Iron Man 1 is the best MCU movie. (Film Making Point of View Only)

[sunofdarkchild]

Tony had to ask for help and let somebody in, literally and figuratively, to win the final battle.

A theme of the entire movie (asking for help, letting people in) that should be obvious to even the most pretentious film critque. Heck, even critics said it was too heavy handed on the themes.

It is so black and white and obvious. It's not like a Kubric film where you have to really dig deep to see the theme. It wasn't very subtle. At least to me.

Tony had no problem asking for help in Iron Man 1. That was Iron Man 2. In Iron Man 1 he had help building the first suit in the cave, was reliant on Stane to smooth things over with the board, asked Pepper to sneak into the company to get info, and was dying to show off his suit to Rhodey. The themes were about taking responsibility for one's actions, not letting people in. In the sequel he had that problem because he was dying and didn't want anyone to know, and his overcoming that is what led to him being able to get together with Pepper and work alongside War Machine at the end. That is where it is "black and white and obvious."

The themes of Iron Man 1 are also "black and white and obvious," and are missing in that final battle. Tony doesn't take what he learns over the course of the film to win. He pulls out a deus ex machina. It's not a matter of the fight not being flashy enough. If the fight had the emotional and thematic weight it should have had then that wouldn't matter. The Luke/Vader duel in Return of the Jedi has terrible choreography and on its own would be a boring fight. But the thematic and emotional weight of the confrontation between father and son is so strong that it doesn't matter. Iron Man 1's final fight makes the fight ridiculously lopsided and yet doesn't have any stakes.

[Arfguy]

I am curious as to which movie the OP (Castle) would rather watch:

Thor? Or Thor: Ragnarok?

I would love to see the answer here.

[WebLurker]

In terms of directors and film craftsmanship, I think the Russo brothers, James Gunn, and Taika Waititi have done better work for the MCU then Jon Favreau's two directorial showings in the same. Heck, I could see a case for Joss Whedon and Ryan Coolger having stronger first films with their involvement. Even some of the so-callled lesser films, like the Ant-Man films and Spider-Man: Far From Home show a great deal of creativity in terms of leveraging the characters gimmicks in creative ways (Iron Man 1 has nothing on the scene with Spidey trapped in Mysterio's nightmare illusion).

[Noodle]

If GOTG had failed, there would not have been Ragnarok or Antman or Endgame or Love and Thunder and any other marvel films even their hardcore fans say the comedy was too much.

Ant-Man came out less than a year after Guardians. The movie was well into production. That movie would have came out the exact same way regardless of the success of Guardians.

The scene with Iron man saving those people from terrorists was the perfect example of mixing a realistic theme about terrorism with superhero fantasy of an Iron Suit without having to think big about toys, something that was absent in iron man 3.

Tony's struggles with PTSD was a realistic element that wasn't used to sell toys. And I say that as someone that hated Iron Man 3. You dissect any of the movies to find moments like that.

I have seen that sort of film. I will leave the comic bookie story plot to fans. that is just one aspect of the film.

So you haven't seen it but want to talk factually about it.

Unfortunately I knew this thread could get derailed fast because I know MCU is not really the franchise for talking about film making experience but i thought i give it a try since once upon a time they had some. Iron Man 1 was clear proof of that.

The thread "got derailed" because people had an opposite opinion than you and you couldn't stand for that. Not everyone is always going to agree with you.

[Castle]

I am curious as to which movie the OP (Castle) would rather watch:

Thor? Or Thor: Ragnarok?

I would love to see the answer here.

Smart question, worth replying that relates to the topic. Thor.

Objectively a better film making experience, easily a top 5 in film experience of mcu movies. I will give a reason, kenneth branagh. He was a good choice as the director, his background as a Shakespearian actor was right for dealing with the Thor Mythos, he is the person fans should thank for creating the Thor and Loki relationship, I think he understood it better than any other director that has used the characters, which comes as no surprise for an actor/director deep into Shakespeare stories. he captured medieval fantasy well with creating Asgard. I think compared to far from home or captain marvel, thor is actually a good film experience. I think its a solid made movie that Branagh has on his resume that should have gotten him more directing gigs.


