tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7407508148371201866.post3843140717130661922..comments2022-09-24T01:51:52.166-07:00Comments on Sara Reads: Review - Avengers: Age of UltronSarahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12444567447308836625noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7407508148371201866.post-88262847332742690702015-05-14T17:58:05.058-07:002015-05-14T17:58:05.058-07:00Thanks very much. I'm glad you enjoyed the rea...Thanks very much. I'm glad you enjoyed the read!Sarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12444567447308836625noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7407508148371201866.post-70211769429345518432015-05-10T12:49:49.955-07:002015-05-10T12:49:49.955-07:00Just discovered your blog and loved your very bala...Just discovered your blog and loved your very balanced and well written review.<br /><br />I too found this movie a little disappointing. I guess Joss just had too much going against him (from a creator's perspective) to deliver a movie of his own taste and vision (pun intended).<br /><br />B2B.Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16498276962097853996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7407508148371201866.post-22151560228438185962015-05-08T10:01:30.722-07:002015-05-08T10:01:30.722-07:00O-kay.
But why, though? Why did you want to point...O-kay.<br /><br />But why, though? Why did you want to point this out to me? Why is it important to you to shove my nose in the fact that I don't watch AoS anymore and therefore wasn't up on the latest three-minute canonical fix that the show provided as if that somehow invalidates my entire argument?<br /><br />You're getting into a degree of fake geek girl "gotcha" arguing that I don't particularly want to get embroiled in, but what the hell, I'm feeling salty so...<br /><br />Is it really ignoring canon to argue that it is implausible that Nick Fury would have been able to muster the resources to build a helicarrier—a piece of equipment that probably costs billions of dollars and would have required funding requisitions and manpower allocation that neither Fury (nor Phil Coulson, by the way) would have had access to in the aftermath of S.H.I.E.L.D.'s official dissolution? Or is it merely discussing the way such a plot point suggests a general refusal to work with the parameters established by other creators in the series? Because the point of my argument was not whether or not the MCU happened to address Nick Fury having a helicarrier at some point (during the pre-credits opening of a television show episode that aired after the film in question was released); the point of my argument was whether or not having that Deus ex Machina device was indicative of larger pattern of behavior on the Whedon creative team's part.<br /><br />Ignoring the real-world ramifications of S.H.I.E.L.D.'s dismantling (which both AoS and AoU do) suggests an unwillingness to accept those developments. The canonicity of those developments and their subsequent retcons have nothing to do with my original argument. I'm not arguing about canon. I understand that canon is flexible. I understand that the minute Whedon wrote his poor characterizations into the MCU they became canon, regardless of how I—or anyone else—felt about them. I understand that Nick Fury having a helicarrier is canon, despite the fact that it is (AoS and Phil Couson notwithstanding) hugely improbable. But what do those poor characterizations and improbable plot points say about Whedon's attitude toward other developments in the MCU? And how did that attitude negatively impact the finished product of his film?<br /><br />And why do you want to take my examination of those questions and turn them into a failure to understand canon that you can write off as an incorrect...<br /><br />Oh wait.<br /><br />I just answered my own question.Sarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12444567447308836625noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7407508148371201866.post-63737095491347738762015-05-07T17:13:33.100-07:002015-05-07T17:13:33.100-07:00Your opinions on AoS show are, of course, valid. I...Your opinions on AoS show are, of course, valid. I wasn't arguing the merits of the show. I was simply responding to this statement:<br /><br />"therefore it was well-nigh impossible for Nick Fury to ride in on a massive helicarrier"<br /><br />--which is canonically false. That's it. You are more than welcome to hate the show and dismiss it. That fact is the show bridged the plot gap between Cap2 & Ultron, which made Fury's helicarrier 100% possible and probable. I'm not here to convince you to like AoS or Whedon. I just wanted to point it out to you because in an essay on how Whedon ignores MCU canon, you yourself ignore MCU canon.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7407508148371201866.post-44721522020836461502015-05-06T23:19:37.995-07:002015-05-06T23:19:37.995-07:00One further point that just occurred to me. And th...One further point that just occurred to me. And this is not meant to be snarky towards you, Nonny, this is just me trying to work my way around to figuring something out at two in the morning.