[Movie] The Avengers (Spoilers)

It did some things well and some things not so well. Overall, pretty enjoyable, but not the 'amazing' and 'fantastic' I keep hearing.

Pros:
-Great job splitting time between characters. The movie was about the Avengers, not any one individual.
-Made the non-hero characters fit into their place. Black Widow and Hawkeye didn't seem irrelevant.
-Great CGI and action.
-Dialogue was way better than expected. Funny without being cheezy.
-Non-formulaic fight scenes. Didn't feel like each hero was set up to use their power in one moment, but rather each faced the enemy in their own variety of ways.

Cons:
-Story clearly. Bad guy attacks, heroes group up and defeat bad guy.
-Boring villain. Maybe it's the genre, but most of these superhero movies have really lame backstories for their villains. Crazy guy who wants to cause chaos for no reason, power hungry guy who wants to take over. There was only a line or two about Loki wanting revenge on Thor. The focus was mainly on chaos and destruction.
-Lack of explanation for people with no background/didn't tie up loose ends. Why could Hulk suddenly control himself? What happened with Widow and Hawkeye? Why was Samuel L. Jackson so lame?
-Pissing contests between heroes. ZZZZzzz. We know what the end result would be.

I don't have a comic book background. Never read them, don't plan to. I have watched the movies and know a little about the characters. Maybe the accuracy to the comics was a huge draw to some people, but I didn't care who was stronger/who would win in a fight. I care more about their reasons and motivations. While the screentime was split well, I felt that overall character story and progression was lacking, especially for Loki and his 'boss'. Mass chaos and/or taking over the world gets old after a while. Even with the heroes, I never felt a connection to any of them so strong that if one died I would have been upset, not that it was going to happen anyway.

I know some don't care about the story or how deep a movie is. But for a lot of people that is the point of entertainment. Media should tell a story - whether it's a movie, show, book, comic whatever. The first thing you ask is 'what was it about?' I don't care about deeper meanings or symbolisms, but story is important. This one was predictable and one-dimensional. You could have completely changed the problem/villain/main plot and still kept half of the movie the same.

Now I enjoyed it, and I think my money was well spent, and I'd recommend it. But I don't think that it was 'great' or 'remarkable' - I'd say decent.

Last edit: 2012-05-08 01:03:00

MooMooMugi United States. May 08 2012 01:07. Posts 4510

Profile Blog #

Next one planned for 2015, only 3 more years ;;

www.twitch.tv/moomoomugi |LoL & SC2 IGN both my username| Just livin' the baylife|FREE 0123456789

CaptainCrush United States. May 08 2012 01:09. Posts 784

Profile Blog #

On May 08 2012 01:01 GefilteFish wrote:
It did some things well and some things not so well. Overall, pretty enjoyable, but not the 'amazing' and 'fantastic' I keep hearing.

Now I enjoyed it, and I think my money was well spent, and I'd recommend it. But I don't think that it was 'great' or 'remarkable' - I'd say decent.

This sums up my feelings exactly. I still think that Thor and The Hulk (ed norton) were better than this movie but it was still very enjoyable.

Dfgj Singapore. May 08 2012 01:41. Posts 5562

Profile #

On May 08 2012 01:01 GefilteFish wrote:
-Lack of explanation for people with no background/didn't tie up loose ends. Why could Hulk suddenly control himself? What happened with Widow and Hawkeye? Why was Samuel L. Jackson so lame?
-Pissing contests between heroes. ZZZZzzz. We know what the end result would be.

Disagree on these. I thought the difference between Hulk transforming due to external factors (on the ship) versus his own choice was a clear factor for how in-control he is. Speculation, but that's the biggest difference I saw - and why he was always more careful about other people riling him up.

I don't think you can criticize both 'heroes team up and defeat the enemy' as cliche (which, well, it is) and 'heroes having pissing contests' at the same time. Having a bunch of people not used to working together and used to being the most powerful individual made it feel fitting to me. Of course they're going to try to assert themselves as above the rest to some degree, and it drove a good amount of the humor.

SC2: nGenXeen D3: Xeen

The KY United Kingdom. May 08 2012 01:56. Posts 6235

Profile Blog #

On May 08 2012 01:41 Dfgj wrote:

Show nested quote +

Most of them felt unnecessary and like they were shoved in for the sake of it to me;
Iron Man vs Thor, followed by Captain America vs Thor? Absolutely unnecessary. In fact, if they had let Thor take Loki wouldn't that have pretty much solved their problem? But no 'genius' Tony Stark is like 'FUCK TALKING FOR A COUPLE OF MINUTES I'M-A FIGHT THIS DUDE ALL CAPS LOLOLOL'
Also the whole Stark vs Cap power struggle thing felt lazy. Yeah Cap is a leader and Stark is a rebel, they should totally fight for control, shove in a couple of lines where Stark says he doesn't play soldier and Cap calls him a douche. Let's have Cap abandon all reason and threaten Stark with a fight.

Man I always rag on this film every time I talk about it. But I did quite like it. Honest.

KangaRuthless United States. May 08 2012 02:07. Posts 298

Profile Blog #

This movie is a popcorn flick. I see a lot of people on the net disagreeing about the storyline (and certain side characters), which is and isn't the weakest point of the film. My point here: it's a popcorn flick. We come here to see the interactions between the main characters and crazy action sequences. Whether or not this creates a cohesive story devoid of gaps is irrelevant. I give it a 4.5/5 because I left the theater thoroughly entertained to the point where I want to see it again in theaters. The last time that happened was LOTR: Return of the King. Even with the pointless fight sequences, seeing all these personalities bounce off each other was a real treat.

The film is damn entertaining, which is the entire reason I took time out of my day to go watch it.

www.youtube.com/KangaRuthless

EchoOfTerran United States. May 08 2012 02:36. Posts 6

Profile #

After the credits, there's a spoiler....

+ Show Spoiler +

Last edit: 2012-05-08 05:23:51

We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then, is not an act, but a habit.

wunsun Canada. May 08 2012 02:38. Posts 587

Profile #

Great movie. I didn't read comic books and since it was such a huge collaboration, some story line gaps were there, but they weren't noticeable and were relatively small.

Overall, great movie. I want to see it again. ^^

xTivo May 08 2012 02:38. Posts 29

Profile #

On May 08 2012 01:56 The KY wrote:

Show nested quote +

... No it wouldn't have. They needed Loki to find the cube. And the Iron man v Thor followed by Captain America was COMPLETELY necessary. It introduces the character of Thor, establishes him as a hothead, and gives you a chance to see Captain America able to do things. And that wasn't really a fight- just Thor getting pissed off and then the tension defusing.

The KY United Kingdom. May 08 2012 04:38. Posts 6235

Profile Blog #

On May 08 2012 02:38 xTivo wrote:

Show nested quote +

Why did they need to find the tesseract so urgently? Wasn't the problem what Loki was going to do with it? Take Loki out of the equation and you've got plenty more time to get to the tesseract. What, did they think Loki was gonna tell them where it was?
And my problem with the fight was Stark's role in it's inception; rather than be like 'hey aren't you a friendly? Lemme explain how we're both on the same side here' he just says 'Loki is ours fuck off'.
And it sure seemed like a fight. Thor seemed to be doing some damage to Iron Man's suit that wasn't gonna be fixed with a lick of paint, and let's say Cap doesn't have a 'vibranium shield' (after all Thor didn't know he did); he smashes Cap in the head with a giant hammer and Cap is dead.

Also you know what I really didn't like? Like, the one genuine problem I have with the plot.
The bit where Black Widow tricks Loki, somehow, into revealing his plan is to release Hulk, and it doesn't matter in the slightest anyway. The world's greatest liar, apparently, has this conversation;

Widow: Let Hawkeye go!
Loki: No, you whiny bitch.
Widow: You're a monster.
Loki: My plan is to release the Hulk! Wait fuck.

That's his big genius plan? His character, I assumed, was meant to be a trickster, who outwits the Avengers rather than fighting them, but his scheme is to blow up a ship with explosives? Real clever, man. They'll never see it coming. Attack them with weapons; it's inspired. His only strength is a magic spear that hypnotizes people, something which is never explored.

My god. I've become one of those people that argues about superhero movies on the internet.

Dreamer.T United States. May 08 2012 04:47. Posts 1585

Profile #

Just saw the movie with a friend. Had a blast watching it, lot's of great lines, and epic fights (Hulk vs Thor, Hulk vs Loki etc). I felt they really made Hulk look like the beast that he is. Iron man as usual was cool ass hell with his tech, and the other heroes were all uniquely entertaining in their own right.

+ Show Spoiler +

Forever the best, IMMvp <3

WhiteDog France. May 08 2012 05:14. Posts 3542

Profile Blog #

Aside from some scene + Show Spoiler + the film was bad for me...

Obscure United States. May 08 2012 05:41. Posts 257

Profile #

I absolutely loved it. The more I think about it the more fun I realize it was. Joss Whedon was the perfect guy to write and direct this movie. He knows the characters and the world so well that I felt the characterization in The Avengers was better than their individual movies (and anyone who says this movie doesn't have character developement, that is what all the lead-in individual movies were for...).

The action was so, so good. The helicarrier sequence and the end battle had me giddy like a little kid. Also the humor, which caught me by surprise, was great. I laughed more than I do watching most "comedies" that come out these days. And the laughs weren't cheap, they were geniune character moments.

It's not Citizen Kane, but it's a perfect summer escapism movie, and if you're a Marvel fan it's a childhood dream come true. Highly recommended.

"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge" - Daniel J. Boorstin

Dfgj Singapore. May 08 2012 05:42. Posts 5562

Profile #

On May 08 2012 01:56 The KY wrote:

Show nested quote +

Most of them felt unnecessary and like they were shoved in for the sake of it to me;
Iron Man vs Thor, followed by Captain America vs Thor? Absolutely unnecessary. In fact, if they had let Thor take Loki wouldn't that have pretty much solved their problem? But no 'genius' Tony Stark is like 'FUCK TALKING FOR A COUPLE OF MINUTES I'M-A FIGHT THIS DUDE ALL CAPS LOLOLOL'
Also the whole Stark vs Cap power struggle thing felt lazy. Yeah Cap is a leader and Stark is a rebel, they should totally fight for control, shove in a couple of lines where Stark says he doesn't play soldier and Cap calls him a douche. Let's have Cap abandon all reason and threaten Stark with a fight.

Man I always rag on this film every time I talk about it. But I did quite like it. Honest.

That was the point, they were acting outside of reason and character because Loki was influencing them.

SC2: nGenXeen D3: Xeen

zoLo United States. May 08 2012 06:36. Posts 4519

Profile Blog #

On May 08 2012 01:01 GefilteFish wrote:
It did some things well and some things not so well. Overall, pretty enjoyable, but not the 'amazing' and 'fantastic' I keep hearing.

Pros:
-Great job splitting time between characters. The movie was about the Avengers, not any one individual.
-Made the non-hero characters fit into their place. Black Widow and Hawkeye didn't seem irrelevant.
-Great CGI and action.
-Dialogue was way better than expected. Funny without being cheezy.
-Non-formulaic fight scenes. Didn't feel like each hero was set up to use their power in one moment, but rather each faced the enemy in their own variety of ways.

Cons:
-Story clearly. Bad guy attacks, heroes group up and defeat bad guy.
-Boring villain. Maybe it's the genre, but most of these superhero movies have really lame backstories for their villains. Crazy guy who wants to cause chaos for no reason, power hungry guy who wants to take over. There was only a line or two about Loki wanting revenge on Thor. The focus was mainly on chaos and destruction.
-Lack of explanation for people with no background/didn't tie up loose ends. Why could Hulk suddenly control himself? What happened with Widow and Hawkeye? Why was Samuel L. Jackson so lame?
-Pissing contests between heroes. ZZZZzzz. We know what the end result would be.

Loki does not want to cause chaos for no reason. In Thor, it clearly shows his downfall when Odin told him the truth. Ever since he was a child, he felt out of place. The Asgardians are similar to traditional warrior civilizations that value strength, bravery, etc. Loki was inferior to Thor in those traits, which caused him to become out of balance. As for the chaos and destruction, how else would someone take control of a planet? Even in real life, wars are waged for control of land.

Banner lost control of the Hulk because Loki was influencing the group, which caused everyone to argue among another. That is why Loki wanted to get captured. Why else would he just sit on a cliff watching Thor and Iron Man fight? There is a moment at the end of the heated debate where Banner was holding the scepter and was about to transform into the Hulk. As for how Loki knows of this, it can be because he mind controlled Hawkeye and other SHIELD agents in the beginning. A lot of SHIELD personnel know of The Avengers Initiative and the contents (Hulk, Iron Man, etc). Loki just took the chance of hoping SHIELD would recruit their candidates, which paid off, although didn't work out completely.

