Review: The Avengers – The astounding culmination of an extraordinary venture

Walt Disney Pictures

(This is a sort of summary of all the thoughts I’ve had about the Avengers movie in the last year or so, some of which I’ve already blogged about. The actual review starts about halfway through the post.)

Universal Studios’ Missed Opportunity

The year is 1940. Imagine you are J. Cheever Cowdin, President of Universal Studios, and you have an idea. Universal has built large parts of its reputation on a slate of genre movies based on gothic novel characters from the last century. “Hang on a minute”, you might say, “all the actors from these iconic roles are still alive, we have them under contract. Why don’t we assemble them in a large-scale gothic ensemble movie and let them have a big adventure together?”

Sadly, Cowdin didn’t have this idea at the time. The best classical Hollywood cinema could come up with, in terms of character crossovers, was Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein. It took the medium of comic books, both to realize a pan-gothic tale of high adventure (Alan Moore’s “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen”) and to lay the tracks for what would become one of the most ambitious projects in recent film history: Marvel Studios’ The Avengers.

When it comes to high-end production values, TV has definitely caught up with movies in recent years. At the same time, though, movies have taken a step towards TV’s more ambitious modes of storytelling. Film franchises, nowadays, are no longer content with telling a single story over a single film. Instead, they lean more and more towards building a cinematic universe that can be filled with stories from several films communicating with each other, as well as other media like games and novels that can run alongside.

Supergroup Mechanics

One of the driving forces behind this development was, once again, comics, and the movies based on their characters, which hit their third big stride (after the Superman films of the 80s and the Batman flicks of the 90s) with the Spider-Man films in the early noughties. Comics had proven over several decades that the characters called into action every week in the serial medium could meet, fight each other and help each other out, sometimes in small ways, sometimes in gigantic climactic battles. These characters were owned by the same company, ergo: they inhabited a universe generally governed by the same rules. A crossover would draw together fans from each of the series, in the same way a musical supergroup can bet on devotees from each of their members’ regular bands showing up at a concert – and later on checking out those other regular bands as well. You don’t need Professor Xavier to see how this concept, in reasonable doses of course, lends itself if not to artistic success then at least to financial gain.

When “The Avengers” first assembled in 1963, they weren’t the first superhero supergroup. Rival comic book company DC’s “Justice League of America” had already crossed over Batman, Superman and other characters several years before. I have read only a few of the “Avengers” comics, but let’s just say that, like many of Marvel’s characters, the team members were mired in all-too-human and superhuman problems, and the actual “Avengers” troupe saw more lineup changes in its fifty years of existence than a badly organized rock festival. Members married, fought, went to war, made up, quarreled and fell in love more often than you want to know. However, they were all still part of one giant narrative called “The Avengers” and overseen by Marvel Comics. (For a brilliant (albeit German) assessment of superhero team dynamics, I recommend Sabine Horst’s article in the upcoming issue of epd film, which she kindly let me read in advance).

Walt Disney Pictures

Hinged on a Promise

Movies of course, are a different breed from comics. Making them costs a lot more and they are dependent not only on the imagination of artists and writers but also on the schedules and egos of actors and directors. And it’s very rare to make a movie that starts to tell a story and then hope that the audience comes back next week to buy the next issue (even though Peter Jackson is doing it again at the moment).

Enter Kevin Feige, President of Production of Marvel Studios, who – at least in the media version of reality – is the mastermind behind the astounding feat that is The Avengers. When Feige took over the reins in 2007, the studio had already prepared the road for him. They had their $500 Million deal with Merrill Lynch set up and they had just bought back the rights for Hulk and Thor.

But it took Feige’s post-credit stinger in Iron Man in 2008, in which Samuel L. Jackson (who signed an unusual nine-movie-deal with the studio) first mentioned the “Avengers Initative” to Robert Downey Jr.’s Tony Stark, for the transformation of comic book mechanics to big budget filmmaking to suddenly seem palpable. Everything that happened since then was no more than a gigantic buildup of expectations towards The Avengers.

