I’ve just returned from seeing the Avengers movie. I’ll post a proper review with spoilers when trans-Atlantic cousins have had an opportunity to view the film, but here are some all-but-very-generic-spoiler-free impressions.

1. The movie was too short. It was densely packed, well paced, and included many good scenes, but this is one story that deserved an extra twenty minutes to decompress. How ironic that I should be complaining about the lack of decompression in an Avengers story! It was very watchable. Roll on the extended DVD edition.

2. Characterisation and interaction gave the movie heart and substance. Everyone, even some minor characters, got a story arc and a moment. I’d have preferred a snarkier wise-assier Hawkeye, but given the storyline there’s reasons for him not to be.

3. 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?

4. 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. Loki managed to be a creditable threat and a great foil for each of the heroes – he even got a one-on-one dialogue moment with each of them. The post-credits behind the scenes major adversary will be a game-changer.

5. The Hulk stole the show at the end.

6. The movie is very quotable.

7. There were a couple of things I’d have liked to see in there that would have made my enjoyment complete, but given how much good stuff there was in there, including some only-for-the-comics-fans bits, it seems churlish to carp.

8. In terms of pacing and content, this movie has relatively few slow-wow “widescreen” moments of the type comics tried to deliver with two-page panels that were popular in the early post-Busiek era, and hardly any of the talking-heads Bendis era material. In its frenetic, packed, detailed, multi-scene, heart-stirring, roller-coaster style this film was Perez all the way. Except for the big impacts, which were Kirby.

In conclusion: A very enjoyable film, well constructed and well delivered, that will have plenty of repeat viewing value. This is the movie Avengers fans always felt their heroes deserved and it has raised the bar on superhero films – and yet there’s still the room for an even better sequel.

Honestly, I'm thrilled to hear that it's been getting rave reviews, for the most part. I've stopped reading or watching things about it for the most part but I'm pretty skeptical about being able to make it a full week without spoilers when most of the world will have already had a chance to view it. Fingers crossed though.

You know, I still remember the horrible adaptation of the "Avengers" television show coming out back in the first year of the BZL and thinking the day of seeing Marvel's Avengers on the big screen would never come. Back then, there were rumors that Tom Cruise was circling a possible "Iron Man" film, and Marvel had finally actually gotten to the screen with "Blade". So we've come a long way.

I'm really looking forward to seeing it all come together, and I'm quite happy that Disney looks to be rewarded for their investment into Marvel and this series particularly, as I suspect that the characters have secured a nice extension on life well beyond the shaky comic-industry.

...is this official clarification of the status of Quicksilver and the Scarlet Witch re future Avengers movies:

http://blogs.coventrytelegraph.net/thegeekfiles/2012/04/comic-book-bites-scarlet-witch-and-quicksilver-could-appear-in-avengers-and-x-men-doctor-strange-and.html

Anyway, Avengers took £17.5m on day one in the UK, surpassed only by Star Wars 3 (Sith) and Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. It's looking possible that there'll be an Avengers 2.

1. I didn't think it was too short, but I did think it took a bit long to set up at the start. Of course, if it -were- longer overall i wouldn't have minded at all either.

2. Agreed. Each character did get their moment really didn't they? But there were also those moments of character-to-character interaction that shone as well. Thor-Iron Man. Iron Man-Cap. Tony-Bruce. Tasha-Hawk. All perfectly interacted.

3. I was really annoyed with the zipper down the front stripe. Black Widow's zipper on the other hand... Otherwise I thought the CG was excellent. Particularly the villains in the fight scenes.

4.Loki almost stole the show again, but not as much as he did in the Thor movie. I particularly enjoyed his chat with the Widow.

Oh yeah - stay for the post-credits everyone! Jaw-Drop!

5. The cinema burst out laughing (in a good way).

6. Indeed.

7. Go on tell us. What can we old Avengers fans who have known each other for more than 10 years do if not entertain each others churlish carpings?

8. The fight scenes were spectacular, I thought. There were so many moments in my head where i was saying "yep- that's the Avengers!".

I want to run and see it again already (and barely just came out of the cinema and came straight here to post!)

Thank you Joss Whedon.

That is all.

Al B.

That's partly why it needed extra length. The initial set-up scenes wouldn't have seemed too long in proportion to a longer film. I also felt that another beat was needed between the characters bickering and the characters becoming a team.




I was pleased that the less obvious interactions were there too, like Banner/Widow and Thor/Coulson. And the Loki/Hulk character moment was especially fun.




