Reviews & Ratings for
The Avengers More at IMDbPro »

Page 11 of 146:

[6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21]

6 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Action only film about comic book superheroes uniting

Author: Bill-stricker from United States
24 February 2013

All I can say is I am stunned that this terrible movie has been given a rating above 2 or 3 by anyone. And to read this film grossed over $600MM makes me lack faith in the movie public. The Avengers has virtually no character development or plot. It basically is non stop chase scenes and things exploding, with an extreme amount of loud noise. I don't think there were more than several quiet, dialog times the entire movie. I kept thinking that the movie would settle down and get to a meaningful story, but it did not happen. I even was watching it in 3D but that did not help. If one wants to go see continual actions stunts and things exploding, then this is the movie for you. I am dismayed that so many people considered seeing this movie, based on the revenues, but then again, I was one of the victims too!

8 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

Sound and fury, signifying nothing...

Author: poe426 from USA
1 October 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Without a doubt, THE AVENGERS is the most expensive video game ever produced; why the techs would want to try to integrate live-action elements, however, is beyond me: the cartoon was okay without them. Robert Downey has the best lines (half a dozen one-liners, to be precise), though Thor's contention that Loki "was adopted" was just as funny. Sam Jackson looks just plain bored throughout- which is saying a lot when one considers the fact that he's the most overrated actor in Hollywood. You know a movie's heavily padded when fully one-third of it could be cut and never missed: the first third of this game is mind-numbingly clichéd and plays out like yet another pseudo-military video game (what used to be called "first-person shooter" games but are nowadays referred to as "first-person action" games) or television show the likes of which we've seen a thousand times. The skrull at the end was a nice little touch, but I wonder why comics- and now their celluloid incarnations- tend to focus on alien invasions for their "big get-togethers" when there are more than enough wannabe tyrants here on Earth...? I think John Carpenter (THEY LIVE) and George Romero (LAND OF THE DEAD) had it right: we have seen The Enemy, and He is Us. Give me RODNEY CECIL, PSYCHO HERO any day.

10 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

Terrible, awful and just plain boring

Author: onewayforanother from Denmark
28 August 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is my first review ever on IMDb, and why do I choose a movie that I don't like? I find it absolutely disgusting that this movie has a 8.6 rating. I can' believe how people actually like this stuff, maybe they slept all the way through it, I can't say. This movie brings absolutely nothing new or interesting to the big screen. It's totally predictable and not funny, it contains so many lame jokes that it makes you feel a bit nauseated at some points. The action is stupid and seen before in older and better movies. The plot is... Wait a second, what plot? The only positive thing in this movie is Robert Downey Jr, but he alone cannot make up for all the flaws that exist in this movie. Certain points in the movie feel very long, and I assume this is because of the actors lack of talent, they are dull and have no feelings. And I laughed every time captain America was show on the screen, his mask looks absolutely hilarious. And I laughed even harder when some of the evil space dudes pulled of his mask, because I'd bet that even the film crew found him looking ridiculous in that outfit.

I guess The Avengers is a good movie if you find trouble sleeping one night, just put it on, and you'll be sleeping in no time

13 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

Overrated!

Author: elysian-lycoris from Toronto
5 October 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie is totally overrated! The movie was just so hyped due to the fact that it contained "everyones favourite super hero".

There was no plot, no character development, and not particularly special effects that made it memorable.

The overall story seemed kind of lame and ridiculous. Why was the main antagonist Loki? And how did it made sense that it took so many super heroes to defeat someone who was "technically" one of their own? The comedic portions contained a few smiles but it wasn't laughing material.

In short, the movie hadn't met my expectations.

15 out of 28 people found the following review useful:

143 Minutes of Mindless Fighting

Author: jdb922 from United States (Texas)
10 June 2012

I walked out of the theater feeling the same way I did back in 2007 after seeing Spider-Man 3. The film was very bloated. It was a simple plot, but at the same time I felt overwhelmed with all these characters, action and effects. It was a lot to keep up with.

