Exactly as intended: an imperfect but entertaining film

Rating: 5/10 (2 January 2013)

Avengers is a flawed but still highly entertaining film. I went in with pretty low expectations but was pleasantly surprised by its entertainment value. However, I think the real problem is not the entertainment value, but the value of the story.
Avengers is inherently an origins story. This is sort of confusing because it tells the story of numerous characters teaming up and forming an alliance. The primary goal should seem to be establishing the characters, their differences, and why each would decide to form such a group. As someone who saw only several of the previous "set up" films (Incredible Hulk, Iron Man,Thor) I felt like I didn't learn much about the characters. The inconsistency of both being an origin film, but also heavily reliant on previous films to know who those characters are, weighed the movie down.
The movie kicks off with action. Yet, it then slows down considerably with some less-than-interesting introductions. It might be silly to be asking for back story, considering the popular nature of these iconic characters, but it seems like this was the very basic requirement of the film. Who are the Avengers?
Back story is glossed over for a few minutes for each character in expository dialog. Thor describes that he is the brother of Loki, Captain America mumbles about some war, and Scar Jo talks about some assassination attempt. This would seem worthwhile if it was not so bland. It is very dull hearing one ultra- warrior after the next explaining themselves. This would perhaps be less of an issue if the dialog was better written. The only dialog that had some genuine wit and charm, that every character seemed to be trying too hard to accomplish, was with Iron Man. The movie suffers from "that guy needs a witty line too" which makes the characters just a bunch of smarties. This is a classic example of "show don't tell" being blatantly ignored.
Loki, while performed well, was a villain who left much to be desired. Making snide and childish squawks about being better than everyone else is not enough. We need to see it in action. Instead we have one character after the next smashing him and sending him through a wall while he insists on superiority. While having the main characters more powerful than the villain is not always bad (joker-batman) the villain needs an equalizer usually in the form of intelligence or ruthlessness. While Loki is certainly mean, he is anything but intelligent.
Loki suffers from "why didn't he do that in the first place" the entire movie. One wonders why he sought to "divide" the Avengers when they were already divided. One wonders why he would stake his entire plan on allowing himself to be captured; or hoping that the Hulk would get angry. One also wonders exactly what Iron Man points out; why would you anger numerous gods, super-soldiers, and mutated beasts who are your only adversaries right before launching an invasion? Divide and conquer makes sense only if your enemies are united. The movie was confused between trying to having a villain break up a united group when they were never united, and a divided group becoming united because they were being attacked.
Whedon has done great work with an ensemble of interesting characters with his previous work on Firefly. It is unfortunate that, despite many believing it to be the case, Whedon has not managed to pull off the same magic. While Firefly relied on character motivations to dictate their actions in a more or less simplistic and wandering plot line, the Avengers relies on a contrived, high-stakes, and stereotypical plot to dictate the actions of the characters while relying on previously earned knowledge of what made these characters tick, rather than demonstrating their cares.
The Avenger's arc of learning to work together only came about as a result of the villain taking a far too obsessive interest with angering his opponents. Instead of the characters looking within themselves for the strength to rise above their differences and work together, our heroes are only united by action taken from without by others. They are often seen squabbling over childish differences of personality rather than differences of opinions or conflicting motives. Instead of The Avengers uniting because of inner strength, they unite due to the dubious actions of an unintelligent villain.
Furthermore, a lie from an otherwise useless Samuel Jackson, only offers a weak emotional appeal from a character nobody seemed to like much in the first place. It all detracted from the fulfillment when the Avengers finally decide to work together in the final act. Instead of excitement over each character finding their way through their own nuances and histories, we feel excitement because the movie is finally going to have some fight scenes again.
This is, of course, the real triumph of The Avengers; the action. The Avengers is certainly a triumph of spectacle. It raises the bar as to what is possible with super hero movies. However, instead of raising that bar with themes in the way that Nolan's batman trilogy attempted, or creating a rather human non-super hero in Shyamalan's Unbreakable, we are simply treated to better-executed and bigger-budgeted explosions. Also, while the film may not have had the most introspective protagonists, they had some entertaining tiffs. Robert Downey Jr. elevates the other cast members' fruitless attempts at comedic relief with comedic genius. This only further solidifies him as the only actor in the bunch that doesn't need a good script to make anything sound awesome.
Ultimately, the intention and the effect is that the Avengers is nothing exceptional or timeless, but certainly fun and exciting.
My subjective breakdown of the movie's major elements: Cinematography 9/10 Editing 8/10 Art Direction 8/10 Sound 10/10 Special Effects 9/10 Acting 6/10 Pacing 5/10 Characters 4/10 Theme 4/10 Music 6/10 Overall 6/10