The Avengers The Avengers Critics Reviews Thread - Part 2

[Joeyjojo72]

Dude is in desperate need of an editor. Painful to read his stuff. When i want an AICN review, I just read Moriarty.

 

[sgaana]

Going back to O'Hehir's review:

...and insist on some kind of edgy, outsider status...

What does that mean? Who exactly has been trying to insist on "edgy", "outsider" status for The Avengers of all things? I honestly don't get this... and I read O'Hehir a lot. Can anyone take a stab at what he's trying to say there? (I agree with xeno's earlier translation, but I'm not sure it was about this accusation, exactly.)

Still, I would have put money on both O'Hehir and Zacharek (who was Salon's movie critic prior to O'Hehir) disliking it. No surprises there.

 

[Joeyjojo72]

I will take the Village Voice review over OHehir's trollerish rant any day. im not gonna rant myself, but he really had no business reviewing a movie he had already decided to hate.

 

[Saitou Hajime]

Hehe, speaking of Knowles, his expected gushing review is now up at AICN.

Did we get another 5 paragraph soliloquy tying the film to his childhood before he got started?

 

[Figs]

Chris Hardwicke?

Don't know who that is.

 

[Raiden]

Hehe, speaking of Knowles, his expected gushing review is now up at AICN.

Not much a review, but at least he did gushed about the movie near the end. t:

 

[Figs]

"Who is Harry Knowles" for $200, Alex?"

 

[Joeyjojo72]

Did we get another 5 paragraph soliloquy tying the film to his childhood before he got started?

I see you're familiar with his "work".

 

[ElMariachi]

They are killing him for the Batman comment but Harry's right. A more Dini-esque, comicbooky Batman will be a breath of fresh air after TDKR. Never understood why people get so defensive over compliments to a great era of Batman. The popularity of Arkham City proves that people love that form of Batman.

 

[Tony Stark]

They are killing him for the Batman comment but Harry's right. A more Dini-esque, comicbooky Batman will be a breath of fresh air after TDKR. Never understood why people get so defensive over compliments to a great era of Batman. The popularity of Arkham City proves that people love that form of Batman.

They can tear him for that, but I thought the same thing. Having seen the trailer my reaction was, "what the hell was that?" I haven't gone onto the TDKR boards today because I don't feel like getting flamed for something I felt that was less than lackluster.

Don't get me wrong, the movie might be great, but the advertising has been pure crap, especially compared to what they did for TDK.

 

[Raiden]

They can tear him for that, but I thought the same thing. Having seen the trailer my reaction was, "what the hell was that?" I haven't gone onto the TDKR boards today because I don't feel like getting flamed for something I felt that was less than lackluster.

Don't get me wrong, the movie might be great, but the advertising has been pure crap, especially compared to what they did for TDK.

I also feel that the superhero landscape has changed between TDK and TDKR. I'm sure TDKR will be a good movie and I'm going to see it, but seeing that trailer made me realized just how much better a villain Joker was compared to Bane, and how the saturated colors become a bit tiresome after awhile. It would be nice if Nolan would use more colors in his films.

 

[Xeno]

Going back to O'Hehir's review:



What does that mean? Who exactly has been trying to insist on "edgy", "outsider" status for The Avengers of all things? I honestly don't get this... and I read O'Hehir a lot. Can anyone take a stab at what he's trying to say there? (I agree with xeno's earlier translation, but I'm not sure it was about this accusation, exactly.)

Still, I would have put money on both O'Hehir and Zacharek (who was Salon's movie critic prior to O'Hehir) disliking it. No surprises there.

I'm not going to quote myself, but I gave my take on O'Hehir earlier. He basically said that Whedon's script/movie positions itself as something that establishment critics like himself would sneer at, thus the jab about "outsider status". He's upset that the film knowingly plays to its target audience, whom O'Hehir disdains, while remaining proof against critics' barbs. Tl;dr: O'Hehir thinks that The Avengers is too cool for school and that pissed him off.

 

[Raiden]

I'm not going to quote myself, but I gave my take on O'Hehir earlier. He basically said that Whedon's script/movie positions itself as something that establishment critics like himself would sneer at, thus the jab about "outsider status". He's upset that the film knowingly plays to its target audience, whom O'Hehir disdains, while remaining proof against critics' barbs. Tl;dr: O'Hehir thinks that The Avengers is too cool for school and that pissed him off.

So he's upset that his jabs against The Avengers are pretty useless, and he's upset about that?

 

[Whiskey Tango]

They are killing him for the Batman comment but Harry's right. A more Dini-esque, comicbooky Batman will be a breath of fresh air after TDKR. Never understood why people get so defensive over compliments to a great era of Batman. The popularity of Arkham City proves that people love that form of Batman.

