IMDb > The Avengers (2012) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
The Avengers
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
The Avengers More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 9 of 168: [Prev][4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [Next]
Index 1674 reviews in total 

24 out of 45 people found the following review useful:

Spectacular & Historic

Author: J S from NY
13 May 2012

This film is not only spectacular but its an "historic" superhero feature film at its best. This is worth the wait. Hell, this was worth the wait 7 years ago when it was first developed. Do we really think this will be in development hell? This is The Avengers "EARTH'S MIGHTIEST HEROES!" This is something what has NEVER been done before & Marvel has got there finger on the pulse. In 1998, a minor marvel character featuring a human/vampire hybrid made it way to the big screen. In 2000, a group of mutants evolved into the box office. In 2002, was the year of the Spider.

After Daredevil, Hulk (Ang Lee), The Punisher, Elektra, Man-Thing, Fantastic Four & Ghost Rider, Marvel Studios would start producing its own films and distribute them through Paramount Pictures & the funding will come from a seven-year, $525 million revolving credit facility with Merrill Lynch. The result led to the creation of the "Marvel Cinematic Universe". Sounds cool, right? It was. No, really, It F***in' was. Iron Man made its motion picture debut, The Hulk got rebooted, Thor & Captain America have "FINALLY" got the Big screen treatment. Then came a huge shift in the Marvel universe.... Marvel Entertainment is now owned by Mickey Mouse.

Amazing. Disney let go the Power Rangers franchise & bought Marvel.

But after everything from comics to TV & film Marvel has put out it comes to show just how far they come as a company & knowing the fact that the biggest supporters (including me) are the fans. That is why they CAN NOT Disappoint us. Yeah, we complain about story lines, costumes & special effects, But if they stay true to the comics, the films would have done its justice. But i know deep down, Marvel Studios will always put out films & stay close to the material. So, what i've said earlier, was it worth the wait? Yes. Yes it was "definitely" worth it.

Marvel Studios, the cast & crew of The Avengers did an amazing job & on the Marvel Cinematic Universe & i can't wait to see what comes next.

Now if DC & Warner Bros. step their game up, we would like to see the Justice League into the big screen.

Was the above review useful to you?

28 out of 53 people found the following review useful:

Simply Perfect

Author: darkraven_109 from Manila, Philippines
28 April 2012

I can not say anything more about THE AVENGERS; the movie just hit all the right spots and a lot more. It didn't only entertain like how a brainless popcorn movie would; it told a great superhero team story.

The characters were written perfectly, the action was spectacular and best of all ever character was a joy to watch. The story had the perfect balance of comedy, action and drama (yes, there's a bit of that too and it's good). It's everything a comic book fan would want out of a comic book adaptation movie.

Every member of the Avengers line-up (whether super powered or not) got the right amount of screen time; if you were like me and thought that Iron Man would get accidentally hog the screen because the trailers made the movie look like "IRON MAN AND FRIENDS," your fears will be washed away. Mark Ruffalo also stole the show as Banner/ The Hulk; if you had a few doubts about him playing the character after Edward Norton was left behind, fear not since he does the job well. I can go as far as saying that Ruffalo is the best incarnation of Banner so far.

Josh Whedon pulled off the impossible; he wrote and directed a perfect comic book adaptation. He created what I consider the best superhero movie so far. He made THE AVENGERS.

To say anything more would be a waste of time. Just go and watch it.

Was the above review useful to you?

30 out of 57 people found the following review useful:

Hihihi - Hahaha

Author: dezsokekovacs from Romania
18 May 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***


1. Giant robotic prehistoric whales swimming in the air? 2. The nuke is the best weapon in the Universe?

3. Every villain dies like in Independence Day (probably because they minds were connected)? 4. The cube has the power to destroy the Universe (strongest then the Big Bang)?

5. Hulk beat the s**t out of Loki? 6. The flying carrier has no radar so they attacked it with no warning?

7. No US army?

Seven ? are enough for first (and definitely the last) view.

Was the above review useful to you?

39 out of 75 people found the following review useful:

Not as great as everyone is making it out to be. A decent - good film

Author: Kadri Nicholson from Jamaica
11 May 2012

My message is to vote this film down. This isn't a 8.8 film. I tried so hard to like it and then I realized it was just another blockbuster.

Felt like the transformers with a similar end world feel but at least Mr Bay had the decency to bring to life a sense of need as the impending doom looms.

Everything was handled in a nonchalant fashion. Sure the Hulk did provide us with entertainment smash smash and that assistant who was playing games was also funny and it didn't feel contrived but for the .....

THIS is not as GOOD as:

City of God, Goodfellas, Memento, Se7en, The Usual Suspects, The Silence of the Lambs, American Beauty, Forrest Gump LOTR 1-3, Léon: The Professional etc


Was the above review useful to you?

