Avengers: Age of Ultron (May 1st, 2015)

[YoNoSe]

I got that

 

[The Iron Koob]

I think it was related to a catastrophic event like when the dinosaurs died and ushered in a new age. I think that was the point of the floating city thing. Didn't ultron say a line about dinosaurs?

 

[Khev]

More words ahead.

This article confirms a lot of what I was picking up on with regard to Whedon's take on the filmmaking process and what ended up on screen.

Joss Whedon on Directing ‘Avengers: Age of Ultron': It ‘Broke Me’

With Avengers: Age of Ultron, Joss Whedon hoped to create something beautiful; his own unique, idealistic ‘Vision.’ But what he brought to life has proven to be a surprisingly divisive, immensely entertaining, and hotly-debated monster of both comic book and Hollywood studio proportions. Hardly a failure (read our review), Ultron – like its genocidal robot counterpart – was as equally misunderstood and deluded in its purpose to either stand alone and make a change, or simply move things forward while keeping the status quo.

Ultimately, though, the film struggled not because it lacked any strings, but a perception that the expanding Marvel universe, and not one, but two world-altering events on the way placed far too many strings on its own story. Strings including studio priorities, fan expectations, and insurmountable hype. And it hasn’t left Whedon unscathed.

Avengers Age of Ultron Poster Joss Whedon on Directing Avengers: Age of Ultron: It Broke Me

Before the opening of Age of Ultron, Whedon spoke to Hero Complex regarding the enormity of the project and the pressures that came with it. So, what most took its toll on the writer/director?

“The weight of the thing, the weight of the last thing, of this not just being the next thing that happens — I wanted this film to be its own movie. I wanted it to be better, if possible, than the first one — not that the first one was the best movie ever made, but I wanted to do better, just be better at shooting. I wanted to work harder on the script. I wanted to spend more time just really working every aspect of it, because why go again if you’re not doing something new?”

Indeed, that desire to do something new and unique has not always gelled with Marvel execs – just ask Edgar Wright. But even more so than Marvel’s head honchos, the main voice pressuring Whedon was apparently his own:

“I heard that voice in my head every time, ‘But is this a great idea?’ And suddenly I had doubt that I don’t usually suffer from. And meanwhile, the studio’s gonna have some too, because everything’s riding on this all of a sudden. And it became a problem in a way that nothing else has. And it was a hard movie to make on top of that. So being paralyzed by either indecision or the weight of responsibility? Not useful, don’t have time for your paralysis, son, snap out of it. This was the hardest work I’ve ever done… it a little bit broke me.

Not many filmmakers, let alone people in general, can say they’ve experienced that same level of stress and pressure to do right by such an enormous, opinionated audience. Yet often with creative endeavors – no matter the size or scope – it’s not so much the viewer you wish to please as it is yourself.

Could anyone really blame Whedon for breaking? Age of Ultron was arguably the most anticipated film, financially speaking, in cinematic history. What made the ‘weight of responsibility’ even worse was the critical and commercial success of its behemoth predecessor. Garnering a 92% certified fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes (read our review) and a global box office haul of over $1.5 billion, The Avengers became the quintessential superhero tentpole with shinier bells and whistles – or suits and shields – than any comic book film to come before it.

Joss Whedon On Set Joss Whedon on Directing Avengers: Age of Ultron: It Broke Me

It’s easy to top a failure; it’s easy to climb higher. But it’s nearly impossible to top (near) perfection. Following Avengers, Joss Whedon was standing on the peak of success – the only way to rise any higher was to jump, and hope he could somehow fly. Unfortunately, in his world – in our very real, very blue world – flying is not as easy as putting on an iron suit (and not even that looks easy).

Again, this goes to show why I think AoU is just a special thing. Not unlike Temple of Doom where Lucas' divorce really anchored the over the top action and often times silly humor with a raw emotional core with very unfiltered imagery I also think that AoU wears the pain of its primary creator on its sleeve as well. It's just one of those productions where the filmmaker isn't drawing on some powerful emotion from his past (like Spielberg did regarding his absent father when he made E.T.) but rather open wounds that he was living when he was making the movie. The "heart ripping" divorce during Temple of Doom and the internal "battles" and lingering self-doubt of Whedon, trying to create something amazing for the world, which then carried over into his characters who also battled each other and were hexed into experiencing visions of crippling doubt or fear themselves while they (particularly Stark and Banner) also tried to do something amazing for the world.

