By now, everyone under the sun is familiar with The Avengers, whether that being from watching the animated shows and films or reading The Avengers #1 in 1963. Here’s a rundown of why the $1.5 billion feature cannot be suppressed by critics’ supposedly ‘flawed waste of time’.

First off, The Avengers is a cinematic event - not a movie. The term ‘movie’ is a North American noun used to describe sub-par blockbusters, not to be associated with a Marvel Studios production (except maybe Thor: The Dark World, but we can only forgive). Although this addition to the MCU deals heavily with acclaimed and honoured actors, it also utilizes the work of Robert Downey Jr., who was then accused of possession of a firearm under the influence of heroin and cocaine and also featured less-distinguished actors such as the entire cast – minus Sam Jackson and Scarlett Johansson.

In case you weren’t living under the sun, the premise of the film is that Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) brings together a group of remarkable people, to see if they could overcome an existential threat. The line-up consists of Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Thor Odinson, Clint Barton, Bruce Banner and Natasha Romanoff. These heroes inevitably team-up to combat Thor’s adopted brother Loki, in order to prevent an alien invasion right above NYC. Now if that doesn’t sound like excitement then I must’ve really enjoyed re-watching Thor: The Dark World (I do not enjoy TDW).

 

#ReleaseTheTaylorCut

Joss Whedon was selected to helm the reins of The Avengers, primarily because of his adoration of Marvel’s character inventory and cemented success in the television industry (Buffy The Vampire Slayer and Firefly). Its obvious that Whedon understood the assignment as the dynamic he managed to perpetuate with Tony and Steve is as close to pressurised as you can get. He re-established Bruce Banner in the manner of a turbulent logician that reflected his desperate battle for control over Big Green.

A large proportion of the film is spent navigating the fearful effect Tom Hiddleston’s Loki governs over Banner, through which it instils an unbreathable atmosphere of tension. A commendable feat accomplished by a man who was allegedly hiding multiple controversies. For more information regarding this subject give Joss a quick 'Google’ and perhaps don’t spend much time reading, he supposedly doesn’t deserve the attention.

The film does its predecessors justice by steering the characters in a direction that enabled for some incredibly purposeful dialogue between two opposing agendas. Watching Captain America and Iron Man squabble over what a superhero should represent is eye-candy. The tilts of the camera and O.S. voices push one particular
scene in the second act further into a conundrum until the framing becomes inverted, a visual representation of Loki’s aptitude to manipulate with his slightest presence.

​

In the MCU’s beginnings we saw some pretty spectacular interactions with an array of characters that allowed growth in a very humane form. Creative directors were evidently feeding from this truck-load of success when they pulled from the three franchises that have provided stilts for future films to stand on – Iron Man, Captain
America: The First Avenger, Thor and Iron Man 2.

Whilst the action pieces do stand-out like a Hulk in a shirt, the other part of the film that really pushes storytelling boundaries are the slower, character-driven scenes. There’s prowess to the interactions that surely push forward the expansive narrative, but still make each scene feel contained and personally stimulative, simultaneously. Through all the heart-shattering experiences, the heroes still exceed at being Earth’s Mightiest with the potential to spring The Avengers franchise into the stratosphere.

An accomplishment, that I’m tremendously happy to report, that has not even begun to be fulfilled.