 |
|
| Tales of the Parodyverse >> View Post |
|
| ||||||
Reply Subj: I just saw the Avengers movie (spoiler-free comment within) Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 at 05:14:27 pm EDT (Viewed 10 times) | |||||||
Here's a summary of my views on the movie, with thanks to those whose feedback helped me formulate them. Spoilers ahoy. There’s no doubt that the Avengers movie is a success by several different definitions. It’s a record-breaking commercial success, vindicating the long game Marvel studios has played in setting up a connected world of superheroes. It’s a critical success, with positive reviews overwhelmingly outnumbering the negative, already cited by some as “the best superhero movie to dateâ€Â. It’s also been complimented for its technical proficiency, its broad appeal, and its proof of a particular set of marketing and release choices. But there are plenty of box-office smashes out there that have not sat that well with long-time comics fans, some of which have performed inexplicably well while other, more fan-beloved products have failed to find an audience. Fortunately the Avengers is not one of the undeservingly successful turkeys. So in this review I’ll be concentrating on what makes Avengers a superior product – and where it could have picked up even a few more points. All good stories have themes. The Avengers movie has things to say about individuality and teamwork, about the nature of heroism, about the impacts that the rise of superheroes might have on a society, and about leadership. Let’s consider how the film deals with each of them. The Avengers comic has always been about very different people banding together “to fight the foes no single hero could withstandâ€Â. That has inevitably led to intra-team conflict, to ego clashes, to developing camaraderie, and to eventual acceptance and respect. The Avengers movie addresses these things head on. There are no Avengers more distinct from each other than a pagan deity, a technocrat billionaire, an out-of-time super-soldier, and a rage-fuelled creature of radiation. The film takes time to establish each, then gives space for each to interact with all the others. In addition to some individual character arcs, the team as a whole has a development arc too, from “I don’t play well with others†and “We’re a time bomb†to “I’m bringing the party to you†and post-battle shawarma. Even better, we see the team forged in just the same way as we saw Tony Stark build his first armour in the Iron Man movie – slowly, painfully, dramatically, and leading to a major payoff. Sadly and remarkably, the film missed out on a potential high moment towards the end of the final conflict because Cap never got to raise his shield and clinch the team’s coming together by shouting “Avengers Assemble!†That was even the movie’s name across half then planet – come on guys! Each character offers a different essay on heroism. Steve Rogers is the classic hero, of course. The man has trading cards. Stark’s criticism of him that “everything special about you came from a bottle†is quickly proved wrong. Cap rises to each challenge and overcomes his personal doubts and problems to become the man that NYPD and the Hulk alike take orders from. Coulson assures Cap that “We could use a little old-fashioned,†and Cap brings the best of the past to the stormy present. Thor is a different kind of hero, literally straight from legend. Thor doesn’t really fear any threat here, despite overwhelming odds. All his weak spots are to do with his relationship with Loki. His foster-brother can and does hurt him, physically and emotionally, and Thor’s heroic challenge is to overcome that. But the hardest and most heroic thing he has to do is to put his pride aside and recognise that he needs the Avengers. Loki makes the error of never accepting that mortals can match an Asgardian god – until he discovers the hard way that Hulk is the strongest one there is. Banner’s heroism is quiet and less obvious. He’s holding back a monster by sheer grit. But this Banner isn’t a whining victim hiding out from the government. He’s working in a humble way to better people’s lives whilst managing his condition. When he finally voluntarily lets “the other guy†come out and play in the final act he’s demonstrating another kind of courage. The Black Widow doesn’t see herself as heroic. She hints at a very dark past, of things she has done and that have been done to her. Her heroism comes from her desire to “get rid of the red in my ledgerâ€Â. She begins by paying back Hawkeye – if she has affection for him she rationalises and conceals it behind that “debt†– then goes on to pay it back by saving the world. Hawkeye even comments that acting like that is uncharacteristic for Natasha; her story arc is about becoming a hero without even realising it. Clint Barton has less time to be defined as a hero because of the circumstances of the movie. His motivations are mostly about payback to Loki and redemption for his unwilling and murderous part in Loki’s schemes. The most obvious hero-development arc goes to Tony Stark. Cap’s jibes are telling. “What are you without the suit?†might have led to an excellent one-liner comeback but it also cuts right into Stark’s insecurities. “Would you lay on the wire?