Avengers Movie: Grrrr....stupid iron man

[Altorin]

I completely agree. I couldn't help but feel that easily seemed like the main character in the film and that's just stupid since he'd already had two movies about him.

that's actually WHY he was the "main character". For the Avengers movie to work and be successful, it NEEDED to hit a home run. It couldn't have just done "decently" and hope for the project to continue. They had to basically re-invigorate a genre that was starting to wane a little bit.

Iron Man had 2 successful movies under his belt. Most people knew and loved him. He was the "slow pitch" that they needed to get the avengers movie to work. Take Iron Man out of the movie, I don't think it would have worked.. Ergo, focusing on Iron Man more closely then the others, you had an audience that was already primed to love the movie.

I think his hyper-importance is a bit overblown though. What was the alternative? This was an origin story for the Avengers Team, and in the canon of the Movie-Universe, Iron Man is really the only established Super Hero. Captain America is undoubtedly a better leader, and will no doubt rise to fill those shoes, but as the movie plays it, he's basically fresh out of the freezer. Hawkeye got a bit of a raw deal, being relegated to a background character in Thor and then a villain through the first half of the avengers, but I think by the end, Whedon and the Actor who played him managed to show us WHY Hawkeye might actually be awesome. That's what they needed to do in this movie. Black Widow had a bit better showing then Hawkeye did in her "pre-movie", but she kicked enough ass and did exactly the same thing, exactly what they needed her to do. The Hulk managed to survive two relatively crappy movies and come out of The Avengers as a crowd favorite.

I think it's better to think of the Avengers as just sort of a wad of glue holding these disparate series together, and ultimately just an advertisement for the future of the series. It got the characters and their cooperation into the collective unconscious, managed to make a pretty penny for its investors, and I thought it was really good. The Avengers did everything that it needed to do to turn this project into a success.

 

[Souplex]

Could be because Iron Man is the only one of these Joss Whedon actually knows how to and wants to write? That's what i would bet on, anyway.

You give the man far too much credit.
He couldn't really write any of them.
Thank goodness for the rest of the Marvel Movie-verse to show us the characters can be itneresting.

 

[Casual Shinji]

It's because Robert Downey Jr. is Robert Downey Jr.

Didn't you see Tropic Thunder?!

They know he's gonna steal the show anyway, so they might as well just give it to him from the start.

 

[wulf3n]

I'm gonna take a stab at why:

Iron Man: $318,412,101 [http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=ironman.htm]
Thor: $181,030,624 [http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=thor.htm]
Catpain America: $176,654,505 [http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=captainamerica.htm]

 

[Drummodino]

People love to hate what is popular don't they?

OT: Personally I thought most of the team got a pretty decent amount of screen time. As others have said above Iron Man was positioned to be one of the most influential characters, but is that such a bad thing? RDJ is fantastic in the role and he didn't have a bad scene in the movie.

All the characters had epic moments true to their character in the final battle. Iron Man, self styled star, saved the day while doing his own thing. Cap, the soldier, directed the rest of the team and the local police while saving a whole train station of people. Hulk, the rage monster, smashed a giant flying snake thing and Loki. Hawkeye and Black Widow, secret agents, kicked Chitauri ass while looking damn sexy. Thor, the demi-god, brought the lightning.

The movie was great, stop nitpicking.

 

[Trunkage]

Firstly, Captain America is plain boring. There is nothing to him or his character. Maybe the next one will be different, but I don't hold onto any hope. Currently, he isn't worth putting into the Avengers
Secondly, wasn't Tony initially rejected from the avengers program, and pretty much has to prove himself to stay in

 

[Casual Shinji]

The movie was great, stop nitpicking.

I don't know.

The movie kinda lacked a "centerpiece", which isn't too surprising when you put this many superheroes together. And the Chitauri were just cannon fodder for the heroes to pummel. There was no sense of threat to them at all, since all they did was ride their space scooters and randomly fire their weapons.

It was a good movie overall, just a bit... flat.

