Marvel Universe (Thar be spoilers ahead.)

[HaemishM]

Of all the Avengers-tied Marvel movies, I enjoyed them all but the weakest were clearly IM 3 and Thor 2. At least IM3 had RDJ hamming it up as Tony Stark while Thor's most redeeming feature was Tom Hiddlestone's Loki. The other films were really good with Winter Soldier being a little better than Avengers, IMO.

The thing about the Thor and Captain America movies is that they should not have worked. The first Thor movie I especially give a lot of credit because I thought there was NO WAY those characters would make a translatable film that non-geeks liked that also didn't utterly piss off comic geeks and Thor fans. But it did, which is why the second felt so bland in comparison. I enjoyed it but it was mostly forgettable save Loki's bits. Captain America is a character that can so easily be badly written and badly played into the most boring Boy Scout in the world, but thanks to the framework set up by Brubaker (and to a lesser extent Mark Waid) in the previous decade's worth of Captain America's books, it wasn't. The directors and screenwriters took the material they were basing it on very seriously and it showed.

You don't have to be a fan of the comics to make good comics movies. You just have to respect that the material is being made into a movie for a reason - it's popular because there have been some stories told over the years that people like. You don't have to cater to the geeks and the nerd rage, but treating them with disdain is a sure fire way to make a movie that appeals to no one.

[Velorath]

The only way to solve this will be for everyone to list out which Marvel films they liked and which ones they didn't, and eventually we'll come to an amicable consensus.

See, that's actually kind of my point.  Not a lot of people quote stats or box office or bums on seats or anything tangible.  It's usually 'I didn't like it as much' which, in the grand scheme of things, means fuckall.  Sure, none of the other stats mean much either (see:  Star Wars), but at least it attempts to compare like for like.

Box office-wise Cap 1 and Thor 1 weren't particularly successful. Even without adjusting for inflation or 3D or taking into account the growth of the worldwide market, Cap's worldwide numbers are right around those of X-men Origins: Wolverine and Fantastic Four. Adjusted for inflation, Cap 1 was about as successful domestically as the first Hulk movie. Thor 1 was only marginally more successful than Cap 1.

[Ironwood]

Ouch !

 

[Evildrider]

The only way to solve this will be for everyone to list out which Marvel films they liked and which ones they didn't, and eventually we'll come to an amicable consensus.

See, that's actually kind of my point.  Not a lot of people quote stats or box office or bums on seats or anything tangible.  It's usually 'I didn't like it as much' which, in the grand scheme of things, means fuckall.  Sure, none of the other stats mean much either (see:  Star Wars), but at least it attempts to compare like for like.

Box office-wise Cap 1 and Thor 1 weren't particularly successful. Even without adjusting for inflation or 3D or taking into account the growth of the worldwide market, Cap's worldwide numbers are right around those of X-men Origins: Wolverine and Fantastic Four. Adjusted for inflation, Cap 1 was about as successful domestically as the first Hulk movie. Thor 1 was only marginally more successful than Cap 1.

Marvel took the risk with those movies.  They knew they weren't going to be box office smashes, but look at how much the sequels brought in.  Even X-Men didn't bring in huge money when it came out.  Also don't forget those movies led to Avengers and that shit made bank.  The Amount of money that Avengers made alone would have funded 8-9 Marvel movies.  I guess the real test now is how Guardians does.  It'll be interesting to see if the goodwill that Marvel has with moviegoers will get them into the theaters.

[UnSub]

"Avengers" being as successful as it was took pretty much everyone by surprise. Up to that point, Marvel Studio's success was based on how well the Iron Man films did, with "Thor", "Hulk" and "Captain America" not reaching that level.

Also, I enjoyed IM3 for the fact that it's done something new and interesting with the Marvel characters, and that it's a Shane Black film. "Thor 2" (and "Thor", for that matter) were enjoyable for Loki above all else.

"GotG" is indeed the acid test for Marvel Studios. Will Han Solo: The Movie bring people in to watch it?

[SurfD]

I am willing to bet that a big chunk of their momentum with the movies may revolve around the fact that, at this stage in the game, pretty much everybody with a functioning brain knows that they are deliberately building each movie to tie into a larger overall storyline, so even though they are different movies, with different characters, many people may go to watch them just to see what the next building block in the story shapes up to be.   It's like Marvel has distilled the essence of attraction of sequels down, and then spread it through the entire MCU.  As long as they dont fuck up somewhere major, that alone will have enough draw to keep them rolling in enough cash to keep the whole ball rolling for years to come.

[Evildrider]

At this point Ant-Man may be the hiccup in the machine.

[Ironwood]

Also, I enjoyed IM3 for the fact that it's done something new and interesting with the Marvel characters, and that it's a Shane Black film.

Can you expand on this ?

