Avatar image for shroudofsorrow
#1 Edited by shroudofsorrow (6001 posts) - - Show Bio

OK, so maybe "so many" is a bit hyperbolic, but in my (admittedly limited), experience, AoU is consistently singled out as one of the more heavily and unloved MCU films. Honestly, it feels like AoU is almost as disliked and bashed as the first two Thor movies and Incredible Hulk. And I just don't get it. I loved Avengers: Age of Ultron. I thought it had a very good Ultron voiced brilliantly by James Spader, wonderful action and visuals, some of the usual great Whedon deadpan quips, and honestly, a solid story of Stark letting his fears get the better of him and driving him to make a terrible mistake. All of that seems like a perfectly solid movie to me.

I mean, I know a lot of people disliked the Banner/Black Widow romance, but I honestly thought that was fine. And if Ultimate Spider-Man and Kitty Pryde is acceptable, I fail to see how Banner and Nat is anymore outrageous or illogical a pairing. And even if you don't like it, that shouldn't ruin a movie by itself.

Other then that, I really have a hard time thinking of just why this movie is so looked down upon and even hated by so many. Can someone fill me in here? Just what are the reasons people give (if any), for bashing AoU? What are the most common criticisms? Because I really can't see just what it is about this movie that makes it an "unfavorite" of the MCU collection.

Avatar image for life_without_progress
#2 Edited by Life_Without_Progress (24672 posts) - - Show Bio

I mean, it's not necessarily "hate". It's just disappointment that they didn't do much for the story and felt like a retread of some of the plot lines from the first Avengers movie.

Needs a little more world building.

Avatar image for shroudofsorrow
#3 Posted by shroudofsorrow (6001 posts) - - Show Bio

@life_without_progress: I don't know, I felt like the second movie's story was relatively distinct from the first, but OK.

Avatar image for saberscar223
#4 Posted by Saberscar223 (4423 posts) - - Show Bio

People think Ultron is a bad villain because he wasn’t like his comic counter part. I like Ultron in the movie

Avatar image for jedixman
#5 Posted by JediXMan (42722 posts) - - Show Bio

It's very... meh. Whedon's kind of snarky writing gets old fast (especially with regard to Ultron) and the "wow" factor that was so prevalent in the first movie was not enough for the sequel.

Also I don't see a lot of hate for the first Thor movie. A lot of people think it's decent to good; maybe not great, but it's a fine origin movie. Dark World deserves all the hate it gets.

Moderator
Avatar image for eternaldarkfury
#6 Posted by EternalDarkFury (1722 posts) - - Show Bio

Because Ultron sucked ass

Avatar image for richubs
#7 Posted by Richubs (4766 posts) - - Show Bio

Because the movie was marketed to be the exact opposite of what it ended up being.

Not once was I threatened by Ultron.

And the movie was pretty average even if the marketing had been on point about its tone

Avatar image for christianrapper
#8 Posted by christianrapper (6289 posts) - - Show Bio

critics don't like It because it seemed like it was just setting up future movies. it also had plot threads that were abandoned later. critics also hate generic villains. ultron was just a generic robot villain and he had a totally asinine plot for destroying mankind. it was way too convoluted and totally unnecessary. some comic book fans don't like it because they strayed away from the plot of the comics. ultron was extremely easy to defeat.

Avatar image for shroudofsorrow
#9 Posted by shroudofsorrow (6001 posts) - - Show Bio

@jedixman said:

It's very... meh. Whedon's kind of snarky writing gets old fast (especially with regard to Ultron) and the "wow" factor that was so prevalent in the first movie was not enough for the sequel.

Also I don't see a lot of hate for the first Thor movie. A lot of people think it's decent to good; maybe not great, but it's a fine origin movie. Dark World deserves all the hate it gets.

I don't know, I kind of like Whedon's snarky writing, and I especially love James Spader's deadpan Ultron. I think he makes that character more entertaining honestly by way of giving him that sort of oily, snarky sadism versus what comic Ultron is often written as. I don't think it was "meh" at all.

Avatar image for shroudofsorrow
#10 Posted by shroudofsorrow (6001 posts) - - Show Bio

critics don't like It because it seemed like it was just setting up future movies. it also had plot threads that were abandoned later. critics also hate generic villains. ultron was just a generic robot villain and he had a totally asinine plot for destroying mankind. it was way too convoluted and totally unnecessary. some comic book fans don't like it because they strayed away from the plot of the comics. ultron was extremely easy to defeat.

