Why I Secretly Hoped "The Amazing Spider-Man" Would Fail

Originally Posted July 9th, 2012, at Playeraffinity.com

I like Spider-Man. Who doesn't? He's Spider-Man: he does whatever a spider can. He's a cultural icon, and people who wouldn't be caught dead with a comic book come in droves to see the movies starring ol' web-head. Sam 2002's Spider-Man was a good start for his movie franchise, and Spider-Man 2 set a high-bar for superhero movies everywhere. I even think Spider-Man 3 gets dumped on more than it rightly deserves. So unlike a lot of people, I was cautiously optimistic when Sony announced they'd be making a fourth movie.

The newest entry in the series, The Amazing Spider-Man, may not have carried over any of the original talent behind Sam Raimi's trilogy, but there's still a lot to like here. Andrew Garfield looks the part more than Tobey Maguire ever did, and getting someone as impossibly cute as Emma Stone too play Gwen Stacey was a smart choice. And I really liked Marc Webb's directorial debut, (500) Days of Summer, which seems to have informed a lot of how Webb's approached this multi-billion dollar franchise. Reviews have been positive, and what started out as an 11th hour dead-sprint to the shooting lot has turned out to be adequate summer fare that I'm probably going to go see.

All that being said, part of me wants this movie to fail. That's a pretty shitty sentiment to have, considering the amount of time and care that no went into making the movie (no to mention the jobs that will hinge on its financial success). It's not one I like to have about any movie, unless I think its an unmitigated piece of garbage, or that a win for this one film will come at the cost of those to follow. The Amazing Spider-Man most certainly falls into the latter category, because while it's great that Sony seems to have found a way to differentiate a Spider-Man reboot enough from its predecessors to justify its existence, fortune favouring the reanimation of a franchise corpse that's barely cold sets a worrying precedent for things to come.

It's been no secret that The Amazing Spider-Man exists for reasons other than that it's going to make a bajillion dollars. It's really more about the potential bajillions that could be made with more Spider-Mans. Sony's control of the movie license requires that they make an actual movie out of the property within a certain amount of time, or the rights will default back to Marvel, like they did en masse after a gold rush on comic properties began in the 90's. It's the same reason that "X-Men" movies continue to get released, despite their increasingly tangential link to the original trilogy.

The legality wrinkle explains why Spidey was AWOL while Manhattan was an alien tailgate party during The Avengers, despite the serious bank Marvel Studios would have made with just a cameo. The depressing part is that Sony is basically treating Spider-Man like a toy they have no interest in until their little brother wants it, and then just play with him so that no one else gets to. What's concerning is whether an unspectacular but nonetheless strong debut for The Amazing Spider-Man will inspire other studios to pump out unnecessary sequels/prequels/reboots simply to keep the keys to a franchise.

Christopher Nolan's 'Batman' trilogy is on track to deliver the coupe de grace final chapter in its story that Spider-Man couldn't, but that hasn't stopped Warner Bros. from already talking about rebooting the franchise. Since Warner and DC are nice and cozy under the Time Warner umbrella, there's less legal wrangling at play here, but it's still insane that more than a year out from audiences getting some closure, Warner's attitude is "let it ride!" Even proven failures are getting second lives; Josh Trank, the director behind the inventive and original superhero movie Chronicle, got the chance to join the big leagues by being offered the chance to direct a Fantastic Four reboot. The lesson: if at first you don't succeed, make a sequel. If that fails too, wait five years and hope everyone forgets that the original sucked every which way but at the box office.

Comic books dominate the reboot discussion because it's inherent to the material. Right now, there are seven different lines of comics starring Spider-Man, either in solo fares, as part of a Marvel team, or inhabiting an alternate continuity. The almost non-existent regard for franchise distinction and the space-time continuum means there's no lack of source material for studios to pick from, especially for characters as old as Peter Parker and the dark knight. With so many different story permutations and character tweaks that have built-up over the years, it's not hard to see characters like Wolverine, Spider-Man and Batman becoming James Bond-esque movie properties, where a new instalment sticking to a few core themes and ideas comes out every few years, from a slightly different creative angle.

