The Avengers The Avengers: News and Speculation - Part 27A sub-se - - - Part 12

[Herolee10]

If it were up to me, we'd get cameos from Tim Roth and Liv Tyler, and have Natalie Portman and William Hurt in minimal supporting roles. Maybe have a scene with Roth in chains inside the containment unit Tony built for him (hopefully Blonsky CAN revert back to human form), bookend scenes with Jane (if she is indeed responsible for bringing Thor back) before and after the battle, and an overall presence by General Ross throughout the film. Without the aforementioned players, Thor and Banner pretty much end up staring at the wall. I like the idea of Bruce being allowed to see Betty again now that he's working for the government and its imperative that Thor and Jane reunite when the fight is done.

Truth be told, Captain America and Thor have the biggest cliffhangers that need to be resolved (with Steve's one being perhaps the most pressing one), followed by Banner.

Tony is pretty much the only one who can go into this film angst free since he had a majority of his issues settled out in the last film, due to the ability of having a sequel before anyone else did to explore those topics. Not to mention, his love life, especially when compared to everyone else, is on the best track right now.lol

 

[Shadowlord X]

An issue which I don't have an answer for is this.

How much should this movie be designed to be accessible to the viewer who has not viewed the previous MARVEL movies?

Does this movie have a responsibility to be accessible to such people?

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

An issue which I don't have an answer for is this.

How much should this movie be designed to be accessible to the viewer who has not viewed the previous MARVEL movies?

Does this movie have a responsibility to be accessible to such people?

let's face it. people who weren't interested in watching any of the previous movies, are probably not interested in watching Avengers too

 

[cherokeesam]

An issue which I don't have an answer for is this.

How much should this movie be designed to be accessible to the viewer who has not viewed the previous MARVEL movies?

Does this movie have a responsibility to be accessible to such people?

I think references to the previous movies is a given, not just for the sake of the GA, but for fanboys as well. Face it, some of these movies will be dormant for over 4 years (TIH) by the time Avengers debuts, so the opening sequences are bound to include recaps of Hulk, Thor, Iron Man and Cap's stories.

 

[Rock Sexton]

I agree. TIH is a much better movie than Cap and Thor (and of course IM2). Hell, if they'd kept the original suicide opening along with the 30 minutes that got cut, its actually better than Iron Man. Norton brought a riveting pathos to the character that made Banner's journey fascinating from start to finish. TIH is the one Marvel Studios movie I couldn't wait to see a sequel to. I wish we could continue to get that level of depth and exploration for all the other characters. I was really expecting it from Cap, but again they strived for a light/popcorn tone at the expense of deeper characterization. I've dragged the wife to see all of the MCU movies and she still likes TIH best. Thing is, you really feel for Banner. You want the guy to be human again. I'm really hoping The Avengers will take us back to Iron Man/TIH territory as far as quality goes.

Still amazes me how much better it could've gotten with all the character building scenes Marvel naively left on the cutting room floor. I can watch TIH endlessly.

 

[DyeLorean]

I have a question about Hulk.
Will Banner be aware being Hulk? It has been teased at the end of TIH that he may control it.

 

[RealIrOnMaN]

http://www.fox8.com/news/wjw-avengers-movie-transforms-downtown-streets-close-mz-txt,0,3923443.story

 

[WildcatNC]

An issue which I don't have an answer for is this.

How much should this movie be designed to be accessible to the viewer who has not viewed the previous MARVEL movies?

Does this movie have a responsibility to be accessible to such people?

I think so. Particularly from a marketing/money standpoint.

I also disagree that only people who watched the other Marvel movies will see Avengers. I think we will get many who didn't watch all or any of the others who go and see it because its a spectacle, never been done, and they will market it that way. Those people may go and catch up on netflix though, who knows.

 

[WildcatNC]

Still amazes me how much better it could've gotten with all the character building scenes Marvel naively left on the cutting room floor. I can watch TIH endlessly.

Thats my main complaint about the Marvel films. An extra 20 min or so of character building would have served them all really well, whether it be the main characters, supporting, or villain.

It always feels like they were cut a little short.

 

[MadVillainy]

Yeah I agree about all the Marvel films couldve used 10-20 mins more. And I like all of them but IM2, but yeah longer run times wouldve made them even better

 

[WildcatNC]

Yeah I agree about all the Marvel films couldve used 10-20 mins more. And I like all of them but IM2, but yeah longer run times wouldve made them even better

I really hope we get directors cuts of all of them eventually with all the added scenes in their proper order.

