Give me a Scotch, I'm Starving


Genius billionaire playboy philanthropist by day, scruffy-looking nerf herder by night.

Hannah. Han for short, as in Solo.

Comic shop assistant manager. Opinionated with a side of nerdy. Iron Man junkie, BioWare fangirl, film critic, literary fiend, lover of tattoos and boys with earrings. Sometimes an artist, occasionally a writer, and always a connoisseur of bad fic.

NOTE: If you want to tag me in something and get my attention, tag it with “Iron Han”, without the dash.


I don’t like that this SHIELD show is apparently post-avengers with Coulson. I wanted Coulson to be dead.

Now before you light the torches and find the pitchforks, I love Coulson. I really do. But the fact he didn’t actually die cheapens the last part of The Avengers for me. The cards were enough “fury initiative.” I don’t think I’ll be able to watch the movie again with as much enthusiasm now, if I watch the last half at all.

Coulson’s death being the push that ultimately formed the Avengers was weak as shit to begin with.  The fact that they’re now retracting his death altogether means that the supposedly heroic Avengers team was formed on a cheap trick.  Meaning SHIELD, the organization these individuals are trusting their lives to in the belief that they have the merit to create a better world - or at the very least, Fury, the director, which might be even worse, since that means he’s a person with power abusing his power - has no integrity whatsoever.

Good job, MCU.

posted 1 year agovia©reblog
Why does it seem that Marvel movies hates Ant Man atm? Is it because they think talking to bugs and growing in size is lame? Like the moment with Tony and Steve using Repulsor Blast and Shield in a combo, it would have been awesome if Hawkeye had said "I got him" and fired at Loki, only for Loki to catch it, and then realize Ant-Man was on the arrow, waiting to get close.
+ makeuswholeisaac-deactivated201

Bro I don’t know how many people (who apparently have never bothered to read the comics) I’ve had to correct when they go “Ant-Man and the Wasp are lame, I’m glad they weren’t in the movie!”  It’s like, um, excuse me, but first of all, Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne were founding members of the Avengers and the fact that they were completely erased from the movieverse universe is not just unfortunate, it’s a fucking travesty.

I guess they didn’t want to put in Hank and/or Janet because they already had so many characters on the team and they didn’t think they would have time to properly introduce/flesh out the characters without making the entire film about developing the characters/character relationships (which I wouldn’t have minded, personally, but maybe that’s just me).  But the problem with that explanation is that Captain America didn’t join the Avengers until issue #4, Hawkeye in issue #16, and the Black Widow didn’t make an appearance on the team until issue #111.  Hank and Janet were there since the beginning, they helped create the foundation for this team you’re using for your flash flick, and now you’re erasing them entirely?  Uncool.

The Wasp was the original badass lady Avenger, not the Black Widow, and the Wasp was the one who originally gave the team their name, not Nick Fury/SHIELD as the movie so desperately wants to people believe.  And to add to that, Janet and Hank’s original history could have been so easily worked into the Avengers movie.  Hank, a brilliant scientist who specializes in the study of molecular science, is offered a position helping Dr. Vernon Van Dyne in his research, but Vernon Van Dyne is killed by an alien criminal who teleports himself to Earth, which forces Hank and Janet (Vernon’s daughter) to team up, become superheroes, and take out her father’s killer.  Hmm, extraterrestrial criminal who teleports himself to earth and kills people…


There was a rumour floating around a few months back that Hank Pym was going to be making a cameo appearance in the Avengers movie, and I was so super psyched about that (and since it was a Whedon production, I was super hoping he would get Nathan Fillion to play Hank).  I mean, even to have him be a consultant for their team, or even to show up somewhere that you could blink and miss him, even if they don’t mention his superhero alias/power, would be a neat Easter egg/bonus for comics readers who were disappointed by the lack of a freaking awesome character (kinda like how Beast made an appearance in X-Men 2).

But no.  The Avengers just pretended that Hank and Janet never existed and expected everybody to play along and be happily dumb.

Poorly played, Marvel.  Poorly played.

Of course none of them care that Coulson dies, but Nick Fury, in true Nick Fury fashion, lies to them and puts blood on the old cards. They realize this person they barely knew thought SO MUCH of them that they owe it to the WORLD that looks up to them. Phil Coulson was a symbol for comic book fans like all of us, and losing that, is the "push" they needed. That's the "push that made the avengers save the world" not their love for a dead agent.
+ Anonymous

But he didn’t think so much of them - he thought so much of Cap.  He looked up to Cap because Cap is the golden boy, the hero whose only motivation for heroism is that he dislikes people who try to unfairly place themselves on a pedestal above others using unfair/tyrannical/violent means and wants to stamp them out so that peace and good can prevail.

