The Avengers!

[Nowhere Man]

I think he just likes explosions. I came out of the theater two hours ago and my ears are still ringing.

Laugh moment: "Puny god!"

If they have enough energy to make a freaking aircraft carrier fly, why are they screwing around with the Cosmic Cube Tesseract?

Fred

[LotusExcelle]

I enjoyed the movie. I could end my commentary there but what I find interesting is that it felt like it was an hour long because the pacing was so perfect. I was never really a Whedon fan (Dr. Horrible aside) but I'm adding everything I can find of his to my Netflix.

The parts other people have mentioned that really stood out: Hawkeye and Black Widow are portrayed as *really* skilled humans. I LOVED that. And their relationship is wonderful as well - like they grew up together but are possibly the only two people on the planet that could ever kill one another (emotionally and literally). I liked the Loki/Thor dynamic. Here it was more organic than in Thor. It felt more like they were really brothers. I liked Nick Fury and how he looked positively sick of the decisions he had to make but was unwilling to blink at having to make them. I won't go on with the other characters but I can't believe so much depth was in a movie that had so much action and so many stars.

[Taeolas]

As I've mentioned on other boards about the movie, this movie was fantastic. It was a perfect combination of a writer, a director and a cast that all obviously know and love the source material. It's one thing to write excellent lines that fit the character; but it takes a good actor who KNOWS the character and is willing to become the character to deliver those lines and make it seem right. For the Avengers cast, from the tertiary characters like Maria Hill all the way up to the A-listers like Iron Man, Thor, etc... , they knew the characters and loved them. Those actors not only got the lines right, they got the attitudes right. (A counter example I've heard for this was in the first X-Men movie; Storm's line to Toad before she zaps him was (uncreditted) from an Abbrams rewrite of the movie; but she didn't "get" the character, so the delivery fell completely flat). In Avengers, the one liner zingers were flying all over the place, but they still fit with the movie because they felt right when they were delivered. (All the way down to the mid-credits bonus scene's courting death line).

[Gillianren]

The actors don't have to love the characters. They just have to have a director who does.

[HenrikOlsen]

The actors don't have to love the characters. They just have to have a director who does.

... and be willing and able to follow direction.

[Noclevername]

Thanos, the villain they show at the end credits has a completely different reason for why he's going to attack the Earth. He is in love with Death, but she shuns him, so he kills more and more people in an effort to make her fall in love with him, but she still wants nothing to do with him, so out of desperation he starts killing by the millions. This is why he smiles after the other character says, "To attack the Earth is to court Death."

I thought the villain shown was the Red Skull, who had teleported away at the end of Captain America. He'd certainly have reason for wanting to attack/torment/test the defenses of Earth and specifically America, and he does have a longstanding historical connection to the Cosmic Cube via the comics. Thanos, on the other hand, would probably find far more efficient ways of inflicting mass death, and would certainly want to get the cube into his own hands rather than use it as a glorified interdimensional doorstop.

[Gillianren]

... and be willing and able to follow direction.

There's that, yes.

[Glom]

Meh. I really don't get what people find just that good about this. It is true that it was impressive how a movie with such a cast could still give enough space to each character for them all to work. None of the heroes felt sidelined and all felt satisfactorily developed.

I thought Loki as a villain here was much less interesting than in Thor. I did kind of like the way his motivation was rooted in being brat, but it lacked all the tragic nuance from that movie.

The final battle in Manhattan was devoid of all tension because nothing that came out of the portal was more than a nuisance to anyone. There's even a shot of hawk eye taking out one of the aliens while not even looking. It's just that easy for him. The sequence on the carrier was much better because at least there was uncertainty about how that would end and it did seem like the protagonists were actually struggling with the problems being thrown at them. However, I still wasn't clear what Loki's point was.

It suffers from Michael Bayesian mood whiplash where they are trying to be epic but also funny at the same time. The biggest laugh was when the Hulk starting slapping Loki around like a rag doll, but that only serves to neuter the villain. Similarly, earlier on when Thor gets upset at ill words being spoken of his brother, but backtracks with the laugh line, "He's adopted" when he is reminded of his crimes, takes what is supposed to be a little character moment and cheapens it for a laugh line.