1. What plot threads?

2. Then they would be hypocrites, as Ego, Hela, and Kilgrave are in no way more sympathetic or nuanced (they're actually all worse), and yet everyone loves Thor: Ragnarok and Jessica Jones and Ego is generally cited as a good MCU villain. So if Ultron is a bad villain because he's an evil destroyer, then why are Ego and Hela exempt? I also disagree that Ultron was "generic". I think James Spader's performance and the sarcastic, snide, quip-heavy personality make him feel distinct enough. I don't think he's anymore generic than the aforementioned Ego, Hela, and Kilgrave, all of whom were well liked by the critics (especially the last one).

3. I don't think it was an asinine plan; he was basically trying to recreate what wiped out the dinosaurs, only do it artificially. I don't see how that's "asinine". Convoluted maybe, but it would have worked in theory had he not been foiled.

Avatar image for johncena69swag
#11 Posted by JohnCena69swag (3960 posts) - - Show Bio

I still think it was better than civil war. James spaders voice was incredible. But yeah you can't really cram all of Ultron in a 2 hour movie without turning his story into a somewhat generic evil ai murderbot story. Ultron deserved the infinity war treatment.

Avatar image for mazahs117
#12 Edited by MAZAHS117 (12716 posts) - - Show Bio

I don’t hate it. I wouldn’t count it as an all-time great, but it has all the stuff that makes for great cbm moments; the team vs Hydra, Hulk vs Hulkbuster, and the team vs the Ultron-bots defending the Vibranium core is something ripped outta the pages of an Avengers comic. Great Chemistry is there between the cast, like the Avengers Tower party scene and some really good stuff between RDJ and Evans characters. Hell, I didn’t even mind the Hulk/Widow bit, I thought it was a good scene between Ruffalo and Scarlett. ... The downsides for me at least, is how Thor was handled, his little side arc seemed out of place or forced or somethin, like they didn’t know what to do with him exactly. And while Ultron started out great and menacing, the quips and sass got old quick for me.

It’s been awhile since I watched it, but looking back on what I remember there’s more good than bad I think

Avatar image for shroudofsorrow
#13 Posted by shroudofsorrow (6001 posts) - - Show Bio

I don’t hate it. I wouldn’t count it as an all-time great, but it has all the stuff that makes for great cbm moments; the team vs Hydra, Hulk vs Hulkbuster, and the team vs the Ultro-bots defending the Vibranium core is something ripped outta the pages of an Avengers comic. Great Chemistry is there between the cast, like the Avengers Tower party scene and some really good stuff between RDJ and Evans characters. Hell, I didn’t even mind the Hulk/Widow bit, I thought it was a good scene between Ruffalo and Scarlett. ... The downsides for me at least, is how Thor was handled, his little side arc seemed out of place or forced or somethin, like they didn’t know what to do with him exactly. And while Ultron started out great and menacing, the quips and sass got old quick for me.

It’s been awhile since I watched it, but looking back on what I remember there’s more good than bad I think

I basically agree with this except for Ultron's quips and sass getting old. I loved his "Oh for god's sake!" moment, and that was fairly late in the movie. And again, isn't a sarcastic and quippy Ultron better than a more generic, screaming maniac raving about how much he hates the meatbags?

Avatar image for alavanka
#14 Posted by Alavanka (2590 posts) - - Show Bio

Ultron was too underwhelming to be a villain for an Avengers film. He would have worked better as the villain for an Iron Man solo movie.

Avatar image for whyzoserious
#16 Edited by WhyZoSerious (1784 posts) - - Show Bio

Cuz it's very good among great movies.

Avatar image for mazahs117
#17 Posted by MAZAHS117 (12716 posts) - - Show Bio

@mazahs117 said:

I don’t hate it. I wouldn’t count it as an all-time great, but it has all the stuff that makes for great cbm moments; the team vs Hydra, Hulk vs Hulkbuster, and the team vs the Ultro-bots defending the Vibranium core is something ripped outta the pages of an Avengers comic. Great Chemistry is there between the cast, like the Avengers Tower party scene and some really good stuff between RDJ and Evans characters. Hell, I didn’t even mind the Hulk/Widow bit, I thought it was a good scene between Ruffalo and Scarlett. ... The downsides for me at least, is how Thor was handled, his little side arc seemed out of place or forced or somethin, like they didn’t know what to do with him exactly. And while Ultron started out great and menacing, the quips and sass got old quick for me.

