WandaVision Is this show making Age of Ultron a better/more important film?

[NHawk19]

I think it's safe to say that Age of Ultron felt like a stepping stone kind of like IM2 when it first came out. It set up a lot but didn't really truly deliver on some larger concepts. Over the years though several things set up in AoU film seem to have been paid off in other areas like the Sokovia Accords in Civil war or Cap throwing Mjolnir in End Game and Thor's reaction.

This project though of all the others has had the most ties to that film. Has that improved and built upon what was established in AoU or increased your desire to watch that film?

For me it's definitely made me want to watch it again, where up to this point it wasn't one of the MCU films I felt a desire to revisit on a regular basis.

 

[metaphysician]

Just to start things, no, WandaVision isn't making Age of Ultron better, because it literally can't. Avengers 2, as the movie exists, is exactly the same movie now as it was six months ago. Retroactive tie-ins in later movies or shows can make connections with it that perhaps feed into a larger meta-narrative, but the presence or absence of that meta-narrative is not what makes a movie good, the presence or absence of good writing, good acting, and proper pacing and structure and thematics are what make a movie good. Age of Ultron is a good, not great, movie, but it was good before and it is no more good now.

 

[Hannibal75]

Age of Ultron was always a good movie whose main sin was being inferior to the original Avengers.

 

[Drizzle]

Age of Ultron is without a doubt the weakest Avengers movie, but it was never bad. It's always been important within the MCU as well, since it starts plot threads that are later picked up in Civil War, Thor: Ragnarok, Infinity War, Endgame, and now WandaVision. I will say that rewatching AOU post-Phase 3 and knowing what happens does enhance the film a bit, with the main exception for me being watching the team quipping at each other during the Battle of Sokovia when it was later treated as a super serious tragedy in Civil War (as it should have been, Whedon's overly jokey dialogue is to blame for that).

 

[Albert1981]

You mean you didn't like Fury's crack about Ultron?: "The guy's multiplying faster than a Catholic rabbit." I thought that movie was hilarious.

 

[GREEN =w= DAY]

The callbacks to Age of Ultron are nice but WandaVision doesn’t make the movie any better or worse for me. It’s still an enjoyable movie but it’s definitely the weakest out of all 4 Avengers movies

 

[Mike Murdock]

Nothing about the original film was unimportant. It was the only real film where the Avengers just got to be a team. It introduced Scarlet Witch and Vision. It set up Civil War, Ragnorok, and Infinity War/Endgame. It explicitly gave the Avengers an awareness of Infinity Stones.

People just think it's a weak movie. That can change on re-watches, but a new show doesn't make it any better. I don't think Endgame made Thor: The Dark World a better movie, although people might appreciate Thor's mother's role in the movie more (but that was always an underrated part).

 

[Drizzle]

You mean you didn't like Fury's crack about Ultron?: "The guy's multiplying faster than a Catholic rabbit." I thought that movie was hilarious.

That was fine. There are some really funny lines in the movie and I do love the banter between the team during the Mjolnir lifting scene. It just wears really thin when we get to Stark quipping "Romanoff? You and Banner better not be playing hide the zucchini" and Natasha and Clint discussing home renovations all while in the middle of a warzone. The first Avengers had moments of levity during the final battle too, but they were fewer, more spread out, and didn't feel forced. Like, Hulk punching Thor out of frame or beating Loki like a ragdoll felt natural. The whole team making jokes during the battle in AOU felt mostly out of place. It felt like a wink and nod to the audience, like Whedon was saying "Hey, you guys like jokes, right?!" The one that landed best was Clint's "The city is flying and I've got a bow and arrow. None of this makes sense."