Introducing characters in Iron Man 2 that were rather unnecessary to the film’s central narrative; releasing Thor and Captain America only several months apart; actually making Captain America (a film about a character which should have worried at least some executives about its limited potential in overseas markets); ending Captain America with the hero’s love interest lost and many questions unanswered; all these hinged on the promise of an as-yet-unmade movie to be directed by geek god Joss Whedon, which would be released in Spring 2012. One thing was sure: Even if The Avengers sucked, you would at least have to admire the effort.

When Fury Calls

Fortunately, it doesn’t suck. What could have turned into a huge clusterfrog of incompatible story lines, star personas battling for screen time and superhero technobabble, instead was gracefully crafted into one of the most enjoyable, clever, action packed pieces of big budget genre filmmaking in recent years. And at its centre rests, amazingly enough, a remarkable ensemble performance by mostly marquee-worthy actors not seen in this field since The Lord of the Rings.

To see the ensemble in action, however, you first have to put it together. The Avengers takes its time doing so, first introducing its main villain Loki and his attack on the headquarters of SHIELD, where he steals the energy-laden cube called the tesseract introduced in Captain America, turns several of SHIELD’s employees into his minions and plans to unleash an alien army to conquer Earth for him. SHIELD, with Samuel L. Jackson’s Nick Fury at the helm, is the smartly-constructed glue that holds the story together. It’s the Avengers‘ MI5, which monitors the superhero universe and calls upon its inhabitants as needed.

This time, Fury decides, the situation is so severe that it justifies a tryout of his masterplan – the superhero supergroup, which so far he has only discussed with the most visible of the future Avengers’ team members, Tony Stark aka Iron Man. So it’s Fury who sends word to Stark and the recently thawed Steve “Captain America” Rogers, and who sends Scarlett Johannsson’s Black Widow to charm Bruce Banner into returning from India – strictly for non-Hulk purposes of course. Thor finds his brother’s mischief on his own.

Walt Disney Pictures

Group Therapy

It will take another hour and a half until Earth’s Mightiest Heroes actually get to fight against Loki in the streets of New York. Until then, the team has to discuss among themselves, ulterior motives have to be revealed, a first test of their collaborative spirit has to pretty much go haywire. Someone, in true Joss Whedon fashion, even has to die. Most of the action takes place on SHIELD’s mobile headquarters, an airborne aircraft carrier outfitted with a command centre that would make the USS Enterprise hide in shame. While the action setpieces that dot the first two acts of the movie are well thought out and keep the suspense alive, they are really just an accompaniment to a number of well-choreographed dialogue scenes between the groups’ members.

Lover’s of bare-bones-narratives might find these first two acts of The Avengers a bit lacking in momentum, but I think Whedon plays his cards exactly right. As a viewer, you need this array of quieter moments for the individual characters and their relationships with each other, to get a sense later on that there really is something at stake in this story, both with respect to external threats and internal morale. There is a scene in which Stark, who is obviously fascinated with the possibility of unleashing the Hulk, and Banner discuss their situation as one scientist to another, except that one of them is a loudmouthed playboy and the other one a soft spoken lost soul with what is repeatedly called “anger management issues” in the film. Another moment pits Thor (“You are all so puny!”) against Captain America’s superhuman righteousness, which simply knocks the arrogant norse god out cold. The situation is a little less clear with both Hawkeye and Black Widow, who are given back stories but cannot help but remain fighting ciphers, even referred to by Tony Stark at one point simply as “a couple of master assassins”.

Walt Disney Pictures

Despite this maybe somewhat wordy first part of the film, however, the story is still rather lean. Whedon never goes for cheap inside jokes unless they serve to push the narrative forward in some meaningful way. When the group finally stands in a circle in full costume, collects their orders from Cap and then sets out to put Loki’s cats back into their intergalactic bag, the audience has a clear feeling for each character’s motivation and roots for every single one of them. Loki as a villain, of course, makes for a great mirror image of the superhero team, borrowing some traits from each of them – from Thor’s arrogance and Stark’s cunning to Hulk’s uncontrollable wrath. That he still has to be a typical comic book villain with no real motive except a hunger for power stemming from a bad childhood, is a conceit that comes with the genre.