That in and of itself isn't a terrible idea in the short-term, but eventually, the choice to make the films will be even less dependent on earnest audience interest and the existence of comic book movies will be self-perpetuating, which hasn't always been great for 007. I dare you to find someone who's favourite Bond movie came out between The Spy Who Loved Me and Licence to Kill. When this train of thought crosses over into franchises not based on continual reinvention, it'll be like when the pig flu combined with the bat flu in Contagion: mass destruction on a global scale.

Okay, that's a little overdramatic, but it'll suck hard regardless. One of the movies I'm looking forward to the most this year is The Bourne Legacy, the sequel to the most consistent trilogy of action films pretty much ever. It doesn't have franchise star Matt Damon, or director Paul Greengrass returning, but it does have franchise writer Tony Gilroy taking over for the latter. The layperson won't give a hot damn who Gilroy is though, so the success of "Legacy" will be judged on brand strength just as much as The Amazing Spider-Man. From there, it's not hard to envision Gilroy leaving the series and someone else taking over, turning the franchise into a creative husk of its former self that gets by based on name-recognition.

Well, that's also being pretty worst-case scenario, as there's no reason to think that just because a property's reigns have been handed over to someone new, it's all a business transaction devoid of any inspiration. Part of what makes a series or character great is that they lend themselves to innovative and original stories within their identifying framework. So really, what I'm asking for isn't less of these movies, just that they happen at a slower rate. Give audiences time to miss seeing Spider-Man and Batman on screen, and let their returns occur at a time when it will actually mean something. At the very least, make a movie for reasons more compelling than legal ones. Spontaneity is great for a relationship and routine is a killer; if we start expecting a warmed over rehash of familiar franchises every five years, we'll just have to start looking somewhere else for new entertainment.

Six Things We Want From Avengers 2

Originally Posted May 8th, 2012, at Playeraffinity.com

What little doubt remained over Marvel’s grand experiment of merging all its comic book franchises into one summer blockbuster pretty much evaporated this weekend, when The Avengers took audiences and the box office by storm. After being hinted at and set up over four years worth of superhero movies, the unprecedented collaboration paid off big time (+$200 million in 3 days big), and now Marvel is prepping for phase 2 of its theatrical master plan.

While those plans include an Iron Man 3, and sequels to Thor and Captain America (and maybe even a new Hulk movie), the golden goose continues to be The Avengers, and with earth’s mightiest heroes having earned some downtime following their explosive introduction, it leaves it to fans like us to speculate and guess what the future holds for Marvel’s flagship franchise. Here are a few suggestions to make sure that the future of this ultimate crossover doesn't become the story of a one-hit wonder, and if you’re among those few who have yet to actually see The Avengers, be warned, as minor spoilers follow.

Keep Joss Whedon as Writer and Director

This is definitely the most important factor determining the franchises’ future. The actors have all signed on for multi-film deals, but a return for writer and director Joss Whedon is still in question. The announcement of his involvement in The Avengers was the first big indicator to fans that Marvel was taking the project as seriously as they should have, and it’s hard to envision anyone having more clout in geek circles than Whedon. His TV background certainly didn’t hamstring the film’s flashy visuals, but it’s his ability to create a sympathetic character out of just about anyone that allowed The Avengers to be more than just a big dumb action movie. He’s just a fantastic storyteller, and anyone looking to fill his shoes will be hard pressed to accomplish anything half as charming, emotional, and well-constructed as what Whedon did in The Avengers.

Expand the Team 

While Marvel will definitely be trying to get some of its lesser known heroes into their own pictures before Avengers 2 (Edgar Wright sounds like he’d give-up his first born to do an Ant-Man movie), that shouldn’t limit the roster to just folks with a film under their belts. Hawkeye and Black Widow were successfully integrated as full members of the team despite previously only appearing in cameos, but the Avengers have had such a huge and constantly changing roster over the years, that throwing in a B-team wouldn’t hurt. The X-Men movies proved that audiences can get a quick handle on superpowered second-string heroes, so there’s no reason folks like Wasp, Black Panther, or Ms. Marvel can’t make their debuts here. Keep them around as side characters or cameos that can bounce off of the founding members, or be used as cannon fodder. Speaking of which...

