The Avengers Why all the cross-over hate?

[Adamantium Man]

Speaking of which, Captain America is supposed to be a legend in modern times, right? But we didn't get any indication of that in any of the other Marvel movies. It's true that we saw the shield in Tony Stark's lab and there were some talks on the Super Soldier experiment but we haven't really got a real clue that he's supposed to be a legend and that Tony Stark know who he is, which is more proof for how much of a mess the continuity is.

That's just because we didn't see Tony's private shrine dedicated to Cap yet. :P

Tony did say he knew it was Cap's shield. And there was a Captain America comic in the trunk Howard left him. Even the tesseract was in Howard's diary. The continuity is there, you just don't see it.

And if you did see it, you'd probably whine about how it's so much in your face.

 

[dony2012]

That's just because we didn't see Tony's private shrine dedicated to Cap yet. :P

Tony did say he knew it was Cap's shield. And there was a Captain America comic in the trunk Howard left him. Even the tesseract was in Howard's diary. The continuity is there, you just don't see it.

And if you did see it, you'd probably whine about how it's so much in your face.

What..?

No he didn't.

Coulson asked him if he knows what the shield is and Tony didn't answer. But it didn't seemed to me like he know what it is.

And if Cap is such a big, famous legend, why would Coulson even ask Tony if he knows what that shield is?

Isn't that supposed to be obvious?

 

[Shadowlord X]

If they had spent time talking about the legend of CAPTAIN AMERICA in the IM movies then people would have been complaining about how those movies are advertising CAP and AVENGERS even more.

MARVEL simply cannot win with everyone. The main thing they have to do is keep doing what they are doing and ignore the complainers. It's working.

Sorry but real MARVEL fans are LOVING this. I have absolutely no complaints about the continuity, crossovers, easter eggs, etc.

 

[dony2012]

If they had spent time talking about the legend of CAPTAIN AMERICA in the IM movies then people would have been complaining about how those movies are advertising CAP and AVENGERS even more.

MARVEL simply cannot win with everyone. The main thing they have to do is keep doing what they are doing and ignore the complainers. It's working.

Sorry but real MARVEL fans are LOVING this. I have absolutely no complaints about the continuity, crossovers, easter eggs, etc.

Oh, the REAL Marvel fans... huh?!




I AM a real Marvel fan, who are you to say otherwise?

I could hate Kevin Feige and think he's an idiot who doesn't really knows what the hell he's doing with the MCU, but i'm still a Marvel fan.

And I don't think the continuity works that great and so far it was only a partial success. If it was in better hands maybe it worked better. Hire a genius like Joss Whedon was a good start of it and a wise decision because if there's someone who could fix all this mess that Feige did it's Joss.

 

[Xeno]

If they had spent time talking about the legend of CAPTAIN AMERICA in the IM movies then people would have been complaining about how those movies are advertising CAP and AVENGERS even more.

MARVEL simply cannot win with everyone. The main thing they have to do is keep doing what they are doing and ignore the complainers. It's working.

Sorry but real MARVEL fans are LOVING this. I have absolutely no complaints about the continuity, crossovers, easter eggs, etc.

Yeah, just like a five minute cameo by Hawkeye in Thor caused some people to claim that it ruined the movie for them. But if it had been some generic SHIELD agent with a bow, they would have whined that it was a blown chance for a Hawkeye cameo. Whatever. I've just started to tune that stuff out because it becomes grating real fast.

 

[dony2012]

Yeah, just like a five minute cameo by Hawkeye in Thor caused some people to claim that it ruined the movie for them. But if it had been some generic SHIELD agent with a bow, they would have whined that it was a blown chance for a Hawkeye cameo. Whatever. I've just started to tune that stuff out because it becomes grating real fast.

O___O


You are aware they didn't HAVE to put ANYONE with a bow.

Why would you even do something like that? Fan-service? Sure, but it was pointless, not to say confusing, for my friends and many other people at the theater.

