just got back from watching the avengers. and i've gotta say, my concerns over the film have been allayed. mostly.
first up, this is one heck of a feat that joss whedon has pulled off, interweaving all the characters into one cohesive, coherent story. so kudos to him for that gargantuan juggling act.
and the humour is hands down the film's best attribute and its secret weapon. no matter how many times you guys may hear about how funny the movie is, trust me, you will be unprepared for some of the moments here. it's almost shocking how explosively and unexpectedly hilarious it can be. i'm talking both verbal witticisms as well as physical comedy.
as many forum members have said, hulk is the show stopper. now, i think marvel's decision to not proceed with any more standalone hulk films (if that is indeed their final choice), is a smart one. this is how hulk should be used. sparingly, in small doses. that way, he is a much more potent force for entertainment and impact --- literally and figuratively speaking.
and now my issues with the film. yes, the avengers is not a perfect movie. and i'm not nitpicking either. the problems i have with it are broad and extensive enough to matter. the first act is kind of weak. i won't go into too much detail but i will say that it's simply exposition overload. it's a testament to whedon's skill for dialogue that he manages to condense what is essentially reams and reams of setup and establishment. in lesser hands , the first act would've been a mess and a total bore, so this isn't a fatal flaw. but still, the film does begin to strain under all that talky stuff.
and then, there is the fear i've had over the handling of loki's character. what i loved so much in thor was that he was never quite a black & white villain. in fact, i never saw him as a villain per se, just a misguided, jealous, tormented brother and son. here however, loki is painted pretty much as a straight-laced villain, whose ambitions are pretty cut & dried. and i found that to be a step backwards from all they'd established before. there is still that sense of sibling resentment and petty vengefulness, but here he seemed to me like a regression. but i suppose in the larger scheme of things, it was simply more practical and expedient to use loki as the big bad. so i can kind of grudgingly accept what they did to the character. besides, tom hiddleston is excellent as usual, so he does imbue some beautifully subtle shades of gray probably not on the page.
and yes, everything (good) you've heard about the spectacular 3rd act showdown is true. it's a balls-out feast of action, well-staged and very well-played out.
that's my two cents. overall, my issues with it weren't major enough to spoil my enjoyment of it. the avengers is one of the best, if not the best, superhero films out there. your move, nolan...
(oh, and this is my 2000th post, so i thought i'd make it count.)