The Avengers Hulk Smashes Box Office Record

[CardinalPiggles]

And the difference between this film and a Michael Bay film is what?

Spoiler

From a technical aspect, The Avengers has:

-Little to no shaky cam
-Limited extreme-close-up. You can actually see what's going on during the action scenes.
-Color correction is done competently. Takes the coloration and design of each character who is supposed to be on screen into consideration, rather than just doing the entire fucking movie in one mode. There's no instances of "orange-face Shia LeBeouf".
-Limited use of slo-mo. I counted maybe three instances in the entire movie. It's an action movie staple to be sure, but excessive usage of it is Bay's style.
-Most of the cuts for dialog actually last long enough to let the audience get in sync with the mood and pacing of the scene. The scene between Black Widow and Loki best represents this.
(if you haven't seen a Michael Bay film before, most of his cuts are incredibly short, distracting and never let the scene build)

As for the writing and characters, you'd have to hold your own opinion. I like them.
But I will say that The Avengers is a marked improvement simply because it isn't overrun with useless, retarded comic relief characters and racist caricatures.

Cool, thanks. I'm glad I got an answer that wasn't 'EXPLOSIONS, HURRRR'. But I still wonder how many people notice theses little differences enough to appreciate them, and how many are just following suit.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Cool, thanks. I'm glad I got an answer that wasn't 'EXPLOSIONS, HURRRR'. But I still wonder how many people notice theses little differences enough to appreciate them, and how many are just following suit.

Whether they notice overtly, I cannot say.

I tend to pay attention to those details a bit more closely now, since some of my worst action-movie experiences are related to things like excessive shaky cam (Bourne series), excessive-close ups (Transformers 2), and of course, useless, irritating comic relief characters (all manner of films; I call it "Chris Tucker Syndrome", even though he isn't the progenitor, he's just the one who clued me into this trend).

 

[xyrafhoan]

And the difference between this film and a Michael Bay film is what?

Spoiler

From a technical aspect, The Avengers has:

-Little to no shaky cam
-Limited extreme-close-up. You can actually see what's going on during the action scenes.
-Color correction is done competently. Takes the coloration and design of each character who is supposed to be on screen into consideration, rather than just doing the entire fucking movie in one mode. There's no instances of "orange-face Shia LeBeouf".
-Limited use of slo-mo. I counted maybe three instances in the entire movie. It's an action movie staple to be sure, but excessive usage of it is Bay's style.
-Most of the cuts for dialog actually last long enough to let the audience get in sync with the mood and pacing of the scene. The scene between Black Widow and Loki best represents this.
(if you haven't seen a Michael Bay film before, most of his cuts are incredibly short, distracting and never let the scene build)

As for the writing and characters, you'd have to hold your own opinion. I like them.
But I will say that The Avengers is a marked improvement simply because it isn't overrun with useless, retarded comic relief characters and racist caricatures.

Cool, thanks. I'm glad I got an answer that wasn't 'EXPLOSIONS, HURRRR'. But I still wonder how many people notice theses little differences enough to appreciate them, and how many are just following suit.

Cinematography makes a huge difference. I can never figure out what's happening in a Bourne film because of the excessive shaking and lightning fast cuts. I can't watch a Bay movie because the special effects are incredibly excessive and the action is extremely erratic.

The Avengers has wonderfully choreographed fights that actually let the audience see the action. It uses many more wide, tracking shots that keep the action on the screen long enough for the audience to process the whole scene and know exactly what is going on. It's never ambiguous who's fighting who or where the characters are in their environment.

Of course, all of this is just on the technical merits of the film. Transformers felt like it was actively insulting my IQ with its horrible "comic relief" characters. Avengers is definitely a Joss Whedon film complete with witty one-liners, but it worked. It IS a comic book movie after all. But there was definitely working chemistry between characters, and the Hulk finally got a moment in the spotlight that he deserved. This is by far the best portrayal the Hulk has ever had, and his rapport with Tony Stark is just top notch. I actually want to say that Avengers is laugh-out-loud funnier than most comedies strive to be, but it works.

 

[SomeBoredGuy]

People flock to gobble up large helpings of shallow, unoriginal shit? Who'd have thunk it.

Please, sir, I insist that you leave your mode of transport at the door.

Spoiler: Image