The aliens are called the Chitauri; they are from the Ultimate take on The Avengers and they are named a few times in the movie, though admittedly their comic-book counterparts are actually completely different (insidious Commie alien shapeshifters; these guys seem to actually be robot mooks who just enjoy killing).

I disagree that this is only as good as the previoius movies- I felt it was much better, if a little superficial plot-wise (and to a lesser extent so story wise), much more coherent and much better at handling its characters, with superior dialogue. I thought the humour was fine and though there was lots of it, I don't think it outdid the action (thought there was more than enough of that) and I don't think the other movies were much different in that area, save that the villains were handled more seriously (though, while Loki is indeed the Butt Monkey of the film, he is still treated seriously and gets enough villainous moments to be treated as a threat).

Its a good review and I can see where you're coming from with some of your points, but I think most people will probably enjoy it more than you did, and you did seem to enjoy it. I agree somewhat with the climax but as you say, it was slight, and I think it at least ties in with the idea that Loki is out of his depth a bit (though this only makes him more likely to hurt people in frustration at that fact, so it doesn't dilute his menace much) so at least its not pointless. I do think he counts very much as the Big Bad, and being a Butt Monkey (and only a light example of one) doesn't negate that and if anything even motivates his villainy convincingly.

For me, and most other reviews and comments I've read, this is better than all the other movies leading up to it.

Well I have only followed the movies so I know absolutely nothing about the comics, but now when you mention it I vaguely remember them being called something like that, but honestly I had completely missed their name.

I probably sound far more negative than what I actually am (I’m going to admit that I have a tendency to Accentuate The Negative) because I really, really did like the movie and found it very enjoyable, apart from the few things I took up in my review. I pretty much liked everything else. But I personally I liked Loki a lot more in Thor where I found him to be a Magnificent Bastard while in this one he felt like a Smug Snake who pretty much every single Avenger kicked the crap out of. After that I just couldn’t take him seriously. I kept waiting for the real villain to appear but he never did (until after the credits I suppose).

I might also add that I had a terrible experience when watching this in the theater. 50% of everyone going there seemed to be around twelve or so and they kept roaring in laughter and applauding over pretty much every single joke (even those that were only vaguely amusing) so by the final half-hour of the movie I was pretty much fuming in rage. So that might have clouded my judgment a bit. I’ll have to see it one more time I suppose.

1) The humor wasn't overpowering; in fact, given that this is the Marvel Cinematic Universe, humor is a given. I mean check it: Iron Man, Thor, The Incredible Hulk, Captain America. All their solo movies were epic summer blockbusters that had a healthy combination of humor, action, and varying degrees of drama. The Avengers doesn't deviate from the formula one bit; in fact, it seems to have perfected it.

If you want a serious, pretentious superhero drama, wait for The Dark Knight Rises. That film seems to have its head stuck up its ass, just like its predecessor.

2) Until Loki got curb-stomped by the Hulk, the most the Avengers could do to him was take a potshot or two – be it verbal or physical. However, up until the third act everything happened according to his plans. I would hardly call that being a Butt Monkey.

3 & 4) Agreed.

Well I still think the humor was too much, which IS slightly strange seeing as my favorite movies of these have been Iron Man (the first) and Thor and both of them were quite silly at times. It might have to do with how Joss Whedon always writes some very good and witty dialogue but I personally feel he can overdo it at times. When basically every line is something witty/banter-y/lampshade-y/snarky I grow a bit tired of it. But really, I’m not sure why I was so annoyed by it.

And I personally liked The Dark Knight (not Batman Begins) just a bit more than The Avengers, as I found it more memorable. But they are really different in their approaches and are both good IMO.

wait, so do you hate the slapstick or the witty banter? Sounds like you might be searching for a reason to _not_ like this film.

I'm just thankful that other people haven't OD'ed on Avengers humor; I've seen the film three times, and on cue, the audience laughs, claps and cheers at the exact same moments. The only difference was the one screening I attended with another Marvel Geek who actually got the Mythology gags. So more laughter there.

...so do you hate the slapstick or the witty banter? Sounds like you might be searching for a reason to _not_ like this film.

Or, like he said in his review, he thought it was good movie with a few flaws. Calling the humour excessive is not the same as saying you hate humour. For goodness sake, read it carefully.

Calling the humour excessive is not the same as saying you hate humour. For goodness sake, read it carefully.

I think you're the one that needs to read more carefully; romxxii is pointing out that the reviewer complained about excessive slapstick in the review itself, but about excessive bantering in a comment; the two are not very similar.