Who is the love interest?

In short: I really liked The Avengers. It’s a spectacular thrill ride for everyone who spent the last couple of years yearning for this moment and should be an entertaining ensemble action flick for everyone else, with a cast of colourful characters to match forebears like The Great Escape and The Magnificent Seven. It delivers on all promises made, it’s tightly written and cool enough to look at, featuring a star-studded cast in which the performances of Samuel L. Jackson and especially Mark Ruffalo probably stand out as most memorable. Ruffalo as Banner, the only member of the team who doesn’t wear his superhero guise on his sleeves, gives the film an emotional centre otherwise often occupied by the female love interest.

One last thing though. The Avengers is exhausting and after all that climax it makes you wonder what will happen next. Kevin Feige has already commented on how he plans to avoid sequel-itis in the following years. We shall see if he manages to pull it off a second time. I wouldn’t want to bet against it.

The Avengers Fan-Screening in Berlin

Wie bereits erwähnt habe ich durch einen glücklichen Zufall – und Hulk sei dank – überraschend zwei Karten für das deutsche Avengers-Fanscreening in Berlin gewonnen. Wenn man schon gewinnt, muss man das auch durchziehen, dachte ich mir. Ich bin also gestern spontan in Mainz in einen Zug nach Berlin gestiegen.

Das Screening fand im UCI Kinowelt auf der Landsberger Allee statt und die Wahl dieses nicht besonders glamourösen Kinos irgendwo im Niemandsland zwischen Friedrichshain und Prenzlauer Berg spricht eigentlich Bände für die Gesamtgestaltung des Abends. Abgesehen von einem armen Willi im Iron-Man-Kostüm, ein paar Kamerateams und jeder Menge Vorab-Kriminalisierung der Zuschauer, die sogar ihre Handys abgeben mussten, wurde sich wenig Mühe gegeben, der Veranstaltung irgendwie einen besonderen Anstrich zu geben. Nicht einmal eine offizielle Begrüßung vonseiten Disneys, Marvels oder deren PR-Vertreter war drin. Nur eine freundliche, amüsierte Kinomitarbeiterin wies uns vor Beginn des Films noch einmal darauf hin, dass wir zu Werbezwecken gefilmt werden und uns doch ducken sollen, wenn wir nicht im Bild erscheinen wollen.

Einem geschenkten Gaul soll man natürlich, wie Pferdehalter weltweit wissen, nicht ins Maul schauen. Und zum Glück war der eigentliche Film alle Strapazen wert. Das Publikum war ein weiterer Pluspunkt – hier wurde an den richtigen Stellen gejubelt, geklatscht und gelacht und die positive Stimmung hing in einer Denkblase über den Kinoreihen, deren Größe jeden Comiczeichner stolz machen sollte. Dass der Film ihnen (wie mir übrigens auch – mehr dazu bald an dieser Stelle) gefiel, sagten mir einige Fans hinterher sogar noch einmal ins Mikrofon:

Ein paar Lektionen zur medialen Begleitung eines solchen Ereignisses habe ich übrigens auch noch gelernt. Vor allem, dass es sich gelohnt hätte, deutlich früher vor Ort zu sein, um vor dem Einlass in Ruhe ein paar Fotos zu machen und gezielt einige Fans anzusprechen. So war ich (nicht zuletzt dank des wie immer chaotischen Berliner S-Bahn-Verkehrs) knapp eine Stunde vor Vorstellungsbeginn am Kino, musste noch für meine eigenen Karten anstehen, meine Gerätschaften abgeben und mir schließlich auch noch einen ordentlichen Platz sichern. Etwas zu hektisch, wie man leider vor allem an der Fotoqualität sehen kann. Wenn also das nächste Mal ein Filmereignis dieser Größe über Deutschland hereinbricht, werde ich vorbereitet sein.

