• 56 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by Emequious_Swerve (1268 posts) - - Show Bio

First off, I want to start by saying that this is my opinion, if you disagree, congratulations, you have one too. So just post something insightful without any insults please.

Second. I don't want to sound whiny or ungrateful. I am happy super heroes are coming to life on screen, but when you see how well crafted some super hero films can be its hard to see some others just look lack lust when they could have been better.

Now, when Marvel Studios first kicked off, they apparently didn't have "Avengers" on their minds yet, they just wanted to have more control and make money off their properties. The first two films they put out......were, well, good. "Iron Man" was a great film that had a good story about Tony Starks redemption. The "Incredible Hulk" was the second film, while not as good as "Iron Man", it was OK and had a good performance by Ed Norton. These movies were really good especially considering at this time, The character of "Iron Man" wasn't a very popular character and its hard to make a good Hulk film, he is hard to work with, but this one worked out alright. While these films were to have connectivity, there was no clear outlook that they would be on a team and interact one day. Just the acknowledgement of each others existence in the same universe.

Then came Disney. They purchased and Marvel and obviously, Marvel studios. Now, I have a theory that the producers put in charge kind of "sapped" the production process of the movies that followed and built up to the" Avengers". By "sapped" I mean they probably told the directors and movie makers what to do and what not to do. What they want in the movie...and what they don't want in the film, by that they limit creativity, look at the Nolan Batman films, what if some jack ass was looking over his shoulders telling him what to do? We most definitely would not have wound up with the movies we wound up with.

The following films that led up to the Avengers are nothing good. "Thor", while it had good set designs and costumes, it also had a very generic, predictable plot and had two very wooden leads with Portman and Hemsworth. "Captain America" is the most bland comic movie to exist, there is no character in that movie that has more than one dimension....Captain America is the hero, the girl is the girl, Tommy Lee Jones is there...physically, and Red Skull is the villain, the is no real character development, Steve Rogers is always a stand up guy, even in the beginning of the movie, the only thing that changes is he takes some super steroid. Finally of course, there is "Iron Man 2", which is hated by critics and fans alike and is just a pretty bad movie and requires no explanation.

Here comes the part where I get lynched................Here it comes.....you ready??............."Avengers" isn't that great. Its OK, its a fun mindless movie and if you like it, that's fine. I just don't understand the acclaim it gets. The plot is formulaic as anything. Whedon writes characters the same way in everything, regardless of them being his original characters or pre- existing characters, they are all just chock load of snark and witty banter and make jokes at each others expense. It just seems like mediocre fan fiction complete with unnecessary fights between super heroes. There is no real story other than "super heroes are wrangled" "super heroes don't get along" "super heroes fight together against arbitrary threat to save the world". The villain Loki doesn't have any real reasoning behind his plan and he doesn't even come off as that threatening, probably because of all the snark flying around all the time. It could have been better, look at the Ultimates comic from which it was partially based. In that comic the characters were much deeper, the story was more involved, it was just better.

I also want to address how just because these movies are connected, and made for comic fans, it kind of alienates non comic readers and just does whatever the hell they want for the sake of fan service. For instance, Nick Fury just shows up in "Iron Man 2" without introduction, now, if you read the comics or saw some stupid "after credits scene" you might know who he is, but this is a movie, the characters in the movie should be relevant TO THE MOVIE. Nick Fury just shows up in for about ten minutes in Iron Man 2 as a commercial to the Avengers. Then in the beginning of "Captain America", Red Skull finds the cosmic cube, and the explanation of what the thing is, is..... "Its from Asgard." Wow!! what a good explanation. That thing has been in like 2 movies and is kind of the focus of one and it just appears to be a plot device key of ultimate power that can open gateways or something, why does Loki need the Aliens if that thing has ultimate power anyways??....... Whatever.

In closing I just want to say that these movies let me down sometimes, and I always find it funny that on websites related to comic books I always read posts about people stating how they want all the Marvel character rights to revert back to Marvel that are in the possession of other studios like "X-Men" and "Spider-Man". No thanks for me. The X-Men films, well, the ones that are known for being good actually have a story and character development beyond anything that most Marvel studios have had. I mean the villain of those movies, Magneto, is more developed than most of the Avengers with the exception of maybe Robert Downey Jr., I mean Iron Man. The Spider-man films I find are also more creative and innovative with the characters than the Marvel films. Look at the Amazing Spider-Man, in that film Gwen Stacey is more intriguing and useful in the last act of one film than Pepper Potts (barring Iron Man 3) Caps girlfriend (forgot her name, lol) and Jane Foster combined...

Thanks if you read the whole rant

#2 Posted by Urban_Ronin (9935 posts) - - Show Bio

Not a bad read. I agree with alot more of your post then I expected to.

#3 Edited by LaserLambert (636 posts) - - Show Bio

I read it, I agree with a lot, especially about Avengers and more specifically about Joss Whedon's character writing.

#4 Posted by colonyofcells (2038 posts) - - Show Bio

It is ok to make dumb comic book movies as long as you can earn billions from them. Maybe dc needs to make their superhero movies dumber too to earn more money.

#5 Posted by Veshark (9058 posts) - - Show Bio

I think you kinda missed the point of Captain America - that he was always brave and courageous even without the Serum. It was the very reason why Erskine chose him in the first place - because the Serum amplifies all that is good and all that is bad. His character arc is that he went from zero to hero, before finally giving his life in the service of his country and the free world - in the true spirit of a soldier.

#6 Posted by colonyofcells (2038 posts) - - Show Bio

The Steve Rogers movie seems ok. The leading lady soldier should've been more like Black Widow.

