Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Marvel's The Avengers' started by Thread Manager, May 6, 2012.
Totally agree I feel that her and Jeremy's character were totally underused.
Maybe I'm behind the times, but just saw Wally Pfister's criticism of the film, I didn't love The Avengers but I certainly digged it. So to call it an appalling film based on camerawork is a tad ridiculous.
It is. I thought he would criticize the fact the movie was shot digitally (since he's a big proponent for film), but camera angles? Really? If he's going to criticize a MCU movie with odd camera angles, it should be Thor (all those Dutch angles) not The Avengers. Seamus McGarvey's work was straightforward and beautifully shot.
I find it silly that a cinematographer is drawn out of a movie because of the camera placement. If he's so bothered by that, he should leave his cinematographer hat at the door first.
One more thing that always annoyed me, We know that the alien army (Chaturi ) were attacking the city as a part of a larger plan of their invasion of Earth, which would have lead to Loki taking control of the Earth, they wanted to defeat / kill all resistance offered to them by the Army , Cops, Avengers, whoever who was opposing them.
So, Why would the Chtauri take a few Humans as hostage ? What they could possibly demand ? The whole scene was included just so that Captain America could do something heroic, otherwise it made no sense.
EDIT: I love all Nolan's Bat movies and Wally Pfister's cinematography, but I don't share his his opinion of Avengers movie and its cinematography, to me, the movie looked good enough, though I have some issues with it.
As a cinematographer, it is his right to criticize a movie based on what he does for a living. But, as someone nearly with a film degree myself, and cinematography being a talent of mine, I disagree with him big time.
It is his right, for sure, but I think he forgot that McGarvey and Whedon were shooting the film as if they were shooting a native 3D production -- which would explain some of the more in-your-face shots. And it was shot to feel like a comic book come to life.
Plus, it wasn't like Pfister made some questionable lighting and camera choices in his own movies. His comments just come off as tactless and idiotic.
My opinion, I didn't think they were taking them hostage, I took it more as them just corralling them together to make it easier to kill a large group in one fell swoop with their grenade-like device.
EDIT: As for the cinematographer's comments... the guy is welcome to his opinion as is anyone. I disagree with it, I loved how Joss chose to film Avengers. My issue with his comment is mainly the way he went about stating it. it just seemed... tactless. The question he was asked didn't even mention Avengers, which leads me to think that he brought Avengers up all on his own and to call it 'appalling' at that?. I don't know... it comes across as perhaps unprofessional to me and maybe just a tad bitter (?)
That's just how it comes across to me, though.
Wally Pfister is a *****e. Complain about story? TDK was very well acted, but the story was not all that great. Batman is betrayed by Selina, resulting in the breaking of his back and his imprisonment, and suddenly when he sees her again he's totally cool? A forced Bruce/Selina relationship? Within 24 hours, Batman is able to fly back into the US and get into Gotham while it is under Bane's control and being watched by the federal government? A lack of any real chemistry betweenBruce/Miranda? The Dark Knight Rises had better acting, but the Avengers overall was a better movie.
Pfister was criticizing the camera angles and positioning in The Avengers as a terrible way of storytelling.
I highly, highly disagree with him. I think The Avengers is a beautifully shot film, but it doesn't call attention to itself either.
Its funny looking at the DKR boards now..some have jumped at this opportunity to bash the Avengers movie..lol. Some nonsense about how its a 'goofy action film' and that it did not deserve the high critic scores etc. Its funny how salty some of them still are that Avengers somewhat stole their thunder when they fully expected the Bat to rule the summer.
I knew the second I saw Pfister's comments re. The Avengers, it would start up another needles round of fanbase wars. And although I agree he's entitled to his opinion, he really came off poorly in that interview. He's now the second person who worked on TDKR (Modine was the first) who's bashed Avengers with no provocation. Whedon and Co. have been nothing but complimentary and gracious about the Batfilms and actually, the fans I've seen have been pretty great about both too.
