The Avengers Why all the cross-over hate?

[BatmanInc]

The Crossover whining is mostly from DC fanboys. If DC came up with the idea first, I guarantee you they'd have no problem with it.

 

[Son of Coul]

Are you counting all the screen-time Black Widow got?

No suh, just the direct references and nods. Black Widow is more subjective as to whether she is "Avenger set-up," as she was part of the plot and could go on to not be in Avengers with the role still making sense, unlike Cap's shield and throwaway lines about the southwest region and super secret boy bands and whatnot.

 

[Aztec]

1) I was primarily just saying what a person's problem with a "2-hour Avengers ad" would be. Not saying it was an actual problem with the film (because I don't remember much of it, having not seen it since watching it at the drive-in when it was in theaters). Also, because the film overall didn't give Tony Stark much to do, things like S.H.I.E.L.D.'s screentime could become exacerbated in the eyes of the viewer.

2) And "the one thing Warner Brothers has gotten right" they knocked out of the damn park. As the old adage goes, "Quality over Quantity". I, and I think general audiences would agree with me, would rather have 1 excellent film than 4 or 5 good films.

1) I'm sorry but you made zero sense here.

2) You would rather 1 excellent film as opposed to 4 or 5 good films? Really? First off IMHO Iron Man and Thor were both excellent films; while TIH and IM2 were really good films. The Dark Knight is an absolute masterpiece, but I'll debate anyone (not in this thread though) about Batman Begins. That film was a step above mediocre at best.

Let's look at the two company's recent track record (IMHO):
Marvel:
Iron Man- Excellent
The Incredible Hulk- Very Good
Iron Man 2- Very Good
Thor- Excellent
Films I am beyond psyched for: Captain America & The Avengers.

WB:
Batman Begins- Good
Superman Returns- Awful
Dark Knight- Outstanding
Green Lantern- Looks so terrible I didn't even see it. (I acknowledge I could be wrong).
Films I am beyond psyched for: The Dark Knight Rises.

To me there is little comparison between the two companies right now.

 

[Pinky021]

I loved BW in IM2, it's nice to see other characters get cross overs in the movies...

 

[Godzilla2014]

The Crossover whining is mostly from DC fanboys. If DC came up with the idea first, I guarantee you they'd have no problem with it.

Again with the ad hominem attacks. Why is that you believe anyone who dislikes the single universe concept is an envious DC fanboy? I personally like the single universe idea, but I don't think it is in truth any better than separate universes. Was The Dark Knight lessened by the fact that its universe explicitly excludes Superman? Absolutely not. Was Iron Man 2 a better movie because its universe includes Thor? Absolutely not. There are benefits and drawbacks to both the single universe and independent universe philosophies.

Also, I see more envious DC fanboys saying that "Marvel is better" than "crossovers suck".

1) I'm sorry but you made zero sense here.

On the topic of if a film was a set-up to the Avengers, you said, "who cares if it was?" I was responding to that comment.

2) You would rather 1 excellent film as opposed to 4 or 5 good films? Really? First off IMHO Iron Man and Thor were both excellent films; while TIH and IM2 were really good films. The Dark Knight is an absolute masterpiece, but I'll debate anyone (not in this thread though) about Batman Begins. That film was a step above mediocre at best.

Let's look at the two company's recent track record (IMHO):
Marvel:
Iron Man- Excellent
The Incredible Hulk- Very Good
Iron Man 2- Very Good
Thor- Excellent
Films I am beyond psyched for: Captain America & The Avengers.

WB:
Batman Begins- Good
Superman Returns- Awful
Dark Knight- Outstanding
Green Lantern- Looks so terrible I didn't even see it. (I acknowledge I could be wrong).
Films I am beyond psyched for: The Dark Knight Rises.

To me there is little comparison between the two companies right now.

