Originally Posted by JustSomeGuy
Man, this is some of the most half-assed way to a judge a film I have ever seen, no offense. The Avengers, I thought, was so far and away better than XFC, that you can't even compare them. And what you listed has nothing to do with why Avengers was good.
Yeah, on the surface, it's a movie about an alien invasion with lots explosions. But the characters of the film were portrayed so much better in The Avengers than in any movie I've seen recently. Look at how it is laid out: Loki steals cube, and Fury needs to go get the Avengers together. So we then a get an incredibly varied introduction to each character who is essential to the plot. Black Widow is a super spy in Russia toying with mobsters. She has then has to go get Bruce Banner, who is in a shack in Kolkata, away from society. Fury then goes to Cap, who is up in the middle of the night hitting punching bags in an old timey gym. Coulson goes to Tony Stark's penthouse, interrupting the personal life of a billionaire playboy to throw some work on him because he has to. Boom. It's such a brilliant setup to these characters. Then Thor comes and shows that this is actually the most personal to him, because it is his brother, someone he thinks he can still save.
At no time in this movie did I stop and think "wow, this scene has no business being in this movie," or that one of the characters felt flat, or said something that didn't sound organic. XFC is FILLED with moments like that. One that stands out in particular is that terrible, awful scene on the boat where that general confronts Shaw, WITH A GRENADE? That scene is literally only in the movie to show the audience what Shaw's power is. There is absolutely no reason for that scene to be in the film, no reason at all for that character to think it is a good idea to confront a bunch of mutants on a boat with only a grenade, other than to simply show the audience something which the writers wanted to the audience to know, but weren't talented enough to weave it into the movie naturally.
He even just blatantly says what his power is! He says it, verbatim, that his power is he can absorb energy. That is such lazy filmmaking. The #1 rule of writing a movie, for me, is you need to show me, not tell me. Perfect example in The Avengers: it would have been terrible storytelling, if someone just flat out said that Captain America is the leader of the Avengers. Because there is no reason for any character to say that in the film. Instead, what does Joss Whedon do? He shows the audience Cap giving off orders to the Avengers. He doesn't talk down to the audience, which happens in so many superhero films, he just shows them. And Joss Whedon understands this important part of making a film, it's why the movie is being so well received, his skill is in telling a story, regardless of what that story is. Yeah, maybe the story of XFC is better than the story of Avengers, but the entertaining bit comes in how the story is told, not necessarily because of what the story is.
Someone said it above that people like to talk about "depth." I will go even further. People confuse a plot that is complicated with being quality. The Avengers may have had a simple plot, but the movie was pulled off flawlessly. Most movies try to go for something with more meaning and end up falling flat on their face in the process. I will take something simple done well over something complicated done poorly every single day. It's why Disney animated films are great. It's why Pixar movies are great. The story itself doesn't matter all that much. It is how the story is told.
But yeah, there is my drunken superhero rant.