I don't know why Banner's comment about putting a gun in his mouth struck me as so very dark, in a movie where the Earth is in peril. But it really threw me.

I really want to see it again now. Like, right now. But I have to get ready to fly back home (I've been in San Jose visiting family for the weekend), and then I have a bunch of work ahead of me. Must see it again at the soonest possible opportunity.

But it really threw me

Well, because it's so personal. That's an emotion most of us can and might experience, whereas the feelings associated with defending the Earth from alien invasion? NSM.

I mean, that's why most action movies have an individual character at direct risk, so the audience can identify with the fear for that person; generalized fear for an entire population is less, um, incentivizing.

Pentagon Quit The Avengers Because of Its ‘Unreality’

The Pentagon halted its cooperation with Marvel Studios’ blockbuster movie The Avengers because the Defense Department didn’t think a movie about superheroes, Norse Gods and intergalactic invasions was sufficiently realistic in its treatment of military bureaucracy.

Moviegoers and comic fans know that S.H.I.E.L.D., led by Samuel L. Jackson’s super-spy Nick Fury, is an international peacekeeping/global surveillance/crisis response/quasi-military organization. But its relationship with the United States is murky. And that basically stopped the U.S. military, which is normally eager to cooperate with the film industry on blockbuster movies, from teaming up with the Avengers.

“We couldn’t reconcile the unreality of this international organization and our place in it,” Phil Strub, the Defense Department’s Hollywood liaison, tells Danger Room. “To whom did S.H.I.E.L.D. answer? Did we work for S.H.I.E.L.D.? We hit that roadblock and decided we couldn’t do anything” with the film.

...

But the ambiguity around what exactly S.H.I.E.L.D. is provides a vexing complication. If it’s an American governmental agency, what kind of constitutional authority does it exercise over the military? If it’s an international body, as the movie text suggests and Strub determined, are U.S. military personnel and equipment on loan to it through some kind of United Nations Security Council resolution? The questions may seem picayune, but they’re precisely the stuff that can cause an image-conscious military to yank its cooperation from a movie.

eta: Rest of article is a little spoilery.

Oddly enough, Law & the Multiverse talks about SHIELD today: [link]

I loved the bit about Banner's attempted suicide too. I think it was taken from the comics. They were going to put that scene at the beginning of The Incredible Hulk, but it was deemed "too dark."

A very appropriate Dork Tower: [link]

Frank is a skimmer. I posted that a few days ago.

He redid the art today (refresh if it looks the same as it did before).

OK, you guys have said everything I wanted to say about The Avengers.

We saw it Saturday in IMAX 3-D. First IMAX, first 3-D movie for me and it was fuckin' GREAT. We had the armrest that flipped up between Dan and me and we held hands (actually I kept gripping his hand like a woman in geekly labor) and I wiggled and jumped and made quiet squeeing noises and didn't have to pee and it was just fun as hell. LOVED. The audience was pretty geeky, so I may have let out a couple of "HELL YEAH's" were received with laughter and approval.

We'll be getting the DVD as soon as it comes out and watching again and again. D is hoping it is still in theatres when M comes this summer, because fuck his mom, we are totally taking him to it. He's seen the Hulk, so I think that 10 is old enough to see The Avengers.

Especially since he went as Wolverine for Purim. (Yes, I bought that costume for him. Do I get a Cool Geek Stepmom badge?)

It was SO geekily satisfying. We stayed until the end and loved the last extra scene.

But there was no shirtless RDJ. Only downside.