The Avengers (2012) spoilers from post 1181

krudler · 13-05-2012 7:11pm

CL7 wrote: »

Balls. Going to see it tonight and 2D version isn't showing at the new cinema in Limerick.

I was at it earlier it was on in the luxury screen in 2D, dont think its on for the later shows though

don ramo · 13-05-2012 8:42pm

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Avengers breaks the billion mark!

nice, hopefully itll pass out titanic,

Basq · 13-05-2012 8:47pm

don ramo wrote: »

nice, hopefully itll pass out titanic,

And 'Avatar' too while it's at it..

don ramo · 13-05-2012 8:53pm

Basq wrote: »

And 'Avatar' too while it's at it..

that would be brilliant if it could, it a far better film than avatar, but id say its asking a lot though,

pixelburp · 13-05-2012 9:09pm

The power of repeat viewings, clearly :eek:

johnny_ultimate · 13-05-2012 9:13pm

There is a slight 'Titanic for the 18-45 year old male' phenomenon going on

opti76 · 13-05-2012 9:21pm

saw this yesterday.... i must admit .. it was awesome ... hulk was perfect .. somebody please tell me that ruffallo has signed on for a proper hulk movie.

Mickeroo · 13-05-2012 9:23pm

pixelburp wrote: »

The power of repeat viewings, clearly :eek:

Hopefully in the way Avatar started a craze for 3D this will start a craze for making films that are of a quality that compells people to go watch them more than once!

I can see it now, in 3 years will all be giving out about how the slew of well made pop corn films are only a gimmick :pac:

don ramo · 13-05-2012 9:33pm

opti76 wrote: »

saw this yesterday.... i must admit .. it was awesome ... hulk was perfect .. somebody please tell me that ruffallo has signed on for a proper hulk movie.

he signed a 6 film deal with marvel there a week or two ago, no word on another hulk film yet, but ruffalo will most likely appear in some of the other guys films, maybe iron man 3 or Captain America 2, cant really see how he could appear in Thor 2,

there is also talks of a S.H.E.I.L.D film a hawkeye/black widow film and a nick fury film so he could potentially pop up there aswell,

i would love to see him get his own film though,

Mickeroo · 13-05-2012 9:35pm

don ramo wrote: »

he signed a 6 film deal with marvel there a week or two ago, no word on another hulk film yet, but ruffalo will most likely appear in some of the other guys films, maybe iron man 3 or Captain America 2, cant really see how he could appear in Thor 2,

Well of course he'll be in the other guy's movies :P

don ramo · 13-05-2012 9:37pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Well of course he'll be in the other guy's movies :P

would him and marky mark get along though:D

522835_10150767777543386_190558433385_9749332_4676398_n.jpg

pixelburp · 13-05-2012 9:39pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Hopefully in the way Avatar started a craze for 3D this will start a craze for making films that are of a quality that compells people to go watch them more than once!

I can see it now, in 3 years will all be giving out about how the slew of well made pop corn films are only a gimmick :pac:

Unfortunately I'd say it's more likely to continue the gimmick of 3D; the studios will see this as a sign the public are happy with 3D, ignoring the fact they essentially forced our hand.

Impossible to figure out of course, but I'd be curious to know what the highest grossing movie is on a single view per person.

Hashtag_HEEL · 13-05-2012 9:42pm

don ramo wrote: »

he signed a 6 film deal with marvel there a week or two ago, no word on another hulk film yet, but ruffalo will most likely appear in some of the other guys films, maybe iron man 3 or Captain America 2, cant really see how he could appear in Thor 2,

I'd love to see the Hulk in Iron Man 3! Two Great scientific minds! Two Funny characters! What could be better?:D

Turtyturd · 13-05-2012 9:59pm

Hashtag_HEEL wrote: »

I'd love to see the Hulk in Iron Man 3! Two Great scientific minds! Two Funny characters! What could be better?:D

I think given the ending of Avengers, Banner appearing in IM 3 is a certainty.

johnny_ultimate · 13-05-2012 10:03pm

If we were to measure a film's financial success purely on a 'warrants [X] rewatches', than Primer should have been the highest grossing film of all time!

In actuality, it's all probably down to being a very big budget film with an instantly recognisable brand (Batman, Titanic, Lord of the Rings, Avengers, Harry Potter - Avatar being the mandatory exception, and I guess 'James Cameron' is in itself a brand). Some degree of basic storytelling competency helps, and it must appeal to a very broad demographic. Preferably a demographic that has money.