It’s been awhile since I watched it, but looking back on what I remember there’s more good than bad I think

I basically agree with this except for Ultron's quips and sass getting old. I loved his "Oh for god's sake!" moment, and that was fairly late in the movie. And again, isn't a sarcastic and quippy Ultron better than a more generic, screaming maniac raving about how much he hates the meatbags?

Ultron started out great, like really great when he attacked the team after becoming self-aware right after the party scene. He was equal parts menacing, sinester, intelligent with just a bit of a snide superiority attitude about him..but went slowly down hill from there I thought. James Spader is talented and more than adequate acting wise to give a performance more than generic, but villains typically are an opportunity for MCU flicks, there’s been some really good actors/actresses that have been cast in villain roles with the MCU, but I suspect Disney keeps the actors/actresses that play them on a short leash creatively for reasons unbeknowest to me. I‘m glad you liked him, but Ultron really just ended up not being my cup of tea

Avatar image for captainplanet_2
#18 Posted by Captainplanet_2 (51 posts) - - Show Bio

Because it was misleading. It was not age of Ultron just a week of Ultron.

Also Black Widow Hulk was super cringy and Black Widow considers herself a monster because she is Sterile . Seriously Marvel!

Avatar image for vulkanian
#19 Posted by Vulkanian (658 posts) - - Show Bio

Because Ultron acted completely out of character and the title of the movie is a reference to a comic book about an apocalyptic world where Ultron takes over and humanity is extinct except for a few heroes.

Then the movie comes out and it’s nothing like it was advertised to be. It was more like Two Days of nUltron.

Avatar image for shroudofsorrow
#20 Posted by shroudofsorrow (6001 posts) - - Show Bio

@alavanka said:

Ultron was too underwhelming to be a villain for an Avengers film. He would have worked better as the villain for an Iron Man solo movie.

I don't think Ultron is too underwhelming to be an Avengers villain; he's one of their greatest enemies in the comics. I think he was a logical choice for a villain in an Avengers movie. And, given that he is, as I just said, one of their main enemies, I think it was inevitable that the Avengers movies were going to use him at some point.

Avatar image for atmexle
#21 Posted by AtmExle (591 posts) - - Show Bio

Ultron was nothing like what was portrayed in the trailers, in fact, the whole tone of the movie is completely different. He was basically a robot Tony Stark and wasn't menacing the least bit. I know he was built after Tony, but there are ways they could have made him scarier.

He didn't seem like a "team buster" and had trouble with many Avengers 1v1, very underwhelming indeed especially if you have read the comics and how he's able to contend with multiple Avengers at once.

The movie also took too much screentime to set up other movies like Ragnarok, Civil War, Infinity War and what have you, doing that made the plot a lot weaker. However, upon a rewatch, those things actually made the movie a lot stronger.

Avatar image for alavanka
#22 Posted by Alavanka (2590 posts) - - Show Bio

@alavanka said:

Ultron was too underwhelming to be a villain for an Avengers film. He would have worked better as the villain for an Iron Man solo movie.

I don't think Ultron is too underwhelming to be an Avengers villain; he's one of their greatest enemies in the comics. I think he was a logical choice for a villain in an Avengers movie. And, given that he is, as I just said, one of their main enemies, I think it was inevitable that the Avengers movies were going to use him at some point.

In the comics. Not the version we got onscreen.

Avatar image for foxerdes
#23 Posted by foxerdes (10257 posts) - - Show Bio

I was disappointed because it seemed so much different than what the trailers portrayed it as.

Avatar image for davidharewood14
#24 Posted by DavidHarewood14 (1485 posts) - - Show Bio

I love that movie. I am also suprised people hates it

Avatar image for itouchedtheboat
#25 Posted by ITouchedTheBoat (3392 posts) - - Show Bio

cuz they haters bruh

Avatar image for christianrapper
#26 Posted by christianrapper (6289 posts) - - Show Bio

@shroudofsorrow: it was an idiotic plan that was way too complicated. He could have just as easily set off all the nukes, screwed with technology , poison the world’s water supply, etc. they obviously had threads that they abandoned. Remember thanos already had an infinity gauntlet but in avengers 3 he had to have one made.

