Startling realization I had when considering which DC New 52 issues to pick up: I had no interest at all in the Justice League because I was more curious about each superhero’s individual story than jamming them all up together into one story. So what does that mean for my anticipation of The Avengers, which is basically the same thing? Apparently not much. I’m lukewarm to genially positive about most of the individual Marvel superhero films (that is, I enjoy them, but they’re pretty disposable), and this probably won’t be much different, but I’m still on-board because of a) Joss Whedon and b) the casting. Lots of people I quite like in here, and from the looks of the trailer that just dropped today, they’re interacting pretty well.
What do you think? Are you ready for The Avengers, or are you petered out on comic book superhero movies? The trailer is tucked under the seat.
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!
(don)
I’m totally in. Love Whedon, the cast is great, and I’ve enjoyed all of the Marvel films at least somewhat (Thor and Iron Man are easily my favourites).
No, thank you. Iron Man I can enjoy because RDJ is the focus. This will be a meddled mess, I am sure.
Jonathan, tell me that you’re not a little excited about seeing Hawkeye on the screen. Just a little bit.
I do like Jeremy Renner.
As was mentioned, Joss Whedon is involved so my interest is a lot higher than it normally would be. The trailer does look pretty dang cool, though, and I have to admit that I’m quite on board after seeing this. The individual films have been pretty hit or miss for me. I really liked Iron Man (first one) and Captain America, but the others were kind of a chore.
I didn’t know Mark Ruffalo was the hulk.
Otherwise this looks like Michael Bay horseshit.
It is not on my top three most anticipated 2012 blockbusters list:
1. Prometheus
2. The Dark Knight Rises
3. Looper
I’ve missed most of the lead up films – gave up on super hero films a while ago, but I think from the trailer this looks vaguely promising. I’m happy with the lack of OTT CGI (other than a bit of flying around it just shows lots of explosions) and I prefer my super hero movies with a lighter tone, which this seems to have. As Jonathan H I’m more interested than normal because of Whedon too.
I’m sure by comparing Joss Whedon to Michael Fucking Bay, Andrew was just trying to be needlessly incendiary for the sake of his own ha-ha’s. So I’ll refrain from calling him a STUPID FACE
I cannot imagine the Avengers looking anything like a MBay movie, and this trailer doesn’t seem to indicate anything of that sort.
Are you guys kidding? This looks a helluva lot more like Transformers or Pearl Harbor to me than Serenity or “Dollhouse”. Looks like cars and people getting thrown around for 2 hours. JUST JUDGING FROM THE TRAILER, but this looks nothing like a Whedon film. In fact, except for the flashes of the characters talking, I’m not sure I’d be able to distinguish this from Transformers. Fanboy disease is striking the third row!
Granted I didn’t see Thor. But don’t really want to.
The “if we can’t save the world, we’ll avenge it” line is every bit as dumb as justification for the team name as Whedon’s “what happens to a toad hit by lightning” line. Especially since I doubt The Avengers won’t save the world.
Other than that, it looks exactly like I’d expect. There’s some explosions, some one liners from Robert Downey Jr., some early special effects, some character posing, and the absolute bare bones of a plot. It basically looks like every other Marvel film, maybe a little bigger, which I suppose is the point.
All I hear is crazy.
I haven’t even seen the trailer and I agree with Andrew 101%
I’m sorry there won’t be any whispering wind or metaphysically-meaningful water sprinklers in this one.
Trust the Whedon, guys.
Trailer-makers aren’t going to show the character interaction stuff that Whedon is so good at and that this film has such an opportunity to include. Not saying it’ll definitely bear us out, but I’m still optimistic. If Joe Johnston can make Captain America as fun as he did, I have faith Whedon can make The Avengers entertaining.
Besides, didn’t Andrew actually give Transformers 3 a relatively positive review? (http://www.rowthree.com/2011/06/29/review-transformers-3-dark-of-the-moon-2d/)
Andrew, you liked Fast Five and Transformers 3. Why are you calling this horse shit, this is right up you alley?