I saw it in 3D, but never again. I couldn't see anything for the first half an hour it was so dark. It was very distracting. I spent a large chunk of the movie watching in double vision as that was a more pleasant experience than the 3D.

And finally, is that thing a tesseract or a cube? It can't be both. They're two different shapes.

[LotusExcelle]

The 3d was post production.

[Gillianren]

The thing is, Loki's villainy is on an intellectual level. Yes, he's stronger and tougher than the humans, but ideally, he's just smarter than they are. However, you can't outsmart Bruce Banner and Tony Stark without working a lot harder at it than Loki did.

[HenrikOlsen]

And finally, is that thing a tesseract or a cube? It can't be both. They're two different shapes.

Depend on how it's turned, there are intersections between a tesseract and a 3D space that are cubes and as the intersection would be all we'd be able to see, sure it can be a cube. To us.

[Doodler]

Laugh moment: "Puny god!"

That was absolutely hysterical.

[ToSeek]

Went to see it last night with a friend of mine. For a big, dumb movie I thought it was pretty well done: the characters were appealing, the plot mostly made sense, there were a lot of good lines. The friend I went with - who's not normally into these sorts of things - absolutely loved it, though. But I'm not sure she gets out much.

[Mr Gorsky]

That was absolutely hysterical.

I confess .... the 12 year old within me preferred: "Hulk. Smash!".

[Mr Gorsky]

I thought the villain shown was the Red Skull, who had teleported away at the end of Captain America. He'd certainly have reason for wanting to attack/torment/test the defenses of Earth and specifically America, and he does have a longstanding historical connection to the Cosmic Cube via the comics. Thanos, on the other hand, would probably find far more efficient ways of inflicting mass death, and would certainly want to get the cube into his own hands rather than use it as a glorified interdimensional doorstop.

Word of the studio (Kevin Feige in an Empire Magazine podcast, apparently) is that it is definitely Thanos. Besides, apart from the colour, it really didn't look like Red Skull as portrayed in Captain America and wasn't played by Hugo Weaving.

[Sam Bell]

For a big, dumb movie I thought it was pretty well done

I agree. It was very entertaining, especially if you went in without the highest of expectations.

As for the OP's question, I couldn't really guess what a theoretical invader's motive might be without first understanding their culture. Maybe our water is in high demand where they're from.

[Gillianren]

Maybe our water is in high demand where they're from.

Kind of like Fiji Water is a thing?

[publiusr]

Not that Marvel needs to do this--but a good way to start a Civil War story might be a crossover with the movie Chronicle as opposed to the character Nitro. Have some arguements between Iron Man and Patrick Stewart's Xavier if they bring him back.

[AKONI]

I agree. It was very entertaining, especially if you went in without the highest of expectations.

As for the OP's question, I couldn't really guess what a theoretical invader's motive might be without first understanding their culture. Maybe our water is in high demand where they're from.

Well, I posted this elsewhere on this thread so I'd do so again...


Thanos, the villain they show at the end credits has a completely different reason for why he's going to attack the Earth. He is in love with Death, but she shuns him, so he kills more and more people in an effort to make her fall in love with him, but she still wants nothing to do with him, so out of desperation he starts killing by the millions. This is why he smiles after the other character says, "To attack the Earth is to court Death."

[Taeolas]

Actually (I missed the OP's question originally) I think this justification was one of the better reasons for invading... Because they were effectively HIRED to invade. The aliens themselves didn't care about Earth; they just wanted to get the Power MacGuffin, and were perfectly willing to let their employer keep the planet afterwards, as long as they got the artifact.

[Hlafordlaes]

I liked the movie. Saw Capitan America not long before, and thought his character was well transitioned and played. Didn't think much of the actor in F4, but like him in these.

[eburacum45]

I agree. Chris Evans's thoughtful, level-headed Cap is completely different to his scatterbrained Johnny Storm, and he deserves credit for that.

I was disappointed to find that the scene in the shawarma restaurant wasn't shown at my local cinema in the UK; was that the case elsewhere?

