And you know this how?

By looking at it.

So...lots of people end up liking it. Win win, says I.

I'd disagree. Not that RDJ wasn't great, but that the story was one of the best we've seen in a super-hero flick. Not that it was terribly original, but it was so well constructed.

Mike

Not quite. I've seen enough Whedon to notice his particular voice all through The Avengers. It's Whedon trying to be as crowd pleasing as possible, but it's not at all accurate to cast this film as some sort of generic product of marketing and studio formula. The Cap and Thor movies were that way, but not this one.

Mike

The Cap movie had a lot of style, but poor action direction. The Thor movie had enough style to obscure its lack of depth. The Avengers movie was Whedon trying to gain some Cameron/Spielberg level political capital so he doesn't have to ever again beg his fanboys to save another one of his failed TV shows.

Candy is popular, no doubt, but there's no equivalent to a dentist in this analogy.

I don't even know what that means. Are you saying that Whedon could have made a better movie but he was afraid it would bomb at the box office?

Mike

Something Allen wrote has intrigued me: "The market wants what it wants and doesn't want to be challenged."

Well, the market is me and you and everyone else who goes to see the film. Perhaps, me and you and everyone else have enough challenges in our daily lives (I know have) that perhaps, just perhaps, me and you and everyone else just want to go and see an entertaining film. Nothing more. Nothing less. Hulk Smash.

No, Whedon couldn't have made a better movie (but that's because Whedon is a wanker). I'm saying Whedon glommed onto this project because he thinks it's his ticket to becoming a top-level Hollywood player (and he may be right). Sort of like how Raimi jumped on Spider-Man, or Jackson on Lord of the Rings, except those two were only seeking validation as directors. Whedon wants to be a brand, like Cameron or Spielberg.