The Avengers (2012) *spoilers from post 1181*

Fysh

Fysh wrote: »

At this point, I've seen Avatar, Alice In Wonderland & Tron: Legacy in 3D. Film quality aside, Avatar's 3D was excellent (I've since had to sit through it in a 2D version and Christ did it ever drag without the 3D to keep you engaged), Tron's was kind of pointless (barely noticeable, and never particularly interesting even when it was noticeable), and AiW's was a demonstration of highest-order cack-handedness.

Transformers 3, Drive Angry and Ghost Rider 2 were films I have no intention of watching because, well, let's just say I can tell they're not my thing.

It will be a real shame if the best commercial demonstrations of 3D in film-making continue to be associated with films that are otherwise critically panned.

Hugo is the best recent example of 3D and what can be done with the tech. A visually stunning film where the 3D never feels tacked on. Drive Angry and Ghost Rider may not be high art but as far as throw away Friday night trash goes, they are fantastic fun.

I have no problem with genre films using 3D and while none of the films I mentioned will ever be considered classics they do something fun with the tech.

johnny_ultimate

Overheal wrote: »

^

Is this what arguments looked like a hundred years ago when they tried to add sound and dialog to films?

Really, Overheal, really? Are you really comparing a massive storytelling revolution like the introduction of sound to 3D? The more appropriate comparison is the addition of colour, and even that opened up significantly greater possibilities to cinematographers than 3D does.

Heck, the digital production and projection of film remains a far more important and promising advancement in recent times, and one I have very few issues with.

Deleted User wrote: »

3D has a place and while post converted 3D should die a quick death film makers who understand what the technology can bring to a film will do some wonderful things with it. To write all 3D off because you saw one or two films use the tech in a poor manner is ludicrous and to actively try and talk people out of going to see a 3D film that you have not seen is just ridiculous.

We're warning people off a post-production conversion - the same post conversion you claim should die in a fire! While Whedon is mildly enthusiastic about it - mildly - the evidence of every single other post-production 3D movie is a red-flag enough, frankly.

Deleted User wrote: »

Avatar in 3D is nothing short of breathtaking and far more enjoyable experience than the 2D version.

'Nothing short of breathtaking' is nothing short of hyperbole! Avatar is definitely the only film I'd say is truly worth seeing in 3D - and yeah, I've seen both Hugo and Cave of Forgotten Dreams and remain unconvinced by either (and if Werner Herzog can't convince me....). Yet even there it is a mere enhancement of what is already on screen: the vibrancy of colour, the lush forests etc... remain deeply impressive in 2D. It certainly distracted me from the iffy storytelling for an hour or so, but alas even the visuals' impact wore off over two and a half hours of turgid film-making.

And if one needs to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to craft a film that makes the most out of a given format, I remain somewhat unconvinced that it is a tool outside the reach of all but the most elaborate of productions, and even then I could live without it.

Honestly, the most convincing 3D technology I've seen is on my 3DS: even then, I can turn off the 3D slider with no ill effects. Until a filmmaker proves otherwise - and Scorcese, Herzog and others have tried, bless 'em - I think as an aesthetic choice it is moderately enhancing at best, highly distracting at worst.

So the Avengers, ey? Yeah!

johnny_ultimate

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

We're warning people off a post-production conversion - the same post conversion you claim should die in a fire! While Whedon is mildly enthusiastic about it - mildly - the evidence of every single other post-production 3D movie is a red-flag enough, frankly.

As I said some post conversion 3D has been rather good, Drive Angry and Ghost Rider both looked very good as the directors shot the films with the conversion in mind. The flashback sequence in Drive Angry is one of the best uses of the tech to date.

I plan on seeing The Avengers in 2D but I'm not going to write off the 3D version till I at least read some reviews of it.

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

'Nothing short of breathtaking' is nothing short of hyperbole! Avatar is definitely the only film I'd say is truly worth seeing in 3D - and yeah, I've seen both Hugo and Cave of Forgotten Dreams and remain unconvinced by either (and if Werner Herzog can't convince me....). Yet even there it is a mere enhancement of what is already on screen: the vibrancy of colour, the lush forests etc... remain deeply impressive in 2D. It certainly distracted me from the iffy storytelling for an hour or so, but alas even the visuals' impact wore off over two and a half hours of turgid film-making.

And if one needs to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to craft a film that makes the most out of a given format, I remain somewhat unconvinced that it is a tool outside the reach of all but the most elaborate of productions, and even then I could live without it.

Honestly, the most convincing 3D technology I've seen is on my 3DS: even then, I can turn off the 3D slider with no ill effects. Until a filmmaker proves otherwise - and Scorcese, Herzog and others have tried, bless 'em - I think as an aesthetic choice it is moderately enhancing at best, highly distracting at worst.

So the Avengers, ey? Yeah!

Cave of Forgotten Dreams had a lot of post conversion going on, they couldn't bring the 3D cameras inside the cave which is why so much of the film looks flat and uninspired.