Gee, people sure are sensitive when it comes to this movie. Read this carefully now, here is the thing. I like witty banter – when it’s not too much. I enjoy slap-stick – when it is not too much and fits the genre. I think The Avengers have both. And I found it to be too much. It’s not harder or weirder than that. I don’t hate comedy - I just thought it was excessive for this particular movie.

Like I said before, Joss writes very witty dialogue. The dialogue alone would have been enough humor for me. But this movie also contained slapstick-y moments, so in the end it started to grate on me. If they had toned down on either the slapstick or the banter I would have been fine with it. As things are now, it annoyed me a bit.

And NO, I’m not searching for reasons to hate the film because as I said before – I LIKED IT JUST FINE, I just didn’t think it was a masterpiece that will forever change my view on filmmaking. So calm down and respect that other people have different opinions than you. If you loved it – good for you, I respect your opinion to do so. I have always said that this is MY PERSONAL opinion and you don’t have to agree with me.

What's with people lately, ok here we go again. You made a "review", if you have problems with criticism don't make reviews in the first place, at least not on tv tropes. People are not even being sensitive, these comments are so tame they can't aren't even in the lowest levels of controversial. The whole it's my personal opinion is usually a very weak point when it comes to reviews.

For God's sake, the OP clearly said he enjoyed the film but he had one problem with it. You can like something even if it is flawed.

My, my, Joss Whedon fans sure are sensitive, aren't they?

Why does it have to be a low point to say it's your own opinion though? People have different opinions, natch. If I was a professional reviewer I might not have used “my personal opinion” in the review, but I'm not and I don't pretend to be. I’m just an ordinary girl who likes movies.

I don’t have problem with criticism - even if it may seem like it. The only thing that bugged me about this whole ordeal was that I said the comedy was overdone. Then everyone suddenly thinks I hate this movie and hates all sort of comedy, even though I said nothing of the sort. It's not like I flamed this movie and gave no reason for it. I simply pointed out a flaw and everyone got all upset about it.

But yeah, I’m done with this now, this leads nowhere.

@ maninahat and Purple Dalek: Thank you. That's just how I feel. I liked this movie but found one flaw. Doesn't mean I hate it.

^ because that's a Logical Fallacy, of course is your opinion, read Irrelevant Thesis. If you made a review you must have means and knowledge to back it up. They challenged points in your review, if you would had just given your counterargument and leave it at that it would had been fine, but you go on and on about how you actually liked this movie (which borders on Special Pleading) and that it wasn't a masterpiece. Just as you didn't say that you hated this movie or slap-stick comedy, romxxii never said that the movie didn't and or couldn't have flaws, but that he didn't agreed with some of the ones you gave.

Well I doubt anything I write is actually going to make a difference here. I did state why I thought the comedy was overdone, so what more arguments should I make? I could understand if this was a debate about say, nuclear power or file sharing where lots of arguments and counterarguments can be made, but it’s not – it’s about whether the jokes in a movie was excessive or not.

Now I thought they were, while other people say “well I didn’t think so, I enjoyed it and laughed all the time”. How do I counterargument that? I wasn’t there with them, so I can’t really claim they are lying. I can’t say that they are wrong because I can’t prove it.

This is like having a debate about whether it’s warm or cold outside. I’m wearing a jacket and I think it’s cold but my friend beside me is wearing a t-shirt and he thinks it’s warm outside. What arguments should I make here? I could claim he is lying because I think it’s cold but all he can say is how he thinks it’s warm, so any arguments here will be null. I could make up some bullshit about how he probably think it’s warm because he is foreign and his skin is less sensitive or some other strange crap but that is completely irrelevant! It still doesn’t change the fact that my friend thinks it’s warm outside. Nothing I say is going to change his mind as long as it’s not cold to him.

In file sharing, on the other hand, arguments can be held about whether or not it’s hurtful to the music industry as whole, whether CD selling is as important as live show concert tickets, whether streaming sites promotes artists or causes major losses of income, lots of arguments can be made.

There are just some personal preferences that you can’t argue much about and jokes and comedy certainly falls under that category. I found the jokes/slapstick/banter excessive in The Avengers, due to a combination of too much witty dialogue banter and slapstick. You didn’t. Again, I can’t prove you wrong. I don’t know you, I have never seen or met you and I don’t know what other movies you like. I have nothing to argue with. All I can say is basically "that is your opinion" as this is simply matter of taste and everyone have different taste in things. So all you can do is agree to disagree, which is not a fallacy.