Cap's costume was right back when Kirby designed it. Anything else just detracts. And his helmet looks dumb without the wings.




I was pleased that Loki was established as a physical threat as well as a plotter. I'd be interested in a DVD commentary track with Huddleston talking about what he thought was going through Loki's mind at various points.




Interesting direction choice.




There were several excellent Hulk moments, but I won't cite them here for spoiler reasons. According to IMDB, the Hulk was voiced by none other than Lou Ferrigno!




A minor problem I had was that the snarky wisecracking movie Stark tends to get lines that would go in the comics to snarky wisecracking Hawkeye. I could have used more showmanship and attitude from Clint Barton; I'd even have settled for a "Goldilocks" or a "Shellhead."




I'll cover that in a week or two when I can mention things without spoiling things. However, I suppose the lack of a proper Jarvis won't come as a surprise to many viewers of the franchise, so I'll mention that one. Without Jarvis in Avengers Mansion there's a key element missing from any Avengers tale.




Fight scenes of this kind have to be brilliantly and precisely storyboarded, each one different and each having a mini-plot all of its own. The fights here has that. This was the first Marvel movie I've watched that didn't feel like it needed one more polish and an additional twist to do justice to the conflict.

I'd object again to Hollywood's obsession with ripping heroes masks off for the final combat but Cap's wingless headpiece looked so butt-ugly the bad guys actually did us a favour this time.




I had a similar experience.







Those execs who canned Firefly are feeling pretty dumb today. Again.

This further explanation came out today:

Another update on Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver and the deal with FOX.
FEIGE: We both have them. There's a specific arrangement with those two characters that would allow us to use them with "Avengers," but not discuss or reference their mutant or Magneto-related lineage. They can use them as mutants and as Magneto's relatives, but cannot have anything to do with "The Avengers."

So they seem to have an easier "in" on the X-men side of things, where as the Avengers can't really reference anything about their existing past or where their powers come from. I suppose they might be able to hint at it, while leaving the specifics out however.

Hope that just means we have extra doses of both of them

I passed from previous marvel movies (Iron man, cap, etc), but I definitely want to see this one. Funny, I never thought it would be any good, but reviews are great. Of course, I just loved Buffy (watched it a couple of years ago for the first time..

Are you seeing it tomorrow/today?

I can see this, but I could also see the set-up trying the patience of the more casual movie-goer. I'm not sure what I would really want to expand, personally... I thought the script offered a nice buffet of character and motivations, giving a little taste of each of them. I was pretty satisfied in general.

I guess if I were to want anything expanded, it would have been Thor's side of things. We're left to make a lot of inferences and given some very simple explanations for his involvement.





He felt like he was coming around towards the end, so perhaps in the sequel he can be a little more of a smart-ass.




I have to say, I was quite happy with the 3D in this one (which is good because the only options at my local multiplex were 3D and Imax 3D.) I though the battle through the streets of NY looked pretty great as a result of it. I was really quite shocked at how much they had going on compared to every other Marvel film in terms of blockbuster action.

I liked Cap's outfit a lot more when he lost the mask. I'd be fine with him staying without it in sequels, myself. It just doesn't make much sense when neither Widow or Hawkeye use any kind of face/head protection.




I quite liked Loki in this. His army made for fun cannon fodder. I would hope in the sequel that they would give us a few more villains for the team to face off against, though. I'm not talking about a random jumble of unrelated villains, but some substantial henchmen that can be more than just fodder. Whedon gave us this, in a way, but I can't really say more without spoilers.




I've seen the suggestion that the popularity of the Hulk in this film is convincing Marvel to change their position and perhaps do another Hulk solo film after all. While I'm definitely more interested in one after seeing him in The Avengers, I have to wonder if perhaps less isn't more when it comes to the Hulk. Maybe he's like the wacky neighbor on a sitcom... great as a supporting character, but the show falls apart if you make him the focus.




I actually thought it was quite restrained coming from Whedon... I actually expected more quips, especially after seeing reviews mention how funny it was.




We may have to open the spoiler-filled thread to get into the various comic nods that were there.




Visually, I really liked it. I was a bit worried from early screenshots that it would all feel too much like sets, especially the SHIELD stuff, but by and large it worked for me.




I'm curious where they go with the sequel. The post credit scene doesn't seem like it would offer something different enough.

I guess so. I guess I saw it at 8:30pm on week night so was glad it ended when it did so i could get home to sleep. I'm not a youngster anymore.

Having said that, more Avengers would have been a good thing!







Given he was out-of-it for most of the movie I'm not surprised his personality was not at the fore. Though it would be good to see this developed in the next movie.

