RE: The Avengers (2012)

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

RE: The Avengers (2012)

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: The Avengers (2012)

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 2:38:25 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

The council were so quick to order a nuke - and I am not sure why. The aliens didn't seem that overpowering given that Black Widow herself took out a whole bunch. Could have at least tried to defend themselves with normal weapons ijn the first instance as they seemed effective.

And having seen it twice now, not once do you actully see any civillians killed. Now I am sure you are suppose to infer that there have been deaths going by the montage at the end, but I can't help but feel that this didn't help.

While Loki is the main bad guy, remember by the point the nuke is being used, he is a crumpled mess. He no longer represents a threat and is out of the picture. All we are left with is the aliens. Aliens that can be taken down without non-conventional weapons.

But having weak cannon fodder is hardly the crime of the century when you are enjoying all the SMASHING. But it does make it feel a little toothless in terms of creating tension.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to shool)

Post #: 301

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 2:44:36 PM

Shifty Bench

Posts: 14570
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

The council were so quick to order a nuke - and I am not sure why. The aliens didn't seem that overpowering given that Black Widow herself took out a whole bunch. Could have at least tried to defend themselves with normal weapons ijn the first instance as they seemed effective.

The council were just being a bunch of dicks. They didn't believe or want to believe in The Avengers and I think they wanted to solve the problem their way.

< Message edited by Shifty Bench -- 8/5/2012 2:56:38 PM >

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b
You have a nice face, Shifty. A face I would have a cup of tea with.

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper
Shifty said it best

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 302

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 3:10:56 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

The council were so quick to order a nuke - and I am not sure why. The aliens didn't seem that overpowering given that Black Widow herself took out a whole bunch. Could have at least tried to defend themselves with normal weapons ijn the first instance as they seemed effective.

The council were just being a bunch of dicks. They didn't believe or want to believe in The Avengers and I think they wanted to solve the problem their way.

Yeah, but that didn't have to mean sending the nukes asap - the aliens weren't like the ones from ID4. They could be taken down with normal weapons - they could have least tried.

Mind you it WAS Powers Boothe...

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to Shifty Bench)

Post #: 303

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 3:22:35 PM

adambatman82

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

While Loki is the main bad guy, remember by the point the nuke is being used, he is a crumpled mess. He no longer represents a threat and is out of the picture.

I don't know, one of the recurrent tropes of that character is that he ought not ever be underestimated. As such I don't think the threat of him really lets up, in spite of the fact that it doesn't amount to anything specific following his encounter with the Hulk. Anyway, By this point its his plan that is out of control - the hole in the sky can't be shut, and it isn't until after this that Black Widow figures out how to handle that particular issue. And isn't the intention of the nuke to destroy the gizmo on the roof of Star Towers anyway, and not the aliens themselves?

< Message edited by adambatman82 -- 8/5/2012 3:23:27 PM >

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 304

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 3:24:47 PM

adambatman82

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

The council were so quick to order a nuke - and I am not sure why. The aliens didn't seem that overpowering given that Black Widow herself took out a whole bunch. Could have at least tried to defend themselves with normal weapons ijn the first instance as they seemed effective.

The council were just being a bunch of dicks. They didn't believe or want to believe in The Avengers and I think they wanted to solve the problem their way.

Yeah, but that didn't have to mean sending the nukes asap - the aliens weren't like the ones from ID4. They could be taken down with normal weapons - they could have least tried.

Just to reiterate, the nuke was sent to destroy the gateway, not the aliens.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 305

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 3:26:53 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

While Loki is the main bad guy, remember by the point the nuke is being used, he is a crumpled mess. He no longer represents a threat and is out of the picture.

I don't know, one of the recurrent tropes of that character is that he ought not ever be underestimated. As such I don't think the threat of him really lets up, in spite of the fact that it doesn't amount to anything specific following his encounter with the Hulk. Anyway, By this point its his plan that is out of control - the hole in the sky can't be shut, and it isn't until after this that Black Widow figures out how to handle that particular issue. And isn't the intention of the nuke to destroy the gizmo on the roof of Star Towers anyway, and not the aliens themselves?