I don't like it when I need to explain things like that to my friends. It's the film's job to explain things, not mine.

 

[cherokeesam]

Oh, the REAL Marvel fans... huh?!




I AM a real Marvel fan, who are you to say otherwise?

I could hate Kevin Feige and think he's an idiot who doesn't really knows what the hell he's doing with the MCU, but i'm still a Marvel fan.

And I don't think the continuity works that great and so far it was only a partial success. If it was in better hands maybe it worked better. Hire a genius like Joss Whedon was a good start of it and a wise decision because if there's someone who could fix all this mess that Feige did it's Joss.

...What "mess?"

There's not a damn thing wrong with the cross-referencing in the movies. They are, at best, small throwaway scenes and cameos (usually reserved for post-credits, anyway), and are entirely unobtrusive to non-fanboys who "don't get it."

The GA don't have any problem with these snippets. *None* of the crossover sequences are even remotely essential to the storylines of the films in which they exist, and therefore, do not intrude in the plot one bit.

The only people b*itching about this are anti-Marvelites (read: Nolanite holy warriors) looking for anything minor to seize on and belittle.

 

[Adamantium Man]

...What "mess?"

There's not a damn thing wrong with the cross-referencing in the movies. They are, at best, small throwaway scenes and cameos (usually reserved for post-credits, anyway), and are entirely unobtrusive to non-fanboys who "don't get it."

The GA don't have any problem with these snippets. *None* of the crossover sequences are even remotely essential to the storylines of the films in which they exist, and therefore, do not intrude in the plot one bit.

The only people b*itching about this are anti-Marvelites (read: Nolanite holy warriors) looking for anything minor to seize on and belittle.

 

[sgaana]

Speaking of which, Captain America is supposed to be a legend in modern times, right? But we didn't get any indication of that in any of the other Marvel movies. It's true that we saw the shield in Tony Stark's lab and there were some talks on the Super Soldier experiment but we haven't really got a real clue that he's supposed to be a legend and that Tony Stark know who he is, which is more proof for how much of a mess the continuity is.

Sergeant York.

General Patton.

General MacArthur.


These are famous names, and I hope you recognize them. They were, arguably, even more famous 20 years ago. They're three of the most famous American heroes of their respective wars.

But how often do you really hear people talk about them today? As I said, 20 years ago, I can remember seeing references to them more often -- because at the time, people writing dialogue for entertainment would have assumed that more people were familiar with them. It's not so true today, the farther in time we get from their wars.

It's not that we've forgotten who they were or what they did. I think if you mentioned their names to people, a lot of people would have at least a vague idea of who they were -- possibly more from famous movies made ABOUT them, than knowledge of their historical roles.

In the context of the Marvel Universe, Captain America is the same kind of thing. It's probably not that Tony doesn't know who he is. It's that in the 00s, we are just not talking about WWII heroes very often. To get a reference to Cap in any of the other existing Marvel movies, you'd need to contrive a reason to bring him up.

My guess would be that they didn't do that in order to emphasize what a very long time it's been since Cap was a living hero. That will help emphasize his "man out of time" quality when we see others react to him in the present day. People in the MCU probably only remember him in a highlight-reel sort of way, which is generally how people remember WWII overall, in snippets.

 

[Shadowlord X]

"The only people b*itching about this are anti-Marvelites (read: Nolanite holy warriors) looking for anything minor to seize on and belittle."

WELL SAID, cherokeeam!!!

 

[Raiden]

O___O


You are aware they didn't HAVE to put ANYONE with a bow.

Why would you even do something like that? Fan-service? Sure, but it was pointless, not to say confusing, for my friends and many other people at the theater.

I don't like it when I need to explain things like that to my friends. It's the film's job to explain things, not mine.

You know, these things are called Easter Egg for a reason. If you're a fan, you'll know who that guy with the bow is, and you should be excited to see Jeremy Renner for the very first time as Hawkeye. If you don't know who he is, the cameo only lasted for less than a minute and it didn't take anyway anything from Thor. So you can resume watching the movie once the cameo ended. Why you keep bringing up something that should be cool in the first place as a rant against the MCU is beyond me. Seems to me that your real complain is the existence of the MCU, and so every little cameo becomes a huge distraction to you.