 

[Drummodino]

The movie was great, stop nitpicking.

I don't know.

The movie kinda lacked a "centerpiece", which isn't too surprising when you put this many superheroes together. And the Chitauri were just cannon fodder for the heroes to pummel. There was no sense of threat to them at all, since all they did was ride their space scooters and randomly fire their weapons.

It was a good movie overall, just a bit... flat.

Eh all film is subjective I guess. I really liked it.

 

[Darks63]

I'm gonna take a stab at why:

Iron Man: $318,412,101 [http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=ironman.htm]
Thor: $181,030,624 [http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=thor.htm]
Catpain America: $176,654,505 [http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=captainamerica.htm]

Not to mention that Iron Man got 2 movies which were pretty acclaimed before the avengers. While Cap, Hulk, and Thor only got 1 each which were pretty much viewed as being pretty meh overall.

 

[Bertylicious]

The movie was great, stop nitpicking.

I don't know.

The movie kinda lacked a "centerpiece", which isn't too surprising when you put this many superheroes together. And the Chitauri were just cannon fodder for the heroes to pummel. There was no sense of threat to them at all, since all they did was ride their space scooters and randomly fire their weapons.

It was a good movie overall, just a bit... flat.

I think that's an interesting observation. I really liked the movie, it was a rare occaison of feeling like money well spent when I saw it at the cinema and I've watched it many times since, but I do understand what you mean. In the LotR movies one was able to appreciate the wider narrative and I think that is what the Avengers was lacking; a central baddy/threat that the franchise can orbit.

The new Avengers movie plans to tackle Ultron, but I suspect he will also not be a recurring villain/theme. He smells of boss fight, you know? Personally I want to see something involving The Red Skull in some dastardlay alliance with some manner of cosmic empire because Hugo Weaving is like Jesus only better.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

The only thing I didn't like too much was that the Cap wasn't really done right at all. All he was was just a guy with a really strong shield and some super strength.

What they should have done is make him act more like a SOLDIER. I mean, c'mon. He survived how many battles and has got the smarts and the strength to do it. Make him act like a badass soldier. A little less heroism and a little more this guy [http://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/14/26/98/51/crysis11.jpg]. And emphasize his ability to take command a bit more too.

 

[ZZoMBiE13]

Avengers has always been an Iron Man centric enterprise though. He funded the group. Provided "Avengers Mansion", used Stark Industries resources to bankroll a lot of their research and tech. Stark built the Quinnjet. And he used to be outright adversarial with SHIELD before the films.

In the comics, I always liked Iron Man, but I never cared for Iron Man comics. His rogue's gallery is just too weak for my tastes. So to me, Avengers IS about Iron Man because that's where I usually saw him. Cap had stronger villains and therefore, a stronger single persona. Thor I never liked before the films. Honestly, I was shocked that his solo movie was as good as it was. And HULK is difficult to build an entire story around because HULK as a concept is pure catharsis. How many times can we see Banner mope? They did the smart thing in Avengers letting Ruffalo actually inject some character into Banner because before that he was just the go-to smarty pants who would eventually get ticked off and go green.

But I'd still say that HULK and Loki were the breakout stars of AVENGERS. Those were the ones everyone was talking about after seeing the movie for the first time. No one was quoting RDJ on the way out of the theater, they were quoting the "Mewling Quim" line. Or talking about HULK.

Also, in the timeline of the film, Steve has only just become unfrozen. So he's still finding his place in the newer world. It makes sense that he's a bit stand offish up until battle breaks out at the end. And they did cut like 2 or 3 scenes of his if you check the deleted scene section of the blu-ray.

I dunno, I think the movie worked pretty well. Seemed to balance the characters out well enough for my tastes.

 

[Mick Beard]

but captain America sucks.. like he is one step off being as bad as superman. infact they shouldn't soil batmans rep with putting him in superman movie, they should have superman fight cap America and release it straight to dvd

 

[Nemusus]

I'm curious about the point of this thread.

