The Avengers, as Important a Film as Hugo and The Artist?

Tools    





The recent release of the Avengers kicks off the summer blockbusters. It has already shattered the record for the best grossing second weekend ever. I was glorified sitting in the theatre, but when I was wasn’t sitting in catatonic awe a thought occurred to me. This was the future of film. Not because of the 3-D (which I opted out of seeing), but because conceptually Marvel films are moving into a new frontier. I couldn’t help compare this new futuristic film to two of the past years’ best film nominees, Hugo and the Artist.
I realize The Avenger is no Oscar nominee. I understand what a movie like The Avengers offers. It is more mental masturbation than cerebral calisthenics. But this is slowly changing. Movies that once relied on visual spectacle for their key source of entertainment are suddenly becoming a bit headier. How do I know this? Because I know where the Avengers series is leading.
My sophomore year of high school, my friend Mike and I and would take regular trips to the mall, spending an hour or two loitering the Borders Books. We’d plop down in a big chair with a stack full of comics, or graphic novels, beside us. We weren’t aggressively nerdy. We read just enough to keep our imaginations aflout: the Ultimate X-Men, The New X-Men, maybe an Ultimate Spider-Man, and then there was the Infinity Gauntlet. The Infinity Gauntlet is as divine as the title suggests. As far as Marvel comics go, it is the Holy Grail. It is a cosmic story entailing every known Marvel character battling a common evil. If there is a character that doesn’t show up in that series then he or she isn’t worth knowing. A movie of the Infinity Gauntlet would be epic, but, Mike and I would discuss, how could it ever be done? The amount of character and level of storylines, even the abstractness of galactic beings battling, how could any of this be portrayed on film?
Well, fast forward ten years later and Mike and I may have our answer with the Avengers. Even still, how does such a movie compare to two Oscar worthy films like Hugo and The Artist? It is all about time. These two films were favorites to win best film this last Oscar season, two films that had they been released separate years both would have likely won. What made the release of these two films concurrent were their linked themes fixed in the history of film. Both pay homage to the roots of filmmaking. Hugo, a film a went into believing it to be a fantasy-adventure, turns out to be more biopic of one of the greatest, least explored filmmakers ever. The Artist pays tribute not to an individual but to a genre, and in doing so shows that that genre, silent films, is still a credible lively form of filmmaking. These two films, both excellent, show just how far film has come, yet how great it’s always been (when done well).
The Avengers, on the other hand, doesn’t pay homage to filmmaking. Instead, it pays homage to comic books. In fact, what is arguably the greatest comic book series of all time, and in doing so it is a salute to where film is going. If Hugo and the Artist take us from past to present then the Avengers takes us from present to future. Never before could so much be going on in a movie without conceptually imploding, but writers Joss Whedon and Zak Penn broke new ground with an Avengers script that is humor, action packed, and contains six coheneret storylines. The movie is not just a visual spectacle, it is also genuinely entertaining. The concepts Mike and I once thought impossible to portray on film are beginning to bud, if not blossom. The sci-fi elements of the Avengers, Tony Starks’ Jarvis system, an Incredible Hulk finally worth watching, and gigantic flying space monsters, are all signs of an evolving film industry. After a few moments of credits Marvel gives us a quick look at Thanos and a sneak peek of things to come.
Now, you are likely at one end of the spectrum or another; you either know Thanos, Galactus, Lady Death, the Watcher, and the rest of the Marvel cast, or this sounds like the language of a hallucinatory conspiracist. I will spare the details, for those who know them and those who don’t, of the Infinity Gauntlet. Marvel comics are without a doubt the greatest comic book empire because they (mostly Stan Lee) created an entire universe, like a cross between Homer’s The Odyssey and Kubrik’s 2001: A Space Odyssey. It reaches a level of absurdity comic book nerds never imagined attaining film (at least not respectably), but rest assured comic book nerds, film has finally caught up to the high concepts of the Marvel universe. Let there be no doubt, the Avengers represents a new frontier in filmmaking and in hindsight what appears to just be a summer blockbuster (albeit a very high grossing blockbuster) may be a film as cultural significant as two championing films, Hugo and the Artist.



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
While it's true that Hugo and The Artist were awards magnets, I don't believe they were really "culturally-significant". I've never been one to poo-poo popcorn flicks, and I even believe that in many ways, those two films are popcorn flicks, although perhaps moreso for people with some knowledge of film history. I'm not a big comic book or super hero freak, but I like those movies when done well and when I see The Avengers, I'll tell you (I'm sure you're holding your breath!) if I think it really is a step up into something more serious than any of the others.
__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page



28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds
Are Hugo and The Artist really that important?
__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews



I may have misread what you meant, there's a lot of stuff there to take in... but I think I know what you're saying with the homage these particular films pay to their genre or toward the sheer root of their creation.