Avatar image for sc
#27 Posted by SC (18159 posts) - - Show Bio

I enjoyed it personally, but I do admit I had higher hopes.

My guess would be people generally had high expectations that weren't met, and I would actually even blame the trailers a little bit, for misleading people to a degree. What I mean by that, is that I am a huge James Spader fan. I rarely consider myself a fan of many actors, he is one of the few, mostly his Boston Legal and Practice work. I actually liked his deadpan snark as Ultron, but I would have liked it even more, if he had that, but also could, on a dime, switch to a more chilling and intimidating menace, the same way I felt he came across in the trailers, with the remix of "I've Got No Strings". That never happened though, he was sort of a joke that used numbers to overwhelm, and a big heavy rock essentially - and there is nuance there and symmetry with Iron Man and all that - but I think I would have enjoyed a more physically imposing Ultron, that needed some cool Avenger team work and power combos to defeat, as well as a bit more oomph.

In hindsight though, they probably wanted to reserve that sense of individual intimidation for Thanos.

I think Suicide Squad suffered from similar problems. The Queen Bohemian Rhapsody was really popular, I liked it too, but I actually preferred the trailer sense and mood of the trailer that preceded it, which, incidentally used a remix too, this time "I Started a Joke" I felt it gave Suicide Squad an unnerving chilling feel, the actual movie (which I enjoyed mind you) felt more generic and incoherent.

Basically I want a movie that has an innocent theme song that is subverted to be an edgy, sinister, creepy unnerving feel to it. What superhero movie can use Mary Had A Little Lamb in an edgy dark... oh wait, The Silence of the Lambs, nevermind.

Moderator
Avatar image for magian
#28 Posted by Magian (151738 posts) - - Show Bio

Mostly because it wasn't better than the first Avengers movie. As I think I have said on a similar thread, it just didn't take the franchise to the next level.

Avatar image for payneintheass
#29 Edited by PayneInTheAss (11771 posts) - - Show Bio

Lot of hype

Similar to what happens with TDK and TDKR

Avatar image for anthp2000
#30 Posted by ANTHP2000 (27767 posts) - - Show Bio

It was a very enjoyable movie, but objectively had a whole bunch of deep quality problems.

Avatar image for immadnice
#31 Posted by ImMadNice (1380 posts) - - Show Bio

Age of Ultron was great

Avatar image for green_tea
#32 Posted by Green_Tea (10529 posts) - - Show Bio

Bruce and BW’s romance came out of nowhere, plus in the ultimate comics at least there was actual build up and development to Pete and Kitty’s relationship

Avatar image for darkthunder
#33 Posted by Darkthunder (2689 posts) - - Show Bio

It was a good movie. The only fault with it was Qs. The only guy I loved the most and he gets killed. Ultron was funny but not at all like an intelligence

Avatar image for gracetrack
#34 Posted by Gracetrack (4678 posts) - - Show Bio

It's better than Avengers 1, Civil War, and Infinity War, in my opinion.

Avatar image for nucleon
#35 Edited by Nucleon (3466 posts) - - Show Bio

@shroudofsorrow: I mean, I know a lot of people disliked the Banner/Black Widow romance, but I honestly thought that was fine. And if Ultimate Spider-Man and Kitty Pryde is acceptable, I fail to see how Banner and Nat is anymore outrageous or illogical a pairing. And even if you don't like it, that shouldn't ruin a movie by itself.

Bah. Natasha pretty much slept with everyone in the comicbooks; I don't see what so strange about it, furthermore that it looked rather clean as far as human relations are concerned.

I don't dislike the movie, I just happen to think it is a rather ordinary film. It was Whedon's TV nature coming back right at him. It wasn't bad, just not as special as the other two Avengers movies. I rate it 6/10 whereas I rate the first and last ones 7 and 8, respectively.

Avatar image for adamtrmm
#36 Posted by adamTRMM (9240 posts) - - Show Bio

Hate is a strong word. Disappointing turning point would be more like it.

1. Misleading trailers. Made it look like there would actually be stakes (they effing saved everyone, even the dog... how sweet. And sterile) and tonal shift compared to first movie when it was nothing but a lie.