Create a Greater Sense of Danger

By the time The Avengers rolls into its last act, and the team has finally assembled, it’s hard to imagine anyone or anything stopping them, whether it’s an alien army, or a malevolent demigod. Yes, the death of Agent Coulson was sudden and wrenching (in other words, classic Whedon), but we need to really see our heroes in danger if the pay-off for their triumphs is going to be exciting. Of course, killing off any of the big four would be crazy when they have their own franchises to carry, and already there are rumours of Black Widow and Hawkeye getting their own movies, but by the time Avengers 2 finally arrives, it may be time to dispose of a few members in the returning cast. It might sound harsh, but a surprise death or two would really raise the stakes, and help shore up the dramatics in a series that’s already mastered being fun.

Let’s See Avengers Tower

The end of The Avengers leaves Stark Tower in desperate need of some renovations, and it’s hinted at that the skyscraper will become the team’s new base of operations. While the S.H.I.E.L.D helicarrier was a decent enough place to bring all the Avengers together, it’s made abundantly clear that an aircraft housing guys like Hulk and Thor is pretty dangerous when 50, 000 feet in the air. Putting them up in Avenger mansion would be a definite downgrade from a flying fortress, so the Tower is easily the most stylish option from the source material. Giving the team a place to call their own would help maintain the sense of community amongst the superfolks, and would be a great location to fill with little Marvel Easter eggs, the same way Odin’s Vault hid clues in Thor.

It’s Called the Marvel Universe for a Reason

Watching Hulk steer a robo-centipede into Grand Central Station was pretty cool, but there’s only so many ways to blow-up a major metropolitan city. Moving the action out of New York, and even off-planet, would help capture the immense scope many of The Avengers’ best stories have. Thor did a great job of simplifying the complicated Norse mythology behind the God of Thunder so that instead of being some sort of deity, he and his fellow Asgardians were essentially just space vikings, creating a precedent for galaxy-spanning adventures. It doesn’t have to be The Avengers: Mission on Mars, but exploring the wider reaches of the Marvel Universe even just a bit would really solidify the franchises’ reputation as an adaptation true to the source material.

Handle Thanos with Care

So unless you’re well-versed in your comic book lore, you were probably wondering who the smirking purple space ape in the non-shawarma related post-credits sequence was. That was Thanos, a death-worshipping alien from Saturn’s moon Titan, and he’s among Marvel’s biggest bads. Having him as the villain in Avengers 2 would support a lot of the things we’ve asked for here: Thanos is an interesting, extremely deadly villain in the Marvel universe, and would present an unprecedented threat to The Avengers, but he’d also be a tricky adversary to pull off correctly. He’s literally obsessed with Death, the female personification of mortality, so his motivations are more than a little unorthodox, and his costume, even compared to the guy’s like Cap and Thor, is kinda ridiculous. We’re not saying he’d be impossible to recreate for theatres, it’s just that it might be hard for audiences to buy a pyjama wearing death-fetishist with a penchant for jewellery as being the greatest for to face The Avengers, so a little bit of tinkering to the established character might be necessary.

Six Ideas for Batman's Movie Future

Originally Posted to Playeraffinity.com, August 25th, 2012

As it's been pointed out for the better part of a month now, there's plenty to admire (or more bluntly, slavishly fawn over) about Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight Trilogy. He not only proved that people will pay a ton of money to see summer movies that are more emotionally and intellectually stimulating than $250-million dollar versions of Rock 'em Sock 'em robots, but also showed that a reboot can be a reinvention instead of just a rehash. And perhaps best of all about The Dark Knight Rises, is that it brings his Batman trilogy to a definitive end, granting audiences closure as he and Christian Bale ride off into the sunset with no intention of even returning to Gotham...

...which is probably why some Warner Bros. exec is currently pulling his or her hair out trying to decide what to do next, since Nolan has burned down the franchise torch so close to the handle, whoever he passes it on to next is going to get burned. Where can Warner possibly go after the unparalleled success of The Dark Knight Trilogy? Is it time to hit the reset button and start from scratch, or see where the few threads left dangling may lead?

Here are a few different thoughts and angles to consider now that the prospect of making a great new Batman movie seems even more daunting than after the boondoggle that was Batman & Robin. First, let's explore the many possibilities of rebooting the Caped Crusader, then discuss the options for a slightly more direct sequel to the trilogy. And if you're one of the three people who hasn't seen "Rises" yet, prepare to have it spoiled.

