May 5, 2012
Avengers Assemble!

And following another unexpected delay (sigh), we’re back with a review of Marvel’s The Avengers. I was a kinda disappointed with it, honestly. More in the review, but it seemed like for everything it did right — or at least every “cool” nugget — there was something it did wrong, and the things it did wrong occurred on a more substantive level. I suspect some folks out there would blast me for actively searching for flaws in the film. And yeah, that’s true — I was looking for them, just as I was looking for things to like about it. I tend to watch movies with an eye to evaluate them on all levels, and I’m not one to cover my eyes and stick my fingers in my ears (or devise my own theories to resolve issues that weren’t sufficiently explained in a movie/show/etc.) when I find something that doesn’t gel. That’s just me.

But that’s not necessarily you, and that doesn’t necessarily mean that you’ll be at all down on The Avengers — as I note in the review intro, I suspect most readers of Scary-Crayon will enjoy it immensely. For an alternate take on the film, check out this review by Jeffrey K. Lyles.

Also, admittedly, this is probably a movie I’d enjoy more on DVD after I fished it out of the $5 bin at Walmart (or, even better, a cart at Dollar Tree). It’s legitimately flawed, but somehow those flaws are less bothersome to me when I didn’t pay $12 for a ticket — and when I’m not noting them in a theater filled with cheering, clapping people. Like, many of the one-liners were amusing, but they certainly weren’t substantive — so they weren’t the kinds of things I’d walk out of the movie quoting and discussing and referencing endlessly as if they actually made the movie significantly better for their inclusion. And while there were a few really good ones, most of the lines were hardly hilarious, so it was a little annoying to hear the theater erupt into raucous laughter in response. At moments, watching The Avengers in a crowded theater reminded me of watching a sitcom, and I generally despise sitcoms. The reason is this: if a joke in a show falls flat and there’s no laugh track, it’s not irritating — it’s just another throwaway line of dialogue and (unless it’s really bad) I forget about it. But if the joke doesn’t work and it’s punctuated by five seconds of yukking, as is the case in most sitcoms, it’s fucking stupid.

Anyway, yeah — thanks for reading; leave a comment if you like. See you next time, which will hopefully be sooner rather than later!

-posted by Wes | 1:44 pm | Comments (4)
  • MickMock says:

    So this is why I’ve seen Joss Whedon’s name pop up so much this weekend? How did it ever escape me that he was connected to this film? XD

    I’m sure to be regaled tomorrow by my boys telling me how awesome this was. I’ll respond with a half-hearted MEH and then they’ll tease me about its special effects, not to mention the fact that it’s NOT A SILENT MOVIE.

  • TR says:

    I think I know what you mean. When a UK company imported the U.S. sitcom, MASH, the UK guys left out MASH’s laugh track. I think that the UK guy’s thought that MASH’s humor + some dark humor, could stand up well, without the LT.

    Oh, I really love your site, too, by the way. : )

    • Wes says:

      Huh, that’s pretty interesting. Have you seen both versions? Do you have a preference? I’d probably prefer any show without the laugh track, but I guess I can imagine an audience who wouldn’t find a show funny unless the laugh track were there — or who would find the same show to be funnier with rather than without the laugh track. Now I’ll have to pop to Wikipedia to read about it, but I imagine that rationale had something to do with the creation of and widespread usage that the laugh track enjoys today.

      At any rate, thank you for commenting! I’m glad you enjoy the site. 😀

Leave a Reply...

Back to Scary-Crayon!
Copyright © 2003-2024 Scary-Crayon. All rights reserved.