![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Okay, disclaimer: I like the movie. It's entertaining watching, it expands the universe, brings in a whole lot of new and interesting things, and develops and elaborates on some of the old.
That said, there are flaws in it.
Avengers: Age of Ultron - the Ugly
SPOILERS BELOW.
The encapsulation of the failings of the movie is succinctly summarised by Maria Hill (who else) in the first third of the movie at the party in Stark Tower.
She's talking with Tony and Thor and Rhodey, and asking where's Pepper and Jane. Tony gives a lame-ass answer, Thor gives much the same. And Maria rolls her eyes and coughs into her hand, "Testosterone!" Then walks away with Rhodey, chatting.
And testosterone is pretty much the failing of the movie.
When you have as many characters in the MCU as you do, and you're bringing them all into a single movie as A:AoU does, then a couple of characters are going to get the development, and most of the rest will fall by the wayside.
The couple of characters who get the development are the ones who already have things to work upon - namely, those who have their own movies, namely the guys. Specifically, the white guys. Tony is one of the two who gets the lion's share of development - Ultron is JARVIS, is Tony's brain without the envelope of humanity and dysfunction, and this is stated in-universe. Clint is the other character who's significantly developed.
Bruce, Natasha, Steve, and Thor all have their moments of character development - as you'd expect, them being the Avengers. Wanda and Pietro get a little, as would be required of two characters in their situation - they need motivation and reason for what they do, so the movie provides backstory.
The rest of the universe? De nada. Maria, Rhodey, Sam, Helen Wu, Technician Guy, and even Fury are there in support of the Avengers - they don't develop. Maria and Fury get the screentime - although Fury gets to make the 'you're Avengers, goddamn act like it' speech.
Note: I'm counting Natasha's relationship with Bruce in the 'character development' column. Just because she's being shown to feel attraction/interest in a man does not "reduce" her to a love interest. Natasha has been developed as a character in her own right in her previous movies, and while a lot of her focus in this movie is on Bruce, the actual direct flirting/romance comes after the point when they think that the world is safe and secure. They're celebrating, she makes a move, and then Ultron shows himself and there's no going back on that. Plus, she's still awesome generally.
(And for those who are angry that she's frequently relationally focused on Bruce, I point you to Clint's concern for Natasha after the fight in South Korea, and while Tony and Bruce are being Science Bros. He nearly loses the cargo in his concern for her.)
There are some seriously awkward bits - the obligatory "male character falls on female character's breasts and inadvertantly gropes her" moment during a party-fight, and just about any time Pepper's name was brought up, Tony squirms. I'm worried for Tony/Pepper now - Tony's mention of prima noctae sure doesn't assauge that.
And there were opportunities missed: setting Maria up in Fury's role would have not only reduced the cameo cast list by one (sorry, Sam L) but also opened up a whole new aspect to a previously-sidelined character: sure, Maria's calling Tony 'boss' but she's also working world security on the side.
The movie passes the Bechdel test - by the skin of it's teeth. A little girl has a two-sentence interchange with Natasha. Her pregnant mother's conversation with Natasha doesn't count because the conversation is about the (male) baby.
But the movie is not, overall, super female-friendly. Female friendships, relationships, character development falls through the cracks. And I expect this. Hell, most feminists I know online? They still focus on their male characters, original and fannish, even if it's not to the exclusion of the female ones. If I can't find feminists online who will write focused on women, what hope in hell do I have of finding men offline who will?
So my expectations of gender equality and good treatment of women in movies (in any kind of media) is fairly low. And that goes for actors/entertainment people, too.
Back to the movie and the testosterone overload, a lot of the exchanges between the guys are about macho. The whole Hammer of Thor thing? Only the guys try it. Natasha declines, and Maria isn't asked. But all the male Avengers try it (and fail, although Steve comes close enough to making Thor anxious). And yes, that has significance later, including the discussion between Steve and Tony right at the end, where they argue that Vision isn't a 'man' so it doesn't count.
Tony's discussions with Bruce are about protection and pride. (We've already seen the hole a mile wide in Tony's psyche about protecting what's his: it looks like the hole hasn't gone away, he's just broadened its horizons.) Bruce's reasons for not being with Natasha is because he's dangerous as the Hulk - while Natasha is dangerous, sure, but she's pretty.
And Steve's angst is about what he is - a supersoldier, made for war as Maria inadvertantly reminds him, and the question of whether there can ever truly be rest for a supersoldier with war injected into his bones.
This movie, largely produced/associated/directed by a male who's frequently cited as being female-friendly, is about testosterone; bring it big, give it to them hard, walk with a swagger, fight for the world, protect what's yours or face the failure to do so. Which is no less than most action movies, sure, but given that the last few movies had more significant female involvement (to the point where Pepper got to take out the bad guy in Iron Man 3), Avengers: Age of Ultron feels very much like a regression in progressiveness on the feminism front.
On the other hand, the movie had not one, not two, not three, but four black men with speaking roles. Admittedly, all those roles were supporting, even Fury's, but the fact that the Avengers: Infinity War team comprises two black men, two women, an android, and the white male supersoldier? Is better than five white men (four of them American) and a woman.
Unfortunately, actually getting more individual movies about the non-white, non-male characters? Is going to be hard going. In any universe.
Personally, I'd put more faith in the Marvel TV series and fanfic for female character development and storyline. No, it's not official, but it's probably a good time to face that female character development in the MCU is going to be far and few between for the next five years at least.
Note: these criticisms don't mean I didn't enjoy the movie. I did. But I'm also very aware of its issues and flaws and failings on non-plot levels, which is one of the aspects which contributes to my enjoyment of a movie.
