen, it would have given Ultron more texture/depth. Plus he pretty much fails at every turn, doesn't accomplish much and gets defeated relatively easily.

Loki's plan was better planned, better developed, better executed and came closer to being realized. I still think it was Hiddleston's best performance of the MCU by far as well, while James Spader was rather bland to me. Ultron wasn't very intimidating or menacing, and actually came off kind of incompetent half the time. There were two many jokes from Ultron to take him seriously, it felt like he was always trying to make you laugh instead of intimidating you. Couldn't take him seriously.

The Banner/Widow relationship felt extremely forced, illogical and unnecessary. Basically feel the same way about Hawkeye's secret family. Thor's vision quest was silly, sloppy and unnecessary. I don't like that that is how Thor figured out someone is out there behind the scenes manipulating the Infinity Stones, or that he figured that out at all, I would have preferred it be a complete surprise to the Avengers that Thanos is behind it all when he starts to attack people in possession of the Stones. I also thought it was pretty stupid how easily the Twins decided to join forces with Ultron and it was awfully convenient that Nick Fury showed up exactly when they needed a way off the floating City.

Don't get me wrong, AoU is still a pretty cool movie, the Hulkbuster scene looked amazing, Scarlett Witch was a cool addition to the team, the story was good enough that I never lost interest and it had alot of cool moments. But I liked the writing and the acting of the characters better in Avengers, the storyline was better, the villain was better, Loki/Chitari felt like a much bigger threat, tension was higher, the comedy hit it's marks better and wasn't as repetitive or overused and it felt far more natural and developed overall. Avengers is one of my Top 5 favorite comic book movies ever, AoU just makes my Top 5 from the MCU itself, and with Civil War coming up it probably won't last long. AoU is good, Avengers is great.

I would disagree with a couple of the statements here that aren't pure opinion.

I can't agree that Loki came closer to achieving his plan. He had opened the portal and the Chitauri had come in, but not nearly enough to conquer the entire world, which was the plan. The time Ultron was off from achieving worldwide extinction is probably only measured in seconds.

They didn't skip the reasoning behind Ultron being born "evil", it was just not explained in great detail. The reasoning is that he was tasked with a task that became paradoxal to him, as securing peace could only be achieved by removing the human race from the equation.

And on one of the opinion pieces, it's of course fine to have that opinion about Thor figuring stuff out but I like that he did as he was asking the question about who is behind the events even in the first Avengers. The infinity stones popping up should also be a big deal imo, not just something that passes unheard of. Especially not on a powerful cosmic place that also directly dealt with two of them.

 

[cleverusername8]

They are equal in my mind. The novelty of having a movie combine the individual stories of a group of characters is really the only distinguishing element of the first movie that made it slightly more enjoyable. But on multiple rewatches of it, I don't feel like it's inherently better than AOU. They're both just popcorn movies anyway.

 

[The Joker]

Glad to see Avengers is winning the poll.

The Avengers is much better. The storyline was better, it was more balanced, had better structure and was more fully formed. The Avengers felt much more organic and natural. The pacing and editing in Avengers was alot better. Alot of things in AoU felt forced, rushed and underdeveloped.

Loki was a better written and acted villain and was given the proper time to develop. With Ultron they skipped the reasoning of why he was "born" evil in the first place. I thought they skipped over important parts of his development and left alot of his storyline up to us to piece together instead of showing it. Example being how did he grab the scepter when it was said he escaped the party via the internet, where did he get the material to built his first body, didn't show much about how he built an entire army of robots, didn't do a great job showing how much time had past for him to do all of that, etc. Yes, these are all things that are fairly easy to figure out but I would have liked to see these things play out on screen, it would have given Ultron more texture/depth. Plus he pretty much fails at every turn, doesn't accomplish much and gets defeated relatively easily.

Loki's plan was better planned, better developed, better executed and came closer to being realized. I still think it was Hiddleston's best performance of the MCU by far as well, while James Spader was rather bland to me. Ultron wasn't very intimidating or menacing, and actually came off kind of incompetent half the time. There were two many jokes from Ultron to take him seriously, it felt like he was always trying to make you laugh instead of intimidating you. Couldn't take him seriously.

