The Avengers: Age of Ultron [** SPOILERS FROM POST 599 ONWARD **]

dr.fuzzenstein

candy-gal1 wrote: »

Absolutley loved this!!!
Have seen it twice already, probably will go another few times Id say, well worth a watch!

+1
Every single movie people will come out against it and say "Well, I would have..." and "I didn't like" and "what the directors should have done", well, it's a free world, go ahead and do a better job.
Unless you're talking any sequel to the Matrix, Highlander and Robocop, but even so, it's easy being a critic, just take someone else's work, take it apart and find flaws. Definitely beats coming up with your own and being subjected to the same treatment. So I will leave you all with my favourite Comic Book Guy quote:

Comic Book Guy: Last night's Itchy & Scratchy was, without a doubt, the worst episode ever. Rest assured that I was on internet within minutes registering my disgust throughout the world.
Bart Simpson: Hey, I know it wasn't great, but what right do you have to complain?
Comic Book Guy: As a loyal viewer, I feel they owe me.
Bart Simpson: What? They've given you thousands of hours of entertainment for free. What could they possibly owe you? I mean, if anything, you owe them.
Comic Book Guy: Worst episode ever.

pixelburp

So nobody's allowed an honest opinion, unless it's wildly positive? How dare people not like my favourite thing sort of idea? Or that hoary old chestnut where critics are somehow challenged to produce in that same field - so do you challenge those who don't enjoy a meal out to cook something better or shut up?

Honest criticism is part of discussion; not everyone is going to agree, or enjoy the film to the same level, but discussion can be as important as the consensus, but it's a bit insulting to just label those with any kind of balanced criticism, or who lack unwavering love for the film, as somehow bitter or lesser. Or worse, like the Comic Book Guy

Mechanical Clocktail

I for one don't plan on learning newspeak anytime soon.

FortuneChip

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

+1
it's easy being a critic, just take someone else's work, take it apart and find flaws. Definitely beats coming up with your own and being subjected to the same treatment.

It is easy to be a critic. If I've paid money for something, I think I'm entitled to have an opinion on it.

The whole movie seemed a bit like a simulation; there wasn't really much aftermath to deal with. Aside from some personnel changes (none of which were caused by controversy), everything is pretty much the same as it was before the Age of Ultron
Stark didn't really have to live with his mistakes for too long. A quick scuffle with Thor and he was all clear again. He barely had to confront Ultron himself other than to talk about omelettes. I'll agree with an earlier poster that Ultron (which well voiced), didn't really seem that threatening.

Vision seemed like a decent introduction, Captain America was probably the strongest character in the movie. Thor was good, but his magic well stuff seemed like he was put there solely to lead in to his next installment.

Elizabeth Olsen is lovely.

cloud493

Everything absolutely does need to be and should be criticised. On the other hand, the internet is an extremely cynical negative place at times, and some people seem to get extreme pleasure from being so cynically negative. So its nice to have a good balance of opinions.

I mean I loved AOU (I've seen it 5 times now) but I also think its my 3rd favourite MCU movie, and definitely not perfect. Balance.

dr.fuzzenstein

cloud493 wrote: »

Everything absolutely does need to be and should be criticised. On the other hand, the internet is an extremely cynical negative place at times, and some people seem to get extreme pleasure from being so cynically negative. So its nice to have a good balance of opinions.

I mean I loved AOU (I've seen it 5 times now) but I also think its my 3rd favourite MCU movie, and definitely not perfect. Balance.

That's kind of what I was getting at. People will always criticise and it's worth bearing in mind it's just an opinion at the end of the day. To find out what I mean, just head over to the message boards over at IMDB. No matter what movie, you will always find a thread in there called "This is the worst piece of sh*t I've ever seen!" and the OP usually gets very irate if people don't agree with him.
Or find any product at Amazon with a very high rating and go read the one star reviews. They are hilarious! One guy suggested that because the product didn't work for him, that the design was to blame and the high rating only existed because the manufacturer had manipulated the reviews. Absolute Gold. In fact hat is the jist of most one star reviews.

syklops

Herself has gone tonight. Im sat here very much the green eyed monster, and I don't mean the Hulk.

johnny_ultimate

Important distinction to be drawn between legitimate criticism and the hyperbolic, barely coherent 'nerd rage' that dominates many of the internet's less readable forum discussions!