†sets up Iron Man’s sacrifice play at the conflict’s resolution, the moment when Stark proves himself a true hero by Cap’s definition. Offering harmony and counterpoint to these themes we have the baseline agent heroics of Maria Hill, the quiet dutiful determination of Phil Coulson, and the complex, morally grey actions of Nick Fury. Nine different takes on the definition of hero, many of them evolving in the course of the film, is an impressive narrative achievement. Factor in Loki’s anti-heroism too and that’s a lot of reflection for a summer action flick. This film finally ties together the strands woven in at least five movies that have come before (I’m not clear whether the original Hulk movie is in continuity or not). More than ever we see cause and effect of the coming of superheroes. The rise of Iron Man and other technological superhumans has begun an arms race that SHIELD hopes to win. The Destroyer’s rampage against Thor has focussed “the world security council†on the need for defences against massively more powerful alien races. The Red Skull’s (still unexplained) Cosmic Cube – or must we call it the Tesseract now? – offers one possible mechanism, but investigation into its properties serves notice to the universe that “The Earth is ready for another level of conflictâ€Â. The Chitauri invasion is by far the most public conflict in the movie Marvel universe so far. Cap’s wartime exploits were mostly in the European theatre of war and long ago. The Hulk’s rampages were briefly on-campus but mostly hidden away. Thor’s battle against the Destroyer took place in an Arizona town. Iron Man’s battles were public but limited. But the Avengers fight Loki in Manhattan, before the world’s media, while giant space monsters emerge from a cosmic hole in the sky to knock down tower blocks. The Avengers movie even develops this theme. The vox populi news items at the end of the movie show a world gone “Avengers crazyâ€Â. The team has truly become “Earth’s mightiest heroes†and the world is forever changed. Even the Hulk is briefly popular. Finally, the movie has much to say about leadership. Loki doesn’t have it. He’d be a bad king because “he lacks convictionâ€Â. “That’s not rulershipâ€Â, Thor tells him at one point, reflecting on the lesson the thunder god learned in his own film. Stark has to learn how to lead (“You’ve never lost a soldier, have you?â€Â) and to follow (“What else have you got?â€Â). Cap leads quite naturally. Fury disobeys his superiors, “Because your order is dumbâ€Â. The Avengers movie is constructed well enough that other themes could be found and described as well, but suffice to say that it is the depth and richness of the text which make this a superior production. The key to selling any fantasy story is usually to make the characters seem real. The most bizarre situations can be sold to a viewing audience if the protagonists reactions and interactions seem grounded enough. While we’re grinning at the sniping or hurting along with the heroes we’re not questioning the flying aircraft carrier or the Norse deities. The Avengers is blessed with some excellent characterisation backed up by crisp dialogue, delivered by some well balanced and measured performances from the main actors. Part of the tradition of Marvel comics is that the heroes meet and fight before they team up. Whedon understands the nine-year-old’s desire to know what happens of Thor hits the Hulk with Mjolnir, or whether the Black Widow could take down Hawkeye (yes up close, no at range). Fortunately, this film is smart enough to back up the juvenile contests with great motivations and a deftness of touch that prevents the story bogging down in pointless conflicts that don’t serve the characters. And it’s fun to see the Hulk trying to lift Thor’s hammer, or Thor discovering the special properties of Cap’s shield the hard way, or Stark’s reaction to getting hit with Thor’s lightning. This film uses a plurality of techniques to define the characters. Best of all it shows not tells. The introductory scenes of each hero set up everything that follows: Natasha “at workâ€Â, Cap alone in an outdated gym pummelling a bag, Stark inventing the future and so on. Interactions with the minor cast and with each other give us insights by the way others react. Coulson’s Cap-worship, Hawkeye’s survivor-rapport with the Widow, Stark’s banter with Pepper, all broaden our view of the protagonists. And at some point each Avengers gets one-on-one dialogue with Loki, and each has a very different kind of conversation with him. Cap’s confrontation is an inspirational defiance, defining Cap’s whole essence. Thor’s meeting is family soap drama. Natasha plays mind games. Fury plays power games. Hawkeye irritates him with a smartass arrow trick. Stark gets to trade banter. The Hulk… takes a direct approach to discussion, paying off on all the conversations before. Whedon manages to give each Avenger and each supporting cast member a moment to shine, and manages to mostly balance out the cast as an ensemble. Of particular merit is the attention given to the Black Widow, defined here much better than in her previous appearances and surely improved by it for subsequent