• Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.

The Avengers The Avengers Critics Reviews Thread - Part 3

Hmmm... Avengers has 225 critics now at RT.

Iron Man had 237, Iron Man 2 267, Thor 254, Captain 215.

I'd say there are some more to come.
 
It´s kinda funny how even the best superhero movies never seem to break above 93%, 94% at RT. It´s an excellent rate, but it never even gets to a 95%, 96% final rate. It´s like there´s always this same little group of critics that will never give a positive review to a superhero movie, no matter how good it is.
 
Anyway, I'd say that it is for certain now that Avengers will stay over 90% at RT at the end.

Which is great. Many people doubted that it'll get that high.
 
Well you can't please everyone. It's a little disappointing though when they say that they're getting tired of SH movies while every year we get the same Rom com movies and movies based on a novel e.g. the Notebook which is literally the same ****.
 
It´s kinda funny how even the best superhero movies never seem to break above 93%, 94% at RT. It´s an excellent rate, but it never even gets to a 95%, 96% final rate. It´s like there´s always this same little group of critics that will never give a positive review to a superhero movie, no matter how good it is.

That's exactly what is is, oh and your avy is awesome btw. :woot:
 
Awesome!!!

I find this Charlotte Observer review interesting because it proves that the pattern I've seen here in Brazil is happening in USA and probably the whole wide World. Here's an excerpt of the review:

'Avengers’ tells a tale for two genders



"Even better, writer/director Joss Whedon has done something remarkable, something unheard of in the echelons of superhero movies – he’s managed to make something that just might capture the female demographic. For the most part, the genre is considered the domain of male members of AA – no, not Alcoholics Anonymous; a far more lethal organization: the arrested adolescent.

Symbolizing the subjugation of cinema to the whims of trolls and comment page obsessives, the kowtowing by and to Marvel and DC has routinely been blamed on “the guys,” while gals get to share the blame for making Nicholas Sparks, Stephenie Meyer and any number of actresses box-office gold.

But with “The Avengers,” Whedon does what he did so brilliantly in his seminal work of any medium, “Buffy the Vampire Slayer.” There, he took a female protagonist and kept the gender bias, working in male interest by investing the genre necessities with some broad bravado. Approach and angle were always about the lack of a Y chromosome.

By being so inclusive, by never forgetting that women sometimes accompany men to the movies (or make the decisions while seated on the living room couch), Whedon works “The Avengers” into a creative communal experience. Gents will get the mandatory bang for their buck. The ladies, on the other hand, get all the emotion and male eye candy they can handle."

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/20...tale-for-two.html#storylink=rss#storylink=cpy

At least here in Brazil, I've noticed a seriously strong female audience through all four screenings I've attended so far, included women looking pass their 50's enjoying the **** out of this movie.
 
It´s kinda funny how even the best superhero movies never seem to break above 93%, 94% at RT. It´s an excellent rate, but it never even gets to a 95%, 96% final rate. It´s like there´s always this same little group of critics that will never give a positive review to a superhero movie, no matter how good it is.

yep, there is always someone who will want to take the movie down a peg if everyone likes it. SM2 was on 94% and recently got knocked down to 93% so someone gave SM2 a bad review YEARS after the movie was released.
 
229 total now; 214 positive, 15 negative

6 or 7 more positives come in w/o a negative and it'll bump back up to 94%.
 
lol Roger Ebert's review again leaves me shaking my head.

He gives it a 3/4. But his review is nothing but a plot summary. No comments on the acting or the technical craft.

Then in his last paragraph, for good measure, he just busts out this bitter generalisation about comic book fans and says they don't deserve a movie as good as this.

Seriously Roger? You're such a ****ing quim.
 
lol Roger Ebert's review again leaves me shaking my head.

He gives it a 3/4. But his review is nothing but a plot summary. No comments on the acting or the technical craft.


Maybe he tries to prove that he actually paid attention to this one.. ;)
 
lol Roger Ebert's review again leaves me shaking my head.

He gives it a 3/4. But his review is nothing but a plot summary. No comments on the acting or the technical craft.

Then in his last paragraph, for good measure, he just busts out this bitter generalisation about comic book fans and says they don't deserve a movie as good as this.

Seriously Roger? You're such a ****ing quim.



Lol :woot:
 
Before I saw the movie, I really cared about what the critics thought about it. Those few critics that disliked it really bothered me. I dont let critics make up my mind about things or anything, but I was just sad that there were people out there who somehow missed out on the magic of seeing this film. Now that I've seen it, I dont give a HOOT about what the critics think. I'm glad most of them like it! All I care about is that it was the best movie I've ever seen. :)
 
lol Roger Ebert's review again leaves me shaking my head.

He gives it a 3/4. But his review is nothing but a plot summary. No comments on the acting or the technical craft.

Then in his last paragraph, for good measure, he just busts out this bitter generalisation about comic book fans and says they don't deserve a movie as good as this.

Seriously Roger? You're such a ****ing quim.
I've noticed a serious downgrade in his review write-ups, almost as if he really only gives long, detailed reviews if they're in the genre he likes.
 
lol Roger Ebert's review again leaves me shaking my head.

He gives it a 3/4. But his review is nothing but a plot summary. No comments on the acting or the technical craft.

Then in his last paragraph, for good measure, he just busts out this bitter generalisation about comic book fans and says they don't deserve a movie as good as this.

Seriously Roger? You're such a ****ing quim.