Nolans films are awesome but after three of them I'm ready for something different. And an Arkham City-esque Batman movie would be pretty damned amazing.

 

[bonzob2000]

Going back to O'Hehir's review:



What does that mean? Who exactly has been trying to insist on "edgy", "outsider" status for The Avengers of all things? I honestly don't get this... and I read O'Hehir a lot. Can anyone take a stab at what he's trying to say there? (I agree with xeno's earlier translation, but I'm not sure it was about this accusation, exactly.)

Still, I would have put money on both O'Hehir and Zacharek (who was Salon's movie critic prior to O'Hehir) disliking it. No surprises there.

Even though he says he's a fan of Whedon in the review, it seems like it's a critique of Whedon's style. Joss has stated in interviews that he doesn't like getting postmodern with superheroes. It's why it always bugged me when Whedon's stuff is called "camp," as camp doesn't take itself seriously, but Whedon takes the business of superheroes (or vampires or spaceships) very seriously indeed. As Nick Fury says, "he still believes in heroes."

However, a key element to his style is contrasting his poetic, grandiose take on comic-book heroes with a running sarcastic commentary that keeps the grandiosity from getting out of hand. For instance, in the scene between Fury and Loki, Fury's big speech, the one that goes: "How desperate am I? You threaten our world with war, you steal a force you can't hope to control, you talk of peace but you kill because it's fun... you have made me very desperate," could be seen as overblown if Whedon didn't soon undercut it with a joke: "Let me know if real power wants a magazine or something."

It seems like O'Heir is reading this style as Whedons' way of having his cake and eating it too -- he can embrace all the silliness of "men in tights" stories, but you can't criticize him for it because he's already made all the jokes you were going to make within the work itself (in this case, usually in the form of an Iron Man zinger).

I don't think O'Heir's wrong, exactly, I just don't think it's a bad thing. As I said, I think it's the balance between the two sides that makes Whedon's stuff work so well.

 

[Tony Stark]

I also feel that the superhero landscape has changed between TDK and TDKR. I'm sure TDKR will be a good movie and I'm going to see it, but seeing that trailer made me realized just how much better a villain Joker was compared to Bane, and how the saturated colors become a bit tiresome after awhile. It would be nice if Nolan would use more colors in his films.

I'm just a bit worried that Nolan lost a bit of perspective on this one. The football scene is the perfect example. I find myself laughing at that scene, am I supposed to? is it supposed to make you gasp? I honestly don't know.

I hope after this Nolan goes back to making stuff like he did as an independent film maker, because to me Memento is still his best film. I loved Inception and it deserved all the accolades it got, but I personally love it when a film maker can do alot with very little, and that's the most apt description I can think of for Memento.

 

[bonzob2000]

I'm just a bit worried that Nolan lost a bit of perspective on this one. The football scene is the perfect example. I find myself laughing at that scene, am I supposed to? is it supposed to make you gasp? I honestly don't know.

I hope after this Nolan goes back to making stuff like he did as an independent film maker, because to me Memento is still his best film. I loved Inception and it deserved all the accolades it got, but I personally love it when a film maker can do alot with very little, and that's the most apt description I can think of for Memento.

I agree. I mean, I do love The Dark Knight, but it's not anywhere near as brilliant as Memento in my book. Even his first film, the ultra low-budget Following, is pretty brilliant in ways his more bloated studio films haven't quite been (less on the nose dialogue, at least).

 

[Tony Stark]

Even though he says he's a fan of Whedon in the review, it seems like it's a critique of Whedon's style. Joss has stated in interviews that he doesn't like getting postmodern with superheroes. It's why it always bugged me when Whedon's stuff is called "camp," as camp doesn't take itself seriously, but Whedon takes the business of superheroes (or vampires or spaceships) very seriously indeed. As Nick Fury says, "he still believes in heroes."

However, a key element to his style is contrasting his poetic, grandiose take on comic-book heroes with a running sarcastic commentary that keeps the grandiosity from getting out of hand. For instance, in the scene between Fury and Loki, Fury's big speech, the one that goes: "How desperate am I? You threaten our world with war, you steal a force you can't hope to control, you talk of peace but you kill because it's fun... you have made me very desperate," could be seen as overblown if Whedon didn't soon undercut it with a joke: "Let me know if real power wants a magazine or something."

It seems like O'Heir is reading this style as Whedons' way of having his cake and eating it too -- he can embrace all the silliness of "men in tights" stories, but you can't criticize him for it because he's already made all the jokes you were going to make within the work itself (in this case, usually in the form of an Iron Man zinger).

I don't think O'Heir's wrong, exactly, I just don't think it's a bad thing. As I said, I think it's the balance between the two sides that makes Whedon's stuff work so well.

