The Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)

[Sideswipe]

Hawkeye alone, being a high-ranking SHIELD agent, could know the workings of the HeliCarrier enough, and have the ability to aim perfectly enough, to create and sink the arrow-with-computer-virus shot from off of the control deck.  And no-one else could have gotten near enough, certainly not on the deck to do it as a flunky.

And Hawkeye, as the character is defined in the Marvel film universe, is a master of 'pattern recognition' from a distance.  Who else would have stood on the roof and guided each Avenger to the appropriate actions (and taken out a few on his own)?  Cap?  Then his "protect the common man" behavior would have been lost.  Iron Man?  Then no point in having the suit.  Hulk? Thor? Seriously?  Hawkeye was the only person who could do that.

Nope.  I call shenanigans.  Hawkeye was still completely irrelevant to the story.  He did absolutely nothing important that could not have been rewritten.  I dont remember anything that virus did that was that important.  It could have been changed to anything and it would still be as ridiculous or less than a random arrow designed only to be shot at a computer port.  As for his "tactical genius" what good did he do?  He may have said we've got guys coming into your area.  Literally anyone could have done that.  There could have been someone in an F-35 flying around calling out positions and shooting down bad guys.  Or it most certainly could have been Captain America, he was an officer in the Army and we saw him planning his missions in his movie.  It could have turned into a rooftop to rooftop chase, both of those scenarios would be more interesting than Hawkeye, who we really havent been given any good reasons to care about.

That, is my point exactly, Anais.  The Black Widow/Loki scene could have been rewritten for anyone.

But then Joss wouldn't have gotten to use his "mewling quim" line (which amused him no end).

Loki would not have spilled his plan to a male.  The idea is that it took a female - which, apparently, Loki holds in contempt to begin with - to 'undo' his plan to some degree was important.  If we hadn't seen someone female at the beginning of the film already show they can outsmart men who think that women are inferior, then the entire segment would not have worked.  So, Widow had to have 'alone time' on screen early on to demonstrate she could manipulate and extract information.

So unless people wanted an 'unnamed female' to get Black Widow's screen time, then there was no other way to accomplish the learning of the 'staff/Banner' proto-team-splitting plot.

This scene really could have been anything or anyone.  It was really pointless in the grand scheme of things. It really only serves to give a character pointless to the movie something do to make it feel like she is not that pointless.  Scarlet Johanson was bland and monotone in this movie anyway, so I dont feel she really added anything.  My point is, knowing what Loki was going to do changed nothing.  Banner still Hulked out and Loki still got away.  You could cut this scene out of the movie and play it for someone who hasnt seen it and they would miss nothing vital.

[goflyblind]

i mean, you could just as easily replace optimus prime in any transformers cartoon.

[RoninFox]

And when you get down to it, Beowulf could have easily been re-written for He-Man.

[ScottotD]

Why was Captain America there? He could have been Indiana Jones. 

The Avengers movie should probably have the Avengers in it.

[LucasM]

Hawkeye alone, being a high-ranking SHIELD agent, could know the workings of the HeliCarrier enough, and have the ability to aim perfectly enough, to create and sink the arrow-with-computer-virus shot from off of the control deck.  And no-one else could have gotten near enough, certainly not on the deck to do it as a flunky.

And Hawkeye, as the character is defined in the Marvel film universe, is a master of 'pattern recognition' from a distance.  Who else would have stood on the roof and guided each Avenger to the appropriate actions (and taken out a few on his own)?  Cap?  Then his "protect the common man" behavior would have been lost.  Iron Man?  Then no point in having the suit.  Hulk? Thor? Seriously?  Hawkeye was the only person who could do that.

Nope.  I call shenanigans.  Hawkeye was still completely irrelevant to the story.  He did absolutely nothing important that could not have been rewritten.  I dont remember anything that virus did that was that important.  It could have been changed to anything and it would still be as ridiculous or less than a random arrow designed only to be shot at a computer port.  As for his "tactical genius" what good did he do?  He may have said we've got guys coming into your area.  Literally anyone could have done that.  There could have been someone in an F-35 flying around calling out positions and shooting down bad guys.  Or it most certainly could have been Captain America, he was an officer in the Army and we saw him planning his missions in his movie.  It could have turned into a rooftop to rooftop chase, both of those scenarios would be more interesting than Hawkeye, who we really havent been given any good reasons to care about.

The virus incapacitated the HeliCarrier so that it could do nothing to prevent the Chitauri invasion.  From what you say here, you don't feel it's firepower would have been useful at the portal?

Hawkeye's observational skills told Iron Man that "they can't corner worth a damn", and yes, he told them all when there was a danger of the Chitauri getting out of their 'containment area' (a far more important point than 'they're coming your way' suggests; your statement suggests you ignored the context for 'they're coming your way', it wasn't just a heads-up, it was a 'we need to keep them isolated from the general population').

You seriously think anyone in an F-35 would have had the remotest possibility of staying aloft more than a few seconds with the Chitauri airborn in far-more-maneuverable air transport?  And you would have liked to have had a random person get important film time, rather than a member of the Avengers who has been an Avenger since 1965?