I'd also say there's as much of a problem with many viewers refusing to look at film even remotely critically, happy to lob all manner of superlatives at undeserving films - nothing wrong with adoring a film, of course, when it's a reasonable, honest response.

I do admit I say that as somebody who believes Age of Ultron is pretty much the height of contemporary cinematic mediocrity, in which commercial interests bludgeon any artistic ones

dr.fuzzenstein

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Important distinction to be drawn between legitimate criticism and the hyperbolic, barely coherent 'nerd rage' that dominates many of the internet's less readable forum discussions!

I'd also say there's as much of a problem with many viewers refusing to look at film even remotely critically, happy to lob all manner of superlatives at undeserving films - nothing wrong with adoring a film, of course, when it's a reasonable, honest response.

I do admit I say that as somebody who believes Age of Ultron is pretty much the height of contemporary cinematic mediocrity, in which commercial interests bludgeon any artistic ones

I think it was grand. :P

DoYouEvenLift

Not bad!


Not much else to say, really. These movies are all just the leadup to Thanos as a villain. That will, or at least should, bring something new and on an absolutely massive scale we haven't seen yet in the universe. I think until Avengers 3 I'm gonna stop going to see the individual avengers movies in cinema. Definitely gonna see GotG2 though.


Really disappointed Quicksilver died instead of Hawkeye and that kid, though. They seemed to build Hawkeye up to die in this and then instead killed off a much better character that could've really changed fight scenes up (like the quicksilver in Xmen DoFP - seriously one of the best scenes I've seen in cinema). Plus killing the kid along with Hawkeye would've shown that the world isn't all sunshine and rainbows where every single civilian can be saved and that the more human heroes like Hawkeye and Black Widow really have their limits.

Corholio

Absolutely hated that 'You had to ask....' joke made by Cap to Thor. Completely killed any sort of worry or threat they had against Ultron during that scene. Actually that's one of my biggest criticisms, Ultron for all his talk, never seemed threatening like a villain should. I think they are relying a lot on Thanos to be the mega villain they are hoping for, and have so far failed to get a threat with even mid-size villains. I actually ended up preferring Malekith as a villain than Ultron.

FortuneChip

Corholio wrote: »

Absolutely hated that 'You had to ask....' joke made by Cap to Thor. Completely killed any sort of worry or threat they had against Ultron during that scene.

There were a lot of very unnatural jokes throughout.
How can they go from "no matter what, we have to hold this ground" to that joke does belittle the whole thing, as if it was all test for the war on Thanos.

dr.fuzzenstein

FortuneChip wrote: »

There were a lot of very unnatural jokes throughout.
How can they go from "no matter what, we have to hold this ground" to that joke does belittle the whole thing, as if it was all test for the war on Thanos.

I did like a lot of the Thor humor, he was very pompous in the first Avengers, it was like he is mellowing a bit and is trying to fit in by cracking the odd joke and they don't all work out. He is an Asgard, humor may be a strange concept to him.
I did like the "I'm running out of things to say" line, though.
And my GF has no objections to Chris Hemsworth whatsoever.

I've spent some time thinking about this and I think Ultron is as menacing as he needs to be. You have to remember the fact that he was a complete and utter blank slate as I would think A.I would be. Also his first experience with mankind, who he ultimately goes on to emulate, is Stark, who isn't menacing and does mean good. I mean there isn't anything there to make him evil. Sure they could have made other things menacing, but ultron used the sheer number of other robots as his weapon.

Since it has finally been released in America, how is the box office looking compared to Avengers #1?

Mitch Connor

One thing that I feel is being overlooked is Ultron should not be considered blank nor an invention of Starks. Though I dont think that was made near clear in the movie.

The AI partially committed to creating itself - Stark and Banner both say they were not close to creting the interface. Jarvis says they were not close to creating the interface. The AI interfaced itself - it created itself (as it does in the comics). Stark shows the AI as an already complicated, computing, thinking AI as soon as he starts investigating the staff. The AI worked itself into creation when given the opportunity.

TheSheriff

Mitch Connor wrote: »

One thing that I feel is being overlooked is Ultron should not be considered blank nor an invention of Starks. Though I dont think that was made near clear in the movie.

The AI partially committed to creating itself - Stark and Banner both say they were not close to creting the interface. Jarvis says they were not close to creating the interface. The AI interfaced itself - it created itself (as it does in the comics). Stark shows the AI as an already complicated, computing, thinking AI as soon as he starts investigating the staff. The AI worked itself into creation when given the opportunity.