You don't need to spend hundreds of millions to get 3D to work. Plenty of low budget films have been shot in 3D and made it look good. Scar, made for less than the catering budget of Avatar may be a terrible film but some of the 3D looks great in it.

For me 3D is a far more enjoyable experience in the comfort of your own home, I've been gaming in 3D for well over a year and it can lead to a far more immersive experience. The 3D in Witcher 2 is fantastic and as good as anything that was seen in Avatar.

I'm not 3D's biggest fan and 9 times out of 10 will pick the 2D screening but at the same time I hate how people will sit around and slate films that they have yet to see.

Handsome Bob

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I assume you're not counting Wolverine / X-Men First Class there :pac: Iron Man 2 is a dangerously close to being a bit crap as well.

Pfft, amateur! X Men is owned by Fox not Marvel. :P

I don't think IM2 is half as bad as people suggest. This is what I've said about it before anyway:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69774891&postcount=4

johnny_ultimate

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not 3D's biggest fan and 9 times out of 10 will pick the 2D screening but at the same time I hate how people will sit around and slate films that they have yet to see.

We're not slating the film at all (have my tickets booked for Avengers tomorrow) but rather slating a technology that we've had a plethora of experience with - indeed, I've seen at least fifteen to twenty films in 3D, many of which were proclaimed to be entirely worth viewing in 3D. They, inevitably, weren't.

No different than warning against a director who has constantly proven inept: no point getting fooled time and time again.

johnny_ultimate

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

We're not slating the film at all (have my tickets booked for Avengers tomorrow) but rather slating a technology that we've had a plethora of experience with - indeed, I've seen at least fifteen to twenty films in 3D, many of which were proclaimed to be entirely worth viewing in 3D. They, inevitably, weren't.

No different than warning against a director who has constantly proven inept: no point getting fooled time and time again.

I meant slating how the film looks/how 3D is used and not the film overall. There are some truly abysmal examples of post conversion 3D but I would never write it all off as there have been a number of conversions that really impressed.

I'm going to see Avengers in 2D but was the common consensus that the 3D was some of the best around I would seriously consider a 3D screening. Likewise if the reviews for the 3D are scathing then I would advise people not to bother with it but I wouldn't tell people to avoid the 3D screening of a film that no one has yet seen.

Ape X

So, um, yeah... thanks for all your answers

krudler

Penn wrote: »

If I had to put an order on them:

Thor
Iron Man
Captain America
Incredible Hulk
Iron Man 2

Thor completely took me by surprise. I knew because of all the Asgard stuff it'd be the most difficult one to pull off, but not only did they manage it, they made just a really great film.

Iron Man 1 is just great, really set the bar high. Then it's a tough call between Captain America and Hulk. Both are actually great films.

Then Iron Man 2 in last place. The villians just ruined that movie.

Thor was a massive surprise for me as well. I was expecting it to be campy and sh1te or too serious and sh1t but it got the sillyness balance just right, it knew exactly what it was and it was a ton of fun to watch. I hope they give it a proper sequel away from The Avengers, which I guess will depend on how that plays out if they want to keep it canon as far as the Avengers universe they've set up goes.

Handsome Bob

Order for me would be

Captain America
Thor
Iron Man
TIH
Iron Man 2

Not that big a fan of Iron Man as others are, I think both films are let down by the villains. They really are the RDJ show.

johnny_ultimate

Deleted User wrote: »

I meant slating how the film looks/how 3D is used and not the film overall. There are some truly abysmal examples of post conversion 3D but I would never write it all off as there have been a number of conversions that really impressed.

I'm going to see Avengers in 2D but was the common consensus that the 3D was some of the best around I would seriously consider a 3D screening. Likewise if the reviews for the 3D are scathing then I would advise people not to bother with it but I wouldn't tell people to avoid the 3D screening of a film that no one has yet seen.

You see, I've stopped taking it on a case by case basis, because when I did I kept getting punished for it. As I said, I've seen Hugo in 3D, supposedly the champion of 3D technology, and got absolutely nothing out of it that I wouldn't have gotten out of it had I seen it without a third dimension (bar, perhaps, the opening sequence which was actually distracting in how much the three dimensions looked like a series of flat two-dimensional planes). The only 3D bits and pieces I've enjoyed have tended to be in novelty films like Jackass or Final Destination whateveritwas: for me, Avatar is the only film that has a third-dimension that works on anything other than a purely gimmicky level.

I honestly have so little faith in 3D based on much personal experience that unless a fairly definite consensus states that a film at least equals (and ideally surprasses) Avatar's use of the technology (or if practical necessity unfortunately dictates the need for glasses) than I am not going to waste my money or time on it. And it had better be a good film anyway because, while Ghost Rider 2 or Transformers 3 may be impressive, I have so little interest in the films themselves that I am more than happy to never experience whatever 3D flourishes they may have.

shadowcomplex

Handsome Bob wrote: »

Order for me would be

Captain America
Thor
Iron Man
TIH
Iron Man 2

Not that big a fan of Iron Man as others are, I think both films are let down by the villains. They really are the RDJ show.

