Avengers: Age of Ultron

Given the number of characters and the nature of the plot, there's two hours of action, ten minutes of plot, and ten minutes of credits... plus the final scenes. There wasn't room for a film, although Widow and Hulk aren’t a bad pairing, and with Hawkeye staying at home, it was very promising. The only positives for me are Wanda, Vision, and Peggy's cameo. (07/16/2015)

The same thing over and over again. Unfortunately, there is a lack of coherence and it lacks the dynamism of the first film. Among all the comic-book clichés, the only things that remain are the well-developed characters and the sharp emphasis on the supporting, not so powerful, yet very interesting figures (Hawkeye, Black Widow). The could have spared the nonsense with the Hulk, as well as the cheap action just for the sake of it, but those smooth digital sequences are cool, right? (even though they look lilke Zack Snyder’s stuff.) Joss Whedon doesn’t deliver anything revolutionary, he just pockets a lot of money because he does what works the most: a little bit of everything, so no one gets offended and everyone gets their fill. I wonder how many dozens of comics with the same plot narrative and framework Hollywood will have to make before audiences realise that it's all the same? Then a creator like Nolan will have to come in and rewrite history again. (04/30/2015)

Successful continuation develops on some loose ends and also manages to warn against AI. Unfortunately it suffers from being a sequel and the movie would benefit from half an hour of character background building, because there simply isn’t enough time for that, what with all the action. Even Ultron’s motivation to attempt to annihilate the Avengers seems to me unconvincingly explained, but he certainly doesn’t lack charisma. Spader enjoys himself. Sidetracking to the infinity stones take your attention the wrong way, even though Whedon tried to squeeze Age of Ultron into the story legitimately, this way it just acts as a bridgehead for the two-part Infinity War which won’t come along for another three years. The powerhouse of the movie it Jerry Renner’s quite (pleasantly) surprising Hawkeye in together with the anti-heroes Stark and Banner who spoil everything they touch. The digital orgies are occasionally a little exhausting, because the action tries to focus on all characters at once. The chemistry in the chit-chat scenes works splendidly, however. I’m quite curious how the changed team lineup affects the next Marvel movies. I’m pleased that they decided to go ahead with something like this. The vision deserves more space. (05/01/2015)

The sequel to the first film, stripped of the element of surprise and enriched with a more capable villain. The action is less bloated, fits into the plot better, and expands the universe with new characters. Anyway, the predictability is even more tiring than the rest of the Marvel movies. Unless there's a major shift in Civil War, there's no point in looking at it any other way than in standby mode. (08/21/2015)

"Marvel is playing games with the audience "Find ten differences". Leaving aside the obligatory "bigger, longer, more expensive, more computer effects", it is indistinguishable from the first movie. What you would miss terribly is a charismatic villain (again), it is noticeably lacking the human element (again), what is completely absent is any fear of the characters (again), everyone is just playing with each other in a harmless way (again) and the final hour turns into one big not escalating, confusing and an interchangeable CGI action mess (again), in which just a bunch of bad guys from space replace countless robots. It is almost impossible to tell the first and the second movie apart, because each of them has the same pros and cons, so you know exactly in advance what and in what form you will get. Which, of course, applies to some extent to all (cinema) Marvel movies. The question is whether to take this established "corporate unified approach" as a good thing or bad. (04/30/2015)