Also romxxii's: "Sounds like you might be searching for a reason to _not_ like this film" isn’t actually a counterargument in my book, it’s an accusation taken out of thin air. So the only counterarguments I got basically sums up to "well, I laughed" and "you don't like comedy" and "watch the dark knight" or "so you don't like slapstick or witty banter?" which is a question I now have answered, so how did they counter my arguments exactly? This is matter of taste, after all, and you can never agree with everyone on that. You are never going to reach a conclusion.

The only real discussion we can have is whether you can use "in my opinion" in a review and that has nothing to do with the movie at all.

Also, I never assumed you all thought it was a perfect, as you claimed I had, but what I did say was that I found a flaw and you didn't like that or disagreed with it. I never said anything about your opinion of the movie other than that; I did however say that “IF you loved it, good for you”.

But I’ll say it again, I have had enough. This leads nowhere.

The alien race was just a bunch of mooks. It is mostly Loki for 90% of the movie and mind controlled Hawkeye for 5% of it. I guess they count as named characters.

But yeah, 3D felt extremely pointless.

I never said the arguments you already made weren't enough, I said that you come out as whynning with the whole, this is my opinion, I actually liked this movie thing. So here's me again, I don't agree with romxxii's hate claims, but I don't agree at how quickly you used the it's my opinion fallacy, or how you keep saying "people", "everyone", etc. even though it was just one person (aka exagerating), I wouldn't had bated an eye at any of this if that weren't part of your reply to him/her. so look at yourself before you call others of being too sensitive.

Another way to show you have problems with criticism is doing things like this. I've never expressed my opinion in the movie, on any of it, you know why? because I haven't seen it yet, so I don't get where you come from with that assumption.

If you payed more attention to the troupe, you would had notice the flaw in that. What would debate teams do half of the time if most arguments were ended with that's just your/my opinion? heck, how much different would the reviews on tv tropes be since about 80% of them argue on these kinds of topics. Of course is a fallacy, because as the troupe clearly said, it implies that all opinions hold the same water, knowing me or not is also a fallacy as it implies you can't argue unless you know the person, which again brings the question as where did 95% of the arguments on the internet came to be, since there's made most of the time by complete strangers.

Never said everything was a counterargument, way to pick specifically that one, why not "Until Loki got curb-stomped by the Hulk, the most the Avengers could do to him was take a potshot or two – be it verbal or physical. However, up until the third act everything happened according to his plans. I would hardly call that being a Butt Monkey." or "I disagree that this is only as good as the previoius movies- I felt it was much better, if a little superficial plot-wise (and to a lesser extent so story wise), much more coherent and much better at handling its characters, with superior dialogue. I thought the humour was fine and though there was lots of it, I don't think it outdid the action (thought there was more than enough of that) and I don't think the other movies were much different in that area, save that the villains were handled more seriously (though, while Loki is indeed the Butt Monkey of the film, he is still treated seriously and gets enough villainous moments to be treated as a threat)." again, don't be so absolutistic.

Well that's a little difficult to know when you say "I just didn’t think it was a masterpiece that will forever change my view on filmmaking." when again, no one said the movie is flawless and or a masterpiece. And yet again, you keep saying I felt this or that way about something which is a Blatant Lies since yet again, as I said before, I can't have an opinion on this movie since I haven't seen it yet.

yet you keep on comming back.

Okay. I heard you, and I respect your opinion on this thing. But like I said before, I'm officially done. I could continue with this argument, I had a few more things to comment on, but I'm going to refrain from doing so. There is no point to it. I'm not going to back down and you are not going to back down. I know how and what I feel and nothing you say can make me change my mind about this, so there is no point to this. I'm done.

Who says I'm not going to back down? it's way too early in this conversation to be making that claim. I don't just go on and on arguing for the sake of arguing, if I'm proven wrong on something then I'm proven wrong. If I can't make a counterargument then I'll admit it, I wont just go making stuff up, move the goalpost or make 20 fallacies to reply something (which happens a lot on the internet).

that's an extremely close-minded way of thinking, but you're right, if that's the way you live then there's really no point, sorry for wasting your time.

I doubt it.

Mahna mahna!

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

Mahna mahna!

marcellX, strop trolling.

Defbye, stop feeding the troll.

how am I trolling? ...are you tsuna4?

I totally agree with this review. The slapstick and Banter was overused and excessive. I think Whedon had too much freedom here as both co-scriptwriter and director: every other scene was crammed with his trademark "witty" one-liners. Frankly, I think Whedon relies to heavily on banter and equates it with characterization.

The theater I was in was roaring with laughter like I hadn't seen before, I guess it was enjoyable for them but I wasn't laughing as loudly as they were (I found it funny but not laugh out loud funny) and that made me resent the humour a bit. It sounds like you had a similar experience :(

I really didn't think there was that much slpstick besides the Hulk punching Thor and beating Loki which were obviously meant to be that and were some of the best parts of the film. I cant really think of any other slapstick in it though. I do agree that everyone ending with a snappy comeback was a bit much though, but it wasnt that bad.

