The Avengers Will the Avengers be viewed in the same light as other classic ensemble movies?

[Juicy J]

^ You basically just summarized why I love Marvel Studios as much as I do.

 

[Dark Raven]

Silvestri better have a score as good and memorable as the Magnificent Seven and the Great Escape. I don't really remember the theme for the Dirty Dozen.

 

[Ultimatehero]

I think the best way to put it, is there hasn't been any successful cross-pollinated franchises.

That really doesn't do it justice though.

AvP, Freddy vs. Jason, the universal monsters, etc. ALL OF THEM had cross-overs that is true. But not once did they start out with the plan of bringing them all together in a unified story and world. Since Iron Man, we've known that 'The Avengers' was coming. And every MARVEL film since then has had a tag connecting them together. That's what makes this so unique. It wasn't "let's combine these already existing characters into a movie" it was "let's start here, create a universe where they all exist, interconnect them then bring them together." I mean, we've known about this movie for... god... six years or something now lol. And many of the characters throughout the film or inter-related in some means. They work as one unified story.

 

[Juicy J]

That really doesn't do it justice though.

AvP, Freddy vs. Jason, the universal monsters, etc. ALL OF THEM had cross-overs that is true. But not once did they start out with the plan of bringing them all together in a unified story and world. Since Iron Man, we've known that 'The Avengers' was coming. And every MARVEL film since then has had a tag connecting them together. That's what makes this so unique. It wasn't "let's combine these already existing characters into a movie" it was "let's start here, create a universe where they all exist, interconnect them then bring them together." I mean, we've known about this movie for... god... six years or something now lol.

Exactly.
Bringing together characters from already existing, separate franchises is nothing new; creating an entire on-screen universe and building up each characters backstory in separate but connected films has never been done before.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

Hours later and I still dont get the comparison with AvP

 

[Juicy J]

Hours later and I still dont get the comparison with AvP

Two characters from separate film franchises appearing in a movie together.
It's a tenuous connection but it's there.

 

[jmc]

Yeah you really can't compare this to anything thats ever been done on film before simply because nothing like it has been attempted. Yes, there have been cross-pollinated franchises before (Freddy vs Jason, AVP, etc) but nothing to this magnitude where there were 5 interweaving movies all culminating in the ensemble film. There really is no precedent for this.
In the end I feel like this movie (given all the positive buzz it's already getting) will be viewed in a league all it's own since it is truly unique, not just as an ensemble film.

But they only interweave on a basic level. The films aren't dependent on one and other to work, they cant otherwise no-one outside comic fanbase will follow them. Avengers really isn't a culmination of some grand story told over 5 films, it's another team up film admittedly a more elaborate one.

 

[cherokeesam]

That really doesn't do it justice though.

AvP, Freddy vs. Jason, the universal monsters, etc. ALL OF THEM had cross-overs that is true. But not once did they start out with the plan of bringing them all together in a unified story and world. Since Iron Man, we've known that 'The Avengers' was coming. And every MARVEL film since then has had a tag connecting them together. That's what makes this so unique. It wasn't "let's combine these already existing characters into a movie" it was "let's start here, create a universe where they all exist, interconnect them then bring them together." I mean, we've known about this movie for... god... six years or something now lol. And many of the characters throughout the film or inter-related in some means. They work as one unified story.

Some of you are acting like they just came up with this concept for the movies, though. This concept is interesting for one film, and one film only; after that, the MCU is established, and the novelty of having a cross-pollinated multiverse will wear off immediately.

You're forgetting that the reason this is happening is because that's the way it happened in the comic books. Pure and simple. The great big super-duper awesome crossover event happened back in 1963. The concept is already 50 years old.

The only thing Marvel Studios is doing is what CBM fans have been asking for ever since the CBM age actually began back in 1978 --- that is, to have a shared universe, the same way it exists in the comic books.

 

[Juicy J]

But they only interweave on a basic level. The films aren't dependent on one and other to work, they cant otherwise no-one outside comic fanbase will follow them. Avengers really isn't a culmination of some grand story told over 5 films, it's another team up film admittedly a more elaborate one.