#7 Posted by JJ62 (1299 posts) - - Show Bio

I think you completely missed the point of the Capt. America movie.

The idea is that when you're a good person, no matter what changes you endure. No matter what happens in the world around you, or what everyone else does. You should try to hang on to what you know to be right, to hold on to the good man inside. That's part of what Captain America is all about, the movie showcased that flawlessly.

#8 Posted by TheAcidSkull (18032 posts) - - Show Bio

nice write up, but i disagree.

#9 Edited by Emequious_Swerve (1268 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark said:

I think you kinda missed the point of Captain America - that he was always brave and courageous even without the Serum. It was the very reason why Erskine chose him in the first place - because the Serum amplifies all that is good and all that is bad. His character arc is that he went from zero to hero, before finally giving his life in the service of his country and the free world - in the true spirit of a soldier.

@jj62 said:

I think you completely missed the point of the Capt. America movie.

The idea is that when you're a good person, no matter what changes you endure. No matter what happens in the world around you, or what everyone else does. You should try to hang on to what you know to be right, to hold on to the good man inside. That's part of what Captain America is all about, the movie showcased that flawlessly.

Thats what I said in my post. That he is the same person in the beginning of the movie that he is throughout, he is a good person and has heroic and influential qualities when he was scrawny, the only thing that changes for him during the film is that he gains size and muscle mass and can hit people. Hardly a character arc IMO

It still doesn't change the fact that no character in that movie has any real growth or identity. There is a minor "love story" with Cap and the girl but its not really significant to anything else and it kind of feels forced in there. I find that movie to be a really long trailer for the Avengers film.

#10 Edited by Loki9876 (3045 posts) - - Show Bio

I dissagree a lot. I think Thor was very enjoyable. Iron man 2 was ok. I wasn't the biggest fan of the CA film but hought it was OK. the Avengers was excellent.
Ow and I think Disney was only involved in the Avengers.

#11 Edited by Veshark (9058 posts) - - Show Bio

@emequious_swerve

I just detailed the character arc to you: he went from zero to hero, before giving his life in the service of his country. Again, you're still missing the entire point of the movie - that it's not the powers that make the hero, but rather the man himself. The whole reason why it's repeatedly shown that Rogers is a decent guy is that that's what makes him special. Amidst the other tougher soldiers, here is a person who despite all of his weakness is still willing to stand up and fight. "I don't like bullies, I don't care where they're from, " Steve says, nailing the whole point of the characterization.

Even that aside, I don't see how this movie has no 'real growth or identity'. It's identity is what it is - a 40s period piece of an earlier, more simpler time. Where there was a war to be fought, and a hero was needed. It's the traditional superhero origin movie, albeit with a different time setting. I'm not sure why you didn't like the love story, I never felt it was forced, but that might just be personal taste. If anything, I thought the two played off each other pretty well.

Before anyone assumes that I like this movie solely for my association with the character, I just want to go on record and say that I hated this movie the first time I saw it. I even preferred Thor over it. In fact, it wasn't until my third viewing that I finally understood what made this movie special. On the surface, it seems like a generic superhero origin movie - but underneath it is a surprisingly compelling story about an honest man serving his country. Take away the fight scenes and the sci-fi gadgetry, and you get a likeable hero from the 40s. Not a perfect man, but not the 'flaws-and-problems' hero that most modern audiences prefer.

To cap this off, here are words from the late Ebert's review of the movie:

It was a pleasure to realize, once "Captain America: The First Avenger" got under way, that hey, here is a real movie, not a noisy assembly of incomprehensible special effects. Of course it's loaded with CGI. It goes without saying it's preposterous. But it has the texture and takes the care to be a full-blown film. You know, like with a hero we care about and who has some dimension. And with weight to the story. As we plunge ahead into a limitless future of comic-book movies, let this be an inspiration rather than Thor or Green Lantern.

#12 Posted by Dragonborn_CT (22212 posts) - - Show Bio

Alright, even if I disagree with your opinion, this is pretty fair and reasonable write up.

#13 Posted by danhimself (22534 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm sorry but you say that when they started that they had no plans for Avengers? The very first Iron Man movie had a after credits scene teasing Avengers...they obviously had it planned from the beginning

#14 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (33336 posts) - - Show Bio

Yea I agree with pretty much everything you said

#15 Posted by Emequious_Swerve (1268 posts) - - Show Bio

@loki9876 said:

I dissagree a lot. I think Thor was very enjoyable. Iron man 2 was ok. I wasn't the biggest fan of the CA film but hought it was OK. the Avengers was excellent.

Ow and I think Disney was only involved in the Avengers.

Thanks for the reply. It was only a theory I had about Disney sticking more people into script writing and the production of Marvel movies. I conjectured that point due to the fact that both Iron Man 1 and 2 had the same people working on it and the second was horrible compared to the the first one.

I didn't think the Avengers was terrible. I just don't understand why people talked it up so much as the "best comic movie ever". I found a lot of comic films to be overall better and more cleverly made, I find movies like "Kick Ass" and even something like "Blade 2" to be better.

@veshark said:

@emequious_swerve

I just detailed the character arc to you: he went from zero to hero, before giving his life in the service of his country. Again, you're still missing the entire point of the movie - that it's not the powers that make the hero, but rather the man himself. The whole reason why it's repeatedly shown that Rogers is a decent guy is that that's what makes him special. Amidst the other tougher soldiers, here is a person who despite all of his weakness is still willing to stand up and fight. "I don't like bullies, I don't care where they're from, " Steve says, nailing the whole point of the characterization.