[Moose]

I agree. Chris Evans's thoughtful, level-headed Cap is completely different to his scatterbrained Johnny Storm, and he deserves credit for that.

I was disappointed to find that the scene in the shawarma restaurant wasn't shown at my local cinema in the UK; was that the case elsewhere?

You can see it here. Enjoy.

[ToSeek]

I agree. Chris Evans's thoughtful, level-headed Cap is completely different to his scatterbrained Johnny Storm, and he deserves credit for that.

I was disappointed to find that the scene in the shawarma restaurant wasn't shown at my local cinema in the UK; was that the case elsewhere?

You're not actually missing that much. There's no dialogue - the only point seems to be that they made it to the restaurant.

[Gillianren]

Oh, I really liked it. I thought it was funny, though that may have been as much tension release as anything.

[Mr Gorsky]

I was disappointed to find that the scene in the shawarma restaurant wasn't shown at my local cinema in the UK; was that the case elsewhere?

Wasn't shown in my local UK cinema either ... and we always make a point of staying right through the credits and only leave the theatre when the lights come up and the staff start to clean up around us.

Anyone know why it was cut from the UK release?

Oh ... and I assume our release is called "Avengers Assemble" to differentiate it from the steaming turkey that was Ralph Fiennes/Uma Thurman stomping all over the legacy of Patrick McNee and Diana Rigg?

[Nowhere Man]

Oh ... and I assume our release is called "Avengers Assemble" to differentiate it from the steaming turkey that was Ralph Fiennes/Uma Thurman stomping all over the legacy of Patrick McNee and Diana Rigg?

Yeah, that's what the Wikipedia page sez. Man, did that movie stink on ice.

Fred

[SeanF]

The boy and I went to see it yesterday while the ladies of the house were at a bridal shower (I think we got the better end of that deal). I really liked it.

One thing that kind of bugged me, though - when Coulson referred to Banner as being like "a Stephen Hawking" and Rogers didn't know who that was, why didn't Coulson use "Albert Einstein" instead of the generic "a really smart guy"? I was actually expecting to hear Coulson say "Einstein" before he said "Stephen Hawking" in the first place, so it really threw me when he didn't even use it for the alternative. Or am I wrong in assuming that by the time Rogers was frozen, Einstein would've been known as the quintessential "really smart guy"?

I did, though, like the subtlety of Rogers just wordlessly handing Fury a ten dollar bill on the bridge of the aircraft carrier.

[HenrikOlsen]

The boy and I went to see it yesterday while the ladies of the house were at a bridal shower (I think we got the better end of that deal). I really liked it.

One thing that kind of bugged me, though - when Coulson referred to Banner as being like "a Stephen Hawking" and Rogers didn't know who that was, why didn't Coulson use "Albert Einstein" instead of the generic "a really smart guy"? I was actually expecting to hear Coulson say "Einstein" before he said "Stephen Hawking" in the first place, so it really threw me when he didn't even use it for the alternative. Or am I wrong in assuming that by the time Rogers was frozen, Einstein would've been known as the quintessential "really smart guy"?

The OED lists 1942 as the first written use of Einstein in the "He is no Einstein" meaning, 1944 as the next time.
It's quite likely Rogers didn't come across the expression before getting frozen, but he may have been aware of Einstein himself.

In the comics he ran across an Einstein robot in 1982, but that chronology is not very relevant for the movie.

[SeanF]

The OED lists 1942 as the first written use of Einstein in the "He is no Einstein" meaning, 1944 as the next time.
It's quite likely Rogers didn't come across the expression before getting frozen, but he may have been aware of Einstein himself.

That's more of what I was thinking of - not necessarily that Einstein's name was commonly being used colloquially, but rather that he would understand what was meant by, "He's like an Albert Einstein." I highly doubt that "He's like a Stephen Hawking" has become a common colloquialism yet (and it would likely be common orally before being used in print), but just about anybody would understand that it meant he's an intelligent person.

And really, it just stuck out to me because my brain was filling in "Albert Einstein" before Coulson even said the name Hawking! I'm going to prefer to think that it's because I was considering Rogers' context rather than because I myself am just that old...