"THE AVENGERS" (2012) Review

"THE AVENGERS" (2012) Review

Back in 2007, Marvel Studios set out to do something that DC Comics managed to achieve some forty-four years ago through a Saturday morning animated series. The studio initiated a series of movies based upon some of its company's popular comic book characters. This series first culminated into the 2012 hit movie, "THE AVENGERS". 

The initial group of comic book heroes that became a team in "THE AVENGERS", turned out to be the following - Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, the Hulk, the Black Widow and Hawkeye. The first four starred in their own movies in what has become known as "Phase One" of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). And the last two characters, the Black Widow and Hawkeye, appeared as supporting characters in 2010's "IRON MAN 2" and 2011's "THOR" respectively. Each movie, starting with 2008's "IRON MAN", hinted at the formation of Marvel Comics' team of superheroes.

Written by Zak Penn and Joss Whedon and directed by the latter, "THE AVENGERS" begins with Loki, the villain from "THOR" and the latter's adopted brother, making a deal with the leader of the Chitauri aliens called the Other to lead an army on Earth, in order to subjigate the human race. In order to do this, Loki needs to retrieve the Tesseract, a powerful energy source originally found on Earth in "CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE FIRST AVENGER". The Tesseract opens a doorway that allows Loki to arrive a top secret S.H.I.E.L.D., use his scepter to enslave a few agents, Dr. Eric Selvig and Clint Barton aka Hawkeye and take the Tesseract. 

In response to Loki's attack, S.H.I.E.L.D. Director Nick Fury reactivates the Avengers Initiative. He, along with agents Phil Coulson and Natasha Romanoff aka the Black Widow; recruits Steve Rogers aka Captain America, Tony Stark aka Iron Man and Dr. Bruce Banner aka the Hulk to form a team and stop Loki's plans and recover the Tesseract. Both Captain America and Iron Man manage to capture Loki in Germany. But during a flight back to the States, Thorarrives and frees Loki, hoping to convince him to abandon his plan and return to Asgard. Instead, a confrontation ensues between the three heroes before Thor agrees to accompany them all back to the Helicarrier, S.H.I.E.L.D.'s flying aircraft carrier. Despite Loki being a captive, the Avengers still need to find the missing Tesseract. Even worse, Loki does not remain a captive very long.

Nearly five years had passed since "THE AVENGERS" first hit the movie screens. And during its time in the movie theaters, it became one of the highest-grossing film of all time. Most fans and critics of comic hero movies tend to view any film with more than one villain as a box office or critical disaster. And yet . . . many of these same critics and fans seemed to have no problem with a movie featuring six comic book heroes. I find that rather . . . odd and contradictory, but there is no explaining humanity's chaotic nature. I have never had a problem with a comic book movie featuring more than one villain or hero, as long as that movie was well written. And I cannot deny that Whedon and Zak Penn wrote a first-rate movie.

First of all, Marvel Studios had made the wise decision to map out the movie's plot with four to five other movies. This enabled them to set up most of the characters before shooting "THE AVENGERS". Natasha Romanoff had received a small introduction in "IRON MAN 2". And Clint Barton was allowed nothing more than a cameo appearance in "THOR". This meant that these two were the only ones left to be properly introduced in this film, along with their previous relationship as S.H.I.E.L.D. agents. Even the Tesseract, the energy source that Loki will use to allow Chitauri warriors to invade Manhattan in the movie's last act, had originally been introduced in "CAPTAIN AMERICA" and hinted briefly in "IRON MAN 2" and in the Easter Egg scene for "THOR". I wish I knew who had the idea to set up the story and characters for "THE AVENGERS" in previous movies. I would congratulate him or her for convincing Marvel to pursue this course of storytelling. For it paid off very well.

Second, I was impressed at how the main cast members - especially those portraying members of the Avengers - managed to click so well and create a viable screen team. Whedon and Penn's script did not make it easy for them. Only the Black Widow and Hawkeye initially felt comfortably working together and even their relationship was disrupted by Loki's temporary enslavement of Hawkeye's mind. I could point out one or two particular performances by the cast. But if I must be honest, practically all of them stepped up to bat and performed beautifully. Okay, I must admit there were a few dramatic scenes that really impressed me. 

