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

[spideyboy_1111]

You misread me. I said avoiding *collateral* damage. Those casualties weren't collateral. They were *intentional* casualties. . . inflicted upon the bad guys.

Marvel has, so far, been entirely fine with the good guys killing the bad guys, where appropriate. What they are not fine with, is the good guys accidentally killing innocent bystanders, or showing reckless disregard for innocent bystanders when battling a villain. Hence why, first thing Tony does in the final battle in Iron Man 2 is "take the fight to the air, away from the crowds as much as possible."

even comics try to avoid that... Most of the heroes actually don't cause deaths to civilians. That's why. they're heroes.. not careless vigilantes. Hulk is a tragic hero though where he can accidentally kill. I think though, those kinda deaths should only happen for story purposes (like Captain Stacy dying in spider-man)

 

[BigThor]

even comics try to avoid that... Most of the heroes actually don't cause deaths to civilians. That's why. they're heroes.. not careless vigilantes. Hulk is a tragic hero though where he can accidentally kill. I think though, those kinda deaths should only happen for story purposes (like Captain Stacy dying in spider-man)

True

 

[Silvermoon]

I kind of want to do the ultimate marathon.

I think it might be fun to do the marathon (assuming I had an AMC theater close to me that was doing it) - but a) I have to work that day and b) even though I know they'll have breaks/intermissions - I still don't think my butt could take being in a theater seat that long *lol*

So I will be happily having my own marathon in the comfort of my own home, most likely stretched out over a day or two and where we can pause/have bathroom & food breaks to our hearts content without missing anything....

...and which will also allow me to see them in the order I want to see them in, which will be Cap, IM, IM2, TIH, Thor. I like to say Thor is last because with Loki as the main villain it seems more fitting to me, but really it's just cause I like Thor the most out of those films t:

 

[spideyboy_1111]

infact... the only way this "casualty" count should be dealt with is if we eventually get a story that deals with elements of Civil War. Which was all about civilians getting killed in superhero/villain battles.

 

[Quasimod0]

In transformers, when optimus fell out of a building or something onto the street, he made himself land in such a way that he didnt land on any of the civilians running around. I thought that was pretty neat

 

[Kirmit]

even comics try to avoid that... Most of the heroes actually don't cause deaths to civilians. That's why. they're heroes.. not careless vigilantes. Hulk is a tragic hero though where he can accidentally kill. I think though, those kinda deaths should only happen for story purposes (like Captain Stacy dying in spider-man)

I think it was shown recently that Hulk's subconscious mind stops him from doing anything to kill even accidentally.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

I think it was shown recently that Hulk's subconscious mind stops him from doing anything to kill even accidentally.

he has before though. That's why the Illuminati launched him into space. But he's always gone back and forth between being in control, or out.

 

[BigThor]

In transformers, when optimus fell out of a building or something onto the street, he made himself land in such a way that he didnt land on any of the civilians running around. I thought that was pretty neat

I thought that was pretty cool as well, Optimus was definately one of the highlights of the Transformers franchise.

 

[Kirmit]

he has before though. That's why the Illuminati launched him into space. But he's always gone back and forth between being in control, or out.

If we're talking about 616 Hulk then I don't think there are that many occurances where someone has been killed because of his actions, it's mostly buildings and stuff that gets destroyed. Infact there was a whole run about someone getting killed in one of his rampages but that turned out to be false. Maybe someone like Art Teacher can back me up on this, their comic book knowledge is better than mine t:.

 

[The Morningstar]

In transformers, when optimus fell out of a building or something onto the street, he made himself land in such a way that he didnt land on any of the civilians running around. I thought that was pretty neat

Then in Dark of the Moon the autobots decided they didn't give a **** about civilians casualties. As exemplified by the freeway chase.

The difference between the first movie and the last two is clear. The first one Spielberg had Bay on a leash, the last two it was just Bay overload.

 

[Poni_Boy]

I'm kind of confused where this collateral damage thing is going now. To the people who want to see more of it, could you explain what you mean? I thought one of the character traits that all of Marvel Studios heroes was that they avoid collateral damage at all costs which causes them to get hurt (Iron Man/WM at the Expo, Thor evacuating civilians from Destroyer's attack, Cap taking the plane down, Hulk "clapping" the helicopter flames out, etc). Mind you, collateral damage is considered inadvertent but acceptable property damage and loss of life during an active engagement. When a villain destroys a town or kills innocent civilians that is not collateral damage. Isn't the point of having these superpowered heroes to show people who will do everything they can to avoid collateral damage? Not saying that it is never featured, but why spotlight it in a film that's meant to highlight a team's first go around and worth?

 

[Crimson King]

I thought that was pretty cool as well, Optimus was definately one of the highlights of the Transformers franchise.

Until he became anti-Optimus in the last film. "KILL THEM ALL!"

I swear, Bay should've given him a goatee.

 

[The Morningstar]

I'm kind of confused where this collateral damage thing is going now. To the people who want to see more of it, could you explain what you mean? I thought one of the character traits that all of Marvel Studios heroes was that they avoid collateral damage at all costs which causes them to get hurt (Iron Man/WM at the Expo, Thor evacuating civilians from Destroyer's attack, Cap taking the plane down, Hulk "clapping" the helicopter flames out, etc). Mind you, collateral damage is considered inadvertent but acceptable property damage and loss of life during an active engagement. When a villain destroys a town or kills innocent civilians that is not collateral damage. Isn't the point of having these superpowered heroes to show people who will do everything they can to avoid collateral damage? Not saying that it is never featured, but why spotlight it in a film that's meant to highlight a team's first go around and worth?