Even that aside, I don't see how this movie has no 'real growth or identity'. It's identity is what it is - a 40s period piece of an earlier, more simpler time. Where there was a war to be fought, and a hero was needed. It's the traditional superhero origin movie, albeit with a different time setting. I'm not sure why you didn't like the love story, I never felt it was forced, but that might just be personal taste. If anything, I thought the two played off each other pretty well.

Before anyone assumes that I like this movie solely for my association with the character, I just want to go on record and say that I hated this movie the first time I saw it. I even preferred Thor over it. In fact, it wasn't until my third viewing that I finally understood what made this movie special. On the surface, it seems like a generic superhero origin movie - but underneath it is a surprisingly compelling story about an honest man serving his country. Take away the fight scenes and the sci-fi gadgetry, and you get a likeable hero from the 40s. Not a perfect man, but not the 'flaws-and-problems' hero that most modern audiences prefer.

To cap this off, here are words from the late Ebert's review of the movie:

It was a pleasure to realize, once "Captain America: The First Avenger" got under way, that hey, here is a real movie, not a noisy assembly of incomprehensible special effects. Of course it's loaded with CGI. It goes without saying it's preposterous. But it has the texture and takes the care to be a full-blown film. You know, like with a hero we care about and who has some dimension. And with weight to the story. As we plunge ahead into a limitless future of comic-book movies, let this be an inspiration rather than Thor or Green Lantern.

Again, I get the point the movie, its basically that real strength comes from within or something along those lines. I am saying....Steve Rogers is always like that. In the beginning of the movie he stands up to bullies even though he is smaller. He doesn't have a character arc. In Thor, Thor is a kind of a jerk and arrogant in the beginning and by the end he learns humility. In Iron Man, Tony Stark is a self absorbed ego maniac in the beginning and has to go through some self discovery and is changed by the end, its film making 101. Captain America doesn't have this: personality wise...he is the same guy throughout the whole movie, he is just physically stronger by the end. Its just his origin story and a long Avengers trailer.

The movie has no real identity, by that I mean it has no real plot or anything. Its just a series of things that happen. If you watch The Rocketeer (which is also directed by Joe Johnston and features an everyman hero that battles Nazis in the 1940's) that movie actually characters that are developed have to do something, a plot, every scene means something and the villain has a clear goal other than "taking over the world". Captain America is just utilitarian, a way to introduce Cap before the Avengers movie. The love story feels forced because its never really developed.....at what point do the characters really fall in love?? Why does he like her?? Its just not a very well done movie. In the end of the movie, it would of been nice to see Steve Rogers, who was always physically inferior, use his wits to save the day...instead he just punches his way out of everything. Disappointing.

I'm sorry but you say that when they started that they had no plans for Avengers? The very first Iron Man movie had a after credits scene teasing Avengers...they obviously had it planned from the beginning

I said they probably didn't have an idea for Avengers yet, which means it wasn't in production and they didn't have a clear view of what they were going to do. I acknowledged that they obviously were linking the characters together. While they may have had it planned they weren't in the process of executing it like they were when the Thor and Captain America movies were coming out.

#16 Posted by JJ62 (1299 posts) - - Show Bio

@emequious_swerve: Well yeah, but that's a big part of what Capt. America's character is all about. The movie portrayed it fine, I think it's the character you don't like.

#17 Posted by Emequious_Swerve (1268 posts) - - Show Bio

@jj62 said:

@emequious_swerve: Well yeah, but that's a big part of what Capt. America's character is all about. The movie portrayed it fine, I think it's the character you don't like.

Its a movie though...there is supposed to be substance and character development. I mean Batman has character arcs in his films where he experiences self doubt. The movie just portrayed Captain America as kind of one dimensional, which is good enough for people I guess.

#18 Posted by JJ62 (1299 posts) - - Show Bio

@emequious_swerve: Some characters are supposed to be good guys all the time. Some are supposed to be that way.

There is characters like Spider-Man and Iron Man who make mistakes and learn from them to become a better person.

Then there are characters like Superman, Cyclops and Captain America who have been good guys since the beginning.

That's a big part of what Cap's character is all about, the movie portrayed it perfectly. I think you just don't care for that type of character.

#19 Posted by Nightwing4 (363 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark: to cap this off. haha. I see what you did there.

#20 Posted by BiteMe-Fanboy (7828 posts) - - Show Bio

Good for you.

#21 Posted by Yung ANcient One (4799 posts) - - Show Bio

Good read. I agree to a certain extent, but I also disagree. I understand about the "love story" but... see Steve wasn't the biggest ladies man of all time. He was pretty much lousy with women. The first girl he made a connection with was Peggy. You see it from the start that she "notices" him. Once he's all big he's more confident, and gets way more attention from the opposite sex. He kissed another girl, so he "broke" Peggy's trust. He felt bad about it. I wouldn't say he "loved" loved her, but I personally understand why he was so attracted to her at the end.

Thor I can agree with but I didn't view it as a lousy love story. I looked at it as having pretty much no love story. I think both characters were just attracted to each other and thats it. Why did he protect her? He's a warrior. He can't walk away from a fight. Thor would rather die saving a random person than to do nothing, let alone someone he's friends with or more so attracted too.

I feel like your nitpicking the movies, and their just not your cup of tea. I mean Nolan's movies had a lot of plot holes in them specifically the first and third films. I personally feel if The Avengers is overrated then so is Nolan's Batman trilogy. I think that the "success" of The Avengers is that it was done, and people enjoyed it.

Me and my cousins/friends have been talking about a Super Hero movie that would include other super hero movies all in one movie to fight a thousand villains. The idea of this movie being accomplished and not being a complete fail is its biggest success. Now I feel like people are dying to see the Justice League because they know it can be done, and that it can be a good movie.