I enjoyed the quarrel between Tony Stark and Steve Rogers, thanks to Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Evans, who did a great job in developing the characters from initial hostility and wariness to trust and teamwork. I also enjoyed Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston, who continued their outstanding work and screen chemistry as the two Asgardian siblings, in a scene in which Thor tries to convince Loki that he and their family still loved the latter, despite his actions in "THOR". Scarlett Johansson managed to appear in three scenes that impressed me. One featured a contest of will and intellect between her Black Widow and Hiddleston's Loki. Another featured both her and Mark Ruffalo, as she manages to convince Bruce Banner to help S.H.I.E.L.D. to track down the Tesseract. But my favorite scene featured a heart-to-heart conversation between Natasha and her old partner, Clint Barton, as they discussed her past and his mind enslavement by Loki. Samuel L. Jackson did an excellent job as the intimidating, yet manipulative director of S.H.I.E.L.D., Nick Fury. He also seemed surprisingly spry for a man in his mid-60s, as his character dodged several near death experiences. Clark Gregg was entertaining as ever as one of S.H.I.E.L.D.'s top agents, Phil Coulson. It was nice to see Stellan Skarsgård repeat his role as Dr. Eric Selvig. Although his role was not particularly big, Selvig had a major impact on the plot. And Skarsgård managed to give his usual, top-notch performance. Cobie Smulders managed to hold herself well as one of Fury's assistants, Maria Hill. It is a pity that Whedon was unable to showcase Alexis Denisof a little more as leader of the Chitauri aliens. I suspect that being cloaked and hidden in the small number of scenes probably did not help much, in the end.

I remembered that Mark Ruffalo's portrayal of Bruce Banner/the Hulk has received rave reviews from the critics and the fans. Many critics had also suggested that his portrayal of the character was superior to both Eric Bana's performance in 2003 and Edward Norton's 2008 portrayal. I say bullshit to that. I suspect that the critics had spouted this crap, because Ruffalo got to portray the Hulk in a movie that proved tobe a box office and critical hit. Ruffalo did a great job in portraying Bruce at this later stage of his existence as the Hulk. However, I also feel there was nothing exceptional about his performance that made his Hulk superior to Bana and Norton's. This whole notion of Ruffalo giving a better performance than the other two actors strikes me as nothing but a lot of fanboy horseshit.

One cannot talk about "THE AVENGERS" without discussing the film's visual effects. What can I say? They were outstanding. Well . . . somewhat outstanding. Seamus McGarvey's photography struck me as very effective in giving the movie an epic feel. And his work was vastly assisted by the visual effects team led by Jake Morrison. For a movie set either in New York City, or over the Atlantic Ocean, aboard a flying aircraft carrier, I was very surprised to learn that a great deal of the movie was shot in both Albuquerque, New Mexico and Cleveland, Ohio. Surprisingly, the film crew only spent two days shooting in Manhattan. 

I do have a few complaints about "THE AVENGERS". One, although I was impressed by Whedon's direction and McGarvey's photography, I cannot say the same about the work they did for the Black Widow/Hawkeye fight scene aboard the Helicarrier. To be honest, I found it slightly murky and confusing. Jeffrey Ford and Lisa Lassek's editing did not help. Their work revived bad memories of Paul Greengrass' quick-cut editing at its worst. Honestly? Jon Favreau did a better job of shooting her fight scenes in "IRON MAN 2". I also realized that Whedon had been talking out of his ass, when he claimed that a good deal of the movie would be shown from Steve Rogers' point-of-view. One, I never thought that Whedon had a firm handle on the Steve Rogers' character.  Whedon's Steve Rogers aka Captain America seems willing to question authority figures - only in extreme circumstances.  This is not the Steve Rogers who is more inclined to follow his own path than blindly follow orders.  Even worse, the film never really hinted any troubles Steve may have experienced dealing with the early 21st century.  And then we come to the Dr. Bruce Banner aka the Hulk character. Could someone explain why the Hulk turned out to be more powerful than a pair of Norse gods - namely Thor and Loki? How in the hell did that come about? This certainly was not the case over fifty years ago, when Thor beat the pants of both the Hulk and the Sub-Mariner in the Marvel issue, Avengers #3 (Jan. 1964). Could someone please explain this phenomenon? 