Iron Man didn't do a good job of that in IM2 really. He should have flown up in the air, instead of around buildings and parking lots. The scene i described before, when they fly past that penthouse where there was a party or whatever it was, War Machine firing his mini gun. Why did Stark fly right up to the window? The people in that room would have been mincemeat.

My view of it is, i don't want Loki and his army just destroying buildings. That's lame and it neuters the threat. We need to see lives lost, whether it's civilians or military.

 

[Vartha]

so the same location in Norway that's in avengers, was in thor and cap?

yeah I want to know why it's so attractive to off worlders. Frost giants attacked it. Odin places the Cosmic cube there...WHY?

 

[Poni_Boy]

Iron Man didn't do a good job of that in IM2 really. He should have flown up in the air, instead of around buildings and parking lots. The scene i described before, when they fly past that penthouse where there was a party or whatever it was, War Machine firing his mini gun. Why did Stark fly right up to the window? The people in that room would have been mincemeat.

That's not collateral damage, though. Iron Man didn't cause that destruction, WM and the androids did. If he had flown through the penthouse window and personally trampled on partygoers because he couldn't control the suit, then yes, that was collateral damage on his part.

But I don't have an answer to your question, aside from that it doesn't make sense. You're describing a linear engagement with no cover or concealment. A dogfight where there's 15 against 1. You don't survive that. The next time I'm in a billion dollar metal suit while flying at a high rate of speed at night, getting pursued by multiple assailants and getting shot at by automatic weapons while trying to avoid colliding with everything in an urban environment, I'll get a better answer for you

 

[The Morningstar]

That's not collateral damage, though. Iron Man didn't cause that destruction, WM and the androids did. If he had flown through the penthouse window and personally trampled on partygoers because he couldn't control the suit, then yes, that was collateral damage on his part.

But I don't have an answer to your question, aside from that it doesn't make sense. You're describing a linear engagement with no cover or concealment. A dogfight where there's 15 against 1. You don't survive that. The next time I'm in a billion dollar metal suit while flying at a high rate of speed at night, getting pursued by multiple assailants and getting shot at by automatic weapons while trying to avoid colliding with everything in an urban environment, I'll get a better answer for you

He would have still been responsible for it though. He brought the fight literally to someones front door.

He should have just flown straight up into the air, or out to sea.

I think it was an oversight by the film makers.

 

[Poni_Boy]

My view of it is, i don't want Loki and his army just destroying buildings. That's lame and it neuters the threat. We need to see lives lost, whether it's civilians or military.

And like others have already mentioned, every Marvel Studios film has shown collateral damage just like they've shown deaths of civilians. But there's a big difference between cinematic-ally alluded to death, focuses death with a slight "cartoony" feel and blatant cherry pie. There's no need for the later in this type of film.

 

[craigdbfan]

He would have been blown to bits if he was exposed with no coverage in the open sky against 15 other dogs. Poni Boy has a point.

 

[The Morningstar]

And like others have already mentioned, every Marvel Studios film has shown collateral damage just like they've shown deaths of civilians. But there's a big difference between cinematic-ally alluded to death, focuses death with a slight "cartoony" feel and blatant cherry pie. There's no need for the later in this type of film.

Well of course. I don't actually want to see innocent civilians shot to pieces. But you know, think of ID-4, when the whole of New York gets blown up. It's pretty clear thousands of people died whilst not explicitly showing people running around engulfed in flames.

 

[Nathan]

He would have still been responsible for it though. He brought the fight literally to someones front door.

He should have just flown straight up into the air, or out to sea.

I think it was an oversight by the film makers.

The only reason I can think of, is that he would have been pretty much dead, just out in the open with all those target sights on him. So he used the buildings to break the line of sight.

 

[Quasimod0]

And like others have already mentioned, every Marvel Studios film has shown collateral damage just like they've shown deaths of civilians. But there's a big difference between cinematic-ally alluded to death, focuses death with a slight "cartoony" feel and blatant cherry pie. There's no need for the later in this type of film.

Exactly, the movies are for kids and for adults. Heck, I dont even care to see bodies piled up. I know what happens when a city is attacked. People die.

 

[Poni_Boy]

He would have still been responsible for it though. He brought the fight literally to someones front door.

He should have just flown straight up into the air, or out to sea.

I think it was an oversight by the film makers.

I don't see how a mostly CG scene could be a mistake by the filmmakers when they had to craft every aspect of it. If it were straight forward filming and they didn't notice people in the shot, that's a mistake. That IM2 scene was purposeful to show a bustling city.

And, I'm sorry, but no it wouldn't have been his fault just like all the deaths that were obviously caused by errant gun fire throughout that entire scene. Don't forget the amount of high velocity metal that was being sent his way and didn't hit anything in frame. Those bullets, in the cinematic sense, impacted against buidlings/cars/people/gophers eventually. That's not his fault either.

 

[The Morningstar]

Whilst putting innocent lives at risk. Not that heroic really. It's not that big a deal, the only part that bugs me is when he flies right past the penthouse. It made me think it was done just to look cool, with no real thought put into it.

 

[TheVileOne]

I saw LOTR Return of the King Extended all in one sitting at AMC and also I've done BNAT three times and also the Hot Fuzztival (which was six movies). So I think I can handle a Marvel movie marathon.

 

[Poni_Boy]

He would have been blown to bits if he was exposed with no coverage in the open sky against 15 other dogs. Poni Boy has a point.

Thank you. That fight would have lasted a whole of 30 seconds. IM did do that with Stane in the first film because he weighed the 1:1 odds and it was evenly matched. Not so in the second film with a similar scenario.