245 replies to this topic

[Anders]

Timothy Zila, on 29 February 2012 - 09:53 PM, said:

Peter T Chattaway, on 29 February 2012 - 01:30 PM, said:

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tY9DnBNJFTI"]http://www.youtube.c...h?v=tY9DnBNJFTI[/url]

I have to say I'm impressed. I don't really have confidence that the movie will be that good, necessarily (especially compared to something like The Dark Knight Rises, which doesn't have to find a way to get so many high-profile superheroes together and give them something credible to do), but it certainly looks cool. Really, really cool.

There are some cool moments in the trailer, and I have no doubt it will be fun, but really there's a bit too much of TRANSFORMERS in that trailer for my liking. Though, I'm still inclined to trust Whedon at this point. At least, unlike some of the other Marvel films so far, it looks like they'll actually be facing a threat that should necessitate the whole Avengers team.

[Timothy Zila]

Anders, on 29 February 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

There are some cool moments in the trailer, and I have no doubt it will be fun, but really there's a bit too much of TRANSFORMERS in that trailer for my liking. Though, I'm still inclined to trust Whedon at this point. At least, unlike some of the other Marvel films so far, it looks like they'll actually be facing a threat that should necessitate the whole Avengers team.

I think I see what you mean but I don't necessarily agree. What's so horrible about Transformers is the action is pretty incomprehensible. I never saw the second or third films, but gathered from reviews that they were even worse and the third acts amounted to an hour of bit metallic shapes crashing into each other and such, with no sense of excitement over what's happening.

In this, however, the action (at least in the trailer) seems comprehensible. Maybe even eloquent (we'll see about that.) The extended shot following the Iron Man was pretty good, and there's some really nice imagery (the Black Widow running through the building, followed closely by the Hulk). I can't think of any memorable image from Transformers, really, except maybe the Scorpion type transformers (which was pretty cool).

[Attica]

Timothy Zila said:

I think I see what you mean but I don't necessarily agree. What's so horrible about Transformers is the action is pretty incomprehensible. I never saw the second or third films, but gathered from reviews that they were even worse and the third acts amounted to an hour of bit metallic shapes crashing into each other and such, with no sense of excitement over what's happening.


The third film's action was much easier to follow (never saw the second) than the first, but the first film has a far more coherent story. Which of course isn't saying much.



In this, however, the action (at least in the trailer) seems comprehensible. Maybe even eloquent (we'll see about that.) The extended shot following the Iron Man was pretty good, and there's some really nice imagery (the Black Widow running through the building, followed closely by the Hulk).
[/quote]


Agreed.

Edited by Attica, 01 March 2012 - 03:13 AM.

[Jason Panella]

The shot of Stark flying and blasting things with his palm rays as he draws closer to some large (bad guy, I'm guessing) ship reminds me of the final space battle in Serenity, which is easily one of my favorite action set pieces ever.

[Ryan H.]

So far, Marvel has so completely failed to establish a universe worth being interested in, and this trailer doesn't have anything to suggest its universe is gonna start being interesting now. I hate to say it, but it all looks rather boring. I'll probably see THE AVENGERS out of obligation, but I'm not very enthusiastic.

Of course, I'm not a Whedon fan, so...

[Jason Panella]

Ryan H., on 01 March 2012 - 08:39 AM, said:

So far, Marvel has so completely failed to establish a universe worth being interested in, and this trailer doesn't have anything to suggest its universe is gonna start being interesting now. I hate to say it, but it all looks rather boring. I'll probably see THE AVENGERS out of obligation, but I'm not very enthusiastic.

Of course, I'm not a Whedon fan, so...

What would make it interesting, out of curiosity?

[Ryan H.]

Jason Panella, on 01 March 2012 - 08:50 AM, said:

What would make it interesting, out of curiosity?

A genuine sense of wonder and awe with a full-tilt embrace of superhero iconography. In an ideal world, THE AVENGERS would play out like a extended set of brilliant comic book covers. THE AVENGERS should be the most superhero-y movie ever. Alas, it's doesn't appear to be that.

Edited by Ryan H., 01 March 2012 - 08:55 AM.