I know that like TOD, AoU is just another sequel that a lot of people enjoyed, a lot of people thought was mediocre, while others just wrote it off as another orgy of CGI or whatever. But when I watch it I'm not just entertained by all the cool geek things that pander to my childhood fantasies or whatever (and boy those are there in abundance) but it just clicks with me that I'm watching something that an incredibly talented artist poured his heart and soul into, for better or for worse, with the end goal of simply making a fantastic movie. I just think it's rare that you see a guy with basically a blank check budget push himself to such limits that he's wiping himself out mentally and emotionally in the process.

George Lucas did it to himself with SW and ESB, and admittedly he achieved near perfection with the first two SW films and Whedon did not. But still, even if it is only "as good" as TOD (which I personally don't think is the case, I think its much better,) it's still amazing to see someone coming off a 1.5 billion movie, THE superhero movie of all time, and just go for broke *artistically* with the sequel.

Quentin Tarantino said of the final action sequence in Kill Bill 1 between Uma Thurman and the Crazy 88 Gang that he wanted it to be the greatest and most epic sword battle of all time. And that if it wasn't he would know the literal limit of his own talent. Only his creative limitations were going to stop it from being the greatest sword fight ever. And I think with Whedon, we did see the very best he could do. And my hat's off to him for a damn fine film.

 

[jye4ever]

Yeah, I like the going for broke part.

He created a movie that is very layered and doesn't spoon feed you all the details.

 

[jye4ever]

Great Hulk observation (this movie just gives and gives):

Along the lines of Banner's arc, I thought it was interesting that we never actually saw Bruce transform into the Hulk in this movie. The film opened in the middle of the attack on Strucker's base, so he was already in Hulk mode; during the attack on Klaue's base, we see Wanda mention to Pietro that she wants to go through with their plan for "the big one," but the next shot of Banner we see is the Hulk rampaging uncontrollably; and during the final battle, Natasha pushes Bruce into a crater (or whatever) and he comes back out fully in Hulk form. I think this goes a long way towards illustrating that Bruce is a monster; in the viewers' eyes, the transformation into the Hulk is instantaneous.

Further, the one time we DO see a transformation is after the lullaby at the beginning of the film, when the Hulk turns back into Bruce. This, combined with never seeing the Bruce-to-Hulk transformation, implies that Bruce's true form is now the Hulk, rather than the normal assumption that it's the other way around.

In The Incredible Hulk, Bruce Banner is a human who can take the form of a big green monster and is doing everything he can to get rid of/control of that ability. In The Avengers, Bruce Banner and the Hulk are one being, as evidenced by the "I'm always angry" line. In Age of Ultron, Bruce Banner is a big green rage monster who can take the form of a human.

 

[Khev]

Great Hulk observation (this movie just gives and gives):

Yes it is a good observation and coincides with the observation that Stark's Mark 45 suit is the one IM suit he ever wears where you don't see him suit up, you don't see him emerge from the suit, and you don't see him ever lift the face shield. Almost like that is HIS final form. So much of the movie is about keeping the status quo and not really accomplishing anything, or changing yourself, and possibly the world and either destroying it or improving it (or yourself.) Those moments are all over the place for pretty much everyone.

You really are right jye, if you don't write it off the layers are there.

 

[ronri]

I think it was related to a catastrophic event like when the dinosaurs died and ushered in a new age. I think that was the point of the floating city thing. Didn't ultron say a line about dinosaurs?

The artbook explicitly mentions that the "Age Of Ultron" was meant to be the extinction-level event that would bring about a new age. So yeah, the city in the sky followed by the meteor scheme, they were meant to be the beginning and signifier of just that.

