AngryJoe: Avengers: Age of Ultron Review

AngryJoe and Company Review and Discuss the Latest Marvel Film, Avengers: Age of Ultron. How does it compare to the first film?

AngryJoe and Crew discuss spoilers, easter eggs, infinity war and the future of Marvel films in our Post Review Discussion of Avengers: Age of Ultron!

About AngryJoeShow

AngryJoeShow - Just one Guys Opinion on Games, Movies & Geek Stuff.


  1. Joe, we know you loved Man of Steel. Let it go.

  2. Sooooooo… you’re on JohnTron’s next Starcade episode then?

  3. iron man was TRYING to get hulk out of the city he failed bu he at least tried

  4. the difference between this and man of steel in terms of collateral damage is that avengers MENTION the civilians and TRY to save them, man of steel did not the only time MoS show civilians being save is at the end when he killed zodd

    • Not only do they try to save them, their very first thought is “there will be a battle, we have to get them out of the danger zone before it starts”. In fact the whole last act was not about defeating the villain, it was about rescuing the civilians which were still in the city. If not for them they could have simply blown it up before it rose too high and then taken care of Ultron. But because there were still Civilians around they first had to evacuate them and fight Ultron off in the meantime.
      Superman punches Zod through three buildings. Iron Man (who also has to fight the Hulk alone because everyone else is down) constantly scans the area for collateral damage and then leads the Hulk into an empty building while ordering Jarvis to buy it.

      • Superman didn’t punch Zod through any buildings. Need a reminder? Watch this:

        • Then what about that 7-Eleven that blew when Supes shoved Zod thru it? Wasn’t I-Hop damaged when he flew Faora into it? Oh I know this one doesn’t apply but I have to mention it; the part where Zod shoves a fuel truck at Supes and instead of just stopping it he jumps over and let’s it slam into parking garage behind him which then causes the truck to explode and take have the building with it. Now that’s being a real Superman.

  5. Honestly, the thing with the Hammer was one of the most unexpected moments in the movie, did you have to spoil it in the non-spoiler part?

    And if you don’t get the difference between the destruction in The Avengers and the one in Man of Steel, it is useless to try to discuss it.

  6. ironman will be in civil war

  7. tezeract=space ether=reailty Loki staf=mind purple gem=power last two stons are soul and time

  8. Joe, let’s get one thing clear: it’s not just about the level of destruction, it’s about how it deals with the destruction.

    Destruction in superhero films is pretty much inevitable. The difference with Man of Steel is that Superman never goes out of his way to actually protect human life or minimize civilian casualties. He never tries to get out of the way of a building, or evacuate people, or try to maneuver a fight away from populated areas. Meanwhile, throughout the entire film the Avengers specifically find ways to mitigate the death toll, even if they don’t always succeed. Hell, the entire third act of Ultron is built around saving human life- not just all the people on Earth, but specifically everyone trapped in with Ultron’s robot army. Hell, Hawkeye goes back to save one kid trapped in the rubble, risking his own life in the process.

    Yes, there’s more destruction in AoU, but the Avengers at least looked like they cared. Clark Kent, on the other hand, could barely bother to help others except when his hand was forced. It just made him come off as remarkably callous and hard to empathize with.

    • Superman was fighting one of one with a flying superpowered Kryptoinan who outmatches him in fighting skill. Zod dominated most of the struggle, there was little Clark could have done about it. Both the Chitauri and Ultron drones both could be taken out by something as simple as bullets and arrows.

  9. ::SPOILER::

    Unlike Man of Steel the Avengers looked for ways to get innocents OUT of harms way, and their FIRST priority was to save everyone they could. Heck, even Hulk (as Hulk not Banner) who is the basically pure Id saw what he caused (once he recovered from the “Spell”) and was horrified by it. That is IMO why he refused to be turned back into Banner and calmly flew off to the middle of nowhere. They also had a solution that would have solved the Death of the planet issue about 5 mins into the fight but it would of killed everyone in that part of the city so they tried for a better solution. Heck, the final 5 to 10 mins of the fight was getting everyone to safety leaving 2 behind possibly to die in order to do so. That is the difference with MoS. They wanted to save everyone and when they couldn’t it caused them great pain. Heck, it destroyed Banner (The only reason Hulk was in the climax was it was Hulk out or Die).

    • Hulk was horrified at the destruction because HE was causing it. He was the Zod equivalent in that scene, not Superman. Also the only reason the Avengers were able to evacuate everyone was because of the last minute reinforcements from SHIELD. If it wasn’t for them, the Avengers would have killed everyone on the asteroid.