I have another minor problem with the movie. In the past five years, fans of the MCU movies have been aware that the Titan supervillain, Thanos, has been collecting all of the Infinity stones, including the Tesseract featured in this film. And yet … Thanos handed over one of the stones - the Mind Stone set in a scepter - to Loki for the latter’s use during the Chitauri’s invasion of Earth. Why would he do that? Thanos is going through a great deal of trouble to get his hands on the Infinity stones. Why would he hand over the only stone - even temporarily - he had in his possession? That makes no sense to me. If I had been Thanos, I would have kept that stone close to me, no matter what.

"THE AVENGERS" may not be perfect. But it is still obviously one of the best comic book movies I have seen, hands down. And it turned out to be one of the best movies of 2012. It deserved all of the accolades it had received. And for the first time in his career, Joss Whedon seemed to have directed a movie that matched his work with his "BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER" and "ANGEL" television series.

"THE AVENGERS" (2012) Photo Gallery

Below are images from "THE AVENGERS", the 2012 movie featuring Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) superheroes. The movie was directed by Joss Whedon:



"THE AVENGERS" (2012) Photo Gallery

"Charles Gunn and His Role in Angel Investigations"

CHARLES GUNN AND HIS ROLE IN ANGEL INVESTIGATIONS

There is something about one of the episodes of "ANGEL" that has always bothered me. My unease centered around an incident between two of the series’ major characters that occurred in the early Season 3 episode, (3.03) "That Old Gang of Mine". But to understand the nature of my unease, one has to return to two episodes from Season 2 - (2.10) "Reunion" and (2.12) "Blood Money". 

As many fans of ”ANGEL” are aware, Angel had decided to fire his three companions – Cordelia Chase, Wesley Wyndham-Price and Charles Gunn – as a despondent reaction over his failure to save a human Darla from the manipulations of Wolfram and Hart and the vampire he had sired, Drusilla; in the episode ”Reunion”. Although upset over Angel’s actions, Cordelia, Wesley and Charles had decided to revive Angel Investigations in the episode, ”Blood Money”:

Gunn takes the card and looks at it.
Gunn: "That's a Angel? Looks like a - a lobster with a - growth or... We'll make our own logo."
Wesley: "Yes. Something sleek, but edgy."
Gunn: "Something that says: you need help, we're there."
Wesley: "Exactly. Danger is our business. (Cordy put a hand to her forehead and begins to stagger) We'll catch you when you fall."

While celebrating the successful conclusion of a case that involved a demon, the trio had a discussion on their agency’s new name:

Gunn: "Our new agency."
Wesley: "Wyndham-Price Agency."
Cordy and Gunn: "The what?"
Wesley: "You don't like it? - It's classy."
Cordy: "It's stuffy. - The Chase Agency! *That* has the right ring."
Wesley: "Why?"
Cordy: "Because it's my name."
Gunn: "Uh, Wes, Ms. Chase, alright, there is only one player here with a name that strikes dread in the demon heart."
Points at himself.
Cordy: "Gunn?"
Gunn: "Uh-huh."

Mind you, the above conversation that took place was nothing more than a spot of fun for the trio. They eventually decided to maintain the agency’s former name – Angel Investigations. 

Now, according to many fans of the series, Cordy, Charles and Wesley had all decided that despite being equal partners in the updated version of the firm, Wesley would act as case leader. In other words, due to his past as a Watcher and extensive knowledge of the supernatural world, he would lead the other two when they were actually on a case. This did not make Wesley head of the firm altogether or the official boss of Angel Investigations. He would simply act as leader during a case. But after an early episode in the following season, a good number of people – including Joss Whedon and Tim Minear – had forgotten. 

