The Avengers (2012) *spoilers from post 1181*

Galvasean

I would imagine it's like any comic hero->movie adaptation, based loosely on the mythos, drawing from various sources but given its own spin.

Doctor DooM

That was kinda the point I wanted to make, only Galva made it reasonably and I went into full blown nerd mode

Galvasean

Doctor DooM wrote: »

That was kinda the point I wanted to make, only Galva made it reasonably and I went into full blown nerd mode

I'm used to it from having the explain that Huffer isn't in the Transformers movie because it isn't a direct remake of MTMTE as many (somehow!) seemed to believe was going to be the case.

Turtyturd

http://www.newsarama.com/film/10-things-avengers-trailer-120229.html

Thought the trailer was decent enough, I hope this works out, because it is a huge undertaking by Marvel but can see it being a little overcrowded with characters. Also not too sure about the inclusion of Loki, I think it would have been better if they focused solely on the Chitauri/Skrull invasion.

Doctor DooM

Galvasean wrote: »

I'm used to it from having the explain that Huffer isn't in the Transformers movie because it isn't a direct remake of MTMTE as many (somehow!) seemed to believe was going to be the case.

Really? How did people even think that would work?

Turtyturd wrote: »

http://www.newsarama.com/film/10-things-avengers-trailer-120229.html

Thought the trailer was decent enough, I hope this works out, because it is a huge undertaking by Marvel but can see it being a little overcrowded with characters. Also not too sure about the inclusion of Loki, I think it would have been better if they focused solely on the Chitauri/Skrull invasion.

I'd bet money at the end of this film one of the Avengers will be revealed to be a Skrull and that'll set up a "Secret Invasion" sequel. I am not convinced we're seeing Skrulls here yet tbh.

Mickeroo

Turtyturd wrote: »

http://www.newsarama.com/film/10-things-avengers-trailer-120229.html

Thought the trailer was decent enough, I hope this works out, because it is a huge undertaking by Marvel but can see it being a little overcrowded with characters. Also not too sure about the inclusion of Loki, I think it would have been better if they focused solely on the Chitauri/Skrull invasion.

Did loki not having something to do with the invasion in The Ultimates? Or am I mixing volume 1&2 up together?

constitutionus

other plus's in the new trailer is the music is more fitting than the first one.

it really sets a tone.

also it kinda hints at things in places that ive forgotton about.

take the breif scene with cap in civvies shaking banners hand on what looks like the sheild helicarrier.

if memory serves the revamp they did on the hulk suggested it was erskines work banner was experimenting with (though i think without his knowledge).

theres a nice little sub plot there connecting cap and the hulk.

also i really liked the new stark tower and brief shot of cap taking a header from above .

ricero

is red skull gonna be in it ?

don ramo

paddy kerins wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tY9DnBNJFTI

Looks pretty neat

think ill schedual my corrective eye surgery for April 28th:D

YouTookMyName

The Avengers will be called Avengers Assemble in the UK. In case anyone confuses it with the 1960s TV series or the abomination of a movie with Uma Thurman obviously.

Turtyturd

Mickeroo wrote: »

Did loki not having something to do with the invasion in The Ultimates? Or am I mixing volume 1&2 up together?

It's been a while since I read them but I can only remember him appearing in Vol 2.

Galvasean

YouTookMyName wrote: »

The Avengers will be called Avengers Assemble in the UK. In case anyone confuses it with the 1960s TV series or the abomination of a movie with Uma Thurman obviously.

Oh lord I had forgotten about that!
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118661/

icarus86

This name change so stupid, id have thought that Marvels Avengers and the individual charachters involved would be well enough known that the average movie goer could tell the difference between them and that dodgy show from years back? Does it only apply to the UK and IRL or is it world wide?

Mickeroo

icarus86 wrote: »

This name change so stupid, id have thought that Marvels Avengers and the individual charachters involved would be well enough known that the average movie goer could tell the difference between them and that dodgy show from years back? Does it only apply to the UK and IRL or is it world wide?

just the UK and here afaik

krudler

icarus86 wrote: »

This name change so stupid, id have thought that Marvels Avengers and the individual charachters involved would be well enough known that the average movie goer could tell the difference between them and that dodgy show from years back? Does it only apply to the UK and IRL or is it world wide?

it is stupid, I doubt anyone is going to see "The Avengers" listed on the cinema guide and think "ooooh, they remade the 60s tv show that nobody remembers" or a sh1tty movie from nearly 15 years ago, given that every Marvel character in it had "...will return in The Avengers" at the end credits. Hollywood, y u no trust audience intelligence!

Sasquatch76

krudler wrote: »

it is stupid, I doubt anyone is going to see "The Avengers" listed on the cinema guide and think "ooooh, they remade the 60s tv show that nobody remembers" or a sh1tty movie from nearly 15 years ago, given that every Marvel character in it had "...will return in The Avengers" at the end credits. Hollywood, y u no trust audience intelligence!