 

[Raiden]

Sergeant York.

General Patton.

General MacArthur.


These are famous names, and I hope you recognize them. They were, arguably, even more famous 20 years ago. They're three of the most famous American heroes of their respective wars.

But how often do you really hear people talk about them today? As I said, 20 years ago, I can remember seeing references to them more often -- because at the time, people writing dialogue for entertainment would have assumed that more people were familiar with them. It's not so true today, the farther in time we get from their wars.

It's not that we've forgotten who they were or what they did. I think if you mentioned their names to people, a lot of people would have at least a vague idea of who they were -- possibly more from famous movies made ABOUT them, than knowledge of their historical roles.

In the context of the Marvel Universe, Captain America is the same kind of thing. It's probably not that Tony doesn't know who he is. It's that in the 00s, we are just not talking about WWII heroes very often. To get a reference to Cap in any of the other existing Marvel movies, you'd need to contrive a reason to bring him up.

My guess would be that they didn't do that in order to emphasize what a very long time it's been since Cap was a living hero. That will help emphasize his "man out of time" quality when we see others react to him in the present day. People in the MCU probably only remember him in a highlight-reel sort of way, which is generally how people remember WWII overall, in snippets.

Well-said. Capt. America was a legend from WWII, but aside from the world leaders like FDR, Churchhill, and the Nazi leader, as well as famous 5-star generals, how many of us still remember all the everyday hero from that era? Someone might have heard Cap's name from his father, but given that we don't even remember very much from events that occurred 20-30 years or prior to that, how would everyone today still remember Steve Rogers?

 

[C. Lee]

You are aware they didn't HAVE to put ANYONE with a bow.

Why would you even do something like that? Fan-service? Sure, but it was pointless, not to say confusing, for my friends and many other people at the theater.

I don't like it when I need to explain things like that to my friends. It's the film's job to explain things, not mine.

You are aware they didn't have to have the government agents called SHIELD. They didn't need to put Dr. Don Blake's name in the movie. They didn't need to mention a scientist working in gamma radiation.

But isn't it freaking fantastic that they did!!!!! These things didn't confuse anyone. The fans knew what was going on, the non fans didn't care one way or the other.

A government agency called SHIELD....the GA either had heard of them from the other Marvel movies or just said "Oh, another new government agency made up for the movies."

Dr. Don Blake.....the GA said "That was her previous boyfriends name." and thought nothing else by it.

The scientist working on gamma radiation....the GA either knew of gamma radiation as pertaining to the HUlk from the movies, TV show, and animated series....or said "Here are scientists talking about other scientists." and thought nothing of it.

There was nothing that needed explaining...I saw THOR several times...when Porter mentioned her former boyfriend was Dr. Don Blake, I saw several people smile or let out a little laugh because they were a fan and knew what it meant....I didn't see anyone jump up and shout "Hey, wait a minute...who the hell is this former boyfriend and what does he have to do with this movie?!?!"

This whole idea that the little crossover mentions and easter eggs are distracting and ruin the movies is baffleing to me.

 

[Shadowlord X]

@ C Lee

"There was nothing that needed explaining...I saw THOR several times...when Porter mentioned her former boyfriend was Dr. Don Blake, I saw several people smile or let out a little laugh because they were a fan and knew what it meant....I didn't see anyone jump up and shout "Hey, wait a minute...who the hell is this former boyfriend and what does he have to do with this movie?!?!" "

LMAO! Brilliant!!!

 

[Raiden]

This whole idea that the little crossover mentions and easter eggs are distracting and ruin the movies is baffleing to me.

