I read a review of Avengers 2
on the EW website a couple of days before seeing it and the reviewer
made a big deal out of how Marvel movies are all starting to look the
same. No surprise there—this and the previous Avengers
movie were directed by Joss Whedon, Jon Favreau did the first two
Iron Man movies (followed by a third not
done by him that nevertheless looks like it was), and Captain
America: The Winter Soldier was clearly designed to fit
an overall aesthetic dictated by those earlier Marvel installments.
Marvel has made it clear they want everything in the MCU, barring the
Netflix Daredevil series, to fit pretty much the same
style and tone, even to the point that they rejected Edgar Wright's
treatment of Ant-Man allegedly because it didn't fit
with that vision (I'm very curious to see how that movie turns
out—the ads make it look a lot like the plot is almost identical to
the first Iron Man, complete with a
villain who wears a supersuit like the hero and fights him using
similar powers).
The real issue with any of this stuff
is whether you have fun while you're watching it, and whether you'll
later go back to see it again. I've watched the first Avengers
twice, would happily see it a couple more times in the space of the
next year or so. Same with The Winter Soldier, a
fast-paced and witty combination of James Bond and superheroes that
is maybe among the most memorable giant-budget Hollywood
extravaganzas in recent memory (I'd certainly watch it before sitting
through the Hobbit movies again). Really, Marvel has
done something absolutely remarkable with the slew of movies they've
released since 2008. They've found a nearly perfect balance of
humor, suspense, and drama (with some missteps—the two Thor
movies, though still pretty diverting, leave a lot to be desired),
they make movies that are fun and colorful instead of dark and
“gritty”—a lesson
the makers of the upcoming DC films would do well to learn from,
especially in regards to how they handle a classically light and fun
character like Superman—and they come together into a total
intra-narrative arc that for the most part works and makes sense, as
long as you suspend some disbelief about how Thor or the Hulk don't
help out Captain America in his movie, or why not even Black Widow or
Hawkeye lend Iron Man a hand in the third installment in his series.
So what does all that mean for
Avengers: Age of Ultron? It means I'm looking forward to
seeing what they do in future films based on what they've done here.
It's not great, but it's definitely good. There's a ton of stuff
going on in this movie; they pile one character on top of another,
even introducing a new hero, The Vision, in the last act. Most
critics will tell you this is bad storytelling; anyone who's read
Marvel comics knows they loved to pack tons of characters into their
stories, sometimes into two or three connected panels, and that Age
of Ultron is just staying true to the feel of its source
material. I'm not the world's biggest comics guy, so I'm no purist,
but I get the impression that what happens in this movie is pretty
friendly to long-time fans.
My only gripe is there isn't enough
Hulk. Apart from the Fantastic Four, it was early Hulk comics that I
had the most familiarity with in my childhood, and the two
stand-alone Hulk movies weren't much (though I don't hate the second
one). I've heard some people say that the Hulk doesn't translate
well into solo films—after all, he's a grunting monster with no
vocabulary who does little more than wreck things. Actually, there
have been many versions of the Hulk over the years, including some
with the mind of Bruce Banner intact, or with a fully formed,
non-Bruce Banner personality that is nonetheless articulate and
cunning. How hard would it be to make that possible in the MCU? I
know the real reason they're not going to do a stand-alone Hulk any
time soon is because Universal owns the rights to those (I'm assuming
Universal has a deal with Marvel Studios similar to the one Marvel
just hammered out with Sony in order to bring Spiderman into the
Avengers and thus save the character from being made forever lame in
one lackluster Sony production after another), but there appears to
be a great deal of fretting about how to handle the Hulk if the
possibility of a stand-alone film ever arises. Again, I don't see
why. I kept expecting Scarlet Witch to zap the Hulk with some kind
of telepathic magic and make him lucid—it would have been an easy
way to bring a new quality out in the character, add some interest,
and probably wouldn't have interfered with the upcoming story arcs
Marvel has planned for its next films. But maybe having a dumb Hulk
provides a little balance; every other member of the Avengers is a
machine gun of funny quips, and a non-witty Hulk is a decent
counterpoint to that. Still, a good Hulk movie is more than doable,
and as a fan of the character I'd like to see one.
The filmmakers are also doing a great
job of giving the individual Avengers a passable dramatic
progression. There's a relationship between Banner and Black Widow,
the kernel of discord between Captain America and Iron Man that is no
doubt intended to lead us into the story for Captain America
3, a family for Hawkeye (not to mention several nods to
fans pointing out how funny it is to have a guy whose only power is
being really good at shooting arrows on a team with people sporting
immeasurable strength, the gift of flight, and unbeatable martial
arts skill), and the rebirth of S.H.I.E.L.D. Yeah, it all speeds by
in a blur, but you can't say this movie gives you a chance to be
bored, something you definitely can't say about all Hollywood
blockbusters. Also, James Spader's voice work as Ultron is
fantastic; nuanced, funny, sarcastic, and fresh for a character of
this type, who in the past would have spoken in clichéd, doom-filled
declarations (you know the kind I mean: “Really, Stark, do you
think you and your team of do-gooders can stop me?!).
That's probably the greatest
achievement of the MCU. They've altered the expectations for
superhero movies. The Dark Knight did a lot as well
(even if that trilogy is responsible for the dreary look of Man
of Steel and, if the current ad is any indication, its
sequel), but Marvel has really raised the bar. Superhero movies have
to be smart now, they have to appeal to well-read, educated fans as
well as the usual movie-going dimwits, they have to have respect for
the history of the comics they're adapting. That never used to be
the case—remember Tim Burton's Batman films? Or Joel
Schumacher's? Or Superman III and IV?
Superheroes were treated as trash for children, with no respect for
the fact that many of the fans were adults who had not only grown up
with the characters, but were reading comics that had grown up with
them. That has changed now, pretty much for the
better. Although eventually, this superhero movie fad will burn out.
What will replace it is a complete mystery, but until then, we'll
very likely end up with even more good to go along with the bad.
Most of the good, its safe to say, will probably be the product of
Marvel.
No comments:
Post a Comment