• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Avengers 2: Age of Ultron - Seriously

Started by Mr Wiggles,

2,574 posts in this topic

Prince Namor

Prince Namor

Posted
Posted

The Golden Age Vision was not an android, but rather an alien from 'Smokeworld', created by Joe Simon and Jack Kirby. He could fly, make illusions of himself, generate extreme cold and whenever there was smoke he could teleport (shrug)

 

He just recently appeared in the Invaders story line in issue #2 and #3 last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Prince Namor

Prince Namor

Posted
Posted

According to Roy...

After a few years of Roy adding Avengers and Stan telling him to get rid of them (I guess he means Hercules and the Black Widow) - him and Stan decided they needed to add a new character to the team.

Roy wanted to bring back the Golden Age Vision and Stan wanted the new character to be an android for some reason. So Roy created the Vision. Once again, according to Roy, Stan told him afterwards, "Why'd you make him red? Nobody will like a red character." And Roy told him, "Remember, Martin once told you that no one would like a character about Spider's..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jaybuck43

jaybuck43

Posted
Posted

Eh. Too many characters isn't really an issue. We get a bit of an origin for scarlet witch and quick silver (not deep but its there) and the film is worth seeing for the hulk hulkbuster fight alone. Also it does a magnificent job teasing what's to come, albeit with what may end up being a very very significant change. It just felt like a connection film where things happen, but its not complete etc. There was still whitty banter, hawkeyes character is much improved, Thor probably was the most fun and had me looking forward to ragnorock. Definitely worth seeing again but didn't have me giddy like I was after avengers 1 or guardians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ComicConnoisseur

ComicConnoisseur

Posted
Posted
Saw the movie. Its good but not as good as the first. 3 and a half out of 5 stars.

Without giving away spoilers(I`m seeing Avengers this Friday.)

How would you compare it to GOTG and Captain America: The Winter Soldier?

I thought those two were the benchmarks in different ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
r100comics

r100comics

Posted
Posted
Saw the movie. Its good but not as good as the first. 3 and a half out of 5 stars.

 

+1

 

To the non-comic public this is yet another generic, robot type villain but personally I thought Ultron was really well done.

 

As others have said Vision is incredible and the stand-out in the movie, but I was happy that Thor has a good showing and provides the greatest endurance feat in any comic movie.....

 

What mainly brings this down is the choppy editing and how slow it is in places.

 

Loads of great stuff for the comic fan though and I'll be seeing it again before the week is out.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jaybuck43

jaybuck43

Posted
Posted

You almost get the feeling that weddons heart wasn't in this one. The pacing is off, it drags in places, too quick in others. Its nothing like winter soldier which was a taught thrilling spy/mystery with action nor was it a grand operetic space battle like guardians was. It sits as a standard sequal that hits all the normal tropes. Sending away characters for no reason other then to service the plot, reimerging when its convenient etc. Again, its good, just not what I was expecting. I'm sure the numbers will be great, but this proves my concern, that other than winter solider marvel has problems with sequals

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jsilverjanet

jsilverjanet

Posted
Posted
You almost get the feeling that weddons heart wasn't in this one. The pacing is off, it drags in places, too quick in others. Its nothing like winter soldier which was a taught thrilling spy/mystery with action nor was it a grand operetic space battle like guardians was. It sits as a standard sequal that hits all the normal tropes. Sending away characters for no reason other then to service the plot, reimerging when its convenient etc. Again, its good, just not what I was expecting. I'm sure the numbers will be great, but this proves my concern, that other than winter solider marvel has problems with sequals

 

is he thinking about Wonder Woman :ohnoez:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Finhead

Finhead

Posted
Posted
Saw the movie. Its good but not as good as the first. 3 and a half out of 5 stars.

Without giving away spoilers(I`m seeing Avengers this Friday.)

How would you compare it to GOTG and Captain America: The Winter Soldier?

I thought those two were the benchmarks in different ways.

 

I would not compare it to either of those. I would compare it more to the Thor, a good movie but not on par with TWS or the first Iron Man. I'm really hoping a directors cut will fill in some of the story that just doesn't mesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Drummy

Drummy

Posted
Posted

Yeah, it sounds like it would have run better at about 2:40 or so...pacing is important, and jarring moves from one scene to another are annoying; it's one of the things I didn't like in Man of Steel. Too bad!

 

Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chip Cataldo

Chip Cataldo

Posted
Posted

I read most of the negative reviews, and half of them seem to be negative because the reviewer doesn't understand what's going on. About half of the rest seem to be negative because the reviewer has an obvious disdain for comic book movies in general.

 

It's really pathetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zosocane

zosocane

Posted
Posted
I read most of the negative reviews, and half of them seem to be negative because the reviewer doesn't understand what's going on. About half of the rest seem to be negative because the reviewer has an obvious disdain for comic book movies in general.

 

It's really pathetic.

 

Or maybe the movie really is 72% perfect, which is good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bane

bane

Posted
Posted
I read most of the negative reviews, and half of them seem to be negative because the reviewer doesn't understand what's going on. About half of the rest seem to be negative because the reviewer has an obvious disdain for comic book movies in general.

 

It's really pathetic.

 

We will see by the end of the week!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing