Showing posts with label Jeremy Renner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jeremy Renner. Show all posts

Saturday, 24 June 2023

Avengers: Endgame (5 Stars)



For the last week I've been watching films on Netflix. Today I realised that I could access my Disney Plus account while I'm travelling, so I have access to dozens of wonderful Marvel films. So I sat down with my son-in-law and asked him what he wanted to watch. He picked "Avengers: Endgame". An excellent choice.

While we were watching my daughter Fiona came in the room and asked what crappy film we were watching. She should have remembered that she'd already seen in twice in the cinema in May 2019. The second time was with me, as recorded in my blog. Even without checking my blog I could remember it clearly, because it was my only ever visit to a 4DX movie. (My review on 16th May 2019 describes what that is). Even so, Fiona has completely forgotten it. Memory is a strange thing. Sometimes I can clearly remember things that happened 40 years ago, but I forget what I did last week.

"Avengers: Endgame" is too spectacular to be forgotten.

Success Rate:  + 5.8

Order from Amazon.com
Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

Saturday, 7 November 2020

Hansel and Gretel Witch Hunters (3 Stars)


As you can see if you compare this post with my last two reviews of "Hansel and Gretel Witch Hunters", my ratings aren't always consistent. I change my mind. It often depends on my mood when I watch a film. If I think a film is absolutely brilliant the first time I see it, it will always get a five star rating, however many times I watch it. On the other hand, if a film is merely good to average, my rating can oscillate between three and four stars. Three stars is the lowest rating I've given to the film so far.

I'll always remember this film as the beginning of a new period in my life. It was the first film that I went to see with the Birmingham Film Group on 27th February 2013. Until then I'd watched films almost exclusively at home. My daughter Fiona, who still lived with me at the time, suggested that I look online for a film group in Birmingham. She was worried that I was becoming a hermit. It was one of the best suggestions that she ever made to me. I finally developed a social life.

At the film group I met Mike McAuley, the group's leader. Over the next months we became close friends. I'd go as far as to say he was one of my best friends. A year later I became a co-host in the film group. We made it a routine that I hosted one film a week (usually on Wednesday) and Mike hosted one film a week (usually on Sunday). In addition, he frequently hosted social meetings on Saturdays, which I always attended. It was usual for Mike and I to be the last ones to leave.

Mike was disappointed when I said I was moving to Germany in 2016. He tried to talk me out of it, for several reasons. Firstly, he thought that the film group would suffer without my help. Secondly, he would miss me as a friend. I wasn't his best friend, but those that he considered his best friends all lived in different parts of the country. A possible third reason, which he didn't state directly, was that he felt that I was betraying my country by leaving. Maybe I'm wrong about this, because I'm basing this opinion on remarks he made while he was drunk.

Time went by. Four years. I stayed in touch with Mike, speaking with him regularly on Facebook, and I visited him whenever I was in England. In Germany I formed a new film group in Stuttgart. Then the Coronavirus lockdowns started. Mike organised online meetups for social purposes or to watch films, so I was an active participant in his group once more. Then something strange happened. Mike started to send me rude messages on Facebook, usually late at night. I shrugged them off, because I assumed he'd been drinking. Then the following conversation took place on my timeline:


As you can see, I was being polite and understanding with him, but he was totally crazy. In the following conversation my friends jumped to my defence. They confirmed that I'd never said I wanted Boris Johnson to die. My friends all know that I'm a strong supporter of Boris Johnson. I consider him to be the best prime minister the UK has had in the last 30 years.

At first I thought Mike McAuley had made a mistake. However, the matter escalated further. He began to spread lies about me on his Facebook timeline. He unfriended me to stop me reading what he was writing, but my friends sent me screenshots of the conversations. For instance:


This is interesting for a few reasons. First, he's backed away from saying that I wanted Boris Johnson to die. This is probably because too many people told him it wasn't true. He's gone on to accuse me of hate speech in general. My friends know that I never indulge in hate speech of any form, but anyone who doesn't know me might believe him.

Secondly, who is Phil Murtagh? I don't know him, and he's certainly never been on my Facebook friends list. How can someone who doesn't know me call me racist or bigoted? It's possible he's confused me with another Mike.

Thirdly, Andy Pettitt (who is Mike's best friend) says I've been warned repeatedly. What's he talking about? When was I ever warned about wanting Boris Johnson or any other politician to die? Andy was one of my Facebook friends, so I sent him a message asking him about it. Instead of replying, he unfriended me immediately. I can understand him taking Mike's side as his best friend, but I'm disappointed that he didn't have the moral integrity to look into the matter and find out what Mike was talking about.

So what's it all about? It's not about Boris Johnson or racism. The problem must lie elsewhere. I think it had to do with my recent appearances in the online meetups. I talked with the people, mostly new members who hadn't been in the group in 2016, and they liked me. This bothered Mike. To explain this I need to go back to 2013. 

On one of our first meetings Mike McAuley boasted to me that he'd had sex with 300 women. I was impressed, but when he left the room one of the other group members said, "It's not true. That's what he tells everyone to make himself sound special". In the following years I realised it was something he often repeated, so I just smiled and nodded, winking at anyone else who was listening.

When I became a co-host of the film group, many people who only visited during the week met me first and considered me the group's leader. Eventually they met Mike, and I told them he was Big Mike, I was only Little Mike. But they still confided in me. One of the members, Elisha, complained to me that Mike had been sexually harassing her by text. I told her that he often misbehaves when he's drunk, but she wasn't happy with my excuse and left the group. A few months later it happened again. Emma, a very good friend of mine, complained that Mike had been sexually harassing her. Once more I told her that he was drunk, but she said that the text messages came early in the day, so he couldn't have been drunk. Emma broke off her friendship with me because I was defending Mike. After I left England in 2016 my daughter Fiona joined the group, and the same happened with her. Mike was sending her sexual messages less than a week before his wedding. This time I spoke to Mike, and he denied it. Fiona sent me screenshots to prove it was true. She also left the film group.

Mike knew by now that women were telling me about him. He'd wanted me to remain in England for the sake of his group, but now that I was gone he wanted me to stay away. I wouldn't have made a connection, but after the initial arguments with Mike in Facebook another two women came forward and told me Mike had sexually harassed them. One of them, Anne, had left the group immediately. The other has remained in the group, and she's asked me not to name her. Anne thinks that Mike only harasses women to make up for his inadequacy at hardly ever having had sex.

I think it's sad that things have turned out like this. For seven years Mike McAuley was one of my best friends. Now he's decided to spread lies about me. This post tells the truth, for anyone who's willing to listen. Despite everything, I don't bear a grudge. If Mike apologises to me in public, everything will be forgiven.

Success Rate:  + 2.5

Order from Amazon.com
Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

Sunday, 30 August 2020

Captain America: Civil War (5 Stars)


As most of my readers know, Chadwick Boseman died of cancer two days ago, aged 43. It was a shock to everyone, because he kept his illness secret for years. When I saw it reported on the BBC website yesterday morning, my first reaction was disbelief. I even suspected it of being a hoax. How can someone so young and (seemingly) so fit die so suddenly?

Since he's best known for his role as the Black Panther in four of the MCU films, I've decided to watch at least two of them to remember him, maybe all four. I haven't decided yet.

The Black Panther is a character who was first invented by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby, appearing in Fantastic Four #52 in July 1966. He became a member of the Avengers in Avengers #52 (May 1968), while Roy Thomas was the regular writer, but it wasn't until September 1973 that he was presented as a true African super-hero. The unknown young writer Don McGregor started to write solo adventures of the Black Panther in Jungle Action #6 which took place in his homeland of Wakanda, not in America. Readers consider the 13-part Panther's Rage story (Jungle Action #6 to #18) to be one of the best stories ever published by Marvel.


Chadwick Boseman is the living representation of the Black Panther as we see him in the Panther's Rage story. He's strong, he's noble, but above all else he's African. This is most obvious in his solo film, "Black Panther", that I'll be watching tomorrow. "Civil War" is an outstanding action film, but "Black Panther" is an African film.

