Marvel Cinematic Universe

As someone who loves both movies... I wholeheartedly agree. They had that madcap constant comedy, tempered by the very compelling emotional scenes, character building moments with much needed heart-to-hearts, and a feeling we were dealing with some broken folks, masking things with a smile... yet the one thing they seemed to take away was laughter, all the time. No nuance, no nothing.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Winter Soldier was lightning in a bottle. Every time Marvel has attempted to follow the tone of that movie, it's either lackluster at best, or flat-out sucks. They just don't know how to make political thrillers anymore, especially since Real Life events keep getting in the way of developing something interesting.

After Secret Invasion, they better keep away from that side for a while, really.

Both Civil War and the Falcon and the Winter Soldier tried for the same sort of thing. I think Civil War isn’t quite as good as CA: WS but still mostly succeeded and is one of my favorite MCU films. FATWS…not so much.

Edited by CheapMarzipan on May 11th 2024 at 11:32:58 AM

keep it a secret forever

I actually think TFATWS gets a bit too much hate, and isn't as bad as some people make it out to be. But there are a lot of problems with that show, especially regarding the ending.

But hey, we got to see Sam and Bucky fix a boat in Louisiana. That alone makes the show worth it.

As much as I like Love & Thunder since it has Natalie Portman as Mighty Thor, her being together again w/ Tessa Thompson and Chris Hemsworth as well as the Guns & Roses soundtrack, it shares the same problem as Wonder Woman 1984 and every Zack Snyder movie since Snyder League: its director, Taika Waititi, was allowed to overindulge himself to excess. And he's nowhere near as good as James Gunn who at least can balance serious themes w/ humor.

As for FAWTS, that discussion has been done to death already in its own thread.

For what it's worth, I seem to recall that I actually rather liked Falcon and the Winter Soldier.

I enjoyed Love and Thunder, but did think it was flawed. Portman was great to watch as Mighty Thor, and Hemsworth and Thompson were good as well. Bale was incredible as the Gorr, and Gorr had a great backstory and great design.

The main issue was the fact it seemed to have 2 clashing tones. I disagree that the Bathos undermined the dark scenes, because usually they were separated well (like they never made Jane's cancer a joke and never brought it up during a humorous moment, though I do get why people disliked it, I do to), but it did feel like I was watching a completely different movie whenever Gorr was on screen. I don't know why exactly, I thought GOTG vol 3 handled the tone well, and that was as humorous as the other films while also having some of the darkest and most brutal moments in the MCU, but with Love and Thunder, it just felt jarring.

I don't think Thor was flanderised really, and the film acknowledges he is annoying and self-centred, it's something he has to grow out of (though a bit more time spent on that would have been better). I do think a bit more time should have been spent on Gorr, but what's there is more or less enough. I thought Korg was still likeable in this film.

Maybe it would have been better as 2 films. A sort of superhero rom-com about Thor and Jane (as Mighty Thor) going on adventures through the galaxy would have been great. They could even have kept the cancer, it would have hit better if the focus of the film was more on Thor and Jane. And then there could have been another film, a dark and brutal film about a man who has lost all hope killing the gods.

James Gunn does have a knack for balancing serious & silly. Besides Guardians of the Galaxy, another good example is Suicide Squad 2.

Edited by KRider on May 11th 2024 at 3:43:17 AM

Gorr barely had any screentime in Love and Thunder. Wasted Bale's performance on that.

What's odd is that Waititi is capable of balancing dark subject matter and comedy. He did that very well in Jojo Rabbit, so it's hard to say why it doesn't quite work in Love and Thunder. I don't think the cancer stuff is done badly at all. I think it's just the comedy around it falls flat.

I actually have no idea what people are saying about the comedy and drama not balancing well when is actually better than ragnarock since is not killing the dramatic moments at every chance given, if anything I find jojo rabbit to not do as well, their comedy falling fall flater to me, but in general is not like you can't judge objectively when a joke falls flat or not, at the end of the day humor is subjective is not like a perfect science in which you can empiricaly prove that something is funny or not so trying to argue what's "funny" and what's "not funny" I feel is just a matter of taste most of the time, so I find it pointless to debate.

I can kinda get why people didn't care for Ragnarok LOVE AND THUNDER.

Though I see it as Thor still very much recovering from 5 years of being out of shape physically and emotionally.

As well as loving his mother, father and brother in an extremely short period of time, losing half his people, then losing that half.

Love and Thunder Thor, despite trying to still seem strong, is still a fucking mess, and it shows.

Edit: Also, Gorr could have done a bit more God-killing. It is his thing.

Edited by HandsomeRob on May 11th 2024 at 6:30:26 AM

Hoenstly think they should have killed him off personally. He's a complete joke of a character at this point that we wouldn't be missing much.

I mean, people were saying the same thing about Quill after Infinity War & Endgame, and Gunn was able to bring him back around.

I feel Thor's character was still good in Ragnarok.

But it's in L&T where he fully devolved into being a total fratboy. Even his dialogue became less interesting, reaching the zenith of how the Asgardians no longer have a unique way of speaking, they talk no different from regular humans.

Tbf theirs a good chance we never see Quill again. And rocket was the main character of 3.

Like seriously what more could we possibly do with Thor anyway?

Edited by miraculous on May 11th 2024 at 6:04:48 AM

Kill him off.

Well, Guardians 3 did end with a splash screen that said THE LEGENDARY STAR LORD WILL RETURN.

So, I dunno. They might still have plans.

I can't imagine why Star Lord wouldn't ever appear again.

Same with Thor, tbh. This is a superhero universe. Why are we entertaining the idea that the moment a character's set of stories is over, there's nothing left they can do but be killed off? That's usually the kind of thinking we tend to specifically criticize execs for.

Edited by KnownUnknown on May 11th 2024 at 11:09:14 AM

By that logic, Tony Stark shouldn't have died in Endgame so that the door will always be open to have him make endless reappearances in the future.

Obviously, you can do more with characters after their main story is wrapped up. But at some point...you gotta let them go.

Especially since there will come a point when an actor might want to move in from the role.

The logic that characters don't become disposable the moment the story is done with them is equivalent to saying characters should never die ever?

Edited by KnownUnknown on May 12th 2024 at 1:25:13 AM

What could be done with Thor now? Nearly anything?

Eta: It's even more silly a question when you remember L&T included a specific Sequel Hook: Thor vs Hercules/omnipotence city.

Edited by dcutter2 on May 12th 2024 at 10:46:49 AM