49 out of 95 people found the following review useful:

Kinda boring, no, yaaaawwwwn, very boring! Zzzzzzzzzzzz

Author: morefshpls from United Kingdom
16 May 2012

How I would love to have championed Joss Whedon for this. But alas, no.

The Avengers is not a great movie. Avengers is a boring movie.

OK, I saw it in 3D. The only other film I've seen in 3D was Avatar and - this may also indicate to you I'm not a movie snoot - I rather thought Avatar was OK, unlike many who say it's awful. You would be right therefore, to infer that the novelty of 3D hasn't exactly had a chance to wear thin on me yet.

Let's just get the 3D out of the way: for me, it was like watching a holographic projection, very unreal. Often there were only 2, maybe just 3 planes of focus and sometimes this made the focus too oddly focused!, e.g. a wobbling briefcase in the foreground that looked like something out of Toy Story. Also, some of the action with Johanssen is frantic CGI cartoony acrobatics, and in 3D this just looks even more of a mess, anything but exciting! I was cautioned not to see in 3D - that person was right. The print isn't compensated for by the darkening effect of the glasses. I think it affected me too. Eye-fatigue, plus the combination of how those glasses make the film so dark, plus a major major flaw in the film, caused me to give up on consciousness and spare my eyeballs more than once.

Yes, in 3D at least, this film is too dark to see what's going on. Detail becomes elusive and the 3D focus only allows you to see one or two parts of the screen - everything else is often deliberately way out-of-focus. This makes the film visually uninteresting (especially for us 'autistic' background viewers ;-).

And the major major flaw.. Oh, I might have already let that slip: this movie is boring! Surely I can't be so bored that easily by a film I've never seen before! It's impossible! Avengers: yes, there's some showy effects that may impress those that can get off on over 2 hours of blam blam blam but me: yaaaawwn! Honestly, I was expecting to enjoy The Avengers, especially since I kinda liked the Thor movie (nothing to do with Portman, who does very little for me). And also, my total non-appreciation for The Avengers goes against what I'd hoped... that I could say something great about this film, and be able to champion Joss Whedon for a new era of Sci-Fi movies. Serenity was good, very good - albeit with forgivably TV-movie quality. Unfortunately, it seems, budget wasn't the limiting factor and I've now lost interest.

Duncan Jones, do you hear?

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Despite a Cast of A-List Stars, "The Avengers" is Just Another Superhero Movie

Author: Devon Westinghouse Ronveiot from United States
23 July 2014

I will start out by saying that overall, I did enjoy this film. I feel like the rating system here on IMDb is used so incorrectly by the majority of folks who use it. For example, if someone loved this movie, they give it a 10. If they didn't like it, they give it a 1, where the truth actually lies somewhere in the middle. Everything is NOT black and white in movies, and I feel like this movie is an unfortunate byproduct of that misconception. With a star studded cast and some pretty incredible visuals, "The Avengers" does many things well that a superhero movie should. What this movie doesn't do well is deliver a unique "gosh that's the best superhero movie i've ever seen!" experience, despite what the inflated rating would tell you.

The plot of "The Avengers" features a pretty basic premise; The US government, naive to their own research on a mysterious object called the Tesseract, accidentally opens a rift to another world allowing the Norse god Loki to enter Earth and essentially wreak havoc. This of course leads to the formation of "The Avengers", which is a collection of Marvel superheroes that many of you will recognize, either from the comic books or previous Marvel films. Together, under "The Avengers initiative", these superheroes go to battle with Loki over the sacred Tesseract which, when wielded by Loki, can open a rift to another dimension and potentially end the world as we know it. Sound familiar? It should, as this general pretense has been used many times over in the past. While the plot doesn't feature any large holes, it also doesn't bring anything new or exciting to the table, either. You can expect many "mini" battles between Loki and the heroes along the way, ultimately leading to the "final showdown" of the film. This is superhero movie 101, and while it works for all intensive purposes, "The Avengers" hardly innovates the genre in any way. Based on it's high rating, I had expected a somewhat unique experience for a superhero movie, but I was unfortunately let down in this regard. The movie does pace itself quite well, however, which kept me interested throughout. If there is one thing "The Avengers" does very well, it's keeping the viewer interested without any serious lulls in the action.