I already discussed the improper use of Cap had he been on the roof in the very quote you respond to:  "his 'protect the common man' behavior would have been lost".  That is essential to Steve's character.  He was the 'human face' to the Avengers, as the waitress who described him after-the-fact showed.  Yes, he's good tactically, that is why he became the defacto leader when the group finally pulled together, and became the person who decided 'who does what' at the start of the battle: and his tactical skill was why he placed Hawkeye where he did.

Clint's actions being taken over by Loki via the staff, then fighting to regain control, wasn't something that made him more 'accessible', or human, or relevant?  That was an 'in' to the character, as well as a demonstration of what being under the control of the staff was like for a regular person.  [Again: something important to a film being shown to 'regular people'.]

That, is my point exactly, Anais.  The Black Widow/Loki scene could have been rewritten for anyone.

But then Joss wouldn't have gotten to use his "mewling quim" line (which amused him no end).

Loki would not have spilled his plan to a male.  The idea is that it took a female - which, apparently, Loki holds in contempt to begin with - to 'undo' his plan to some degree was important.  If we hadn't seen someone female at the beginning of the film already show they can outsmart men who think that women are inferior, then the entire segment would not have worked.  So, Widow had to have 'alone time' on screen early on to demonstrate she could manipulate and extract information.

So unless people wanted an 'unnamed female' to get Black Widow's screen time, then there was no other way to accomplish the learning of the 'staff/Banner' proto-team-splitting plot.

This scene really could have been anything or anyone.  It was really pointless in the grand scheme of things. It really only serves to give a character pointless to the movie something do to make it feel like she is not that pointless.  Scarlet Johanson was bland and monotone in this movie anyway, so I dont feel she really added anything.  My point is, knowing what Loki was going to do changed nothing.  Banner still Hulked out and Loki still got away.  You could cut this scene out of the movie and play it for someone who hasnt seen it and they would miss nothing vital.

Knowing what Loki was going to do in advance of Bruce Hulking out caused the nascent team to pull together when the Hulk appeared, rather than fracture completely.  It not just counteracted, but reversed what Loki had planned for it to do.  That was almost as important as what happened to Coulson, and was essential for them to start to act like a team.


Plus, as I stated before: Hawkeye and Black Widow were there for the 'common man' viewpoint, for the non-comic-obsessed to have someone they could relate to.


And, yes, any story can be completely re-written to exclude characters initially integral to their plots (as people have given suggestions of here).  But I am particularly in agreement with ScottotD's pithy comment:

The Avengers movie should probably have the Avengers in it.

[Sideswipe]

You dont seem to understand what I was saying.  Im not saying that the character should be changed, I am saying that the way they are written in the movie their absence would not change much of the movie.  There is nothing they do that someone else could not do.

[anais.butterfly]

And, yes, any story can be completely re-written to exclude characters initially integral to their plots (as people have given suggestions of here).  But I am particularly in agreement with ScottotD's pithy comment:

The Avengers movie should probably have the Avengers in it.

Because Captain, Iron Man, Hulk, and Thor aren't Avengers?

[The Lurker]

And, yes, any story can be completely re-written to exclude characters initially integral to their plots (as people have given suggestions of here).  But I am particularly in agreement with ScottotD's pithy comment:

The Avengers movie should probably have the Avengers in it.

Because Captain, Iron Man, Hulk, and Thor aren't Avengers?

He didn't say that.

[anais.butterfly]

And, yes, any story can be completely re-written to exclude characters initially integral to their plots (as people have given suggestions of here).  But I am particularly in agreement with ScottotD's pithy comment:

The Avengers movie should probably have the Avengers in it.

Because Captain, Iron Man, Hulk, and Thor aren't Avengers?

He didn't say that.

It's called Hyperbole.


Ok, I am done commentating. There are valid reasons to have Hawkeye and Widow in the movie (they were in the comics and they are not "super"). There are valid reasons that the movie could be considered too convoluted with them. There are also valid reasons to be worried that adding more characters will make it more convoluted in a bad way (I call it the Spiderman 3 affect).

I am still going to watch Age of Ultron, I will still enjoy it, and I will still very much look forward to Infinity War.

[ScottotD]

So you'd prefer Hulk standing on a tall building providing a range attack and shouting instructions instead of smashing? I suppose anyone 'could' have done it but it doesn't mean they should have. 

The Loki/Natasha scene also provides character for people who may not have seen Thor, Loki's not as smart as he thinks he is. 

Having two human characters also provides contrast, humanity and stakes to the movie ...as well as being two of the Avengers.

[jonalame]

I see Lucas has a sound, broad argument and that the retorts to it amount to "nuh-uh".

[anais.butterfly]

I see Lucas has a sound, broad argument and that the retorts to it amount to "nuh-uh".

Now I know why I avoid any debate on the new Star Trek.