Ragnarok is a GOTG Rip off , its a Disney manufactured movie in every bad sense of the word. There is no film experience actually worth talking about with this movie. it's funny and that's it.

[Castle]

Ant-Man came out less than a year after Guardians. The movie was well into production. That movie would have came out the exact same way regardless of the success of Guardians.




Tony's struggles with PTSD was a realistic element that wasn't used to sell toys. And I say that as someone that hated Iron Man 3. You dissect any of the movies to find moments like that.



So you haven't seen it but want to talk factually about it.




The thread "got derailed" because people had an opposite opinion than you and you couldn't stand for that. Not everyone is always going to agree with you.

The thread will only get derailed if people go off on the topic. the topic said film making point of view only. this is not a favourite fans mcu movie thread. its a thread from an artistic film making experience POV.

To me, its equal to First Avenger. Both of these movies hit all the right beats for origin stories, feature charismatic casts and establish their respective characters. Even though First Avenger is more of a world threat type of movie than Iron Man, the stakes for each character in each movie basically are the same.

As a solo movie, Black Panther is about the same. But I can't put it there with those other two movies because the character had already appeared in a couple of movies so was kind of established already. Dr. Strange falls just below those other three movies. The Hulk solo movies and the first Thor movie are way lower.


Black Widow movie seems like it is going to be good, but its got a big uphill climb to stand with FA and IM, because Widow is so established already.

I think Black Panther was half in and half out. it has half personal film making experience and a half experience that keeps on reminding you that you are still watching an ''MCU'' Disney movie.

A lot of good things in the film like Killmonger's character, the costumes, music score and soundtrack, Ryan directing Chadwick Boseman (RIP) with bringing T'Chailla to life was all Ryan Coolger and I think he did a good job.

The others parts of the film like the overall plot and generic 3D CGI third final battle was all MCU and Kevin Fiege.

[Scott Taylor]

I think Black Panther was half in and half out. it has half personal film making experience and a half experience that keeps on reminding you that you are still watching an ''MCU'' Disney movie.

A lot of good things in the film like Killmonger's character, the costumes, music score and soundtrack, Ryan directing Chadwick Boseman (RIP) with bringing T'Chailla to life was all Ryan Coolger and I think he did a good job.

The others parts of the film like the overall plot and generic 3D CGI third final battle was all MCU and Kevin Fiege.

Michael B. Jordan was also very good in the role. He elevated that character in the same way he elevated Creed.

You make good points about the CGI, but the last scene's cartoony fight was totally redeemed by the death scene of Killmonger.

[Noodle]

The thread will only get derailed if people go off on the topic. the topic said film making point of view only. this is not a favourite fans mcu movie thread. its a thread from an artistic film making experience POV.

And people have pointed out to you how they disagree with your opinion on this from a film making point of view. You've dismissed every one of them as opinions of fanboys, more or less, which you even admit to in your own statement:

I know MCU is not really the franchise for talking about film making experience

Again, just because people disagree with you doesn't make them wrong, just as you're not wrong if you disagree with them. It's just a difference of opinion. Quality is subjective.

[WebLurker]

And people have pointed out to you how they disagree with your opinion on this from a film making point of view. You've dismissed every one of them as opinions of fanboys, more or less, which you even admit to in your own statement:



Again, just because people disagree with you doesn't make them wrong, just as you're not wrong if you disagree with them. It's just a difference of opinion. Quality is subjective.

Not sure this thread's so much about Marvel Studios' filmmaking quality as it for the OP to have a place to post about how he hates Disney and the MCU.

[Jokerz79]

Iron Man 1 is an awesome movie. But from a Film making point of view I'd put a few "Disney" MCU films a head of it and I went to film school.

But to name one in particular I'd put above it GOTG Vol. 2

Tony had a great character arc and growth in his 1st outing but in GOTG Vol. 2 5 characters did with Peter, Gamora, Nebula, Yondu, and Rocket.