I think the plot was the main problem. As stated in the title, it just seemed like a bunch of monotonous fighting. Basically the whole movie was: they fought each other, then they fought a bunch of bad guys. Hulk would throw a bad guy through a wall, Thor would hit someone with his hammer, Captain America would pop in and throw his shield at somebody etc... and it just went on and on and on. It was boring as hell. This is how I feel about Transformers. It's just 3 hours of big CGI robots fighting. Action scenes are suppose to leave you leaning on the edge of your seat.

The Avengers are all practically invincible, so what's the point? When you have two seemingly unstoppable characters fighting, there's nothing much at stake, so it gets boring. You could say the same about Superman II, and Freddy Vs. Jason, but those were exciting as hell to watch. I'm thinking it's cause they had better stories and weren't crammed full of crap. We seem to live in a quantity over quality society, and I don't understand why. It's always just MORE MORE MORE with people... but less is more. You can get too much of anything, and there's something to be said for proper pacing.

Also, there's so many over the top special effects in this movie. Special effects and action are great, but they're tools to enhance your story, and this movie was severely lacking in that department. When you got a film that's crammed full of all these characters, action and effects, it's a lot to swallow. Their individual movies were much more focused and grounded in reality. It never fails though, when you get a group of characters or even actors together in one big movie, their individual films are usually always better. They're like good soups. By themselves they're good, but if you mix 'em together, they're bad.

As much as I love super heroes, the past 10+ years they've flooded the market, and it's starting to get tiresome.

I'm never very good at rating films, but I'll give this one a 5 out of 10, which is so-so. I can't bring myself to say that The Avengers is bad, but I can't say it's good either. I'm trying to think of some positive things. Scarlett Johansson is stunningly attractive. Robert Downey Jr. delivers a good performance along with some good one liners. There's some spontaneous and amusing bits. There's some decent dialog here and there along with some cool shots, effects and action scenes... not to sound contradictory. I believe this movie could actually be greatly improved with some major re-editing... but even so, there's only so much you can do with editing. In it's current condition, it's a bit of a mess.

For any super hero fan out there, it's worth watching, but don't expect anything on the same caliber as superior super hero team movies such as X-Men or Watchmen.

15 out of 28 people found the following review useful:

3D effects were great but plot was lacking

Author: brace01 from United States
8 June 2012

The 3D effects in the movie were second to none but the "story" consisted of mainly just conflict after conflict. There was nothing truly intelligent about the plot or any of the twists. It is worth watching to see the effects, especially Iron Man flying around. They did a great job of making you feel like you were in the action.

I'm disappointed with the IMDb rating and feel that the studios are now finding ways to game the ratings system by adding a bunch of paid propaganda. IMDb used to be my go to site but with how high this movie is rated I feel I need to find another site that is more accurate. IMDb used to be SPOT ON but obviously they are selling out for ad revenue!

16 out of 30 people found the following review useful:

Passable time and brain cell killer.

Author: brefane from United States
9 June 2012

Loud and overlong with minimal character and plot development and casual banter among the characters that feels more like a run through. Likewise, the conflict and plot don't really seem to matter, and there is no tension, suspense or pacing. Each scene is on same level as the one before; you could watch this film with the scenes arranged in virtually any order. This thing totally lacks momentum. The expensive cast does well enough, but the film's length and one-dimensional plot grows tiresome and the noisy soundtrack seems designed to prevent dozing. The Avengers is not particularly recommendable, nothing about it is memorable or original and it's not a film I feel any need to revisit. It's a passable time killer; nothing more.

18 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

Mostly entertaining popcorn-flick with amazing action; not much else

Author: #1 Movie Lover
2 August 2012

'The Avengers', first of all, is a good movie. While sometimes overlong, it's entertaining, and the action scenes are amazing. However, it doesn't have enough depth to be another one of those "classic superhero films". The reputation instead should be "enjoyable superhero flick". First off, if an effort is made to assemble all of MARVEL's Avengers, that effort must be made with a little more success than this.