The Banner/Widow relationship felt extremely forced, illogical and unnecessary. Basically feel the same way about Hawkeye's secret family. Thor's vision quest was silly, sloppy and unnecessary. I don't like that that is how Thor figured out someone is out there behind the scenes manipulating the Infinity Stones, or that he figured that out at all, I would have preferred it be a complete surprise to the Avengers that Thanos is behind it all when he starts to attack people in possession of the Stones. I also thought it was pretty stupid how easily the Twins decided to join forces with Ultron and it was awfully convenient that Nick Fury showed up exactly when they needed a way off the floating City.

Don't get me wrong, AoU is still a pretty cool movie, the Hulkbuster scene looked amazing, Scarlett Witch was a cool addition to the team, the story was good enough that I never lost interest and it had alot of cool moments. But I liked the writing and the acting of the characters better in Avengers, the storyline was better, the villain was better, Loki/Chitari felt like a much bigger threat, tension was higher, the comedy hit it's marks better and wasn't as repetitive or overused and it felt far more natural and developed overall. Avengers is one of my Top 5 favorite comic book movies ever, AoU just makes my Top 5 from the MCU itself, and with Civil War coming up it probably won't last long. AoU is good, Avengers is great.

Excellent post

 

[DOBSON10]

I can't agree that Loki came closer to achieving his plan. He had opened the portal and the Chitauri had come in, but not nearly enough to conquer the entire world, which was the plan. The time Ultron was off from achieving worldwide extinction is probably only measured in seconds.

I guess technically you're right, but it certainly didn't feel that way to me. Loki/Chitauri felt more forceful and actually put up a good fight. Despite the fact that Ultron's "city drop" was potentially minutes away and would have ended life on Earth, it never felt like it would actually happen or that he actually had the upper hand. The Chitauri actually turned the tide at some point, it didn't feel like Ultron ever did.

They didn't skip the reasoning behind Ultron being born "evil", it was just not explained in great detail. The reasoning is that he was tasked with a task that became paradoxal to him, as securing peace could only be achieved by removing the human race from the equation.

It was poorly done to me, and felt very "glossed over".

And on one of the opinion pieces, it's of course fine to have that opinion about Thor figuring stuff out but I like that he did as he was asking the question about who is behind the events even in the first Avengers. The infinity stones popping up should also be a big deal imo, not just something that passes unheard of. Especially not on a powerful cosmic place that also directly dealt with two of them.

Definitely my own opinion, all of the review is, whether some is fact or not. Obviously I would have preferred he not figure out someone is behind the scenes and that in a future movie, Thor: Ragnorak being a good place to start IMO (since Civil War has enough going on already), Thanos begins to systemically attack those in possession of the Stones and The Avengers start to add it up once he gets 2 or 3 of the Stones. I just like the surprise attack angle much better.

 

[hafizbat]

I thought it would have worked out much better if Ultron was a successful creation at first. Some team members like Steve and Thor would be wary, but Ultron would do his job so well that the team would become dependent on him.

And then, we slowly watch Ultron start to turn. We could see why he starts to believe humanity is the problem (remember the guy throwing something at the Iron Legion bot?), and we could see him turn to resentment and anger towards Stark and humans. It would make his turn much more impactful, and he wouldn't feel so rushed and half-baked.

 

[DOBSON10]

I thought it would have worked out much better if Ultron was a successful creation at first. Some team members like Steve and Thor would be wary, but Ultron would do his job so well that the team would become dependent on him.

And then, we slowly watch Ultron start to turn. We could see why he starts to believe humanity is the problem (remember the guy throwing something at the Iron Legion bot?), and we could see him turn to resentment and anger towards Stark and humans. It would make his turn much more impactful, and he wouldn't feel so rushed and half-baked.

I agree with this and I also would add that I think the Twins should have tried to attack Tony on their own instead of blindly joining forces with Ultron without questioning it. Then, when Ultron sees that the Twins are causing problems for Tony (and by association The Avengers) he uses that to his advantage both as a distraction and part of his larger plan. Then as the story progresses the Twins realize Ultron is a much bigger threat than Tony and learn that Tony is not as bad as they perceived when they see him trying to save the world with the Avengers up close.

Ditch the Bruce/Window romance and change the plotline to that above and I think the story would have been much tighter, more coherent and would have given Ultron/The Twins more time to develop.

 

[Mjölnir]

I guess technically you're right, but it certainly didn't feel that way to me. Loki/Chitauri felt more forceful and actually put up a good fight. Despite the fact that Ultron's "city drop" was potentially minutes away and would have ended life on Earth, it never felt like it would actually happen or that he actually had the upper hand. The Chitauri actually turned the tide at some point, it didn't feel like Ultron ever did.