I see what you did there :cool:
 
I'm gonna start using that word from now on. I can't use the c-word, so i'll use that :D
 
To me, anything 85% and up is great. Personal tastes and politics play a big role in reviews. And genre films can become so mechanical at times that it's hard for a critic not to become jaded.
 
Just read Armond White's review.
Hilarious. Sorry if it's been brought up before. Amazing review. He's a true master of his craft.
 
Here's Almond Plights review:

Previous Marvel Comics superhero movies such as Iron Man, The Hulk, Captain America and Thor were like roughly cut puzzle pieces that looked odd and unfinished by themselves–pretend-movies derived from already established brands. Most of them, particularly Jon Favreau’s dung-colored Iron Man, were poorly directed. Now, fitted together in Marvel’s The Avengers, the superhero tales still don’t quite cohere: instead, each superhero’s traits and powers have been simultaneously inflated yet streamlined (Scarlett Johannson’s Black Widow, barely a cameo in last year’s Captain America, is almost a character here) with the sole intent to overwhelm, not merely entertain. That’s why a corporate brand is part of the title.

A live-action version of the comic book series about “Earth’s Greatest Super Heroes,” Marvel’s The Avengers is promoted as the ultimate Comic-Con–the franchise of franchises, the movie for which contemporary audiences have been trained to anticipate and genuflect. This whopping sales campaign manipulates immature, undeveloped adolescent taste into the mistaken notion of cultural fulfillment. The Avengers is neither good nor important, yet the more it consummates Marvel Comics’ current strategy to secure the adolescent comic book/graphic novel/video game market, it illustrates Hollywood’s shameless insufficiencies.

To discuss The Avengers as a story–or even a thrill ride–is delusional. Best to tally some of the actors’ deceits (which parallels the media’s complicit self-deception) as they trivialize the emotional satisfaction that is supposed to come from modernizing myth and legend.

The Captain America role traps Chris Evans, who was a great tease as the Human Torch, in an uninteresting anachronism–now a truly faded idea of American Exceptionalism. Same holds for the Halloween freakazoids Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Bruce Banner/The Hulk (a CGI’d Mark Ruffalo). Jeremy Renner’s archer Hawkeye seems to be auditioning for Katniss’ evil twin brother in The Hunger Games. As villainous Loki, Tom Hiddleston, who was so moving in Spielberg’s War Horse and Terence Davies’ The Deep Blue Sea, comes closest to giving a performance. He suggests the intense young aspirant Peter O’Toole, though without the glorious voice–and no story details to frame his petulance, just a pretext for the superheroes to fight his plan for world domination. The film’s only probable hero is zillionaire gadgeteer Tony Stark who Robert Downey has finally learned to make his own–using hipster witticisms that lend this basically unhip movie some erratic self-satire.

Only a capitalist icon with Stark’s endless resources makes sense to an audience of semi-illiterate consumers catered to by the leisure industries and discouraged from interest in characterization, theme or ideas. That’s why Sam Jackson’s Nick Fury can simply watch action from the sidelines, occasionally firing off a gun shot or epithet, pretending to be a leader in his ghetto eye patch. (Insert convenient Obama analogy here.)

Director Josh Wheedon brings TV squalor (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) to his big screen debut. Wheedon doesn’t have Zack Snyder’s personal style (the elan that at least made Watchmen and Sucker Punch thoroughly idiosyncratic and fitfully compelling). Wheedon directs impersonally, which is to say he manages the proceedings as one runs a fast food joint. This analogy ought to appall the very fast-food patrons who flock to The Avengers yet cannot accept that an artistic enterprise should be more than ground patties of optional substance. Like Wheedon, they can’t tell the difference between art and conviction-less product.

This proves the brainwashing that has happened to pop audiences in the generations since comic books and TV stole their imaginations from cinema and literature. Much of this tragedy has to do with the impact of television (Wheedon’s background) which has destroyed popular understanding of narrative complexity. Each superhero should represent overcoming some social or personal difficulty (like Eric Bana in Ang Lee’s underrated The Hulk); now they’re just gimmicks. Wheedon simply makes the action go on and on. He has no sense of dramatic build or rising to a peak. He overloads the spectator with one climax after another (imitating Michael Bay angles, particularly the same skyscraper-devouring turbine F/X from the last Transformers flick).

Unlike the lyrical teen fantasy Chronicle or Neveldine-Taylor’s daring Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance which addressed life, death, morality, Marvel’s The Avengers has little to say other than “Buy me!” Millions of mentally hijacked moviegoers will respond like Pavlov‘s dog, barking “Wow!”
 
Hee! SLJ tells the NYT Critic what he thinks of his Avengers review ...

http://movies.msn.com/movies/article.aspx?news=725796

Haha, SLJ was just having some fun. People are so damn touchy. As if he's actually calling for A.O. Scott to be fired over a negative review.


Sam just asked his followers to suggest a new career that would suit Mr. Scott better than reviewing movies does. He was simply trying to help an obviously frustrated man find happiness. I applaud Mr. Jackson's altruistic spirit. With the spate of superhero films coming in the near future, Mr. Scott's life is bound to become more and more painful as the summer progresses. Hence Sam's charitable desire to get the man out of the business for the sake of his sanity if nothing else.
 
Wow that's... insane. So Black Widow was in Captain America? Joss Whedon is called Josh Wheedon? Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance was a daring story about life and death?

:funny: He's not even trying to hide his trollness here.
 
I'm more than happy with how this film has finished (pretty much) on RT. Much better than expected.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
201,567
Messages
21,991,419
Members
45,788
Latest member
drperret
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"