This is a subjective matter of opinion, but in my opinion, Batman Begins was better than Iron Man or Thor. I saw Green Lantern and it was bad, so I'll give you that. The Dark Knight alone is better than any of Marvel Studios' films, and they're playing catch-up, shared universe or not.

 

[BatmanInc]

Again with the ad hominem attacks. Why is that you believe anyone who dislikes the single universe concept is an envious DC fanboy? I personally like the single universe idea, but I don't think it is in truth any better than separate universes. Was The Dark Knight lessened by the fact that its universe explicitly excludes Superman? Absolutely not. Was Iron Man 2 a better movie because its universe includes Thor? Absolutely not. There are benefits and drawbacks to both the single universe and independent universe philosophies.

Also, I see more envious DC fanboys saying that "Marvel is better" than "crossovers suck".



On the topic of if a film was a set-up to the Avengers, you said, "who cares if it was?" I was responding to that comment.



This is a subjective matter of opinion, but in my opinion, Batman Begins was better than Iron Man or Thor. I saw Green Lantern and it was bad, so I'll give you that. The Dark Knight alone is better than any of Marvel Studios' films, and they're playing catch-up, shared universe or not.

I should probably point out I said 'mostly'.

Plus, I'm not saying DC fans in general. I mean the crazy-ass fanboys. Like the people who think that Avatar is the greatest thing to ever happen, ever.

I'm not saying that anyone who likes DC says that, it's just that from what I've seen, the people who mostly don't like the universe are insane-ass fanboys. I could be wrong, but that's just my perspective.

 

[Aztec]

The Dark Knight[/I] alone is better than any of Marvel Studios' films, and they're playing catch-up, shared universe or not.

We will just have to agree to disagree here.

 

[Iron_Stark]

I haven't seen Iron Man 2 since I saw it at the drive-in, so I couldn't really tell you how many minutes were spent on this or that, but if I recall correctly the film's problem overall was that Stark didn't do much, so things like the Avengers set-up might have become exacerbated. Hell, the Avengers talk is most of what I remember of the film.

See the post below.

I'm here again, about 3 1/2 minutes including the 40 sec post credit scene.

A far cry from the 2 hour long commercial it's being made out to be.

Are you counting all the screen-time Black Widow got?

Why should people count the Black Widow screen time? She made her debut waaaay back in Tales of Suspense #52 (ToS if anyone doesn't know was Iron Man's book). Should it not be appropriate for her to make her debut in an Iron Man movie?

Also Cap, he got defrosted in an Avengers comic and had his first few adventures with the team, should it not be appropriate for him to have his first adventures in an Avengers movie or should it be like the '90s movie where he's defrosted by eskimos and run down to California on foot before meeting people he knows?

 

[Son of Coul]

It became a concern with skeptical fans and critics alike ever since they announced their lineup after IM and TIH were released. These people still feel that these movies make up some kind of an "Avengers Series," when that is absolutely not the case and Avengers is its own separate franchise.

Even more erroneous is the frequent claim that all the solo movies exist solely to "advertise and lead up to The Avengers." Yes, making five $150 million movies in order to promote just one by putting vague winks and nudges to it throughout them. Those scheming sunza*****es.

And the more I think about it, the ultimate shame is gonna be these "haters'" reactions of The Avengers if it doesn't deconstruct the genre and CHANGE EVERYTHING (which Whedon already said it wouldn't be a deconstruction like TDK, Kick-Ass or Watchmen). These people will be ready to sick the movie with things like, "They made five long commercials for THIS? It's nothing special or anything... 2/5"

I dunno, I don't usually complain like this but I guess RT's mistreatment of Cap with some of the negative reviews being based on solely on disliking the genre has left me annoyed.

 

[psylockolussus]

The Avengers movie is like the 1st movie to do this. 5 movies to set-up 1 movie. People should stop hating because its interesting and exciting.