2. Ultron... Oh damn, "look we have yet another snarky quip master right here, but now, wait for it, evil and robot! how cool is it?!" Yeah, no. First, he didn't even feel like an antihuman AI which is what he is supposed to be. No cold logic, no strong points about human bullshit, just Tony Stark 2.0, now fully iron. And don't tell that he was based off of him, he shouldn't have been in the first place. I mean, they even gave him lips to humanize him... how pathetic was that? It was afraid to make him a commentary on the dangers of technological revolution we're experiencing which was the most natural thing to do. I mean everything about him reeked of lazy writing. Speaking of which...

3. No novelty. Same old dynamics (beside probably Nat/Bruce thing, which was pretty random I think), same old snarks, same old never actually getting into it. It kinda showed Whedon has no range actually.

And so on. Not in the mood to make a full review. I will say it isn't a bad flick for what it was, with some even good things to it. But in the end? It was a major disappointment to me. A moment I realized MCU has become a riskless business.

Avatar image for ready_4_madness
#37 Posted by Ready_4_Madness (16555 posts) - - Show Bio

- Ultron never felt like a threat.

- The last fight was a much weaker version of the first Avengers.

- The dialogue was bad.

- Quicksilver was underwhelming.

- The Action was the movie’s only redeeming factor.

Avatar image for helloman
#38 Posted by Helloman (30115 posts) - - Show Bio

They don't.

Avatar image for nucleon
#39 Posted by Nucleon (3466 posts) - - Show Bio

@adamtrmm: Ultron... Oh damn, "look we have yet another snarky quip master right here, but now, wait for it, evil and robot! how cool is it?!" Yeah, no. First, he didn't even feel like an antihuman AI which is what he is supposed to be. No cold logic, no strong points about human bullshit, just Tony Stark 2.0, now fully iron. And don't tell that he was based off of him, he shouldn't have been in the first place. I mean, they even gave him lips to humanize him... how pathetic was that? It was afraid to make him a commentary on the dangers of technological revolution we're experiencing which was the most natural thing to do. I mean everything about him reeked of lazy writing.

Yeah. Totally right.

But admitedly, he was hard to fit in: His story in the comicbooks is one about Oedipus complex and a complicated web of parentage with many Avengers, effectively making him part of their familly. IMO he would have benefitted from more character development - a shame, because Ultron is definitely in the Avengers' top-3 rogues.

Avatar image for adamtrmm
#40 Edited by adamTRMM (9240 posts) - - Show Bio

@nucleon:

I think the OC aspect of his character is a bit overrated. And it isn't obligatory. In the end of the day, he became what he was by absorbing all of the misery and frustrations Pym shared with him. Eventually it sort of reprogrammed him. And since we had Stark with his Iron Patrol and quite a few innuendos on how he's perceived imperialist and fascist and what not, I think his concerns could've been just as successfully integrated and mirrored onto his AI system. Which in totality with continuous nature of unsolvable human crises would lead that AI to gain its new identity of Ultorn as the Ultimate solution to the human question, for example.

See if I can spin in way it makes sense for movie all while respecting the source material, I think professional writers can too. They just didn't want to...

Avatar image for shroudofsorrow
#41 Posted by shroudofsorrow (6001 posts) - - Show Bio

@shroudofsorrow: it was an idiotic plan that was way too complicated. He could have just as easily set off all the nukes, screwed with technology , poison the world’s water supply, etc. they obviously had threads that they abandoned. Remember thanos already had an infinity gauntlet but in avengers 3 he had to have one made.

Avatar image for shroudofsorrow
#42 Posted by shroudofsorrow (6001 posts) - - Show Bio

Bruce and BW’s romance came out of nowhere, plus in the ultimate comics at least there was actual build up and development to Pete and Kitty’s relationship

Not it didn't. They met and became a couple in the span of a single comic issue. Didn't seem like there was much build-up to me.

Avatar image for nucleon
#43 Edited by Nucleon (3466 posts) - - Show Bio

@adamtrmm: Without the OC aspect, Ultron is just another AI-type of ennemy; but the OC gives him (sick) human traits that makes him deviate from his cold programs, and definitely taints his every actions in the end. It is the way he feels human.

I agree he was being too much humanized in AoU, and not in the right way: His alliance with the twins was out-of-character, and he wasn't scary - Ultron in the comics is scary, with the mouth furnace and robotic tone. But IMO the movie's worst problem is that it is way too alike Iron Man 3.