Andrew liked the first Transformers movie too.
I’m going to guess because this is ‘comic book hero’ that somehow in Andrew’s book that makes it worse than Fighting Robots or The Rock’s muscles glistening with baby-oil.
As Gamble said in the Cinecast, it ain’t the band, it’s the fans/critics. Look, I like Joss Whedon’s stuff. I watched “Buffy” week to week in its entirety, I’m a huge “Firefly” fan and I even liked “Dollhouse” to some extent. – and I’m inclined to agree with Jandy, probably all of the good barbs and interactions are not shown in the trailer. But what is in the trailer looks like nothing different than a Bay film. So did I like Transformers 3? Yeah, for what it was. Do I gush over it like Matt Gamble gushes over baby stomping? No I do not.
So what I’m saying here is, the movie may be perfectly fine. People looking at this trailer and seeing something completely amazing and different is what bugs. It doesn’t look like anything new or particularly exciting. Once again it appears to hinge on RDJ’s sarcastic insults. Which, to be quite frank about, I’m getting kind of sick of that schtick. Maybe the movie will be alright. But to me it just looks like more of the same old same old which really doesn’t interest me much. So I can’t understand why someone would sit and scream and yell about how terrible Transformers 3 is, and then turn around and say this looks amazing. No it doesn’t.
re: Transformers 1. For about the 5th time Gamble, I suggest you go back and read my review. I would hardly say I “liked” it.
ok, I just watched the trailer again. ARE YOU GUYS FUCKING KIDDING ME!? I challenge anyone to find one thing, ONE THING, in this entire trailer that isn’t straight out of a Bay film. It’s got the rotating around the characters camera movement (usually explosions in the background), it’s got the “eyes closed, looking dangerous down on one knee with a sword shot”, it’s got the same sound effects as a mutating robot and plays fucking Limp Bizkit or Korn (or whoever the hell that is) in the background. Aw shit yeah…
Fast Five has nothing to do with Super Heroes or giant robots. They’re both action movies; that’s where the comparison ends. But I’d say I liked Fast Five for its action sequences (which were pretty awesome – particularly when comparing it to part 4 which was a piece of shit in every regard). The street blowing up and cars flying all around in that movie was done in an impressive and pretty ridiculous street chase. This has cars exploding for no reason other than to have cars blowing up. It looks like Independence Day.
I’m not sure anyone in this thread has said it looks “amazing.” Certainly I didn’t originally. I said I’m still intrigued by the casting and director despite my ambivalence toward superhero group stories. I think it’ll be big summer blockbuster popcorn fun, and that’s all.
You’re right Jandy, I’m definitely putting words in people’s mouth. But it’s just this vibe of excitement I’m getting that I don’t understand. But that’s just me. If it looks cool to someone, then fair enough. Enjoy.
Musically, It’s NIN this time around (itself derivative of the 300 trailer which was a much more effective NIN usage)
In all fairness, this is what the marketing department did advertising SERENITY (look familar to Ms. Johannson above?):
(but at least they had the good sense to cut a trailer –MOSTLY– around the witty Whedon-y humour and dialogue):
Speaking of shitty marketing…
Here’s Edward Norton seeing The Avengers trailer for the first time:
I don’t think it will be as Whedony as Firefly or Dollhouse or Buffy. That’s dumb. He’s working with existing, well-established source material with its own requirements. Honestly, it SHOULDN’T feel Whedonesque the way his own shows do. And when working with existing material, he’s not always as good, so yeah, I’m still skeptical, but I’m a whole lot more intrigued because of his involvement than I would be without it. But he does know how to write for and handle an ensemble cast, and he has written comic runs of X-Men before (which I haven’t read and can’t comment on), so yeah…intrigued. It certainly doesn’t look worse than any of the other Marvel films, and I’ve at least been entertained by all of those.
This was just a “teaser” to get the general audience excited about it. Once the full length trailer that shows the actually story I bet Andrew will change his tune.