The drop wasn't minutes away, it was already happening when IM and Thor destroyed it.

It was poorly done to me, and felt very "glossed over".

We see that differently then. Ultron first has his confused monologue about it when he's "born", and then he comes out in an Avengers drone and explains it to the Avengers. Felt clear to me.

Definitely my own opinion, all of the review is, whether some is fact or not. Obviously I would have preferred he not figure out someone is behind the scenes and that in a future movie, Thor: Ragnorak being a good place to start IMO (since Civil War has enough going on already), Thanos begins to systemically attack those in possession of the Stones and The Avengers start to add it up once he gets 2 or 3 of the Stones. I just like the surprise attack angle much better.

Yes, I just felt like going into one opinion piece as I wanted to refer to what was started before. As for when Thanos starts to get the stones, I don't see how the Avengers would learn about it until he comes to Earth, unless Thor is keeping an eye on it. The other Avengers are completely clueless about the cosmic side of the MCU.

As it is now Thor is going to look into it but I don't think he'll figure much out until Thanos starts making his move. But I'm of course not saying you're wrong if you prefer something different.

 

[hafizbat]

I agree with this and I also would add that I think the Twins should have tried to attack Tony on their own instead of blindly joining forces with Ultron without questioning it. Then, when Ultron sees that the Twins are causing problems for Tony (and by association The Avengers) he uses that to his advantage both as a distraction and part of his larger plan. Then as the story progresses the Twins realize Ultron is a much bigger threat than Tony and learn that Tony is not as bad as they perceived when they see him trying to save the world with the Avengers up close.

Ditch the Bruce/Window romance and change the plotline to that above and I think the story would have been much tighter, more coherent and would have given Ultron/The Twins more time to develop.

Spot on. I would have much preferred that arc for the Twins. In the movie, we never even see them interact with Tony beyond that 2 second encounter in Klau's ship. For such a central part of their story, you'd think Whedon would have had them interact with Stark more. It would have been great to see them realize that he's a hero, not a villain.

I agree about ditching the Widow/Hulk plotline. I'd also can the Hawkeye family stuff. It was nice, but came at a heavy cost that wasn't worth it. That time could have and should have been spent on much more integral things.

Age of Ultron had huge potential. There was some really good material there and if Whedon focused on crafting the best possible movie rather than forcing stuff he wanted to show (Widow/Hulk, Hawkeye family) AoU could have been truly great.

 

[DOBSON10]

The drop wasn't minutes away, it was already happening when IM and Thor destroyed it.

Guess I'll need to watch it again, I didn't realize it had reached the height it needed to get to to cause an E.L.E., the last comment about it I recall was Ultron saying "even if I dropped it now it would still kill billions" and it seemed that Iron Man and Thor just took it out as soon as they figured out the best way to do it. You may be right but still, Loki/Chitauri felt like a bigger threat to me regardless.

We see that differently then. Ultron first has his confused monologue about it when he's "born", and then he comes out in an Avengers drone and explains it to the Avengers. Felt clear to me.

It's not that it's not clear, it just felt very rushed, undetailed and poorly developed.

Yes, I just felt like going into one opinion piece as I wanted to refer to what was started before. As for when Thanos starts to get the stones, I don't see how the Avengers would learn about it until he comes to Earth, unless Thor is keeping an eye on it. The other Avengers are completely clueless about the cosmic side of the MCU.

As it is now Thor is going to look into it but I don't think he'll figure much out until Thanos starts making his move. But I'm of course not saying you're wrong if you prefer something different.

We're close on this it seems, I just would have preferred they remained completely oblivious to what is going on with the Stones. The whole team knows about the Tesseract and the Scepter, and Thor knows about the Ether but they didn't know they were containers for the Infinity Stones. They obviously figure out that the Scepter holds a stone, but they don't know much about it other than it's very powerful, and none of them should know about the Orb yet. Thor having a weird vision that shows him that the containers hold Stones and that they have been popping up (including the Orb) was just a VERY weak way for him to figure out that someone is probably behind the scenes manipulating their recovery, in my opinion.

I would have kept Thor off the scent, the team oblivious to the fact that the Tesseract, Ether and Orb also hold Stones and had them learn once Thanos comes after a Stone that's on their radar, preferably after he's already acquired a few in a couple of the movies leading up to Infinity War.