I can nitpick Nolan's character development as well. Bruce doesn't ever stop being an obsessed emo cynical rich kid. From the begging he's depressed, obsessed and cynical. He trains and thinks he can save the day but keeps doubting himself and being cynical every time he fails. Always and forever depressed until he dies. That's just me nitpicking it though.

At the end of the day I congratulate you for having an opinion. Everyone having an opinion is one beauty of what life has to offer. It truly complements everyone's point of view by having them so different and on opposite ends. It's totally crash. I mean some people love Superior SPider-man, some people hate it, some people enjoy Avengers Arena, and some don't. I don't like Star Wars, Candy, or first person shooter games. I honestly don't despite the huge popularity of each. It is better for everyone to have their own taste.

( + )

#22 Posted by PunyParker (10789 posts) - - Show Bio

Of cource it sucks! It doesnt have Spider-Man!! (kidding....sort of)

Look.....Its RDJ-universe,so....yeah.Iron Man 3 just CANT overcome DKR at the box office.....thats just wrong.

MCU sreated a lot of IM irritating fanboys....thats not quite good too.

#23 Posted by PunyParker (10789 posts) - - Show Bio

Here comes the part where I get lynched................Here it comes.....you ready??............."Avengers" isn't that great. Its OK, its a fun mindless movie and if you like it, that's fine. I just don't understand the acclaim it gets. The plot is formulaic as anything. Whedon writes characters the same way in everything, regardless of them being his original characters or pre- existing characters, they are all just chock load of snark and witty banter and make jokes at each others expense. It just seems like mediocre fan fiction complete with unnecessary fights between super heroes. There is no real story other than "super heroes are wrangled" "super heroes don't get along" "super heroes fight together against arbitrary threat to save the world". The villain Loki doesn't have any real reasoning behind his plan and he doesn't even come off as that threatening, probably because of all the snark flying around all the time. It could have been better, look at the Ultimates comic from which it was partially based. In that comic the characters were much deeper, the story was more involved, it was just better.

THANK YOU!!!

I'm not the only person in the world that found the film mediocre!!

#24 Posted by Veshark (9058 posts) - - Show Bio

@emequious_swerve

The movie has nothing about real strength coming from within and everything about selflessness. Erskine himself says in the movie, "This is why you were chosen. Because a strong man, who has known power all his life, will lose respect for that power. But a weak man knows the value of strength, and knows compassion.” The character arc begins not when Rogers gets beat up as a scrawny kid, but when he tries to join the armed forces. He was always weak and unable to defend himself, but he seeks power not as a way to show others that he is capable - but because it was a means for him to do the right thing. If volunteering himself for an experimental, untested procedure was the only way he would ever join the Army, he was willing to take the risk. Why? Not because he wanted strength, but because he felt that as an American citizen - it was the right thing to do.

And we see the natural outgrowth of this character arc as he gains his powers. We see him confused in the aftermath of Erskine's death, and temporarily choosing to be a USO monkey. As he promotes the purchase of war bonds and plays a goofy stage character, he believes he is actually doing something good. But when he learns that Bucky is captured, he finally rises to his full potential, by using his inherent strength and skill to save his friend. This here is the major change in Steve's characterization, when he goes from civilian to soldier and starts adopting the role of a 'Captain'. In the same manner of how Tony learns his weapon-making takes other lives or how Thor learns humility. You assume that all character arcs have to be massive, obvious changes, but you're missing the more subtle one in Captain America.

As for his personality, again, it's what identifies him and makes the character special. The entire cornerstone of Captain America was that he was always a 'good guy' even before the procedure. Iron Man only became a hero after a near-death experience with the Ten Rings opened his eyes, but Steve was always willing to stand up for what he believed in. It's an interesting parallel of the more idealistic 40s to the cynical modern world, and as actor Chris Evans himself puts it, "He comes from a more honest time." Throughout, we see Cap's selflessness standing out from everyone else. And that's actually the starting point for his relationship with Peggy. She sees the courage inside the skinny frame when he 'saves' everyone from the dummy grenade, and they develop a rapport. As a pretty woman, Cap naturally has an attraction to her (that scene when she's in the bar), and he goes as far as expressing it by being jealous when Howard Stark suggested they go 'fonduing'. But it never goes too far past that because Cap is always on the field...until they finally culminate it with that final kiss (while riding on a jeep, which I always found amusingly Indiana Jones-like). But there are little moments sprinkled throughout that show the two are concerned for one another - that scene where Cap was believed MIA after saving Bucky, Cap carrying her picture in his compass, the final plane scene.

As for the villain, I will concede that the Red Skull was a very generic aspect of the movie. The MCU's portrayal of the Skull is not to my liking, I much prefer the master-planner as opposed to the Super-Soldier. But look at the other 'evil plots' of the MCU. Loki wants to rule over Asgard, he accomplishes this by eliminating the one person who can stop him - Thor. Obadiah Stane wants control of Stark Industries, he does the same thing by trying to kill Tony. It's really no different here. But beyond the one-note villain, the plot isn't just a uniform series of mindless explosions. Here is a hero who isn't an arrogant douche from the start like Thor or Tony, infinitely likeable, and someone that we can root for. We see him finally rising up to the occasion when he saves Bucky, proving his worth, and the entire story culminates in his sacrifice. There's a consistent portrayal of a hero right there. As for your suggestion of Steve 'using his wits', realize that it's a superhero film and that 90% of all characters use their power to solve problems. You might as well complain about Iron Man while you're at it.

