The Avengers The Avengers Critics Reviews Thread - Part 1

[PokeJ]

The Matrix doesn't hold up well.

 

[Xeno]

The Rolling Stone Review is in the May issue. I don't think it's online yet.

Awesome that he gave TA such a high score - I can't remember him giving blockbusters of this kind 4 stars. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Is the EW review online yet?

Also, I think bonzob2000 and Joeyjojo72 have nailed the essence of Joss Whedon's style perfectly! Way better than I was trying to articulate.

Travers' grade for The Avengers really doesn't surprise me. I felt that he would appreciate the film and not penalize it because of its genre. He and Corliss are two top critics upon whom I depend for fair reviews, even when they would clearly rather deal with Oscar-bait dramas and indies. Reading the entire review when it becomes available will be interesting.

 

[flickchick85]

Flickchick, was it Glieberman who reviewed TA?

It's really not that bad for EW; Owen Glieberman rated Iron Man a B+ too...

Yep, it was Owen.

It's clear he enjoyed the film a lot, but here's his one main criticism:

The first half hour is murk, with too much gobbledygook about the Tesseract.

Here's his final paragraph:

In terms of storytelling, The Avengers is for the most part a highly functional, banged-together vehicle that runs on synthetic franchise fuel. Yet the grand finale of CGI action, set in the streets of New York, is – in every sense – smashing. True, it wouldn't be out of place in a Michael Bay movie, but no Transformer was ever as transfixing as this leaping, flying, pummeling super-team. It makes you eager to see what they'll do next, now that they've defeated a threat even bigger than their egos.

And to summarize the gist of his review, he says the best thing about the movie is the way the superheroes clash with each other. He also cites Mark Ruffalo's take on the Hulk as a stand-out, as well as Tom Hiddleston, whom he suggests may become an actor of Gary Oldman's stature.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

The Matrix doesn't hold up well.

It's a classic that holds up perfectly well.

Which parts could be improved? There are none. It was the perfect turn-of-the-century film.

Can you name 5 sci-fi movies from the last 10 years better than the Matrix?

 

[Vulklin]

Matrix Trilogy is 10/10

and so is the very underrated Dark City, which is maybe the only film I could argue is better, although I love both. Recent sci fi that is.

 

[Joeyjojo72]

Messiah you took the words right out of my mouth. hopefully he at least remembered to , yknow, ENJOY THE MOVIE !!! Hah. I love the dazed responses. As if someone saw some s*** theyve never quite seen before and their brains are having trouble deciding how to process it. I want to see this now please.

Ive seen this kind of reaction more than once over at nolanfans

 

[Joeyjojo72]

Yep, it was Owen.

It's clear he enjoyed the film a lot, but here's his one main criticism:


Here's his final paragraph:
And to summarize the gist of his review, he says the best thing about the movie is the way the superheroes clash with each other. He also cites Mark Ruffalo's take on the Hulk as a stand-out, as well as Tom Hiddleston, whom he suggests may become an actor of Gary Oldman's stature.

Just saw TInker, Tailor and i can say that is a bold statement.

 

[flickchick85]

Just saw TInker, Tailor and i can say that is a bold statement.

Damn straight, Oldman's probably my favorite actor on the planet. That said, he did say Hiddleston may be an actor of Oldman's stature - he didn't say he was definitely there yet. t:

Here's the exact quote:

The second smartest thing they did was to allow Tom Hiddleston to let it rip as Loki. He's close to a generic villain, but Hiddleston invests his ravings and evil smile with a sleek mystery and power that suggests he may be an actor of the stature of Gary Oldman.

 

[Xeno]

EW lost all credibility when they gave The Matrix a C+.

Morons.

That was about 12 years ago lol. Do they still have the same reviewers?

EW's review of The Matrix was written by Lisa Schwazbaum, who is still slogging away there. She compared the film unfavorably with John Woo's Face/Off. That alone invalidates her opinion on The Matrix and all other films for all eternity.

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,273006,00.html

It's a classic that holds up perfectly well.

Which parts could be improved? There are none. It was the perfect turn-of-the-century film.

Can you name 5 sci-fi movies from the last 10 years better than the Matrix?