[jgsugden]

I think Marvel has blown Sony, Fox, Paramount, etc... out of the water in terms of telling great Comic Book movie stories.  I used to have high praise for Raimi's Spider-man and for the first 2 X-films, but when I rewatched them fairly recently, they felt very flat compared to what Marvel has achieved.  The X-films and Raimi's Spider-man get a lot of things right, but the things that they get wrong are the things that Marvel would never accept. 

Historically, Marvel's biggest sellers have been the mutant books.  The biggest solo character was Spider-man.  That was why other studios bought up the rights to those characters and are holding onto them for dear life.  The only reason the Avengers side of things is so big right now is that Marvel has handled it very well in the movies.  If Marvel had a chance to get back mutants, Spidey or FF, there should be no doubt it would be a game changer for them and they'd immediately start folding them into their plans.  As their plans take years to go from inkling to release, it would be 2018 (at the earliest) before a film was released if they obtain the characters today - but there is no doubt they'd cut the current plans off the walls at Marvel's office and revise them to include the characters that have been at the core of their long term success.

[Lakov_Sanite]

First class and DOFP are both solid films, you can argue amazing spider man, dc movies all you like but at least this next gen of x movies are doing it right.

[Margalis]

I couldn't watch IM3. It was super boring and the cinematography was awful. It looked like a made-for-TV movie in many ways. The entire thing also had a very been there, done that vibe.

If they make another IM they really need to shake things up. Have something happen in the first few minutes that changes the status quo.

[eldaec]

I couldn't watch IM3. ...... The entire thing also had a very been there, done that vibe.

Completely agree - and I don't really understand why people are surprised after 3 movies that this is the case, or think that Thor and CA will be in any different state, or even that  the avengers will stand up to it if they don't swap some characters out.

[Lakov_Sanite]

I couldn't watch IM3. ...... The entire thing also had a very been there, done that vibe.

Completely agree - and I don't really understand why people are surprised after 3 movies that this is the case, or think that Thor and CA will be in any different state, or even that  the avengers will stand up to it if they don't swap some characters out.

 
Cap 3 has things they can wrap up though and the ending of Thor 2 leaves the way open for a MUCH better movie than the second.  The iron man movies while not bad were very villain of the week with no real running thread between them.

[Margalis]

With Thor you can pretty much do anything with alternate dimension, space, whatever. He can go on an adventure that can be almost anything.

All the Iron Man movies take place in the same basic locale with the same characters. That's a big part of why they feel samey. The first 30 minutes of IM3 is him in his mansion, messing with his robots, talking to Jarvis, talking to Gwyneth Paltrow - stuff we've all seen before.

Cap 1 and 2 took place in different time period, and Thor fairly different locales.

[Lakov_Sanite]

Agreed but what I'm saying is if there were some over-arching theme to iron man 1-3 to tie them all together it would have done wonders but even after the second one I'm not sure if they knew there would ever be a trilogy.

[Ironwood]

They also didn't tie into The Avengers at all and it stuck out like a sore thumb, especially the 3rd one.  It was one of the main complaints.

[eldaec]

I read the link as being RDJ was sad because he saved the world and decided to stop being iron man.

[jgsugden]

First class and DOFP are both solid films, you can argue amazing spider man, dc movies all you like but at least this next gen of x movies are doing it right.

First class and DoFP are fine, but the problems that are there are things that Marvel has been very good at avoiding.  I could break it down in details, but I'd best summarize it as:  The thing the MCU has that the X-films lack is the soul of the comics.  There are just too many little things that are off in the X-films that they nail in the MCU.

[Evildrider]

They also didn't tie into The Avengers at all and it stuck out like a sore thumb, especially the 3rd one.  It was one of the main complaints.

The third Iron Man was full of Tony having PTSD from the stuff that happened in Avengers.

[Ironwood]

Yeah, sure, mentioning 'hey shit happened to me' is one thing :  I'm talking about the links that tied it into the greater Universe, like, oh, I dunno, a Terrorist threat to kidnap and murder the president and where was Shield ?  Where were all his Avenger mates when his house was being shelled to fuck ?  Why was this guy suddenly running solo (and being quite crap at it).

And other problems, like what the fuck was up with him recharging a fucking arc reactor with a car battery.  (Sorry, sorry, sorry, I just can't get over how fucking shitty that movie was, the battery bit in particular...)

Look at Cap 2 and Thor 2 and the tie in was far, far, far greater and worked much better because of it, even if the story on Thor 2 was technically weaker.

Iron Man 1, 2 and 3 are not only divorced from the greater whole far too much, they're also quite divorced from each other.  If you'd moved from Iron Man 1 to 3 without watching 2, would you have missed ANYTHING ?  Explanation as to why Pepper is in charge, maybe, but that's it.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. You've got me monologue-ing.

[Margalis]

The Avengers were busy saving a cat from a tree.

These movies do have that problem in a way the comics don't. In the comics "they were busy doing something else" actually works because the busy people are busy in their own books, or even if they aren't the idea that they are busy is plausible because there's just so much going on in such a sprawling universe.