I think it was to do both. And while I agree about the Loki thing, in the movie itself he is put out of commission for the rest of the film. I kinda think it might have been stronger had the alien general come down to the planet and maybe he and the Captain could have ducked it out. Just to give the bad guys a face and in fact, given CA something big to take on.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to adambatman82)

Post #: 306

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 3:28:44 PM

Rebenectomy

Posts: 5537
Joined: 20/1/2008
From: 10-0-11-0-0 by 0-2

***SPOILERS***

There's always the argument as well that the 'threat' of the invasion and what we saw of it, could have been a dry run. We've no idea whether the full force of alien race was employed, it could have simply been a means for testing what earth had and how they'd respond to such a threat. We could be looking at just a bit of toe dipping, with Loki nothing more than a guinea pig. After all, we know now that someone else was ultimately pulling the strings.

_____________________________

TARDIS = Time And Relative Digestives In Space

(in reply to adambatman82)

Post #: 307

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 3:32:25 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rebenectomy

***SPOILERS***

There's always the argument as well that the 'threat' of the invasion and what we saw of it, could have been a dry run. We've no idea whether the full force of alien race was employed, it could have simply been a means for testing what earth had and how they'd respond to such a threat. We could be looking at just a bit of toe dipping, with Loki nothing more than a guinea pig. After all, we know now that someone else was ultimately pulling the strings.

I like to think these were the rejects from the proper army, who the alien leaders gave to Loki while laughing behind his back.

*alien fumbles around when trying to activate bomb*

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to Rebenectomy)

Post #: 308

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 6:29:48 PM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

SPOILERS

Loki's plan was never to actually subjugate the Earth. He knew all along that, whether he succeeded or not, Thor and Odin would never let him get away with it ultimately. I think his - unstated - goal was to be returned to Asgard. With the Tesseract.

Bear in mind that Loki is the God of Mischief. Not evil. He lives to cause trouble.

The Other tells Loki: "There is no realm, no cave you can hide from his wrath should you fail him (in recovering the Tesseract)"

So, Loki 'invades' Earth (why? because it will piss off Thor, no other reason), promising to recover the artifact for Thanos...

Loki is now in a win-win situation for him. If he wins and recovers the tesseract, he will have a powerful ally when Thor and Odin show up to put him in his place. If he loses (quite possibly his preferred outcome) Thor takes him and the Tesseract back to Asgard, where he knows full well that Thanos will come looking for them. More mischief. More chaos. More joy for Loki.

Lesson 1 about Loki: Don't trust him, He's not very nice. And never believe him when he tells you what his plan is. One should immediately think "right, so what's his REAL plan then?"

Quick aside: the alien army was meant to subjugate the non-supers (which they were more than capable of). Loki was meant to take out the supers and effectively neuter SHIELD at the same time. He outright underestimated Cap, Hawkeye and Widow in particular - to be out-manipulated by her was a genuine shock for him, to whom humans were simply inferior on every level.

The council did not believe the Avengers could contain the invasion - they believed they'd quit or implode or simply fail - it was a stupid ass plan, as Fury said - but not entirely unbelievable - if the battle hadn't been contained (Cap ordering the team to keep the battle contained within 3 blocks would have seemed an impossible task, if you don't believe in the Avengers ability to pull it off - and the Council did not have the benefit of seeing what we were seeing) then the invasion could have been truly unstoppable.

The film doesn't spoon feed you all of this, but it's all there if you pay attention and read between the lines a bit. It helps if you know a bit about the characters motivations, personality. history, etc, but the film gives you all the clues you need to fill in a lot of the apparent 'holes' in Loki's plan.

The punch line of the movie was in fact emphasising that those aliens were nothing but cannon fodder ultimately, when they thought it was going to be a walkover (from "what can the human do but burn?" to "To challenge them would be to court death!") - underlined by Fury's warning, "now EVERYONE will know not to fuck with Earth" (paraphrased slightly). The Avengers kicking the absolute shit out of the army was the very point they - Fury in particular - wanted to make. Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough. Because we don't care how big your army is. We have a Hulk (who was fucking awesome, don't you think?).

< Message edited by KeithM -- 8/5/2012 6:50:10 PM >

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 309

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 6:50:53 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

Well ok...but a lot of that is speculation for the future.

