Originally posted by ares834
Loki's scepter having the mind gem is pretty stupid. I mean, why would Thanos entrust something so important to an underling? But minor complaint really.
Thats like wondering why Thanos keeps trusting others to get the job done, when he could just do it himself, but Marvel needs to save him for the gauntlet.
It's not really a big risk. He's Thanos. They want him as badass and grand as possible in his schemes. A Thanos that isn't afraid to lend out a gem in order to gain another is how a cunning and fearless Thanos should be. It won't look stupid when Thanos tricks everyone and takes the gems from them like he did in Thanos Quest.
Originally posted by Firefly218
And just who would've been a better choice? Loki brought Thor to Earth, Dr. Banner and Iron Man to SHIELD and Cap back in action seamlessly.
Someone that requires an actual team to defeat? I don't know, that's just where i would start. Look, i'm not bashing this franchise. The risks they took have obviously paid off but this "avengers" gamble could have easily turned into another, X-3, Superman Returns, Amazing spiderman 3..,etc. The lynch-pin has and always will be, Iron man/Jon favereau-RDJ. I know this was always intended to be a never ending business franchise. As much as i welcome that, however, i yearn to see a more condensed and finite story. Considering this, Loki would be one of the weakest characters to bring the Avengers together, atleast in the way that transpired.
I don't want to seem like im complaining though because the kid in me is alive and well. I love what we've been given, but the same person that brings me to an internet forum dedicated to picking movies apart, leaves me ridiculing every aspect of each film. The aspect that be critisized the most, is the weakness of the villain that causes the assembly of the Avengers.
^ Well I personally think it was smart of them not to bring in the biggest baddest invincible villain right from the first movie. Because then the sequels will just seem like they're downgraded in comparison.
I want the sequels to get bigger and better with each one.
The fact that they made the First one as great as it was without bringing in -say Thanos- right away, has also helped the franchise tremendously, because they've not even used any of their Trump cards yet.
Plus having Loki be the one to bring the team together was a nice nod to the comics.
Just my opinion anyway.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
^ Well I personally think it was smart of them not to bring in the biggest baddest invincible villain right from the first movie. Because then the sequels will just seem like they're downgraded in comparison.I want the sequels to get bigger and better with each one.
The fact that they made the First one as great as it was without bringing in -say Thanos- right away, has also helped the franchise tremendously, because they've not even used any of their Trump cards yet.
Plus having Loki be the one to bring the team together was a nice nod to the comics.
Just my opinion anyway.
Yeah, you're right, man and i dont want to seem like i'm trying to nit-pick this franchise apart. Obviously, the typed word can only capture a slight amount of one's sarcasm. I have nothing but hope for these future movies..,atleast, the majority of the films involved in, "phase 3". It's obvious that the gambles this studio took on it's writers, directors and producers has paid off. I just hope we are spared filler movies and production t.v shows. When you have something like Iron Man and you waste TWO movies doing nothing, i get concerned. When i say, "concerned" i mean, concerned as a consumer. I'm a comics fan through and through but just like the comics have taught me. One has to be very wise in the story arch and run they invest in. Iron man 3 made that amount of money on name alone. I didint want to see a name like that fall into the same category of Xmen and Spiderman, but it has.
Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
Yeah, you're right, man and i dont want to seem like i'm trying to nit-pick this franchise apart. Obviously, the typed word can only capture a slight amount of one's sarcasm. I have nothing but hope for these future movies..,atleast, the majority of the films involved in, "phase 3". It's obvious that the gambles this studio took on it's writers, directors and producers has paid off. I just hope we are spared filler movies and production t.v shows. When you have something like Iron Man and you waste TWO movies doing nothing, i get concerned. When i say, "concerned" i mean, concerned as a consumer. I'm a comics fan through and through but just like the comics have taught me. One has to be very wise in the story arch and run they invest in. Iron man 3 made that amount of money on name alone. I didint want to see a name like that fall into the same category of Xmen and Spiderman, but it has.
Oh yeah I completely agree with what you've said on Iron Man. The first IM was just so awesome and was such a great film to kick off the whole MCU. But the sequels both sucked.