'The Avengers' ends up feeling like more sequel than spin-off, instead of studying and developing each character. If we're supposed to care about all these superheroes...give them noticeable differences, more display of emotions, and a distinctive background. Just because they're superheroes who have some funny one-liners doesn't mean the viewers will automatically think they're the best people who ever lived. In other words, the characters have too little depth. Something that bugs me is that a few people have been saying this is better than Christopher Nolan's "Batman" trilogy, yet the latter is a perfect example of a series of films that have greatly influenced (and perhaps even transcended) the superhero genre.

In 'The Dark Knight' there wasn't a single character who was "just there for nothing". Meanwhile, Loki is an uninteresting villain and doesn't hold a candle to Heath Ledger's disturbing, brilliant portrayal of The Joker (who, on the other hand, actually seems like a villain even when he's just not doing anything). How come 'The Avengers' all have to work to defeat Loki and his army, while Hulk can simply toss him around like a plastic spoon? That said, the long action sequence where the assembled Avengers all defeat Loki's army is quite outstanding, and many detractors of this film admit that this is also the best part.

It contains amazing cinematography, like a minute-long shot that steadily observes each Avenger and sees how they're doing with the aliens. Of course, the rest of the action scenes are also top-notch, considering there's fighting for most of the movie. The sequence with Black Widow running away from The Hulk is especially memorable, and displays arguably the most likable Avenger here, along with Iron Man. The two that we care the most about.

Overall, I'd say that 'The Avengers' could have been cut about 20-30 minutes short to flow more as a superhero film. I had hoped for more character development, since there were so many characters to pay attention to. I loved the action, and was pleased with the clever action scenes, especially the last 40 minutes and the parts with Black Widow. It's undeniably entertaining, and while it's not transcendent and genius, it's a great popcorn-flick. Would I see it again? Yes, but not my #1 priority.

20 out of 38 people found the following review useful:

Tour de farce

Author: kristof wuyts from Belgium
13 September 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I heard people call The avengers a tour de force, a perfect box-office bonanza, the wickedest ride of their lives and best movie ever! I can only assume that every single one of them is a comic book freak and are all obsessed by every Marvel hero and villain. I can tell you I'm a movie buff but I'm not a comic book freak. In my opinion that shouldn't matter because dark knight for instance, is one of my favorite movies of all time. I know it's not from Marvel but DC comics but I also liked the first iron man movie (he turned into a narcissistic bastard after the first and I didn't like that character development) So I'm not gonna wright a movie of just because I'm not a huge Marvel fan.

But after 2 1/2 hours of sitting through the deluge of explosions, "witty" banter, and generic story-telling. I was happy the movie ended, all around me there were people applauding and telling each other what an awesome movie they just saw. My plan was just to go home and put on a real movie. With plot twists and character development, both things I missed in the avengers. You could say it's fast paced but if the story doesn't grab you by the balls, it's all irrelevant. The only thing the movie had going for itself was that it was hilarious, to bad it didn't mean to be.

I knew after five minutes that the movie wasn't going to live up to the hype. And it was only downhill from there to be honest. The last sequence was the worst in my book. The alien invasion was so stupid, we were all wondering what was going to come through the black hole. And what came to wipe out all of humanity? A few hundred Chitauri, wow... is that an invasion? Six avengers got their stuff together and mobbed the floor with them. That was a huge anti-climax!

I think this movie is very overrated and only worth a view if you're tired and want some brainless 'entertainment', other than that it really is only for the comic book geeks. And maybe teenagers who've been brainwashed with years of Asian (fighting) cartoons. Oh yeah, the movie I watched when I got home was snatch!

29 out of 56 people found the following review useful:

The decline of smart scripts begins here

Author: frank_mli from United States
13 July 2012

This movie is just for people who can't grow up, there is no smart moves, only pure special effects with no meaning behind, a joke. This explains why there are so many 40 yo men living like children out there. Like a man in a much better film said:

"God **** it, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables; slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy **** we don't need. We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War's a spiritual war… our Great Depression is our lives."

Think about it, do you really want to have fun with this nonsense entertainment, without thinking even for a second?.

Page 11 of 146:

[6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21]

Add another review

Related Links