I suggest you rewatch this movie when you find the time, and try watching it with an open mind this time. I think if you go in not with the mindset that it's an 'Avengers commercial' but on it's own terms, you might find that it's actually a very well-made and charming movie.

@nightwing4 Haha believe it or not, that was actually entirely unintentional.

#25 Posted by Rabbitearsblog (5861 posts) - - Show Bio

Awesome post! Although, I personally enjoyed the Avengers and Iron Man. I even liked Captain America a bit.

#26 Edited by Emequious_Swerve (1268 posts) - - Show Bio

@jj62 said:

@emequious_swerve: Some characters are supposed to be good guys all the time. Some are supposed to be that way.

There is characters like Spider-Man and Iron Man who make mistakes and learn from them to become a better person.

Then there are characters like Superman, Cyclops and Captain America who have been good guys since the beginning.

That's a big part of what Cap's character is all about, the movie portrayed it perfectly. I think you just don't care for that type of character.

What are you taking about?? Just because I thought the movie was uninspired doesn't mean I don't like or don't get the characters. Just because a character is a good guy from the beginning doesn't mean they can't have a character arc. I suggest you watch "Superman 2", Supes has a good story arc in that. I also recommend the "Ultimates". In which the Marvel Films takes a lot of inspiration, Cap is way more developed in that book then he is in his own movie.

@yung_ancient_one said:

Good read. I agree to a certain extent, but I also disagree. I understand about the "love story" but... see Steve wasn't the biggest ladies man of all time. He was pretty much lousy with women. The first girl he made a connection with was Peggy. You see it from the start that she "notices" him. Once he's all big he's more confident, and gets way more attention from the opposite sex. He kissed another girl, so he "broke" Peggy's trust. He felt bad about it. I wouldn't say he "loved" loved her, but I personally understand why he was so attracted to her at the end.

Thor I can agree with but I didn't view it as a lousy love story. I looked at it as having pretty much no love story. I think both characters were just attracted to each other and thats it. Why did he protect her? He's a warrior. He can't walk away from a fight. Thor would rather die saving a random person than to do nothing, let alone someone he's friends with or more so attracted too.

I feel like your nitpicking the movies, and their just not your cup of tea. I mean Nolan's movies had a lot of plot holes in them specifically the first and third films. I personally feel if The Avengers is overrated then so is Nolan's Batman trilogy. I think that the "success" of The Avengers is that it was done, and people enjoyed it.

Me and my cousins/friends have been talking about a Super Hero movie that would include other super hero movies all in one movie to fight a thousand villains. The idea of this movie being accomplished and not being a complete fail is its biggest success. Now I feel like people are dying to see the Justice League because they know it can be done, and that it can be a good movie.

I can nitpick Nolan's character development as well. Bruce doesn't ever stop being an obsessed emo cynical rich kid. From the begging he's depressed, obsessed and cynical. He trains and thinks he can save the day but keeps doubting himself and being cynical every time he fails. Always and forever depressed until he dies. That's just me nitpicking it though.

At the end of the day I congratulate you for having an opinion. Everyone having an opinion is one beauty of what life has to offer. It truly complements everyone's point of view by having them so different and on opposite ends. It's totally crash. I mean some people love Superior SPider-man, some people hate it, some people enjoy Avengers Arena, and some don't. I don't like Star Wars, Candy, or first person shooter games. I honestly don't despite the huge popularity of each. It is better for everyone to have their own taste.

( + )

Thanks for the reply. Of course I agree that not everyone is going to like everything. I am just trying to make a plea that these movies are kind of lack lust, like they could be a whole lot better but it seems that Marvel Studios won't take chances just to appease the fans. They are losing talent (like directors) probably over creative control because Marvel is wanting them to be a certain way. As I have mentioned several times, the three movies I picked on could have been epic and just seemed like trailers for the Avengers movie.

It wasn't really a love story in Captain America, it was just a series of things that happened.They initially are flirtatious and by the end of the movie when talking to each other over the radio they seem like, without explanation, they are in love. As for Thor, I wasn't even aware that was supposed to be a love story. I am not joking either, I just thought they were setting up a relationship for another movie...which there lies the problem...the whole Thor movie was just set up for other movies....

Whenever I say anything bad about the Avengers people always say I am "nitpicking", which I disagree with. Nitpicking would be if I was saying things like "Captain Americas suit looked stupid" "Why didn't Iron Man do this, when he should have done that, blah, blah" I am making judgements based on common fundamentals of film making. Like a movie should have a plot, character arcs and development, a good villain that has purpose etc. Avengers seems absent of most of these things. As I mentioned in my first post, heroes being wrangled to fight aliens isn't really a plot. "The idea of this movie being acclomplished and not being a complete fail is its biggest success", which is your words is hardly a good reason, IMO. In that case you could call the Transformer films a big success...were they successful at the box office? Indeed. Were they good films?God no.

I don't know why you brought the Nolan films into this, I would never say they are flawless, but they do have the elements a good film should have.

@veshark said:

@emequious_swerve

The movie has nothing about real strength coming from within and everything about selflessness. Erskine himself says in the movie, "This is why you were chosen. Because a strong man, who has known power all his life, will lose respect for that power. But a weak man knows the value of strength, and knows compassion.” The character arc begins not when Rogers gets beat up as a scrawny kid, but when he tries to join the armed forces. He was always weak and unable to defend himself, but he seeks power not as a way to show others that he is capable - but because it was a means for him to do the right thing. If volunteering himself for an experimental, untested procedure was the only way he would ever join the Army, he was willing to take the risk. Why? Not because he wanted strength, but because he felt that as an American citizen - it was the right thing to do.