I actually liked the cinematography in all the Bat films; no matter the flaws they are seriously gorgeous comic book movies.
But seriously, poor show, Pfister. Wasn't necessary to phrase it that way at all.
I've seen this pop up on a dozen or sites and I have to wonder: who cares? Seriously? I know they're just hit ****ing but how is this driving hits?
I just sort of laugh that anyone's reaction to this "news" (lol) is more involved than "Kay."
I respect his opinion - or at least his right to give it - but it was definitely dickish and bad form professionally. Luckily we as Avengers fans are in a wonderful position to be magnanimous. Im actually looking forward to this guy's directorial debut.
Just sitting here thinking after watching the movie again on BluRay...
I really feel like they missed a little with the death of Coulson. When IM tells Loki you pissed off someone else and his name is Phil, it doesnt have the "punch" I know the director was looking for.
I think Phil getting stabbed in the back then having the comedic scene with the destroyer weapon underplays what his death really meant to his allies. They should have done something where Phil sacrifices his life willingly to aid the team or team members. The scene could've been very dramatic where Phil gets stuck inside the "Steel Trap" after saving Thor and the Avengers just aren't able to get to him in time. Something along those lines....
I'm nitpicking, yes. This is still my favorite superhero movie....
I honestly thought he was going to say "One more person you pissed off...me!"
It's shot like a TV show. The whole movie has Whedon's television sensibilities attached to it and it's actually a benefit to it in terms of character and narrative; it's able to balance the large ensemble through a somewhat episodic structure with very clearly defined three acts. In terms of the cinematography it's mostly subjective, but to me at least it wasn't a strong suit of the film. But that's okay, it's really good anyway.
No matter how many times I watch The Avengers I STILL think he's going to say that.
Nah I'd say Thor was more underused than her, she had far more screentime than him and Hawkeye.
Look its WP's opinion and he is welcome to it. I would like to see the whole quote or for him to show what he was talking about.
I think I mentioned this awhile back, but I wanted to mention it again..
Three things I would of done differently.
1) Definitly made Widow's bites shot out and blow up, whoever made that suggestion is right on. Would of made her more fun in the fight scenes.
2) During the 3 way fight, when Thor was dropping the hammer on Cap, I think it should have been Cap covering Ironman somehow and Cap should have been the only one left standing as shockwave blows Thor back. It would have been a great shot as the camera panned back if Cap was standing strong over Ironman and Thor. It would have been much better than how he looked getting up in actual film.
3) During the group argument scene, I wish it would have been Cap who stopped for a second as he was arguing with Tony, shook his head to clear his thoughts, and realized that something was wrong as he looked at everyone arguing. I wish he would of stopped everyone and said something like "this isn't right... " looking around at everyone and then the alarm goes off, instead of the line "Dr Banner.. put the scepter down".. only looking at banner... I think this would of shown Loki's control and influence over everyone in that scene, and Cap being the only one able to break it.
I see someone's a big Cap fan, especially with what you said in number 2 of your post.
I'm more of a fan of Hulk and Thor, but I love it when Cap is portrayed as the leader.
Agreed, particularly when Stark even has to prompt Cap to "call it" during the final battle, something I presume Steve would've been able to surmise on his own.
Yeah Cap being portrayed as the leader is only right, but Cap not budging from Thor's blow would be eye roll worthy.
I'm a little confused. It might have been said a while back, not sure. Why exactly would Cap's shield not protect him from Mjolnir? Wouldn't the design of the shield cause whatever force Mjolnir had to simply go around or fall to the sides of Cap since he held it over himself? Is not the vibranium that strong? Is this speculation that Cap would've been hurt or is this something that has been specified in the comics....that he would've been hurt?
Vibranium is supposedly stronger than steel and completely absorbs vibration. I would think the initial impact of Thors hammer would have some effect on Cap. Think of it like this, if Thor were just to put his hand up to the shield and push, Cap would feel the resistance if he's holding the shield up. Try not to think of it like a force field. That's how I look at it anyways.