MovieChat Forums > Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) Discussion > The complete SUCCESS on an artistic leve...

The complete SUCCESS on an artistic level.

posted 10 years ago by writing_in_red
41 replies | jump to latest

I saw someone talking about how this movie failed artistically and I felt compelled to put forward the counter argument.

It boggles my mind that so many people seem to think this film is shallow. How? It examines the role of the hero. If anything, Captain America: Winter Soldier was a very by numbers movie because Cap was always the hero, he was always the boy scout and always doing the right thing.

In Avengers 2 we examine just what the right thing is.

In trying to save the world, Tony over steps the line and creates something that will ultimately destroy it - but that's not the point. The point of this movie is accepting that we CANNOT save the world, we CANNOT stop evil from happening and all we CAN do is fight to protect what we hold dear.

The lesson is learnt and we see this at the end of the movie. Always Tony Stark has been Iron Man flying through the air but at the end we see him as a normal man driving a normal, real car. He has been humbled. He has learnt that he cannot save the world.

It's a message to all of us, I think. Protect and hold dear but do not try to control and change the world. It won't work, it can't work and it will ultimately lead to conflict and death.

I think Joss touched on this in Serenity, where they talked about how the Alliance were "trying to make people better" but it did not work.

A very thoughtful film with brilliant moments that do hit home. If Avengers united heroes, Avengers 2 humbled them and taught them their role in the wider scheme of things.

10/10 It delivered everything I wanted to see, I had a blast watching it and I found the film's message to be a thoughtful and accurate one.

The Nth Doctor Adventures - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9OBLh4UAdzRgWWkSCD4h7w/feature

[–] MrsBuckyBarnes 9 years ago

an upfront admission: i have just had a big lunch and i'm too lazy to compose a comprehensive reply.

i would not say this film failed artistically. the main point of the film was to entertain and for the majority of the audience and critics alike it succeeded in that regard.

my first thought on reading your post was that the fact you had to refer to iron man/stark so many times indicates that there are some structural problems in this film about a team.

my second was that the winter soldier was far from shallow and had a level of topicality and emotional resonance that was far superior to aou. compare the anguish of cap, faced with the possibility of killing his best friend, and that final "end of the line" exchange with the death of quicksilver.

i also thought that it is not clear that cap always did the right thing. letting bucky live was and is a big risk. working for 2 years in an organisation that was pushing him into acts that he considered morally dubious is not the right thing.

the final thought i had is this:

Protect and hold dear but do not try to control and change the world. It won't work, it can't work and it will ultimately lead to conflict and death.

don't try to change the world? what a defeatist, reactionary message. from what little i have read about whedon's character, i would question whether this was what he was trying to say. surely the message was 'do not give up the fight against tyranny and trying make the world a better place, even when the odds of success are extremely bleak'? this is the running theme throughout all the marvel films.

[–] IronBallsM 9 years ago

Artistically, there has never been better comic book based films than both Avengers movies. That's the bottom line, lunch or no.

[–] MrsBuckyBarnes 9 years ago

i disagree. i would place superman the movie above both avengers films. better acting, casting, costume design, characterisation, cinematography, pacing, editing and directing. which is why people still talk about that film more than 35 years after it was released. much as i enjoyed the avengers (aou was quite poor imo) it is open to question whether it will be held in the same regard 3 decades from now. to my mind there is no doubt that aou will be categorised as the mediocre film that it is in 30 years time.

[–] DeviantHitman 9 years ago

Transformers 4 looked better than this movie. In damn near every way, the angles, the fights, the clarity, the realism behind the transformers and settings they were in.

There is nothing to see here folks.. move along now.

[–] SpanishRicky 9 years ago

Nothing has looked better in the past three years. That's quite a compliment.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] helderuto 9 years ago

This is the first CBM to have a competent script imo.

Idiotic troll is idiotic.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] VVolfySnackrib 9 years ago

Avengers is one of my new favorite marvel movies. While I thought Avengers was a complete mediocrity, Avengers 2 stepped up and used all of its resources well. It was also well written, well acted (even from abysmal actress Scarlet Johanssen), it was witty and intelligent and had several deeper layers beneath all the supposedly mindless action.
While I consider Iron Man the best marvel movie, Avengers 2 at least deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as you when you mention Iron Man, Thor and Guardians of the Galaxy.

[–] Mr_Creative 9 years ago

It's a 6/10 and I don't see any real artistic value in it. There's nothing particularly bad about it, but nothing, and I do mean nothing, about it is special either.

It's a full blast blockbuster, which it is obviously meant to be, but nothing more. Not a single element about it raises it to anything more than that.

R + L = J

[–] VVolfySnackrib 9 years ago

The first Avengers is a 6/10. Avengers 2 is better. And nothing you said demonstrates why Avengers 2 is nothing more than full blast blockbuster. You asserted that there's no element about it that raises it to anything more than that, but absolutely fail to demonstrate to show why that would be, especially since the evidence is not in your favor. There is plenty to raise it above a mediocre summer action movie. Excellent character development and chemistry between the actors. Well written dialogue, plot, script, with a well placed tongue in cheek. It's a well structured script, strong in its presentation and you can tell a lot of creativity was put into it. The humor is top notch, as is to be expected from Joss Whedon because that's basically his trademark. Punch in the gut unpredictable hilarious humor.
And something concrete that raises it above average is that it dares to focus on themes of impending doom, short term and long term, with no escape no matter what the heroes do. They can only ever hope to postpone the eventual destruction of the world by alien forces, which creates an ominous dark atmosphere and you can tell the pointlessness of it all hits the characters hard. It's kind of like finding a way to make the typical end of the world cliche more personal and relatable because each of the heroes actions have under the course of many marvel movies been of utmost importance for the overall state of society around the world, and end of the world scenarios have gotten very up close and personal to them.
It's a kind of Odyssey, an epos, stretching throughout many movies that have to find ways to work on their own with a beginning, middle and end, all while intertwining with one another and building up to the jackpot which is the Avengers franchise. The first Avengers movie stumbled, the second is on fairly solid intellectually satisfying ground.

If you can't see the multiple layers within this movie, then you're clearly not able to look deep enough into a movie.

[–] IronBallsM 9 years ago

The first Avengers brought home a 10/10 and set the bar so high that nothing in the future may ever be able to match.

[–] blackdoug 9 years ago

That really is what true art delivers.

[–] Dash1969 9 years ago

It's true that this movie was the very best of the summer. It wasn't a strong season but Marvel more than did their part.