>Ant-Man turned out better than Age of Ultron
What happened? Is this what it feels like when a bubble is about to burst? Why was that movie so...average? The only new thing that worked well was James Spader as Ultron.
>>67177598
Age of Ultron Sucked because 2 hours isn't enough time to establish a villain as strong enough to be a threat. They always seem cartoony and impotent.
>>67177598
Joss whedon happened
>>67177752
Then how come Burton managed to do so in few minutes?
They let Joss Whedon direct a movie. Joss Whedon is a fucking terrible director.
>>67177598
>What happened?
Joss Whedon.
>>67177801
>>67178015
>>67178057
But the first one was nowhere near as bad.
>>67178167
Still not very good
They used Age of Ultron as a spring board for Phase 2 or 3 of the MCU
So it was basically a shell
>>67178167
It was still incredibly mediocre.
>>67178167
For a first watch maybe but if you give it a second viewing its pretty terrible. It literally looks like a tv show
>>67177801
That was honestly a surreal day to me when his fanbase turned on him
I wonder how he's faring now
>>67178167
The first one is pretty bad, but Joss Whedon had less creative control over it. With this one, he pretty much had full control over it, and he let all the first one go to his head.
It's the same thing that happened with Lucas and the prequels, just with a much smaller time frame.
>>67178242
Couldn't have happened to a better guy. You reap what you sow. What comes around goes around. And so on.
Because there is an art to directing an ensemble cast that requires a lot of balancing and an ability to tell a lot about a character in a small moment. This is a skill lost on most post-New Hollywood directors and is particularly lost on a hack tv director like Whedon. James Gunn made a good choice in directing GotG as if it were an ensemble comedy and gave every character a chance to shine.
Go watch a John Sturges film and get taken to school.
>>67178301
Didn't they turn on him straight after he said Jurassic World was sexist or something
>>67178356
That's when it started, then the backlash blew up when ultron came out
>>67178356
No, they turned on him because Black Widow was a sexist character in Avengers 2 because she gets caught and has to be saved by her boyfriend Hulk, and her only use on the team is calming the Hulk down with her pussy, and Black Widow being a monster because she can't have babies means a woman's worth is tied to her ability to fart out crotchspawns. Oh and she's prettier than them and looks sexy and whatever else.
>>67178277
Wasn't it the other way around? I thought Marvel execs got too involved in Ultron. Isn't that what Whedon said?
>>67178330
I was gonna mention that too, GotG is like the Avengers in space, but it's a hell of a lot better. And Whedon didn't even have to worry about origin stories either, since it was all covered in the standalone films.
>>67178330
>Go watch a John Sturges film and get taken to school.
Holy shit this so much.
It also doesn't help that Avengers was also shot as a fucking TV series with a TV aspect ratio and TV storyboarding, so it didn't shine when it needed to.
Age of Ultron was better
Ant Man had nice script/story but the director wasn't so good.
>>67177598
>James Spader as Ultron.
agreed.
I can still hear Spader's voice for Ultron when I read.
Three similar battles against CGI robots killed it. It was boring.
>>67178472
Its fucking disgraceful that a blockbuster movie was shot like a fucking tv show.
>>67177598
Ant man started the superhero fatigue for me. That movie really makes you realise and say why should I care?
And that costume is horrendous.
Joss Whedon was assblasted,here was bad blood between him and Marvel, that's why he shat on AoS and that's why he shat on Marvel and that's why he will never make a Marvel movie again. You can tell that he included some things just to piss certain people off (Hulk/Widow) and that he tried to be a rebel.
>>67178330
>>67178472
>>67178605
That opening scene of this first Avengers movie will be burned in my mind forever as a Hollywood low point. That image of Loki sitting in the back of a pickup truck awkward as fuck and incompetently shot "car chase" that ensues...
>>67179001
Still the best leading man since RDJ tho.
>>67179001
>hating based Rudd
Come on its CURRENT YEAR
>>67178467
>Wasn't it the other way around?
Yes. Whedon had much more control over Avengers 1, and he actually did manage to pull off an ensemble piece pretty well (such as by downplaying Thor a bit because he didn't want it to be "Thor vs. Loki plus some other guys")
Disney is making twice as many movies than their story can actually sustain, so every other movie or so only really exists to set up the next one. Iron Man 2 was awful, but it set up Avengers, which was pretty good. Ultron was awful, but it's setting up Civil War, which is the movie they *wanted* to make. It's looking like it'll probably be a better entry in the series.
