Official Avengers Tread ere

James J said:
I'd have personally liked to see Thanos as the bad guy with the film starting with 20 mins or so of his history which would have been far more true to the avengers story. Would also have been a nice starting point for a very good trilogy!
Click to expand...

Yeah but then it was Loki who inadvertently brought the Avengers together in the comics so that's what makes this film so great because it does the same thing.

Starting off straight away with Thanos would be too ridiculous and over the top.

They've already made a good starting point for a possible trilogy, now with the sequel unsurprisingly confirmed and all.
 
Phatjayunoi said:
Yeah but then it was Loki who inadvertently brought the Avengers together in the comics so that's what makes this film so great because it does the same thing.
Click to expand...

That's what makes it "so great" for the tiny fraction of the audience who know that sort of thing and care. They can have their little squeal and jizz in their pants because of a nod to the comics.

The overwhelming majority of people don't care. You shouldn't have to study ten years of comic book history to appreciate a film.
 
Vonhelmet said:
That's what makes it "so great" for the tiny fraction of the audience who know that sort of thing and care. They can have their little squeal and jizz in their pants because of a nod to the comics.

The overwhelming majority of people don't care. You shouldn't have to study ten years of comic book history to appreciate a film.
Click to expand...

The first Avengers movie was always going to wind up being an origins type story. They spent the first 3/4s of the movie really establishing the team coming together which is why (for me at least) the aliens at the end felt a little tacked on. Almost as if they did it just to show the engine they spent the entire film building actually ran.

Using Thanos as the baddie would have resulted in either
a) The loss of focus on the team
b) Not enough screen time for Thanos.

Thanos might not be that well known to non comic readers but he's one of the big guns in the lore (if not the biggest) and it would have been a crime to waste him.

I imagine that's what Whedon was thinking anyway.
 
Energizer Bunny said:
The first Avengers movie was always going to wind up being an origins type story. They spent the first 3/4s of the movie really establishing the team coming together which is why (for me at least) the aliens at the end felt a little tacked on. Almost as if they did it just to show the engine they spent the entire film building actually ran.

Using Thanos as the baddie would have resulted in either
a) The loss of focus on the team
b) Not enough screen time for Thanos.

Thanos might not be that well known to non comic readers but he's one of the big guns in the lore (if not the biggest) and it would have been a crime to waste him.

I imagine that's what Whedon was thinking anyway.
Click to expand...

^^^ I agree completely. The focus of this film was the formation of the Avengers ("Avengers Assemble"), rather than the specific threat they face. Marvel have pretty much spent four movies building up to this (Iron man 1+2, Thor, Captain America) so they were always going to make a big deal out of the assembly of the team.

Having a "super-duper-invincible" enemy in this movie would have been a waste - there simply wasn't enough screen time to justify such a powerful adversary. Far better to save "the big guns" for round two, where much more screen-time will be devoted to the battles.
 
Since the next three films are the second in the "cycle" that leads up to the second Avengers film I think they'll probably build Thanos throughout all three of them.

The only reason this works is because of Kevin Feige. By putting one man in charge of all the Mavel Cinematic Universe films allows for the kind of continuity we've seen so far. From what I gather he's the one that directs where the plot of the films go, so hopefully we'll see some more crossover in Iron Man 3, Thor 2 and Cap 2.
 
i've seen mention of a possible bad guy for iron man 3 that seems to tie in with a few of the avengers, not deeply into the lore, so not sure how likely it might be.

mention on digitial spy of ben kinglsey being signed up to be the manderin
 
Shamikebab said:
Yeah a couple of people have mentioned that in the Iron Man 3 thread.
Click to expand...

i know, just wondered if the more knowledgeable members thought it was a likely possibility, as the bits i've picked up have been separate connections with the various avenger members rather than as a group.
 
So, now that the movie has almost run its course at the box office, I was checking to see how it did at the box office.

It seems to have done rather well.

In the all time box office gross list, it is ranked No.3, behind the 2 James Cameron movies.

http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/alltimegross?region=world-wide

Its amazing that Ross Whedon, who is essentially a TV series director, ends up making the 3rd highest grossing movie of all time.
 
We're building the box set for this at work at the moment, i'm sick of the sight of it already and we haven't even started shipping it yet :(

We have a pre-release shipping figure of 1.4 million units on the stand alone movie and have already built about 30k of the BR boxset and 50k of the DVD boxset. That's just phase 1. I'm going to hate this movie by christmas :)
 
Bloody hell, I enjoyed it but I didn't think it would make anywhere near that.

Superhero movies usually seem to make between 200 and 500.
 
It's probably an exception as this was the first superhero movie where everyone, I mean EVERYONE enjoyed. From my young cousins to old working colleagues bringing their Grandkids to watch, coming out saying how brilliant it was.

Keep it up and I'm sure the sequal will make it big too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom