ibdoomed wrote:I've heard a lot of bad things about this avengers movie
Then you've been doing an amazing job of ignoring the overwhelmingly positive response. This is largely what makes you look like a troll.
like black widow gets more screen time than others)
I didn't bring a stopwatch, but it didn't seem like a particularly Black Widow move to me. Especially if you mean "than all others" as opposed to "than some others." She probably did have more screen time than Banner/Hulk, for instance, but Stark/Iron Man and Rogers/Captain America were right up there, as was Nick Fury.
ibdoomed wrote:I've had no desire to see it from a superhero standpoint
Which is fine - nobody's forcing you to. But, again, be aware that when you ignore the 97% of the feedback that's incredibly, overwhelmingly, almost spiritually positive to focus on a couple of small things and shout out loud "I'm not seeing this because of this one little nit that I've decided to focus on to the exclusion of all else" it makes you look like a troll.
Also, quotes like:
ibdoomed wrote:I don't understand how you can add 3 or 4 crap movies together and expect anything less than exponential crap.
ibdoomed wrote:I might actually rent this day 1 after I finally watched CA a month ago and it didn't make me puke like I thought it would.
The public is killing me. If we (the collective we) don't stop going to theaters, we'll never get decent movies back.
Are pure and blatant trolling, whether you meant it or not and whether you like it or not. Coming into a thread where people are discussing something they're excited about and crapping all over it not only sight-unseen, but based on other, prior movies that you ALSO haven't seen and assume sight-unseen to be bad is just crap behaviour. Feel free to see the movie and then point out weaknesses, that's cool. Feel free to not see the movie and keep your opinions to yourself - that's also cool. Even posting a single response that says, "I don't plan to see this because of X and Y and Z" wouldn't be completely out of line and might even be helpful to others who were on the fence about it. But to dismiss the entire franchise out of hand and continue to post about how you assume it sucks, in direct opposition to the first-hand, incredibly positive reviews of all of us who have actually seen it? Don't do that.
ibdoomed wrote: [I] wanted to know what Joss brought in
If this hasn't been answered to your satisfaction already, it doesn't seem likely that it ever will be. It's also not relevant in my opinion. There seem to be a lot of folks who LOVED LOVED LOVED Joss's previous work who were disappointed that The Avengers wasn't more like what they expected. Presumably there may also be people who hated his prior work and may have love the Avengers because it lacked those things they didn't like about his prior work. Then there's folks like me who are largely indifferent to and not that familiar with his prior work, and for whom The Avengers stands all on its own.
ibdoomed wrote:that made it worth the 4 hours of my life.
The Avengers is only 142 minutes long.
ibdoomed wrote:When I thought "fleshed out characters portrayed by big actors, giving great one-liners, with action motivated by stories", the first movie that came to mind was The Expendables.
We have diametrically opposite definitions of the phrase "fleshed out." There wasn't a single character in The Expendables that had even a tiny amount of meaningful character development, in my opinion.
ibdoomed wrote:let me know if you need me to go away again.
Nope - just take the feedback you've been receiving to heart instead of ignoring it.
[For the record, had I seen your last full paragraph before I started this reply, I might have altered my tone somewhat. I don't mean to slap you down overly hard or interfere with your therapy in the least. I WOULD like to see you be able to contribute here in a way that's healthy and productive for you and for those you interact with, and at the moment that's not really happening. I hope you're able to adapt and stick around.]