Normally when we talk good movies, we talk about how successful they are at guiding believable and interesting characters along an engaging storyline. Characters are the bare building blocks of plot. If we're going to care about something happening in a fictional universe, we're going to have to first care about who it's happening to. 

But not all films need fully realized imaginary personalities in order to draw in an audience. Some of the best films ever made convey compelling experiences with nary a character in sight. These are those films--the ones that somehow get us excited and engaged despite the fact that there's no one in them for us to relate to.

Fantasia

I guess you could argue that Mickey Mouse is a character in his own right, but he doesn't really do anything as himself in Disney's experimental synesthetic spectacular. He stands in for the Sorcerer's Apprentice and then he provides some comic relief in between segments--that's it. On the whole, Fantasia moves along purely on the engine of its visuals and the beautiful music that inspired them. It's perhaps the only Disney film without a brand to accompany it, existing purely for the sake of its own artistic merit.

Koyaanisqatsi

Taking the earth as a whole in its gaze, this time-lapse full-length goes so far as to argue that all life is worthy of starring in its own film. Directed by Godfrey Reggio and scored by Philip Glass, this art film forsakes all the traditional hallmarks of the medium in which it operates. There are no characters, no sets, and no dialogue. There's simply the world, caught on camera. Koyaanisqatsi moves from documenting natural landscapes untouched by human development into a closer focus on civilization and bustling human activity. To see life portrayed on this scale grants you more than just a sense of perspective. It changes the way you think about why we do the things we do every day.

I'm not going to say Joss Whedon has sold out. That would be a cliched oversimplification and an overall unhelpful statement in the discussion about what The Avengers has actually done to Hollywood. Besides, Whedon never committed to pure artistry in the first place. He's always been more than comfortable selling entertainment products to the highest bidder. So I won't say that Joss Whedon has sold out. But I will say this: it feels weird to see Joss Whedon take Disney money to make a glossy and overblown (if spirited) toy catalog. 

As anyone who knows anything about anything already knows, The Avengers broke box office records by drawing a butt-ton of profits on its opening weekend. If there were ever a sign that the movie industry as we know it is alive, healthy, and gluttonous as ever, this was it. Piracy be damned; people will still gladly shell out $30 a head for a 3D midnight opening ticket plus accoutrements. Especially if the film in question is the first shiny summer action flick of the season with an all-star cast of already-loved characters.

Maybe we shouldn't be surprised that The Avengers's script drips out as lazily as it does. Whedon didn't have to do any work to make it hook. Just between RDJ's effervescent likability and Scarlett Johannson's, ahem, screen presence, you could make a summer smash hit without writing a single original line of dialogue. Throw in the rest of the crew and it becomes obvious why Whedon's trademark witticisms were tranquilized into easy, family-friendly stock humor. As a director, he gets all the beats to milk the laughs, but as a writer he seems to have left his spine back on Serenity.