Next up is the acting/casting. This movie is literally jam packed with famous actors/actresses, from Robert Downey Jr. as the always recognizable Iron Man(my personal favorite from not just these films but all in the Marvel collection), Chris Evans as Captain America, Mark Ruffalo as The Hulk, and Chris Hemsworth returning as Thor(my second favorite of these characters). There are many others, from Scarlett Johansson, to Samuel L. Jackson, to Jeremy Renner, etc etc. You get the idea. There are lots of famous people in this movie. The acting from these heavyweights of the industry is generally very good, despite a pretty generic script. You can expect a lot of cheesy one-liners, petty arguments, and general "i'm a better superhero than you" moments throughout the script. With a lack of clever writing and, in my honest opinion, a truly despicable villain(Loki just doesn't do it for me, sorry. He looks like a 15 year old boy with a deer helmet), "The Avengers" has a hard time distinguishing itself from the pack, despite all the talented actors involved with this film. One could really make the argument that the talented actors casted for this film ARE what makes the movie above average, because they really have to make the most out of what they are given in the script.

Overall, "The Avengers" offers an exciting, albeit predictable, superhero experience. The actors bring their A-game for this film and the electricity between them definitely makes this movie better. I do have to say I felt a bit of nostalgia watching some of my favorite heroes from childhood band together on the big screen to battle evil. Despite it's fairly long runtime, "The Avengers" kept me interested from start to finish even if I cringed at some of the writing from time to time. Overall though, I think it was the villain, Loki, who brought the viewing experience down for me. He just isn't believable as a true villain, and the "twist" at the end will leave you feeling pretty underwhelmed. Despite these fall backs, though, this is still an enjoyable film to watch. If you expect something more than a 2 hour superhero romp coming into this, you may find yourself a bit disappointed like I was. If you come into this thinking that you will see some cool superhero action and some great actors, you will be much better off. "The Avengers" is a cool superhero movie, but in my opinion, nothing more. This film isn't American Beauty or even the Dark Knight(best superhero movie ever IMO), so as long as you temper your expectations, you will more than likely enjoy "The Avengers".

For an exciting, if somewhat underwhelming, superhero experience, I give "The Avengers" a solid 6/10.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

One big, long fight scene. Boring.

Author: rachel-pollack from United States
23 May 2015

This is not a great movie. It's not even a very good one. I liked the first Avengers movie; this one greatly disappointed me.

The plot and subplot--barely there.

All the snappy dialog in the whole movie MAYBE equaled two minutes.

Character relationships--we're supposed to believe them?? The audience wasn't born yesterday...

This movie focuses on the fight scenes. Technically, they impressed me (I counted 11 visual-effects companies in the credits!). I didn't time the fight scenes, but I would guess that they take up at least 90 minutes of the movie.

So if you like fight scenes, this movie is for you. For the rest of us, meh.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

crying and dying

Author: Luka Eterovic from Croatia
14 May 2015

I don't know where to begin with this one. I had high hopes, maybe too high.

Few hundreds of thousands people rated this movie with more than 8, which is like B+ mark in IMDb terms (yes, I'm obsessed with ratings). But does it justifies it's praise?

Digital age changed movies, both drastically and rapidly. But movie is not just the looks. And yes, Avengers do look great and effects are cool (although I was not impressed as I was with Avatar). But, guess what? Avengers are nothing but looks. Strip CGI from this one and you are left with bland and boring story, too many characters that were unable to develop and humour so bad that is insulting. Even worse, ending is shockingly predictable.

Now to my final point.

Avengers were made for specific public, comic nerds and teens obviously. Avengers are popcorn flick filled with effects, effects and effects. Avengers were made to make millions of dollars. And Avengers is not a good movie. Good fun, maybe, but not a good movie.

And Avengers 2 was released in 2014 and it's called Guardians of the Galaxy.

I have internal information about how they have come up with the story: Tony Stark, the Canman, stole translate machine from aliens. Someone who writes scripts farted and translated it to English. Good thing is, translator works.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Avengers a 'no no'

Author: rjennica from United States
12 May 2015

Folks...In case you're interested in the new "Avengers" movie, don't waste your time or money. Unlike the first installment, this has nothing but special effects with a disjointed storyline. There are explosions in which most caught in the blast radius would get killed, but leaves nothing but scratches and little or no blood. It's almost stupid, with lines that are supposed to be funny, but are just 'fill-ins' for lack of meaningful dialog. However, the kids in the audience laughed a lot, which made me realize how out of place I was and need to grow up. There will be no next time if there is yet another sequel. Yuck. How disappointing.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Your Average Superhero Action Movie. Nothing Special At All.

Author: ultraraaj400 from Canada
4 June 2014

The Avengers is your average Superhero Action Movie. The movie only succeeds at doing one thing............mindless action. The Storyline was typical, just a bunch of Superhero's "saving the world". The special effects were typical of 2012. After about 20 minutes of watching it you'll get bored. If you love mindless action with your favourite Superhero then you should watch this movie. However if your want a movie which is interesting with an unique storyline, then absolutely do not watch this movie. An overall boring, average Superhero movie. Don't people ever get bored of this typical mess? I know I do.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 9 of 168: [Prev][4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history