The Avengers Why all the cross-over hate?

[Raiden]

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

Yeah, I'm not saying that IM2 was perfect by any means, but SHIELD & Fury's inclusion aren't the reasons why the movie was flawed. An underdeveloped villain (Varko), a weak secondary villain (Hammer), and uninspiring final battle are all elements that could've been improved upon with a stronger script imo.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

The last thing Captain America is, is modern. The guy's first decade of comic book history took place in the 40s. He'd been around 25 years by the time he joined The Avengers. Had Marvel not been so eager to get to The Avengers film, Johnston's film, particularly its 2nd & 3rd acts, woulda had a chance to breathe. Batman Begins is considered to be the template for great origin films, the reason for that being that the film explores the hero's journey to becoming a hero & closes with his establishment as one. It doesn't go overboard trying to explore that consolidation of heroism. That's something that as much as the origin, requires time & a sequel. The film should have ended with Cap fighting & defeating a foe inferior to Schmidt, gaining him the confidence to embrace his newfound heroism. That would have also allowed us to get to know Bucky more & actually care about his death in the sequel. Again, the psychology of being a hero needs to be explored, not glossed over in a montage.

Then Captain America becomes the sequels to Pirates of the Carribean and the Matrix, 2 overly bloated movies that should have been only one. We did see Cap mourn Bucky's death, about to the extent that every other movie deals with death. The one scene of Cap drinking was enough. I think if they do the Winter Soldier storyline, it will be a much better way to deal with Bucky and that has to be done in modern times. WW2 is the origin movie, stretching it into two movies wouldn't have worked, it would've suffered from the same thing Iron Man 2 did, retreading old ground.

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.

Really?!?! If there was campy/goofiness it happened a scene before at Tony's birthday party. At the same time though, it marks Tony's rock bottom.

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.

So who should have put Tony on the right path? In the movie he alienated his two closest friends from the first movie Pepper and Rhodey by that point. Someone needed to step in and put him back on the right path, Tony's clearly given up hope at that point. You need someone to do that and it has to be someone that he's interacted with and hasn't completely screwed over and alienated yet. In the universe that means either Coulson or Fury. Oh wait, I forgot it should've been Happy Hogan, he would've been the perfect person for the job.

 

[Doc Samson]

Really?!?! If there was campy/goofiness it happened a scene before at Tony's birthday party. At the same time though, it marks Tony's rock bottom.

Y'know what's weird to me? And I'm just saying this in general, not directly towards you, but in SM3, one of the main complaints is how the Symbiote was handled. Peter dancing around the streets, with his emo cut, and the whole nine. Presumably, pointing to the goofiness of it all, for something that should be a serious matter.

Yet, Stark is hanging out in a donut for his "rock bottom" segment. Fury tells him to "exit" said donut, then proceeds to get all "Shaft" on him:

"Whoa, whoa, whoa. He took it? You're Iron Man and he just took it? The little brother walked in there, kicked your ass and took your suit? Is that possible?"

"I have bigger problems in the southwest region to deal with. Hit him!"

(Stark) "Oh, God, are you gonna steal my kidney and sell it?"

(To Stark) "I've got my eye on you."

C'mon, it was ridiculous, corny & silly dialogue that was just as egregious, if not more so, than a clip of Parker dancing for 10 seconds. People groaned about the underdeveloped villain in Sandman (which is essentially Vanko) the unnecessary villain in Venom (or is that Justin Hammer)

Mary Jane & Harry doing the twist is just as bad as Tony at his birthday party pissing in his suit. Or requesting some dope beats from the DJ.

The way people seem to defend this movie, which was mediocre at best, is baffling, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. On the otherhand let's not pretend like there wasn't reasonable cause for some people to dislike parts of it.

 

[Iron_Stark]

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.

Then place the blame on the director and writer. You're whining and moaning at the wrong people.

There's nothing wrong with the director of the secret government agency that was shown throughout the first movie finally showing up in the second movie. It's how he was handled that's the problem.