Blogging the Avengers Fan-Screening in Berlin

I can’t believe I got so lucky. I actually won two tickets for the fan screening of The Avengers tomorrow in Berlin. So I will actually see my most anticipated film of the year a week and a half before the rest of Germany! Thanks so much.

I will try my best to capture the experience in this blog, as much as I am allowed to. I’ll bring my camera and audio recorder and use the train ride back to Mainz to write/edit/post something for this blog.

If you are also at the screening and would like to meet up for a chat about the film afterwards, tweet me!

UPDATE: The post about the screening is in German and it’s here.

“Film Weekly” – An Obituary

When I visited my first real film festival as a professional writer, the Edinburgh International Film Festival in 2008, I saw Oscar Nominee Richard Jenkins a few feet away from me and couldn’t have cared less. I was looking for someone else and when I finally spotted him, I was so star-struck that I didn’t dare to talk to him. Good thing I ran into him a second time – and this time I managed to chat with him for a bit. The man was Jason Solomons, a film journalist for “The Guardian” and he had been in my ear for over a year, every week.

Jason was the host of the Guardian’s podcast “Film Weekly”, the first podcast I listened to regularly, and one of the best film podcasts around, as far as I am concerned. In an internet world, where the geeks – and the loud films they like – have increasingly taken over power, “Film Weekly”, Solomons and later co-host Xan Brooks gave off a cushy scent of old film journalism gentry and art house sensitivity. I first discovered the show in an episode on Danny Boyle’s Sunshine (via the now defunct blog “Cinematical”) and was immediately hooked.

I almost never agreed with Jason’s and Xan’s assessment of more mainstream films, especially animation, and I found the way Jason conducted some of his interviews to be rather unnerving (witness, for example, how he almost drives David Cronenberg mad, by insisting on discovering what’s “cronenbergian” about him). On the other hand, here were journalists who had the power of a publication like the “Guardian” behind them, who could be autonomous and irreverent without too much press junket fanboy-ism.

They led me to art house gems I would hardly have discovered without them, featured big stars as well as small indie newcomers and had English accents that were easy on the ear. At about 30 minutes, the show was exactly the right length, and not as long-drawn and chatty as some of the other efforts on the net (like Filmspotting and the /filmcast).

It’s really too bad, that Solomons and Brooks hosted their last show a week and a half ago. Their company gave no real reason for the cancellation except “limited resources & belts being tightened, as well as the desire to push the Guardian’s multimedia in new directions”. A video show will follow later this year. While video might generate more clicks in this day and age, it’s also hard to enjoy it while you’re going for your weekend run and takes a lot more active commitment to watch regularly. I, for one, will probably stop consuming the “Guardian”‘s film coverage now. I hope I will have the opportunity to run into Jason or Xan at a film festival again to tell them how much I miss their show.

Navel Gazing – Part 4: Social Networks

Image: Wikimedia Commons

I’m not usually an early adopter. I am too stingy for it. Spending large amounts of money on a new thing that hasn’t proven it will catch on yet and whose subsequent generations will fix all the faults the first one had? Lunacy! But there is one thing about which I can still tell the tale that I was there before most everyone else I know – and that’s Facebook.

I got lucky, though. In the fall of 2005, I moved from Germany to Edinburgh to spend a semester abroad. Conveniently, this was after Facebook had expanded to UK universities but before it opened up to everyone everywhere, one year later. So, while everyone in Germany was still connecting on the German Facebook Clone StudiVZ, I was already using the Next Big Thing to hit Germany. And that’s my claim to early adopter fame.

Facebook

It’s true what they say, Facebook is creating a sort of second, parallel internet. If you are using it, you notice stuff that you don’t notice when you are not using it. I have basically stopped using e-mail for communicating with people I know on Facebook. Instead of sending out invites to communal activities, I just create an event. And the sort of private blogging that I used to do before I started this “serious” blog (on Livejournal, I dare you to find my blog, it’s still up) has migrated to Facebook as well. Mostly in short status updates, of course, but sometimes I also still use Notes, the almost-forgotten Facebook blogging app.

