Pavlov’s Franchise

Written by Armond White on . Posted in Arts & Film, Our Town, West Side Spirit.


The Delusion of Marvel’s The Avengers

Previous Marvel Comics superhero movies such as Iron Man, Hulk, Captain America and Thor were like roughly cut puzzle pieces that looked odd and unfinished by themselves—pretend movies derived from already established brands. Most of them, particularly Jon Favreau’s dung-colored Iron Man, were poorly directed.

Marvel’s The Avengers.

Now, fitted together in Marvel’s The Avengers, the superhero tales still don’t quite cohere; instead, each superhero’s traits and powers have been simultaneously inflated and streamlined (Scarlett Johannson’s Black Widow, barely a cameo in last year’sIron Man 2, is almost a character here) with the sole intent to overwhelm, not merely entertain. That’s why a corporate brand is part of the title.

A live-action version of the comic book series about “The Earth’s Mightiest Heroes,” Marvel’s The Avengers is promoted as the ultimate Comic-Con—the franchise of franchises, the movie contemporary audiences have been trained to anticipate and genuflect to.

This whopping sales campaign manipulates immature, undeveloped adolescent taste into the mistaken notion of cultural fulfillment. The Avengers is neither good nor important, yet the more it consummates Marvel Comics’ current strategy to secure the adolescent comic book/graphic novel/video game market, the more it illustrates Hollywood’s shameless insufficiencies.

To discuss The Avengers as a story—or even a thrill ride—is delusional. Best to tally some of the actors’ deceits—which parallel the media’s complicit self-deception—as they trivialize the emotional satisfaction that is supposed to come from modernizing myth and legend.

The Captain America role traps Chris Evans, who was a great tease as the Human Torch, in an uninteresting anachronism, now a truly faded idea of American Exceptionalism. The same holds for the Halloween freakazoids Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Bruce Banner/The Hulk (a CGIed Mark Ruffalo).

As villainous Loki, Tom Hiddleston, who was so moving in Spielberg’s War Horse and Terence Davies’ The Deep Blue Sea, comes closest to giving a performance. He suggests the intense young aspirant Peter O’Toole, though without the glorious voice and no story details to frame his petulance, just a pretext for the superheroes to fight his plan for world domination.

The film’s only probable hero is zillionaire gadgeteer Tony Stark, who Robert Downey has finally learned to make his own using hipster witticisms that lend this basically unhip movie erratic self-satire.

Only a capitalist icon with Stark’s endless resources makes sense to an audience of semi-illiterate consumers catered to by the leisure industries and discouraged from an interest in characterization, theme or ideas. That’s why Sam Jackson’s Nick Fury can simply watch action from the sidelines (occasionally firing off a gunshot or an epithet), pretending to be a leader in his ghetto eye patch. (Insert convenient Obama comment here.)

Director Joss Whedon brings TV squalor (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) to this, his second big screen superhero outing. Whedon doesn’t have Zack Snyder’s personal style, the élan that at least made Watchmen and Sucker Punch thoroughly idiosyncratic and fitfully compelling. Whedon directs impersonally, which is to say he manages the proceedings as one runs a fast-food joint.

This analogy ought to appall the very fast-food patrons who flock to The Avengers, yet cannot accept that an artistic enterprise should be more than ground patties of optional substance. Like Whedon, they can’t tell the difference between art and conviction-less product.

This proves the brainwashing that has happened to pop audiences in the generations since comic books and TV stole their imaginations from cinema and literature. Much of this tragedy has to do with the impact of TV (Whedon’s background), which has destroyed popular understanding of narrative complexity.

Each superhero should represent overcoming some social difficulty; now they’re just gimmicks. Whedon simply makes the action go on and on. He has no sense of dramatic build or rising to a climax. He overloads the spectator with one climax after another (imitating Michael Bay angles, particularly the same skyscraper-devouring turbine f/x from the last Transformers flick).

Unlike the lyrical teen fantasy Chronicle or Neveldine/Taylor’s daring Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, which addressed life, death and morality, Marvel’s The Avengers has little to say other than “Buy me!” Millions of mentally hijacked moviegoers will respond like Pavlov’s dog, barking “Wow!”