All the other heroes are entirely self-serving, and Coulson never made any indication that he cared for any of them, no matter what tricks Fury might have up his swanky leather sleeve.  As far as we can tell, to Coulson, Natasha and Clint, who are the ones he would have been closest with of the team given the circumstances, are just more agents of SHIELD (albeit valuable ones).  To add to that, Stark even commented that Coulson’s views, aka “he died still believing in heroes”, were outdated and he didn’t subscribe to them.

Plus, honestly, Banner gave the strong impression that he was more than ready to bolt at a moment’s notice, so in that case it’s not realistic that he would stick around after Coulson’s death, even with the blood trick/guilt trip, considering A) he figured out that the cage provided by this team that was trying to make him trust them and which Loki had been held captive in had been meant for him, “in case you had to kill me”, and B) he didn’t want to be there in the first place, so to now have a heartless supernatural killer on the loose who has their group as a target, specifically Bruce, who knows the most about gamma radiation and so would most likely be able to fuck with the Cosmic Cube, it’s probable that he would want to make himself as scarce as possible, as quickly as possible, so that he doesn’t A) suffer horribly at the hands of the Avengers, or B) suffer horribly at the hands of Loki.

Now with Barton, this was one of the things that I mentioned before, and which really bothered me.  Whedon took characters who had had established personalities in previous films and flattened them to make them slide more easily into his chalky script (Hawkeye had more personality in his three-minute cameo in THOR than he had in the entirety of the Avengers movie, and Loki’s personality skipped about a thousand miles from where it had been in THOR without any apparent reason or gradual, believable development - he almost seemed more like the sort of villain you would find in a Rocky & Bullwinkle special than the well-rounded character with clear motivations but twisted methodologies and ambiguous morals that he was in THOR).

In THOR, Barton and Coulson exchange this short, quippy banter wherein their relationship is established as a sort of structure wherein Barton is a good agent who does what he’s told but he gives Coulson guff in a well-meaning, playful sort of way, and Coulson accepts it with a sigh because he knows Barton is good at what he does and means well, and plus he’s Coulson and he can take a lot of abuse and still wind up on top with his frozen supernanny smile.  We can believe they’re friends, and that that Hawkeye would be upset if something were to happen to Coulson, his unspoken buddy, especially if it were by his own hand.

But then in the Avengers, they completely squash that entire established relationship by turning three-dimensional Barton into this agentbot who regards everyone in SHIELD with a short of stiff, standoffish, entirely un-fun front.  This is not the same Barton from THOR, and this Barton is clearly not anybody’s buddy.  So then, when he is informed of Coulson’s death he doesn’t go “Oh, he was my friend, what has Loki done, this is all my fault and I’ll never forgive myself, I must avenge Coulson”.  He goes “This was my fault”, Natasha replies “No it wasn’t” and Barton basically goes “Oh good because I was starting to worry for a second there” and drops it, moving on to the motivation of wounded pride to seek out Loki and end his reign of terror, rather than avenging a fallen friend/comrade.

Realistically, even with the whole “he died believing in heroes” guilt trip bit, the bloody cards that Steve never signed apply to Steve, alone - i.e., “he believed in you, Steve, and you, Steve, let him down”.  Which might motivate Steve, but would not realistically push anybody else into immediate action for feeling awful for having let down someone who looked up to them as larger than life, because nobody did.  Coulson, to these people (apart from Cap), was not someone who looked up to them as heroes, he was someone who pushed them around, which could potentially be translated as him having been trying to push them to be their best after the fact, but honestly that’s grasping at straws.

So even if Fury were to try to appeal to their sense of vanity/heroism/guilt/pity/etc. with this whole “Coulson died believing in you guys” schtick, I just don’t believe it would hold water.

But again, maybe that’s just me.

I wasn't going to ask at first but I'm curious.What did you think of Phil Coulson and his death in the Avengers? Also any thoughts on Maria Hill?
+ neonreverberations

Honestly, it was shocking, but I think I was mostly just angry.  Like, I knew Whedon was going to kill a character, since he always kills a character, wooga-wooga, but at this point it feels like more of a publicity stunt than something that was legitimately necessary to move the movie/plot forward.

Clearly he had to pick somebody to kill and he figured that the guy who would make the least impression on future movies if he were to die now would be the best target.  Nick Fury is too integral to die, and the Avengers team would be incomplete and therefore incapable to do future movies with the same team they worked so hard to market for this movie if he were to kill one of them, so the only option left is Coulson.  It seems perfectly logical when it’s put into that perspective.

