The Avengers The Avengers: News and Speculation - Part 27A sub-se - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 49

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Well to be fair Cap's film had plenty of deaths. Some of which were just nasty. Like the guy getting turned to a red mist after going through the propeller. It even had genuine, old school style blood squibs that would make Paul Verhoeven proud. I mean, that part where the Hydra spy gunned down that old lady actually had me shocked. I was like, 12A, really? lol.

They were the only two though in the movie really, during the war scene's we didnt really see anything other than people getting vaporised.

I'm also pretty sure SOME Shield agents were killed when The Destroyer came to earth during THOR even though it wasn't shown.

Thats the thing though, we never actually see it, just show one or two to show there is a threat in these movies, thats all I ask.

 

[The Morningstar]

nah, google's straight edge. that's how he has all that time to come up with the fancy name tags he enjoys using so much.

heh

Can't find the picture anywhere.

 

[metaphysician]

Not showing dead and bleeding bodies isn't the same thing as "no casualties."

I would say the thing Marvel avoids moreso is literal collateral damage, in the sense of casualties caused by the *heroes*. Villains endangering people is fine ( when they aren't deliberately trying to kill them ), but heroes are supposed to try and prevent collateral damage.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

They want to see the heroes overcome a great threat. Neutering the threat by having it do... nothing, makes for bad story telling and a bad movie. Family movie or not.

If you don't have a believable threat, there is no tension. If there is no tension, then the whole thing is a pointless excercize in showing off the latest CGI technology.

Kids need to be frightened by the bad guys, so that the heroes defeating them is something they can be excited and happy about. For adults the bad guys need to pose a serious threat otherwise it's just a shallow, SFX extravaganza.

:Up: spot on, how credible can a threat be if it kills no one? Not very is the answer. Show they capable of evil things instead of implying it. No one is asking for blood and guts, Darth Vader choking people out in Star Wars was enough to show him as a credible threat.

 

[Chewy]

:Up: spot on, how credible can a threat be if it kills no one? Not very is the answer. Show they capable of evil things instead of implying it. No one is asking for blood and guts, Darth Vader choking people out in Star Wars was enough to show him as a credible threat.

And Red Skull vaporizing people is...?

 

[Vartha]

Not showing dead and bleeding bodies isn't the same thing as "no casualties."

I would say the thing Marvel avoids moreso is literal collateral damage, in the sense of casualties caused by the *heroes*. Villains endangering people is fine ( when they aren't deliberately trying to kill them ), but heroes are supposed to try and prevent collateral damage.

um Thor goes THROUGH the Frost beast's head, Cap THROWS Hydra Agents out of a plain, I'm sure they aren't going to avoid anything except the actual GORE.

 

[The Morningstar]

Red Skull was clearly evil though. In his very first scene he had an entire town destroyed, even though he said he would spare them.

 

[Splat]

Haha not once have I watched a MCU movie and thought, "You know what would make this better? If I saw some civilians get killed or injured. ".

 

[lixdexia]

And Red Skull vaporizing people is...?

also loki shooting a giant laser at a planet, which may or may not have shown frost giants exploding, i don't remember.

 

[Chewy]

also loki shooting a giant laser at a planet, which may or may not have shown frost giants exploding, i don't remember.

It did

 

[The Morningstar]

It also had people being frozen solid in the prologue.

 

[BigThor]

Yeah I was talking about damage as far as craters being knocked into the ground and characters being knocked through buildings, I don't really mind civilians not beng killed on screen but I don't oppose it either.

 

[Chewy]

Yeah I was talking about damage as far as craters being knocked into the ground and characters being knocked through buildings, I don't really mind civilians not beng killed on screen but I don't oppose it either.

But why would superheroes go out of their way to cause millions of dollars' worth of damage and endanger many many people by damaging the lower floors of a populated building?

 

[BigThor]

It also had people being frozen solid in the prologue.

Followed by a Frost Giant leaping into the air to smash a frozen woman and child.

But why would superheroes go out of their way to cause millions of dollars' worth of damage and endanger many many people by damaging the lower floors of a populated building?

They wouldn't go out of their way to do it, it just should be a bi-product of super strong beings fighting and sending each other flying due to the impact of their blows.

 

[Vartha]

But why would superheroes go out of their way to cause millions of dollars' worth of damage and endanger many many people by damaging the lower floors of a populated building?

Well trying to save life on EARTH is the main goal. things like NYC can be rebuilt, life can't.

 

[Chewy]

Well trying to save life on EARTH is the main goal. things like NYC can be rebuilt, life can't.

People are in the buildings in NYC. Quite a few people

 

[Shadowlord X]

They must be spending some real money on marketing this movie.

Is it normal to have FULL TRAILERS on television??? I though tv spots were usually short 15 - 30 second things.

 

[Shadowlord X]

Haha not once have I watched a MCU movie and thought, "You know what would make this better? If I saw some civilians get killed or injured. ".

LOL. Touche.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

It wouldn't call it b****in', we were just saying that Marvel could do a better job of showing how fights between superhuman being should effect the evironment.

It wasn't like people were going all "Marvel movies don't have enough collateral damage, they suck", it's a pretty understandable thing to want to see in a superhero film.

i can pretty much name extensive collateral damage in every marvel film from Blade to Cap. you're nit picking simply because you liked a Hancock... a horrid film... that only got one thing right..

 

[Vartha]

People are in the buildings in NYC. Quite a few people

well that's why Tony says if we can't spot them we can AVENGE earth.
kinda like what happened after the Towers, we put a boot in "their" arse


EDIT: keep in mind it's not just NYC the Avengers visit. We KNOW they visit other countries Germany for one, a middle eastern country too. One of the first pics we saw for Avengers was a site they were going to film at.

 

[The Morningstar]

i can pretty much name extensive collateral damage in every marvel film from Blade to Cap. you're nit picking simply because you liked a Hancock... a horrid film... that only got one thing right..

Hancock is nowhere near being a horrid film. It's a great concept that for the most part, is executed well. It just drags like a mother****er once it gets about two thirds in.

 

[Chewy]

Hancock is nowhere near being a horrid film. It's a great concept that for the most part, is executed well. It just drags like a mother****er once it gets about two thirds in.

Everything about Charlize's character and how she fits into the film is nonsensical

It's a fun movie, until Hancock goes to jail

 

[The Morningstar]

My problem with Theron's character is that i saw the "twist" a mile off. Actually i think i figured it out in one of the interviews prior to the release.

I enjoyed the movie for the most part, but it could have been much better.

 

[Vartha]

PERSONALLY I want to know what the attraction was for in Tonsberg Norway? Will there be MORE in Avngers seeing as we've seen it in both Cap and Thor?

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Hancock is nowhere near being a horrid film. It's a great concept that for the most part, is executed well. It just drags like a mother****er once it gets about two thirds in.

fine. I'll give it a "mediocre" which it was (it was pretty forgettable to be honest) it's a great concept that fell flat. The film couldn't decide if it was a comedy, or a drama which really didn't mesh well. I went to a test screening in LA, and the audience pretty much unanimously dissed it, mostly for the same reasons.

It's a great concept to a pretty dark, R-rated story that wasn't executed as realistic and gritty and drama filled as it should have been. The action scenes were cool, but I felt they lacked substance.