<br /><br />Joss Whedon recently gave an interview in which he said that as far as he was concerned Coulson was dead in Avengers2 and that AoS was its own private corner of the universe. Dead for all intents and purposes in Ultron, but alive in terms of canon. (I guess Coulson is now the Schrodinger's cat of the MCU.) So by Joss Whedon's interpretation of Coulson's status, the Deus ex Machina that AoS went out of their way to provide for the film should be discounted. Obviously, Whedon is completely wrong about Coulson's status, but.<br /><br />It is kind of totally a mess.<br /><br />Anyway, I didn't say before in my previous response, but thank you for your feedback. It is appreciated.Sarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12444567447308836625noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7407508148371201866.post-5050696913417175552015-05-06T23:08:08.649-07:002015-05-06T23:08:08.649-07:00In all honesty, I stopped watching Agents of S.H.I...In all honesty, I stopped watching Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. at the mid-season break because I got tired of its sloppy writing and horrible treatment of minority characters (I have been reading the recaps at Comics Alliance to keep up on any major developments, though), so you'll have to take this opinion with the requisite grain of salt, but...<br /><br />...from what I can tell, Coulson's development of the helicarrier for Fury was not an ongoing plot arc of the season aside from an earlier mention of "Theta Protocol" (a buzz phrase that could have been turned into anything the writers needed it to be at a moment's notice... which is smart planning for a series in a shared universe). The fact that Coulson turned out to have been building a helicarrier on the sly is... in fairness, no less plausible than the concept of helicarriers to begin with... but it's still hard for me to buy a helicarrier that just happened to be equipped with everything the Avengers needed to evacuate a floating city that no one knew was going to be an objective. I'm willing to suspend my disbelief pretty far, but Fury's appearance at the end of Ultron struck me as an example of a writer writing himself into a corner and needing a miracle to get out again.<br /><br />Additionally (and this is obviously just my take), but even accepting AoS as canon, which I do, the entire premise of rebuilding S.H.I.E.L.D. has always felt like Whedon and Co. (I realize that the AoS creative team is no longer Whedon himself, but rather his brother and sister-in-law) digging their collective heels in and refusing to accept where the Cap2 creative team took the franchise. Whedon et al had an idea for a show that was about S.H.I.E.L.D., and they were given the greenlight to do that (even though they were warned from the outset that S.H.I.E.L.D. was going to be dismantled). Rather than work within the parameters established by Cap2 to come up with something truly innovative—and really bridge the gap between Cap2 and Ultron—the creative team of AoS immediately went to work rebuilding the parameters of the pre-Cap2 world to the best of their ability. <br /><br />I don't know, Nonny. I look at AoS, and I just think: for someone who claims to be a stickler for stakes that stick, Whedon has a really strange way of showing it. But if it works for you, that's totally cool. We certainly don't have to agree on every point.Sarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12444567447308836625noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7407508148371201866.post-20309281569558054242015-05-06T19:17:21.244-07:002015-05-06T19:17:21.244-07:00*Cap 2 (not 1)*Cap 2 (not 1)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7407508148371201866.post-21152690577374266622015-05-06T19:16:46.649-07:002015-05-06T19:16:46.649-07:00I agree with a lot of what you say here, and you b...I agree with a lot of what you say here, and you bring up interesting points. One thing to note, though, is that the SHIELD helicarrier & Nick Fury saving the day crosses over with the tv show Agents of SHIELD. The episode prior to the movie premiere set this up and it has been a plot arc of the season. This past season was a bridge between Cap 1 and Age of Ultron. It is an extension of that and did not come out of nowhere. Whether people like it or not, the tv show is part of the MCU now. It makes 100% sense within that context. The episode after the movie release dealt with the fallout of that helicarrier. For reference, I'm referring to this statement:<br /><br />"And it made a mockery of the principle plotline of Captain America: The Winter Soldier—that S.H.I.E.L.D. had been largely dismantled and that therefore it was well-nigh impossible for Nick Fury to ride in on a massive helicarrier (that just happened to be loaded up with everything the heroes needed to evacuate a flying city that no one knew was going to be a flying city) and save the day."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com