 

[Aztec]

And the more I think about it, the ultimate shame is gonna be these "haters'" reactions of The Avengers if it doesn't deconstruct the genre and CHANGE EVERYTHING (which Whedon already said it wouldn't be a deconstruction like TDK, Kick-Ass or Watchmen). These people will be ready to sick the movie with things like, "They made five long commercials for THIS? It's nothing special or anything... 2/5"

I dunno, I don't usually complain like this but I guess RT's mistreatment of Cap with some of the negative reviews being based on solely on disliking the genre has left me annoyed.

Unfortunately you're right. In almost every review you can read the cynicism. It's totally unwarranted but it's there. That same frustration you are feeling I am too and that's what inspired me to write this thread.

I have literally seen reviews that say things along the lines of (not exact quotes):

"Marvel has taken its last required step to reach their goal of The Avengers."

"A fun film, but let's be honest it's all about next year's Avengers."

"Of course the obligatory Avengers references are in there to hype next year's film."

When I see things like this it astounds me that: 1) these people are taken seriously as "critics" and 2) these people are so clueless as to the tremendous risk and innovation Marvel is undertaking here. Shouldn't there at least be some admiration for the company for trying something different? Isn't that the big complaint lobbied against Hollywood that it's always "re-treading old ideas"? Now a young company tries a revolutionary and different approach to film making; and the so called "critics" (mostly morons with a web address) proclaim it corporate Hollywood "business as usual". Stupid for so many reasons...

 

[Aztec]

I apologize for the double post but here is a PERFECT example of the idiotic reviews online. This is from "Emanuel Levy". Whoever the hell that hack is? Clearly he's a guy who has his own website (which any idiot can obtain) and now he's somehow labeled a "professional critic"; and as a result he's actually placed on the first page of reviews on Rotten Tomatoes!

"Not as good as the first Iron Man, not as bad as Green Lantern, it's almost a necessary, even obligatory panel toward next year's Avengers, but as a stand-alone adventure, it leaves much to be desired.

Emanuel Levy
EmanuelLevy.Com"

Notice the use of the word "obligatory"? As if Marvel is just doing the "same old studio crap". Meanwhile they are attempting something that's never been done before. What a bunch of ingrates there are out there disguised as "professionals".

 

[sgaana]

Unfortunately you're right. In almost every review you can read the cynicism. It's totally unwarranted but it's there. That same frustration you are feeling I am too and that's what inspired me to write this thread.

I have literally seen reviews that say things along the lines of (not exact quotes):

"Marvel has taken its last required step to reach their goal of The Avengers."

"A fun film, but let's be honest it's all about next year's Avengers."

"Of course the obligatory Avengers references are in there to hype next year's film."

When I see things like this it astounds me that: 1) these people are taken seriously as "critics" and 2) these people are so clueless as to the tremendous risk and innovation Marvel is undertaking here. Shouldn't there at least be some admiration for the company for trying something different? Isn't that the big complaint lobbied against Hollywood that it's always "re-treading old ideas"? Now a young company tries a revolutionary and different approach to film making; and the so called "critics" (mostly morons with a web address) proclaim it corporate Hollywood "business as usual". Stupid for so many reasons...

Like you guys... I don't want to come across as fangirl-paranoid, but... I am honestly concerned about what this means for how The Avengers will be received next year.

As I said in my first post, I find this exciting, because it hasn't quite been done this way before. And I honestly don't get how "these movies are all connected, telling an over-arching, larger story that has individual pieces" becomes, for so many critics and viewers, "watching one movie that refers to the existence of others = just an advertisement for later movies".

Regardless of whether I understand the objections, though... you're right, it seems that a LOT of people are already very cynical about this attempt to create a "shared movie universe". It is kind of feeling like they are determined to dislike the very CONCEPT of The Avengers, already -- they're primed to be unimpressed. (Just as, granted, we who are excited about the concept are primed to love it.)

Or that the best that can be hoped for is that when people see The Avengers movie, they will say something like, "all these heroes together work better than they did individually in the movies leading up to this".