Chadwick Boseman
November 29, 1976 – August 28, 2020

Success Rate:  + 2.6

Order from Amazon.com
Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

Wednesday, 29 January 2020

Avengers: Endgame (5 Stars)


Stan Lee didn't create the character Thanos. He was created by the writer/artist Jim Starlin in 1973, when Stan had already given up most of his writing activities at Marvel. Nevertheless, Stan Lee laid the foundation for the Marvel Universe, and he created the Avengers and most of the other heroes in the film. His contribution to comics and modern culture overall can't be underestimated.

The Blu-ray disc of "Avengers Endgame" that I watched today has a short tribute to Stan Lee. It's not a full tribute, it's just a review of his cameo appearances in the Marvel Cinematic Universe films.


These words, spoken by director James Gunn, express my thoughts precisely:

"My hero. The greatest man alive".

Stan Lee has passed away since this photo was taken, and the world is a poorer place without him. However, for me he still lives on in his writing. In the course of writing my Marvel Years posts I read his comics regularly. I'm up to mid 1971, close to the end of his regular writing. Other less capable writers stepped into his footsteps. Some of Marvel's writers were good, some were average, some were poor, but even Marvel's best writers weren't Stan Lee. He had a spark of genius that others could only dream of.

The most touching part of the tribute is when Robert Downey Jr kneels before Stan Lee and kisses his hand. That wasn't an empty affectation, it's a sign that he truly loved him. As do I.


Asking whether there will ever be another Stan Lee is like asking if there will be another William Shakespeare. It's not impossible, but it's highly unlikely.


On an unrelated matter, I've been running into the limitations of Google's Blogger (Blogspot). I add labels to posts to list the actors who appear in a film. Not every actor, just the ones that I consider to be the major actors. That's five or six actors per film, on average, but the last two Avengers films, "Infinity War" and "Endgame", have an overwhelming ensemble of big actors. Blogger limits me to a maximum of 20 labels per post, so I've been forced to omit some of the actors. Originally I omitted the actors who play smaller parts. Now I've decided to do the opposite. I've omitted the labels for the actors who play the biggest roles, because people know they're in the film anyway. The actors that I have omitted from the labels are:

Chris Evans (Captain America)
Chris Hemsworth (Thor)
Mark Ruffalo (Hulk)
Robert Downey Jr (Iron man)
Scarlett Johansson (Black Widow)
Samuel L. Jackson (Nick Fury)

Nuff said!

Success Rate:  + 5.8

Order from Amazon.com
Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

Wednesday, 31 July 2019

Avengers: Endgame (5 Stars)


This is the third time I've seen "Avengers: Endgame". The first time I saw it was in a German cinema. The second time was in an English cinema. Today I watched it in a friend's house, in beautiful 4K resolution and supposedly Dolby Surround Sound. I say supposedly, because I wasn't aware of being surrounded by the sound. It seemed to be coming to me from the front, like a normal stereo soundtrack. I'm saying that as a compliment. If I'm watching a film that's taking place in front of me, I don't want to hear the noises behind me.

I feel quite jealous of the beautiful movie system that I enjoyed today. It's not a matter of money. I could afford it if I wanted to. My trouble is the size and layout of my room. The furthest I can sit away from the screen is 135 cm (53 inches), so the largest screen that would be sensible for me is 49 inches.

Yesterday I watched "Avengers: Infinity War", which helped me to appreciate "Avengers Endgame" in its context. "Infinity War" has action all the way, whereas "Endgame" is slow and  mournful, with only occasional action scenes, all of which are splendid when the action breaks out. For the first hour very little happens at all. We meet the characters, and we share their sorrow after having lost so many friends.


I'm pleased to see that Captain Marvel's powers haven't been toned down in the film. Of the highly powered heroes, she's the only one who lives up to her strength in the comics. This makes her the most powerful hero in the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe), unlike the comics, where several heroes have greater power, such as Warlock and the Silver Surfer. The original male Captain Mervel in the comics was also stronger than her.

Where do the Avengers go from here? Where does the MCU go from here? Kevin Feige, the producer of the MCU, has promised that there won't be an early reboot, starting the Avengers again from the beginning with younger actors. In "Endgame" several characters were killed, and others will disappear because the actors haven't renewed their contracts, so now they've gone for good. They'll be replaced by other Marvel characters; there are so many to choose from. This is a good idea, but we can't go on like that forever. The best, most appealing characters are the ones that Stan Lee invented in the 1960's, and cinema audiences will grow bored when they've disappeared. A reboot is inevitable, but when will it happen? I don't know yet. The Marvel bosses will make a decision based on the viewing figures.