 

[Albert1981]

That was fine. There are some really funny lines in the movie and I do love the banter between the team during the Mjolnir lifting scene. It just wears really thin when we get to Stark quipping "Romanoff? You and Banner better not be playing hide the zucchini" and Natasha and Clint discussing home renovations all while in the middle of a warzone. The first Avengers had moments of levity during the final battle too, but they were fewer, more spread out, and didn't feel forced. Like, Hulk punching Thor out of frame or beating Loki like a ragdoll felt natural. The whole team making jokes during the battle in AOU felt mostly out of place. It felt like a wink and nod to the audience, like Whedon was saying "Hey, you guys like jokes, right?!" The one that landed best was Clint's "The city is flying and I've got a bow and arrow. None of this makes sense."

Yeah, that was the first MCU movie where practically everybody in it decided to become a comedian...But I kinda liked it? I mean, Ultron saying "Oh for God's sake!" made me laugh out loud. I love Spader though.

 

[Zarex]

I have no problem with there being lots of yuks in my live action superhero comic book adaptations. But Whedon had a couple of cringe worthy gags that he manage to avoid in his first Avengers film. I am thinking specifically of the "terribly well balanced" back and forth between Thor and Vision after the Synthezoid hammered Ultron out of frame. Where he ended up in a Quinjet, firing bullets at a speedster (that he for some reason cannot avoid) to then get tossed out of frame YET AGAIN by the Hulk.

There is some good stuff in the Avengers sequel, but I find it to be the most frustrating of all the MCU entries. It shoulda and coulda been a lot better.

 

[Albert1981]

I have no problem with there being lots of yuks in my live action superhero comic book adaptations. But Whedon had a couple of cringe worthy gags that he manage to avoid in his first Avengers film. I am thinking specifically of the "terribly well balanced" back and forth between Thor and Vision after the Synthezoid hammered Ultron out of frame. Where he ended up in a Quinjet, firing bullets at a speedster (that he for some reason cannot avoid) to then get tossed out of frame YET AGAIN by the Hulk.

There is some good stuff in the Avengers sequel, but I find it to be the most frustrating of all the MCU entries. It shoulda and coulda been a lot better.

Yeah, AoU didn't live up to its potential. But I still love it because I like my villains to have a sense of humor. It's not often you see killer robots talking about omelettes and frisbees.

 

[Drizzle]

Yeah, that was the first MCU movie where practically everybody in it decided to become a comedian...But I kinda liked it? I mean, Ultron saying "Oh for God's sake!" made me laugh out loud. I love Spader though.

Yeah, AoU didn't live up to its potential. But I still love it because I like my villains to have a sense of humor. It's not often you see killer robots talking about omelettes and frisbees.

Spader was great. I really hope that he'll be back in the MCU in some form because Ultron is too important of a villain to be a one-and-done. He just had to be moved out of the way to make room for big bad Thanos. I know a lot of people weren't crazy about Ultron being quippy but it logically makes sense since he was mostly created by Tony Stark in the MCU. Even though Ultron despises his "dad", he still rubbed off on him. The omelette line and Tony's response to it paints that pretty clearly.

 

[Albert1981]

Spader was great. I really hope that he'll be back in the MCU in some form because Ultron is too important of a villain to be a one-and-done. He just had to be moved out of the way to make room for big bad Thanos. I know a lot of people weren't crazy about Ultron being quippy but it logically makes sense since he was mostly created by Tony Stark in the MCU. Even though Ultron despises his "dad", he still rubbed off on him. The omelette line and Tony's response to it paints that pretty clearly.

I think most people agree that Spader's performance was the highlight of that movie. He was so dynamic, energetic and funny. I also didn't understand why people objected to making him an "evil" version of Stark. That totally made sense to me. And I understand why Feige and Whedon didn't want to go the route of making Ultron a cold, emotionless, and brutal baddie. That would have been cliche. Surprisingly, quite a few of the jokes in that movie landed with me. Considering there were so many of them. I hope Ultron can come back one day. But I think it is unlikely, unfortunately. I would love to be wrong though.

