An above-average follow-up, but disappointing compared to it's predecessor.

Rating: 7/10 (23 April 2015)

WARNING: THIS REVIEW WILL CONTAIN SPOILERS!
Whoa, there is a lot to talk to about "Age of Ultron". I remember watching "The Avengers" at cinema 3 years ago and highly enjoying the film. As a result, it's usually typical that I'm eagerly waiting for the next instalment. I was thrilled to see Ultron as the titular antagonist, I mean, what could go wrong? Watching the film today, I came to think of the film as being just "good" and nothing really special emitting from what Joss Whedon could have achieved.
"Age of Ultron" occurs sometime after Shield is disbanded after the events of "The Winter Soldier" (Another great Marvel in the Marvel Cinematic Universe). With the Avengers needing a break in saving the world, Tony Stark decides to join Bruce Banner in jump-starting a Chitauri Computer System known as Ultron. It succeeds, but is too successful as Ultron soon becomes sentient and plots to bring peace to Earth by eradicating humanity. And as usual, the Avengers have to clean up the mess, joined along by mysterious twins Pietro and Wanda Maximoff (Who start off as villains) and another sentient robot known as the Vision.
The Good: Of course, the Avengers are assembled near-flawlessly. Robert Downey Jr. continues to dominate Tony Stark/Iron Man with his quirky, energetic acting, Chris Evans delivers what he has to as Steve Rogers/Captain America and Scarlett Johansson portrays Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow with great flexibility and versatility. I admit not liking Pierto/Quicksilver, but I did enjoy the additions of Elizabeth Olsen's Wanda/Scarlet Witch who came off as interesting and intriguing and Paul Bettany's Vision, who was a brilliant addition to the franchise. Out of the heroes, Jeremy Renner was one who stole the show as Clint Barton/Hawkeye. He had so much development and much of the plot even focused on him and we had a nice touch with his family. Heck, he played a bigger role than "The Avengers" and this is where "Age of Ultron" holds one of it's strongest points. Ultron was the best character in the entire movie. He was dark, intimidating and downright sadistic, yet displays a very quirky and humorous personality like Tony Stark and I've got to say James Spader definitely nailed it as Ultron. He was WAY better than Loki. My only gripe was to see him battle the Avengers all alone for a longer period of time. Oh, and his final moments were beautifully crafted and a must-watch for the Marvel Fanboys. The visuals are spectacular as always, nothing much said. The soundtrack was well-crafted and Ultron's version of "I've got no Strings" is a great version of the original Disney classic song; Dark, gritty and haunting, it fits the film perfectly. Also, the fight scenes are amazing and yeah, it's a must-watch; intense, grand-scaled, exhilarating, it's what you had hoped for. And lastly, the post- credits scene; You HAVE to watch it if you're a real Marvel fanboy...
The Bad: Yep, with many goods to highlight "Age of Ultron" there is no doubt there will be some degree of junk thrown into this. Mark Ruffalo still portrays Bruce Banner/The Hulk masterfully, but his role in the film was weaker than I thought and I felt The Hulk was somewhat underwhelming myself. The Hulk's romantic involvement with Black Widow was forced and hammy and I felt it just hampered the storyline. Chris Hemsworth as Thor was kind of at his weakest. His sudden detour in the middle of the film was a mess and although it is a set up for "Ragnarok" I couldn't understand what on Earth is going on with his storyline. Aaron Taylor Johnson as Quicksilver just turned out to be meh. Unlike the one in "Days of Future Past, I found to be bland and uninteresting, unlike Scarlet Witch. Samuel L. Jackson was probably the weakest in terms of main characters. His role as Nick Fury was in my opinion, very limited and stale. His role in the final fight was also kinda meh to me. I mean, come on man, Sam Jackson could do way better than that. The film was also unnecessarily long (Do we really need 2 hours and thirty minutes for this film) and with fight scenes happening in such a short time- space, the film kinda gets boring and the pacing becomes somewhat jarred at times. Also, Ultron may be the film's greatest point, but I felt that he needed to be stronger. I mean, I don't want another villain who depends on an army to reign supreme. The side-characters were somewhat underwhelming and I'm not really sure if they were memorable. Don Cheadle's James Rhodes/War Machine makes an appearance, but so much little of him is actually seen in combat and Anthony Mackie's Sam Wilson/Falcon is downright useless. Really, he only appears for a few minutes and that's it. I'd at least expect a little from him.
In conclusion, I'd say "Age of Ultron" is a good follow-up to "The Avengers". Yes, it was somewhat disappointing compared to the previous one, but I believe there is still hope in this franchise, as marked by the post-credits scene. There was a lot of potential built up into this film. Some sky-rocketed, others just fell out of the scraps. In the end, it was a worthy film, but only if it could have been better...
A final rating of a 7.4 is the best I'd give to this film, whose closest number rounds up to 7. But I am positive there will be spark of light in "Infinity War". Only time will tell...