Yeah I didn't really follow this in the cinema - the whole where exactly did he come from kind of past me by.

Jarvis found code surrounding the infinity stone?

irishmover

Watched Guardians of the Galaxy again last night... Last time I seen it was the cinema. Think I'll have to watch winter soldier again too.

Helps remember what's going on even after seeing Age of Ultron.

It got me wanting to see more about what's going on and what I've missed about the future movies/tie in.

Here's a good article albeit a little old now.

http://screenrant.com/avengers-guardians-galaxy-crossover-movie-james-gunn/

Also second time round GoTG was better. Its a really good movie.

pixelburp

Adding my own thoughts, I have to echo Johnny_ultimate's opinion here: Avengers 2 is nothingness. Both in a good and also in a bad way. And yes, I love comics. I love sci-fi. I love genre fiction. I love B-movies; about the only blot with my geek-credentials would be that I'm not a mad fan of Joss Whedon, I think he's a bit overrated and his characters interchangeable. But it feels like this thread has begun the late-period descent on a similar level to other comic/Chris Nolan threads.

Avengers 2 is the ultimate in cinematic empty calories: I knew what I was getting, I'd seen it about a half dozen times already and I left with a mild, pleasant taste that for me, made me shrug my shoulders and go 'meh', It wasn't bad, just not even remotely special. Not a single moment made me sit up and think 'hey, that was pretty cool'.

Nothing's at stake, no matter how apparently terrible Ultron's plan appeared to be, no conflict remained divisive, everyone won and each beat within the film was almost identical to those in the last few Marvel films. I was so utterly broken and apathetic watching the climatic CGI battle it's hard to imagine a day when tentpole blockbusters had a properly thrilling finale, often being a mere one on one between lead characters. Nope, gotta have the union-mandated 'Orgy of CGI destruction while heroes fight over a McGuffin'.

There may be plenty of people champing at the bit at Marvel's extended timeline but I can't be the only one who's just utterly, completely jaded by them now. It has been the same trick over and over and over again until I simply stopped caring. Guardians of the Galaxy was a bright spot all right, I can't deny I throughly enjoyed its snarky, cynical humour, but that was all despite the same boxes ticked that all the other Marvel films must adhere to. I don't imagine Ant-Man is going to buck that trend and if reports are true, it seems like Edgar Wright left because he wasn't following that recipe to the letter.

You know what's the biggest problem for me though? Daredevil. Now, that show has its faults (its adolescent levels of violence for instance), but otherwise it's confident, smart, layered, well put together and while it doesn't revolutionise the dark crime-thriller, there's a tangible set of stakes and immediate, palpable tension. Hell's Kitchen feels like a dangerous setting. Often I've felt nervous for the main characters because I just didn't know how things were going to pan out.
A half-dozen SWAT troops felt a larger, more immediate danger than the hundreds of those CGI Ultron clones that were being swatted away like nothing: when was the last time the films had any actual tension, any immediate sense of danger? They're so obnoxiously rote at this stage, so in the production line of these bloody 'Phases' that everything has to be a precursor to something else so nothing is ever in flux, nothing's ever truly at risk. Nobody suffers. Daredevil may yet slip into that horrible mould, but for now it's bloody, brooding tone sets it apart from the rest of the grand plan and that makes the films look bad.

Too long, didn't read? Avengers 2 just is. Not good. Not bad. Daredevil is making these films look bad.

Gbear

pixelburp wrote: »

Too long, didn't read? Avengers 2 just is. Not good. Not bad. Daredevil is making these films look bad.

I think the fact that Daredevil is the first "grown-up" bit of Marvel produce is what makes a fair bit of difference.

It's not just about the swearing, violence and so on - it's about a willingness to broach more difficult ideas and challenge the characters to a far greater degree than having supermen blow up legions of henchmen/drones.

I can't believe they've actually taken the plunge into deeper, scarier waters - not after everything else had been so safe.

If their primary productions are at least competent, fun and broadly speaking enjoyable, then I'm totally ok with them being a bit unambitious so long as they're willing to take chances on other productions. That vindicates their entire business model both financially and artistically.