"Avengers Endgame" has become the highest grossing film ever, if the figures aren't adjusted for inflation. That's one of the advantages of my Success Rate. It's a relative number from comparing the budget and the box office takings, so inflation doesn't play a role. My way of calculating the Success Rate makes "Endgame" the most successful film in the MCU, but less successful than the non-MCU Marvel film "Venom", which scored + 6.6.

Success Rate:  + 5.8

Order from Amazon.com
Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

In the review I wrote yesterday about "Avengers: Infinity War" I said that Thanos would never retire and become a hermit or a farmer. One of my friends sent me a message, saying that I was mistaken. He pointed out, quite correctly, that after he lost the Infinity Gauntlet to Adam Warlock he became a farmer, "scraping out a living from the soil". However, this is what he became after losing the Gauntlet. He would never have become a farmer if he had remained the universe's supreme being. He was exiled to live alone on a remote planet by Adam Warlock, so what else could be do except to farm the land?


As we can see, he's become very stoic. He accepts his new position in life. However, I don't believe he would have taken this position voluntarily.

The story of Thanos continues in Marvel comics, some of them written by Jim Starlin, but for me this page isn't just the end of the Infinity Gauntlet saga, it's the final end of what I consider to be Marvel canon.

Thursday, 16 May 2019

Avengers: Endgame (5 Stars)


While I was in Birmingham this week I went to see "Avengers: Endgame" again. It was suggested by my daughter Fiona. She saw it last week, but she didn't understand it. That's not surprising. The first MCU film that she watched was "Black Panther". "Endgame" – I'll shorten the title – refers to so much of the early films that it must be totally incomprehensible to any johnny-come-latelys. Or should that be spelt johnny-come-latelies? I don't know if there's a special rule for the plurals of adverbs.

I sat explaining to Fiona the previous 21 MCU films, concentrating on the ones most prominently referenced in "Endgame": "The Avengers", "Thor: Dark World" and "Guardians of the Galaxy". At first she sat attentively, but as I continued she was overwhelmed by the long list of names and her face went blank. She found a full review of "Endgame" in YouTube and listened to the first minute, but it was awful. The reviewer was just rattling off the plot at a breakneck speed, which confused her even more.

So we went to the cinema. There was a 4DX screening at Cineworld on Broad Street, which we chose because neither of us have seen 4DX films before. If you don't know this technology, it's a way to immerse the viewer in a film by provoking his other senses, not just sight and sound.


This is the 4DX theatre in Cineworld Broad Street. Eight rows with 20 seats each, arranged in groups of four. The gap at the front left is possibly for wheelchair users, but I would have to ask about that. I don't consider 4DX suitable for wheelchair users, unless the functionality is limited.

I know that it's officially been allowed to give away "Endgame" spoilers now, but I shan't. I'll just review the 4DX experience.

There are extensive warnings on the door before you enter. You shouldn't use 4DX if you're pregnant, you shouldn't use 4DX if you're shorter than 1.30 meters (4'3"), plus many seemingly random restrictions. The cinema obviously wants to protect itself from all possible lawsuits.

When you sit down you're supposed to put your head on the headrest and your feet on the footrest. The only controls on the seat itself are for the water. You can turn off the water sprays to stop yourself getting wet. That's a setting for wimps. Why would anyone want to stay dry in a cinema?

The most enjoyable feature was the chair motion. The chairs move in all directions at different speeds. When there are fights the motion is fast and jerky. I found it effective that when a plane was flying the chair very slowly tilted forward, giving the impression of movement.

There was frequent wind blowing, mainly from my left. That's possibly because I was sitting on the left of the four-chair group. It gave me the impression of being outside. This was mostly appropriate.

One strange feature is the vibration of the chairs. This was usually done whenever there was a loud noise. I found it somewhat arousing, because the vibrations went straight through my testicles. I suspect that it might be even more exciting for women. However, I have to admit that despite the cheap thrill this did nothing to enhance the movie experience.