Don’t listen to the haters. For me, Facebook has gotten better with every update. Now, with the introduction of Timeline and the revamping of Groups, it is finally a real “best of both worlds” experience. Before, I politely declined friend requests from people I didn’t know too well, because I am still using Facebook for lots of pretty personal stuff. Now, I’m fine with friending colleagues and distant acquaintances, because I simply move them too the appropriate list. Lists also helped me cope with my internet bilinguality (more on that next episode). I can finally write updates in German and not spam my English-speaking friends’ news feeds with them. At the same time, timeline now finally has become a reliable archive of my life and online activity and will probably come in handy some day – if only they added a good search function soon.

What does Facebook do for me, newswise? I sometimes pick up stories from there that I missed elsewhere. My friends’s status updates sometimes alert me to topics, blogs, etc. I wouldn’t have caught without them. I follow several bands, which is great for not missing when they go on tour, and movie projects (although most of them don’t really do that good of a job). Mostly, though, it still connects me with personal friends on a personal level. The few times that I have actually entered into discussions with people didn’t go so well.

If you want to discuss stuff with me, feel free to do so. Some of my profile is actually public and I allow subscriptions. The fact that I haven’t enabled public search, however, shows that Facebook is still more of a private medium for me.

Twitter

While Alex and Facebook were a natural fit, it took Twitter and me a while to become friends. I needed to read about it for a long time before I decided to try my luck there. As you might tell from this blog, expressing thoughts in 140 characters is not really my forte and I am witty only very occasionally (terrible, terrible puns are more my specialty). I also have a really old smartphone that takes ages to even load the Twitter app (I had a newer one but it got stolen – the difference on my Twitter behaviour is palpable). So I don’t tweet too often and I have few followers and even less who follow me because of what I tweet (I guess). Even though this scratches my ego somewhat, I have since found that you don’t need a lot of followers to use Twitter as an awesome cherry on the media cake.

Twitter is my serendipity machine. In its own very limited way it breaks through my filter bubble and points me to things I wouldn’t have noticed without it. Even though I follow mostly people who are either famous or from my field or both, there are enough of them and the connection with them is weak enough to transcend the feedback loop of social networking. Whenever I feel like finding something new or leftfield, I head to Twitter.

I also love to use Twitter as a running commentary on current events. The best experience I have probably had was watching the Oscars this year (always a very lonely affair in Germany because of the time difference). I had my Twitter feed running the whole time, tweeted myself and somehow felt like I was watching the ceremony with a circle of cool friends.

Twitter is not an essential part of my media diet. I also think it is a much better tool for freelancers than for regular employees – I’m not allowed to tweet about most of the interesting stuff that happens to me – and I have found that I am simply more of a blogger than a microblogger. But I wouldn’t want to miss Twitter in there. It makes for some very interesting flavouring.

The Rest

I registered on StudiVZ, the dying German copycat-cousin of Facebook, with an e-mail-address that has since been deactivated. I can’t remember my password so I haven’t been able to log in and see the devastation for some years now.

I try to use Xing, the German copycat-cousin of LinkedIn, as a business profile, giving people who don’t know me personally an alternative to Facebook. I hardly ever use it and I wouldn’t know why I should start, especially since Facebook made the list feature more prominent.

I have a Google+ profile, but I have yet to use it. Why the heck should I hang around two sites with almost the exact same functionalities? I hear people say the conversations on Google+ are better. I was never unhappy with the conversations on Facebook.

That’s about it for my media diet, but I have one more topic left to cover, so there will be a part 5 about the pain in the ass that bilinguality can be.

Navel Gazing is a multi-part blog series about my personal media consumption habits, meant as a case study and a moment of self-reflection on account of Real Virtuality’s third birthday.