Review of The Avengers (2012) by Fdt44 — 04 May 2012

As a director and co-screenwriter, Joss Whedon is no stranger to mixing and matching genres, and 'Avengers' is no different; while it has one of the most engaging, well-written, and slickly paced screenplays ever known to Marvel-based films, met with spectacular action sequences, shot at scrolling multi-dimensional angles--the non-stop action foregrounded from the mesmerizing setpieces and cinematography--too, is the suprisingly clean wit that brings relief at the most opportune times; both when the action subsides and drowsiness kicks in, and when the overstimulation of explosions, sound effects, and "Hulk-fists" flood the senses.

However, notwithstanding its keen eye for diversity, and its frequent reminder to the audience that its characters are, real people with real lows and highs, and even larger hearts, albeit shown tacitly, 'Avengers' is, proudly so, a mind-vacationing summer caper; one that just happens to be much more tolerable, thanks to its ensemble cast's performances and the aforementioned flair.

Assuming the form, though, of the genre, the film is host to, well...problems. Further, it tries arduously to make the viewer unaware of its issues, usually of continuity, masking them up, both literally and figuratively, but fanboys and casual moviegoers alike, will be far too engaged.

Nonetheless, if one doesn't think too hard, 'Avengers' is an elite, alpha-male, man-amongst-boys spectacle that can't be missed. Put differently, it more than marginally exceeds its hyped expectations.

More specifically, though, the pairing of the script with each of the "heroes" is a delight in itself; each brings something a bit different to the table, and each delivers in their role. First and foremost, is Robert Downey Jr.

's Tony Stark. Downey benefits, arguably the most from the quick-punching dialogue, as he wears his arrogant, billionaire-playboy-braggart aura so balanced that, when on-screen, he is all the audience can look at; his performance plays out like he was born to play the character, "Shakespearan-bearded," and all.

One can't leave the theaters without Scarlett Johansson's Black Widow on their mind. As the tantalizingly tempestuous scarlet-beauty, she moves the screen with her walk, her talk, and her kick-ass, which apparently all can be done in one scene; think interrogation becomes interrogator.

Next, is the unexpectantlyn refreshing Mark Ruffalo who plays the night-and-day role of anxiously cool Bruce Banner and the robustly stalwart and indomitable Hulk. Aside from his own contribution as Banner--which he does wonderfully--is the remarkable semblance his CGI'd-Hulk draws to the original, Lou Ferrigno (the "hulking" homo erectus with a thick, bushy, black-and-gray brow as well as the same touch of humanoid sense of self).

Chris Evans' 'Captain' is also commendable, although, Evans himself, looks a good 15 pounds slimmer. He steps up to the role, but his same massive physique displayed in his own self-titled journey, is greatly reduced, which in turn, subtracts from his physical prowess.

In addition, Hemsworth's Thor looks and acts just as formulated--his Aryan, golden-locks and azure eyes, bulbous shoulders and arms and the same misplaced naivete and ignorance--fits Whedon's mold. Samuel L.

Jackson's Nick Fury, is no exception. While not as charismatic as the others, his "Shaft"-like spin, stern, in-your-face, and collectedly in control, is also apt the ensemble. And, although Renner's Hawkeye/Barton adds some action-filler, he doesn't quite offer anything much other than a few bicep flashes and stray arrows; such arrows that never seem to run-out.

But, that is only one, very minor, continuity issue found among the many others. At the same time, however, special mention goes to Tom Hiddleson's Loki. Now, here is a villain who is so unpredictably nefarious, that almost an entire film is centered around him, but it works.

I thoroughly enjoyed Hiddleson as Loki in "Thor," probably even more so than Thor himself, and again, he delivers with such darkly crafted charisma and snakily twisted facial expressions that is almost as fun to root for him as it is against him.

So, yes, each character contributes. But, I have to ask, what's up with Clark Gregg's Agent Coulson. Not quite sure if Whedon is pointing to a, let's say, "fruity" demographic or what; his role is not really necessary, and only kills extra time and strong moments.

As a whole, though, 'Avengers' packs an astounding beginning, a slow, estrogenic drama-anticlimax, followed by a resonantly solid close that does an incredible job at finishing on a high note; a ringing conclusion that acts as the world's best eraser--it wipes the distractingly uninvolved middle right from the minds of its audience--and re-draws a picture worth looking at: a superior, Marvel-action-flick-masterpiece.

Sadly for Whedon, not all are as easily manipulated.