And we see the natural outgrowth of this character arc as he gains his powers. We see him confused in the aftermath of Erskine's death, and temporarily choosing to be a USO monkey. As he promotes the purchase of war bonds and plays a goofy stage character, he believes he is actually doing something good. But when he learns that Bucky is captured, he finally rises to his full potential, by using his inherent strength and skill to save his friend. This here is the major change in Steve's characterization, when he goes from civilian to soldier and starts adopting the role of a 'Captain'. In the same manner of how Tony learns his weapon-making takes other lives or how Thor learns humility. You assume that all character arcs have to be massive, obvious changes, but you're missing the more subtle one in Captain America.

As for his personality, again, it's what identifies him and makes the character special. The entire cornerstone of Captain America was that he was always a 'good guy' even before the procedure. Iron Man only became a hero after a near-death experience with the Ten Rings opened his eyes, but Steve was always willing to stand up for what he believed in. It's an interesting parallel of the more idealistic 40s to the cynical modern world, and as actor Chris Evans himself puts it, "He comes from a more honest time." Throughout, we see Cap's selflessness standing out from everyone else. And that's actually the starting point for his relationship with Peggy. She sees the courage inside the skinny frame when he 'saves' everyone from the dummy grenade, and they develop a rapport. As a pretty woman, Cap naturally has an attraction to her (that scene when she's in the bar), and he goes as far as expressing it by being jealous when Howard Stark suggested they go 'fonduing'. But it never goes too far past that because Cap is always on the field...until they finally culminate it with that final kiss (while riding on a jeep, which I always found amusingly Indiana Jones-like). But there are little moments sprinkled throughout that show the two are concerned for one another - that scene where Cap was believed MIA after saving Bucky, Cap carrying her picture in his compass, the final plane scene.

As for the villain, I will concede that the Red Skull was a very generic aspect of the movie. The MCU's portrayal of the Skull is not to my liking, I much prefer the master-planner as opposed to the Super-Soldier. But look at the other 'evil plots' of the MCU. Loki wants to rule over Asgard, he accomplishes this by eliminating the one person who can stop him - Thor. Obadiah Stane wants control of Stark Industries, he does the same thing by trying to kill Tony. It's really no different here. But beyond the one-note villain, the plot isn't just a uniform series of mindless explosions. Here is a hero who isn't an arrogant douche from the start like Thor or Tony, infinitely likeable, and someone that we can root for. We see him finally rising up to the occasion when he saves Bucky, proving his worth, and the entire story culminates in his sacrifice. There's a consistent portrayal of a hero right there. As for your suggestion of Steve 'using his wits', realize that it's a superhero film and that 90% of all characters use their power to solve problems. You might as well complain about Iron Man while you're at it.

I suggest you rewatch this movie when you find the time, and try watching it with an open mind this time. I think if you go in not with the mindset that it's an 'Avengers commercial' but on it's own terms, you might find that it's actually a very well-made and charming movie.

@nightwing4 Haha believe it or not, that was actually entirely unintentional.

Well now I just feel like you are trying to spell this movie out for me and there is the problem that I have with it. The fact that you have to explain it...

You just admitted that Steve is is always standing up for what he believes, thats what I wrote in my original post...I wrote, and simplified, that he is a "stand up guy" throughout the whole movie, so therefore has a lack of character development. The stuff you are explaining isn't a character arc...its just him doing things. In a movie a character should have a certain viewpoint...and it will change by the end of the film.

The part where "Captain goes from civilian soldier to the role of Captain" is done in a montage, he sets all those soldiers free and then the next thing you see is him putting flags on a map with the general, there is no real scene or transition that covers it. It just happens

Are you serious??...Iron Man did use his wits in the first Iron Man, and no, you are wrong, and thats peoples problem right there...just because its a super hero film doesn't not inherently mean they have to use their power to solve their problems and save the day. Just in a movie where it seemed to have a million writers trying to do 16 different things, like Captain America did.

I respect your opinion for liking the story underneath all the corny action and scif-fi stuff, I mean that stuff is unapologetic and doesn't seem to take itself to seriously. As I mentioned, and I am sticking to my story its just a bland movie, the characters and story don't really evolve past generic. There is no real plot either....like some other super hero films its just Caps origin story then Cap has to stop the Red Skull from "taking over the world", that....is not really a plot.

#27 Posted by Veshark (9058 posts) - - Show Bio

@emequious_swerve

The fact that I have to explain it doesn't automatically negate the validity of the movie - I could just as easily comment that the large majority of other viewers seemed to have enjoyed it, judging from the other posters above who agree. But I don't.

If him progressing from one role to the next isn't a character arc, what is? Character arcs don't always have to be necessarily blatant and obvious transitions of one's personality, it could just as easily be the growth or maturity of a character in other forms. Not all heroes have their viewpoints changed by some traumatic event in the thread of Tony or Thor, Captain America is different, a fact which while you might not agree with, does have its merits.

I'm not referring to the montage - I'm referring to the Captain finally choosing to stop being a USO monkey, and use the powers that he was given to save his friend. This is the point where he finally becomes a soldier, and it's a defining moment in the movie's characterization of the character. As for Iron Man, if you're referring to him using the arc reactor to kill Stane, realize that he spent the entire last half of the movie brawling with him. I'm not saying that powers need to be the sole answer to all their problems, but your suggestion that Steve 'use his wits' goes against the entire thing this movie has tried to drill in. Cap is not a thinker or a genius in the vein of Tony Stark, he has the courage but not the strength - and now that he has is, why wouldn't he use it? There's nothing to suggest that he relied on intellect when he was scrawny.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

#28 Posted by MartianManhunterIsBetterThanCyborg (2243 posts) - - Show Bio

I wouldn't say garbage, but people like it because Marvel had the balls to try something like this. As comic fans, we like to see our heroes come to life. Marvel fans get to see a whole slew of their favorite characters while all DC fans get is Supes and Bats again and again.