It's really impossible to pin down 'why' though. To me, neither Avengers or Titanic or Avatar are films that demand multiple theatrical re-viewings, but I don't pretend to in any way understand the activities of the cinema-going public!

Bullseye1 · 13-05-2012 10:35pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

It's really impossible to pin down 'why' though. To me, Avengers.......that demand multiple theatrical re-viewings, but I don't pretend to in any way understand the activities of the cinema-going public!

Not sure if you read comics but if you had no way would you not see a reason for multiple viewings. 10 years ago when most of these comic movies kicked off people still would not have believed that Avengers would ever make it to the silver screen especially when Marvel had carved up their characters among the different studios.

If WB/DC ever produce a JLA it will be an even bigger surprise since they seem incapable of making a movie outside Batman and Superman and even the latter character has struggled. DC must be seriously regretting Joss not making Wonder Woman.

jaykhunter · 13-05-2012 10:49pm

I wish Box Office Mojo would divide the revenue a film brings in by the average ticket price that year, so we could get a more accurate representation of how popular a film actually is. I know the media doesn't want that because every time a big film comes out & does well, it'll break box office records....i.e. 'tis a lot easier to do that if your film costs double what it did a decade ago...but as an information site Box office Mojo should tabulate it.

johnny_ultimate · 13-05-2012 10:57pm

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Not sure if you read comics but if you had no way would you not see a reason for multiple viewings. 10 years ago when most of these comic movies kicked off people still would not have believed that Avengers would ever make it to the silver screen especially when Marvel had carved up their characters among the different studios.

To me the only way a film deserves a reviewing in the cinema is a) you want to go with other friends or b) it's a work that truly requires another look to get your teeth around (and that's very rare - only one that jumps out recently is Margaret, and I'm going to wait for DVD on that one). To me, there's not really anything in The Avengers that requires a second-look. That's not necessarily a criticism mind - I don't think the vast majority of great films require a second look in close succession to the first. I actually think it takes away from the enjoyment of the film, as I tend to find myself 'taking it apart' a bit more if the film is still fresh in my mind, and means it will be a long time before I feel comfortable rewatching it again as it'll all be too familiar.

Again, this is just me, and I'm clearly a minority on here. But I had my fun with The Avengers: done & dusted, many more films to watch (none of which I'll rewatch immediately either). Not complex enough to justify spending more time with it when there's so many others in cinemas at the moment. I don't read the comics, but I very much doubt I'd feel differently if I did.

Mickeroo · 13-05-2012 11:03pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I don't read the comics, but I very much doubt I'd feel differently if I did.

I'm not disputing the rest of your post, sound reasoning all around, but if you had grown up reading the comics and watching the cartoons the way I did I seriously doubt you'd have only gone to see this once. I still can't believe it got made

Then again I'm sure you've seen film adaptations of stuff you loved just as much and only watched it once too, so its probably a case of different strokes I suppose

krudler · 13-05-2012 11:21pm

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Not sure if you read comics but if you had no way would you not see a reason for multiple viewings. 10 years ago when most of these comic movies kicked off people still would not have believed that Avengers would ever make it to the silver screen especially when Marvel had carved up their characters among the different studios.

If WB/DC ever produce a JLA it will be an even bigger surprise since they seem incapable of making a movie outside Batman and Superman and even the latter character has struggled. DC must be seriously regretting Joss not making Wonder Woman.

outside Batman and Superman a lot of DC characters are...kinda sh1te tbh. Its prob why so few of them make it to movies, and the ones that do arent very good, like Green Lantern. the Marvel universe tends to be more movie friendly, just imo though

brianregan09 · 13-05-2012 11:22pm

Exactly same as myself grew up reading about the Avengers and watching the comics, and im actually happy that Spiderman is at another studio same with X-men because they both have there own massive convaluted continuitys , spidey or wolverine weren;t original Avengers anyway :P

Also doubt Banner will be in IM3 as marvel has repeatedly said that Tony is gonna have to go it alone here (they learned from IM2)

Mickeroo · 13-05-2012 11:33pm

krudler wrote: »

outside Batman and Superman a lot of DC characters are...kinda sh1te tbh. Its prob why so few of them make it to movies, and the ones that do arent very good, like Green Lantern. the Marvel universe tends to be more movie friendly, just imo though

Can't say I agree with that, Green Lantern is a brilliant character as is the Flash. Don't judge GL on his crappy movie. Jesus, if they made a proper JLA movie I don't think I'd be able to contain myself.

