The Reality of Marvel's Avengers Project

The Reality of Marvel's Avengers Project

Based on the prequel movies, how I think the Avengers will turn out.

Follow LMFA0:
By LMFA0 - 7/26/2011
Over the past three years Marvel has been building one of the most anticipated movies of all time. Im not kidding about that either. It is the first of its kind not just because it has four of the biggest Marvel A-listers, but because never in the history of film has five separate films led up to one giant summer blockbuster. But is it enough? Has Marvel made enough of an impact with their prequel films to make the impact that a movie of this caliber should?


Box Office

If you look at the facts, based on reviews and box office takings, the Marvel movies have been good but not great. They are making an average amount of money per film, each film making around 200-300 million domestically, and most of them have been given better than a B average film rating. Oddly enough though the general public don't seem to understand the build up. What I mean by that is that even though the films are treated as stand alone (basically) they are building towards this Avengers movie, but the amount of money per movie has not really grown from one movie to another. This means that roughly the same amount of people are seeing these movies and if the fan base is growing per movie, it is very slight. Does this mean the Avengers will make a similar amount compared to the rest of the prequel films?

No, not necessarily. In theory, the Avengers will make much more money because of the combination of characters coming together in one movie, but simply adding what each movie had made together obviously wouldn't be a realistic estimate of how much the Avengers will make. I would say that the avengers will make more than all of the the prequel films but not a whole bunch more. There will be those who go see this movie that have not seen all or any of the prequel films just due to the hype created by media and what not around the time of the release. Then again, with the amount of CBMs in the past few years people may not see this due to fatigue of the sub-genre, but I highly doubt that these people would make much of a dent in over all box office takings.

In my opinion, the movie will make around 400-500 million domestically at the most due to other competition, what the other movies have made, and what hype might cause in ticket sales to increase.

Story/ Action/ Chemistry

My opinion in this is very shaky due to the fact that each movie has been written and developed by different directors and writers, so I may be wrong in this. I feel as if Marvel has messed up since Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk in both Story and Action. both Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk had story and action that flowed well within their movies but since then Marvel seems to have messed this up. Iron Man 2, Thor, and Captain America have all suffered from horrible action scenes during the climatic battle scenes at the end of the movies. This bothers me because an Avengers movie with short, shoddy action scenes would be a nightmare. Yes, we want to see a great story and yes, we want to see great chemistry, but this is a CBM during the summer, there has to be a good amount of action. I feel as if, and i may be wrong, we will see each character having either their own action sequence or the team will split into twos and we will see small team action sequences building up to a final climatic battle in which all of them will be in a battle together, but that's it. Action has been Marvel's Achilles heal and i dont see this changing. I could actually see, due to the fact there are four main heroes and four smaller heroes, that the amount of time with each Main hero will be short and unsatisfactory, but spread even between the Main heroes none the less.

Once again, this is only my opinion but I feel pretty confident in it.

Will the Avengers be good? Yes
Will we be satisfied? Maybe but I'm thinking the hype will be too much and we will leave the theater unsatisfied
Will we all see it no matter what? HELL YES

As always, leave your opinions below.
DISCLAIMER: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct. ComicBookMovie.com is protected from liability under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) and "safe harbor" provisions. CBM will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please contact us for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. You may also learn more about our copyright and trademark policies HERE.
1
LIKE!
19 Comments
CorndogBurglar - 7/26/2011, 1:24 PM
i don't know. like you said, you can't look at the history of the prequel films. each movie has a different writer and director. they are the ones that determine the action scenes and story.

Trust in Joss Whedon and crew. Joss knows what he's doing.
BigK1337 - 7/26/2011, 2:37 PM
All I have to hope for is that the sequel exceeds the first.

So far, this movie looks awesome just as it is.
thunderforce - 7/26/2011, 3:20 PM
I doubt that Marvel is going to scrimp on anything with this movie .
superotherside - 7/26/2011, 3:48 PM
honestly I thought that all the action in all the films were great... no they aren't Spider-man action scenes but not every hero can do what Spider-man can do thus his action scenes may not be as good... I think most will be pleased with the Avengers movie... no it's not going to go into crazy hype such as TDK but it will be a good movie that most will like... what will it earn... idk on this one it could top TDK or it could be just Iron man I think we'll have to wait and see on this one... anyway good article! :)
NatDuv - 7/26/2011, 7:15 PM
That blog bored me to hell.
Xandera - 7/26/2011, 7:24 PM
What Intruder said...
Wadey09 - 7/26/2011, 7:59 PM
Iron Man 2's main drawback was the talking in the middle. while it was very informative, like every lecture known man, it was incredibly booooooring.
and that was mainly because Marvel had to set up some plot threads for future movies. which led to it not really feeling like an Iron Man movie, but the Avengers Set Up Part I.
but i'm glad they went ahead and got the boring stuff out of the way because you can tell from Thor and Captain America that Marvel has learned from their mistakes of interference.