#29 Posted by akbogert (3222 posts) - - Show Bio

Not a bad read. I agree with alot more of your post then I expected to.

Also, I think @veshark has convinced me I liked Captain America more than I thought I did. And I did enjoy it, just not as much as I do now.

#30 Posted by NorrinBoltagonPrime21 (5877 posts) - - Show Bio

Another nitpicker and now a conspiracy theorist. You nitpickers all sound the same, you're better off trying to watch the movie with an open mind and focusing on the positive instead of watching the movie so you can rant about it.

#31 Posted by flazam (2496 posts) - - Show Bio

I think Marvel Movies are Very Well structured in the sense how they are all linked, Something Dc doesn't have

you make a hard case though!!

#32 Posted by Veshark (9058 posts) - - Show Bio

@akbogert said:

@quintus_knightfall said:

Not a bad read. I agree with alot more of your post then I expected to.

Also, I think @veshark has convinced me I liked Captain America more than I thought I did. And I did enjoy it, just not as much as I do now.

Yay for me! I guess....?

#33 Edited by Jonny_Anonymous (33336 posts) - - Show Bio

The OP brings up a lot of good points but the only thing people focus on is Captain America? Sheesh! Anyway the reason people love these films so much is not because there great but because of the Cheerleader Affect

#34 Edited by lykopis (10746 posts) - - Show Bio

@theacidskull said:

nice write up, but i disagree.

@dragonborn_ct said:

Alright, even if I disagree with your opinion, this is pretty fair and reasonable write up.

This pretty much sums up my take.

Although -- just as a side comment -- I found the relationship with Captain America and his ladylove poignant and perfect. Not every relationship needs to be dramatic with clothes torn asunder and erotic shadows against the wall suggesting carnal pleasure. Steve Rogers is a gentleman. A true gentleman and I see nothing empty in having two people quietly acknowledge their affections for the other without resorting to overdone confrontations and screamed acknowledgement of the other's love.

I didn't even like Captain America (the character) before I saw the movie. But everything @veshark wrote in this thread is exactly what came across and by the time the film ended, I understood why Steve Rogers is so popular.

Oh -- and as for Thor, I practically detested the character prior to the film. And discounting cinematic awesomeness with scenes and special effects is a bit unfair considering how movies are meant to wow the audience with visual porn to which I have to say, Thor provided in spades. Spectacular throughout. Loki was the character I felt especially drawn to -- and it was the interactions with Thor (and Odin) which made it more so, just like it should.

As for Thor and Jane -- it was also perfect. Thor was a gentleman -- in his own, charmingly innocuous way and Jane was representing the majority of us hetero-females in the audience in a refreshing way with her reaction to the Norse god -- in several scenes.

That's it. Great blog. :)

#35 Edited by Veshark (9058 posts) - - Show Bio

@lykopis said:

Although -- just as a side comment -- I found the relationship with Captain America and his ladylove poignant and perfect. Not every relationship needs to be dramatic with clothes torn asunder and erotic shadows against the wall suggesting carnal pleasure. Steve Rogers is a gentleman. A true gentleman and I see nothing empty is having two people quietly acknowledge their affections for the other without resorting to overdone confrontations and screamed acknowledgement of the other's love.

Ah, thank you, I was having trouble finding the words to convey what you said here. This is exactly what I meant when I was expounding on Steve and Peggy's relationship. It's reflective of their more simpler time; just a man who genuinely thinks that she's - in Steve's own words - the 'right one'.

#36 Posted by Fuchsia_Nightingale (10180 posts) - - Show Bio

Nope

#37 Edited by SavageDragon (2252 posts) - - Show Bio

I think you go overboard by saying the Cinematic Universe for Marvel is Garbage. As a whole they are woven together pretty well and they are yet to have a disaster like Raimi's Spiderman 3 or X Men 3 The Last Stand which were very low quality films. Im not a crazy fanboy for the MCU either, I like the Nolan Bat Movies more than probably any Marvel Movie and I cant fricken wait for Man Of Steel. All I say is I think you might be nitpicking a little too much. My favorite Comic films probably are V for Vendetta and Dredd and I agree the avengers atleast for me dont stand up to those two very different, but awesome movies.

#38 Edited by HumanRocket (8076 posts) - - Show Bio

I disagree :)

#39 Posted by Killemall (18564 posts) - - Show Bio
#40 Posted by novi_homines (1338 posts) - - Show Bio
#41 Edited by novi_homines (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

This all boils down to opinions. Many people like the Marvel Cinematic Universe because they simply enjoy the movies. Some like it, some don't. There is no such thing as a unified opinion. I will say that there are only few "fantastic" films within the MCU in my opinion (Thor, IM1, Avengers). The rest are good to average. I feel there are Marvel movies outside the MCU which are fantastic, and better in alot of ways (Spiderman 2, X2, First Class).

I also agree that I would like to keep characters like Spiderman, X-Men, and FF out of Marvel's hands for 2 reasons.

1. I would rather spiderman not be contained within the Avengers universe. I think he works better alone. Same goes for the FF, and X-Men.

2. alot of MCU movies seem to follow the same script: light hearted, and slightly comical. I understand this for IM. But Cap, Thor, and others shouldn't all have comical elements within their movies.