During the fights I was sometimes poked by a rod underneath my right shoulder blade. When I checked the chairs afterwards I found two rods, on the left and the right, but the left rod was never used. Maybe it was broken on my chair. This was a weird feeling. It would have had to hit me a lot harder to simulate a fight.

There was a very pleasant smell in the scene where Thanos is walking in his garden. I liked it a lot. The scent feature was only used in this one scene. I would like to experience it in a film more often, so I can compare the scents, whether they change from scene to scene.

One thing I didn't like was the lights that flashed on the sides of the theatre when there was an explosion or something similar. This was highly annoying.

What about the water? "Endgame" isn't a very wet film, but I experienced it in one of the opening scenes. When Hawkeye killed the Japanese Yakuza boss I felt his blood splashing on my face. That was a nice touch. In a later scene, when it was raining, I felt a few drops of rain on my face. That wasn't enough. I should have walked out of the cinema with my t-shirt dripping wet.

My overall impression is that 4DX is a nice gimmick, but it's not something I like enough to want to do it often. 4DX costs £4.70 more than the normal ticket, and for that price it's really not worth it.

Thursday, 2 May 2019

Friday, 25 January 2019

Captain America: Civil War (5 Stars)


This is the 13th film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, released in May 2016. Despite being called a Captain America film, it has so many of the Avengers in it that it could be called an Avengers film. There's no Thor or Hulk, but there are 12 super-heroes, of which seven are Avengers (Captain America, Falcon, Iron Man, Black Widow, Hawkeye, Scarlet Witch, Vision), three are new characters (Black Panther, Spider-Man, Ant-Man), one is a former enemy (Winter Soldier) and one who's a government soldier (War Machine). Call it whatever you like. It's a great film.

And then there's Stan Lee.

This is another film in which Stan Lee appears late, almost as an after-thought after the action is over, though not as late as in "Ant-Man". He appears three minutes from the end as a FedEx delivery man with a package for Tony Stark, which he mispronounces as "Tony Stank". We only see him for four seconds, but every moment that he spends on screen is glorious.


There are two new characters, or at least they're new to the MCU. The first is the Black Panther, King T'Challa of Wakanda. To be precise, in the picture above he's still Prince T'Challa, because his father hasn't yet died.


The other new character is Spider-Man. Long months of negotiation were needed to get him into the film. The MCU films are created by Marvel Studios, a subsidiary of Walt Disney, but the rights to Spider-Man in film were sold to Sony many years ago.


A character who unexpectedly returns is General Thunderbolt Ross, who we last saw as the Hulk's nemesis in "The Incredible Hulk". He's gained more power by retiring from the army and moving into politics. He's now the US Secretary of State. He fits well into his new role. He's someone who's always mistrusted super-powered beings, so if he can't destroy them he at least wants to contain them. He's a key figure in the creation of the Sokovia Accords, a document restricting super-heroes like the Avengers. Rather than act on their own initiative the Avengers will only be allowed to act if instructed by the United Nations.

The reason for this is that the Avengers have been blamed for hundreds of deaths caused in Sokovia in "Avengers: Age of Ultron". That's obviously stupid, but it's no less stupid than what real world politicians say every day. Did General Ross forget that Ultron was planning to drop Sokovia from the sky with an impact great enough to destroy all life on Earth? The Avengers saved billions of lives, and now they're being punished for the few hundred that perished as collateral damage in their battle with Ultron? If the Avengers had already signed the Sokovia Accords they would still have been sitting in America waiting for the United Nations to reach a decision when the Earth ceased to exist.

A question I didn't deal with when writing about "Age of Ultron" is where Sokovia is located. It's a fictional country, so it can't be pinpointed precisely, but an important clue is a statue that we briefly see in the background.


The statue is identical to the statue of Robert Peel in London, but the plaque at its base gives more information.


The plaque honours Prince Constantine of Imereti, a prince of Georgia. This identifies Sokovia as a micro-country that has broken away from Georgia, placing it somewhere near the East of the Black Sea.