The Avengers should at the very least be good. as in watchable and you have seen worse. kinda like the first X-men. but if you want some incentive feel a little more faith, check out my Editorial that i posted the other day.

just click on the pic:
MoonDoggyX - 7/26/2011, 8:54 PM
Nice article, I couldn't have said it better myself!

@intruder - marvel = some of the best action you've ever seen on film??? Then you must not have seen many movies, homie... lol... if u want, I can email you a few suggestions of some good action/cbm's u should watch so that you can catch up...

I do however have faith that wheadon will bring the action better than johnson and branagh did.

I am a little worried about the amount of money the movie will make. Not counting iron man series, tih made barely made any money, and thor and cap only made as much as they did because of the 3D upcharge. If you want a little perspective, as far as actual ticket sales, X3 out sold all marvel made movies besides iron man... by a lot...
golden123 - 7/26/2011, 9:26 PM
You contradict yourself with "the movie will make around 400-500 million domestically" because you had previously said, "the avengers will make more than all of the the prequel films but not a whole bunch more", and Ironman (which made the most domestically out of the Avenger set-ups) only made 318.4 million. I believe The Avengers will gross the third most, out of all the 2012 Comic Book Superhero movies, right after The Dark Knight Rises and The Amazing Spider-Man.

I do agree with you on Marvel's action. Thor was never quite able to match up to it's first action scene which made the "climax" seem dissapointing, in my opinion. They also could of done a much better job witht the Destroyer scene, or actually, it would probably be better for the movie if they didn't include that fight scene and added some other obstacle that could of completed his humbeling.
Coloso - 7/27/2011, 12:01 AM
Right on Intruder!

And SuspenseSmith please tell me you are not trolling? I won't even bother to check that article out. "My take on why Thor and Cap aren't doing so well..." You must be a Marvel hater :P
Orphix - 7/27/2011, 2:45 AM
@Wadey

Spot on about IM2. That film committed two of the worse sins any movie could make. Firstly boring exposition scenes discussing things that have very little to do with the main plot.

And secondly Nick Fury as a Deus Ex Machina to essentially solve all Starks problems. This took away most any of the dynamic drama the film had built up.

Also - with regard to The Avengers - Marvel have a tricky balancing act in promoting this film. On one hand they have to let everyone know about how epic this film is with all these various characters from other franchises appearing in it. But on the other they don't want to alienate those people who feel they haven't watched all the other films and fear they won't have a clue whats going on.
95 - 7/27/2011, 6:03 AM
The Avengers is not going to break box office records. $650M is my guess. Marvel's build up is genius, but we cannot dismiss the possibility of this being completely disappointing. I say, bring on the Skrulls!
blvdnoise - 7/27/2011, 6:17 AM
"never in the history of film has five separate films led up to one giant summer blockbuster"

You're right.. Harry Potter did 7 separate films leading up to an 8th (summer blockbuster) film that broke records world wide.. it seems Ye have little faith.
LMFA0 - 7/27/2011, 6:47 AM
Blvdnoise @

You bring up a decent argument in that each film had had different director but while the situations are similar, they are also very far from being the same. I would say that the Avenger's is not only a much harder sell than Harry Potter but that even though each film is building on the next, each film has had such a different tone to it. I would say that the only similarities between the 5 prequel movies is that they all have a common goal in the end and they are all based in the same universe. That's it. So while HP may hav a similar situation it's very different.

P.s. The reason the last potter film made so much is because everyone and their mother knew it was the FINAL movie. Us fanboys know this isn't the end, hopefully, but most of the people I know personally 1. Don't have a clue that these films are leading up to something 2. Have no idea there is an Avenger's movie coming out. He'll, most people in both Thor and Cap didn't stay after the credits. That's where the main build up has been and IMO this is where Marvel has messed up the most.
MoonDoggyX - 7/27/2011, 9:18 AM
@Intruder - " I said Iron Man had some of the best action I have ever seen in a film. Get it straight retard." You did, my bad... And I'm not retarded, I'm big-boned! lol

Honestly, Batman Begins had awesome action, though I agree with you on the rest of you sarcastic list.