Captain America was ****e

what the hell!

Ya I wasn't a major fan of Captain America I nearly fell asleep in the middle of it...

Links234

I really loved Captain America, but the whole montage in the middle kinda killed it for me a bit

shadowcomplex

I found captain america boring, I mean he's really insignificant in this movie, the only super heros withreal power are thor and hulk, I suppose iron man too to a certain extent, my brother saw this in aus and he says hulk steals the show

what the hell!

Just finished watching TIH again and I think I prefer it to Cap

Thoms Yorkie Bars

Iron Man and Cap are probably the two best build up films, imo. Thor I really liked the first time around, but I watched again recently and just thought that it was fairly meh. I think TIH is probably the worst of the them. I don't know why people think it's better than the 2003 one

Rabies

Watched The Avengers a couple of hours ago.
Loved it. Some great lines, looks great and gives enough screen time to everyone.
The Hulk and Tony Stark really stand out.

Not sure if its one I'll watch again and again. But def worth a viewing on the big screen.
No need for 3D either.

PTH2009

Just watched it.EPIC is the only word to describe it. It wraps up the first chapter of avengers movies quite nicely.

Sesudra

Have my tickets booked for tonight, am so so excited by this! But after managing to avoid any new trailers or clips for the past few weeks, I was in my mams with the telly on in the background and I accidently saw the clip with

Captain America saying "Hulk, smash".

. Would have loved to have that be a surprise!

Zero-Cool

Sesudra wrote: »

I was in my mams with the telly on in the background and I accidently saw the clip with

Captain America saying "Hulk, smash".

. Would have loved to have that be a surprise!

Ya, what an awful decision to put that in the ads. There was a great cheer and applause when that happened in the cinema.

Sesudra

sheehy83 wrote: »

Ya, what an awful decision to put that in the ads. There was a great cheer and applause when that happened in the cinema.

Ah well, am sure there'll be loads of other cool moments I haven't seen!

Handsome Bob

3 hours and 40 minutes to go, watching Cap and Thor in preparation.

what the hell!

Watched the Iron Mans and TIH last night in the run up. There was a 7am showing here in Cork this morning but would nearly have to have taken the day off. 17.20 I'll be there!

kronsington

Sesudra wrote: »

Have my tickets booked for tonight, am so so excited by this! But after managing to avoid any new trailers or clips for the past few weeks, I was in my mams with the telly on in the background and I accidently saw the clip with

Captain America saying "Hulk, smash".

. Would have loved to have that be a surprise!

I knew this was going to be in the movie and knew this on a tv spot and accidently saw it on tv as well- they really should have saved it for the movie.

the wait is finally over. waiting til saturday to see it when my brother is back from college. Look forward to reading everyone's thoughts on the movie. Can a separate reviews thread be set up?

hightower1

kronsington wrote: »

Look forward to reading everyone's thoughts on the movie. Can a separate reviews thread be set up?

There is a seperate review section here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=370

titan18

Just back from seeing it, and it was pretty good. Only downsides were the 3D being absolutely useless and making some sections of the film blurry and too dark. The audience were stupid aswell, lots of clapping and cheering meant I couldn't hear some lines.

Oafley Jones

titan18 wrote: »

Just back from seeing it, and it was pretty good. Only downsides were the 3D being absolutely useless and making some sections of the film blurry and too dark. The audience were stupid aswell, lots of clapping and cheering meant I couldn't hear some lines.

Saw that Mahon Point are charging a euro extra for 3D - without the glasses. Imax excluded, if done with the format anyway.

cursai

Is the new The Dark Knight Rises trailer on beforehand. Anybody whos seen the Avengers???

titan18

cursai wrote: »

Is the new The Dark Knight Rises trailer on beforehand. Anybody whos seen the Avengers???

Not for me, we had Promotheus and Spiderman reboot

waterglass305

I hadn't expected much from Marvel and to be honest, based on a lot of their previous films. I was not optimistic.
But I was pleasently surprised, while having cheesy clique moments, the film rocked!
The acting was good (I can't fault Samuel L. Jackson) and the speacal effects were very good.
Delighted to have gone even though the crowd I was with in the cinema kept clapping and laughing at jokes.

Spoiler alert!!
I'm going on about the films plot!!!

One of the things I liked was that the superheroes were real people you could relate to (for a film with people with superpowers :P). One scene where they got all tensed up and angry at each other helped underline that they're flawed people. Unlike other movies where the characters go through the motions (happy, depressed, elevated to face a challenge, happy again), this film tried and nicely succeded to make our hereosmore human.

However I can fault it for the entire Alien invading bit; the Alien invaders that are meant to be the ultimate destroyers that will destroy the world, but in fairness I was expeting better than blue lasers that cause as much damage as a mini-grenade. Considering the damage done to cities with modern and 1940s weopens (think the Blitz) I was a tad disappointed. Not to mention the aliens lack of a coordiated battleplan; just showing up and shooting everything is not a plan.