      • I think you’re missing the point which is that the filmmakers acknowledged the need for superheroes to protect the innocent civilians in this Avengers and the first Avengers, something that MOS had no consideration for at all during the movie other than plot convenience. Superman saved people during the big battles 3 times; Lois, the helicopter Pilot and the Family at the end which gave Supes the poor excuse to snap Zod’s neck. Truth is I don’t care if Joe or anyone else likes MOS all I want them to do is stop defending it and even though they like it, honestly admit it is a bad movie that was poorly made. Everybody likes bad movies, I have my favorites but at least I’m willing to admit they’re bad. Doesn’t mean I still don’t enjoy them. MOS is one of those movies, so just let it go Joe, cause history will prove you wrong again and again as time passes.

  10. BTW, they didn’t just Mention Wakanda they introduced Black Panther’s primary antagonist…Claw (the arms dealer). The brand on his neck was put there by Black Panther for stealing the Vibranium.

  11. Moviemantweeter1999

    i just thought that quicksilver was the weakest character out of them all but that’s just me. I would also like to see you do a video on how dc can learn from marvel and build on there movies. speaking of DC, I think it’s dumb how batman has a metal suit but that’s just me. but i agree with you on that romance it was just really stupid and forced. It’s really cool that you watch the blacklist too that show is awesome.

  12. Joe, except for Jonathan Kent, everything about Man Of Steel sucked. Get your arrogant head out of your ass, please. I don’t need to elaborate on the differences between both films since it would be redundant at this point.

    • What’s wrong with him loving it?

      • Nothing. But it is pretty much pointless to keep harping on it. This was supposed to be a review of Age of Ultron and he turned it into yet another defence of Man of Steel. He won’t convince anyone who doesn’t like Man of Steel at this point.

        • He’s hardly the only one to bring up Man of Steel in an Avengers 2 review. A whole bunch of other reviewers brought it up to reiterate that they hated it. Why is he any different?

  13. In that dude’s defense, I like some Michael Bay stuff, too. This came at the PERFECT time. I just saw it yesterday. It was pretty good, not quite as good as the first one but still pretty darn good. The jokes were good but I don’t think that there were as much of them. The action was great. They went a bit too far into the “Iron Man 3” character study trap at the wrong time for my taste and with Ultron, he went from confused to evil in one scene. He needed at least one other scene.

    I’m so excited for Marvel’s upcoming movies. My only complaint about Man of Steel was the beheading of Zod. It just felt so non-Superman-like. I had no other issue with that movie. I thought that it was pretty great.

  14. Skipped the first while of the video because I have no interest in Man of Steel

  15. I liked the love story

  16. Ok, minor thing i wanted to say. Every main Avenger has romance aspect to their story.

    Thor has Dr. Foster
    Stark has Pepper Potts
    Captain America had Agent Carter
    Hawkeye has his *spoiler*
    Hulk had Betty Brant
    black Widow was the only one that didn’t. They have rectified this in a way that seemed believable and the fact that she feels like a monster because of her training and brainwashing makes them have a sensible connection.

    • I am not opposed again her having a romance. But the difference is that in all those romances you just mentioned, the Avenger was the clear lead and the female was “the love interest”. There was a distinct emphasis in the male character. By pairing Natasha with Bruce (who is, btw, 15 years older than her, while she is alongside with Steve the youngest of the Avengers he is the oldest – if it were the other way around, the writers wouldn’t have even considered a romance between those two), they turned HER into the love interest and made the romance all about him and his needs. It would have been different if they had, for example, paired her with Falcon. Not only do those character have a nice chemistry, they are also roughly the same age, and since Falcon is a side character while she is one of the original Avenger, the focus would have most likely been on her, not on him, making him the love interest in the set up.

  17. The one part that bothered me graphics-wise was Ultron’s face. If you watch, it flexes and bends like it’s made of rubber, which on the one hand gives him more realistic human-like expressiveness, but on the other makes him look almost like a cartoon. Given that his face is supposed to be made of metal, I’d expect it to be more rigid. Having it all flexible like that spoils the illusion of the metal man and makes him look weak and vulnerable. This is something they got right with Iron Man – his suit really looks like it’s 100% metal. Where they want things to bend, there’s a visible join between two rigid parts. In all five movies he’s been in, you almost never see metal bending, and when you do, it’s because he’s been seriously damaged. Ultron, which remember is based on the same technology as the Iron Man suit, completely turns that around by having a rubbery flexible face.

Leave a Reply