IM clearly has just become a name that will make money no matter the quality and they can get away with that as long as the character stays popular which he will as long as he stays as the most loved character in the Avengers franchise. But I'm sure if not for Avengers, the IM franchise popularity would be going down right now, not up.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Oh yeah I completely agree with what you've said on Iron Man. The first IM was just so awesome and was such a great film to kick off the whole MCU. But the sequels both sucked.IM clearly has just become a name that will make money no matter the quality and they can get away with that as long as the character stays popular which he will as long as he stays as the most loved character in the Avengers franchise. But I'm sure if not for Avengers, the IM franchise popularity would be going down right now, not up.
yeah they stopped progressing iron man... he has stayd the same.. no real ground breaking armor adds... no real feats
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Oh yeah I completely agree with what you've said on Iron Man. The first IM was just so awesome and was such a great film to kick off the whole MCU. But the sequels both sucked.IM clearly has just become a name that will make money no matter the quality and they can get away with that as long as the character stays popular which he will as long as he stays as the most loved character in the Avengers franchise. But I'm sure if not for Avengers, the IM franchise popularity would be going down right now, not up.
That's simply not true for lots of people. A majority of moviegoers gave IM3 positive reviews. I even remember some people claiming IM3 was funnier than Avengers a year ago.
Relative to most action/adventure/tech movies that come out, the Iron Man trilogy has been above average to great. IMO, the complaints are incredibly overrated.
Also, IM3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spiderman 3
LOKI..LOKI..LOKI...LOKI....LOKI...
Digital Spy or rather Kevin Feige confirms Loki is in this..
Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
Someone that requires an actual team to defeat? I don't know, that's just where i would start. Look, i'm not bashing this franchise. The risks they took have obviously paid off but this "avengers" gamble could have easily turned into another, X-3, Superman Returns, Amazing spiderman 3..,etc. The lynch-pin has and always will be, Iron man/Jon favereau-RDJ. I know this was always intended to be a never ending business franchise. As much as i welcome that, however, i yearn to see a more condensed and finite story. Considering this, Loki would be one of the weakest characters to bring the Avengers together, atleast in the way that transpired.I don't want to seem like im complaining though because the kid in me is alive and well. I love what we've been given, but the same person that brings me to an internet forum dedicated to picking movies apart, leaves me ridiculing every aspect of each film. The aspect that be critisized the most, is the weakness of the villain that causes the assembly of the Avengers.
They downgraded Loki in this. It's not like comic book Loki isn't a team buster. Aside from Thor, who Loki could trick, the rest of the team shouldn't be much of a problem had they wanted Loki to be a team buster like he is in the books. Even movie Loki could have fooled Iron Man into attacking Captain America by making Cap look like Loki through illusions. He could have done the same and turned the Avengers against one other just by trickery alone, but they couldn't have him do that. He'd probably kill off most of the Avenger,s leaving only Hulk and Thor to defeat him. Then they couldn't do a Iron Man 3.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Oh yeah I completely agree with what you've said on Iron Man. The first IM was just so awesome and was such a great film to kick off the whole MCU. But the sequels both sucked.IM clearly has just become a name that will make money no matter the quality and they can get away with that as long as the character stays popular which he will as long as he stays as the most loved character in the Avengers franchise. But I'm sure if not for Avengers, the IM franchise popularity would be going down right now, not up.
They rushed production of IM2. They should have built up his alcoholism story better, especially when they had Downey, so we could see his fall before Fury gives him tapes of Howard that would begin his rise. It would have made the arguments with War Machine convincing. That whole Nascar bit was unnecessary, they could have introduced Whiplash in a different way. IM3 was Marvel chickening out on the Mandarin and giving Shane Black too much free reign. Also there was too much over the top forced humor. Thing is Marvel did that One Shot with Kingsley.
Hopefully they've learned that too much humor isn't a good thing and that they should trifle with certain character's origins and should just go all in.
Originally posted by Firefly218
That's simply not true for lots of people. A majority of moviegoers gave IM3 positive reviews. I even remember some people claiming IM3 was funnier than Avengers a year ago.Relative to most action/adventure/tech movies that come out, the Iron Man trilogy has been above average to great. IMO, the complaints are incredibly overrated.
A majority doesn't mean much, statistically MoS is on par with both Iron Man sequels. And that's with, imo, a bias boost that the MCU gives out. Now I'd like to think of all three films a success with quite obvious flaws except that only Marvel get the success while Supes gets the shit end of the stick.
If you think the IM sequels have overrated complaints then you pretty much have to acknowledge the same for MoS.
Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
LOKI..LOKI..LOKI...LOKI....LOKI...Digital Spy or rather Kevin Feige confirms Loki is in this..
Called it. I wish i could find where i posted a long time ago that Loki will take the place of Mephisto in the MCU in an infinity gauntlet arc.
While it doesn't state this I think this will be the case.