Reply to Topic
The Avengers changed the standard of the superhero genre forever. This movie changed my life haha
The Avengers Assemble
→ in Movie Reviews
The Avengers changed the standard of the superhero genre forever. This movie changed my life haha
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
They did it by ripping off Transformers plot. yes, changed the standard alright.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
They did it by ripping off Transformers plot. yes, changed the standard alright.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
A base which houses the main villain. His lackeys attack, he is free... action moves to city. Main hero/leader of good guys is made to look like he will sacrifice his life, but that doesn't happen.
Also Allspark & Tesseract, one opens a cosmic gateway or something, while the other would help transform the earth into a planet like theirs.
Also Allspark & Tesseract, one opens a cosmic gateway or something, while the other would help transform the earth into a planet like theirs.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Wow...First of all then every 3 movie in the world took Transformers story...Who lied to you that Iron Man was leader?Are you thinking about him?So every opening of cosmic gates was ripping of Transformers?Then X-Men:Last stand also ripping off Transformers I mean they also have main villain in their base,she attacks and escapes,so is that also ripping of?"Action moves to city",well you know with alien invasions that kind of shi* happens you know,aliens tend to attack city's.It is kinda stupid I must say that you find this as a ripping off Transformers...I didn't know that every object that opens cosmic gate was stolen from Transformers,well I think there is more than 100 movies with plot that you just explained...Main villain escaping his prison,yea Transformers invented that,you know Loki,the trickster,he kinda loves to escape...I'm kinda frozen with this kind of explanation.
__________________
“By definition, you have to live until you die. Better to make that life as complete and enjoyable an experience as possible, in case death is shite, which I suspect it will be.”
“By definition, you have to live until you die. Better to make that life as complete and enjoyable an experience as possible, in case death is shite, which I suspect it will be.”
Last edited by -KhaN-; 01-28-14 at 03:26 PM.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
firstly I think Transformers is as average as Avengers. And my response was to the guy who said it changed the tandard for superhero movies.
And the idea that action deliberately moves to city, doesn't it seem clichéd, jusr cos action in the city would look better in cities than base. Avengers action could have ended on the base itself, as it is it was floating in the sky.
And many movies show similar things, but what I wrote above is just comparing those 2 movies, so getting a third movie in between with just one point, is not what I had in mind, if I did, my post would have been longer, & you would be frozen far too long. Right?
And the idea that action deliberately moves to city, doesn't it seem clichéd, jusr cos action in the city would look better in cities than base. Avengers action could have ended on the base itself, as it is it was floating in the sky.
And many movies show similar things, but what I wrote above is just comparing those 2 movies, so getting a third movie in between with just one point, is not what I had in mind, if I did, my post would have been longer, & you would be frozen far too long. Right?
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
and Tony Stark was the leader cos he got paid the most, & hence they decided he should be all through out the film the most.... ohh ya, & doesn't he tell the rest what to do in the end.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
firstly I think Transformers is as average as Avengers. And my response was to the guy who said it changed the tandard for superhero movies.
And the idea that action deliberately moves to city, doesn't it seem clichéd, jusr cos action in the city would look better in cities than base. Avengers action could have ended on the base itself, as it is it was floating in the sky.
And many movies show similar things, but what I wrote above is just comparing those 2 movies, so getting a third movie in between with just one point, is not what I had in mind, if I did, my post would have been longer, & you would be frozen far too long. Right?
And the idea that action deliberately moves to city, doesn't it seem clichéd, jusr cos action in the city would look better in cities than base. Avengers action could have ended on the base itself, as it is it was floating in the sky.
And many movies show similar things, but what I wrote above is just comparing those 2 movies, so getting a third movie in between with just one point, is not what I had in mind, if I did, my post would have been longer, & you would be frozen far too long. Right?
And you needed to be ass in the end...
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
and Tony Stark was the leader cos he got paid the most, & hence they decided he should be all through out the film the most.... ohh ya, & doesn't he tell the rest what to do in the end.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
A base which houses the main villain. His lackeys attack, he is free... action moves to city. Main hero/leader of good guys is made to look like he will sacrifice his life, but that doesn't happen.
Also Allspark & Tesseract, one opens a cosmic gateway or something, while the other would help transform the earth into a planet like theirs.
Also Allspark & Tesseract, one opens a cosmic gateway or something, while the other would help transform the earth into a planet like theirs.
Ummm,I thought SHIELD(Nick) was in charge?Captain America also told them what to do sometimes so did Nick and rest of SHIELD.