How about they didn't need anybody shouting from the rooftops? The entire scene could have been written differently. Also, having human characters is not a requirement for superhero movies. Finally, just because the character was in the comics, doesn't mean they have to be in the film (Gambit).


I feel like I am being ganged up on just because I don't worship The Avengers like it's the greatest movie in the world. When did this movie become The Dark Knight?

[Soguru]

I feel like I am being ganged up on just because I don't worship The Avengers like it's the greatest movie in the world. When did this movie become The Dark Knight?

It is awfully damn good, however, dissenting opinions deserve consideration too. I do see where you're coming from Anais, and to some extent I do agree with you.

[LucasM]

[[EDIT right before posting:  Yup, I really need to shut the fuck up.  After the last couple weeks, I can't afford thinking enough to force myself to write clearly right now.]]

I feel like I am being ganged up on just because I don't worship The Avengers like it's the greatest movie in the world. When did this movie become The Dark Knight?

It is awfully damn good, however, dissenting opinions deserve consideration too. I do see where you're coming from Anais, and to some extent I do agree with you.

I don't feel discussing ideas about a film (or anything else) is an attack on the person expressing those ideas.  It wasn't my intent that you or Sideswipe feel that you, personally, were being attacked.  And I wasn't 'attacking' any ideas, I was just sharing my viewpoint.  While I agree with my viewpoint, I don't expect everyone to.

From what you've said, there is a different aspect than what I'd been addressing.  My approach was to a conglomeration of criticisms of the two characters, rather than specifically addressing one of the things you'd initially said.  That being that instead of 'Hawkeye and Black Widow don't do anything unique/helpful and distract from the 'big' characters', more, 'there's too much going on.'  Personally I prefer films and TV that are 'story dense' (as in: more story complexity [so long as the writer is competent to pull the threads together, as Whedon is]).  So having a superhero 'war' story, having the activities of multiple people doing multiple different things to accomplish their combined goal works for me.  Had a lesser 'team' writer done the screenplay, I'm not sure it would work.  Since Whedon's doing Avengers:Ultron, I suspect there won't be a problem there, either.  But with Whedon's contract just about done, I am, however, not sure about the possibilities for Infinity War 1+2, which, if even remotely true to the original story would have everyone in the Earth-based Marvel Universe and the kitchen sink in it.  Ideally Marvel Studios would hire Jim Starlin to write both films, which would be awesome, since the story was his baby to begin with.  But that is unlikely to happen.


Do I feel The Avengers was a perfect film?  No.  A 'really good comic-based film'?  Yes, one of the best ones that's been filmed, overall.  But...

But there are actually two things that I feel about the Avengers film that are not positive.  The first is minor: there is one line in it that actually grates on me because it is clearly done for the audience's sake and not because it would actually be appropriate to the character.  That is when Iron Man smacks into Thor after Thor abducts Loki off the (Quinjet or just average SHIELD vehicle[?]).  Thor had been saying, "listen to me brother..." (or words to that effect), and Loki retorts to the empty air - after Thor has been knocked away by Iron Man - "I'm listening."  Loki plays to an audience.  There is no audience there.  So that line is done for a quick laugh from the film audience.  It irritates me.  It takes me out of the story for an instant, which I don't care for.

The other thing that I've shared with others (though possibly not on the RT Forum) is that the film The Avengers is a rather shallow film if one has not seen all the characterization of the characters that came from all the Marvel Studios films that preceded it.  In the film The Avengers, I don't believe there is enough character development for anyone in it (except, ironically, Black Widow) for the audience to really understand them or care about any of them if they haven't already seen IM, IncrHulk, IM2, Thor, and CapAm [or haven't read the comics, as unheard-of as that may be].

But, when considering the films preceding The Avengers, I feel Whedon did a masterful job of building on what had come before, with adding just a little more to each character, and adding it so that it was fully continuous with (i.e. not in conflict with) any of what had come before.  For a team story of that size and complexity, that is pretty exceptional.


Going back a bit, I forgot in my first post to say that I agree with these comments, as well [since there's no 'LIKE' button, figured I'd LIKE these here, regarding Widow tricking Loki]:

Love the hell out of that scene.  Manipulating the god of lies, that's hardcore.

Hell yeah! And it says a lot that one of the better scenes in an action movie is two characters in a room talking.

I really liked Black Widow (much more than in Iron Man 2) and Hawkeye in Avengers. And I was a big doubter beforehand. I would totally watch a Black Widow or Hawkeye movie now.

A Black Widow/Hawkeye team-up film would be excellent.   But with the big name character films coming up through 2019, sadly it won't happen.  [Maybe a two-parter guest shot on Agents of SHIELD would be an adequate substitute. ]

[ScottotD]

The constant 'OH NOES IT WILL BE CRAP BECAUSE..." that seems to overwhelm every thread about an upcoming movie will never stop being surprising and confusing to me.

I see Lucas has a sound, broad argument and that the retorts to it amount to "nuh-uh".

Hahaha, I will put a blanket LIKE on every post by Lucas on this thread from now on I think.  You have no need to worry about, you are writing very clearly.