Then came the early Season Three episode, ”That Old Gang of Mine”. In this particular episode, Charles discovers his former comrades are murdering harmless demons for fun. When he tries to convince them to stop, he learns that - due to his association with Angel - he has lost their trust. One of his former associates gives Charles the opportunity to win their trust by killing Angel, who is unable to defend himself due to a spell. Near the end of the episode, Wesley had threatened to fire Charles if the latter ever goes against Angel Investigations again.

Here is the rub. Why in the hell would Wesley threaten to fire Charles? HE HAD NO RIGHT TO DO THIS. Charles was no longer an employee of Angel Investigations. He was one of three partners. I realize that he and Cordelia had voted to allow Wesley act as leader in their cases. But this gave Wesley NO RIGHT to treat Charles as an employee, instead of a partner. He should have told Charles that he and Cordelia would break their partnership with Charles if the latter ever pulled again what he did in "That Gang of Mine". Instead, Wesley treated Charles like a minion. Even worse, no one has protested against Wesley’s behavior this to this day:

Gunn: "Don't guess Rondell and his crew are gonna be crossing Venice boulevard again any time soon."
Wesley: "It's never easy - the pull of divided loyalties. - Whatever choice we do end up making we feel as though we've betrayed someone."
Gunn: "Yeah."
Wesley: "If you ever withhold information or attempt to subvert me again, I will fire you. - I can't have any one member of the team compromising the safety of the group, no matter who it is. If you do it again you will be dismissed, bag and baggage, out of a job onto the streets."

Just reading the above passage pisses me off. Did Wesley actually believe he had a right to treat Charles like an employee? Like some damn minion? Tim Minear – who wrote the transcript – and Joss Whedon obviously allowed Charles to accept the threat as genuine. And I do not understand this. What in the hell were they thinking? Both seemed to have forgotten that Angel Investigation 2.0 had been co-founded by Charles, Wesley and Cordelia. Because of this, Wesley had no right to treat Charles like some employee, instead of a colleague and co-owner of the agency. But since Minear and Whedon seemed to be stuck in their vision of Charles as some muscle-bound employee, they made a major blooper in regard to Charles' character. And worst of all, the majority of the Jossverse fans see nothing wrong in Wesley’s treatment of Charles or the idea that the Englishman was the African-American’s employer and not fellow colleague. 

I am sick to my stomach.

"ANGEL" RETROSPECTIVE: (5.02) "Just Rewards

Below is a look into (5.02) “Just Rewards”, a Season Five episode from ”ANGEL”:
 


”ANGEL” RETROSPECTIVE: (5.02) "Just Rewards"

Co-written by David Fury and Ben Edlund and directed by James A. Contner, the Season Five episode, (5.02) “Just Rewards”, was an immediate follow-up to the conclusion of the season premiere, (5.01) “Conviction”. The latter ended with Angel receiving a mysterious package that contained the amulet he had given to Buffy Summers in the ”BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER” finale, (7.22) “Chosen”. When the amulet activated, it released Spike’s non-corporeal body. 

At the beginning of ”Just Rewards”, Spike explains that he was killed in Sunnydale during the final battle featured in ”Chosen”, while wearing the amulet. He also explains that the amulet he wore brought his non-corporeal spirit to Wolfram & Hart. When Angel learns that a necromancer named Hainsley is buying corpses from Wolfram & Hart to reanimate with demonic essences, he decides to pay him a visit to tell him that they will no longer supply him with bodies. Spike decides to tag along and is offered a body by Hainsley.

First of all, I have to say that the interaction between Angel and Spike were dead on. When the episode had first aired, someone stated that Spike's character seemed to have regressed. Of course, you have to understand from his point of view that a) he is dealing with Angel; b) his death did not go off as expected, hence his anger and frustration at The Powers to Be; c) despite his "regression" and dislike of Angel, he helped his grandsire overcome the necromancer anyway. James Marsters' performance was fantastic, although there were moments when he seemed to overdo it a little. However, his last scene with Amy Ackers was superb, as he effectively brought out Spike's pathos and fear of being permanently stuck in a hell dimension. I am not surprised that a Spike/Fred romance never materialized. They never really struck me as a couple with a potential for romance. However, I was not surprised that they became close friends.