The Reboot Route

Distance Yourself From The Nolan Films As Much As Possible: 

One of the biggest problems with Marc Webb's recent superhero reboot, The AmazingSpider-Man, is that it's aesthetically indistinguishable from Sam Raimi's original trilogy, and offers only slight changes in tone and characters to get us through the same origin story we've already seen. Having to watch two Batman origin movies in the same decade would suck, as would trying to make a reboot in the vein of The Dark Knight Trilogy. Whoever winds up following Nolan will inevitably be ill-equipped to recapture his kinetic, more realistic take on Batman, so no one should even try.

The best course of action will be to either take an approach that's either much lighter, or even darker. As for setting up the character, any reboot would be wise to alter the traditional story heavily, or skip over it altogether. Whoever doesn't know that Bruce Wayne's parents got shot when he was young, and that he has a thing for bats, probably doesn't care about Batman in the first place.

Follow Marvel's Lead: Fun First, Brand Building Second

Sure, a lot of The Dark Knight Rises' success at the box office is due to it offering a darker, more mature alternative to Marvel's breezy and more gratifying superhero flicks, but Batman's been goofy a heck of a lot longer than he's been moody. A return to Batman's campier, but more accessible roots would help give a new film its own identity, while also giving DC the opportunity to build towards something they've wanted for years: a "Justice League" movie.

Marvel launched the "Avengers" initiative with Iron Man because he's the most relatable and charismatic character in their roster; the same could be said of Batman for The Justice League. While next summer's Man of Steel is rumored to get the team-up ball rolling, early teasers make it appear nearly as grounded and serious as Batman Begins was, and the whole point of crossovers is that they're meant to be fun and exciting, something The Avengers did really well.

To wit, i'm going to say three words no one wants to hear: bring back Robin. It's really easy to hate The Boy Wonder, even Christian Bale said he wouldn't do a Batman movie if Robin was in it, but Batman having a sidekick makes him part of a team, which is what The Justice League is all about. A young companion helps to lighten the tone, and means Bruce Wayne's past doesn't have to be the main through line all over again.

Make The Darker Knight

It's hard to imagine a PG-13 rated superhero movie that's somehow bleaker than one in which love interests tend to die horribly and the hero's hometown does a six month LARP of Berlin circa 1945, but Batman's source material has some seriously grim alternate versions to draw from.

Take, for instance, Batman: Earth One, the newest comic to modernize Bruce Wayne's originsby reimagining the death of Martha and Thomas Wayne as political assassinations, and Gotham's police force as completely at the mercy of organized crime. Best change: prim and proper butler Alfred gets turned into a gun-toting S.A.S. badass, who trains Bruce in crime fighting, even though he should probably be the one out on the streets cracking skulls in the first place.

Or Warner could revive their original plans for the post-Schumacher era and use Darren Aronofsky's plan for a "Batman" that's part Se7en, part Dirty Harry. Instead of inheriting the Wayne estate, Bruce becomes a street rat under the care of an auto repairman named Big Al. For high-tech weaponry, Bruce has cobbled together junk, including an armoured Lincoln Continental straight out of Mad Max. While he slowly develops a secret identity that includes a hockey mask, Jim Gordon is a suicidal Serpico figure looking to violently end corruption in Gotham, and Selina Kyle is busy running a local cathouse. The latter option in particular would need something stronger than a PG-13, but a bump up in age rating is about the only way you'll out-dour Nolan.

The Sequel Route

Blake-man Begins

By conventional standards, the end of The Dark Knight Rises is about as sequel-ripe as you can get. With some instructions left by the presumed dead Bruce Wayne, hero cop John Blake finds the Batcave, and one can imagine Bruce also left a bunch of details on how to access all the hideout's special toys, and what day garbage is. Granted, it's unlikely that Blake is as well versed in martial arts as Bruce, but he's as determined to bring justice to Gotham as the original Batman, due process and civil rights be damned!

This leaves open a few options for Blake as the new protector of Gotham. John Blake does sound suspiciously like Tim Drake, a former Robin who started hanging out with the big boys once he ditched the red and green tights to form his own secret identity, Night Wing. Keeping on the name train, the reveal that Blake's full name includes "Robin" in it could mean that's the new identity in store for young John, although most superheroes will recommend coming up with an alias that doesn't actually contain parts of your real identity.