But comparing one or two, or in this particular case, three disparate films to one another, and asking if one is more important than the other is a bit vague.

I could draw a similar line with comparing, say, Tremors, Eight Legged Freaks and Mars Attacks and their homage to the 1950s creature feature B movie, and how much more important one is over the other, particularly when it comes to paying homage to the Comedy Horror genre too.
Then comparing those three to say, the new Batman Franchise and Nolan's creative outlook on the Batman Universe and the comicbook world and then trying to find which of those 6 movies (soon to be 7) is the most important based soully on their impact on their various genres and sub-genres.

To me, it's kind of a moot point.

I like your style though and that your first post on this forum is quite a monster one too



Gotta agree; I was disappointed with Hugo, and loved The Artist, but I don't think either are particularly "important" films, nor will they be seen as such later.



Thank you all for your feedback. Keep it coming. It definitely helps with developing my writing. I maybe could have supported the significance of Hugo and The Artist a bit more. I do think The Artist revitalized a dormant genre.



I don't think you can make the argument that it "revitalized a dormant genre." You can argue that it will, but I'm not aware of some new rush of silent films hitting the market. I think it's probably wrong that it will do that, too, but at least that's something that hasn't happened or not happened yet.



I don't think you can make the argument that it "revitalized a dormant genre." You can argue that it will, but I'm not aware of some new rush of silent films hitting the market. I think it's probably wrong that it will do that, too, but at least that's something that hasn't happened or not happened yet.
How about instead of "genre" we say "John Goodman"?



I don't think you can make the argument that it "revitalized a dormant genre." You can argue that it will, but I'm not aware of some new rush of silent films hitting the market. I think it's probably wrong that it will do that, too, but at least that's something that hasn't happened or not happened yet.
That would be the worst.



John Goodman's only slump was The Flintstones. It didn't kill his career though, he's still going strong as he always was.

In fact, 2009, two years before The Artist was released, was his busiest year to date in his career.



will.15's Avatar
Semper Fooey
The Flintstones was crap, but it was also a box office hit so it hardly hurt him.

But he had stinkers after it that ended his starring career, like the one where he was heir to a throne, and Babe Ruth.
__________________
It reminds me of a toilet paper on the trees
- Paula



will.15's Avatar
Semper Fooey
I don't think you can make the argument that it "revitalized a dormant genre." You can argue that it will, but I'm not aware of some new rush of silent films hitting the market. I think it's probably wrong that it will do that, too, but at least that's something that hasn't happened or not happened yet.
I don't think we will be seeing more silent movies because of The Artist.

And The Artist is not the first silent movie in the sound era. There were hardly any prior to it and there will be hardly any in the future.



2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ
I didn't mind The Artist but I think it will be a forgotten about best picture winner, and I don't even think it will stand the test of time. There's plenty of silents that I'd rather watch than The Artist.

Hugo I don't see as very important either, though I'm probably the wrong person to ask because I didn't see the film as that great to begin with.

Avengers is a fun popcorn flick yes, but I think it can also last the test of time and is one of the more cunning films of its kind.



I think it is utterly bizarre reading that The Infinity Gauntlet was some sort of apex of storytelling/commerce/anything, and that Marvel ca. 1991 would be an advance that the movie industry would "catch up to." But then I never would have guessed that a second-string character like Iron Man would become huge. Guess it shouldn't surprise me when the Adam Warlock movie breaks every known record.



will.15's Avatar
Semper Fooey
Iron Man second string? They have been publishing that since the sixites.

My idea of second string is Ghost Rider. They cancel it, then years later they revive it and cancel it again.



28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds
Iron Man second string? They have been publishing that since the sixites.

My idea of second string is Ghost Rider. They cancel it, then years later they revive it and cancel it again.
I'd call Iron Man second string, then I'd place Ghost Rider 3rd string. Before the flick, no one knew who Iron Man was, except for those who read the comics. He was never as popular as Superman, Batman, Spiderman, or X-Men, which I would rate as the tops.



Yes,Avengers are very important...for bringing Hollywood even lower than before...



Gotta agree; I was disappointed with Hugo, and loved The Artist, but I don't think either are particularly "important" films, nor will they be seen as such later.
I agree with this, except I didn't like The Artist and liked Hugo.