C'mon, it was ridiculous, corny & silly dialogue that was just as egregious, if not more so, than a clip of Parker dancing for 10 seconds. People groaned about the underdeveloped villain in Sandman (which is essentially Vanko) the unnecessary villain in Venom (or is that Justin Hammer)

gtfo, Hammer was unnecessary? Really? Who was then? War Machine? It's one thing to say SHIELD isn't needed or Fury has no business in the movie, but to state that JUSTIN F'n HAMMER is unnecessary in an IRON MAN movie is beyond ridiculous and laughable.

Like I told you a while back, watching an Iron Man movie doesn't make you an Iron Man expert.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

Y'know what's weird to me? And I'm just saying this in general, not directly towards you, but in SM3, one of the main complaints is how the Symbiote was handled. Peter dancing around the streets, with his emo cut, and the whole nine. Presumably, pointing to the goofiness of it all, for something that should be a serious matter.

Yet, Stark is hanging out in a donut for his "rock bottom" segment. Fury tells him to "exit" said donut, then proceeds to get all "Shaft" on him:

"Whoa, whoa, whoa. He took it? You're Iron Man and he just took it? The little brother walked in there, kicked your ass and took your suit? Is that possible?"

"I have bigger problems in the southwest region to deal with. Hit him!"

(Stark) "Oh, God, are you gonna steal my kidney and sell it?"

(To Stark) "I've got my eye on you."

C'mon, it was ridiculous, corny & silly dialogue that was just as egregious, if not more so, than a clip of Parker dancing for 10 seconds. People groaned about the underdeveloped villain in Sandman (which is essentially Vanko) the unnecessary villain in Venom (or is that Justin Hammer)

Mary Jane & Harry doing the twist is just as bad as Tony at his birthday party pissing in his suit. Or requesting some dope beats from the DJ.

The way people seem to defend this movie, which was mediocre at best, is baffling, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. On the otherhand let's not pretend like there wasn't reasonable cause for some people to dislike parts of it.

I see the situations completely differently actually because of where the characters were, in Iron Man 2 Tony's basically faced the barrel of a gun most of the movie. He's dying, he knows it and has tried to stop it but can't. The birthday scene is really the rock bottom, he doesn't care anymore, he's given up, everyone wants to help him, but he won't let them in on what's wrong. This is in character though. Also, the exchange between Tony and Fury is also in character, it's playful banter, much like how Tony talks to Pepper and Rhodey, remember the scene where Tony's being chased by the jets in Iron Man 1, it's that same playfulness, Fury knows this is how to relate to Tony, the only way Tony will "let him in". Peter's stuff with the symbiote was just totally out of character and cheese for the sake of cheese, they symbiote needed to feed off Peter's rage, show be losing control.

I also don't think Vanko or Hammer were underused or underdeveloped. Vanko was out for vengence, Hammer was out for greed, let's also not forget Tony screwed him in front of the Senate, both of them saw Stark/Iron Man as their enemy, both had reasons. Sandman had no motives in the movie, Vanko had revenge. Venom was a lot like Hammer, but Hammer was much better fleshed out by Stark's constantly belittling him and screwing him. Someone obviously losing control still manages to outwit him, in front of the Senate and object of affection/the press.

Truthfully I think the only thing that's wrong with Iron Man 2 is Tony building another suit and fighting someone in a suit because that looked too similar to the first Iron Man.

 

[Iron_Stark]

Vanko was definitely under used and under developed. He got screwed over bad.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

Vanko was definitely under used and under developed. He got screwed over bad.

I really don't think so, I'm not so sure Vanko even wanted to kill Iron Man at first, he just wanted to show the world Iron Man was human and could be hurt, death would've been a bonus though. Look at him in the jail scene, he doesn't seem to be trying or plotting to get out, he accomplished what he set out to do. The work he did for Hammer was basically what Tony did in Afganistan in Iron Man 1, told Hammer what he wanted to hear, he's building weapons, but pursued his own agenda. He would have liked to kill Iron Man sure, but just humilating and/or showing the world he was human would be enough and that's what he did.

 

[Shadowlord X]

Well said Amazingfantasy15!

