The Avengers (2012) *spoilers from post 1181*

mikhail wrote: »

That said, I loved the Avengers. Whedon called Star Trek "the perfect summer blockbuster" in a Comic-Con panel a couple of years ago. I agreed (to within practical limits - nothing is actually perfect), and I think he outdid it. I wasn't confident that even he could juggle that many characters effectively, but every character has some great moments. The action is shot with a clarity and a sense of space that is missing from nearly every blockbuster I've seen in a decade. And the jokes, oh boy. I'm not sure how you enjoyed Cabin more than this Johnny; it's a tenth as funny, and all the genre deconstruction in the world can't make up for that. I do have reservations: one or two points where the pace seems a little slack, the forgettable score as mentioned, and the somewhat over-familiar metalic alien threat, but they don't spoil the broth for me.

Fully agree on Star Trek - I hold that up as a shining light, a perfect example where the individual elements came together to create a highly potent cocktail of entertainment. There I was willing to forgive the plotholes and the predictability of the plot due to the sheer force of what was on screen: a feeling I only felt once or twice during The Avengers.

I think the pattern emerging here is that a lot of people really liked it in spite of its limitations (which I think almost everyone agrees on) while others were less willing to forgive the very same limitations despite acknowledging that it does many things very well: think it just kind of boils down to an individual's experiences in this case. Darko's post on the film is almost identical to my initial reactions, but with a positive spin whereas mine is more negative. Horses for courses and all that

As for Cabin in the Woods, to me that was such a fresh experience - one that took over familiar rules and made the audience re-evaluate them while having a terrifically fun time in the process. With The Avengers, there was this gnawing sense of over-familiarity. What it did, it did well, but what it did, I've seen many times before. I agree that moments were very funny, although only a handful of the unexpected jokes really worked for me in terms of delivery, whereas others were simply wearily predictable punchlines. While I fully agree that the directorial clarity was admirable, it also slightly lacked punch: almost too clean, if that makes any sense, which it mightn't. I suppose the counter argument is that the clarity is indeed the stylistic flair, but there were a few moments of interesting decisions - whether it was an askew camera angle or the strangely engaging colour palette when Hawkeye - that suggested to me there was the potential for something more than mere clarity.

I guess as a long-term Joss Whedon fan, I was expecting surprises, wit and an emotional involvement that was outside what is reasonable to expect from what is (in essence) a genre production. Serenity, Cabin in the Woods, Dr. Horrible, good Buffy and - hell - even Dollhouse (which rewarded those who committed despite its hella shaky start) all provided that, or at least most of that (I'll admit Cabin in the Woods lacks emotional punches, but has the rest in excess). In comparison, The Avengers was just a highly competent blockbuster. Worth watching? Sure! But also, to my disappointment, forgettable. Here and on the social networks I've heard many people refer to it as the most awesome or amazing cinema experience they've had in a while: a solidly enjoyable albeit frustrating one was all I got.