The obvious direction would be to have Blake go for the brass ring and become the next Batman. It'd be a clever way of acknowledging that the title can pass not just from actors, but from characters too. Plus, they could follow Grant Morrison's recent run of Batman & Robin comics where a (temporarily) dead Bruce Wayne is replaced under the cape and cowl by former Robin, Dick Grayson. The Robin shaped hole in the dynamic duo was then filled by Damian Wayne. Who's Damian you ask? Well to answer that, we should consider …

Talia Is Alive and Preggers

Here's what we know about Talia al Ghul: she's got serious ninja skills courtesy her father, Ra's, she and Bruce had an impromptu foyer fling (and considering Bruce's celibate streak, chances are the bat-condoms in his wallet were expired), and her death was about as convincing as Katie Holmes playing a district attorney. Unless we see a funeral, closing your eyes and slumping over doesn't cut it. During the climax of the movie, when everyone was busy watching Bruce re-enact his favorite scene from The Avengers, Talia could have easily slinked away somewhere safe to later discover she's going to have a Bat baby.

In the comics, Damian Wayne was the son Talia and Bruce, raised by the former to be about as nice as anyone could expect from a kid named Damian. But after some fast-tracked daddy issue resolution (i.e. Bruce dying), Damian settled down and became an official part of the Bat family, filling in Dick Grayson's shoes as Robin just as Grayson was filling in Batman's.

Imagine this then: Talia's shame at failing to fulfill Ra's plans for Gotham forces her into hiding, where she raises and trains Damian, preparing him for his legacy as the heir to both the League of Shadows, and Wayne Enterprises. With Bruce too busy completing his bucket list of countries to bone Catwoman in, a young Damian comes to Gotham to find the mysterious Batman his mother has told him so much about. When he finds John Blake instead of dear old dad, a more experienced, wiser John Blake takes Damian on as his ward, training a replacement that, like Bruce, has some serious family issues. It not only sets up a fresh story dynamic, but also seeds possibilities for more sequels, by having a future Batman waiting in the wings.

Take Batman Global

Speaking of Grant Morrison, before DC comics decided their continuity had become as tangled as Christmas lights caught in an airplane propeller and hit the ol' reset button on everything, Morrison started a "Batman" series that saw Bruce Wayne taking his fight against crime around the world. Batman Inc. had Gotham's guardian branch out across the globe, finding promising crime fighters to enlist as Wayne-funded protectors for their respective regions.

While Gotham has been the most important uncredited character in Nolan's films, it's taken quite a beating over the years, and increasing the scope of the "Batman" universe would help open new story opportunities. The Dark Knight already had Batman kidnapping an oily criminal accountant from China, so there's precedent for a Batman without borders. And last we see Bruce Wayne, he's out and about in the world, so who knows what new and exciting villains beyond the skyscrapers of Gotham need a good thumping from the original masked vigilante.

Review: The Avengers

It’s pretty incredible that The Avengers is an actual movie and that it came out in theatres today. How many successful movies have been made by combining two separate franchises, let alone four? Comic books have cross-pollination ingrained in their DNA, particularly Marvel’s, but it was hard to imagine an Avengers movie as being anything other than a cash-in starring a bunch of  easily affordable no-names playing some of the biggest names in comics. So when Marvel decided to give each hero their own film so as to set-up the characters ahead of time and actively build towards this one amazing-mega-ultra-team-up, it showed an actual commitment to the idea of turning a super-group of superheroes into the kind of event movie it deserved to be. Getting geek icon Joss Whedon to write and direct the whole thing seemed itself almost too good to be true.

Yet here we are, four years after The Avengers was first teased at the end of Iron Man, with the greatest convergence in cinematic entertainment, pretty much ever, ready to blow audiences away. So, how is it? Well... it’s good, quite good even. That might sound reductive but the fact that The Avengers doesn’t collapse horribly beneath its own ambitions is an achievement unto itself. We have the stars and co-stars of four separate blockbuster franchises all stuffed into one single picture. Robert Downey Jr. is as rakish as ever playing billionaire Tony Stark, who dons the crimson and gold armour of Iron Man once more, but this time he’s joined by supersoldier-turned fish out of water Captain America (Chris Evans), fresh from a nasty plane crash-related hibernation. There’s also Thor (Chris Hemsworth), the warrior prince from another planet who wields Shakespearean verse and a nasty hammer in equal measure, as well as the big green guy himself, The Hulk, being kept in check by Marvel newcomer Mark Ruffalo as the giant’s low-key scientist alter-ego, Bruce Banner.