David Boreneanz also gave a great performance. It seemed as if working with Marsters has brought out the best in him. I had no idea that Angel had so many issues regarding Spike. I guess it would have been a lot easier for him to believe that the Bleached Wonder had not changed. It is interesting that he had failed to inform the Angel Investigations team about Spike and Buffy's relationship, Spike's soul and the fact that the latter had saved the world. Resentment perhaps? It seemed as if both Angel and Spike had major issues that need to be resolved between them around that time. And the first issue they both had to get over their “rivalry” over Buffy, just as Drusilla had been an issue in the past.

I had also heard people complain that Wesley Wyndham-Pryce, Fred Burkle and Lorne were not seen that much in this episode. I believe they were right. With the exception of the establishment of Spike’s friendship with Fred, she – along with Wes and Lorne – barely made an impact in this episode. However, Charles Gunn did not suffer from a lack of scenes. In fact, I suspect that he was slowly assuming Wes' role as Angel's "Prime Minister" around this time.

As for Harmony, she did not bother me one bit. I have always enjoyed Mercedes McNab’s portrayal of Harmony. Quite frankly, she has always been a lot of fun to watch. And I really enjoyed her jealous reaction to the news about Spike's relationship with Buffy. Poor Harmony. Even after shooting Spike in the back with an arrow and declaring her emotional independence in the ”BUFFY”episode, (5.14) “Crush”, she remained infatuated with him. Victor Raider-Wexler (from AMC-TV’s ”THE LOT”) gave a deliciously creepy performance as the necromancer, Magnus Hainsley. The character seemed to be a powerful magic practioner. I wonder how he would have done against Willow? I also wonder how many of his previous clients continued to walk the streets of Los Angeles. 

All in all, ”Just Rewards” was an entertaining episode. It reminded me of how much I had enjoyed that early period of Season Five.

Top Ten (10) Favorite Episodes of "ANGEL"

Below is a list of my ten favorite episodes of "ANGEL" (1999-2004), which starred David Boreanaz: 


TOP TEN (10) FAVORITE EPISODES OF “ANGEL”



1. (1.19) “Sanctuary” - The second of a two-part episode about a burnt out Faith’s appearance in Los Angeles. Following her breakdown, Angel discovers that the Watchers Council and Buffy are after her.






2. (2.07) “Darla” - Angel tries to find a way to save a human Darla from the clutches of Wolfram and Hart, while she remembers her past as a vampire. 






3. (5.11) “Damage” - Angel and Spike hunt down a psychotic Slayer who has escaped from an institution and believes that Spike is the man who drove her insane.






4. (2.02) "Are You Now or Have You Ever Been" - In this send-up on the post-World War II Communist witch hunts, Angel recalls a traumatic experience during the 1950s at the Hyperion Hotel.






5. (1.18) “Five by Five” - The first half of Faith’s appearance in Los Angeles has the rogue Slayer being recruited by Wolfram and Hart to assassinate Angel.






6. (3.09) “Lullaby” – Holtz, a demon hunter from the past, hunts down Angel, while Darla endures a difficult labor.






7. (4.10) “Awakening” - In an attempt to bring down The Beast and restore the sun, Wesley brings in a dark mystic to extract Angel's soul.






8. (5.08) “Destiny” - Spike is recorporealized, and the two souled vampires battle it out to drink from the "Cup of Perpetual Torment" to settle the renewed conflict of the Shanshu Prophecy.






9. (4.16) “Players” - Gwen Raiden enlists Gunn's help to steal a device to control her electrical abilities while Lorne attempts a ritual to restore his empathic powers.






10. (4.04) “Slouching Toward Bethlehem” - Cordelia inexplicably returns from her higher dimension, but she has no memory of who she is and who her friends are; and Lilah Morgan develops an interest in her reappearance, as well.