The Adventures of Tintin.
I loved the movie, and I had precisely zero issues with the way the characters looked. Great performances from Jamie Bell, Andy Serkis and Daniel Craig. Easy going escapist Spielberg is so much better than baggy, lecturing historian Spielberg. He's just an absolute master at his craft. The likes of Michael Bay can only dream of ever directing action sequences like Spielberg so effortlessly does in Tintin.
It's basically the antithesis of Nolan's Batman movies in the best possible way, showing you how a good comic book movie can be done in a different way. It's bright and colorful, funny, witty, over the top, unrestrained. Yet it avoids being ridiculous, too clichéd, boring, or insulting (I think you all know what other movies I have in mind here).
It doesn't have any weaknesses, but it has many strengths. The pacing is spot on, you never get bored but it doesn't overwhelm you with relentless action either - it builds up continuously, but it slows down in perfect rhythm between the more powerful scenes. It even has some of Whedon's unexpected moves where he goes against your expectations - I actually expect one of these scenes to be mentioned on the same page with a certain event in Raiders of the Lost Ark.
"puny god"
And there's soooo much content, it's not like the first Iron Man which I really like but it leaves you wanting more, especially because the fight with Iron Monger is so underwhelming. Here, you get just enough of everything but not too much.
Sure, it does not really have a "serious" aspect, but we'll get enough of that in the final Dark Knight movie so why bother trying to force it into this movie. The main goal is to entertain you and Avengers achieves it perfectly from beginning to end.
If I really had to criticize something, it's the design of some elements - the aliens are completely unremarkable, I couldn't sketch them up at all; and the Captain's suit isn't as good as it should be (at least he spends a lot of time without wearing that silly hood).
But the new Iron Man Mark VII armor is cool, the Hulk tops the previous ILM incarnation, oh and the SHIELD "headquarters" is amazing too. Yeah, Thor's pretty much the same, Loki has some upgrades but the look is the same... However, altogether there's an insane amount of effects work, practically seamless all the time, with some truly insane sequences that I have absolutely no idea how they're even possible... light spoiler:
there's a shot which starts with flying by the side of Iron Man, all the way until he lands near the others and starts some close quarters fighting, and it's completely seamless all the way with insane momentum
People thought the trailers gave away too much, but honestly, it's like 5% at most, this is like the most intensive stuff since Avatar.
It's been overdue for at least a decade, but Whedon's finally going to heaven. If Prometheus, the Dark Knight Rises and the Hobbit can live up to expectations just half as much as Avengers did then 2012 is going to be a red letter year for movies.
That's a good summary on Avengers Laa-Yosh. I saw it today and liked it. The pacing was good and all characters got enough screen time to shine and kick ass. Funny humour and for once enough action, while still keeping everything flowing "naturally" is a good accomplishment. I wish they'd make a Superman movie half this good.
edit: I saw the 2D-version, not a big fan of the 3D currently... I was very surprised to see Avengers having 1.85:1 aspect ratio. I didn't even know they use that anymore. I thought they are all 2.35:1. It looked a bit weird to me to see such a narrow view.
It makes sense because of the verticality of the New York scenery and the variable height of the characters from Scarlett to the Hulk. They'd had to tilt the camera all the time to frame everything properly and particularly with the 3D it'd only make everyone sick.
Stereo wasn't bad by the way. Haven't seen a lot of post converted movies so I'm not sure how awful it could get but this version was even working at times.
My policy these days is to avoid watching trailers or reading reviews of films I fancy watching. They give away spoilers much too often these days.
I did recently watch the trailer for The Hobbit but then I know what happens in that already! What I don't quite understand is how 1,600 pages of LoTR can be made into 3 movies but less than 400 pages of The Hobbit becomes 2 movies...
My policy these days is to avoid watching trailers or reading reviews of films I fancy watching. They give away spoilers much too often these days.
I did recently watch the trailer for The Hobbit but then I know what happens in that already! What I don't quite understand is how 1,600 pages of LoTR can be made into 3 movies but less than 400 pages of The Hobbit becomes 2 movies...
Because Jackson and his writers are padding the story, writing out the scenes where the White Council confronts Sauron and drives him out of Dol Guldur, his fastness in southern Mirkwood. Which I don't trust at all.
Because Jackson and his writers are padding the story, writing out the scenes where the White Council confronts Sauron and drives him out of Dol Guldur, his fastness in southern Mirkwood. Which I don't trust at all.
Well, considering that Jackson chopped various bits out of LoTR (I'm looking at you Bombadil and the Barrow downs) and added other parts in (a car-chase involving Wargs) to no great end, I'm not overly convinced we'll see much good come of this.
A pity, in some respects, that the LoTR movies had to be made instead of a Game of Thrones-type miniseries. Some of the TV shows produced these days are much superior in their conception and plotting to the movies.
Pretty much my attitude. I'm not a big Jackson fan as is, but we'll see. I'd like to know where he plans on ending the first film, though my hunch is it'll revolve around Gollum.
I love most of his works I've seen. Though admittedly the list of what I've seen of his is limited to The Frighteners, Dead Alive, LOTR and King Kong. King Kong sucked.
I love most of his works I've seen. Though admittedly the list of what I've seen of his is limited to The Frighteners, Dead Alive, LOTR and King Kong. King Kong sucked.
Funnily enough I agree exactly. As such I am pretty excited to see the Hobbit. I don't care about liberties, I care about whether the movie is entertaining and has good acting etc... they can change the story a lot as long as the resulting story is good.
jackson is too much of a perfectionist, he hasnt done a bad work though (Ive seen all his films).
Youre both right youve gotta take poetic license, cause what works on a page may not work on screen (dialogue where the person is thinking to themselves for example)
Avengers 9/10 - Great popcorn movie, and great start to the summer movie season. Very Whedon-esque, the pacing is a bit off the first half, but the second half is pure action.