HOWEVER.  That’s where the logic comes to an abrupt halt.

Now, we, the audience, like Coulson because he pushes everyone around who deserves to be pushed around, he takes guff from no one, and he’s got his own brand of quiet-voiced badassery, but think about it: Stark didn’t like him, Cap ignored him/didn’t know anything about him, Banner never met him, Clint was only casual work buds with him, and Natasha… I’m not even sure if they ever met in the movies.  Fury liked him, but Fury is not a team.  Fury is just one man.

To be honest, the Avengers simply wouldn’t care if Coulson were to die.  Sure, they’d feel badly because it’s a fallen comrade that clearly was a friend of Fury’s, but that’s not going to be what forces them all up off their asses and into a complete change of character, turning them from self-serving neophytes into a functioning unit of self-sacrificing heroes.

They have known each other for a grand total of maybe half an hour, so realistically, if Coulson then dies horribly at the hand of Loki when they’ve barely finished introducing themselves, what’s going to happen?  Stark is going to say “fuck this, he killed Coulson too easily, I’m out”, Steve is going to go “his technology is stronger than ours, it is not even human in nature, we’re screwed”, Bruce is going to go “man I didn’t sign up for this shit pack my bag I’m going back to Timbuktu”, Thor is… in a glass box somewhere, Clint is all “fuck this is my fault I’m gonna go stuff myself in a small dark space and feel awful about it”, leaving Natty all, “well fuck”.

So to answer your question, to have this character that we, the audience, really liked, suddenly and unnecessarily and horribly die, and then to go “AND THAT WAS THE PUSH THAT MADE THE AVENGERS SAVE THE WORLD!” is… dumb.  It’s dumb, it’s inaccurate, it’s gratuitous, and more than that, it’s just hurtful.

And I thought Hill got pretty much zero screen time.  She was entirely ineffective and unmemorable, which is majorly disappointing, because Hill in the comics is awesome and she deserves to have a bigger role.  If you’re going to take out Coulson, let Hill take the screen time he would have had, don’t just sideline her and give that extra screen time to Fury for being Fury.  He can be Fury in his spare time, Hill’s only got this one movie to make us like her.

And in that regard, she kinda… failed.

If this comes out mean I apologize, I'm just exhausted and can't think of a better way to word it. Was there any part of the Avengers movie that you liked?
+ youregonnaneedabiggergun

The scene at the very tail end of the credits.  I lost my shit.  Not literally, but… I was crying from laughing so hard.

But in all seriousness, I did enjoy some of the humour, when it was not entirely out of place.  I laughed at most of the punchlines (in fact, I’m pretty sure I was the only person in the theatre who laughed, and loudly, at the line “you and I remember Budapest very differently!” because… well, I guess everyone else was thinking “there were no aliens in Budapest” but the first thing my mind jumped to was Clintasha hotel-room sexcapades).

Unfortunately, though, sometimes Whedon tried to substitute humour for an important progression of story, or when he did not know where to go with a scene he would tape over the gap with some slapstick so people would overlook it and he could skip to the next scene.

I liked that Natasha was written as a strong character, even if they could have toned the “strong” down a little.  People say Joss writes women well, but the way Natasha was written sort-of just felt like a man with breasts, to me, and not in the works-for-her Commander Shepard sort of way.  I’m not saying she has to be a wimp, but she doesn’t have to be such a hardass all the time.  We’ve got a whole team of dudes, we don’t need another one.

I also really enjoyed the Other’s makeup because, even if it looked entirely out of place in the movie (which moved at a weird pace to begin with) and made his scenes seem a little hokey and misplaced, it reminded me of Pan’s Labyrinth.  I really like when cool special-effects makeup is used, rather than just shrugging it all off to CG.

Also, Mark Ruffalo.  I loved Mark Ruffalo.  He was perfect.  Absolutely perfect.  Best Banner yet, by a longshot.  Can we just… have Mark Ruffalo play all the roles?  All of them.  Including the Black Widow.  Just put him in a wig and he’s good to go.

I’m sure I’ll think of other things later (when it’s not 3am, haha), but that’s all I can think of off the top of my head.

So do you think the bit at the end with "The Other" and Thanos was a lead-in for Thor 2? Or are we seriously gonna have to wait 3 years for that storyline?
+ ohhappilyneverafter


I don’t know what to think of that scene with Thanos.  I’m really super hoping they use the Enchantress for the villain in THOR 2, and I really really hope Avengers 2 is going to be the Skrulls/Secret Invasion, so… I don’t know what to think.  The Skrulls are really what I was hoping for for this Avengers movie, an intelligent villain that would actually make the Avengers think as a team, make them come up with strategies together, make them worry and mistrust and undermine one another for more reasons than just petty, picking, immature insults and poorly-hidden secrets that for some reason Nick Fury carries around with him in an oversized suitcase.