Avatar image for farkam
#44 Posted by Farkam (12036 posts) - - Show Bio

Long, noisy, empty, pathetic let down of a villain, repeat of first avengers, new characters are duds, yeah...

Avatar image for marvelanddcfan24
#45 Posted by MarvelandDCfan24 (7537 posts) - - Show Bio

There was more quips than substance

Utrons mannerisms were way to human his metal mouth and face would move like a human and bend weird plus he sucked

Story lacks substance, wayyy to many quips, ulteon wasnt used properly

Avatar image for shroudofsorrow
#46 Edited by shroudofsorrow (6001 posts) - - Show Bio

@farkam said:

Long, noisy, empty, pathetic let down of a villain, repeat of first avengers, new characters are duds, yeah...

I don't think it was "noisy and empty". I think the movie had a solid enough Ultron story that saw Tony Stark giving into his fears and making a huge mistake based on that fear. I don't think that's "empty". Not any more than something like Thor: Ragnarok, which was mostly concerned with being a fun time rather then anything resembling what Tony Stark has to go through in AoU.

I also don't see how it's a "repeat" of the first film; this movie doesn't deal with an alien invasion, and the team is already formed rather then needing to come together. Obviously there are similarities between the two, but why wouldn't there be? They involve the same characters and director. But I don't think that makes one a "repeat" of the latter.

There was more quips than substance

Utrons mannerisms were way to human his metal mouth and face would move like a human and bend weird plus he sucked

Story lacks substance, wayyy to many quips, ulteon wasnt used properly

Again, I don't see how it lacks substance; a story about Tony Stark nearly destroying his own team through his own fear and foolishness doesn't seem like a lack of substance. I also don't see how a story like that is any less filled with substance then many other MCU films are (The Thor trilogy, Ant-Man and Wasp, Guardians of the Galaxy, etc.). Likewise, I don't think the amount of quips in AoU is any worse then the amount of humor found in most MCU movies (including the ones I just mentioned).

OK, so at this point, I'm seeing a pattern with the reasons here. Namely:

1) A lot of disappointment over how Ultron was handled

2) A feeling of false advertisement regarding the movie's tone being lighter then the trailers made it seem

3) Feeling like the second movie didn't do enough to feel distinct from the first film.

4) A hatred of the quips and humor

I've seen other reasons given, but these seem to be the four most common. I honestly don't agree with the first or fourth at all, and the second and third aren't reasons enough to hate or be highly critical of the movie in my mind. But hey, at least now I have a better sense of why so many people (unjustly), hate on this film.

Avatar image for marvelanddcfan24
#47 Posted by MarvelandDCfan24 (7537 posts) - - Show Bio

@shroudofsorrow: its not a hatred of quips or humor there was just way to much of it and it was used at horrible times and much of it wasnt funny whatsoever look at Infinity War there was a bunch of quips and the movie is very much liked

The reality is AoU is the worst Avengers film get over it

Avatar image for adamtrmm
#48 Posted by adamTRMM (9240 posts) - - Show Bio

@nucleon:

Without the OC aspect, Ultron is just another AI-type of ennemy; but the OC gives him (sick) human traits that makes him deviate from his cold programs, and definitely taints his every actions in the end. It is the way he feels human.

At worst give Stark that role. But like I said, I disagree. Seeing him dissing humanity and exploiting their best inventions against them PROPERLY would already be satisfying enough.

I agree he was being too much humanized in AoU, and not in the right way: His alliance with the twins was out-of-character, and he wasn't scary - Ultron in the comics is scary, with the mouth furnace and robotic tone. But IMO the movie's worst problem is that it is way too alike Iron Man 3.

Can you elaborate?

Avatar image for christianrapper
#49 Edited by christianrapper (6289 posts) - - Show Bio

@shroudofsorrow: man. It’s ok to admit that movies change course sometimes. All series do it. It’s obvious that’s not the same gauntlet. Thanos isn’t even the same Heck, odin even had a fully formed infinity gauntlet. Marvel was not building to infinity war ending the way it did in part 3 the whole time. It’s almost impossible for a series with 21 movies not to have them. Denying obvious ones just doesn’t make sense. It’s ok to love a series without denying the facts. I love the movies but I am not stupid. All movies and series have flaws.

Avatar image for ipvman
#50 Posted by IPvMan (866 posts) - - Show Bio

Ultron.