Of course, this might be a red herring planted by the directors when they created the fictional city-state as a patchwork of scenery and townscapes from all over Europe.


We met Ant-Man in the last MCU film, but here we see the other side of his character. He can't just shrink, he can also grow in size, increasing his strength in the process. He's strong enough to tear an aeroplane apart. Or should I call it an airplane? I normally avoid Americanisms, but the American word has become very common in England in recent years.



It's no coincidence that the camera shows Steve Rogers and Natasha Romanoff against the background of the church stained windows. The cameramen must have been crawling on the floor to get these upward shots. Is it supposed to suggest that the two have divine qualities?


Natasha Romanoff (codename Black Widow) and Clint Barton (codename Hawkeye) might have been close friends while they worked together at SHIELD, but now they're on opposite sides. Natasha signed the Sokovia Accords, Clint didn't. Their consciences have separated them, but once again: how could any of the Avengers have signed the Accords? Isn't it obvious that the whole reasoning behind the Accords is flawed?


Wanda Maximoff's powers have very little in common with the Scarlet Witch created by Stan Lee in 1964. Is she even a mutant? She doesn't call herself Scarlet Witch, as if she hasn't yet accepted that she's a super-hero.


Tony Stark has gone from one extreme to the other. In "Age of Ultron" he was still trying to go it alone by creating an intelligent robot or android to keep peace on Earth. Now he's decided to submit to the control of the United Nations and General Ross. It's his bad conscience affecting him, but if he'd been more stable he would only have modified his plans rather than rejecting them completely.


The Vision was created by Roy Thomas in October 1968 and rapidly became a fan favourite. Fans were touched by his philosophic musings and his struggle to become human. At the time of publication Roy Thomas was accused of basing the character on Star Trek's Spock, which he strongly denied. In a way, the Vision was the opposite of Spock. Spock was a Vulcan-human hybrid who was always fighting to suppress any emotions he felt. The Vision was an artificial being without emotions, but he tried to learn emotions to make himself more human. The Vision has more similarity with the android Data who didn't appear in "Star Trek: The Next Generation" until 1987.

I have difficulty deciding which Captain America film I like more, "Winter Soldier" or "Civil War". They're my two favourite films in the MCU so far, but they're very different. "Winter Soldier" has the atmosphere of a spy thriller, whereas "Civil War" is a high octane action film throughout. They're both masterpieces, each in their own way. I find it difficult to understand why "Black Panther" was nominated for an Academy Award as Best Film but "Civil War" wasn't. I'll never understand the mentality of serious film critics.

Success Rate:  + 2.6

Order from Amazon.com
Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

Wednesday, 23 January 2019

Avengers: Age of Ultron (4½ Stars)


This is the eleventh film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, released in May 2015. Stan Lee appears in a short scene as a proud World War II veteran at a party in the New York Avengers headquarters. Thor is sharing a flask with Captain America.

Thor describes the drink, "This was aged for one thousand years in the barrels built from the wreck of Grunhel's fleet. It is not meant for mortal men".

Stan Lee, sitting nearby, butts in, "Neither was Omaha Beach, blondie. Stop trying to scare us. Come on".

Thor agrees and pours a small amount into a glass. Moments later we see Stan being carried out slurring the single word "Excelsior".


He really was an army veteran. In 1942 he volunteered to join the US Army, and he served in the Signal Corps from 1942 to 1945. After initially serving as a lineman he was transferred to the Training Film Division, where he wrote material such as training manuals and the scripts for propaganda films.


In this wartime photograph Sergeant Stanley Lieber – that was his real name – is shown designing a poster. That's curious. In his career he was never an artist.


In June 2017 Stan Lee was made a lifetime member of the Signal Corps Regimental Association. Better late than never. Most people knew nothing about his military history, so it needed a comic book fan in the Signal Corps to suggest him.

This is a video of the award being presented. After the presentation Stan says, "This is one of my proudest moments. Excelsior!"

Often when news reports talk about Stan Lee they refer to him as "Stan Lee, the creator of Spider-Man". That description gives a point of reference for the people who aren't dedicated comic fans, but it's always annoyed me. He created so many other characters, both heroes and villains. Here are a few of the other characters he created, all of them featured in "Avengers: Age of Ultron".