You have to be excited about it on the fact that Joss Whedon is the writer and director. Though i liked some of the Marvel films, this might be the first that is completely cohesive.
The trailer has obliterated the previous record for iTunes downloads. Ten million in 24 hours.
http://www.deadline.com/2011/10/avengers-trailer-on-itunes-10m-downloads-in-24-hours/
You may have buyer’s remorse after Bay jerked you off, but the fact of the matter, Andrew, is that you still came.
Hard.
Andrew, you seem to be tossing out “Michael Bay” in a Godwin’s Law kind of way. Tsk Tsk.
Because the problem with Bay movies isn’t really what they look like.
And I thought you liked at least a few Bay movies…
…and you tossed NIN in with Limp Bizkit…
and then Kurt doubles down saying it’s derivitive of 300 because it’s the same band. Therefore don’t see The Two Towers, because it has the same music as Requiem for a Dream. Don’t see John Carter (Benjamin Button). And hey, that music in Social Network.. sounds like someone might have ripped off the trailer for 300! It happened first in a film related thing, therefore it’s derivitive! See Kurt’s previous case of Iron Man having ripped off Robocop.
I’ve been cynical about this Avengers movie but I know Blockbusterphobia when I see it, and this site is either sick or bigoted, whichever use of phobia we’re going with. You put some blockbusters into a “we won’t even give you an inch” zone.
I wouldn’t say I’m “bigoted” toward Blockbusters; but I’m certainly skeptical of them. If one shows me something that surprises me or gives me details I haven’t seen before, then I’ll probably be on board to some extent. I praised Captain America and Apes this summer. I think Limitless could be considered a super hero film that did some interesting things. But that probably doesn’t count as it maybe leans a litle more towards the genre side of the spectrum.
Bottom line here is: this trailer is so bad it almost looks like a parody of these types of films. If that’s sort of what it’s going for, then bravo. But I have a hunch it’s taking itself pretty seriously. And what baffles me is the excitement. Again, it’s the most derivative, cliche trailer I think I’ve seen in 5 years and people seem to be going wild about it (as Matt pointed out above). I talked to a couple of friends before Human Centipede last night and both thought it looked “awesome”. If you honestly think that, then fair enough. But there seems to be this weird fanboy sickness going around that just makes me feel like this…
http://youtu.be/wC8y0HoopVE
Actually, The Two Towers used the RfaD soundtrack before EVERYONE started using it. They were pretty much the first to use it in a trailer.
The John Carter thing is annoying in that it uses an illplaced version of the Acrade Fire song, whereas the brief Benjamin Button trailer used it better, albeit not as good as they could have.
It’s not as black and white as you make it out to be, Goon. Since trailers are complex organisms (so to speak), it is not as easy to cry foul because it is praised in one trailer and damned in another.
The use of NIN is clumsily used in this trailer.
Lets just say that we are Blockbuster wary (particularly on Marvel’s paint-by-numbers strategy so far since they got into the production business), and not throw out the bigoted word, eh?
Suggesting this is the most cliche ridden / derivitve trailer in 5 years is Campea level hyperbole. (I one upped the Godwin’s law with that one)
It’s a figure of speech, Goon. It would be the same as me saying, “oh it’s the worst.”
I guess the written word doesn’t bring about sarcasm or intended exaggeration very well. Sorry.
Calling me Camea-like certainly gets my blood boiling though. Good thing I can claim to not have made the worst movie of 2010.
37 comments on a trailer. I guess Marvel did its job.
It’s amazing to me that after who knows how many rounds of this in other threads, particularly this year, we’ve kicked open the “are these kinds of movies good or what” debate yet again, especially given that we already know where everybody sits at the table.
To recap:
Some Row Three writers hate superhero movies and are always going to hate superhero movies and have an almost unimaginable quantity of cold contempt for anyone who feels otherwise. These same individuals have arrived at their opinion, are correct, and are not interested in new information – thank you.