[Jason Panella]

Ryan H., on 01 March 2012 - 08:54 AM, said:

A genuine sense of wonder and awe with a full-tilt embrace of superhero iconography. In an ideal world, THE AVENGERS would play out like a extended set of brilliant comic book covers. THE AVENGERS should be the most superhero-y movie ever. Alas, it's doesn't appear to be that.

Yeah, I don't disagree here, but I'm still excited for it. I think it often comes down to how we approach superheroes: are they the silver age champions, more postmodern and angsty, or something else entirely?

[Peter T Chattaway]

One or two new bits of footage (including a cameo that I don't think I had seen anyone confirm before):

[Jeremy Ratzlaff]

Jason Panella, on 01 March 2012 - 09:23 AM, said:

I think it often comes down to how we approach superheroes: are they the silver age champions, more postmodern and angsty, or something else entirely?

There's definitely audience appeal to all of the above, though the 'postmodern and angsty' approach connects with those who care about storytelling a whole lot more, and that connection is deeper. Marvel's general approach, thus far, definitely seems to connect more with Transformers fans than anyone else. I'll take The Dark Knight over Thor any day, and so would probably everyone else on here.

[Thom Wade]

Sure...but I will take Thor over Green Lantern any day as well.

[Jeremy Ratzlaff]

Well, there's bad approach to film style, and then there's simply bad film.

[Jason Panella]

I'll take the third way, I think.

EDIT: As in, an "entertainment" that has a lot of character and narrative meat on the bone.

Edited by Jason Panella, 19 March 2012 - 08:50 PM.

[Ryan H.]

Jeremy, on 19 March 2012 - 06:47 PM, said:

There's definitely audience appeal to all of the above, though the 'postmodern and angsty' approach connects with those who care about storytelling a whole lot more, and that connection is deeper.

Does it? I think great storytelling can still occur in the superhero medium with a sense of whimsy, wonder, and levity (take, for instance, Morrison's ALL-STAR SUPERMAN). This idea that intelligent storytelling always equates with po-faced angst doesn't hold water.

[Anders]

Ryan H., on 19 March 2012 - 08:57 PM, said:

Jeremy, on 19 March 2012 - 06:47 PM, said:

There's definitely audience appeal to all of the above, though the 'postmodern and angsty' approach connects with those who care about storytelling a whole lot more, and that connection is deeper.

Does it? I think great storytelling can still occur in the superhero medium with a sense of whimsy, wonder, and levity (take, for instance, Morrison's ALL-STAR SUPERMAN). This idea that intelligent storytelling always equates with po-faced angst doesn't hold water.

100% right. ALL-STAR SUPERMAN is one of the few comics I love to pull off the shelf and re-read on a regular basis. Some of Morrison's best work. I'm not a huge Superman guy (was always more of a Batman and Spider-man guy), but the wonder of Morrison's works so right with the character. Everyone else should take notes on how to right Supes from that book.

For Batman, sure I don't mind some angst (though I like the way BATMAN:TAS keep things light enough for older kids, but didn't water down the character).

For THE AVENGERS, I'm still optimistic that Whedon can find a nice balance between keeping a good banter going between the characters and yet not shying away from mortal danger (see FIREFLY/SERENITY). But those trailers aimed at the Transformers crowd aren't making it easy. I guess I'll have to resign myself after IRON MAN, THOR, etc. that this won't be a Silver Age romp. The fact that Sam Jackson is playing Nick Fury as a nod to Mark Millar's ULTIMATES doesn't suggest it either.

[Jeremy Ratzlaff]

Ryan H., on 19 March 2012 - 08:57 PM, said:

Jeremy, on 19 March 2012 - 06:47 PM, said:

There's definitely audience appeal to all of the above, though the 'postmodern and angsty' approach connects with those who care about storytelling a whole lot more, and that connection is deeper.

Does it? I think great storytelling can still occur in the superhero medium with a sense of whimsy, wonder, and levity (take, for instance, Morrison's ALL-STAR SUPERMAN). This idea that intelligent storytelling always equates with po-faced angst doesn't hold water.