And I got why they did what they did - but it seemed like they skipped a whole bunch of options before going nukes! we need nukes! I know it was done for storytelling needs, but it came off as too sudden a decision.

As for the aliens - they were still getting their arses kicked by non superheros. Yes it would likely be a harder fight, but not an impossible one.

And of course don't get me started on the Trade Federation ending - wish they had set that up a little better - again I know why they do it (saves time) but every time I see it done, in Meance, Battle LA, ID4 and now this, it has developed into a bit of a cliche.

But again you don't mind because of the SMASH. Just hope for the next one they deveop a match to fit the need for the team up.

< Message edited by Rgirvan44 -- 8/5/2012 6:51:29 PM >

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 310

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 6:52:35 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

In a way it kind of reminds about Rise of the Planet of the Apes in that the character work is so strong, and when they hit the beats, they knock it out of the park, that you forgive elements of storytelling.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 311

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 6:57:25 PM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

SPOILERS

Re: First name "Agent"...

Stark on the phone to Coulson: "This is the Life Model Decoy of Tony Stark. Please leave a message."

Sounds like a set up line to me... but where's the pay-off?

Was that 'confusion' when Hill sends a medical team to help, but Fury says they already called it just confusion in the heat of battle or something more?

Just wild speculation, but Stark line brought to mind the old adage "if you show a gun in the first act, you must use it by the third" except in this case the gun is an LMD...

Or alternatively, if they think that's a bit cheap, they could prise him out of the cold, dead hands of Thanos' consort as a last resort...

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 312

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:07:39 PM

adambatman82

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM

SPOILERS

Re: First name "Agent"...

Stark on the phone to Coulson: "This is the Life Model Decoy of Tony Stark. Please leave a message."

Sounds like a set up line to me... but where's the pay-off?

Was that 'confusion' when Hill sends a medical team to help, but Fury says they already called it just confusion in the heat of battle or something more?

Just wild speculation, but Stark line brought to mind the old adage "if you show a gun in the first act, you must use it by the third" except in this case the gun is an LMD...

Or alternatively, if they think that's a bit cheap, they could prise him out of the cold, dead hands of Thanos' consort as a last resort...

I theorised that Coulson will show up as the mind pattern for Vision at some point. Would be fitting.

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 313

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:13:52 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

A the end I thought I saw you know who walking through the command centre.

But it wasn't and I was sad. Boo Whedon! BOOOOOOO!!!

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to adambatman82)

Post #: 314

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:20:54 PM

Rebenectomy

Posts: 5537
Joined: 20/1/2008
From: 10-0-11-0-0 by 0-2

KeithM makes a few good points about Loki there, he did look almost pleased to be heading back to Asgard in the closing scenes.

_____________________________

TARDIS = Time And Relative Digestives In Space

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 315

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:21:45 PM

adambatman82

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

In a way it kind of reminds about Rise of the Planet of the Apes in that the character work is so strong, and when they hit the beats, they knock it out of the park, that you forgive elements of storytelling.

You keep saying that there are problems with the story, yet there are at least two good reasons being presented to you that suggest your issues with the whole nuke thing were more a misreading on your own part than an actual fault with the story.

1) Once again, the nuke was being sent to destroy the gateway, not the aliens.

2) As KeithM points out Fury intended for the battle to be a message sent out to the rest of the universe (thats not speculation btw, its explicitly stated by the character in the films closing moments).

I get the impression from this thread that you're simply digging for complaints to make towards a film that you actually really enjoyed. And there's no need to insult everyones intelligence with the "blinded by HULK SMASH" accusations either.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 316

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:21:46 PM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Well ok...but a lot of that is speculation for the future.

Based on - practically signposted - clues in the film.

quote:

And I got why they did what they did - but it seemed like they skipped a whole bunch of options before going nukes! we need nukes! I know it was done for storytelling needs, but it came off as too sudden a decision.

I agree - and so did Fury - but TO THEM, they were already out of options (the cop mentions that the army is "hours away" and this is going critical NOW - again, from their perspective).

quote:

As for the aliens - they were still getting their arses kicked by non superheros. Yes it would likely be a harder fight, but not an impossible one.