krudler · 13-05-2012 11:38pm

brianregan09 wrote: »

Exactly same as myself grew up reading about the Avengers and watching the comics, and im actually happy that Spiderman is at another studio same with X-men because they both have there own massive convaluted continuitys , spidey or wolverine weren;t original Avengers anyway :P

Also doubt Banner will be in IM3 as marvel has repeatedly said that Tony is gonna have to go it alone here (they learned from IM2)

I'd say Banner will have a cameo or bit part at least, although Marvel prob wont want Banner in a movie without the Hulk appearing, since Hulk gets most of the big audience pleasing moments in Avengers it'd be silly to not have him go green at least once if he does make an appearance, but then they might want to keep the individual characters in their own movies and the team only in Avengers sequels, who knows.

krudler · 13-05-2012 11:39pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Can't say I agree with that, Green Lantern is a brilliant character as is the Flash. Don't judge GL on his crappy movie. Jesus, if they made a proper JLA movie I don't think I'd be able to contain myself.

I meant more Aquaman and Wonder Woman :pac:

Mickeroo · 13-05-2012 11:41pm

krudler wrote: »

I meant more Aquaman and Wonder Woman :pac:

Haha, I get you! Having said that they've had some damn good storylines too!

Galvasean · 14-05-2012 1:13am

pixelburp wrote: »

Impossible to figure out of course, but I'd be curious to know what the highest grossing movie is on a single view per person.

I believe Gone With The wind is still the 'most popular' film having sold more individual cinema tickets than any other film.

Gonzo · 14-05-2012 2:54am

saw this movie in 3D and it ruined the film on me. I will never go see a 3D movie ever again. Rewatched it in 2D and it's much better.

Zubeneschamali · 14-05-2012 9:36am

Otacon wrote: »

I think Thor seemed short-changed because he had the smallest arc. He basically ends the movie as he starts, with little character progression.

Thank Christ Whedon has more sense than to fake up some bullsh!t just to tick a box that says every character has an arc.

Zubeneschamali · 14-05-2012 9:49am

jaykhunter wrote: »

I wish Box Office Mojo would divide the revenue a film brings in by the average ticket price that year, so we could get a more accurate representation of how popular a film actually is.

You mean like this?

Avengers is at #105 in the list, if you don't care to click through, just ahead of Shrek 3, and behind Shrek.

jaykhunter · 14-05-2012 10:22am

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

You mean like this?

Kind of! Except these adjust every film ever to today's ticket prices, so the numbers will change each year - instead of dividing gross by the ave ticket price that year - the numbers would stay the same; i.e. estimated tickets sold.

For example, Star Wars brought in $775,398,007 total. The average ticket price in 1977 is $2.23. So it sold an estimated 347,712,111 tickets. That final number will always stay the same.

By comparison, AVATAR brought in $2,782,275,172 with an average ticket price of $7.50 (although this might be inaccurate as it was only/mostly shown in 3D, right?) So anyway by these numbers it sold 370,970,023 tickets.

Of course it'd be more accurate finding out the % seen in 3D and ave price per country etc but I think estimated tickets sold it makes for a far more interesting discussion/objective view! Also it annoys me that they look much closer at domestic gross, despite international generally doubling the box office or better!

Zubeneschamali · 14-05-2012 10:28am

jaykhunter wrote: »

instead of dividing gross by the ave ticket price that year - the numbers would stay the same; i.e. estimated tickets sold.

Ah, you mean like this.

Avengers is still 105, of course, and Gone with the wind is still 4 times its total.

don ramo · 14-05-2012 11:03am

jaykhunter wrote: »

Kind of! Except these adjust every film ever to today's ticket prices, so the numbers will change each year - instead of dividing gross by the ave ticket price that year - the numbers would stay the same; i.e. estimated tickets sold.

For example, Star Wars brought in $775,398,007 total. The average ticket price in 1977 is $2.23. So it sold an estimated 347,712,111 tickets. That final number will always stay the same.

By comparison, AVATAR brought in $2,782,275,172 with an average ticket price of $7.50 (although this might be inaccurate as it was only/mostly shown in 3D, right?) So anyway by these numbers it sold 370,970,023 tickets.