Hulk (May 1962)
Thor (August 1962)
Iron Man (March 1963)
Nick Fury (May 1963)
Quicksilver (March 1964)
Scarlet Witch (March 1964)
Black Widow (April 1964)
Hawkeye (September 1964)

I can't guarantee that their film representations resemble their original appearances in the comics. If you want on-screen realism you have to watch Axel Braun's Marvel films.

Success Rate:  + 1.2

Order from Amazon.com
Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

Wednesday, 9 January 2019

The Avengers (5 Stars)


This is the sixth film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, released in May 2012. It finally unites all of the Avengers to battle Loki and an alien race called the Chitauri. The members of the Avengers are:

Iron Man – first seen in "Iron Man" (2008)

Thor – first seen in "Thor" (2011)

Hulk – first seen in "Incredible Hulk" (2008)

Captain America – first seen in "Captain America" (2011)

Black Widow – first seen as a supporting character in "Iron Man 2" (2010)

Hawkeye – first seen as an unnamed supporting character in "Thor" (2011)

Whoever first conceived the slow, steady build up to the release of "The Avengers" is a marketing genius. Was it Avi Arad? Was it Kevin Feige? Was it someone else? It was an ambitious plan to map out a series of 22 films from 2008 to 2019.

Maybe the original plan wasn't for exactly 22 films. The first film ("Iron Man") and the last film (the as yet unreleased final battle between the Avengers and Thanos) were planned, but the route between the two points has been changed on the way. Iron Man was more popular than expected, which is the reason a second Iron Man film was released so soon. Another change concerned Spider-Man. It wasn't agreed until 2015 that he could appear in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Stan Lee has a 4½ second cameo at the end of the film. After the Chitauri have been defeated there are a series of television interviews showing the public's reaction. Stan Lee appears as a sceptic sitting in the park playing chess with a man who looks suspiciously like Ian McKellen. The words he speaks are

"Superheroes in New York? Give me a break!"

How many people recognise the irony in this interview? There's a subtle in-joke that only fans of the early Marvel comics would recognise. In the early 1960's DC Comics were the market leaders in superhero comics. All of the DC heroes were located in fictional American cities, for instance Batman lived in Gotham City, Superman lived in Metropolis, the Flash lived in Central City, Green Lantern lived in Coast City. When Stan Lee began to write superhero comics in 1961 he didn't want his stories to be set in a far distant Marvel Universe, he wanted them to be accessible by being set here in our own world. With the exception of the Hulk (New Mexico), all of his superheroes lived in New York. That's the real meaning of the ironic interview in the park. Until 1961 it was considered impossible that superheroes could be in New York. Then Stan Lee changed history by putting dozens of superheroes in the middle of a city that everyone knows and can relate to.


Here are the six members of the Avengers staring upwards at the Chitauri attack. If you can't name them all you have to stay behind after school and watch all the MCU films. Although that's not much of a punishment. I would consider it a reward.


Clint Barton and Natasha Romanoff aren't referred to by their customary superhero names. They're called Agent Barton and Agent Romanoff, since they're both members of SHIELD.


We see them called Hawkeye and Black Widow on a computer screen in the SHIELD helicarrier. This is the only time Clint Barton is called Hawkeye in the film, although on one occasion he's called the Hawk. Natasha Romanoff states early on that she carried out a mission with the codename Black Widow, but it's not used as her standard name.


In this film Phil Coulson was killed by Loki. That was a mistake. The fan backlash was immense. He had to be brought back from the dead for the TV series "Agents of SHIELD". They did it in a much too complicated way. They could merely have said that Phil Coulson was revived in medical treatment shortly after Loki's attack, but Nick Fury didn't tell the Avengers because he wanted to motivate them.


Loki is the best film villain ever, with Magneto a close second. Yes, Loki is evil, yes, Loki is a murderer, but he's still so cool and charismatic that it's impossible not to like him. That's what makes a villain good. Clear-cut confrontations between black and white are boring. Interesting heroes are ones with flaws, and interesting villains are ones we can admire or feel sorry for.

Success Rate:  + 4.9

Order from Amazon.com
Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de