The X-Men films, by contrast, tend to lean on Hugh Jackman's Wolverine, making him feel like a "leader" more so than he's really supposed to be. But that's largely because Wolverine is wildly more popular than any other X-Man and Hugh Jackman is without doubt a leading man.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
You know, I have to agree with this. When you get down to it, a lot of these films are pretty formulaic and derivative of each other. Thank you for calling particular attention to these reverse MacGuffin plot lines in sci-fi/superhero films, where the villain is trying to obtain some "artifact" in order to unleash it and bring a darkness over the world, which (of course) we know will be foiled by the heroes at the final moment. It might serve to show off the entertainment chops of headline actors, but from a narrative standpoint it's not terribly interesting. After seeing a few of these "like" films, you start to feel like you've seen this already.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Depends on your definition of "ripping of," I guess. Making a derivative film, in a sense, means ripping off another film. Are filmmakers stealing scenes and repeating them verbatim in their own films? No. Are they repeating the tone, feel, pacing, and even sometimes order of scenes to mirror other successful films? Yes.
Still, this happens so commonly and is so seemingly accepted in the film industry that nobody really cries foul. Personally, I don't care to make a distinction one way or the other. I just don't want to see an endless string of films that are so similar, I feel like I'm watching the same thing over and over again. This particularly bugs me when filmmakers start making films that are derivative of their own work. Christopher Nolan, for example, is a great filmmaker. But all of his films so far has a "like" quality. The color palette and lighting, the pacing, the music, the circuitous scripts, even the cast: they all start to mirror each other. Some people can't get enough, but I find myself getting a bit bored.
Still, this happens so commonly and is so seemingly accepted in the film industry that nobody really cries foul. Personally, I don't care to make a distinction one way or the other. I just don't want to see an endless string of films that are so similar, I feel like I'm watching the same thing over and over again. This particularly bugs me when filmmakers start making films that are derivative of their own work. Christopher Nolan, for example, is a great filmmaker. But all of his films so far has a "like" quality. The color palette and lighting, the pacing, the music, the circuitous scripts, even the cast: they all start to mirror each other. Some people can't get enough, but I find myself getting a bit bored.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Finally someone got what I was saying.
I just compared it to Transformers sarcastically replying to that guy who spoke about changing standards.
And like I said lot more movies can be brought into comparison, but I don't want to go there.
I just compared it to Transformers sarcastically replying to that guy who spoke about changing standards.
And like I said lot more movies can be brought into comparison, but I don't want to go there.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Considering there are only so many kinds of stories to be told, it is not surprising certain movies share certain elements. Both are mega blockbusters who annihilate box office numbers and have heavy emphasis on action and more then a little CGI.
BUT Avengers is easily a far superior film IMO to Transformers. The Avengers has much more likable characters portrayed by far superior and charismatic actors.
I mean really who do you want to watch a movie with. This guy?
Or THIS guy?
To top it off The Avengers is just more fun. And the attempts at humor from Joss Whedon are actually funny, unlike the out off place humor Bay inserted into a movie about giant robots.
BUT Avengers is easily a far superior film IMO to Transformers. The Avengers has much more likable characters portrayed by far superior and charismatic actors.
I mean really who do you want to watch a movie with. This guy?
Or THIS guy?
To top it off The Avengers is just more fun. And the attempts at humor from Joss Whedon are actually funny, unlike the out off place humor Bay inserted into a movie about giant robots.
X
Favorite Movies
True, Avengers is a better film. That's cos Transformers hardly had any good actors besides John Turturro.
Avengers could afford a bigger & better cast, also most of the Avengers cast has starred in their own movie which was successful as a standalone film. So you can't really compare them both. Noone would would watch a standalone movie based on Shia as his character. & You could keep changing the lead Transformers & people wouldn't care, as long as Optimus & Bumblebee continue to be in it & they are not real life actors.
So I really won't compare Avengers to Transformers in terms of cast or characters, the scope is different for both. But yes you could compare CG Optimus to CG Hulk.. CG Hulk wins, but that's not entirely cos of Avengers movie, Hulk rocks no matter what, the idea of that character is cool no matter what.
Avengers could afford a bigger & better cast, also most of the Avengers cast has starred in their own movie which was successful as a standalone film. So you can't really compare them both. Noone would would watch a standalone movie based on Shia as his character. & You could keep changing the lead Transformers & people wouldn't care, as long as Optimus & Bumblebee continue to be in it & they are not real life actors.
So I really won't compare Avengers to Transformers in terms of cast or characters, the scope is different for both. But yes you could compare CG Optimus to CG Hulk.. CG Hulk wins, but that's not entirely cos of Avengers movie, Hulk rocks no matter what, the idea of that character is cool no matter what.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
My biggest problem with the Avengers & X-men was how the most successful character hogs screentime & importance. Like Sleezy, pointed out Wolverine did the same with X-men.
You know, I never found Cyclops a good character, but as a leader he was always great. That was his thing, if Professor X was good at delivering speeches, Cyclops was good at leading a team. COnsidering how diverse the X-men team was in terms of each one's abilities. Wolverine was always good as the gaijin rebel. But the movies always sidelined Cyclops. That's why I loved X-men: First Class, each character was as cool as they should be.