 

[Doc Samson]

gtfo, Hammer was unnecessary? Really? Who was then? War Machine? It's one thing to say SHIELD isn't needed or Fury has no business in the movie, but to state that JUSTIN F'n HAMMER is unnecessary in an IRON MAN movie is beyond ridiculous and laughable.

Like I told you a while back, watching an Iron Man movie doesn't make you an Iron Man expert.

And once again, commenting on what I'm saying doesn't make you an expert either. I said some people complained about Hammer being unnecessary, I didn't say that personally, It's a complaint I've seen on here numerous times since the movie came out. From other people. I was using it as a parallel comparison between the nitpicks people have with SM3, saying that Venom was unnecessary, something I never said either. Clown.

 

[Iron_Stark]

I really don't think so, I'm not so sure Vanko even wanted to kill Iron Man at first, he just wanted to show the world Iron Man was human and could be hurt, death would've been a bonus though. Look at him in the jail scene, he doesn't seem to be trying or plotting to get out, he accomplished what he set out to do. The work he did for Hammer was basically what Tony did in Afganistan in Iron Man 1, told Hammer what he wanted to hear, he's building weapons, but pursued his own agenda. He would have liked to kill Iron Man sure, but just humilating and/or showing the world he was human would be enough and that's what he did.

Yeah he did want to kill Tony. He wasted his life away in Siberia, he watched his dad die infront of him broke and penniless, blaming the Stark family. He wouldn't have gone through all that trouble if he didn't want to kill him. As far as the jail scene, he just got there, there really wasn't much time to start plotting an escape. And then Hammer told him "You just don't kill the guy." Humiliating him and doing all that other stuff to his legacy was Hammer's idea.

And like I've said many, MANY times, Vanko should've done that throughout the movie, he should've crashed Tony's party and kicked his drunk ass around, or atleast sent a drone to give Tony and the audience a glimpse of what's to come. Vanko should've been the one to lead the drones in the aerial fight, Vanko and Tony should've have atleast two more face to face confrontations before having a big fight at the end.

But alas, Favreau and company wanted to appease fanboy requests and Marvel wanted to sell a few more toys.

 

[Doc Samson]

Yeah he did want to kill Tony. He wasted his life away in Siberia, he watched his dad die infront of him broke and penniless, blaming the Stark family. He wouldn't have gone through all that trouble if he didn't want to kill him. As far as the jail scene, he just got there, there really wasn't much time to start plotting an escape. And then Hammer told him "You just don't kill the guy." Humiliating him and doing all that other stuff to his legacy was Hammer's idea.

And like I've said many, MANY times, Vanko should've done that throughout the movie, he should've crashed Tony's party and kicked his drunk ass around, or atleast sent a drone to give Tony and the audience a glimpse of what's to come. Vanko should've been the one to lead the drones in the aerial fight, Vanko and Tony should've have atleast two more face to face confrontations before having a big fight at the end.

But alas, Favreau and company wanted to appease fanboy requests and Marvel wanted to sell a few more toys.

One of the few times you've made some type of sense

 

[Iron_Stark]

And once again, commenting on what I'm saying doesn't make you an expert either. I said some people complained about Hammer being unnecessary, I didn't say that personally, It's a complaint I've seen on here numerous times since the movie came out. From other people. I was using it as a parallel comparison between the nitpicks people have with SM3, saying that Venom was unnecessary, something I never said either. Clown.

I've never seen anyone complain about Hammer, not. one. person.

You're the one that's making the bad comparison.

The correct comparison would've been War Machine as both were fanboy requests and both were shoehorned. dummy.

One of the few times you've made some type of sense

I always make sense when it comes to Iron Man movies and other stuff about the character, it's the complainers and whiners that know jack about the character and think they know what's best for the movies that don't make sense.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

Yeah he did want to kill Tony. He wasted his life away in Siberia, he watched his dad die infront of him broke and penniless, blaming the Stark family. He wouldn't have gone through all that trouble if he didn't want to kill him. As far as the jail scene, he just got there, there really wasn't much time to start plotting an escape. And then Hammer told him "You just don't kill the guy." Humiliating him and doing all that other stuff to his legacy was Hammer's idea.