features. Ruffalo’s portrayal of Banner has evinced much positive comment and the actor offers a commendable interpretation of his part which also offers a better insight into the Hulk and his mild-mannered host. Loki managed to be a creditable threat and a great foil for each of the heroes, with Huddlestone offering a while palette of reactions from tormented to smug, and finally to incredulous submission. If there is any weakness here it is in Hawkeye’s portrayal. The movie offers the grimmer and less interesting Ultimate Hawkeye more than the free-spirited loudmouthed showman of the actual Avengers. This can perhaps be excused given the circumstances that keep Hawkeye from the interactions the rest of the team get to have in the first half of the film, but Clint Barton did not shine as brightly as the rest of the cast. The problem is that a snarkier, smartass movie-Stark gets most of the lines that comics-Hawkeye might spout (“Doth thy mother know thou art wearing her drapes?â€Â) leaving Clint little to do. Even a “Shellheadâ€Â, “Goldilocks†or “Greenie†would have been welcome from movie-Hawkeye. Maybe another time? The battle scenes are very effective. Superhero movies are still developing a “language†of portraying fantastic action in a way that comics have had to develop over many years. Some techniques are the same, while others are necessarily very different. Avengers takes movie superhero action to another level. The fights are each different, each well-paced and well storyboarded, with mini-storylines of their own. This offers a better brand of action and ensures that the narrative continues rather than letting the audience switch their brains off for the bits with the explosions. Finally there were the easter-egg in-jokes. Project Pegasus and ROXXON oil were topped by “You have reached the Life Model Decoy of Tony Stark…†and “Puny god.†These throwaway details don’t just bring a grin to fans’ lips but help sell the idea of a bigger, coherent universe out there. That said, and for all that this movie had the best on-screen superhero conflict to date, there were still things that could have been better. The rank-and-file villains were generic and forgettable but offered the level of menace they were supposed to. Their battle machines were ideal for showcasing a variety of hero smackdowns, but they still lacked any real personality, being mere CGI cyphers to be kicked around. Cap’s role in the final battle seems a little light. Sure, he gets to save a bank full of people, but he, the Widow, and Hawkeye don’t get to do anything as visually interesting as the airborne Avengers. What was missing was some intermediate combat-oriented bad guys, “boss villainsâ€Â, bigger and nastier than the rank and file Chitauri, to offer significant one-on-one battles for Cap and the other human-ability Avengers. Cap taking out a Chitauri general seems like a no-brainer to me. The most glaring omission was the sidelining of the SHIELD helicarrier in the final act. Having gone to the trouble of setting it up as the coolest thing in the skies in act one, it turns out to be nothing more than a flying liability. A ground-based installation couldn't have been crippled with one blast arrow, couldn't have nearly killed Thor by dropping him, and couldn't have its entire security force distracted by falling from the skies so that a class 1 prisoner could walk away. The only thing the carrier does is launch a missile at the city to kill the only people with a chance of stopping an alien invasion. What we needed was another scene where the carrier gets to take on one of those big flying alien snake thingies. Let Fury unleash some wah-hoo whoop-ass on one of them using his expensive toy. Then let him ram another of those (non-existent) boss bad guys with his flying car. The visuals are almost universally excellent. A few slightly ropy CGI moments are masked by the sheer sweep of the whole, and some sequences are remarkable. Costume-wise, only Cap’s outfit was a slight let-down. Why bother changing from the original if you can’t make it look better on screen? What’s wrong with proper chain mail anyway? The movie’s genius was its ability to flip from dramatic to funny to poignant to exciting as dexterously as Iron Man navigated the canyons of Manhattan. It never stayed still long enough to get tedious or predictable. There was always a new conflict, a new dilemma, a new quip, a new situation to keep the story pumping. I wonder what this formula, now proven so successful, will do to subsequent superhero action films? I can only assume that the movie censors don’t know what “quim†means. All in all, a very good film, and for my money the best of its genre so far. I’d have been happier yet with Edwin Jarvis and Avengers Mansion in there, with a more authentic Hawkeye, and a Samuel L Jackson opening credits voiceover, “And there came a day…â€Â, but I’m more than happy with what I got. It’s a remarkable achievement and an unprecedented landmark in the history and development of the Avengers’ story. Anyone who wants to argue with that would be courting death. IW | |||||||
Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 4.0; on Windows XP
| |||||||
| |||||||
| On Topic™ © 2003-2024 Powermad Software |