You know, I never found Cyclops a good character, but as a leader he was always great. That was his thing, if Professor X was good at delivering speeches, Cyclops was good at leading a team. COnsidering how diverse the X-men team was in terms of each one's abilities. Wolverine was always good as the gaijin rebel. But the movies always sidelined Cyclops. That's why I loved X-men: First Class, each character was as cool as they should be.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
My biggest problem with the Avengers & X-men was how the most successful character hogs screentime & importance. Like Sleezy, pointed out Wolverine did the same with X-men.
You know, I never found Cyclops a good character, but as a leader he was always great. That was his thing, if Professor X was good at delivering speeches, Cyclops was good at leading a team. COnsidering how diverse the X-men team was in terms of each one's abilities. Wolverine was always good as the gaijin rebel. But the movies always sidelined Cyclops. That's why I loved X-men: First Class, each character was as cool as they should be.
You know, I never found Cyclops a good character, but as a leader he was always great. That was his thing, if Professor X was good at delivering speeches, Cyclops was good at leading a team. COnsidering how diverse the X-men team was in terms of each one's abilities. Wolverine was always good as the gaijin rebel. But the movies always sidelined Cyclops. That's why I loved X-men: First Class, each character was as cool as they should be.
...My whole point was that ripping of and similarity is not same thing,you know when you say ripping off that sounds kinda bad,that is all I wanted to say.Now on this leader thing,you are correct that Logan seems like leader and Tony seems like leader of Avengers but they are not leaders by the script and by movie itself,yea RDJ and Jackman are getting the most screen time but that is different thing,I just rewatched X-Men series so memories are not old,they tried to make Cyclops a leader type,he did lead team in movie,they said few times he was supposed to be leader of everything after Professor.I just want to say they were not leaders by the story,script,leading actors and leaders of teams in story is not same thing.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
My biggest problem with the Avengers & X-men was how the most successful character hogs screentime & importance. Like Sleezy, pointed out Wolverine did the same with X-men.
You know, I never found Cyclops a good character, but as a leader he was always great. That was his thing, if Professor X was good at delivering speeches, Cyclops was good at leading a team. COnsidering how diverse the X-men team was in terms of each one's abilities. Wolverine was always good as the gaijin rebel. But the movies always sidelined Cyclops. That's why I loved X-men: First Class, each character was as cool as they should be.
You know, I never found Cyclops a good character, but as a leader he was always great. That was his thing, if Professor X was good at delivering speeches, Cyclops was good at leading a team. COnsidering how diverse the X-men team was in terms of each one's abilities. Wolverine was always good as the gaijin rebel. But the movies always sidelined Cyclops. That's why I loved X-men: First Class, each character was as cool as they should be.
No arguments on the X-Men movie though. Jackman was front and center.
X
Favorite Movies
But I rarely recall doing any leading, in the first movie Cyclops had a decent role, but he was hardly tactician he is known for.
Second and third movie he was hardly there. It has nothing to do with who the leading man was or the popular one, Cyclops wasn't the Cyclops he should have been.
In TMNT, Leonardo is either the appointed, self-appointed or presumed leader. So, they do play around with that well onscreen especially the conflict it establishes with Raphael. Raphael does assume the role of a leader or even the leading man for that matter, but the group order remains the way it should.
Now on the other hand, you have the Ghostbusters, is Venkman the leader.. hardly, but he does like to think of himself as one, but he is a true leading man of the film.
So I do agree there is a difference between the two. But Avengers script makes Ironman the leader not in service to the story but popularity, but they do know Capt America is always the true leader figure in the comics, so they resort to in-jokes and humorous hints and still manages to keep their moneymaking hero in the front
But the scripts do throw in a joke or two for the fanboy pleasure, stuff like "who made you leader?", "He is supposed to be the one calling the shots"..
Second and third movie he was hardly there. It has nothing to do with who the leading man was or the popular one, Cyclops wasn't the Cyclops he should have been.
In TMNT, Leonardo is either the appointed, self-appointed or presumed leader. So, they do play around with that well onscreen especially the conflict it establishes with Raphael. Raphael does assume the role of a leader or even the leading man for that matter, but the group order remains the way it should.
Now on the other hand, you have the Ghostbusters, is Venkman the leader.. hardly, but he does like to think of himself as one, but he is a true leading man of the film.
So I do agree there is a difference between the two. But Avengers script makes Ironman the leader not in service to the story but popularity, but they do know Capt America is always the true leader figure in the comics, so they resort to in-jokes and humorous hints and still manages to keep their moneymaking hero in the front
But the scripts do throw in a joke or two for the fanboy pleasure, stuff like "who made you leader?", "He is supposed to be the one calling the shots"..
X
Favorite Movies
X