Avengers has been out for over a year now. If ever there was a time to rant about desired changes to a movie, wouldn't it have been BEFORE the release of said movie?

See, that's just silly. How on Earth are we supposed to discuss a movie before it comes out? Even if the OP got early access to it, the rest of us wouldn't have.

 

[Parasondox]

So I was watching the Avengers again before I went to see the dark world, and it really struck me how ridiculous the amount of screen time / lines / badass factor that iron man was given compared to the other heroes.

Even ignoring romanoff / hawkeye, it felt like Tony Stark was centre stage the whole movie, and I really disliked it. The avengers are supposed to be a team, and on that team, iron man isn't even the leader. Despite that though, the movie basically felt like iron man 2.5

Take for example, the scene of Captain America vs loki. Basically cap fights loki and is losing, but horray, iron man comes in and subdues him with ease. Or when the nuke is about to level the city, "hey which character hasn't had enough screen time? I know, iron man! Look he can make the sacrifice too!".

Basically the pecking order went like this
Iron Man: largely drove the plot, his subplots and devices were key to the movie
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Thor: Had his fair share of screen time and badass moments
>>>
Captain America: Seemed underplayed and had poor lines, especially for the supposed "leader"
>>
Hulk: Wait who was he again? Oh right he had a couple of rage scenes and then showed up at the end where he could magically control his powers.


I know Robert Downey Junior was paid $50 million vs $8 mill for the other stars, but was it really necessary for him to overshadow them so badly? Why do you think this happened?

Well I don't think you will be too fond of Avengers: Age of Ultron because rumour has it, or just most likely, Tony Stark/Ironman may be the main focus of the movie... again.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I'm gonna take a stab at why:

Iron Man: $318,412,101 [http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=ironman.htm]
Thor: $181,030,624 [http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=thor.htm]
Catpain America: $176,654,505 [http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=captainamerica.htm]

Took a while, but someone finally covered it.

Because Bewbs R Kewl.

I dunno. Too flippant, maybe, but my thoughts on the matter is that Scarlet is one of the most popular female actresses with the "Comic Book Nerds" online. Seriously, just look at the love she gets from geeks and geek sites online - it's creepy. Very few people care about her ability to act, they just care about her curves.

She CAN act, though. Not that it's on display much in The Avengers, but she's actually a very competent actress when the script and direction allow for it. Before she was an "It Girl" getting "It Girl" roles she was a small move/indie darling, and her sexuality didn't exactly take center stage in films like Lost in Translation or Ghost World. I would run to hang an Oscar on her, but she's perfectly capable at her craft.

 

[Diddy_Mao]

Yes, in the comics the Avengers were Cap's team. as were the Ultimates, to a lesser extent.
And as the movies move forward it may very well be that the avengers will end up being Cap's team in the long run.

For now it makes sense to lay the burden more on Stark's shoulders. He's the one who needed to learn to be a hero and to assemble the others into a cohesive team. He needs to see the common good that can be gained from a super group since presumably he'll be the one bankrolling the Avengers.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

What I don't get is the whole "learn about sacrifice" arc for Tony. Didn't he willingly sacrifice himself in the first Iron Man movie so that Gwyneth Paltrow could blow Stane up? Sure, he survived, but he was OK with dying so long as he took Stane with him.

 

[DementedSheep]

Because while Cap is the leader and Thor is the one with ties to the antagonist Ironman the most popular of the lot. That and think Joss Whedon likes writing snarky assholes a bit too much.

What I don't get is the whole "learn about sacrifice" arc for Tony. Didn't he willingly sacrifice himself in the first Iron Man movie so that Gwyneth Paltrow could blow Stane up? Sure, he survived, but he was OK with dying so long as he took Stane with him.

I think it was less for him learn about sacrifice and more to prove to others that he wasn't just a rich irresponsible asshole.

 

[Bakuryukun]

Personally, I felt they balanced all of the members of the team pretty well, I don't think the movie would have been nearly as good, if even one of them was absent, they all brought something interesting to the screen in both the script and the fights.