Of course it'd be more accurate finding out the % seen in 3D and ave price per country etc but I think estimated tickets sold it makes for a far more interesting discussion/objective view! Also it annoys me that they look much closer at domestic gross, despite international generally doubling the box office or better!

yeah spot on, case and point Avatar $700+million american domestic, $2+billion internationally,

film success should be rated by the simple calculations of bums on seats, obviously for now and for a while yet breaking a billion dollars at the box office will be a big deal, maybe in 10 years when it costs $400million dollars to make a romantic comedy a billion dollars will be a failure:D

CL7 · 14-05-2012 11:20am

krudler wrote: »

I was at it earlier it was on in the luxury screen in 2D, dont think its on for the later shows though

Saw it last night, excellent. The 3D was pointless like most people said on here though. Was impressed with the new cinema as well. Going to go back there again later this week and watch it in 2D.

jaykhunter · 14-05-2012 11:49am

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Ah, you mean like this. Avengers is still 105, of course, and Gone with the wind is still 4 times its total.

Almost!

That one does the estimated tickets, but for just the US -- can u find a page that includes international (i.e. total revenue)?

Nervous Wreck · 14-05-2012 11:53am

Mickeroo wrote: »

Can't say I agree with that, Green Lantern is a brilliant character as is the Flash. Don't judge GL on his crappy movie. Jesus, if they made a proper JLA movie I don't think I'd be able to contain myself.

I actually liked the GL movie.... It wasn't the best but it was certainly better than I was expecting it to be! And it set up nicely for a sequel (that will probably never happen even though ****ing Ghost Rider got a sequel :mad: ).

I agree though, there are some good characters and good stories to tell in the DC universe! I can't see a JLA movie happening in the next 15 years though tbh. As said, although Batman has been incredibly successful, there hasn't really been a critically successful Superman movie since Superman II. DC seems well able to produce fantastic storylines for films (individual characters and JLA alike) but they're mostly in the animated incarnations. I wanna see a live action movie!

Penn · 14-05-2012 11:57am

Anyone else hear about some adoption organisation is upset because of Thor's "He's adopted" line? They're saying that the film is trying to imply that Loki is the bad buy because he was adopted. Heard it this morning on the Hollywood Babble-On podcast.

F*cking ridiculous if true. People will take any chance to be offended at anything. The joke isn't that Loki was adopted. The joke is that Thor was defending him but when he found out what he did he tried to weasel out of it by saying that to distance himself from Loki.

Another source

Nervous Wreck · 14-05-2012 12:05pm

Penn wrote: »

Anyone else hear about some adoption organisation is upset because of Thor's "He's adopted" line? They're saying that the film is trying to imply that Loki is the bad buy because he was adopted. Heard it this morning on the Hollywood Babble-On podcast.

F*cking ridiculous if true. People will take any chance to be offended at anything. The joke isn't that Loki was adopted. The joke is that Thor was defending him but when he found out what he did he tried to weasel out of it by saying that to distance himself from Loki.

Another source

I hate the world....

don ramo · 14-05-2012 12:12pm

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

I actually liked the GL movie.... It wasn't the best but it was certainly better than I was expecting it to be! And it set up nicely for a sequel (that will probably never happen even though ****ing Ghost Rider got a sequel :mad: ).

I agree though, there are some good characters and good stories to tell in the DC universe! I can't see a JLA movie happening in the next 15 years though tbh. As said, although Batman has been incredibly successful, there hasn't really been a critically successful Superman movie since Superman II. DC seems well able to produce fantastic storylines for films (individual characters and JLA alike) but they're mostly in the animated incarnations. I wanna see a live action movie!

there has been rumblings of a JLA movie for a year or two, DC are on about rebooting batman almost immediately after TDKR,

Superman (Man of Steel) is being rebooted right now, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0770828/ , due for release next June,

while Green Lantern exploded all over the place so did the Ang Lees Hulk, so no reason it couldn't be rebooted in 2 or 3 years,

surely they could update Wonder Woman a bit to appeal to audiences, as they could with Green Arrow and The Flash,

i was never into comics but looking at what Marvel have acheived without some of there most recognizable names available to them, shows that with the right idea and the right people it can be done,

Mickeroo · 14-05-2012 12:17pm

I guarantee after the success of Avengers WB will want to do a JLA movie, thats the way hollwood works sure, if something makes big money the other studios will try and emulate it.

Handsome Bob · 14-05-2012 12:36pm

I thought GL was absolute muck, typified by that speech Hal gave to the villain about how he was chosen, I thought that he came across as a bit of a dickhead.

spankmaster2000 · 14-05-2012 1:12pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

I guarantee after the success of Avengers WB will want to do a JLA movie, thats the way hollwood works sure, if something makes big money the other studios will try and emulate it.