I don't know why they don't just leave them in honestly.

I've never heard someone say, "you know what?, if the movie wasn't 2 hours and 15 minutes I would have probably went and saw it. I just cant take the extra 15 minutes (all while watching the 20 min of commercials for a 110 minute feature)"

If its a good movie, the run time isn't that relevant till you start passing the 2 1/2 hour mark. Even then I think its overstated.

 

[Chewy]

More showings in the theaters if the movie's under 2 hours

Hopefully the inevitable boxset comes with some extended editions

 

[BobbyCorwin88]

Cap and Thor felt like very safe movies IMO. It felt like they wanted to do nothing more than introduce the characters we'll be dealing with and help us understand a little about them. They're still fun to watch, but that's about it. They aren't gripping in any real way. I never thought Thor's romance with Jane Foster felt realistic at all. Cap and Peggy were alright, but I was hoping they would have time to explore that relationship a little further.

Spoiler

Did anyone else feel like they shouldn't have killed Bucky?

It felt like it happened way too quick and didn't really change anything.

 

[Grommers]

More showings in the theaters if the movie's under 2 hours

Hopefully the inevitable boxset comes with some extended editions

Only reason I haven't purchased any of the DVD's.

I'm hoping for a nice box set.

That's what always frustrated me about LotR and Star Wars...constant re-releases. When I should of just waited for box set. I'm holding out this time buck-os'!

 

[Raiden]

Thats my main complaint about the Marvel films. An extra 20 min or so of character building would have served them all really well, whether it be the main characters, supporting, or villain.

It always feels like they were cut a little short.

Yeah, a longer cut of those movies probably would've been better, but it's not like Fox and their insistence to keep the movies' running time around 1 hr. 30 minutes. Cap is 2 hrs. long and it's neither too long nor too short imo.

 

[Chewy]

Cap and Thor felt like very safe movies IMO. It felt like they wanted to do nothing more than introduce the characters we'll be dealing with and help us understand a little about them. They're still fun to watch, but that's about it. They aren't gripping in any real way. I never thought Thor's romance with Jane Foster felt realistic at all. Cap and Peggy were alright, but I was hoping they would have time to explore that relationship a little further.

Spoiler

Did anyone else feel like they shouldn't have killed Bucky?

It felt like it happened way too quick and didn't really change anything.

People say stuff like this and it really makes me wonder what they're talking about. They're no safer than Iron Man was. And if that's where you're heading then it seems you have a problem with the films tonally. Not everything needs to be dark and gritty.

 

[Raiden]

If it were up to me, we'd get cameos from Tim Roth and Liv Tyler, and have Natalie Portman and William Hurt in minimal supporting roles. Maybe have a scene with Roth in chains inside the containment unit Tony built for him (hopefully Blonsky CAN revert back to human form), bookend scenes with Jane (if she is indeed responsible for bringing Thor back) before and after the battle, and an overall presence by General Ross throughout the film. Without the aforementioned players, Thor and Banner pretty much end up staring at the wall. I like the idea of Bruce being allowed to see Betty again now that he's working for the government and its imperative that Thor and Jane reunite when the fight is done.

Well, unless those actors are willing to do their cameos for free or for minimum fee, it is unlikely to see these A-list actors show up for a minute and then disappear.

 

[MadVillainy]

Cap and Thor felt like very safe movies IMO. It felt like they wanted to do nothing more than introduce the characters we'll be dealing with and help us understand a little about them. They're still fun to watch, but that's about it. They aren't gripping in any real way. I never thought Thor's romance with Jane Foster felt realistic at all. Cap and Peggy were alright, but I was hoping they would have time to explore that relationship a little further.

Spoiler

Did anyone else feel like they shouldn't have killed Bucky?

It felt like it happened way too quick and didn't really change anything.

People say stuff like this and it really makes me wonder what they're talking about. They're no safer than Iron Man was. And if that's where you're heading then it seems you have a problem with the films tonally. Not everything needs to be dark and gritty.

I never got why people say Marvel's movies are "cheap" or "safe". Thor is probably one of the least safe superhero characters brought to the screen and honestly Cap was pretty risky too, not just with it being a period piece but the character himself as well.

 

[WildcatNC]

People say stuff like this and it really makes me wonder what they're talking about. They're no safer than Iron Man was. And if that's where you're heading then it seems you have a problem with the films tonally. Not everything needs to be dark and gritty.