I too was waiting for a "Goldilocks" comment that never came, I have to say.







The alien-craft-sky-snake things were neat they way they swam through the air.

I really like the Thor-IM fight scene in the mountain region.

I also like the way they slowed down certain aspects of some of the fights - i was like looking at a kick-ass panel in a comic book (or as close as you can get in a movie).

I want to go and watch it again for that.




Agreed.







I won't spoil who it is - even though his thread is now marked spoils, but I would wonder how they can pull him off as the next vision without it being a similar "demi-god from myth" type thing. Which may seem like too much of a repeat of Loki. I have to admit my jaw dropped when I saw him grin but. Didn't yours?

They could easily retcon-tie-in Carol Danvers as Ms Marvel to using him as a villain too, to bring in another female avenger next time.

That got me thinking though - what other villains could show up next? I was thinking:

Ultron: pros - we could get Hank and Jan too! cons - more silvery robot CGI would be too similar to the aliens in this one perhaps.

Kang: It's Kang! Nuff said.

Masters of Evil: Now this has potential! How cool would Radioactive Man look on the big screen?







The world does not need another Hulk movie.














Here.

I agree Jarvis was not Jarvis was a bit of a let down, but then on reflection I'm glad they gave him a nod at all, I guess.

I miss the Pyms not being in it.








Agreed. I hope there is less SHIELD stuff in the future though.








There is nothing that says they even have to use that next time, right?

Still, it will be interesting to see how/if they do.

The main beat I felt was missing was between the team deciding to be a team post-Coulson and them getting into the big fight at the end. I could have used a smaller not-all-combat mission to start the meshing.

Other than that, I'd have liked to establish a proper Cap/Clint dynamic, maybe with Steve addressing Hawkeye's after-possession funk. I'd have like a Natasha/Hill moment, to differentiate them and to show how they relate. More Cap/Fury would have been good; Fury's the only character who really had no story arc here, although plenty of character definition. And more Thor doing non-fighting stuff.










The problem is that a smartass Tony Stark robs Clint of a lot of his lines. The "mother's drapes" quip could as easily have been real Hawkeye's dialogue. The other defining aspect of Barton is his showmanship and that was a bit sparse too. Contrast with the Avengers cartoon: the one I re-watched this week had Hawkeye bursting in with "Relax, guys, I'm here to save the world!"




It's raised the bar.

I haven't seen a 3D version. I try to avoid those.







I liked Cap breaking it up, with the answer to that classic Mjolnir vs shield fan debate.







The kids and I intend to catch it again tomorrow.







Cap wears his outfit because it's known, recognised, and trusted - and issued to him (by FDR). Give the man his head-wings and proper chain mail.




Marvel has really done the whole massive army of adversaries thing for a while now, after all those Stanebots in Iron Man 2, frost giants in Thor, and now the alien invaders in Avengers. I think a different kind of threat would work better for Avengers 2. Perhaps masters of... evil?




I loved the statement that provoked the grin.

If I'd been doing the scripting I'd have slotted in Kang for A2 and revealed that the "second phase" project that Hill and Fury rescue at the start of the movie was the Ultron technology for A3.




Ms Marvel doesn't interest me all that much. The only iconic characters now missing are Wanda and the Vision. And since each of the current team exemplify a major and different background - super soldier, technology hero, mythical deity, monster of science, superspy, and highly-skilled showman archer - I don't think Carol's different enough. Mutant witch and synthezoid are.

Still, now we know why the cosmic cube keeps getting such a high profile!













Pretty damn cool.




The only way to do a proper Hulk movie is to get into the Peter David MPD stuff and have the Leader go all out to gamma-irradiate the world.




Not even with Mr Fixit?










Jarvis and Avengers Mansion are by far the biggest omissions, affecting the whole tone of the story. A little Gyrich might have been fun too.

I would have liked a little supporting cast interaction. I wanted Pepper Potts, Betty Ross, and Jane Foster comparing notes. I wanted Nick Fury to stamp down hard on Thunderbolt Ross.










It's why we need Avengers mansion - not Avengers tower.













Well, Ben Kingsley's signed up as villain for Iron Man 3, and the rumour is location shooting in China. That suggests the Mandarin, so there could be a link between his alien (Makluan) power rings and he-who-appears-post-credits.

Meanwhile, tomorrow's Avengers cartoon guest stars Rocket Raccoon - honestly - plus Adam Warlock, Star-Lord, Groot, and Quasar - versus Michael Korvac.