George Miller actually made a decent stab at making a Justive League film a few years ago.
Although it was eventually canned; I do remember reading about the entire cast, being on-set while fully costumed; even if it was only for a few hours.

Those are some spy-shots from a set I'd love to have seen!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_League_Mortal#Canceled_film

krudler · 14-05-2012 1:13pm

CL7 wrote: »

Saw it last night, excellent. The 3D was pointless like most people said on here though. Was impressed with the new cinema as well. Going to go back there again later this week and watch it in 2D.

they've ended the 2D run afaik, asked them during the week, they have a facebook page and are good for answering questions on it though so if enough people ask they might run it in 2D again. its a balls that not only is 2D getting less showings but it ends its run first.

Mickeroo · 14-05-2012 1:20pm

spankmaster2000 wrote: »

George Miller actually made a decent stab at making a Justive League film a few years ago.
Although it was eventually canned; I do remember reading about the entire cast, being on-set while fully costumed; even if it was only for a few hours.

Those are some spy-shots from a set I'd love to have seen!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_League_Mortal#Canceled_film

Yeah I remember that, it was going to be a seperate universe from the Nolan & Singer ones with a younger cast iirc.

Would have been interesting to see how it would have worked without lead up movies like the Avengers had the luxury of.I guess supes and bats would have been the main focus.

There was also a Superman/Batman team-up movie in the works being directed by Wolfgang Peterson at one point, though it was being billed as Superman Vs. Batman.

Nervous Wreck · 14-05-2012 1:22pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Would have been interesting to see how it would have worked without lead up movies like the Avengers had the luxury of.I guess supes and bats would have been the main focus.

If DC were to do a JLA movie, some lead-ups would be essential.

Galvasean · 14-05-2012 2:17pm

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

I hate the world....

constitutionus · 14-05-2012 3:44pm

got around to watching it again last friday in the new IMC cinema in tallght and went to the 3D showing .

now im NOT a fan of 3D.

Im not rabidly against it like some ,but ive gotten sick of seeing such half arsed versions of it that it may as well not exist.

but sweet jesus the 3D in this was actually very good !

now maybe its the cinema. supposedly its state of the art and the glasses i got arent like the ones i get in liffey valley and were easier to put over my own but none of the things that usually piss me off were apparent.

the screen was nice and bright and some fecking how it even made caps outfit looks better (i really dont understand that one, i hated his helmet in 2d but it blended in better here).

3D is still something ill only go to on a rare occasion if i can help it but it wasnt the disaster i expected in this, particularly some of the flying shots though new york. gave me a bit of hope for the spidey film. and they avoided some of the more obvious tropes (i wouldve sworn blind that bit with the helicopter going down at the begining with the blades hitting the ground would be in 3D but it wasnt.)

fair play to em.

i'd actually have no prob advising people to see it in that format and im lost to think of another action film beyond avatar that i can say that about.

krudler · 14-05-2012 4:04pm

overheard someone arguing about how Stark could have fallen back through the portal once on the other side if there's no gravity in space, guess the earths gravity was strong enough to pull him back through as he wasnt that far past it the wormhole/portal thingy

Penn · 14-05-2012 4:11pm

krudler wrote: »

overheard someone arguing about how Stark could have fallen back through the portal once on the other side if there's no gravity in space, guess the earths gravity was strong enough to pull him back through as he wasnt that far past it the wormhole/portal thingy

I was more so thinking the explosion of the missile hitting the Chitauri ship/base may have also pushed him towards the portal, then allowing gravity to pull him back through

mikhail · 14-05-2012 6:06pm

krudler wrote: »

overheard someone arguing about how Stark could have fallen back through the portal once on the other side if there's no gravity in space, guess the earths gravity was strong enough to pull him back through as he wasnt that far past it the wormhole/portal thingy

I am unable to perform the necessary piece of relativistic calculus to tell whether gravity would have an effect through a circular aperture (ignoring for a moment the physics the aperture itself). At least I know I haven't a clue how that'd work though.

jcsoulinger · 14-05-2012 6:12pm

I seen this at the weekend, I taught it was good just a little kiddish for my taste but fully expected that going in so its not a real fault of the film. Would give it 7 out of 10.

Dont know if someone asked this in the thread before but in the hulks first appearance in the film he is totally out of control but in his second freak out he seems to know exactly what hes doing, this inconsistency really grinded my gears.

The Avengers (2012) *spoilers from post 1181*

Comments

The Avengers (2012) spoilers from post 1181