Welcome to the main discussion thread for the Marvel Cinematic Universe! This pinned post is here to establish some basic guidelines. All of the Media Forum rules
still apply.
- This thread is for talking about the live-action films, TV shows, animated works, and related content that use the Marvel brand, currently owned by Disney.
- While mild digressions are okay, discussion of the comic books should go in this thread
. Extended digressions may be thumped as off-topic.
- Spoilers for new releases should not be discussed without spoiler tagging for at least two weeks. Rather, each title should have a dedicated thread where that sort of conversation is held. We can mention new releases in a general sense, but please be courteous to people who don't want to be spoiled.
If you're posting tagged spoilers, make sure that the film or series is clearly identified outside the spoiler tagging. People need to know what will be spoiled before they choose to read the post.
Edited by Mrph1 on Jul 29th 2024 at 3:09:00 PM
i mean it's kinda hard to deny that most of the marvel movies have been pretty similar in directorial style and overall feel despite the differing genres. groot is cool and i like gotg, but gotg is also one of the more interesting movies in the mcu thanks to the narrative device of using old pop songs to both convey mood and tie into quill's character.
i don't really buy that they're ruining creativity in hollywood mostly because the type of safe, mass-appeal lighthearted action blockbuster style of movie has been around for a long time before marvel. at the end of the day directors will make the movies they want to make, because many of them are artists and care more about their artistic ambitions than just creating something that will sell.
just look at guillermo del toro and how he constantly fights studios to make movies the way he wants, even at the expense of budget cuts and lower marketability.
I don't think that Marvel movies are more similar than every other movie is similar to each other. And it is pretty easy to deny that they have all the same tone. Just put Thor, Captain America, The Winter Soldier, Got G and Ant-Man beside each other. Those are stylistically very different movies.
edited 25th Jul '15 1:50:18 PM by Swanpride
I'd say Marvel films have been getting better. I didn't think a dang thing between The Incredible Hulk and The Avengers was above average, whereas the only "eh" movie since then was Dark World. Everything else has been fantastic.
Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.I dunno, while the first two thirds of their films tend to be interesting the MCU has a problem with a formulaic third act. Both Cap films, both Avengers films, Thor 2, Iron Man 3, Guardians of the Galaxy, all of them involved lots of fighting, CGI things flying in the air and blowing up and/or giant ships crashing into the ground. Iron Man 2 is borderline. Iron Man 1, Hulk, and Thor 1 didn't, but the first two were when Marvel Studios was still finding its feet and the conclusion of Thor 1 with the Destroyer was pretty tepid.
Still haven't seen Ant-Man yet but the fact that doesn't happen sounds like a point in its favor.
edited 25th Jul '15 2:10:13 PM by AlleyOop
the winter soldier and gotg are stylistically different compared to all the other films, yes. however i don't really find most of the phase 1 movies that different in terms of style and execution from each other. maybe i'd feel differently now if i were to rewatch them but that's pretty much how i felt when i was watching them years ago.
compare that to say, the tim burton batman movies which have a distinct directorial style completely different from any other superhero movie (note i am not saying they are good movies), it's easy to see how stuff like the mcu ends up blending together in people's minds.
i agree actually. i think winter soldier by itself is probably better than anything in phase 1.
edited 25th Jul '15 2:16:10 PM by wehrmacht
I think the The First Avenger is a vastly underrated movie. I enjoy it even more than Iron Man 1.
But I agree that Phase 2 has been stronger than Phase 1 overall. Winter Soldier and Got G are easily the best movies of the franchise so far, and The Dark World was the only "what were they thinking" movie for me.
edited 25th Jul '15 2:17:12 PM by Swanpride
i think first avenger might be a movie i enjoy more on a second viewing. i always thought that after iron man 1 it was the best phase 1 film, definitely more enjoyable overall than Thor or Incredible Hulk. it probably had the most memorable soundtrack in all of phase 1, largely thanks to star-spangled man being a massive Ear Worm
edited 25th Jul '15 2:20:51 PM by wehrmacht
Well, that is Alan Menken for you. But it also had visually the most to offer with the 1940s vibe, and had some really thoughtful touches. Like the moment when Steve grieves because of Bucky in the Bar in which he once celebrated his rescue, and what was once a vibrant place is now a bombed out ruin because of the war. Or the sudden cut from the stage show to the hard reality of war.
edited 25th Jul '15 2:24:33 PM by Swanpride
The First Avenger is my favorite Phase 1 solo film after Iron Man 1. It had its share of flaws, mostly with pacing and the second half, and the action scenes were kind of an afterthought. But the writing and acting were strong throughout. And the period setting added a lot of charm without becoming campy.
edited 25th Jul '15 2:31:53 PM by AlleyOop
Funny, I remember seeing an internet reviewer who called it one of the worst movies, saying Those Wacky Nazis was complete Narm and outdated and Cap was a stereotypical bland Boy Scout. Before you ask: I completely disagree with him on that.
edited 25th Jul '15 2:35:31 PM by Theokal3
I am German, which kind of makes me an authority on this trope, and the movie did something really smart: For one they made clear that The Red Skull was more an off-shot of the Nazis and not a representation of them, and they added this one line that the first country the Nazis conquered was their own. Honestly, they dealt with the source material in the best way possible and even throw in some criticism of propaganda into it.
Even in the comics he's generally not as bad as Shallow Parodies make him out to be (Ultimates version, maybe), and hasn't been used as an American propaganda piece since his revival in the 60s or whenever it was. He's generally more of a mouthpiece for progressivism than nationalism. Hell, after the Watergate scandal he actually QUIT being Captain America for a while because he thought supporting the American government was betraying his ideals.
edited 25th Jul '15 3:54:21 PM by AlleyOop
x6 If they did, I don't think it would make it onto national TV unscathed. Doing it in the comics is one thing, but to actually make a (in)famous president out to be a Supervillain in a medium that regularly gets millions of viewers? I'm not sure if they'd have the guts to go through with it. (Or, more importantly, if the network would allow it.)
edited 25th Jul '15 4:22:16 PM by kkhohoho

You know who I would like to see as the villain should they make an Iron Man 4 (aside from the Real Mandarin obviously)? The Living Laser. He has always been one of my favourite Iron Man villains conceptually, he would make a nice change to all the armored villains and I am sure they can make him work. And don't go tell me it's not realistic enough, because after what they did in Extremis with Iron Man 3....
edited 25th Jul '15 1:36:48 PM by Theokal3