I will say though that this might just be a phase one thing (IM is naturally comical). With Cap 2 tackling the more serious story of the winter soldier, and Thor: The Dark World looking much more gritty, I feel a change in tone and a more serious approach for all of these movies may be marvel's blueprint going forward.

#42 Posted by Carter_esque (6447 posts) - - Show Bio

I disagree completely.

#43 Edited by cattlebattle (12759 posts) - - Show Bio

Another nitpicker and now a conspiracy theorist. You nitpickers all sound the same, you're better off trying to watch the movie with an open mind and focusing on the positive instead of watching the movie so you can rant about it.

How is this guy nitpicking?? He is talking about how the movies are structured. Nitpicking would be complaining about Lokis helmet or something ridiculous.

I agree for the most part, the Marvel movies seem kind of plain and like they are afraid to take chances......and yeah, the Avengers is over rated.

#44 Edited by NorrinBoltagonPrime21 (5877 posts) - - Show Bio

@cattlebattle: Complaining about "predictable plots"(every superhero plot is predictable to a certain extent), not understanding hero or villain motives, complaining about after credit scenes, not understanding character development, complaining about roles of women, etc. It sounds like more like blind hatred without ever giving the movies a chance to be enjoyable. It's easy to nitpick a movie like this guy did, I could easily do the same with the Batman movies he likes or any movie for that matter.

#45 Posted by Yung ANcient One (4799 posts) - - Show Bio

I meant you were nitpicking Captain America's & Thor's movies not the Avengers. I do agree that The Avengers' movie wasn't the best story plot but it worked (for some people.) I find it quite difficult to have engaging movie with so many main characters with such little time to tell everyone's story. Again, I felt like you were nitpicking Captain America and Thor, so I chose to nitpick Nolan's Batman. I also mentioned Nolan's series because you mentioned it with High Regard.

look at the Nolan Batman films, what if some jack ass was looking over his shoulders telling him what to do?

I personally think The Avenger's movie isn't overrated because it was fun, action packed, and you got a quick taste for all of the characters.

I could go back and forth with you, but

I. I think this conversation/subject/debate/whatever would be better in person.

II. I'm taking a quick break at the moment of my busy day today, so I can't spend to much time on this.

Maybe Later

Till then

Have a good day, and I hope Man of Steel, Thor Dark World, and The Wolverine will be good movies to watch.

( + )

#46 Posted by Nerx (15088 posts) - - Show Bio

And this is why marvel/disney must hijack nolan and force him at gunpoint to script movies for them

that man is a weapon at the hands of WB

#47 Posted by InnerVenom123 (29499 posts) - - Show Bio

"Avengers" isn't that great. Its OK, its a fun mindless movie and if you like it, that's fine. I just don't understand the acclaim it gets. The plot is formulaic as anything. Whedon writes characters the same way in everything, regardless of them being his original characters or pre- existing characters, they are all just chock load of snark and witty banter and make jokes at each others expense. It just seems like mediocre fan fiction complete with unnecessary fights between super heroes. There is no real story other than "super heroes are wrangled" "super heroes don't get along" "super heroes fight together against arbitrary threat to save the world".

And that's exactly what people wanted to see.

#48 Edited by novi_homines (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@innervenom123 said:

@emequious_swerve: "Avengers" isn't that great. Its OK, its a fun mindless movie and if you like it, that's fine. I just don't understand the acclaim it gets. The plot is formulaic as anything. Whedon writes characters the same way in everything, regardless of them being his original characters or pre- existing characters, they are all just chock load of snark and witty banter and make jokes at each others expense. It just seems like mediocre fan fiction complete with unnecessary fights between super heroes. There is no real story other than "super heroes are wrangled" "super heroes don't get along" "super heroes fight together against arbitrary threat to save the world".

And that's exactly what people wanted to see.

This. And that's exactly why I loved the movie, and consider it the greatest comic book movie of all time. It was extremely funny, pure entertainment all the way through, and was a dream come true as a comic book fan. Now I have to wait for DC to do the same thing.

And this is essentially how all avengers team ups, as well as DC team ups, are represented. They fight, argue, and hate each other at first but end up coming together to defeat evil, in every entertainment medium. It happens in comics, it happened in "Avengers: EMH", and it happened in the movie. And they were all still fantastic. If you think that the Justice League movie won't follow this script, you will be in for a rude awakening.

Heck, thats EXACTLY what happened in the New52 meetup of the Justice League. Superman fought batman, Green lantern, and Flash. They all argued, and they all later teamed up to fight the greater evil. Lol, this is how teams full of alpha dogs are formed. And it is the truest representation of how it should happen.

#49 Edited by BiteMe-Fanboy (7828 posts) - - Show Bio

I DISAGREE!

#50 Posted by cattlebattle (12759 posts) - - Show Bio

@cattlebattle: Complaining about "predictable plots"(every superhero plot is predictable to a certain extent), not understanding hero or villain motives, complaining about after credit scenes, not understanding character development, complaining about roles of women, etc. It sounds like more like blind hatred without ever giving the movies a chance to be enjoyable. It's easy to nitpick a movie like this guy did, I could easily do the same with the Batman movies he likes or any movie for that matter.

Well, thats kind of whats sad about most super hero movies, the fact that their plot was predictable and that they fail to have an engaging script most of the time. He did say he enjoyed the Iron Man and incredible Hulk movie, so, I don't think its really "blind hatred"

I can honestly see where he's coming from, Marvel studio movies feel pedestrian in a way, like they are trying to play it absolutely safe. I agree that Iron Man 2 was a terrible sequel, I actually fell asleep watching Thor and I do think the Avengers was bit overhyped. It doesn't mean I am nitpicking or have hatred or anything....I just have an opinion.