You're absolutely right, it's not camp. Firefly is the perfect example, there's so much dry humor and off the cuff statements, but it's not camp. If anything it's satirical. Like the one episode where they walk into that bar and they're singing folk songs about Jayne.

The reason why Whedon was so perfect for this, is because the whole idea of a "Super friends" type of team alone is a ridiculous notion which was done back in the day as a ploy to sell more comics. So Whedon is not afraid to flat out say, "yeah this is ridiculous folks" but then try and tell a serious story in that context.

 

[Xeno]

So he's upset that his jabs against The Avengers are pretty useless, and he's upset about that?

Pretty much. He hates the genre, wants it to die an ugly death, yet he knows that it's here to stay. The "fanboy" audience he disdains is still there, enjoying the spectacle. The entire review was his impersonation of an old man waving his cane at the neighborhood kids and yelling, "Get off my lawn!" Unsurprisingly, he came off as even more "bratty and entitled" as he accuses fans of the genre of being.


I read Salon religiously for its first five years, but gave up on it when the supercilious navel-gazing got to be too much. The site reeks of "bratty, entitled coolness," to quote O'Hehir again, which must be how he senses it in others.

 

[debbiety]

The best way I can describe most, (if not outright all 3) of his TF movies is:
The TV show 'Cops' filming as Sam runs towards/away from the metal humping onscreen.
http://www.sencart.com/Supply-evening-dresses_c423

 

[J.Howlett]

I'm just a bit worried that Nolan lost a bit of perspective on this one. The football scene is the perfect example. I find myself laughing at that scene, am I supposed to? is it supposed to make you gasp? I honestly don't know.

I hope after this Nolan goes back to making stuff like he did as an independent film maker, because to me Memento is still his best film. I loved Inception and it deserved all the accolades it got, but I personally love it when a film maker can do alot with very little, and that's the most apt description I can think of for Memento.

He's getting killed for the comment because I think people tend to forget what Batman was, in cinema, in the late '90's. Batman Forever and Batman & Robin anyone?

We've had the gothic version. We've had the freaky version. We've had the Adam West TV version. It was only inevitable that we'd get the graphic novel/gritty version one day.

Once Nolan's done, we'll get another version of the character. I don't understand what the big freaking deal is?

People screamed for this type of Batman picture for years. We get it and now they want to go back to what it was in the '90s. Hilarious.

 

[Roose Bolton]

I wouldn't really say that the 90s Batman films are really all that much like the Dini run on Detective or the Arkham games, not in the slightest.

 

[J.Howlett]

I wouldn't really say that the 90s Batman films are really all that much like the Dini run on Detective or the Arkham games, not in the slightest.

Doesn't matter what they're like in relation to the comic. It's the fact that all the Batman films have been completely different from each other...and up until that point, we hadn't had the "graphic novel" version of the character grace the screen yet. I mean, everyone was calling for it after what happened to the franchise in '97.

And again, this notion that Knight in '08 made all the films in this genre dark and gritty is pure nonsense. Besides Watchmen, they've all been basically done the Marvel way...which is not a knock.

Either way, Harry's review is not surprising. The one good thing about Harry's hyperbole is that he actually wants every movie to be great. He doesn't really have agendas, per se....but I do love his enthusiasm about movies. But, sometimes...like this time, he goes a tad overboard.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

He's getting killed for the comment because I think people tend to forget what Batman was, in cinema, in the late '90's. Batman Forever and Batman & Robin anyone?

We've had the gothic version. We've had the freaky version. We've had the Adam West TV version. It was only inevitable that we'd get the graphic novel/gritty version one day.

Once Nolan's done, we'll get another version of the character. I don't understand what the big freaking deal is?

People screamed for this type of Batman picture for years. We get it and now they want to go back to what it was in the '90s. Hilarious.

I think some people realize with the Arkham City video game that there are quality options cinematically outside of the "Law and Order Batman world" Nolan crafted.

Do we want penguins strapped to rocket or a Gotham filled with glo-sticks? No

Do we want an ingenious Batman in a classic grey and black costume fighting Clayface and Mr.Freeze in between impressive detective work and escape artistry? Most definitely.

 

[K'Prime]

He's getting killed for the comment because I think people tend to forget what Batman was, in cinema, in the late '90's. Batman Forever and Batman & Robin anyone?

We've had the gothic version. We've had the freaky version. We've had the Adam West TV version. It was only inevitable that we'd get the graphic novel/gritty version one day.

Once Nolan's done, we'll get another version of the character. I don't understand what the big freaking deal is?

People screamed for this type of Batman picture for years. We get it and now they want to go back to what it was in the '90s. Hilarious.

if they go back to 90's batman i will kick a puppy over a goal post.