Now there's an open minded view... Please permit everybody to have their own opinion, and realise that those opinions are every bit as valid as your own.moorlock2003 wrote:The movie is not worth all the prattling on and on about, as it has widely and correctly been declared terrible by the overwhelming majority of people who had the displeasure of enduring it (and I'm one of them, having sat through it twice). Apologists for this awful movie are simply in denial. Any major studio film not given advance showings for reviewers is a red flag warning that it is a turkey. The only good things about it were a few interesitng visuals (and an $80 million budget should at least give us that) plus the fact that it brought attention to the original series. But honestly, everything else about it reeked.
I love the movie, am a big fan of the television series and the radio series. I'm most certainly not in denial, and frankly I find your comment a tad offensive.
As for Warners barring of the critics from the previews meaning that it was a turkey, I think it points more to their complete lack of understanding of what The Avengers is than any comment upon the quality of the movie (before they hacked it, I mean). They didn't know how to handle it.
If they had one iota of common sense, they'd have kept the movie at its original length, trusted the people they paid to make it and treated it like any other movie. There is no way on earth that it would have ended up with the (mostly undeserved) negative reputation that it has garnered in the wake of their mishandling of the publicity if they hadn't stupidly rung all the alarm bells.