Is it time for us nerds to start anticipating THE AVENGERS, directed by Joss Whedon?

puny god was drowned out by all the laughter the first time i saw it, only caught it the second time around
he's adopted also got massive laughs both times

i was just so gleeful seeing the avengers on screen as that was one of my fave childhood comics

actually feel like i need to do a proper write up on the experience

just saw this crazy link where some put together every avengers cover together
http://www.flickr.com/photos/blprnt/7128032299/lightbox/

saw again. still awesome. cobie smulders smoulders. Thor's p good might catch his movie.

Thor's movie is pretty meh. Seems like it's all filmed on the same four square block set, with no clear villain (snooze giant robot), albeit plenty of villainy.

otm about the set. it was very weird.

Is there a precedent in the comics for the huge percentage of redheads on the bridge of the helicarrier?

nick fury likes redheads, nothing weird there

this was really good but it felt long (and was long)

SHIELD's pro-redhead hiring stance I fully support.

this was really good but it felt long (and was long)

― flopson, Sunday, May 27, 2012 1:09 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark

out of context thread

i really liked that thor seemed like it was filmed on an intersection

This was fun. Too long, dragged a few times, but fun. As has been pointed out many times in this thread, Ruffalo had the stand out performance.

It's actually a Ruffalo/Downey stealth sequel to Zodiac.

Finally got around to seeing it and I didn't really dig it that much; maybe I've become cynical in my 26 years but dizzying action scenes and dialogue that is almost exclusively A) lame one-liners or B) foreshadowing something that happens 5 minutes later in the movie. It actually reminded me a lot of the Expendibles, more impressive visually but not as funny. I counted maybe two lines that didn't seem incredibly scripted (and I think both of them were RDJs!) but I suppose that maybe I'm looking into this too much as the last oh say 90 minutes of it was just one big action sequence that got more ridiculous and improbable as time went on. I get that all these guys are smart dudes but their ability to formulate the perfect plan or to understand incredibly complex technology despite getting repeatedly whacked in the head was kinda irritating. But I give the movie 1 zillion points for not going too far down the Jeremy Renner/ScarJo dumb romance story which would have killed everything.

All that said I think this was probably the greatest visual spectical since say Spiderman2 so that counts for something

"incredibly scripted" could be a way to compliment dialogue, actually

"incredibly scripted!" - frogbs, ny post

Reminds me of an Eddie Izzard bit

the 'awesome like a hot dog' bit?

No, the one about how a lot of people think his show is completely improvised but in fact it is very tightly scripted.

spectical

http://images.mylot.com/userImages/images/postphotos/2364334.jpg

I finally saw this! It was terrific! I'll read whatever the fuck you people had to say about it now.

ha ha shakey thought it was the skrulls. fantastic four and silver surfer give a shit about skrulls and krees and shit. Avengers are like, planet what? you're a SPECIES? we up against pantheons muhh

Is Tuomas ever not the wrongest dude about this kind of stuff? yes, let's keep the face-codpieces on everybody all the time, also, purple bird flair has never been a bad idea!

It's actually a Ruffalo/Downey stealth sequel to Zodiac.

PREQUEL

http://www.vh1.com/celebrity/bwe/images/2012/05/Avengers-Hulk-Loki-1337008016.gif

what did Tuomas post?

I always hated how the Marvel movies have the heroes constantly removing their masks so that you can see the famous actor's face. Iron Man looks cool with the helmet, but not with Robert Downey's head sticking out the suit; Tobey Maguire's face + Spider-Man's suit looks just silly. I wonder if it's because, A) the actors demand their faces should be shown during action scenes too, or B) the movie makers think people can't emphasize with a hero unless he has a human face (completely ignoring the fact that people emphasize with characters like R2-D2 too)?

Can you imagine if they'd done the same thing in the Batman movies?

― Tuomas, Wednesday, February 29, 2012 1:40 PM (4 months ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

He also wanted Hawkeye to keep his original costume iirc
http://kabooooom.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/hawkeye.jpg

Hawkeye > Hawkman, I guess, but still a third-tier superhero costume.

saw the bourne legacy trailer last night and thought wow I can't believe they made a hawkeye movie already

did u not see the opening titles

no the trailer did not have opening titles

Tuomas also disappointed that Renner doesn't have a fabulous purple outfit in the Bourne movie

lol i didnt see the word trailer

I mean people get into R2-D2 as a character because he's more like a clever animal
I don't think that's why people give a shit about MARVEL'S THE AVENGERS NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH EMMA PEEL

and basically nobody should rock saturated purple very hard except as an accessory or perhaps if they are a comical pimp stereotype

i don't know if i understand what is going on but welcome back to ilx, i guess

My mother-in-law, bless her heart, asked us who was playing Emma Peel in this version when we told he we were going to see this.

banner's "secret" was a terrific reveal and also sums up everything about why intergalactic big bads should think twice about fucking with earthian superheroes imho (also says a bit about why they are so careless with the collateral)

Disney chief Bob Iger has confirmed that Joss Whedon will not only write and direct "The Avengers" sequel but will also develop a live action Marvel-themed TV series for ABC says Variety.

In an official statement: "Joss Whedon has signed an exclusive deal with Marvel Studios for film and television through the end of June 2015. As part of that deal, Whedon will write and direct Marvel's The Avengers 2 as well as help develop a new live action series for Marvel Television at ABC. He will also contribute creatively to the next phase of Marvel's cinematic universe."

No other details were given on what Whedon's Marvel TV show would be. Whatever it is, it's separate from the "Incredible Hulk" series ABC is developing with Guillermo del Toro.

The first "The Avengers" film has earned nearly $1.5 billion at the worldwide box office. The sequel is rumoured to be targeting a May 2015 release.

The series, whatever it is, has potential to do a bit of expositional heavy lifting so A2 can be all tight and lean and shiny.

somehow i don't think this potential show will tie in that closely to any of the future films. It'll just be set in the same universe

The fact that Whedon is developing the show gives it that potential though.

Runaways, SHIELD, or something along the lines of Damage Control are the ideas people are putting out there. Any of those could work

Oh man I will watch Whedon Marvel tv--- plzplzplz astonishing x-men

i'd stop hoping for that to happen right now

different studios etc

Yeah, no X-Men, no Spider-Man.

SHIELD makes sense -- it could be done within tv-budget constraints.

JOSS WHEDON ALPHA FLIGHT, PEOPLE

I am already imagining the crappy accent Eliza Dushku will adopt as Aurora