Boy that third act was dreadful. Did anyone else fell asleep towards the end there? Weakest link in the movie for me: Scarlet witch and her brother who kinda looks like the marathon bomber from Boston? Whoops was that too soon? I mean, the character of Scarlet Witch is fine, I just didn't think the actress who played her didn't bring that much emotion to the character. There was more action set pieces this time around but not memorable enough like it was in the first movie. Although Hulk in this one had the best scene and action throughout the movie. Boy was this movie looooooong! Ultron was great by the way, loved every minute he was onscreen and that mech suit???? Bad ass stuff man!
I actually loved Scarlett Witch and Quicksilver, particularly in her early scenes where they gave her a really creepy vibe. The actress is actually pretty talented, she just didn't get any quippy lines so she seemed bland. Really only 2 issues that bothered me. For one they seemed to completely ignore the ending of Iron Man 3, and secondly I thought the action was excessive. It bordered on Michael Bay levels, you have to let the movie breathe a little.
I think we all got a little spoiled by Winter Soldier. Clearly the Russo Brothers are better at filming frantic action pieces than Whedon is. This latest Avengers (have seen it twice now) had a few problems, but overall I enjoyed it. The first problem was the 'super-quick-action-edits' during the fight scenes, particularly the opening set piece. Contrast this with the action pieces in Winter Soldier, where cuts were longer, and we got more of a sense of the action.. it was just *better*. Second, there were a handful of scenes where they 'tell us, instead of showing us'. Particularly when Hill references the 'worldwide search' for Ultron, and just casually describes that hunt. I understand the need to cut down on the length of the movie, but still, this was a significant part of the story, imho, and it was just glossed over. There were more like that, but you get the idea. TELLING us about how long and hard they had been searching for Loki's scepter instead of showing us, TELLING us about the Twins' history instead of showing us, etc. 'Exposition', instead of letting us see and experience it. The decision to have the two young kids playing with a 'vague Eastern-European accent' was a terrible terrible thing. It was unnecessary. The kid playing Quicksilver did.. *ok*.. but the Olsen girl, while she may be an ok actress, she demonstrated the worst grasp of an accent since Aaliyah tried to play with an accent in 'Queen of the Damned'. Natasha is Russian, but she has zero accent. Now I understand she is a trained agent, but it is not unreasonable to think that someone who has essentially been raised by Hydra would also be a 'trained agent' in such things, such as getting rid of a terribly thick and heavy accent. Really bad decision by the director. A slight, mild accent would have been better. Plus.. Spoiler KILLING Quicksilver? Really? Ok I admit I have never read this particular story arc, but I don't recall Quicksilver dying in such a way. Fortunately, no comic book character ever stays dead for long, so hopefully he will return somehow - I liked him more than Scarlet Witch. All in all, as long as the movie was, it felt rushed to me, like the Ultron story should have been at least two full movies, if not three. Can someone familiar with the AoU comic arc fill me in - didn't Ultron actually WIN, and take over the whole world? I mean, wasn't that the whole idea behind the very phrase 'AGE of Ultron'? It seemed it was far too easily dispatched and dismissed.
As a stand alone movie and as someone who isn't a fan of the comics, this movie is a 4/10 for me. Horrible dialogue, and extremely fast pacing. Didn't care about any of the characters. Just a really bland highly excessive CGI movie.
Completely right, in fact I had forgotten the ending of Iron Man 3, thought Tony had all his stuff taken out? Did he still have his glowing heart or was it completely removed now?
If you're interested and have the time this guy breaks down the comic version of AoU pretty well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksmQUXlIKCA (didn't embed because there are multiple videos). Best logical guess to why AoU wasn't longer is because they don't own the rights to major characters in the story. Couldn't agree more on the Russo brothers though.
http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/the-hater-s-guide-to-avengers-age-of-ultron-1702062494 I felt like none of the action lived up to the big fight in Avengers.
I agree, the movie really felt like more of an Iron Man movie than The Avengers, if you know the story line it makes sense. It was dumbed down a little for the younger crowd, but overall a decent movie. The CGI was done well overall. I really think the problem was in the story not the movie, its hard to get too excited over Ultron, something from Earth, we want to see aliens and armies not the clone wars. Then again, i thought the first one should have been a Thor movie. I hope the next one is better.
I enjoyed the movie, but it had problems. I felt that Scarlet Witch's Mind altering was a bigger threat than Ultron, which in turn felt like stealing a page from Hawk Eye being mind altered in the last movie. Ultron being a wise cracking robot didn't work too well for me. I would have preferred more of a Terminator slant. Failing to acquire his adamantium body and then the avengers gaining Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch AND Vision made the over all threat of Ultron to be rather under whelming. They also kind of just swept Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver's hate for Stark under the rug and forgot about it after they found out Ultron's plan for world destruction.
Good point- oh noes, AI goes berserk again! I didn't realize it before but this did bother me about the plot. Played out.
Under these circumstances, your review shouldn't be taken into account. Your review is like saying: "I've never liked contact sports and I don't know who the Texans and Colts are, so after I went to their first match of the season, the game was a 4/10 for me." Why even go see it if you didn't see the first one and you have no idea what's going on?
He still has his glowing heart, I believe - it's just, the shrapnel thing that could kill him at any time, was removed. With that said though, the arc reactor thing in his chest was only meant to keep the shrapnel piece at bay - so he might not actually have it in his chest anymore. I forget.
I've seen the first one. I've seen all the marvel movies. There have been plenty of films that had a background story based on a novel, comic etc that I loved without ever being a fan of the original medium. Chris Nolan's Batman movies for one(primarily Begins and Dark Knight) and the Lord of the Rings trilogy are two examples. Nolan's Batman movies had atmosphere. The Avengers series is just another Michael Bay Transformers CGI **** fest. BTW Guardians of the Galaxy>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Age of Ultron The only reason this movie is in high regards with so many is of the nostalgia factor of seeing your childhood comic book heroes on the big screen in live action.
I honestly don't see any difference in the cinematography of a Michael Bay CGI riddled film and a Whedon Avengers CGI riddled film. I'm honestly perplexed that the same guy directed Serenity and the FireFly series. The witty banter was natural in that series. It's so obviously forced in Age of Ultron.
Great summary here - http://theweek.com/articles/552969/...rprisingly-comprehensible--actually-kind-good The villains are definitely weak (other than Loki) and the premise of world destruction is definitely getting old. I hope phase 3 shifts away to something new entirely. There's definitely a great opportunity to.
If you have a problem with the imagery, that's on you. Witty banter only seems forced to a small minority. Avengers was not in the league with X-men and Batman concerning source material popularity, though it isn't a slouch. People like Avengers because it was fun, witty, and visually pleasing. Avengers isn't Batman so it can't use dark imagery to hide special effects and it is going to have a different atmosphere. Avengers also needs more special effects as the characters just demand more. You don't like it. I get it. I didn't like some things about Avengers. Comparing it to Transformers is just a drastic overstatement....just seems like it isn't your type of movie. There are a lot of people that like Avengers like me who didn't read the Avenger comics. I read X-men and Batman. While Batman is better directed than Avengers, I prefer the witty banter in Avengers.
Good summary. I agree that Quicksilver, Vision, and Ultron seemed flat. I liked how they did SW, but think they made it too easy for her to Hex people in seen with Gollum.