I agree. They are meant to be fun, character driven summer movies.

Which they are.

 

[The Morningstar]

I thought the story and structure of Captain America was very original, actually. Well, except for the last 20-30 minutes where it just became your typical "stop the bad guys scheme" plot beat. But that's the same with pretty much any action/thriller/horror movie.

 

[WildcatNC]

I never got why people say Marvel's movies are "cheap" or "safe". Thor is probably one of the least safe superhero characters brought to the screen and honestly Cap was pretty risky too, not just with it being a period piece but the character himself as well.

I agree. Both were risks with no established cinematic history really. Both also had the potential to come off as really hammy, hokey or corny.

 

[WildcatNC]

Yeah, a longer cut of those movies probably would've been better, but it's not like Fox and their insistence to keep the movies' running time around 1 hr. 30 minutes. Cap is 2 hrs. long and it's neither too long nor too short imo.

I came away feeling like I didn't see enough of Red Skull. As a fanboy I would have loved to see more of the Howling Commandos too but I understand you can't do everything. I thought Skull was a little underdeveloped at least to be the main villain. Weaving was awesome with what he was given though, he still made it work.

I loved the movie, its honestly just nitpicking.

 

[BobbyCorwin88]

When I say "safe", let's use Thor as the example, I mean that I feel the film didn't really do everything it could to fully immerse us in Thor's world through the storytelling. The plot was very predictable and straightforward. You didn't really have to guess what was going to happen throughout the course of the film.

I felt like they should have showed us a lot more of Asgard than they did. It was there, but it didn't really feel "lived in." We only got to see a few segments with the main characters, but nothing really with the rest of the Asgardians. I felt like it was a waste of a great location.

The best thing that happened story-wise was Thor destroying the bifrost and cutting off his connection to Earth. It was still predictable, but at least we're left wondering how he's gonna make it back down to Midgard.

Blackman:

Thor is probably one of the least safe superhero characters brought to the screen.

I agree, and I'm glad he was generally well received by the casual movie-goer. I just feel like there was a lot more there that we didn't get to see which was blanketed by a very casual, predictable story. I liked it but I didn't love it.
All in all, Thor performed well, but it definitely left me wanting.

CHEWY:

They're no safer than Iron Man was.

I don't know about that. The cast alone was enough to sell Iron Man. I'll agree that it's a risk to introduce a hero who isn't Superman/Batman/Spider-Man to the general public, but Iron Man, in true Iron Man fashion, knew it was awesome and knew it could appeal to a huge demographic. If people like my parents, who hate comics, love Iron Man, then that tells me something about what kind of character he is.

it seems you have a problem with the films tonally. Not everything needs to be dark and gritty.

Sorry, that's an assumption. I'm usually the first to speak out against folks who call something "too dark" or "not dark enough." I hate the word even. I didn't expect Thor or Cap to have that tone at all. I didn't want them to because that's not who they are. Their stories simply didn't do anything that great and instead took a more safe and casual route. Iron Man took the time to properly characterize its cast of characters and side plots and succeeded all the more for it. Cap and Thor did well enough for their main characters, but kind of left everyone else on the sidelines. That's really all there is to it.

 

[Raiden]

I never got why people say Marvel's movies are "cheap" or "safe". Thor is probably one of the least safe superhero characters brought to the screen and honestly Cap was pretty risky too, not just with it being a period piece but the character himself as well.

I agree. I think both Thor and Capt. America had alot of pitfalls, and could've easily degenerate into camp (like their past appearances have shown). Thor is an Asgardian god speaking in Shakespeare, and Cap is a soldier from WWII who woke up in present day. Their movies not only have to be good, they have to be relatable to casual moviegoers, which is no easy feat. I'm quite impressed with the kind of job that Marvel did to bring both of them to the big screen, and as Green Lantern has shown, a botched job can sink a movie quickly.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I really hope we get directors cuts of all of them eventually with all the added scenes in their proper order.

I don't know why they don't just leave them in honestly.

I've never heard someone say, "you know what?, if the movie wasn't 2 hours and 15 minutes I would have probably went and saw it. I just cant take the extra 15 minutes (all while watching the 20 min of commercials for a 110 minute feature)"

If its a good movie, the run time isn't that relevant till you start passing the 2 1/2 hour mark. Even then I think its overstated.

Exactly. And let's not forget that the top three grossing movies made are all around the 2.5 hour mark. Titanic, TDK, and Avatar are all really long friggin movies, and people still watched the crap out of them.