I doubt it's Hollywood's doing. It'd be an infringement on copyright if they used the Avenger's name here. Blame whatever company owns the 60's Avenger's name.... Still doesn't explain why they went with the awful "Avengers Assemble". Surely "Marvel's Avengers" would have been enough to avoid being sued?

Anyway, has anyone seen the animated Avengers series of last year, maybe the year before? If so, is it worth a look?

Overheal

Mickeroo wrote: »

just the UK and here afaik

Yeah. I saw the title for it though. Looks mank.

That said, Harry Potter and the Sorcerors Stone... they even went as far as re-shooting any of the dialog that mentions the stone to match.

stephenmario

Sasquatch76 wrote: »

I doubt it's Hollywood's doing. It'd be an infringement on copyright if they used the Avenger's name here. Blame whatever company owns the 60's Avenger's name.... Still doesn't explain why they went with the awful "Avengers Assemble". Surely "Marvel's Avengers" would have been enough to avoid being sued?

Anyway, has anyone seen the animated Avengers series of last year, maybe the year before? If so, is it worth a look?

Names are not copyrightable, you can only trademark the look of a title but not the title itself. When it comes to really recognizable brand entities like Star Wars, it would be ruled that there is significant possibility for consumer confusion, and that you were trying to piggyback on the success of an established brand, but I don't think that would be the case with something as simple as The Avengers title. I'm pretty sure this was a decision actively made by some executive...

Mickeroo

Sasquatch76 wrote: »

I doubt it's Hollywood's doing. It'd be an infringement on copyright if they used the Avenger's name here. Blame whatever company owns the 60's Avenger's name.... Still doesn't explain why they went with the awful "Avengers Assemble". Surely "Marvel's Avengers" would have been enough to avoid being sued?

Anyway, has anyone seen the animated Avengers series of last year, maybe the year before? If so, is it worth a look?

Surely the comics and animated shows are infringing on the copyright too if thats the case though?

constitutionus

ya'd think so.

but then again theres a tag line in the animated title of "world mightiest heroes" or some such so maybe that gets around it.

which begs the fecking question WHY didnt they just do that with the film ?

in know its a petty thing and if the worsth thing about the film is its title ill be delighted but as another poster pointed out the most blindinly simple solution was to just call it "marvels the avengers"

hell even "the avengers initiative" is better than avengters assemble.

Sasquatch76

Is it trademarked then, if not copyrighted??

Doctor DooM

The recent Avengers cartoon is called Earth's Mightiest Heroes and it's quite a good laugh, even as an adult (Hulk is particularly funny in it). The first 5 episodes aren't great as they do a prequel episode with each individual character, but when it gets going it's a lot of fun.

I dont' really understand the furore about the name. They added the word assemble to it. Everyone goes mental. Really?

Penn

Doctor DooM wrote: »

I dont' really understand the furore about the name. They added the word assemble to it. Everyone goes mental. Really?

Which film would you rather ask for a ticket for? "The Dark Knight Rises" or "The Caped Crusader goes up"

Sasquatch76

Doctor DooM wrote: »

The recent Avengers cartoon is called Earth's Mightiest Heroes and it's quite a good laugh, even as an adult (Hulk is particularly funny in it). The first 5 episodes aren't great as they do a prequel episode with each individual character, but when it gets going it's a lot of fun.

Just saw that it's available on Netflix. Will check it out over the weekend!

krudler

Penn wrote: »

Which film would you rather ask for a ticket for? "The Dark Knight Rises" or "The Caped Crusader goes up"

how come Batman doesnt dance anymore?

Penn

krudler wrote: »

how come Batman doesnt dance anymore?

He remembered his parents were dead.

Pacifist Pigeon

Saw the trailer. Looks unoriginal and very derivative. But what can else can you say about Marvel Comics being made into films...

Doctor DooM

Penn wrote: »

Which film would you rather ask for a ticket for? "The Dark Knight Rises" or "The Caped Crusader goes up"

But it's closer to "The Dark Knight" or "The Dark Knight Rises". It's one word of difference.

Sad Professor

The full UK title is actually Marvel Avengers Assemble. No way would they pick such a stupid title. It's obviously a rights issue.

Penn

Doctor DooM wrote: »

But it's closer to "The Dark Knight" or "The Dark Knight Rises". It's one word of difference.

Well same thing, would you see a film called "The Dark Knight" or a film called "The Caped Crusader"?

To me, it matters f*ck all when all is said and done. I'll always refer to it as The Avengers, and to me it always will be The Avengers. But 'Avengers Assemble" is a sh*tty name for film and the reasons behind the name change and the fact that it's only being changed here and the UK is just ridiculous. Nobody even remembers or cares about the other Avengers sh*te.