Of course the films have to be independent of each other to work. If they didn't it would, in a way, defeat the whole purpose, because it's about four separate franchises coming together. The fact that they connect, even if you feel it's only on a 'basic' level, is, as I said, unprecedented.
And no one said the Avengers is a culmination of a 'grand story' told over five years, as there are 4 separate stories being told. It is, however, a culmination of what the connective tissue in each movie has been leading to. Summing it up as 'just another team up film only more elaborate' is completely underselling the whole thing.
As I said before: creating an entire on-screen universe and building up each characters backstory in separate but connected films has never been done until now.

This concept is interesting for one film, and one film only; after that, the MCU is established, and the novelty of having a cross-pollinated multiverse will wear off immediately.

What makes you say that? The concept was interesting for more than one story in the comic books, whose to say it's only going to be interesting in one film?

 

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Kudos to Marvel Studios for what they've done to lead to this movie, but at the end of the day, I'm sure that it's only going to be just a superhero movie, not a monumental lighting bolt in the history of film.

 

[El Payaso]

Kudos to Marvel Studios for what they've done to lead to this movie, but at the end of the day, I'm sure that it's only going to be just a superhero movie, not a monumental lighting bolt in the history of film.

Basically.

 

[Quasimod0]

Unless its just completely amazing, it won't be viewed in the same light as classic ensemble movies because it's already an established team in many other forms of media

 

[jmc]

Of course the films have to be independent of each other to work. If they didn't it would, in a way, defeat the whole purpose, because it's about four separate franchises coming together. The fact that they connect, even if you feel it's only on a 'basic' level, is, as I said, unprecedented.
And no one said the Avengers is a culmination of a 'grand story' told over five years, as there are 4 separate stories being told. It is, however, a culmination of what the connective tissue in each movie has been leading to. Summing it up as 'just another team up film only more elaborate' is completely underselling the whole thing.
As I said before: creating an entire on-screen universe and building up each characters backstory in separate but connected films has never been done until now.

But if there's nothing overall that's connecting them as a whole from a story perspective what's so special about the universe? If the stories remain individual you're not really enhancing anything, you're not really leading to anything, all you're doing is saying these characters live in the same world. Okay....and? If each film's plot in the lead up was some crucial piece to the Avengers puzzle where viewing it was required then yes it would be unprecedented and would probably make the team up payoff all the greater, but to have done so would have been catastrophic because only people like us would have paid attention to a series of films dedicated to each character who's plots all intertwined. So in the end whilst the number of characters teaming up I would agree is new, in essence we're still getting a team up film that's been done before.

 

[Marvel]

Of course the films have to be independent of each other to work. If they didn't it would, in a way, defeat the whole purpose, because it's about four separate franchises coming together. The fact that they connect, even if you feel it's only on a 'basic' level, is, as I said, unprecedented.
And no one said the Avengers is a culmination of a 'grand story' told over five years, as there are 4 separate stories being told. It is, however, a culmination of what the connective tissue in each movie has been leading to. Summing it up as 'just another team up film only more elaborate' is completely underselling the whole thing.
As I said before: creating an entire on-screen universe and building up each characters backstory in separate but connected films has never been done until now.

Exactly right and it IS wild and unprecedented. Empire Mag has a fun but telling look at the whole concept. They were joking around but there's truth in the jest. It's simply an epic idea that Marvel had and is pulling off this May.

They have some fun and compare "what if other genres took The Avengers crossover route?" Avengers really is that unique and such a cool concept. Here are there examples...

SuperSpies: The team- James Bond, Jason Bourne, Ethan Hunt and Xander Cage.
tagline: "Undercover and over the top."


Maverick Cops: The team - John McClane, Martin Riggs, Dirty Harry and Axel Foley
tagline: "They have the right to remain violent"


Strippers: The team - Sin City's Nancy (Jessica Alba), The Wrestler's Cassidy (Marisa Tomei), From Dusk Till Dawn's Satanico (Salma Hayek) and The Full Monty's Gaz (Robert Carlyle)
tagline: "Unleashed. Undressed. Unstoppable."

This really has never been tried before to take leads from solo successful films and tell a tale.

 

[Juicy J]

Haha I've never seen that before but that's hilarious ^

But if there's nothing overall that's connecting them as a whole from a story perspective what's so special about the universe? If the stories remain individual you're not really enhancing anything, you're not really leading to anything, all you're doing is saying these characters live in the same world. Okay....and? If each film's plot in the lead up was some crucial piece to the Avengers puzzle where viewing it was required then yes it would be unprecedented and would probably make the team up payoff all the greater, but to have done so would have been catastrophic because only people like us would have paid attention to a series of films dedicated to each character who's plots all intertwined. So in the end whilst the number of characters teaming up I would agree is new, in essence we're still getting a team up film that's been done before.