No, actually, the non-supers (except for the far-more-exceptional-than-even-otherwise-skilled-humans skill levels of Widow and Hawkeye) were receiving a
pretty sound thrashing without the Avengers present. Those Leviathans without Thor and Hulk would have been unstoppable by anything short of, well, a Hulk.

quote:

And of course don't get me started on the Trade Federation ending - wish they had set that up a little better - again I know why they do it (saves time) but every time I see it done, in Meance, Battle LA, ID4 and now this, it has developed into a bit of a cliche.

Sorry, don't get the reference. Trade Federation? :whoosh:

quote:

But again you don't mind because of the SMASH. Just hope for the next one they deveop a match to fit the need for the team up.

Well, as I said, the emphasis here was in showing that the Avengers coming together was a warning to any others looking at Earth as easy pickings. Yes, this was a fight that they won fairly soundly in the end, but to suggest that an alien invasion led by a god from myth (Loki) isn't a good enough reason to get the team together (for its first outing where you need to spend as much time on forming the team as on the threat) is a bit disingenuous I think. It was a good enough one for the 'origin'.

Let's say they did it your way. They spend a third of the movie showing how unbeatable the aliens are, their motivations, their society, whatever. We spend correspondingly less time getting to see the Avengers get to know one another. For the second film where less development on the team is needed maybe, but for this one, adding more villains would have almost certainly been detrimental.

Loki is the villain, not the aliens. They're just like Luthor's flunkies. Only scarier to the average joe. Taking an existing villain, with a somewhat already developed personality and motivations, allowed them more time to spend on the important stuff, instead of wasting it on establishing him in greater depth than would have been helpful to the overall narrative.

Seriously, that's what bitching about the alien army amounts to - complaining that Joker's goons aren't given more backstory or present a greater threat. Focus on the important, not the practically irrelevant (which is precisely what Whedon did).

Would it have been even awesomer if they'd added a little bit here or a little bit there or did this instead of that? Maybe. Maybe not. Right now I'm inclined to bow to their greater judgement considering just how good it is and how well it's doing, although I am looking forward to seeing some of the scenes that didn't make the cut.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 317

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:26:42 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82

I get the impression from this thread that you're simply digging for complaints to make towards a film that you actually really enjoyed. And there's no need to insult everyones intelligence with the "blinded by HULK SMASH" accusations either.

Classy Adam.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to adambatman82)

Post #: 318

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:28:06 PM

adambatman82

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82
I get the impression from this thread that you're simply digging for complaints to make towards a film that you actually really enjoyed. And there's no need to insult everyones intelligence with the "blinded by HULK SMASH" accusations either.

Classy Adam.

Huh? What's wrong with what I said?

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 319

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:28:41 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

And by the way I enjoyed all the action and the character beats. I wasn't insulting anyone with those comments. But hey, believe what you want and jump down the throats of anyone who levels some minor criticism at the film.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 320

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:29:37 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

I would like to think you knew me better than to insult people in that manner. But I guess not.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 321

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:38:59 PM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

But Adam was right in what he said. Your comment about being "blinded by Hulk Smash" is fairly insulting to those of us who weren't blinded by anything at all, except how well made, entertaining, and outright fun the movie was.

And he was also right in that you seem to be be looking for faults where none exist and can't accept a perfectly well reasoned explanations for your problems based on both subtle and outright explicit clues given in the film, perhaps for fear that you might have been the one blinded by Hulk Smash to some of the story elements you claim are lacking...

If there were valid "minor criticisms" that would be one thing, but when they're simply a result of you not paying attention, missing some subtext or outright misreading the film's intentions entirely, then don't be surprised when people call you on it.

Some criticisms might be valid, some might purely be a matter of taste, but when they're just plain 'wrong' someone's got to say it.

< Message edited by KeithM -- 8/5/2012 7:42:39 PM >

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 322

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:40:37 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM

But Adam was right in what he said. Your comment about being "blinded by Hulk Smash" is fairly insulting to those of us who weren't blinded by anything at all, except how well made, entertaining, and outright fun the movie was.