But, call me cynical about people who are cynical... I'm way more expecting the "this is what we were building towards? underwhelming" reaction. More based on their preexisting irritation with the entire exercise. Ugh.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

That's not it at all. What you are doing is trying to dismiss the opinion of anyone who disagrees with you by discrediting them as being envious DC fans.
Also, it's not a lack of imagination that has lead to the lack of DC Cinematic Universe. A lack of talent or imagination would not have produced The Dark Knight, would it? It's that their primary franchise that is up and running, Batman, was designed to exclude such a possibility to focus solely on Batman himself and make him more unique, so it's more so a different philosophy than a lack of talent or imagination.

That's kinda my point though. Dc has Batman....and what else? They've completely dropped the ball with every other character they've attemped to bring to the screen ever since, particularly Green Lantern. They're sitting there with their thumbs up their butts while Marvel leaves them in the dust.

Sure...Nolan's a talented creator. Who ELSE ya got?

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

That's kinda my point though. Dc has Batman....and what else? They've completely dropped the ball with every other character they've attemped to bring to the screen ever since, particularly Green Lantern. They're sitting there with their thumbs up their butts while Marvel leaves them in the dust.

Sure...Nolan's a talented creator. Who ELSE ya got?

I agree with this completely!

 

[sha1243]

whoops wrong thread

 

[Raiden]

This is a subjective matter of opinion, but in my opinion, Batman Begins was better than Iron Man or Thor. I saw Green Lantern and it was bad, so I'll give you that. The Dark Knight alone is better than any of Marvel Studios' films, and they're playing catch-up, shared universe or not.

I really like TDK, but it alone isn't so amazing that I'd put it above ALL the Marvel Studio movies. And aside from TDK, what else does WB have? BB isn't better than Iron Man, Superman Returns was...average, so was Watchmen. And do I have to get into Green Lantern?

Nolan's Batman trilogy is ending with TDKR, while Marvel will make the Avengers and follow it up with IM3 and Thor 2. I do hope Man of Steel will be alot better than SR, but Snyder can be a hit-or-miss director.

If WB ever makes a JLA movie, and that's a huge IF, they'll probably do it only after the Avengers prove to be a success at the box office.

 

[ReTrO JuNkIe 42]

The Avengers movie is like the 1st movie to do this. 5 movies to set-up 1 movie. People should stop hating because its interesting and exciting.

Not only that, but I think the reason we are all on this site is cause we are all fans of these characters and the comics they come from, so how could any comic fan not love what they are doing, It was just a few years ago we got excited for just a mention of another character and the potential for a crossover and here we are just a year away and people complain

 

[ReTrO JuNkIe 42]

The Crossover whining is mostly from DC fanboys. If DC came up with the idea first, I guarantee you they'd have no problem with it.

Says the person with the batman name just playing, I am a big batman fan also but i love the MCU cant wait to own all of them on bluray

 

[Iron_Stark]

Not only that, but I think the reason we are all on this site is cause we are all fans of these characters and the comics they come from, so how could any comic fan not love what they are doing, It was just a few years ago we got excited for just a mention of another character and the potential for a crossover and here we are just a year away and people complain

I still remember the days when the grainy bootleg video of Nick Fury at the end of Iron Man got a couple of hundred thousand hits on youtube before being yanked got people excited.

Now, they mention Stark in the Thor movie in one throw away line and it becomes an Avengers commercial.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

I´m sorry, you guys don't understand why some people are saying that this last movies are just a set-up for The Avengers?
And you are saying this, in this movie, in the Captain America forums?
You guys do know that the movie's subtitle is THE FIRST AVENGER, right?
Do you want anymore set-up than that ridiculous subtitle?

There's been a disturbing trend I've noticed from critics and fanboys alike lately when it comes to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. There have been endless complaints about films being a "set-up" for The Avengers. First of all I don't believe it's true of any of the films, second of all who cares if it was?.