Other Row Three writers THINK AWESOME SHIT IS AWESOME, MAN, HOLY SHIT
No Row Three writers that I am aware of (myself included) behave in the comments as though they have even a basic understanding of the precepts of subjectivity.
The whole comic book superhero push-pull in these (R3) comments sections is like movie-chat-warm-up exercises. You go thru the motions to get ready for other things. But, still you better warm up, lest you hurt yourself doing real exercise.
I’m mostly kidding here.
“Good thing I can claim to not have made the worst movie of 2010.”
Did you sit through the entirely of the Anniversary? I had a blast watching it just because of the Campea-history, even if it was so obviously truly awful.
Matt I don’t entirely agree with your conclusions. I don’t have a “hate” for all superhero movies. In fact there are several that I like quite a lot; love in some cases. And I have subjectivity in mind when making statements sometimes. But that’s kind of irrelevant here.
What I’m asking about (for the third time) regarding this trailer is WHY people are so excited about it. So far no one has said anything other than it’s Joss Whedon and so that should be good enough. Or just comments calling me crazy because I don’t get it, or a debate on Michael Bay films. All I ask is for someone to say WHY this trailer is so exciting? I don’t mean it as condescension or insult. As I’ve said twice now, if you think this trailer looks “AWESOME SHIT IS AWESOME, MAN, HOLY SHIT” then that’s fair enough. But when I ask why, all I see is just, “are you crazy!? It’s Joss Whedon!” or “but Andrew, you liked Fast Five”. Neither of those things have anything to do with this trailer.
So what is it about THIS TRAILER that has people excited? Is it simply the prospect of a beloved franchise coming to theaters again this summer? Is it the awesomeness of cars blowing up? Is it that RDJ and Ruffalo have a couple of lines? Is it the Scarlett Johansson looks hot in tight leather with a look of devilish mysteriousness while a building explodes behind her? Is it seeing Chris Evans thrown out of a window and hitting a car? Is it the cool sound effects? Is it Sam Jackson’s eye patch? Is it the laser guns shooting a road? Or is it simply the idea of all these films coming together after 5+ years of build-up?
When I see this trailer all I see is a mash-up of every single super hero set piece splashed on the screen almost simultaneously. I see nothing new or interesting. I wasn’t kidding when I said it almost looks like a parody. It does. So again, for the last time I ask, why does this trailer get you excited to see the film?
Goon,
No I couldn’t sit through the whole thing. It made my eyes and ears bleed simultaneously after about 15 minutes. It wasn’t funny, it wasn’t interesting, it was just plain awful. It made all those feeling of hatred come rushing back so I had to turn it off.
PS – my eyes and ears didn’t literally bleed.
I don’t know that this trailer is that exciting, Andrew, divorced from the other things that intrigue me. I mean, if I hadn’t been interested already, this trailer likely wouldn’t MAKE me interested. My interest still comes mostly from the director and cast, and wasn’t really heightened by the trailer – but the trailer didn’t LOWER my interest, either, which it seems to have done for you. The only thing that did make me sit up and notice is the introduction of Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner – we hadn’t seen him in anything yet, not even the tag at the end of Captain America – and I liked that three-second interaction with RDJ. It wouldn’t push me over the edge of I weren’t interested, but since I am, it was a nice taste. That’s all.
Andrew: I didn’t think the trailer was amazing either, but it looked better than I expected which is why I was fairly positive about it. I actually thought it looked less over the top and special effects heavy than I figured it would be which I liked, so I’m surprised by the Michael Bay comments, but I can sort of see where you’re coming from with all the explosions and things. Plus the snatches of character banter we get suggest a breezier experience which is what I’m after in a blockbuster.
Fast Five has nothing to do with Super Heroes or giant robots. They’re both action movies; that’s where the comparison ends. But I’d say I liked Fast Five for its action sequences (which were pretty awesome – particularly when comparing it to part 4 which was a piece of shit in every regard). The street blowing up and cars flying all around in that movie was done in an impressive and pretty ridiculous street chase. This has cars exploding for no reason other than to have cars blowing up. It looks like Independence Day.