I gotta lean more on Tomwithnonumbers and Deadpool. I too had a similar experience when I went to see the movie, the crowd laughing at almost everything, I didn't thought Ironman hitting Thor was meant to be a joke, now the one linner Loki gave was, there were only like 4 or so real slapstick comedy moments.

While I don't agree about the slapstick and banter (I thought it was awesome and hilarious, and the best thing about the movie aside from the characterization and action), I think you made your points very well, cogently, and reasonably in comment 14082. And while I don't think Marcell was being a troll, I do think he was unfairly targeting, even harassing you. In fact it seems odd to me that someone who hasn't even seen the movie would find such a strong need to debate with someone who had seen it, liked it, but found a few flaws in their opinion—apparently because there's something horribly wrong with having a different opinion or being able to dissect a work and find things to like and dislike instead of completely leaning one way or the other.

The only criticism of the four pointed out that actually I agree with is the 3rd one. 3D WAS pointless as it usually is with movies not specifically designed for it.

1. is just a matter of opinion. One of my friends actually thought the same, but to me the humor was awesome (as it usually is with Joss Whedon). Some people just don't have my awesome sense of humor, I guess.

2. Already explained. They appear in the Ultimate Universe and are named in the movie (they are like the 'more serious skrulls' as opposed to the silly green ones from earth 616).

3. Agreed.

4. Don't think so. The climax was Iron Man learning a very important lesson on heroics from Captain America and the whole scene and the way it happened.

As for Loki getting curb stomped it was great and genious in so many different levels:

A. It defies conventions and makes for an original, unpredictable ending.

B. It is very true to the characters (Loki might be a badass and probably even abble to stop the hulk with some sorcery, but he is also tremendously arrogant and was rightfully demolished by commiting the mistake of enganging in hand to hand combat with "the strongest that is").

C. It helps underline that the real vilain of the movie is not Loki or any external force, but the Avenger's own internal conflicts.

D. It's definetelly on the top 5 most funny moments on the film.

E. Its not at all anti-climatic, it actually helps the structure for reasons A and C, building up to the real ending (which is much better than any "final battle" could probably have been).

@Ingonyama

I was never debating if s/he liked it or not, if the movie did had those flaws or not, or any of that (please at least read), I also agree that s/he gave a good explanation, at the time I couldn't agree or disagree with him/her about any of that. All I said is that if s/he's so quick to burst on criticism (which at that point I hadn't said anything yet) and so hell bent in that it is just his/her opinion, then s/he shouldn't had made a review here on tv tropes, where the point is that other tropers critique your critique of the work. If I saw it or not is not an issue here, you can change the movie and end up with the same discussion. And on contrary s/he was the one who kept insinuating I was leaning to one side (kept saying I liked, not like, thought, dindt thought this or that) when I never had a side to begin with.

ps. how am I targetting and harassing him/her? I've never talked to him/her before (that I know of) and even the one we had here was rather short, specially for tv tropes.

@Slight

In 3D it was also too dark to see the background very well.

SO I've seen it today, and I agree with the review. It is a good film, but like you said:

The comedy was a little too much. It's funny for a while, but eventually the constant quips and repartee just comes off as smarmy, smart-arsery. Typical Whedon really, though I found it more tolerable here than in Serenity.

Yeah, Loki is basically a butt-monkey for most of the movie. Almost every encounter ends with someone getting one over on him, which is kind of silly when his powers are built entirely around cunning and manipulation.

The biggest thing that got on my nerves though was the flying aircraft carrier. That thing was basically a floating plot hole generator. I can't imagine what was going through the designer's head: "Let's build a flying, invisible aircraft carrier! The flying element helps nothing! And the stealth doesn't work! And it is far more vulnerable than a normal aircraft carrier! And it has no apparent air to air defences of any kind! Genius!!!"

^^ Agree so much :) I was thinking whose idea was it to build a great big heavy fortress and then stick it up in the sky so they will die painful deaths if anything happens to go wrong :D

But it's comics silly stuff like this is meant to happen :)

@ maninahat

My thoughts exactly: you put it quite succintly.

I hadn't considered the aircraft carrier issue, though. I think it proabably would've held up to "mundane" threats, such as the Iron Monger or other battle aircraft, but certain parts of its design seemed like a major oversight.

You'll have to blame the comics for that one, and lord knows if it wasn't included, plenty of fans would be upset.