The AvengersFollow

First "Official" Trailer has gone live.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwsIbjCKcgo&feature=player_embedded

Hopefully we see Joss let Loki off the chain and cause some real mayhem, rumors abound that Loki brings the Skrull to Earth so The Avengers are having to fight on two fronts.

I'll go see it, but like I've mentioned elsewhere the movie is already off to an annoying start. I just don't see how you can have an Avengers movie without two of the founding members. I'm sure they'll mention and maybe even cameo Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne, but an Avengers movie without Ant-Man and The Wasp seems wrong. Oh, one more thing: Cap's modern costume looks weird. The cowl just doesn't look good in real life where it barely looks okay in comics. It is a silly thing to focus on, and maybe it'll work better in the movie than the stolen away photos taken that have been leaked for the past few months, but from what I've seen it just looks entirely out of place.

And Dr. Banner looks like Zoolander. RAWR! HULK MOST RIDICULOUSLY GOOD LOOKING OF THEM ALL!


Edited, Oct 12th 2011 12:43pm by lolgaxe

Not being a comic book nerd, I have no problem seeing the movie as is. Insects not included.

It's about ******* time.

You crazy. That movie was second only to the Iron Man movies.

I cringed so many times during it. And I've never judged Natalie Portman more.

I thought the first Iron Man was easily the best of the super hero movies to come out recently. I imagine most would agree. Never saw Captain America, because I just don't care about him. Thor's characters were all stale and horribly written. I know Natalie Portman and Stellan Skarsgård are great actors, but both their roles were just dead weight in the film. And there's no room in my heart for "over-acted Viking."

I enjoyed the first spider man, but some of the acting was rough. And it stretched the thirty-year-old-teenager thing a little too far (in terms of the actors). The second started off well, but by the time he lost his powers I was kinda no longer caring. Never saw the third (and feel no need to).

I feel like the X-men trilogy is where people are the most divided. I know people who thought the third was easily the best, and I know people with the opposite opinion. I hated the 3rd movie. But I liked the first two. I thought the first movie was better, but I appreciated the expansion of the cast they did in the second. I'm watching an X-Men movie--show me some mutations, dammit.

If we aren't limiting this to Marvel, though, then the two most recent Batman movies blow the rest out of the water, as far as I'm concerned. I thought the first one was excellent, and the second was pure sex.

I thought that Superman movie was AWFUL.

I was talking about Reeves'.

In a related note, I found Cap' online.

I enjoyed it. Was hoping for the Red Skull in Avengers, but that now seems unlikely.

Edited, Oct 13th 2011 12:34pm by Omegavegeta

Honestly, I don't think you can really credit Superman for being responsible for the current crop of superhero films. There was a brief spat of films that were released after that film, and they got progressively worse, then people stopped making big budget superhero films. The current crop of films in that genre really owes Spider Man for getting the ball rolling again. It's pretty reasonable to say that had that film sucked, none of the following ones (even the new Batman ones) would have been made.


While the purist in me is slightly bothered by the absence of Antman and Wasp, only just slightly. I can totally see why they left them out. The Avengers has for most of its history been about the "most powerful" superheroes. Let's face it, when your starting lineup includes Thor, Iron Man, and the Hulk, any one of whom can take on the armies of mid sized nations without breaking a sweat, your "mighty scale" kinda goes up to 11 already. Characters who could already just accidentally die via unintended side effects of battles involving those first three and with the mighty powers of being able to shrink to even smaller and more squishable (and harder to see and thus more likely to be accidentally killed/stepped on) size just seems like poor additions. Leaving them back at base to do some research and maybe point the big guns in the right direction might be wiser.

Even Hawkeye and Captain America are tough calls, but you can at least see how they lend consistent value to the team while in the field. Cap's tactical prowess (and sufficient combat skill/power to not get accidentally squished) is worth bringing. And Hawkeye's quiver of trick arrows may help deal with some circumstances that brute force alone can't. But it's going to be a rare case where shrinking (and I suppose controlling ants) is going to help a whole lot.

I can just see it:

Pym: Hey. There's a door here. Let me shrink down to ant size and slip through the keyhole...
Hulk: Smash!
Pym: Ok. I guess we're through that door. Look a security grid. Let me use my knowledge of science to crack their security...
Stark: Already disabled with a directed EMP pulse. We good?
Pym: Um... Yeah. Opps. There's a bunch of heavily armed guards coming this way. Let me use my control of ants to make them itch and well just walk right...
Thor: By the power of Odin, let my mighty hammer create winds to sweep these foes from the battlefield!
Pym: Well... That was effective as well. I'll just hang out here. Let me know if you guys need anything.

I enjoyed the fact that they really tried to at least let you see other mutants in the second movie though. They did it in the deleted scenes of the first, but not really ever focusing on characters that existed in the series (at least prominently).

This was the case in the third movie too. I just thought that it was an awful film.

Haven't seen the newest one.

While Spidey 1 was certainly more successful, it was actually Blade, then X-Men, that got the comic book movie machine rolling again.



How do you figure?

Edited, Oct 14th 2011 1:06am by Omegavegeta

Shut yo' mouth, Gambit was awesome. :P