I completely agree. Not only is The Matrix an incredible science fiction/action film, but it also explores profound philosophical questions quite ingeniously yet without dumbing the subject matter down. It covered the same ground as a graduate-level seminar in Cartesian epistemology, but brilliantly cloaked its philosophical musings in the trappings of a Hong Kong-style action flick. The real triumph is that the audience can engage with the film on any level they choose: superficially as a kick-ass action film, or more deeply as an examination of the nature of reality and consciousness. To me, The Matrix is the finest work of pure science fiction ever filmed.

 

[bonzob2000]

I dunno, I like the Matrix a lot, and it's no doubt hugely influential, but it's far from a perfect film. I think LS's review is a bit harsh, but one line from it has always stuck with me as kind of true, when she called it "underwritten and over directed."

Anyway, EW isn't the greatest magazine in the world, but writing off a critic because they wrote one review you disagreed with twelve years ago is a little silly. I have critics I adore and trust who I still vehemently disagree with once in a while. And anyway, Owen reviewed Avengers, not Lisa.

Oh, and Face/Off is an action masterpiece. Not that they are particularly comparable, but I'd say Face/Off is easily superior to Matrix.

 

[Suzanne78]

Yep, it was Owen.

Ha! I knew it I wonder if the guy who reviewed Star Trek 2009 would've given it an even higher score... But I'll take the B+ from him. I do like his reviews. He even gave Thor an A-.


Really, really happy about Peter Travers. I've not followed his reviews for a while, but I know he's super respected.

It's clear he enjoyed the film a lot, but here's his one main criticism:


Here's his final paragraph:
And to summarize the gist of his review, he says the best thing about the movie is the way the superheroes clash with each other. He also cites Mark Ruffalo's take on the Hulk as a stand-out, as well as Tom Hiddleston, whom he suggests may become an actor of Gary Oldman's stature.

Edit: Sounds awesome! I love that he said Tom Hiddleston "may become an actor of Gary Oldman's stature". He may have more growth to do to get there, but Hiddleston's a tremendous talent.

ETA 2: Matrix 1, I loved with a tremendous passion. Matrix 2 & 3... I could barely sit through both of them. And I really loved the underrated Dark City.

 

[Joeyjojo72]

bonzo id have to say that Face/Off, like many of the movies John Woo made in the US in the 90's, hasnt really aged well. Watched some of it on cable the other night and it was difficult to watch the over-the-top action and travolta/cage scene chewing (both at the same time) without tittering. I still like his Hong Kong stuff though.

Now lets get back on topic eh?

 

[Suzanne78]

Also, isn't Oldman waaaaaay the heck overdue for an Oscar? He hasn't won one ever, right?

 

[bonzob2000]

I also watched it recently and disagree. It's operatic like all Woo's stuff, scenery chewing is part of that. Still better than Matrix. Back on topic now.

 

[Joeyjojo72]

To each his own i guess. Hopefully we will agree that the Avengers is great!! 166 hours to go!!

 

[Vulklin]

Spoiler

Here are my thoughts on each character. The order is not strict but more or less in keeping with which one I liked best.

Hawkeye
He was actually the character who had the most moments in the film that made me think "cool". That is a surprise. I heard he had been neglected and was weaker than the rest, but I did not see it at all. I liked him under Loki influence and as one of the Avengers. Consistent throughout and cool in a subtle way.

Nick Fury
He had lots more screen time than I thought. Could even argue he was second billing. He kicked some bad agents arse and I liked his performance very much. He also had one of best lines "yes but its a stupid ass plan" made me lol

Captain America
He was good. Definitely in the category of good as I expected before I watched. Important and lots of screen time. I liked how he was taking on the role of leader and showing great tactical knowledge. He took down plenty of Chitauri and agents and showed his agility and bravery and basic heroic nature.

Black Widow
Another as good as I expected category. I really like her fight with Hawkeye and their friendship. When she hijacked one of the Chitauri speeder things I had flashbacks of Leia on a Speederbike lol
Still don't like that interrogation scene fight though.

Iron Man
This was definitely not the Iron Man Show, which is good. He was cool as always, just like in Iron Man. As Stark though he was not as funny as I was expecting. Shakespeare in the park was hilarious and a few other moments, but some jokes fell flat on my deaf ears. Also his relationship with Banner was not deep enough at all. They had a little bit of banter but I did not feel any great friendship forming.

