The Avengers (SPOILERS BEWARE0

[Desdichado]

I wouldn't call either Buffy nor Angel commercial failures since they lasted 7 and 5 seasons, respectively. I would even say Buffy, at least, was sufficiently mainstream to be the #2 show on a fledgeling network and showed broad youth appeal.

That's fine and--no offense--I don't see you as a particularly keen TV industry insider, so I don't think what you would call it is particularly relevent.

Buffy did well by UPN's standards. But it was UPN's standards. It got kicked off the WB fer cryin' out loud, and it's not like the WB had really high standards. Why? For ratings.

Buffy was very much a cult favorite only. It was not a "hit" in the traditional sense that that word is used.

And yet it was the closest thing Whedon had had to a hit in his repertoire. It was curious to me that he was picked to run this, and clearly it looks like it was the right decision after all. In many respects it's because--as he recognized in that 15 points article--that he had to file off a lot of the Whedonisms to make Avengers be a good Avengers movie.

 

[Felon]

I don't think any other handling of it could have captured the the wonderful humour of that moment in the way it was encapsulated in the movie.

So here's the thought process being presented: people enjoyed that scene, ergo any other way of handling that scene must therefore be utterly ruinous. Irrational mental barrier identfied.

Advocating its revision is advocating the loss of one of the most iconic stand-out moments of the entire movie. That's likely to elicit a response.

Advocating its revision does not equate to advocating the loss of the scene. That's simply a false dichotomy. Something good can be made better.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Has George Lucas hurt you all so deeply?

You're the only guy who seems to be annoyed about this.

I don't think anyone is trying to change your mind, why not just think 'Oh, other people have a different opinion' and go back to talking about what you DO like?

Seriously, there was so much that was fun about that film.

 

[Felon]

That's fine and--no offense--I don't see you as a particularly keen TV industry insider, so I don't think what you would call it is particularly relevent.

OK, you got me curious. By what virtue do you feel comfortable saying Whedon's stuff is a failure, and then dismissing Bill's opinion as irrelevant because you don't see him as a keen industry insider?

You're not really Kevin Klein, are you? I thought that was just a picture!

Buffy did well by UPN's standards. But it was UPN's standards. It got kicked off the WB fer cryin' out loud, and it's not like the WB had really high standards. Why? For ratings.

Buffy didn't get kicked off WB. Whedon moved it to UPN because he got a better offer. And mostly out of bitterness for losing Buffy, WB cancelled Angel despite it having good (but not Buffy-level) ratings.

 

[Umbran]

Has George Lucas hurt you all so deeply?

You sure you want to go the "dismissive and personal" route in a thread with two admins and a moderator active in it?

No, George Lucas didn't hurt me deeply. I just happen to think that making Loki seem badass just then would mean Hulk was reacting to a credible threat at that moment, rather than indulging in an all-too-human desire to shut a pompous blowhard up. It would remove most of the humor from the scene, reducing it to one more shot of a fight. I see no overall improvement there.

 

[Felon]

You sure you want to go the "dismissive and personal" route in a thread with two admins and a moderator active in it?

Say what now? How is a knee-slapping joke about George Lucas to nobody in particular tatamount to a dismissive personal attack?

I mean, except to George Lucas.

I just happen to think that making Loki seem badass just then would mean Hulk was reacting to a credible threat at that moment, rather than indulging in an all-too-human desire to shut a pompous blowhard up. It would remove most of the humor from the scene, reducing it to one more shot of a fight. I see no overall improvement there.

What I envisioned is more like for half-a-sec the audience thinks Loki's about to make a comeback, and then, SURPRISE! NOPE! Vintage Whedon anticlimax humor.

 

[Umbran]

Say what now? How is a knee-slapping joke about George Lucas to nobody in particular tatamount to a dismissive personal attack?

If you want to discuss it, let's take it to PM or e-mail, and not clutter the thread with it.

 

[Piratecat]

Felon, he's trying to gently tell you that you're starting to come off as pugnacious and argumentative in a fun thread about a comic book movie. I'll be less gentle. Scale back, please. Let's discuss the movie, everyone, instead of heading off on a tangent about Lucas and FOX.

On a happier note, my wife just came back from seeing it. She is screaming "HULK SMASH! as she careens around the house.

 

[Grimmjow]

i loved when CA was giving orders to the police and he was like "Why should i listen to you?!" then CA beats up the aliens and the guy starts repeating what he told him

 

[MarkB]

So here's the thought process being presented: people enjoyed that scene, ergo any other way of handling that scene must therefore be utterly ruinous. Irrational mental barrier identfied.


Advocating its revision does not equate to advocating the loss of the scene. That's simply a false dichotomy. Something good can be made better.

I didn't say you'd lose the scene - I said you'd lose the iconic stand-out moment.

That scene, as it stands, is one of the most awesome, most talked-about moments in the entire movie - top three certainly, maybe even number one. It might, theoretically, be possible to improve upon it, but I can't see the revisions you've suggested doing anything of the sort - more likely, as Umbran said, it would have diminished it to just another fight scene, relatively forgettable.