Amph Avengers: Doomsday (and Secret Wars)

The Iron Man armor in the final battle is obviously different from the one at the beginning of the movie, yet I can't find any reference to it anywhere. Odd....

 

wait.....do you think the fight made thing's better?

 

It subdued the Hulk, whose rampage would not have ended until everything in the city was smashed--and who knows how long thereafter. So. Yes. I'd say it helped.

He was possessed by Wanda. It wasn't even a normal hulk freak out.

 

And the police didn't seem to be firing nice gentle bullets to calm him down.

 

You'd think they could surgically put something in Banner with that compound that undid his Hulkout he had in Incredible Hulk. When he hulks out at a bad time just flip a switch and signal the device inside banner to release the compound and then just wait 30 seconds and no more Hulk.

 

You seriously think Hulk would have done less damage on his own? That the poor little guy would have just tuckered himself out in a harmless fit?

This is Banner's greatest fear coming true. The Hulk rampaging indefinitely--uncontrollably.

 

I was under the impression that the de-hulking didn't take. He transforms almost immediately afterward.

 

Bruce Banner explicitly states in Avengers that he tried to eat a bullet and that the Hulk spit it back out. so yeah, I could see how that might not work.

 

Well he actually underwent the treatment in Incredible Hulk... so it is possible

 

He underwent treatment that failed. At what point, exactly, did you stop watching TIH? Because that's the climax.

 

It stopped him from Hulking out. It wasn't permanent. But it did have the ability to prevent him from doing it for a short time. That's my point.

 

The character Andy Serkis played is, as I understand it, a Black Panther villain. His name is Klaw and given that Ultron ripped his arm off in this one, I anticipate him returning as a main villain sporting a handy claw arm or something in the Black Panther movie. I mean, I may be totally off on that, but it could be.

 

It stopped him from hulking out until it was convenient to the plot for him to Hulk out. So, they do it again, and it can fail at any time, based on the needs of the plot. So. Useless.

 

Maybe, maybe not:

http://marvel.wikia.com/Ulysses_Klaw_(Earth-616)

 

STERNS: "Even if everything goes perfectly, if we induce an episode, if we get the dosage exactly right, is that going to be a lasting cure or just some antidote to suppress that specific flare-up?"

In other words, it worked in the lab and didn't when Bruce went out of the copter. It is possible that it might not work again and all of the research was confiscated by Thunderbolt. Possibly even destroyed.

 

Wasn't that the wonder drug mentioned in Winter Soldier that helped Fury fake his death?

 

Was it? I don't think they ever actually stated that. In any case, if anyone confiscated the Mr. Blue research, it would be SHEILD. They'd want in case they ever needed to bring a Hulkedout Bruce Banner, since simply killing him won't work.

 

"Tetrodotoxine B reduces the pulse to one heartbeat a minute. Banner made it for his stress-related issues. It didn't go well for him, but we found uses for it." - Nick Fury.

Can't see where they gave it a name in TIH, though.

 

I know I'm over-analyzing. I'm not the only one who feels that way about that particular film. But I also like most of the Avengers movies a lot, and so we'll just agree to disagree on some points. It's all good. At any rate, I did have some concerns about how they would handle Ultron at first, but I was really liked the contrast between him and the Vision in the movie.

 

I'll take your word for it with Penn. Um...if we are going to have Thanos, the Other, and all these aliens in that movie, who and what they are needs to be clearly spelled out earlier than the teaser. Otherwise, it's not clear why Loki is afraid of them, why he's working with and for them, and so on. You know, it's like when Plinkett says we need to know exactly who our enemies are? There can be some mystery and so on, but it needed to be explained in the film proper, not in the teaser. Even in the teaser, Thanos is not named. Thanos, as I learned after that movie, is one of the most insane, lethal, sadistic, and wicked of all Marvel's antagonists. I had no idea who he was when I first watched that movie, and as a result, I had no idea why Loki was fearful of him. Not everyone reads comics before they see a movie. Many do it afterward. I understood Loki's motivation (i.e. his desire to be a king over a world just like his father and his biological father were over their respective worlds). Tom Hiddleston is a fantastic actor, but my friend felt that Chris Hemsworth did the best job in the first Avengers film, and I'm inclined to agree. And, yes, it does matter how the staff and the cube were affecting his mind. When he manages to break its hold over him in Dark World, we need to know that. There were masses of people who had no idea why he was a tragic, nuanced character in Thor 1, why he was just so over-the-top desperate, evil, crazy in Avengers, and then all of a sudden he becomes nuanced again in Thor 2. So, yes, it does matter. Lol. The biggest mistake is not explaining why all the aliens die simultaneously. After the movie, I learned that they had cybernetic implants. Masses of people and I had no idea that that was the case until after the movie.

I can understand why some people don't like The Dark Knight for explaining things and going into detail in different areas, but there still was plenty of room for imagination and different interpretations. There are some people who don't like that film for omitting the fact that Harvey Dent's abusive father was a cop, which partly explains his hatred for corrupt cops and how his dark side originated. But I think that movie can work without that omission. I don't think the first Avengers works as well without its respective omissions.

 

Well, the Thanos stuff doesn't really need to be spelled out yet. The Emperor has, what, 2 minutes of screen time before RotJ? And he's still a presence and menacing until the moment he shows up. He doesn't need to be shown slaughtering children to know that he's an evil son of a sith. You just know that he is, because absolutely everyone is terrified of him.

 

But the Emperor doesn't need introduction in ESB, because we already got that in ANH. Theres all this talk of an "Empire" in ANH, so when the guy shows up in ESB and Vader calls him "master", we automatically know "Oh, so this is the guy running the joint". In the first Avengers, when Thanos is shown, I didn't really know or care who he was. He was just some big bad that didn't really seem important to the main plot of the movie and whose inclusion seemed pointless to me. My biggest compaint about the first Avengers, besides the lack of serious character development, was how there was almost little to no exposition in it. It was balls to the wall from the first minute and didn't give the audience time to ease into it. They just start off with LokI invading and causing the destruction of the S.H.I.E.L.D. base. it doesn't really explain a whole lot throughout the movie. It just expects the general audience to enjoy the explosions and the comic book fans to get the references.