That said, there are flaws in it.
Avengers: Age of Ultron - the Ugly
SPOILERS BELOW.
The encapsulation of the failings of the movie is succinctly summarised by Maria Hill (who else) in the first third of the movie at the party in Stark Tower.
She's talking with Tony and Thor and Rhodey, and asking where's Pepper and Jane. Tony gives a lame-ass answer, Thor gives much the same. And Maria rolls her eyes and coughs into her hand, "Testosterone!" Then walks away with Rhodey, chatting.
And testosterone is pretty much the failing of the movie.
When you have as many characters in the MCU as you do, and you're bringing them all into a single movie as A:AoU does, then a couple of characters are going to get the development, and most of the rest will fall by the wayside.
The couple of characters who get the development are the ones who already have things to work upon - namely, those who have their own movies, namely the guys. Specifically, the white guys. Tony is one of the two who gets the lion's share of development - Ultron is JARVIS, is Tony's brain without the envelope of humanity and dysfunction, and this is stated in-universe. Clint is the other character who's significantly developed.
Bruce, Natasha, Steve, and Thor all have their moments of character development - as you'd expect, them being the Avengers. Wanda and Pietro get a little, as would be required of two characters in their situation - they need motivation and reason for what they do, so the movie provides backstory.
The rest of the universe? De nada. Maria, Rhodey, Sam, Helen Wu, Technician Guy, and even Fury are there in support of the Avengers - they don't develop. Maria and Fury get the screentime - although Fury gets to make the 'you're Avengers, goddamn act like it' speech.
Note: I'm counting Natasha's relationship with Bruce in the 'character development' column. Just because she's being shown to feel attraction/interest in a man does not "reduce" her to a love interest. Natasha has been developed as a character in her own right in her previous movies, and while a lot of her focus in this movie is on Bruce, the actual direct flirting/romance comes after the point when they think that the world is safe and secure. They're celebrating, she makes a move, and then Ultron shows himself and there's no going back on that. Plus, she's still awesome generally.
(And for those who are angry that she's frequently relationally focused on Bruce, I point you to Clint's concern for Natasha after the fight in South Korea, and while Tony and Bruce are being Science Bros. He nearly loses the cargo in his concern for her.)
There are some seriously awkward bits - the obligatory "male character falls on female character's breasts and inadvertantly gropes her" moment during a party-fight, and just about any time Pepper's name was brought up, Tony squirms. I'm worried for Tony/Pepper now - Tony's mention of prima noctae sure doesn't assauge that.
And there were opportunities missed: setting Maria up in Fury's role would have not only reduced the cameo cast list by one (sorry, Sam L) but also opened up a whole new aspect to a previously-sidelined character: sure, Maria's calling Tony 'boss' but she's also working world security on the side.
The movie passes the Bechdel test - by the skin of it's teeth. A little girl has a two-sentence interchange with Natasha. Her pregnant mother's conversation with Natasha doesn't count because the conversation is about the (male) baby.
But the movie is not, overall, super female-friendly. Female friendships, relationships, character development falls through the cracks. And I expect this. Hell, most feminists I know online? They still focus on their male characters, original and fannish, even if it's not to the exclusion of the female ones. If I can't find feminists online who will write focused on women, what hope in hell do I have of finding men offline who will?
So my expectations of gender equality and good treatment of women in movies (in any kind of media) is fairly low. And that goes for actors/entertainment people, too.
Back to the movie and the testosterone overload, a lot of the exchanges between the guys are about macho. The whole Hammer of Thor thing? Only the guys try it. Natasha declines, and Maria isn't asked. But all the male Avengers try it (and fail, although Steve comes close enough to making Thor anxious). And yes, that has significance later, including the discussion between Steve and Tony right at the end, where they argue that Vision isn't a 'man' so it doesn't count.
Tony's discussions with Bruce are about protection and pride. (We've already seen the hole a mile wide in Tony's psyche about protecting what's his: it looks like the hole hasn't gone away, he's just broadened its horizons.) Bruce's reasons for not being with Natasha is because he's dangerous as the Hulk - while Natasha is dangerous, sure, but she's pretty.
And Steve's angst is about what he is - a supersoldier, made for war as Maria inadvertantly reminds him, and the question of whether there can ever truly be rest for a supersoldier with war injected into his bones.
This movie, largely produced/associated/directed by a male who's frequently cited as being female-friendly, is about testosterone; bring it big, give it to them hard, walk with a swagger, fight for the world, protect what's yours or face the failure to do so. Which is no less than most action movies, sure, but given that the last few movies had more significant female involvement (to the point where Pepper got to take out the bad guy in Iron Man 3), Avengers: Age of Ultron feels very much like a regression in progressiveness on the feminism front.
On the other hand, the movie had not one, not two, not three, but four black men with speaking roles. Admittedly, all those roles were supporting, even Fury's, but the fact that the Avengers: Infinity War team comprises two black men, two women, an android, and the white male supersoldier? Is better than five white men (four of them American) and a woman.
Unfortunately, actually getting more individual movies about the non-white, non-male characters? Is going to be hard going. In any universe.
Personally, I'd put more faith in the Marvel TV series and fanfic for female character development and storyline. No, it's not official, but it's probably a good time to face that female character development in the MCU is going to be far and few between for the next five years at least.
Note: these criticisms don't mean I didn't enjoy the movie. I did. But I'm also very aware of its issues and flaws and failings on non-plot levels, which is one of the aspects which contributes to my enjoyment of a movie.