Who cares?
What about anyone that actually likes the characters and want a movie about them, not just movies to introduce the characters so they can make The Avengers in 2012?
I'll care about The Avengers in The Avengers movie, not before.
In a Captain America movie i want to care about Steve Rogers, in an Iron Man one i want to care about Tony Stark and so on...

Iron Man II is awful in every regard not just because SHIELD was there (but it didn't helped either, and the least we talk about Black Widow the best), in Thor it was just painful to watch SHIELD there.
SHIELD is everywhere, it´s ridiculous.

I really like TDK, but it alone isn't so amazing that I'd put it above ALL the Marvel Studio movies. And aside from TDK, what else does WB have? BB isn't better than Iron Man, Superman Returns was...average, so was Watchmen. And do I have to get into Green Lantern?

I´m not going to go about Marvel vs DC, i like comics, not companies, but....
The Dark Knight is not only better than ANY Marvel movie made so far, it is better than any comic book movie made ever.
Is not a perfect adaptation, but then again, we can´t really look at it this way, TDK is a sequel to Batman Begins, all flaws it has when it comes to an adaptation is on BB alone (the same deal goes to X-Men 2).
As for Batman Begins vs Iron Man...none of those are as great of a movie as people make them to be.
Iron Man works because of Downey Jr. and Jeff Bridges, two astonishing actors that make superb jobs.
Batman Begins fails as an adaptation of Batman, but, then again, what other superhero movie hasn´t failed when it comes to adapting the characters and be true to them?
Outside of Hellboy.......NONE

The best 6 comic book movies so far, imo, are:

1 - The Dark Knight
2- Ang Lee´s Hulk
3- X-Men 2
4- Hellboy
5- Sin City
6- Kick-Ass

 

[Alientraveller]

What about anyone that actually likes the characters and want a movie about them, not just movies to introduce the characters so they can make The Avengers in 2012?

Yet each movie was still about them.

So who would have investigated Mjolnir then?

 

[Raiden]

I´m sorry, you guys don't understand why some people are saying that this last movies are just a set-up for The Avengers?
And you are saying this, in this movie, in the Captain America forums?
You guys do know that the movie's subtitle is THE FIRST AVENGER, right?
Do you want anymore set-up than that ridiculous subtitle?

Obviously, The First Avenger is to setup the movie for next year, but it is only a movie subtitle. I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill there.

Who cares?
What about anyone that actually likes the characters and want a movie about them, not just movies to introduce the characters so they can make The Avengers in 2012?
I'll care about The Avengers in The Avengers movie, not before.
In a Captain America movie i want to care about Steve Rogers, in an Iron Man one i want to care about Tony Stark and so on...

They are called SHIELD, but would it have been any different if they were called FBI or CIA? They did not distract the movie, and Agent Coulson actually participated in the plot instead of just being a bystander. I think you just don't like the concept, even though SHIELD so far did not do anything to harm the movies they were in. And would you be happier if we just have an Avengers movie without any explaination or setup before its introduction? That would've been an awful idea.

Iron Man II is awful in every regard not just because SHIELD was there (but it didn't helped either, and the least we talk about Black Widow the best), in Thor it was just painful to watch SHIELD there.
SHIELD is everywhere, it´s ridiculous.

As I said, the SHIELD just functions like a government agency, and you won't have any problem if they were called any other name. I think it's great to see Agent Coulson, whom we were introduced in IM1, instead of a new agent or a nameless one at that.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

Another impressive thing about Marvel's "Avengers Initiative" is that we've had four different creative teams making their own movies, but also tied into each other. It all feels like the same universe, while telling very different stories and dealing with much different subject matters.

 

[TX85]

Another impressive thing about Marvel's "Avengers Initiative" is that we've had four different creative teams making their own movies, but also tied into each other. It all feels like the same universe, while telling very different stories and dealing with much different subject matters.

Indeed,I f'n love it and I've enjoyed all the tie-in including Iron Man 2(I must be one of the very few who enjoyed every tie-in stuff in IM2)!!!