Exactly. If there were no cameos, no Easter Eggs, and no mentions or references to other people and events of the Marvel Universe, why even have it in the first place? Won't that be exactly what Chris Nolan is doing with his Batman trilogy, which treats its films as standalones and have no relationship with any other DC superheroes? And if anyone wants a movie to actually explain all the little cameos and Easter Eggs that shown up, that would've defeated their purpose, won't it?

 

[sgaana]

Well-said. Capt. America was a legend from WWII, but aside from the world leaders like FDR, Churchhill, and the Nazi leader, as well as famous 5-star generals, how many of us still remember all the everyday hero from that era? Someone might have heard Cap's name from his father, but given that we don't even remember very much from events that occurred 20-30 years or prior to that, how would everyone today still remember Steve Rogers?

Given his high profile in the Marvel Universe, I'm willing to put Steve Rogers / Captain America up on the same level of recognition as the most famous of five-star generals, and the most famous adversaries (in which I'd include people like the Red Baron, and Erwin Rommel -- people in the war who became household names, in other words; indeed, I bet that more people today could give you a one-sentence definition of who the Red Baron was than could name the man who is said to have shot him down; or could name the equally-famous American ace of that war).

Even so -- NONE of those people come up in conversation all that often these days, even though they were hugely famous. It's just the passage of time.

To be clear -- I wouldn't be complaining if any of the other Marvel movies HAD made a bit more of a point of creating a context in which to refer to Captain America as a famous hero and legend of WWII. I think they could have done it in a natural enough way. I'm just saying that it doesn't strike me as some huge oversight that he isn't particularly mentioned. In the present-day world of the MCU, he's just... old news. The same way we treat many real-life heroes/legends from the past.

 

[C. Lee]

Canadian Captain Brown and an Australian ground gunner (sorry, can't remember his name) are generally creditied with the Red Baron's shootdown....and Eddie Richenbacker was the American ace. I'm a bit of a history buff.

 

[sgaana]

Canadian Captain Brown and an Australian ground gunner (sorry, can't remember his name) are generally creditied with the Red Baron's shootdown....and Eddie Richenbacker was the American ace. I'm a bit of a history buff.

t: Brown was who I was referring to with "said to have", since yeah, isn't it pretty much accepted now (given the location of the fatal wound) that it was the shot from the ground that killed him?

"Rickenbacker", though. (As opposed to, "Richthofen".)

Still -- history buffs aside, my bet would be the average person's main knowledge of the Red Baron comes from Peanuts, and perhaps the Royal Guardsman song... but no, "Snoopy" isn't an acceptable answer for "name an American ace from the same war".

(If merely remembering -- let alone having memorized -- "Snoopy vs. the Red Baron" is a sign of age, and Kids Today don't even know that song any more... I do not want to know about it, la la la, I can't hear you.)

 

[Doc Samson]

...What "mess?"

There's not a damn thing wrong with the cross-referencing in the movies. They are, at best, small throwaway scenes and cameos (usually reserved for post-credits, anyway), and are entirely unobtrusive to non-fanboys who "don't get it."

The GA don't have any problem with these snippets. *None* of the crossover sequences are even remotely essential to the storylines of the films in which they exist, and therefore, do not intrude in the plot one bit.

The only people b*itching about this are anti-Marvelites (read: Nolanite holy warriors) looking for anything minor to seize on and belittle.

And this right here exemplifies why people get all riled up. Nobody HAS to be a Marvel hater to dislike some of the decisions made in these films.

I've owned way more Marvel books than DC, for sure, but I don't have an allegiance to either one of them. I want solid films. I think I got that with a lot of Marvel properties so far, but I also feel like certain movies (IM2 in particular) would have benefited from excluding SHIELD and focusing more time on other things. I don't see what the problem is with that criticism

 

[Xeno]

O___O


You are aware they didn't HAVE to put ANYONE with a bow.

Why would you even do something like that? Fan-service? Sure, but it was pointless, not to say confusing, for my friends and many other people at the theater.

I don't like it when I need to explain things like that to my friends. It's the film's job to explain things, not mine.

