The first one was pretty disappointing IMO - thought it didn't have the cheese or charm factor of the classic 80s action films. Biggest crime was being dull.
That was also my problem with the first one. It was a boring, badly done B-movie that just happened to have some 80s action stars in it. If this one is the same way, I think I'll pass.
He was a bad guy, he was awesome. Jumping roundhouse kicks FTW. These films are meant to be silly, they don't take themselves too seriously. I don't actually remember a plot in the first one but there was kind of one in this film. But it not about the story, it's about badasses kicking serious ass, which it does well. It is more of the same but it's much better than the original.
The Avengers A pretty typical dumb Michael Bay style crapfest. I'm really glad I didn't waste money seeing it in a theater. I was rolling my eyes at the parts that were meant to be funny, and laughing at the parts that were meant to badass and cool. The villains are literally giant space snakes that come through a portal. That was the best they could come up with apparently. The acting was bad. The one-liners will have you face palming. I really have no idea why there was such a huge circle jerk over this movie. ScarJo looked hot in her catsuit and the flying aircraft carrier was kind of cool. Those are the only nice things I can say about this movie. 4/10
I rarely taking film stories too seriously, but the first Expandable had such a plot loophole I couldn't like the movie. EVERY SINGLE ENEMY WAS LOCATED ON A ISOLATED COMPOUND!!!! One airstrike and the movies over. In fact, the girl wouldn't have gotten captured and rescued if they just dropped a $2M tomahawk.
like Iron Man these thing are MUCH better in theatres. Typical Micheal Bay film true, but you shoulda' expected as much.
I watched the Avengers in theaters and honestly I felt a bit the same as monkey, but with everyone else's reactions around me including my friends I realised I must have walked into the film with the wrong attitude. There really wasn't much else that could have been done with such a concept. There's no way in hell they could have made it stand up to other comic book based movies of recent times as far as the story goes - the whole concept of it is a comic book nerd fest of a "what if". It was well done in many ways, had some fun moments, but I definitely prefer the first two Nolan Batman movies (haven't seen the third), the first two Spiderman movies and Iron Man. 6.5/10 for me. I too was rolling my eyes and almost waiting for it to end, but looking back on it I think it was pretty good for what it actually is, except what that is doesn't interest me all that much. I'll just add that I saw the movie on the first night and the only hype I had was that from my excited house mate, somewhat offset by his not so convinced girlfriend who had even stronger negative reactions than me - but that's to be expected with the target audience this movie SHOULD have.
yeah I was absolutely shocked when my brother's g/f said she enjoyed herself in Iron Man 2 with all the sexual (masculine) innuendo and all. But than maybe she likes it like that :x. Or maybe she wasn't paying attention to the movie lol cept when there was a seat rocking explosion. Typical female.
I'm sure it would have been fun in IMAX 3D just for the spectacle of it, but that doesn't make it a good film. I think it's like Fusion said: I've gotten used to the caliber of the recent Nolan Batman films, and now everything else seems a bit lame by comparison. I may eat my words when I see The Dark Knight Rises, but Batman Begins and The Dark Knight were both impeccably well made films that had a lot more going for them than just the action and special effects.
I haven't seen avengers yet. Just didn't peak my interest. I think the leaked nudes of scarjo downplayed the need to see her clothed.
Batman is about Detective work, Avengers is about punching helicopters, Punisher is about ripping apart dogs with your bare hands. It's all relevant, you can't go into Avengers or X-men and expect to watch Batman or even Spiderman they're totally different films.
@alterego You love crappy, overrated movies, so have at it! @supersonic Did somebody erase your memory and implant new ones? It sounded like you watched it:
@cmdrmonkey I can tell that you and Fusion aren't familiar with the basic concept of The Avengers, so it's not surprising that you didn't like it if you were expecting it to be like Nolan's Batman.
Throw a bunch of superheroes together in one comic and see if something sticks? Avengers is just more proof of what I've always said, which is that superhero movies should stick to having one hero and one villain. You throw more into the mix and you get a big mess. Batman and Robin is another good example.
I didn't have a problem with avengers really. I think mostly because I already expected a movie of Transformers 3 caliber.. 45min of plot and the rest of it being action since all of the backstory for all of the characters was laid out in their own movies.
That's what I mean...you don't personally like that, but it's extremely popular with people who enjoy the superhero genre. Most of the major comic book "events" are centered around multiple characters, so fans of the genre have been waiting a long time for these kinds of flicks.
Maybe if the enemies had been better, it wouldn't have been so lame. It was like they got all of these superheroes together as a team with this elaborate setup over the course of several movies to fight...drumroll....giant space snakes. Yeah, that's fucking lame. Like really, really lame. And the space snakes weren't even that menacing. The hulk basically flips them over, and then the movies ends.