Well, yeah, I mean that scene where the cop sat on the roof calling out incoming targets and taking some of them out with explosive bullets was pretty awesome. And what about where that cop used that explosive bullet to knock Loki off his chariot so that Hulk could smash him? That part was soooo cool. So, yeah....you're right. Just as useful as the cops.
heh. i can't believe you've devolved into this much of... i don't even know the best way to say it.... an internet.
fine, i'll acquiesce. your opinion is correcter than others. if you want to think that the bow and arrows guy was a majestic swooping angel of erection, even in the same movie that already treated the character one step above "guy in red shirt" or "the professor from good will hunting", that's fine.
Whoa, whoa, whoa man. I think you're misreading my intent. I'm not debating or arguing with you. I thought we were just joking back and forth like normal. I sincerely am sorry if you thought I was seriously trying to "take you to task" for your opinion. You just said he was no more useful than the cops. I pointed out that's not true, he just wasn't AS useful as, say, Thor. That's all. You don't have to like him. I even thought he was too underplayed, to be honest. Clint should have been firing out three arrows at a time or some crazy Legolas-shit like that.
No offense, Rob. Seriously.
Your inability to properly gauge real acting is astounding. You should fight crime. And become a movie critic.
i know, i know. the stinging shame of embarrassment will be all over me when loki steps forth at the oscars - even years after the film, he will continue to win the award from the performance of a life time as "serviceable bad guy in action film". (also, "serviceable" in this reference defers to you servicing him. because you are really gay and you love blowing dudes. especially actors in nearly generic roles.)
Again, I thought it was obvious I was joking with you. It's obvious I want to fuck Tom Hiddleston. I think I even said as much. I'm sorry dude. Just playing with you.
I'll take pure-hearted-from-the-40's Steve Rogers (a personality profile you don't seem to think existed before the 50's, oddly enough). Evans played him exactly as he was presented in his solo film. And that's probably why he was presented that way in the AVENGERS. When you have super-clever narcissistic Tony, bullheaded Thor, eccentric Bruce, and badass Hawkeye, you need a moral center. That's just good storytelling. I know that's not easy to digest on modern canvas, as everyone seems to think all characters must be flawed and fucked-up as the audience members. But, contrary to modern opinion, genuinely good people still exist. I don't see any problem having them represented on the screen. It ain't like we have an overabundance of "Aww shucks!" characters.
that's the misinterpretation i hate from era pieces. like films that take place during rome's reign, when they show blank white, half-broken columns. or a sanitized 50s, where everyone is a neighbor in a giant sub-burb. grandpa metheus might be calmer and peaceful now and remember days backwhen that were noble, but in the actual time, he was smoking cigars, swearing, and punching polak's 70 years ago - just as much as grandma metheus was blowing folks. the ticker tape "we won" parade after WWII, where the sailor is kissing the chick in the famous pose, was
looooousy with strippers and orgy fucking. it was like a direct path to clubs on 42nd street. it was not a "good job, son *handshake*" presentation, as its always portrayed.
You make very good points here. And I concede, you're right. There's probably a bit of romanticizing the era, as usual. But, as G-Man points out (can't believe I agree with him), it's Steve Roger's personality that makes him "Aww shucks", thus separating him from the other normal meatheads of the day. Honestly, did you see the Captain America movie? I feel like maybe you didn't and are just basing him off his appearance in Avengers. The advantage of all these characters having solo movies means Avengers didn't have to waste time justifying anyone's character except Banner. So, in this case, you're right. Steve Rogers wasn't written like a typical 40's guy. He was written like Steve Rogers, from the Captain America movie.
I do take issue with G's idiot-love for that insipid line about "France" and the "A". Not only did it sound incredibly forced and dumb on the page (it literally turned me off of that character ever since), but it just smacks of an ignorant, dinosaur culture that still thinks it's "kewl" to be all "MERICA #1 !!! WHOOO!!! FUCK THE REST OF THE WORLD!! WHITE MERICANS AND PROUD!! BEER!!!!!"
that said, i wasn't looking for him to have deep flaws and night terror flashbacks or whatever - but i would have enjoyed a more general-like, no-nonsense, fuck you tone to the character. his brief "get the suit" clash in the film with tony stark might have been the closest to that.
I think we'll get more of that with other movies. But, I don't think either you or Gake will be satisfied with Steve being the moral standard he has always been presented.
Again, I apologize if I pissed you off. Or, if you're an alt of someone I must have pissed off. Or you're still reeling from how horrible Green Lantern actually was (cause it sucked). Seriously? You're one of the guys I like here. I hope you aren't ever seriously pissed at me or annoyed by my playing with you. If you are, I'll stop engaging you, man. As far as I'm concerned, it's all good with us.