Also Yondu's death was executed excellently IMO for a poignant ending to him.

The costumes, sets, and props were top notch.

Make up was fantastic.

CGI Outstanding.

Excellent Lighting.

Amazing Designed Set Pieces in the film.

Across the board it took everything to the next level IMO.

[Midvillian1322]

Smart question, worth replying that relates to the topic. Thor.

Objectively a better film making experience, easily a top 5 in film experience of mcu movies. I will give a reason, kenneth branagh. He was a good choice as the director, his background as a Shakespearian actor was right for dealing with the Thor Mythos, he is the person fans should thank for creating the Thor and Loki relationship, I think he understood it better than any other director that has used the characters, which comes as no surprise for an actor/director deep into Shakespeare stories. he captured medieval fantasy well with creating Asgard. I think compared to far from home or captain marvel, thor is actually a good film experience. I think its a solid made movie that Branagh has on his resume that should have gotten him more directing gigs.


Ragnarok is a GOTG Rip off , its a Disney manufactured movie in every bad sense of the word. There is no film experience actually worth talking about with this movie. it's funny and that's it.

Not only is your opinion unpopular you still Haven't learned what Objectively means. Smh

[Steel Inquisitor]

The thread will only get derailed if people go off on the topic. the topic said film making point of view only. this is not a favourite fans mcu movie thread. its a thread from an artistic film making experience POV.




I think Black Panther was half in and half out. it has half personal film making experience and a half experience that keeps on reminding you that you are still watching an ''MCU'' Disney movie.

A lot of good things in the film like Killmonger's character, the costumes, music score and soundtrack, Ryan directing Chadwick Boseman (RIP) with bringing T'Chailla to life was all Ryan Coolger and I think he did a good job.

The others parts of the film like the overall plot and generic 3D CGI third final battle was all MCU and Kevin Fiege.

Nothing about the work Marvel put into Wakanda as a society, the fashion and tribal inspirations from various cultures in Africa and how they used real African languages? How they made a film which has a majority black cast behind and in front of the camera? The social dynamics and relationships having incredible depth in two hours made no impression? How Marvel was very up front with politics, rather than ignoring it or being background noise is most super-hero films?

[Revolutionary_Jack]

If by "film-making point of view" we are talking about how these movies are made, then there's not any tangible difference between the movies made before Disney bought it and the ones they made after.

When we use words like film-making unless people are really specific about what they mean, then that refers to the technical nature of how these films are produced. So let's actually talk about that, hmmm.

IM-1, IM-2 and all the movies up till, I think, The Avengers 1, were all made by Marvel Studios. Marvel Studios manages to be as efficient as it because it keeps a below-the-line staff of VFX people (second-unit action directors, stunt co-ordinators, VFX people, pre-viz guys, sets and others) at ready and puts them to work quickly and efficiently (to the extent that calling anyone director when they don't really have a say on the fight scenes and so on is disingenuous).

It's important to note that not all movies made by Disney are made this way. Star Wars, the movies at least, aren't produced this way. This isn't how Abrams and Rian Johnson made the first two Star Wars films. (The third one I'm not sure because that seems like a rushed mess)

So to the extent people want to hate Disney for sullying Marvel's "director's paradise salad days" before it got bought (and which never existed), and to the extent that it's valid to criticize Disney (and it is indeed valid to do so)...the fact is it's unlikely for there to be real differences in terms of how these movies are made even if Marvel Studios remained independent.

IM-1, IM-2, Thor 1, Cap America First Avenger, these were all made in the same way that movies were made in Disney.

[Username taken]

Not sure this thread's so much about Marvel Studios' filmmaking quality as it for the OP to have a place to post about how he hates Disney and the MCU.

This basically.

If the OP is looking to validate their distaste for the MCU and Disney, there doesn’t need to be multiple threads about this.

[lowfyr]

Not sure this thread's so much about Marvel Studios' filmmaking quality as it for the OP to have a place to post about how he hates Disney and the MCU.

This is it. He just hides his bias against the MCU and Disney behind a new reasoning.