And like I've said many, MANY times, Vanko should've done that throughout the movie, he should've crashed Tony's party and kicked his drunk ass around, or atleast sent a drone to give Tony and the audience a glimpse of what's to come. Vanko should've been the one to lead the drones in the aerial fight, Vanko and Tony should've have atleast two more face to face confrontations before having a big fight at the end.

But alas, Favreau and company wanted to appease fanboy requests and Marvel wanted to sell a few more toys.

Watch the jail conversation between Vanko and Tony, it was all about making God bleed, not killing him.

As for Vanko sending to drones to Tony's party, that screws Hammer. Also, he couldn't go himself because he needed to keep a low profile, since he should've been dead and all. As for leading the drones, wouldn't it have been better for hammer to use someone from the army rather than the fugitive he broke out of person as the face of his roboarmy?

 

[Doc Samson]

I've never seen anyone complain about Hammer, not. one. person.

You're the first one that's making the bad comparison.

The correct comparison would've been War Machine as both were fanboy requests and both were shoehorned. dummy.

Please, it's been made. There's a difference between a character being unnecessary & being unnecessary in the context of a particular movie. Hammer could've been the main villain in a whole other movie by himself. Either way, the movie was mediocre IMO. You can love it all you want, couldn't care less.

I always make sense when it comes to Iron Man movies and other stuff about the character, it's the complainers and whiners that know jack about the character and think they know what's best for the movies that don't make sense.

Yeah right, everytime somebody says something about this movie, you fly off the handle talking a bunch of nonsense that isn't even relevant to the original post you quoted. I can voice my opinion just like you voice yours

 

[Iron_Stark]

Watch the jail conversation between Vanko and Tony, it was all about making God bleed, not killing him.

As for Vanko sending to drones to Tony's party, that screws Hammer. Also, he couldn't go himself because he needed to keep a low profile, since he should've been dead and all. As for leading the drones, wouldn't it have been better for hammer to use someone from the army rather than the fugitive he broke out of person as the face of his roboarmy?

Well then Vanko should've arrived in a Mk.2 suit, kicked his ass, revealed himself, and no one believes Tony because he was plastered. There are ways they could've written him in.

Again, no one would've known who's leading the drones, just a quick mention that there was a human inside the suit.

 

[Iron_Stark]

Please, it's been made. There's a difference between a character being unnecessary & being unnecessary in the context of a particular movie. Hammer could've been the main villain in a whole other movie by himself. Either way, the movie was mediocre IMO. You can love it all you want, couldn't care less.



Yeah right, everytime somebody says something about this movie, you fly off the handle talking a bunch of nonsense that isn't even relevant to the original post you quoted. I can voice my opinion just like you voice yours

Find a quote where someone said Hammer was unnecessary and I'd tell them they're also just as delusional.

For it being such a mediocre movie, you sure do whine and complain about it a lot.

 

[Doc Samson]

Find a quote where someone said Hammer was unnecessary and I'd tell them they're also just as delusional.

For it being such a mediocre movie, you sure do whine and complain about it a lot.

No, just stating my opinion. If you go back (which I know you have problems doing) I originally responded to another poster such as yourself, who seems to think that anybody who says something negative about IM2 all of a sudden is some type of diehard DC fanboy, or Nolanite, or Marvel Hater, or Ironman hater, or.....something. It's ridiculous.

As irritated as you seem to get with me "complaining" about IM2 is the exact same way I feel when people get all bent out of shape if anyone dares criticize it. I'm pointing out things that are wrong with it, that not only me, but other people, have had issues with. Why would I want IM2 to be mediocre? What do I get out of that?

 

[Spider-Fan]

Doc Sampson, Iron Stark. Get more civil. Both of you are entitled to your opinions, and yes...that means someone can post negative comments without needing to be harassed or asked why they're doing it. People need to stop acting likle anyone who questions what a movie did is a troll.

 

[Doc Samson]

Doc Sampson, Iron Stark. Get more civil. Both of you are entitled to your opinions, and yes...that means someone can post negative comments without needing to be harassed or asked why they're doing it. People need to stop acting likle anyone who questions what a movie did is a troll.