You have seen these movies before, right? You are aware that they are all brought together by SHIELD, an organization which has a presence in literally all 5 of the MCU movies? And that they will be teaming up against the villain from Thor, a character from one of the aforementioned previous films?
So yes, in a way each of these films is a crucial piece to the Avengers puzzle. I thought that was self-evident.
And if this really has been done before on film, then by all means, tell me when.

 

[Marvel]

You have seen these movies before, right? You are aware that they are all brought together by SHIELD, an organization which has a presence in literally all 5 of the MCU movies? And that they will be teaming up against the villain from Thor, a character from one of the aforementioned previous films?
So yes, in a way each of these films is a crucial piece to the Avengers puzzle. I thought that was self-evident.
And if this really has been done before on film, then by all means, tell me when.

That's why Marvel has been so masterful. Each film can stand on its own yet each film has added depth to the last. If you would replace SHIELD with the FBI in Iron Man, it would still work perfectly. Yet, having Howard Stark appear in Cap makes both Iron Man films that much more complex if you choose to invest in that universe. It truly is brilliant really.

 

[gugumugats]

But they only interweave on a basic level. The films aren't dependent on one and other to work, they cant otherwise no-one outside comic fanbase will follow them. Avengers really isn't a culmination of some grand story told over 5 films, it's another team up film admittedly a more elaborate one.

This is the point I've been trying to make in the small Justice League thread. Of course, we all know a JL movie might never happen.

I dont think jmc is saying that Avengers is not unprecedented or something, but it really isn't as big a deal as some us fanboys think it is. If anything, the Avengers is just the climax for this big ambitious universe that Marvel Studios created. For me, the excitement has been ongoing since the post credits in Iron Man.

Here's another point of discussion. Would Avengers work in a vacuum? For instance, imagine you're part of the GA and you've never seen any of the other MCU movies.

 

[jmc]

Haha I've never seen that before but that's hilarious ^

You have seen these movies before, right? You are aware that they are all brought together by SHIELD, an organization which has a presence in literally all 5 of the MCU movies? And that they will be teaming up against the villain from Thor, a character from one of the aforementioned previous films?
So yes, in a way each of these films is a crucial piece to the Avengers puzzle. I thought that was self-evident.
And if this really has been done before on film, then by all means, tell me when.

Again, they're just shared elements though it's not knowledge that's required or even what you'd term vital. The name 'Shield' is inconsequential in all the films, you could replace Shield in each film with a completely different government organization, FBI, CIA, whatever, and the story doesn't change one bit. As for Loki, he's going to have to have some form of introduction in Avengers given not everyone would have seen Thor, and that goes for all the characters to some degree except maybe Iron Man. Rule one is you don't assume the audience knows everything, in fact I'm pretty sure Joss said something along those line in regards to this film, so if that's his mind set I'll hazard a guess and say he's approached it very much as it's own thing meaning we're probably not going to get much major referencing of the past films, which it actually good because you risk losing your audience otherwise.

This is the point I've been trying to make in the small Justice League thread. Of course, we all know a JL movie might never happen.

I dont think jmc is saying that Avengers is not unprecedented or something, but it really isn't as big a deal as some us fanboys think it is. If anything, the Avengers is just the climax for this big ambitious universe that Marvel Studios created. For me, the excitement has been ongoing since the post credits in Iron Man.

I do think the unprecedented tag gets used incorrectly but that's pretty much what I'm getting at, I think the fan community is making it out to be a bigger deal than what other people are. Hell I had someone ask me 'where's that Green Lantern dude in Avengers?'. Seriously the vast majority of people don't really care how connected things are, all they know is that there's a movie with a bunch of superheroes coming up.

Here's another point of discussion. Would Avengers work in a vacuum? For instance, imagine you're part of the GA and you've never seen any of the other MCU movies.

It's has to work on it's own. If it relies too heavily on past films then that's going to affect who see the movie. But it's a good question and one that's given me an idea for a topic on the Misc Comics forums so I might take this conversation over there and not tie up this thread any further.