Perhaps. I suppose I was fairly deprived as a youngster and never grew up with any comics/superhero stories, the only real exposure I have to the superhero genre has been the big-budget mainstream films. My personal sense of wonder is always triggered whenever pinpoints of light are uncovered in the midst of an entirely dark setting, which is why the more 'postmodern angsty' style of The Dark Knight holds faaar greater appeal to me than anything else I've seen in the genre.

[Ryan H.]

Anders, on 19 March 2012 - 09:14 PM, said:

100% right. ALL-STAR SUPERMAN is one of the few comics I love to pull off the shelf and re-read on a regular basis. Some of Morrison's best work. I'm not a huge Superman guy (was always more of a Batman and Spider-man guy), but the wonder of Morrison's works so right with the character. Everyone else should take notes on how to right Supes from that book.

Agreed. The other Supes book I admire is SUPERMAN: FOR ALL SEASONS, which is significantly more low key than ALL-STAR, but equally "gets it."

Anders, on 19 March 2012 - 09:14 PM, said:

For Batman, sure I don't mind some angst (though I like the way BATMAN:TAS keep things light enough for older kids, but didn't water down the character).

There's plenty of whimsy and wit in BATMAN:TAS, and yes, it has a great handle on the character. It's by far my favorite adaptation of the character to another medium.

Anders, on 19 March 2012 - 09:14 PM, said:

I guess I'll have to resign myself after IRON MAN, THOR, etc. that this won't be a Silver Age romp.

No, it won't be. Marvel is more interested in following existing trends than in establishing new ones (and let's face it, the time Marvel flicks did try something very novel, Ang Lee's HULK, the results didn't exactly pan out), and the success of IRON MAN made it the template for all that has followed.

[Persona]

As an Iron Man and Daredevil guy, and not necessarily an Avengers or Hulk guy (except for the Bill Bixby Hulk when I was like, what -- eight??), I've got a few questions. The first of which is -- how does the Hulk fit into this group? Isn't he a little too unpredictable? Isn't it rage (or pain or intensity) that triggers the Hulk? How can he actually work for good? How can he be a part of a team? Seems like that would be harder than other Avengers, even though it's Stark who says, "I don't play well with others."

In the trailer, it is pretty cool to see the Hulk rescue a falling Iron Man. But again -- how can that work? Maybe I simply don't get the Hulk or how he truly works.

The Black Widow has had no real movie for her intro. Hawkeye has had absolutely nothing. How do we introduce the other characters and still get a cool plot with a decent bad guy?

This movie, to me, feels it needs to be 240 minutes long.

The action in the trailers says, "Wow. Super cool." But the thought behind it says, "Under-developed, un-planned, not enough investment in its characters."

I have to say though -- I am looking forward to seeing how they tie all the movies, so far, together. I'm certain that is their point, and it seems like the work they put in should be a blast.

[Timothy Zila]

I'd have to agree with that.

I've always thought the idea of the Hulk being part of a group of super-heroes pretty patently ridiculous.

It's just so . . . counter-productive.

Like asking a unstable bit of dynamite (all you Lost fans out there . . . I know you still exist) to be a part of your team.

I imagine they will be 'harnessing' the Hulk's power, but the idea still strains credulity (and I'm talking within a comic-book world that's already outlandish).

I'll be interested to see how they handle it, though.

[Jason Panella]

Persona, on 19 March 2012 - 10:02 PM, said:

As an Iron Man and Daredevil guy, and not necessarily an Avengers or Hulk guy (except for the Bill Bixby Hulk when I was like, what -- eight??), I've got a few questions. The first of which is -- how does the Hulk fit into this group? Isn't he a little too unpredictable? Isn't it rage (or pain or intensity) that triggers the Hulk? How can he actually work for good? How can he be a part of a team? Seems like that would be harder than other Avengers, even though it's Stark who says, "I don't play well with others."

If we're going by the comics, I'm pretty sure the Hulk was one of the founding characters in the early '60s, but quickly left because of his quirks. Of course, he showed up from time to time to team up for story arcs here and there.

Edited by Jason Panella, 20 March 2012 - 05:56 AM.