If I were to stick strictly to CBM's I'd say the best, action-wise: SpiderMan 2, X2, X3 Scott Pilgrim, Kick-Ass, the whole Blade series, Iron Man 1, the Incredible Hulk and 300. Sorry if I missed any...
AmonWarmann - 7/27/2011, 9:31 AM
I would disagree with you on the point that since Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk that Marvel movies action scenes have been poor - that is simply not true! I am hoping that The Avengers delivers some awesome, jaw-dropping, climatic action scenes next year. That has to be priority 1. Obviously I hope the story etc is good as well, but if the action isn't what it needs to be this film will flop.
EarOne - 7/27/2011, 12:35 PM
the problem ever since THE INCREDIBLE HULK is...Marvel seems to want to rush to The Avengers, which is understandable. i mean you can only sustain the momentum so much. the momentum which was started at the end of the end credit of the first Iron Man, when Fury said "Avengers Initiative". especially when people started to talk about it, the buildup and excitement just started to grow and grow even bigger.

now back to the problem. with TIH, the movie is NOT the first big screen Hulk movie, so, that's ALREADY a problem on its own. adding to that the ang lee's hulk disappointed not just critics and regular moviegoers, it underperformed at the box office. Thus, all this created skepticism and doubts, especially from non-fan audience. they probably decided to wait for the dvds when TIH came out, in 08, which is too bad.

not saying that the movie doesn't have its legit problems. the story's too light weight and doesn't have quite the appeal to the mass audience, outside CBM world. but, lemme just revisit this later.

with Iron Man 2...too much subplots in such a short time length. but, that too has a similar problem to TIH, but i'll get back to that later.

Thor, it manages to beat the odds by actually turning out a decent movie. before it came out, it's mostly perceived to be the MOST challenging of all Marvel movies to be adapted to a live-action movie AND the one most likely to fail. and yet, they picked the right cast, the right tone and the right everything. so, on that aspect, i think the movie's quite a big achievement. but, still it's NO Lord of the Rings, which some people tend to compare this to.

Captain America, which i just recently watched..it did the job in intrpducing a super hero concept, which was perceived to be TOO OLD FASHIONED and just would be a TOUGH SELL for today's audience. and in a world, post 9/11, where, it's pretty clear how America hasn't been particularly seen, by the international community, as the grand ideal country it probably used to have during WW II, the movie might face a huge obstacle in being a success internationally. but, so far, the story's been good to the movie and, internationally, it seems to be embraced quite well. however, the review's not been all rosy.

now...from all the marvel movies, the first Iron Man still seems to be the ONE to nail it, cuz, it's the first one. nobody had ANY expectation for it to be a HUGE success, especially in the same summer as The Dark Knight, the clear favorite and champ. plus, it's the FIRST one, so..there's more time and ideas given to mold the movie JUST RIGHT to be an exceptional one. and it's got one HUGE advantage, it's got that "never seen anything like this before" factor, which usually happens with the FIRST movie of any franchise. in this case, it applies enormously to Robert Downey, Jr.'s portrayal of Tony Stark.

by the time of IM 2, Downey's Stark is still amusing but not as fresh. the pacing, much like the rest of the other marvel movies (talkin bout the ones with shared universe), seems to be short and RUSHED, just like the productions.

through out all the movies, since Iron Man 1, i've seen some badly executed or poorly conceived scenes or storylines and dialogues, which, if given more time, i'm sure the filmmakers would've spotted and fixed. all the acting have been quite superb through out, but the scripts still needed to be polished a little more, because the biggest challenge to all these live-action movies IS to translate and connect to the general audience, who's got NO idea on who's Loki? why the Hulk always gets to keep his pants on, while hulking out? or why and HOW was Rhodey able to wear the metallic iron man armor without tony's help? actually...the last one PUZZLES everyone, even the fans.

after seeing all the marvel flicks, post-Iron Man 1, i believe, if only given the right amount of time in pre-production and length of the movie, all of em will be much bigger successes at the box office, even Thor, the least known of them all.

hopefully, by the time they were about to start the production of The Avengers, they'd have recognized these problems and more and would address and fix em.

ps: i do find the last action scenes in IM 2, Thor and Cap are quite BELOW my expectations. they're not bad..but for an ass-kickin super hero movies "not bad" is NOT good enuff.

FriendlyNeighborhoodSpidey - 7/28/2011, 10:27 PM
I think all of them are good. Some not as much as others, but none of them are bad or just ok.
KungFuKoala - 7/31/2011, 6:56 AM
Cap is the worst offender regarding Marvel Studios' ethic of "stuff this partuclar movie, we just want to get straight to the Avengers". How they basically ommitted Cap's Mark II initiation and condensed 3 years of missions into a 2 minute montage is absolutely criminal. And the first bit of real story telling in his Mark II uniform, is the final mission.

This is more weird considering that the first half of the movie is perfectly executed and I was expecting the movie to turn out better than IM.

And we didn't even get to see a frozen Steve. Rubbish!

Does Kevin Feige insist that no single movie can go over the 2 hour mark?? Thor could have done with an extra 5-10 minutes, Cap at least another 20 mins. There's nothing wrong with a 2h 30min movie when it feels more like a 2 hour movie (both Thor and Cap brisked along at a fine pace) and I'm yet to meet someone turn away from a theater on the basis that a movie is over 2 hours in length.

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.