Turtyturd

Went to see it on Friday night and I would agree with a lot of the recent sentiment saying it was okay, as I have already forgotten a lot of it. Really enjoyed the scene where the Avengers first encounter Ultron as those kind of scenes showing the characters doing normal things are some of my favourite ones from the comics. Also enjoyed the scenes in both the opening a climactic battles where it panned the whole team as they fought with the latter sticking out as the basis for Disney's inevitable theme park ride. The team at the end was also a bit West Coast/Great Lakes and while I guess Stark/Thor/Hulk will be back for Infinity War you can see why they were so desperate to get Spider-Man involved.

Overall I am still a bit meh towards the MCU, I applaud the effort and the scope of it but it's still just dumbed down too much in comparison to the comics for me.

senordingdong

Thought it was exhausting.

Really suffering from superhero fatigue.

sonic85

all the villains from the marvel universe are starting to meld into each other I think. hydra goons, hammers droids, extremis, chitauri, dark elves, ultrons minions - all different names and different looks but all similarly uninspiring and too easy to dispatch. no threat whatsoever.

I much prefer the look of the hulk from nortons movie. I remember a scene where hes standing outside in a thunderstorm with rain streaming down his skin and I thought he looked brilliant!

brianregan09

sonic85 wrote: »

all the villains from the marvel universe are starting to meld into each other I think. hydra goons, hammers droids, extremis, chitauri, dark elves, ultrons minions - all different names and different looks but all similarly uninspiring and too easy to dispatch. no threat whatsoever.

Totally agree this is one thing that annoyed me about the opening battle some of the Hydra lads actually looked like Ultron Robots lol, I loved how when Quicksilver came out though , He actually quite quickly made a **** of Hawkeye and Cap on the battlefield should have more of this ya know have the team take down 1 or 2 solid grunts instead of a bunch of aldi goons like usual

Greyjoy

Corholio wrote: »

Actually that's one of my biggest criticisms, Ultron for all his talk, never seemed threatening like a villain should. I think they are relying a lot on Thanos to be the mega villain they are hoping for, and have so far failed to get a threat with even mid-size villains. I actually ended up preferring Malekith as a villain than Ultron.

i found Malekith a fairly bland villain but at least they established him as a genuine global threat. For a film titled "Age of Ultron" it seemed to take place entirely in that made-up eastern european country over the course of a week. They could have done a little more to highlight Ultron's threat worldwide - even just a quick montage of news reports of Ultron's bots fighting & defeating various international police & armies.

Penn

Greyjoy wrote: »

even just a quick montage of news reports of Ultron's bots fighting & defeating various international police & armies.

But the threat was localised entirely in Sokovia. It was a global threat in as much as the city hitting the Earth could have killed everyone on Earth, but The Avengers had already evacuated most of the city before the fighting began, and before the city took off. The rest of the action probably took place within an hour, maybe two.

It was a threat to all humanity but the action was completely located in one specific area.

Realistically aren't the majority of global threats located in one specific area?

Greyjoy

Bad Horse wrote: »

But the threat was localised entirely in Sokovia. It was a global threat in as much as the city hitting the Earth could have killed everyone on Earth, but The Avengers had already evacuated most of the city before the fighting began, and before the city took off. The rest of the action probably took place within an hour, maybe two.

It was a threat to all humanity but the action was completely located in one specific area.

Dropping the city was definitely a global threat. But the problem for me was that the reveal of Ultron's doomsday plan came too late in the film. Up until the finale what does Ultron actually do?

He tries (and fails) to hack the nuclear codes.
He takes a load of vibranium from Wakanda.
He steals the '3D printer' from Korea to build himself a new body.

None of that convinced me he was a genuine global threat. Certainly not one that was deserving of the title "Age of Ultron".

Penn

Deleted User wrote: »

Realistically aren't the majority of global threats located in one specific area?

Yes, but in response to the point about Ultron's army fighting international police/armies, Ultron's bots were all in Sokovia, and Sokovia started flying before any international police/armies could possibly have gotten there.

rossc007

Question for you guys: So in the first Avengers the Chitauri give Loki the scepter to go and get the Tesseract. In Age of Ultron we find out that there was an infinity stone in the scepter, did the Chirauri know this? I thought the end game for Thanos was the inifinity stones?

p.s. Jesus, thats the question I've ever asked...

brianregan09

Chitauri were nothing but an aimless army controlled by Thanos , He probably thought gamble one get 2 back kind of thing as he is trying to assemble them all together , His gamble didn't pay off

But he'll be back to rip the gem out of Vision's head one would presume in the 1st Infinity War Movie