Admittedly, the Avengers cartoon has captured what makes Hawkeye such a great character. Renner is too much the overly-cool "Ultimate" Hawkeye, and it makes him rather dull by comparison. In all honesty, if they had to cut somebody to make room for a new Avenger next time, Hawkeye would top my list... and that surprises and kinda saddens me.




I liked that not only did the heroes get their own big moments, their iconic weapons did as well. Cap's shield deflecting the energy of Mjolnir, Iron Man's suit hitting "400%" capacity, and Hulk completely failing to lift Mjolnir.

And I will give credit to Hawkeye's automated quiver... that was pretty cool. I'm quite annoyed that Black Widow wears those bracelets and yet only uses tiny handguns in the big fight scenes. In all honesty, they looked pathetically inadequate, and how much cooler would it have been to fire widow's stings, gatling-gun style from the cartridges circling her wrists?




I do wish they had at least taken a page from Video Games, and thrown a few mid-level boss characters in there to add variety to the fight... Especially for Captain America, who was stuck on the ground. Even "Raiders of the Lost Arc" knew that after watching Indy punch out half of the Nazi army, you needed to put him up against a big, shirtless guy under a flying wing. Some visually larger alien monster officer or super-trooper for Cap to beat up in more of a struggle would have kept it from seeming like his part in the finale was lesser.





That was indeed a great set-up for that particular villain reveal... and it likely meant absolutely nothing to 95% of audiences. I admire that.

However, what I was alluding to, pre-spoilers, was actually the idea that Hawkeye filled the role of Loki's kick-ass henchman... Only, he was "cured" and changed sides before the final battle, which removed a big interest from the villain's side and left only the leader and cannon fodder.





I'd enjoy Ms. Marvel, although if they were going to use her I would have put Carol Danvers in Maria Hill's role. I think, however, there might be deleted scenes with Maria Hill, as from actor's statements I expected there to be more about her in the film... Samuel Jackson said multiple times that they don't see eye-to-eye, and that she's much more in the pocket of that shadowy commission... Yet I never really saw evidence of this in the final film.

I think the Wasp would be a great addition, although apparently Whedon tried to work her in with earlier scripts and just couldn't get it to work, so she was cut. I'll be curious to see if they ever get Ant-man off the ground and introduce Pym and her.

On the subject of future Avengers, I've heard the repeated, completely-baseless theory that Agent Coulson was going to end up being the Vision... and I actually wouldn't mind that having some truth to it now that they've apparently killed him (although I found the scene somewhat suspicious.) I've never felt you needed Simon Williams to make the Vision work, the interesting thing about him in that regards is just the question of whether he's his own man or just a copy of another. Basing his brain waves off of Coulson connects the audience and the Avengers to that question in an emotional way, without having to introduce and kill off Williams (a character that Whedon has said he'll never add to the team anyway.)




I was really hoping for a hint that the mansion was going to be introduced at the end... More as a place where they could get together out from under SHIELD's eye.

I also was checking all of the names in the video reports at the end, but I didn't see any that I recognized. Unfortunately, Gyrich might not be available... Fox used him (and killed him) in the first X-men movie. If they actually have a role planned out for her, I'm guessing Hill was introduced so that she could supply that kind of antagonism.




I liked that they established that none of the big 4 trust SHIELD, making it feel less like they're some SHIELD task force.

Enjoying this thread. But what about other comics nods you and others mentioned earlier?. I don´t know that much of Marvel U. to catch them.

And about having the vision...always that they make him look cool(visually) and not robotic at all(personality wise). And i don´t know if that will be easy to do in movies. Otherwise don´t use him. They already changed IM and HW personalities-if I were a fan of the last one I would be really upset with the movie-, and I am fine with it, but Vision´s personality was too good in the early years to mess up with.

Indeed. Clint needs to be significantly broadened out if he's to hold his own with the others.




I thought everybody's specialities were well observed. The Widow's first "information-gathering" scene and Cap's moment with the beleagured New York police also come to mind.




Yes, that was a wasted opportunity, especially given that they even featured in the final credits graphics.




Yes, that would have been a useful addition.

The other big omission was not giving the Helicarrier anything to do other than be attacked. Cool as it is, throughout the movie it's nothing but a liability. A ground-based installation couldn't have been cripped with one blast arrow, couldn't have nearly killed Thor, 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 troop carrier 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 bas guys with his flying car.




This whole movie has been very cleverly marketed, and the new villain;s identity has now gone viral.




I'd certainly buy an extended edition of this.




Hank and Jan would seem to be suitable cast to intriduce when Ultron's turn as villain comes round.