 

[LexiKon318]

The artbook explicitly mentions that the "Age Of Ultron" was meant to be the extinction-level event that would bring about a new age. So yeah, the city in the sky followed by the meteor scheme, they were meant to be the beginning and signifier of just that.

Cool. Thanks ... only got to crack my book open earlier so I didn't get that far. I want to watch the movie again already ha

 

[Devil_666]

I've never really liked anything Josh Whedon has ever made, other than these Avenger movies and to a lesser degree, Cabin in the Woods. And I've never been into comics (except for admiring the artwork). So while I'm familiar with comic book characters and their origin stories in general, I don't go into any of these type of movies with nostalgia or childhood memories. So no expectations. With that said, I saw an entertaining, enjoyable movie (overall) that did have some boring parts, flaws, and stuff I thought could've been cut out. It also had a lame ass villain that was better at cracking jokes then being a threat. And then I went home.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

I've never really liked anything Josh Whedon has ever made, other than these Avenger movies and to a lesser degree, Cabin in the Woods. And I've never been into comics (except for admiring the artwork). So while I'm familiar with comic book characters and their origin stories in general, I don't go into any of these type of movies with nostalgia or childhood memories. So no expectations. With that said, I saw an entertaining, enjoyable movie (overall) that did have some boring parts, flaws, and stuff I thought could've been cut out. It also had a lame ass villain that was better at cracking jokes then being a threat. And then I went home.

Yup, we saw the same film, except I went to Arby's afterwards

 

[CallMeTheDoctor]

Yes, the title isn't necessarily a timeline but rather the idea of a future could have existed. Many people don't like Ultron, but you must be aware to realize that Ultron almost executed his plans. Consider the death of QS, had that not happened, how else would SW have left and leave the switch vulnerable? Hell even before that; Tony had no idea to save everyone. Ultron wasn't a bad villain, it was variety of factors. He would have easily killed millions, but SHIELD came out of nowhere. I'd say Avengers lucked out on that.


Also people say Loki was a more brutal villain, for me; it isn't the case. Loki is a god looking to enslave, the most brutal thing he did was stab a guy for a retinal scan. Ultron chopped off a dudes arm because he was compared to a human, yet to mention: Tony Stark.



Loki also was scared of Thanos and started regretting his actions because of fear to his future. Ultron, as a damaged sentry, committed to his idea of evolution that he attacked Vision, knowing that he wouldn't be a match physically.


I'm saying after viewing it 3 times, Ultron has become a favorite; which wasn't the case in the first viewing.

 

[jye4ever]

Well said /\

 

[Darth Snoopy]

Yes, the title isn't necessarily a timeline but rather the idea of a future could have existed. Many people don't like Ultron, but you must be aware to realize that Ultron almost executed his plans. Consider the death of QS, had that not happened, how else would SW have left and leave the switch vulnerable? Hell even before that; Tony had no idea to save everyone. Ultron wasn't a bad villain, it was variety of factors. He would have easily killed millions, but SHIELD came out of nowhere. I'd say Avengers lucked out on that.


Also people say Loki was a more brutal villain, for me; it isn't the case. Loki is a god looking to enslave, the most brutal thing he did was stab a guy for a retinal scan. Ultron chopped off a dudes arm because he was compared to a human, yet to mention: Tony Stark.



Loki also was scared of Thanos and started regretting his actions because of fear to his future. Ultron, as a damaged sentry, committed to his idea of evolution that he attacked Vision, knowing that he wouldn't be a match physically.


I'm saying after viewing it 3 times, Ultron has become a favorite; which wasn't the case in the first viewing.

 

[Khev]

Whedon on Ultron and the Twins:

Did you play around with his powers, and what he’s capable of?
Yeah, I did. The powers in comic books – they’re always like, ‘And then I can reverse the polarity of your ions!’ – well, we have to ground things a lot more. With Ultron, we have to make him slightly less omnipotent because he’d win. Bottom line. Also, having weaknesses and needs and foibles and alliances and actually caring what people think of him, all these things, are what make him a character and not just a tidal wave. A movie about a tidal wave can be great, but it’s different than a conflict between one side and the other.

