Age of Ultron: Are Marvel Getting Too Big for Their Boots?

Normally, when a big film does badly, the post mortem begins right away. The dreaded think-piece rears its ugly head within days. But do financially successful films get a longer grace period? And with Ant-Man out in less than a fortnight, is it time for us all to be honest about Age of Ultron?

There’s a bunch of snarky thirty-something movie critics who’ll hate the Marvel movies on principle, but they can’t argue the films don’t make money. In Age of Ultron‘s case we’re talking Scrooge McDuck dollars too. What these critics should be arguing though is that Age of Ultron might well damage how much money Marvel makes in the future. Here’s the thing: I’m just not sure it’s a great movie. Don’t get me wrong, it’s good, very good. In between all the noise and clutter it’s still a Joss Whedon film. And the guy just knows how to make this stuff.

The characters are all still recognisably themselves and they still largely act and react in the ways we’ve come to expect them to. Iron Man still makes wisecracks, Captain America is still your morally upstanding grandpa, and Thor still looks and sounds like he stepped out of a Shakespeare tragedy. All that stuff is fun popcorn fodder. Ultron himself is great too, and has some super witty lines. The action scenes are universally great, and this movie is the closest we’ve seen to the comic book aesthetic on the big screen. Remember that bit where the Avengers are fighting off all those Ultrons at once? That’s the double page spread in the middle of the comic where all the heroes are fighting together at once.

But how the movie looked was never really the problem.

If Whedon’s interviews are to be believed, a lot of the stuff that irked people about the film was pushed in by Marvel Studios. The weird bit where Thor has a bath in a cave? That’s there because Marvel insisted on it, then cut the scene down because it did badly with test audiences. It seems Whedon had to fight to keep in some of the more character-driven moments as well, like Hawkeye’s farmhouse. Others, like extra scenes between Bruce Banner and Black Widow were cut completely.

Ultimately there’s something odd about Age of Ultron‘s list of priorities, and a lot of it can be attributed to the whole multi-movie continuity thing. Why does Andy Serkis make it into the film’s final cut, and not the scenes that might have given the Hulk-Widow romance some much needed clarity? Why, when the first Avengers movie gave us so many great character moments, does Age of Ultron reject this for a barrage of action scenes that are inventive but ultimately exhausting? Why do we need to waste ten minutes of the first act on a party scene to show us characters who really don’t matter to the plot?

age-of-ultron-06
More of this, please.

I’m a big fan of the Marvel movies, and I love how all the characters can hang out together across different films. But this is overboard. I’m all for the Falcon (Captain America’s buddy from Winter Soldier) showing up in The Avengers. But what’s he doing there? If he’s not got anything to do in the story he’s just clogging up space. Thor’s scientist mate is hilarious in the Thor movies. Here the guy is shoehorned in for a vague and flimsy reason. For the first time, Marvel’s cool party trick of having all their movies in the same universe misfired. It was overwhelming, even with a maestro like Whedon at the helm. It was still a good movie, but oddly disappointing. On the other hand it is The Avengers, isn’t it? That one big movie where everyone from all the other movies get together? It was always going to be busy.

Do me a favour though. Take a stroll over to the Wikipedia page for Captain America: Civil War. Take a look at the cast list. I’ll still be here when you get back. Crazy, right? Who isn’t going to be in that film? I’m worried, guys. The thing that has allowed the Marvel movies to work is that each one is something different. Winter Soldier was a sleek spy thriller, Guardians of the Galaxy was a kooky space opera. Looking at the cast of Captain America: Civil War could easily be mistaken for Avengers 3. Since 2012’s The Avengers, Marvel have been the kings of the box office. But I’m starting to think this is leading to overconfidence. It’s possible that in a year’s time we’ll all be saying how good the new Captain America film is. I could be barking up the wrong tree with this entire article. But this is where we are right now.

So a personal message to Marvel Studios: don’t mess this up guys. Don’t make all of your movies into homogenised goop. And as a personal favour to me: please, please, please, get this sorted before you start making Captain Marvel.

Some of the coverage you find on Cultured Vultures contains affiliate links, which provide us with small commissions based on purchases made from visiting our site. We cover gaming news, movie reviews, wrestling and much more.