What happened to Hawkeye and Black Widow? It was explained when Black Widow had the talk with Loki, that she was an expert Russian spy that was an enemy to SHIELD. Hawkeye was sent on a mission to kill her, but he didn't do it. Instead SHIELD picked her up as one of their own. That is why throughout the movie, Black Widow wanted to retrieve Hawkeye because she felt this was the time to pay back what Hawkeye did for her.

Show nested quote +

I don't think it was unnecessary. Thor is a Norse God and he is in the heat of battle by fighting Iron Man. Captain America jumps in to try to stop the fight. At this point, Thor is still in battle mode and still upset because of what Loki is trying to do to Earth and its population. Did you honestly expect Stark to sit down and have tea time with Thor? What he did perfectly fit his cocky and arrogant attitude that he is known for (comics or his last two movies). How was the heated debate between Rogers and Stark lazy? Their rebuttal is actually accurate and truthful to what they would say in their comic book counterpart.

On May 08 2012 05:42 Dfgj wrote:

Show nested quote +

That was the point, they were acting outside of reason and character because Loki was influencing them.

Exactly. Loki has the ability to influence others, which was was shown after the credits of the movie Thor, where he mind controlled Erik Selvig (also in The Avengers) into researching more on the comic cube/tesseract.

On May 08 2012 04:47 Dreamer.T wrote:
Just saw the movie with a friend. Had a blast watching it, lot's of great lines, and epic fights (Hulk vs Thor, Hulk vs Loki etc). I felt they really made Hulk look like the beast that he is. Iron man as usual was cool ass hell with his tech, and the other heroes were all uniquely entertaining in their own right.

+ Show Spoiler +

+ Show Spoiler +

On May 08 2012 01:41 Dfgj wrote:

Show nested quote +

I agree. That is the point of the concept for The Avengers, where some of the strongest heroes are suppose to unite against a common threat.

Last edit: 2012-05-08 07:23:56

XaI)CyRiC United States. May 08 2012 06:55. Posts 4163

Profile #

On May 08 2012 01:01 GefilteFish wrote:Cons:
-Story clearly. Bad guy attacks, heroes group up and defeat bad guy.
-Boring villain. Maybe it's the genre, but most of these superhero movies have really lame backstories for their villains. Crazy guy who wants to cause chaos for no reason, power hungry guy who wants to take over. There was only a line or two about Loki wanting revenge on Thor. The focus was mainly on chaos and destruction.
-Lack of explanation for people with no background/didn't tie up loose ends. Why could Hulk suddenly control himself? What happened with Widow and Hawkeye? Why was Samuel L. Jackson so lame?
-Pissing contests between heroes. ZZZZzzz. We know what the end result would be.

I don't have a comic book background. Never read them, don't plan to. I have watched the movies and know a little about the characters. Maybe the accuracy to the comics was a huge draw to some people, but I didn't care who was stronger/who would win in a fight. I care more about their reasons and motivations. While the screentime was split well, I felt that overall character story and progression was lacking, especially for Loki and his 'boss'. Mass chaos and/or taking over the world gets old after a while. Even with the heroes, I never felt a connection to any of them so strong that if one died I would have been upset, not that it was going to happen anyway.

I know some don't care about the story or how deep a movie is. But for a lot of people that is the point of entertainment. Media should tell a story - whether it's a movie, show, book, comic whatever. The first thing you ask is 'what was it about?' I don't care about deeper meanings or symbolisms, but story is important. This one was predictable and one-dimensional. You could have completely changed the problem/villain/main plot and still kept half of the movie the same.

Now I enjoyed it, and I think my money was well spent, and I'd recommend it. But I don't think that it was 'great' or 'remarkable' - I'd say decent.

I personally didn't have a problem with the story. With the amount of major characters who have each headlined their own movie already, I don't think there was any room for a complex, in-depth storyline. Also, this is a movie based on The Avengers, which is pretty much entirely about big bad guy attacks -> superheroes who are usually able to handle bad guys on their own group up together since it's a big bad guy -> by grouping together, superheroes are able to defeat big bad guy. Formulaic and cliched or not, that's what the source material is about, so that's what the movie was always going to be about.