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Trackback from your site.

  • Mike

    You, Mr. White, are the one out of touch. Perhaps it possible (or plausible) that movies, like everything else, have evolved.

    No longer are we (THE AUDIENCE) shackled to the restrictions, ambitions, and preconceptions of 1950′s era film making. Though you may have failed to evolve alongside the moviegoing public, we should not have to suffer at the expense of your failures.

    To summarize all of your incorrect and whimsical assumptions (unsubstaintiated by fact because any “fact” is a startling and direct contradiction to your own negative opinion) — people no longer watch movies to be taught lessons. They do not read books to discern the meaning of life. The trend has instead been towards escapism. We consume literature, absorb movies, and turn to television to revel in the temporary disconnect from the real world.

    So, why are you so hell bent on being a hater? Your constant negativity at first made you unreadable (despite the fact that your writing is acceptable); now though? You just remind me of a bitter man in his 60′s with a terrible marriage who can’t seem to tell if the holidays are a time to be happy or sad — caught between what was and what is in your own life (and thus subjecting readers to your problems)

  • Andrew Gedeon

    Jesus, man. Do you get paid by the syllable?

    I am eternally entertained by your elitist blowhard mentality you employ while constructing your literary reviews.

    To say that comic books and TV have stolen the imagination from cinema and literature is a joke. Hint…comic books stole imagination from literature. Cinema and TV stole imagination from both comics and literature.

    I understand that everyone has their own tastes in entertainment, but to say movies like Sucker Punch and (sorry, I just threw up in my mouth) Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance are “daring” or “compelling” over…well, pretty much anything…is laughable.

    Thanks, and keep up the work.

  • http://www.creativejamie.com jamie insalaco

    Congratulations, you’re part of the 3% of CRITICS (not even movie goers, but your peers) who didn’t like Avengers – but you liked the Ghost Rider sequel… again, you’re right there on the fringe! I took general psych in college, so I know you aren’t wrong for disagreeing with the crowed, but jeez… Was Star Trek 5 your favorite of the franchise?

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/Y3OUUNSVKQE5OKZ7HWIWJ2AVSQ John Ferenz

    Do you really think anyone making this movie thought they were making art? This is fun entertainment and you’re picking it apart like it’s intended to be modern myth. Is your inner child dead? Do you have fun anymore, Armond? By the way, I am 34 and I love smart movies but I also love enjoyable fun entertainment, in fact I don’t even know any adolescents but nearly everyone I know at work loves this movie.

    Well, that’s probably because we actually WORK instead of critique movies we could never even fathom coming up with the way you do.

  • http://www.facebook.com/JonJacobR Jacob Russell

    I can’t imagine what possess these people to leave such negative comments. Personally I find your perspective fascinating and frquently end up seeing themes in films that I wouldn’t have noticed thanks to the hard work and passion you clearly put into your work. I even agree with you on occasion. Thanks for the great work and enlightening form of criticism.

  • aldebaranredstar

    The comic book dumb and dumber mentality just keeps everyone in the same mindless, stale state of emotionless consumerism. If art does not in any way bring us any new ideas–what is the use? Just to make $$? 

  • James_Raynor

    There’s a good reason that Aristotle ranks spectacle so low in importance in his poetics.  It’s simply not enough to fulfill the audience’s need for soulful material, and that’s mostly what this film is made of. After seeing Whedon’s Serenity, which was an above average film, I was disappointed to see that he now puts forth something of such little substance and reward. You articulated my own impression perfectly when you called it “fast food.” I also agree that Whedon’s direction was non-existent. It’s interesting to me that the exact same disappointment was present with this film that I had when I saw The Tree of Life, which is considered “high art.” The films are nothing alike but the vivid feeling of mediocrity was identical. I applaud you for speaking a bit of truth.

  • Jordan Lund

    So Avengers is a terrible movie for all the same reasons that you said G.I. Joe was a great movie. Gotcha. Good troll man… seriously.

..