Instead we got mindless savage brutes with no societal structure, no language, and no strategic prowess.  What the Avengers faced in the first Avengers movie was basically an insect infestation on a large scale.  Booorriinnngg.

But, back to Thanos, it makes less sense to be a lead-in to THOR 2, because the next film coming out is Iron Man 3, so if they were going to do a lead-in, it would be for that (judging by the lead-ins/Easter eggs in the other films).  But to tell you the truth, I have no idea what their plans are for future films/if the ending is a lead-in to Iron Man 3 or THOR 2 or Avengers 2, but… that’s what I’m hoping for.



Joss your CG was flashy but we care more about the characters than the graphics

so take note I guess

for next time

I wasn’t sure where they were at with Clint and Natasha. Cause in the comics, she pretty much breaks up with him when she resumes being Black Widow…so I’m not sure if they were after that and never mentioned it or were before that….

In the comics the bitch dumps his ass and vanishes because he’s the worst, whiniest criminal ever and she’d rather be the Black Widow than have to deal with Daddy Issues McCircus Brat.  But that was before both of them quit their life of crime in order to fight for the good guys, which was where they were at in the Avengers.  With no mention of Bobbi and Stark tied up with Pepper, it only makes sense that they would be together (since they have been together in the comics and the only people Natty was in a relationship with around the time she joined the Avengers were Matt “Daredevil” Murdoch and Tony Stark).

Plus having that strong tie with Natasha would make both of their existences in the Avengers movie more solid, and make more sense.  Natasha is a part of SHIELD in Iron Man 2, and in the Avengers she is called in because she’s good at what she does, but how did they know about her in the first place?  Before she was an agent?  Or how did they know she would not just turn around and stab them in the back once she was accepted into the program?  Wouldn’t it make more sense if their other top agent, Clint Barton (who was madly in love with Natasha during his time as a criminal and still vividly remembered her for her proficiency), recommended her and vouched for her?

(To put it into perspective, I’m pretty sure it was Hawkeye who convinced Natasha to join the Avengers in the comics in the first place, in Avengers vol. 1 #111, so saying that the two still had feelings for each other/he still had feelings for her could be taken as canonly accurate, at that point in time/the Avengers movie.)

IIRC, they just said "The Hawk is in his nest". I don't think they did either. And don't worry. I like hearing other opinions :)
+ makeuswholeisaac-deactivated201

I remember them calling him “the Hawk”, but that’s not Hawkeye.  That was them being clever with one another (and Joss thinking his own writing clever).  People who knew Hawkeye was Hawkeye went “har har, they’re talking about Hawkeye, silly boys” but people who saw THOR and only knew him as Barton went “wait what why do they call him the hawk, does he have good eyesight or does he fight with a knife or are they saying he’s gay and likes little boys”.

And I’m glad I’m not driving you nuts. xD <3

You won't get any flaming from me. I actually had some issues myself. The key one being loose ends from the other movies. Without spoiling anything, as I said in my last ask, the absence of characters just annoyed me, especially the fact that Pepper was so much in the film yet no other chick, especially Jane. Also, I wish War Machine was addressed at some point during the third act, and I honestly hated Hawkeye's portrayel in the movie. I felt it wasn't Hawkeye but just a serious archer.
+ makeuswholeisaac-deactivated201

You might not be packing the flames, but I’ve already lost one follower since posting that last answer.  I DON’T APOLOGIZE. xD

Back to the movie, at least Jane was mentioned, though.  Betty?  Nothing.  Not a peep.  Thor was assured his girlfriend would be okay (I guess that was also important because of [spoiler involving other character(s) from the THOR movie]’s involvement with the big conflict?  Maybe?) but Bruce never even got a “Betty’s not in harm’s way, don’t worry”.  I mean, I know Bruce can’t be entirely open about everything going on in his personal life, but SHIELD would definitely know about her anyway.

Bruce spent almost the entirety of The Incredible Hulk with or around her, she was involved in the Super Soldier/Gamma Project that turned him into the Hulk in the first place, and if Tony/Fury talked to her father, I’m sure he would be very clear that he wanted the Hulk to stay the hell away from his daughter.  It would have taken them a grand total of thirty seconds of dialogue for Fury/Coulson to tell Banner, “Dr. Elizabeth Ross has been moved out of harm’s way and put under strict SHIELD supervision” or something to that effect.  Now that’s just careless writing.