I thought Loki and the Chitauri made for good villains. I agree that Loki's motivations seemed to be a bit scattered, i.e. humans are made to be ruled, freedom is a lie and against your nature! vs. I'm pissed about living in Thor's shadow, being adopted and not being king! vs. the Chitauri are too powerful and you might as well be on the winning side! However, he was still an interesting character, and it wasn't a big deal that he couldn't seem to make up his mind about why he was doing what he was doing. If anything, it seemed pretty clear that he was a very conflicted guy who was pissed off about being defeated by Thor and losing his crown, made a deal with the devil, and then regretted it but couldn't turn away because he had gone too far. I see nothing wrong with a villain whose goal was to create chaos and screw up the order of the universe because he hated the way things were. Again, anything more complicated than that would likely not have fit into this type of movie.

The lack of background information on the heroes was inevitable due to the fact that they were taking multiple headlining characters and putting them into one movie. There was enough there so that people would understand the basics of who they were, what they were capable of, and how they ended up banding together. Anyone who wants more details can go back and watch the movies, which they really should have watched beforehand anyway if they cared that much about knowing the characters. They were never going to have enough time to go through detailed backstories and explanations, and expecting them to is unreasonable. The same goes for the whole attachment to the characters issue. The attachment was supposed to be built by their own individual movies, doing so in this movie without doing an injustice to the characters would have just been impossible.

As for the Black Widow and Hawkeye, I hear they may be making spinoff movies for them in the near future. They were obviously not as developed as the other characters, but they were never the type of headlining superheroes that the others were anyway, even in the comics. What do you expect when you have two characters who are basically just really well-trained human beings vs. an Asgardian god, two genetically-mutated/enhanced humans, and a genius inventor who created the greatest piece of weaponry on the planet? I actually thought they did a pretty good job of working in what are admittedly inferior teammates into the story and making sure they played their parts in the grand battle in a way that made sense (i.e. not doing the heavy-lifting and acting more as support).

How was Nick Fury lame? Do you know anything about what the character is supposed to be? What were expecting him to be other than the guy who ran the organization who brought the various heroes together?

You can't complain about the lack of details or depth in the movie or its characters while at the same time admitting that you don't care to do any of the legwork to do so. The movie is based off of an existing franchise with an ENORMOUS amount of depth and detail, with a built-in fanbase that is demanding and unforgiving with regards to deviations from said material in any significant way. The movie was built to adapt and pay homage to that source material, which limited what they could do with it. The focus of this movie was always about bringing together a group of major superheroes who were capable of carrying their own comics and movies, and bringing them together to take down a bad guy. If you don't think premise is sufficient, then that's a matter of taste and not a failure on the part of the people making the movie. This was never going to be an Oscar-competing type of film, so it makes no sense to analyze it as one.

Beyond just the franchise, this was also a movie bringing together the main characters of five separate full-length feature films, each of which is a franchise in themselves, so you have to consider the other movies when assessing this one. This is not a standalone movie and was never meant to be one. What makes this movie so great and such an achievement is the way in which it was able to take on such a herculaen task and execute it so well within the confinements of a single film.

RusHXceL United States. May 08 2012 06:59. Posts 986

Profile #

I like Hulk smash.

looking for people mp8+ to farm or ubers.

XaI)CyRiC United States. May 08 2012 07:06. Posts 4163

Profile #

On May 08 2012 01:56 The KY wrote:Most of them felt unnecessary and like they were shoved in for the sake of it to me;
Iron Man vs Thor, followed by Captain America vs Thor? Absolutely unnecessary. In fact, if they had let Thor take Loki wouldn't that have pretty much solved their problem? But no 'genius' Tony Stark is like 'FUCK TALKING FOR A COUPLE OF MINUTES I'M-A FIGHT THIS DUDE ALL CAPS LOLOLOL'
Also the whole Stark vs Cap power struggle thing felt lazy. Yeah Cap is a leader and Stark is a rebel, they should totally fight for control, shove in a couple of lines where Stark says he doesn't play soldier and Cap calls him a douche. Let's have Cap abandon all reason and threaten Stark with a fight.

Man I always rag on this film every time I talk about it. But I did quite like it. Honest.

All of those fights were "necessary" as forwarding one of the major themes of the movie, i.e. taking a group of heroes who aren't used to being part of a team and getting them to work as one. The way Stark reacted to Thor stealing their prisoner is entirely consistent with his brash, egotistical and reckless character, which was established in the two Iron Man movies.