Interesting theory, although it might put a dampner on a Vizion/Wanda relationship, given that Coulson was 'cellist'.




The biggest omission was Cap not yelling "Avengers Assemble!" - especially given that this was the title of the movie across half the planet.




I tried and failed to glimpse the names of the Security Council when they appeared on the video monitors.




If there was any doubt that the Avengers should be a trusting adjunct of SHIELD it syrely evaporated at the point Fury was over-ruled and the Helicarrier tried to nuke NY.




A briefly-glimpsed sign identifies the research facility at the start as Project: Pegasus. There's a ROXXON oil ad in the NY background (a ROXXON gas station also featured in the Coulson short "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way To Thor's Hammer").




it would require some good casting and a sympathetic script.

By the way, I'd love to see Hawkeye guest star in the next Cap movie against Baron Zemo's Masters of Evil: Radioactive Man, the Fixer, the Crimson Dynamo, Moonstone, Quicksilver and the Scarlet Witch. Of course, two of the Masters might defect part way through, making a quartet of cooky heroes.

A very good point. Even I was wondering what the use was in that thing taking off... Seeing it in battle would have been a great addition.





Apparently Whedon has said that he trimmed the film down from something that was over 3 hours, but that he doesn't believe in putting any of it back in. "Thor" apparently had a great deal trimmed from it as well and never got any kind of extended release. We'll have to see if the shift over to Disney changes the likelihood of Marvel releasing special editions, but for now I think we can only count on a lot of cut scenes included among the extras.





I know Whedon was quoted as saying, in answer to the question of how you follow up something this huge in a sequel, "By making the next one more intimate and personal." (paraphrasing)

Ultron is the most personal of adversaries for the Avengers, in my opinion... provided the right roster.





I assume you mean "dating a cellist", according to that little bit of dialog between Cap and Stark.

Actually, I think that helps. The Vision needs that test to affirm that he's his own man. Think of that Harras written issue where the Vision and Crystal go to help Alex Lipton's father and wife, and replace Crystal with the Scarlet Witch.

Honestly, that's the benefit of using Coulson (regardless of the Cellist) as the basis for the Vision instead of introducing Williams. Since SHIELD will likely be a constant in these films, it makes it very easy to explore the question of whether his actually is Coulson, or if people expect him to be Coulson. One assumes there would be plenty of people on the Hellicarrier (not to mention among the Avengers themselves) who would know and react to this new being walking around with Coulson's brain patterns.

Besides, the smart way to play the Vizh/Wanda relationship is to introduce the attraction in one film, and then build up the external resistance to them being together in the next, before you actually let them come together. Throwing them together in the span of one movie wastes the potential.

Of course, none of it matters a lick if they don't expand the cast to include either of them.


And in answer to Yo's concerns, my guess is that this whole Coulson/Vision rumor began (long before the Avengers came out and Coulson died, mind you) because his personality is actually a pretty good fit for the Vision, minus the fits of rage. He doesn't come across as emotionless or mechanical, but he does come across as unflappable, intelligent, and resourceful in a way that is almost, for lack of a better word, robotic. Just add some angst about who or what he is that can boil over into rage and I think you have a pretty good template for a take on the Vision that I'd enjoy.





I looked at those too, but I don't believe that any names were displayed... just coded numbers. Is that shadowy "World Security Council" from the comics anywhere?

I will say that Powers Boothe would make a pretty damn good Cornelius Van Lunt.





When Stark is trying to dodge Coulson's call, he answers the phone as "Tony Stark's Life Model Decoy", referencing SHIELD's robotic duplicates.

I do wonder what might be included on some of those computer screens within the SHIELD helicarrier.




Now that is an excellent idea, and could work for the next Avengers as well.

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 date”. 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 withstand”. 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 ledger”. 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 conflict”.

    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 crazy”. 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 conviction”. “That’s not rulership”, 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?”) and to follow (“What else have you got?”). Cap leads quite naturally. Fury disobeys his superiors, “Because your order is dumb”.

    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 work”, 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?”) leaving Clint little to do. Even a “Shellhead”, “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 villains”, 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…”, 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

So now the film sits at over $1 billion in a few short weeks (a number that The Dark Knight needed its entire run to make), it has set the opening weekend record here in the states, and followed that up with the first ever $100m+ second weekend.

I really could have never predicted we'd even get an Avengers film someday, let alone one this wildly successful. It's nice to know that the characters will now last for more generations regardless of the survival of comic books, as nothing that hits this kind of success is abandoned completely.