Point taken. Like I stated above, I wasn't personally saying anything about Hammer, or Vanko, just making comparisons, very valid ones, to the common complaints of SM3. But just for the road:

The best newcomer to the franchise. No doubt RDJ is the perfect Tony Stark, but I would love to see how Sam would've tackled it, he has that same quirky quality

Guess I'm just an IM2 hater. Oh wait...

 

[Spider-Fan]

Point taken. Like I stated above, I wasn't personally saying anything about Hammer, or Vanko, just making comparisons, very valid ones, to the common complaints of SM3. But just for the road:

I am not saying you guys can't continue to discuss this. I am more than happy to read a good discussion on it. I just don't want this to devolve into "Hater" "No I'm Not" "You are...and a moron too!"

I saw it going there. Hence my post. But, I agree with a lot of the criticism of IM2, myself. I think it is a good movie, but very flawed and could have been better with a few changes. Doesn't make me a hater (like I don't think you are), it just means I have issues with it which I like discussing.

 

[Doc Samson]

I am not saying you guys can't continue to discuss this. I am more than happy to read a good discussion on it. I just don't want this to devolve into "Hater" "No I'm Not" "You are...and a moron too!"

I saw it going there. Hence my post. But, I agree with a lot of the criticism of IM2, myself. I think it is a good movie, but very flawed and could have been better with a few changes. Doesn't make me a hater (like I don't think you are), it just means I have issues with it which I like discussing.

Definitely was going there, he has a history of getting under my skin, and vice versa I suppose, but yes, most times if you have any issues, your the devil. I Should be used to it by now, but I just can't help it sometimes...

 

[Iron_Stark]

No, just stating my opinion. If you go back (which I know you have problems doing) I originally responded to another poster such as yourself, who seems to think that anybody who says something negative about IM2 all of a sudden is some type of diehard DC fanboy, or Nolanite, or Marvel Hater, or Ironman hater, or.....something. It's ridiculous.

As irritated as you seem to get with me "complaining" about IM2 is the exact same way I feel when people get all bent out of shape if anyone dares criticize it. I'm pointing out things that are wrong with it, that not only me, but other people, have had issues with. Why would I want IM2 to be mediocre? What do I get out of that?

I've never called you a hater. Infact I really don't care if you like this movie or not, but if you're going to complain atleast find the correct things to complain about.

Comparing Venom to Hammer is ridiculous, Hammer wasn't there for fan-service, he wasn't put there because of studio pressure, he wasn't put there to sell more toys, the script the have multiple rewrite mid production to include the character. All of that was because of War Machine. Now that character is the perfect parallel to Venom.

 

[Doc Samson]

I've never called you a hater. Infact I really don't care if you like this movie or not, but if you're going to complain atleast find the correct things to complain about.

Comparing Venom to Hammer is ridiculous, Hammer wasn't there for fan-service, he wasn't put there because of studio pressure, he wasn't put there to sell more toys, the script the have multiple rewrite mid production to include the character. All of that was because of War Machine. Now that character is the perfect parallel to Venom.

And therein lies the rub. Who are you to tell somebody what's qualified for discussion? I'm sure your aware some people on Earth have differing opinions?

 

[Spider-Fan]

I've never called you a hater. Infact I really don't care if you like this movie or not, but if you're going to complain atleast find the correct things to complain about.

Comparing Venom to Hammer is ridiculous, Hammer wasn't there for fan-service, he wasn't put there because of studio pressure, he wasn't put there to sell more toys, the script the have multiple rewrite mid production to include the character. All of that was because of War Machine. Now that character is the perfect parallel to Venom.

So, he can critique something you had an issue with, but not something you didn't? Who are you to say what is correct/incorrect to complain about? That is hypocracy at its finest, my friend.

 

[Iron_Stark]

And therein lies the rub. Who are you to tell somebody what's qualified for discussion? I'm sure your aware some people on Earth have differing opinions?

Well just because they're different doesn't make them right.

Like your Hammer/Venom comparison.