Captain America stepping in to try to make the peace between Stark and Thor to accomplish a greater goal is consistent with his character as a military captain. As established in his movie, he is the consummate soldier who believes that no single soldier is more important that than the whole or the cause (i.e. scene where he tosses himself on a grenade to save everyone around him, which is even referenced during his argument with Stark). That also explains why he immediately clashes with Stark, who is shown in his movies to be egotistical to the extreme and is not the type to toss himself on a grenade for others (again, as argued in the movie). Captain America challenging Stark to a one-on-one fight is consistent with his military mindframe as well.

Again, a lot of what you're complaining about is explained in the other movies. While this film is very entertaining as a standalone film (as many have attested to), it really shines when watched in the context of the other movies and the greater Marvel universe. Without putting in the legwork to appreciate that context, you're not going to be able to enjoy this movie to its fullest and there's nothing wrong with that because that's how the movie was made.

REDBLUEGREEN Germany. May 08 2012 07:18. Posts 1463

Profile Blog #

Captain America and Hawk guy were kind of lame. Liked everything else though especially the Thor vs Ironman fight and every scene with Hulk... the bass from his roars made the chairs in the cinema vibrate :D

XaI)CyRiC United States. May 08 2012 07:18. Posts 4163

Profile #

On May 08 2012 04:38 The KY wrote:Why did they need to find the tesseract so urgently? Wasn't the problem what Loki was going to do with it? Take Loki out of the equation and you've got plenty more time to get to the tesseract. What, did they think Loki was gonna tell them where it was?
And my problem with the fight was Stark's role in it's inception; rather than be like 'hey aren't you a friendly? Lemme explain how we're both on the same side here' he just says 'Loki is ours fuck off'.
And it sure seemed like a fight. Thor seemed to be doing some damage to Iron Man's suit that wasn't gonna be fixed with a lick of paint, and let's say Cap doesn't have a 'vibranium shield' (after all Thor didn't know he did); he smashes Cap in the head with a giant hammer and Cap is dead.

Also you know what I really didn't like? Like, the one genuine problem I have with the plot.
The bit where Black Widow tricks Loki, somehow, into revealing his plan is to release Hulk, and it doesn't matter in the slightest anyway. The world's greatest liar, apparently, has this conversation;

Widow: Let Hawkeye go!
Loki: No, you whiny bitch.
Widow: You're a monster.
Loki: My plan is to release the Hulk! Wait fuck.

That's his big genius plan? His character, I assumed, was meant to be a trickster, who outwits the Avengers rather than fighting them, but his scheme is to blow up a ship with explosives? Real clever, man. They'll never see it coming. Attack them with weapons; it's inspired. His only strength is a magic spear that hypnotizes people, something which is never explored.

My god. I've become one of those people that argues about superhero movies on the internet.

They needed it urgently because it's an item with unlimited potential for destruction and they didn't know what the bad guys were planning to do with it. If you know that bad people have possession of an unlimited power source, then you're definitely going to want to get it back as soon as possible just because of the potential risks. Loki being captured did nothing to dispel that problem, especially since they were all so suspicious about how easily Loki was captured and detained.

As for why they took Loki, he was the mastermind behind the theft of the Tesseract as far as they knew, so of course they would go after him to look for clues/answers. Also, as you argued, it was reasonable to think that having Loki under their control would limit the potential for the Tesseract doing damage. By the time they had captured Loki, he had already mindcontrolled multiple key people and gone on a killing spree. How does it not make sense to capture him as soon as possible, whether or not they're able to get any information from him?

Loki is a master trickster, but he's also extremely arrogant and obviously doesn't take the non-super powered characters like Black Widow seriously. Is the bad guy letting his hubris get the better of him theme cliched and overplayed? Sure. But it's consistent with Loki's character and his perspective of him being a god dealing with mere mortals.

As for the scheme, remember that his goal was to provide a distraction for Hawkeye to find the materials needed to open the portal, which he accomplished perfectly. He obviously had no fear of being captured, which also proved to be well-founded. All in all, his plan to allow himself to be captured to provide a distraction for Hawkeye, put himself in a position to sow dissension between the members of the Avengers and act as a homing beacon to locate the SHIELD flying headquarters, and unleash the Hulk and Hawkeye to deal a huge blow to SHIELD worked pretty well. It's certainly not a plan that failed to make any sense within the context of the story.