How difficult is it to understand that the agent with the bow was there to take Thor down at Coulson's command. His function was the same as the other agents who fought Thor, including Jasper Sitwell, who was unnamed onscreen. Name or no name, it's that simple. Only someone familiar with Hawkeye/Clint Barton from the comics would even pause to think about that very minor cameo otherwise.

 

[dony2012]

And this right here exemplifies why people get all riled up. Nobody HAS to be a Marvel hater to dislike some of the decisions made in these films.

I've owned way more Marvel books than DC, for sure, but I don't have an allegiance to either one of them. I want solid films. I think I got that with a lot of Marvel properties so far, but I also feel like certain movies (IM2 in particular) would have benefited from excluding SHIELD and focusing more time on other things. I don't see what the problem is with that criticism

What he said^^

To be clear -- I wouldn't be complaining if any of the other Marvel movies HAD made a bit more of a point of creating a context in which to refer to Captain America as a famous hero and legend of WWII. I think they could have done it in a natural enough way. I'm just saying that it doesn't strike me as some huge oversight that he isn't particularly mentioned. In the present-day world of the MCU, he's just... old news. The same way we treat many real-life heroes/legends from the past.

Same.

 

[Iron_Stark]

That's just because we didn't see Tony's private shrine dedicated to Cap yet. :P

Tony did say he knew it was Cap's shield. And there was a Captain America comic in the trunk Howard left him. Even the tesseract was in Howard's diary. The continuity is there, you just don't see it.

And if you did see it, you'd probably whine about how it's so much in your face.

QFT!

What..?

No he didn't.

Coulson asked him if he knows what the shield is and Tony didn't answer. But it didn't seemed to me like he know what it is.

And if Cap is such a big, famous legend, why would Coulson even ask Tony if he knows what that shield is?

Isn't that supposed to be obvious?

Good grief, where the hell do these people keep popping out of?

Have you not been paying attention to any of the Iron Man movies or how Tony Stark acts with people?

It was rhetorical question, of course Coulson knew that Tony knew who's shield it was.

Tony being the lovable dick that his is to everyone acted like he didn't care about the shield or whatever and used it to prop up the machine.

And this right here exemplifies why people get all riled up. Nobody HAS to be a Marvel hater to dislike some of the decisions made in these films.

I've owned way more Marvel books than DC, for sure, but I don't have an allegiance to either one of them. I want solid films. I think I got that with a lot of Marvel properties so far, but I also feel like certain movies (IM2 in particular) would have benefited from excluding SHIELD and focusing more time on other things. I don't see what the problem is with that criticism

It's still funny how people want to blame SHIELD for IM2s problems even though they had the same amount of screen time as the first movie.

 

[kedrell]

Plus at the end of TIH Tony clearly indicates that he is well aware of the old super-soldier program to General Ross.

 

[Moridin]

And this right here exemplifies why people get all riled up. Nobody HAS to be a Marvel hater to dislike some of the decisions made in these films.

I've owned way more Marvel books than DC, for sure, but I don't have an allegiance to either one of them. I want solid films. I think I got that with a lot of Marvel properties so far, but I also feel like certain movies (IM2 in particular) would have benefited from excluding SHIELD and focusing more time on other things. I don't see what the problem is with that criticism

I just think it's a misplaced criticism. IM2's problems stem from a rushed script not the inclusion of SHIELD or Avengers cameos.

 

[Doc Samson]

It's still funny how people want to blame SHIELD for IM2s problems even though they had the same amount of screen time as the first movie.

Nick Fury wasn't essential to the plot of IM1. At all. He made his appearance at the end, which is how it should be. Once he stepped onscreen in IM2, the whole tone of the movie changed, and IMO, got campy & goofy.

I just think it's a misplaced criticism. IM2's problems stem from a rushed script not the inclusion of SHIELD or Avengers cameos.

To some maybe, but it's just my opinion that the whole subplot with the new element could have been done without Fury and/or Widow at all. I've been down this path way too much to repeat or reiterate, but I felt it was just unnecessary.