The world of the movies is much tighter and more focused - there aren't a million other established threats that could be keeping the rest of the Avengers occupied.

[Ironwood]

If you want to look at it purely through that lens :  Where the hell was SHIELD ?

And don't give me 'they were too busy being HYDRA'.

[Lakov_Sanite]

I'm not even talking about the movie universe, i just wish the iron man movies had some sort of internal continuity.  Each iron man movie can be viewed independently of the others and nothing is lost.

[Ironwood]

Yeah, that's what I said.

[HaemishM]

To be fair, Thor wouldn't have been available in IM3 because he was off world. The others and SHIELD... yeah, you got a point. It's one I can handwave away with "comics" but I can see where it'd be an issue. Of course, the problems with IM3 were bigger than that (and I say this as someone who enjoyed IM3 despite its flaws).

[Fordel]

While IM3 has many flaws, the weirdest to me was how they handled the Mandarin. They seemed to set him up so very well, right until they provided the twist and what? 

[Ironwood]

Ach, that wouldn't have been so bad except for the smooshing of extremis and Mandarin.  Having them BOTH be the same guy was a bit shitey.

If Killian had been the Mandarin mastermind in the background, you'd have been ok with it, since it would make sense as an 'update' (even tho it's a bit white-washy).  However, having him be the Mandarin and also the head of AIM and also the Extremis Firebreathing Nutjob was a little...much.

Hey ho.  Bad film was bad.

[jgsugden]

We have not yet seen the Mandarin, but they have established he exists.  I imagine that if we see him, it will either be:

1.) In IM IV - in 2020 (first IM post RDJ) or so,
2.) In MAoS - he'd be a good foe for the agency for a season, or
3.) In Avengers III as a member of the Masters of Evil.

I think they wasted Extremis, but the Mandarin twist was fine in my books.

[Ironwood]

Killian was The Mandarin.

[jgsugden]

Killian was The Mandarin.

No.  Killian claimed to be the Mandarin in the film ... but it is 100% established in All Hail the King that Killian was not the Mandarin.  Interviews with Feige, the writers and director of the short and IM III also confirm that the intention was that the real Mandarin was out there in the world... and would not be happy about Slattery's portrayal.

http://marvel.wikia.com/Marvel_One-Shot:_All_Hail_the_King

[Ironwood]

Still bullshit.

Ironically, bullshit that makes IM3 an even bigger pile of bullshit.

[Lakov_Sanite]

Still bullshit.

Ironically, bullshit that makes IM3 an even bigger pile of bullshit.

I dunno, isn't ret-conning bad decisions the most comic booky thing they can do?   

[jgsugden]

Still bullshit.

Ironically, bullshit that makes IM3 an even bigger pile of bullshit.

I think there is a wide gap between bullshit and IM III, but I was very disappointed that it did not come close to my very high expectations.

Personally, I think IM III's problems is why Wright is off Ant-man.  IM III failed to reach full potential because it was more of a sequel to Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang than it was a sequel to prior Iron Man movies.  Black made one of 'his' movies, and it did not fit in correctly with what Marvel was trying to do.  They tried to compromise, and what they ended up with were some tensions in the film where the Marvel style and the Black style didn't mesh - and they couldn't get them to play together.

The way I'm reading Wright's departure, especially after Gunn's comments on the subject, is that Marvel looked at what went wrong with IM III and saw it going on again in Ant-man.  If they made Wright's film, it would not fit with the MCU or their future goals for the character.  They took the script and had it rewritten to keep the Marvel feel and preserve their goals for the character - at the expense of what made the film a Wright film (and seemingly failed to take it in a good direction).

[Lakov_Sanite]

Still bullshit.

Ironically, bullshit that makes IM3 an even bigger pile of bullshit.

I think there is a wide gap between bullshit and IM III, but I was very disappointed that it did not come close to my very high expectations.

Personally, I think IM III's problems is why Wright is off Ant-man.  IM III failed to reach full potential because it was more of a sequel to Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang than it was a sequel to prior Iron Man movies.  Black made one of 'his' movies, and it did not fit in correctly with what Marvel was trying to do.  They tried to compromise, and what they ended up with were some tensions in the film where the Marvel style and the Black style didn't mesh - and they couldn't get them to play together.

The way I'm reading Wright's departure, especially after Gunn's comments on the subject, is that Marvel looked at what went wrong with IM III and saw it going on again in Ant-man.  If they made Wright's film, it would not fit with the MCU or their future goals for the character.  They took the script and had it rewritten to keep the Marvel feel and preserve their goals for the character - at the expense of what made the film a Wright film (and seemingly failed to take it in a good direction).

Now THAT is bullshit.  Black's style had nothing to do with that trainwreck of a script.

[Ironwood]

Still bullshit.

Ironically, bullshit that makes IM3 an even bigger pile of bullshit.

I dunno, isn't ret-conning bad decisions the most comic booky thing they can do?   

Needs more Cable.