Now onto the 3 who actually were a little disappointing. Slightly disappointing mind, not massively.

Thor
He definitely came across as less powerful than in individual movie. People say that the Hulk v Thor fight was a tie, but to me Hulk seemed to be more powerful of the two. Also they definitely should not have shown the Iron Man v Thor fight in that clip, because the fight in its entirety is not much more and I was left underwhelmed having already seen the best part of it.

Hulk
Hulk was cool. Loved that he was shown smashing Chitauri and most importantly LEAPING ABOUT.
There a quite a few things though that disappointed me about him.
I did not like how he was acting like an ape at times. Love the look, but not the behaviour.
They spoiled way too much with trailers and tv spots, because aside from Loki beatdown, I had already seen Hulk's best bits. So it was very underwhelming indeed.
Hulk v Thor was disappointing because it was so short and we never stayed with them for more than 10 seconds at a time. It was just cut to them Thor uppercut, which was very cool by the way. But then cut away again. Then cut back Hulk throw Thor, cut away again. I would have preferred to see them duke it out to a finish, with that finish being Hulk destroying the plane and falling, then back to the rest of the stuff going on. So Hulk v Thor was a big disappointment really, best thing about it was the uppercut.

Loki
I loved Loki in Thor, when he talking to Odin about his origins was great and I also like Hiddleston the actor playing him. But Loki as a villain was quite a disappointment. He acted very well, had a few cool moments, but as a character he failed to draw me in and grab my attention.
I am not the biggest Dark Knight fan at all, but I did think Joker was a fascinating character. Loki did not fascinate me and at times, he actually came across as laughable.
Right at the end when he says "I think I will have that drink now" just made me think what? It was a definite comic book type moment. But in the film it was ridiculous.
Is he evil? Is he a menace? Is he simply a nuisance? Maybe he is the ant after all?

 

[jaqua99]

It's a classic that holds up perfectly well.

Which parts could be improved? There are none. It was the perfect turn-of-the-century film.

Can you name 5 sci-fi movies from the last 10 years better than the Matrix?

The matrix trilogy was unbelievable

 

[Vulklin]

Also, isn't Oldman waaaaaay the heck overdue for an Oscar? He hasn't won one ever, right?

Me: Gary? Which of the great actors, apart from yourself, have an oscar?

Gary:

[YT]NRIr9MNmCwU[/YT]

 

[Saitou Hajime]

bonzo id have to say that Face/Off, like many of the movies John Woo made in the US in the 90's, hasnt really aged well. Watched some of it on cable the other night and it was difficult to watch the over-the-top action and travolta/cage scene chewing (both at the same time) without tittering.

THOSE WORDS ARE BLASPHEMY!
DO NOT BLASPHEME! DO NOT BLASPHEME!

 

[Joeyjojo72]

Lol forget i mentioned it.

 

[Oruku Saki]

It's a classic that holds up perfectly well.

Which parts could be improved? There are none. It was the perfect turn-of-the-century film.

Can you name 5 sci-fi movies from the last 10 years better than the Matrix?

No, but if District 9 isn't right up there then there's a problem; also would add the new Star Trek to the list. Matrix was the most original of those though (or at least original in the fact that it took from so many sources and put it all together marvelously)

 

[craigdbfan]

Rotten Tomatoes Consensus:

"With a script that never forgets its heroes' humanity and no shortage of superpowered set pieces, The Avengers lives up to its hype -- and raises the bar for Marvel at the movies."

 

[Oruku Saki]

Awesome! finally a consensus

 

[warhorse78]

I have just got here, and people might already have warned the rest of the forum of this, but don't read the review from the New York Post, it's got spoilers I did not need to read.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Matrix Trilogy is 10/10

and so is the very underrated Dark City, which is maybe the only film I could argue is better, although I love both. Recent sci fi that is.

You meant the Matrix right? Because the Trilogy was....meh.

And I think The Matrix was a classic. A very good film, the only thing I could compare it to is that it poses a lot of interesting theological ideas only to have the last act of the film basically be all action. But I'm not complaining. It had some of the best movie fights I've seen in a movie in years.

However, the next two were just...yeah. They just didn't have it.