 

[jmc]

Just to return to the topic of the thread, I think what you'd term classic ensembles usually only come about several years down the line, even decades, and depends on the quality of the film itself. Even in the last 10 years films you'd be pretty hard pressed for someone to name a great ensemble film that's stuck in people's memory.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

But they only interweave on a basic level.

which is more than any of the Vs. movies ever had and this "basic level", the shared universe, the aknowledgement those other heroes exist out there, right from the start, is the big difference

The films aren't dependent on one and other to work,

no they aren't. those are seperate franchises. nevertheless, they coexist in an interconnecting movie universe. again, this is, what has never been done before, this is the novelty, this is the bold and risky move.

they cant otherwise no-one outside comic fanbase will follow them.

just like the audience of the harry potter movies consisted only of Potter readers?
IF Marvel would have gone the way you suggest and, instead of having different connected franchises, decided to just have ONE massive franchise with all those films being sequels and more depended on one another, it wouldn't be very different than the Potter movies, the Star Wars movies, Twilight or the Narnia movies (different lead roles in different films), or any other multiparted movie saga.But all of this has been done before.
Instead, they did something different.

Avengers really isn't a culmination of some grand story told over 5 films,

No. It is just the end of the first chapter of the MCU and also the first part of a new franchise in the MCU, consisting of characters already introduced in the MCU.

it's another team up film admittedly a more elaborate one.

You think?

 

[jmc]

Do me a favour, don't bother splitting my posts up coz I won't reply to them. Anyway, I've got a thread planned for this topic of conversation that I'm gonna put into the Misc Comics films thread where this discussion can take place. I don't wanna high jack this thread.

 

[Shadowlord X]

I think the best way to put it, is there hasn't been any successful cross-pollinated franchises.

I do admire Marvel's chutzpah for even attempting this. I'm also thankful that Disney owns them because should this be a complete failure (which I highly doubt), this won't kill them.

I've never been rooting as much for a film in my life though, because should they pull this off, I think it will encourage other studios to take chances. I get so tired of hearing people say Marvel plays it safe with their films. This is hardly safe, in fact nothing they have done has been particularly safe.

Need I remind people they had a good thing going co-releasing films in conjunction with other studios. Sure they had some misses, with Daredevil and Elektra, but even the FF movies, while they may have not been great, they did make money. X-men and Spider-man were huge successes.

Going out with Iron Man on their own, who up until that point was not all that well known outside of the comic fan base, was a huge risk. They took out huge loans to finance the film, which potentially could have sent Marvel back into bankrupcy court as they were in the 1990's. They also decided to reboot a franchise that everyone said was a total flop in Ang Lee's Hulk.

Adding to that, the thought from the beginning was to create the MCU, which was a huge risk. Captain America didn't even have a screen play at the time they made the decision to make the MCU. While some called Fiege for interference of the directors, he was trying to make a cohesive story that would not contradict itself, so he asserted his authority in areas that might undermine the MCU, but at the same time, allowed the film makers to make their own story. Iron Man, Hulk, Iron Man 2, Thor, Captain America: The First Avenger....five films that couldn't be more different interms of style yet they form somewhat of a pseudo saga.

I for one loudly applaud Marvel for what they are doning here, and hope it pays off big time.

Thank you, sir, for these inspirational words!

This post deserves a round of applause, a standing ovation, and an encore!!!



The deluxe edition Handbook of the MARVEL UNIVERSE got me permanently attached on a deep level to MARVEL, and honestly, I think the MCU is the greatest thing ever!

 

[Shadowlord X]

You know what never ceases to amaze me?

There are certain individuals who are frequenters of this site who simply cannot stand to see fans of the MCU acknowledging how great the concept is and expressing that joy to one another. They literally see people thoroughly enjoying something that they don't like or are not invested in, and for some reason that gripes them on the inside. And they are compelled to intervene in such discussions and do what they can to tear down the concept and put a damper on the joy MCU fans are feeling.

I can never truly understand the mentality of such people.

 

[Hawkingbird]

I think that the movie may not go down in film history, but Marvel might for creating their own movie franchises.

 

[Dark Raven]

How do people think it will rate alongside blockbuster movies with ensemble casts like Star Wars, Independence Day or Jurrasic Park? I wouldn't say though that Jurrasic Park has a really huge actor attached to it, unlike with Harrison Ford or Will Smith in the other two. I don't think Jeff Goldblum or Sam Neil are in quite the same league.