And he was also right in that you seem to be be looking for faults where none exist and can't accept a perfectly well reasoned explanations for your problems based on both subtle and outright explicit clues given in the film, perhaps for fear that you might have been the one blinded by Hulk Smash to some of the story elements you claim are lacking...

I was talking about the action against the aliens who were basically cannon fodder. Usually that would annoy me but I was so caught up in the characters and the action that it didn't matter.

How is that insulting?

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 323

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:42:21 PM

adambatman82

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44
And by the way I enjoyed all the action and the character beats. I wasn't insulting anyone with those comments. But hey, believe what you want and jump down the throats of anyone who levels some minor criticism at the film.

Oh come on, I haven't questioned anyone else's criticism of the film, not least "jumped down the throats" of anyone. I don't give a damn what anyone thinks of this film, but I do take issue with accusations that I've been blinded by spectacle in to believing something that I don't believe.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 324

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:44:13 PM

adambatman82

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM

But Adam was right in what he said. Your comment about being "blinded by Hulk Smash" is fairly insulting to those of us who weren't blinded by anything at all, except how well made, entertaining, and outright fun the movie was.

Dang, Hell must have indeed frozen over, KeithM and Adambatman82 are agreeing on something! Hope all is well Keith my old sparring partner, haven't seen you around for a while. ;)

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 325

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:45:03 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

I was talking about the battle with the aliens. Not the whole movie. As someone who hasn't read the comics, doesn't know the history (and maybe this is the problem here) I just saw them as cannon fodder. But unlike something like TF3, I enjoyed seeing the heroes interact and yes, beat the crap out of the bad guys, and I didn't mind that they didn't seem that much of a threat.

I don't see how this is insulting anyone. In fact it is praising the movie for having such strong characters.

< Message edited by Rgirvan44 -- 8/5/2012 7:46:01 PM >

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to adambatman82)

Post #: 326

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:45:25 PM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

"Blinded by Hulk Smash" is what was insulting.

Let me put it to you directly.

Are you saying that I, or Adam, or anyone else, were blinded by HULK SMASH into liking this film more than it 'deserves'?

If not, why did you write it? I'm not personally insulted by it, but it was an insulting, almost 'snobby' thing to say.

It just smacks of the type of thing film snobs say to explain away how 'light' entertainment strikes a chord with an audience. And it's insulting in the say way as say that reviewer who SLJ bitched about on Twitter - it wasn't the fact that she didn't like it that bothered him, it was the fact that she characterised anyone who did as a "mindless drone".

It's that kind of demeaning, oh-so-superior, generalisation that people find insulting, and that's what your line read like...

< Message edited by KeithM -- 8/5/2012 7:53:45 PM >

(in reply to adambatman82)

Post #: 327

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:50:42 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM

"Blinded by Hulk Smash" is what was insulting.

Let me put it to you directly.

Are you saying that I, or Adam, or anyone else, were blinded by HULK SMASH into liking this film more than it 'deserves'?

If not, why did you write it? I'm not personally insulted by it, but it was an insulting, almost 'snobby' thing to say.

Apart from the fact I never said that....

Here is what I said - But having weak cannon fodder is hardly the crime of the century when you are enjoying all the SMASHING. But it does make it feel a little toothless in terms of creating tension.

That is me saying, that while I thought the aliens were weak it didn't matter Here is another comment

"And of course don't get me started on the Trade Federation ending - wish they had set that up a little better - again I know why they do it (saves time) but every time I see it done, in Meance, Battle LA, ID4 and now this, it has developed into a bit of a cliche.

But again you don't mind because of the SMASH. Just hope for the next one they deveop a match to fit the need for the team up."

Nowhere am I suggesting that it is anyone elses view. When I say "you" I mean "me". And it is backing up my first point, which is about the aliens and how well Whedon balances them against the action.

I didn't say blinded and I didn't suggest you or anyone else where somehow being blinded by it.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 328

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:51:49 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18898
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

And you guys really taking me to task for saying SMASH, something which is in the film and which plenty of people have used for shorthand for the action in the film?

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 329

RE: The Avengers (2012) - 8/5/2012 7:55:34 PM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

No, not for saying it. For HOW you said it. It just came across that way.

Don't worry about it. Like I said, I'm not personally insulted. You've qualified it since, so no worries.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 330