 

[Justice4#Rouge]

Not ashamed to say Ultron is my fav Avengers films. Ignoring the director of course

 

[KaijuDude1992]

I have always enjoyed AOU, but I don't know if WandaVision makes it better more so than it just being more relevant now. That movie is still a mess IMO and while I liked Spader's Ultron I always felt like he still could have been better utilized or altleast felt like a more serious threat than he was.

Wanda/Pietro are still the highlights of that movie for me too like they were even back then and I hope to see ATJ return at some point because I would like Wanda to have somekind of final moment with her brother, especially now that she's been fully fleshed out as a character.

 

[Primal Slayer]

Considering it is the birth place for Wanda and Vision...its pretty damn important lol

 

[InvisibleWoman]

Considering it is the birth place for Wanda and Vision...its pretty damn important lol

This.

I would say it's one of the movies you can't really skip if you want to fully understand what's happening later down the line. I've always liked AoU actually and will go back to it more often than I do IW and Endgame. Perhaps because it is a slightly "lighter" film with humour.

 

[First Avenger]

I will be the odd duck here and say that despite its shortcomings and Whedon being revealed as a PoS, I have always found AoU to be a visually, thematically and narratively more interesting movie than Avengers. Even if it's somewhat less than the sum of its parte, it's full of some of the best scenes in the whole MCU and it's Always been important as Civil War, Ragnarok, Black Panther, Infinity War, Endgame and now Wandavision all reference the movie or are a direct result of it. I also don't see Age of Ultron as a sequel to Avengers but as the middle point of the whole Infinity Saga, so that's probably why I see it in a more positive light.

 

[Weather Witch]

Well, it doesn't change the movie itself of course, but WandaVision did make me rewatch it and I actually really enjoyed it this time around.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Definitely not. WandaVision is pretty good if not for a weak finale and it doesn't retroactively make anything from the previous phases of the MCU better or worse. Av2 remains not only the weakest Avengers movie but one of the worst films of the MCU in my opinion.

 

[CaptainWagner]

It's certainly made AOU more important to the overall storyline of the MCU. But better? Whedon's character-regressing hackery isn't affected by this at all. It's still in the Bottom 5 MCU installments for me.

 

[The Batman]

Regardless of quality, none of the Avengers movies are unimportant. I'd say all four are integral to the overall story of the MCU.

 

[Neno_Kos]

AOU is really flawed movie as standalone one. What makes AOU passable in my eyes is that movie set events for what come after it. Civil War, Sokovia Accords, Endgame, Wandavision etc etc. Now it really depends from which side do you watch it. Those movies and those storylines which happened after AOU made AOU in grand scheme truly important.

But as standalone movie it was weak, dragged, main villain (Ultron) was wasted, stakes werent high as they needed to be and only person which got killed was newly introduced character we had 10 minutes development. AOU was supposed to be more dark and gritty with villain being big part of the story. It was supposed to be start of MCU which had memorable villains. Not mention personal dislike for change in story where Stark made Ultron instead of Hank. We needed to have Ant Man movie earlier in franchise or at least have mention of Hank or introduced him earlier in MCU.

Overall if you think about it if they nailed movie instead focused on setting up MCU for next half a decade this movie would likely end up being better than Endgame or Civil War. And not only it would be truly important movie in MCU but would be also great movie. Still somehow wish we get to see Ultron down the line somewhere in MCU.

 

[Albert1981]

Definitely not. WandaVision is pretty good if not for a weak finale and it doesn't retroactively make anything from the previous phases of the MCU better or worse. Av2 remains not only the weakest Avengers movie but one of the worst films of the MCU in my opinion.

Yeah, I loved WandaVision but the finale wasn't so great.

 

[Yowza]

No.

The movie stands by itself irregardless of whether Wandavision was made or not. Wandavision though has to work around the fact that Age of Ultron already exists.

Overall, Age of Ultron just had too much to shoehorn in. It doesn't retroactively start to not be the case due to Wandavision. Wandavision has to circuitously work around what's already been done and is none the better for it.