When Ultron speaks, he has a point. He is really not on top of the fact that the point he’s making has nothing to do with the fact that he’s banoonoos. And that he hates the Avengers for bringing him into this world, and he can’t really articulate that or even understand how much he hates humanity. He thinks he all that. That guy is very fun to write. He combines all the iconic stuff. The powers he has are slightly different – he can control certain things, he’s not just firing repulsors.

And you also have Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch.
They have an origin but it’s largely described. They’re already good to go by the time we’re up and running. You don’t want to fall into Spider-Man 3 territory – and I say that as a guy who actually thinks pretty well of that movie, there’s some great stuff in that movie – but there comes a point where you’re overloaded with frontstory, backstory, origin story and it becomes very hard to juggle. My instinct is always, ‘Don’t put in more, work with what you have.’

But I insisted on putting in more in this movie because I felt I needed more villains. I needed someone for Ultron to talk to, and I need more trouble for the Avengers. As powerful as Ultron is, if he builds more Ultrons, they’re Ultrons. There’s no reason for him to ever to talk to them because they’re him. ‘I need you to – I KNOW! I AM TOTALLY YOU! I DID IT EARLIER! I know that because I am also me.’ That’s not a good conversation. Actually, it sounded pretty good there. I think I’m onto something.

You’ve retconned Ultron’s origin. In the comics, Hank Pym – Ant-Man – creates Ultron. Here, it’s Tony and, to a lesser extent, Bruce.
Of all the heat I’ve ever taken, not having Hank Pym was one of the bigger things. But the fact of the matter was, Edgar had him first and by virtue of what Edgar was doing, there was no way for me to use him in this. I also thought it was a bridge too far. Ultron needs to be the brainchild of the Avengers, and in the world of the Avengers and the MCU, Tony Stark is that guy. Banner has elements of that guy – we don’t really think of him as being as irresponsible as Tony Stark, but the mother****er tested gamma radiation on himself, with really terrible, way-worse-than-Tony-Stark results.

It didn’t make sense to introduce a third scientist, a third sciencetician, to do that. It was hard for me, because I grew up on the comics, to dump that, but at the end of the day, it’s a more interesting relationship between Tony and Ultron if Tony was once like, ‘You know what would be a really great idea?’ They’re doing what they always do – which is jump in headfirst, and then go, ‘Sorry, world!’ But you have to make it their responsibility without just making it their fault.

Joss Whedon Talks Avengers: Age Of Ultron

 

[jye4ever]

That was a pretty funny interview.

 

[abake]

Don't know if this has been posted, but I thought it was an interesting read:

Age of Ultron Is Proof Marvel Is Killing the Popcorn Movie | WIRED

 

[Deckard]

Age of Ultron Is Proof Marvel Is Killing the Popcorn Movie | WIRED

I'd place that blame firmly on the shoulders of Chris Nolan. How many movies have been ruined because they wanted to replicate the dark, tactical, realistic feel.

 

[cilantropants]

Jesus H Cricket, everyone now believes they're a proper critic and journalist because they have a keyboard and believe being the opposing voice to everything is the same as intelligent writing. What a pretentious gasbag Sady Doyle is. She probably only farts ironically.

 

[pturtle]

View attachment 184735



I'd place that blame firmly on the shoulders of Chris Nolan. How many movies have been ruined because they wanted to replicate the dark, tactical, realistic feel.

So it's Nolan's fault because other studios tried to copy his style and couldn't do as good a job?

Man the Nolan haters are something else.

Jesus H Cricket, everyone now believes they're a proper critic and journalist because they have a keyboard and believe being the opposing voice to everything is the same as intelligent writing. What a pretentious gasbag Sady Doyle is. She probably only farts ironically.

Agreed, just because a pseudo journalist writes a piece like this must mean its true. I don't even like AOU but I don't see how it's killing the superhero genre, or hurting summer blockbusters.

 

[jye4ever]

Only explanation I can come up with is that she was denied entrance by Marvel to a free movie screening with the stars.

You have to read her piece all the way to the end, yikes!