I was disappointed that there wasn’t a Rhodes mention/appearance but I guess War Machine wasn’t really integral to the story/plot (since he wasn’t helping them to fight and each character was given one “outside” tag-along character from their movies to make it seem more fleshed out?  I guess?  Thor got Bruce’s share.)  Iron Man 3 is coming out soon enough, so I have hopes that they bring in/discuss the War Machine technology in there with some degree of class/completion/satisfactory in-depth explanation/exploration, since Iron Man 2 was three steps down from a vuvuzela concert in entertainment value/actually explaining what the f*ck they were talking about/adhering to canon.

Don’t… even get me started on that one.

As far as Hawkeye goes, what bothered me most was that they never really explained why… Hawkeye… was there.  Like, they never went “He’s the best of the best at what he does, and that’s why he’s valuable to SHIELD as an agent even though he uses less than conventional methods”.  We jump straight from “Eyes in the sky with a gun, what the hell are you doing up there Barton I said a gun” to “Where’s that dude with the arrows” “Oh you know he’s where he always is why do we keep him around he’s antisocial and he uses an outdated weapon and he smells”.  Please, at least acknowledge his presence as more than another pair of boots on the dance floor.

And after that, nobody seems in the least surprised by his presence, or even privy to it.  He comes out of places nobody knows he was, and the only acknowledgement he seems to get is “Oh right I knew you were there all along stranger so if you’re done peeing let’s go”, or “oh sure he’s always been a part of our team no sweat here”.  He didn’t get in a lot of his signature snark, either, which I guess made it less glaringly obvious that nobody really acted like he was more than a cardboard cutout propped up to accessorize SHIELD/the team group photo/Natasha’s room.

Also, there was a glaring lack of Clintasha.  Waaayyy too much poorly-written Pepperony, not enough (none, actually) Clintasha - i.e., “Is this love, Natasha?” “Hell no I’m a Whedon character and I don’t have time for your sissy sentimentality, thanks for the info though sucker”.  And is it just my poor memory, or did they never even actually refer to him as Hawkeye?  Like, ever?

Sorry to talk your ear off like this, but… it’s good to get it out. xD

What were your thoughts on The Avengers? I made a post about it earlier about the cons I had about the movie(Mostly the absence of Jane, Betty, and Peggy, and wtf War Machine was) but I would love to to hear your thoughts. Also, I kinda wish Hawkeye had been a little more snarky, but thats just me.
+ makeuswholeisaac-deactivated201

I… I…

I feel like I’m going to get majorly flamed for my opinion on the Avengers.  Also my full-fledged opinion would require revealing a bunch of spoilers so I might write it all out later and shove it under a cut so people who haven’t seen the movie don’t have to have unwanted spoilers shoved in their faces.

But I’ll say the most concise thing that struck me about the Avengers: it seemed… vapid.  It also felt like it was written as a bunch of “memorable scenes” patched together with hopscotch scribbles to make way for the next “memorable scene”.  It wasn’t so much a powerful story as a bunch of intentionally-made-to-be-quotable moments thrown together.

The movie itself was flashy and colourful and there were lots of huge scenes where lots of things happened, but it all felt so menial, like… I don’t know.  Like I didn’t really care if the characters fell out of the sky.  I mean, I know it has a bunch of characters in it and therefore it can’t really take considerable time to make each and every one of them fabulously well-rounded and have enough screen time to flesh themselves out, but for god’s sake, don’t throw away an entire previous movie’s worth of character development for a few easy laughs/scares.

Cough, LOKI.

To that effect, I hated the way Pepper was written.  HATED it.  I thought Joss was supposed to be known for writing strong, well-rounded female characters, but he took this take-charge, self-sufficient, intelligent, professional, strong female character and turned her into this Daisy-Dukes-wearing throwaway girlfriend figure.  Potts keeps Stark from falling apart, but here it just seemed like she was there to make lighthearted wink-wink passes at him and fret her pretty little head over him when he got into big trouble.

In all, I felt pretty empty after leaving the theatre, not full and happy and ready to seize the day like I did after leaving THOR (which I went to see eighteen times in theatres - seizing the day is a good feeling).  It felt more like, “Well, and now I’ve seen the Avengers.  Now what?”

I’m looking forward to the sequel, though.  Come to think of it, the sequel is probably going to wind up being everything I had hoped the first movie would be.  I can’t say exactly why, because spoilers, but… I have high hopes for the sequel.