But wait, there’s more! Increasingly prominent S.H.I.E.L.D director Nick Fury gives Samuel L. Jackson greater opportunity to give grim looks from his one good eye, and has a new assistant (Cobie Smulders) to boot. Superhero scout and franchise connective tissue Agent Phil Coulson continues trying to get his ragtag team of metahumans together, and Thor’s scientist pal Dr. Selvig (Stellan Skarsgard) is in tow as well. Then there’s the pair of assassin types, Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), who’ve been promoted from cameos to full-time world savers. Phew. Even at an arguably excessive 140 minutes, there is a lot going on in The Avengers, with no less than a dozen characters to introduce, both to each other, and audiences still a bit foggy on which one’s the time-displaced WWII vet and which one’s the Norse god.

Despite all the necessary groundwork laying that would hamstring the film’s leading up to it, The Avengers still has so much to get viewers up to speed on that it makes for a talky opening hour and a half. All the more reason to be thankful that it’s Whedon filling in the speech bubbles, as while his direction is clean and focussed, it’s his words that the movie really needed. Rather than settling for a glossy, one-shot crossover, great effort is made to develop the relationship each hero has with the others, while simultaneously maintaining the personalities established in each solo ventures before bringing them into the greater world of super-dom as a whole.

Whedon keeps things light, if not always brisk, with his trademark brand of self-aware humour, including more than a few riffs on costuming, which is funnier when coming from a guy wearing stars ‘n stripes pajamas. Getting everyone to play nice together is the story’s real conflict, as such varying powers and personalities create plenty of friction aboard S.H.I.E.L.D.’s fancy new flying helicarrier. So once Thor’s mischievous brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) steals the Tesseract, a cosmic MacGuffin that’s been popping up all over the Marvel movie universe, with the intent of leading an extraterrestrial army to earth’s front door, the real threat is whether the heroes be able to survive each other long enough to save anybody else.

It leads to more than a few surprise turns to the established Marvel formula. There’s an emotional and political murkiness throughout, as S.H.I.E.L.D.’s intentions are rarely transparent, and the personal conflicts bear out into much more globally conscious ones. The final act is as action-heavy as ever, with a full-blown intergalactic war ripping apart downtown Manhattan, and these setpiece closers were often the weakest link in the previous efforts, but here, it’s the culmination of 10 hours worth of set-up, so the catharsis is almost unparalleled. It’s a whole lot of CG destruction by monsters whose motives are about as vague as their species name, but it doesn’t matter because holy crap, Hulk just punched a mecha-baleen whale in the face! And wow, Thor just chip-shot an Acura into five aliens! With such a diverse array of badasses, the action beats switch fast but hit hard, even at the 2-hour mark. It’s raw spectacle, pure and simple, but because so much care has been put into making us love who’s putting on the show, it makes for one hell of a pay-off.

And through it all Whedon has, quite improbably, found a way to make every member of the all-star line-up relevant and matter. Hawkeye’s bow and arrow looks pretty measly when compared to the 8-foot tall Hulk, but his accuracy helps out in plenty of situations where smashing can’t. Perhaps most surprising is Johansson as Black Widow, who showed up in Iron Man 2 mostly just as eye candy, but now gets to quip and kick-ass along with everybody else. The team spirit that the Avengers is based on manages to not just survive, but invigorate the big screen translation, and you’ll know it once you see the requisite but charming after-credits sequence (of which there are two, so be sure to stick around). The story itself is simple and occasionally contrived (true to comics, mind-control is a big factor), but it’s built on a foundation of wonderful characters whose interactions within that story are what keep you engaged, be they flashy or funny.

It might seem odd to end talking about another comic franchise but the recently released final trailer for The Dark Knight Rises will likely play before your screening of The Avengers. It gives a stark comparison between what Christopher Nolan is doing with Batman and what Marvel has done with The Avengers. While Nolan wants to create a case for artistic filmmaking within the blockbuster framework, Marvel has once again done what they’ve proven themselves best at; making fun, highly entertaining comic book movies that are effortlessly easy to enjoy. Nolan might be pushing the expectations for the genre, but The Avengers reminds us that just because something’s a spectacle, doesn’t mean it can’t be satisfying. Even better, you can bet there will be plenty of new Avengers fan ready to assemble when the team’s next outing arrives in the (hopefully not too distant) future.

4 out of 5