LOVE
Batman '66
Superman
Superman II
Batman '89
Batman Returns
Batman Forever
Batman & Robin
Spider-Man
Spider-Man 2
Spider-Man 3
Watchmen
LIKE
Iron Man
Thor
Thor: Ragnarok
Captain America: The First Avenger
Captain America: Civil War
Avengers
Avengers: Infinity War
Avengers: Endgame
Guardians of the Galaxy
Guardians of the Galaxy 2
Doctor Strange
Spider-Man: Far From Home
Howard the Duck
X-Men
X-2
HATE
Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
X-Men: The Last Stand
MEH
Everything else
Phase 1 Marvel was the best marvel got with been creative. Thor, Iron Man 1, Hulk and Captain America were not 100% identical in tone or film style, maybe it was not as drastic as telling apart a Sony Spiderman film from Sam Raimi to a Bryan Singer X-Men film but phase 1 marvel was the most variety of MCU.
Now imagine if we ever got to see Edward Norton and RDJ go at it? this was a good step up for that to what we see now.
Phase 1 was not the most variety in the MCU
I kind of disagree with this - Peter was in high school for all of 5 minutes in Spider-Man 1. It's not a regression for reboots to go back and try telling stories in that era. There's a lot of story potential there that Raimi didn't tap into. Spider-Man 1 does not in any way count as one of Spider-Man's "high school era" stories.
That said after ASM and MCU yeah, High School Petey's been done, move on. But even then I wouldn't say no more high school stories ever again. Maybe not in the next 20 years or so, but eventually when it'd feel new again perhaps. Especially since neither ASM or MCU did high school Spider-Man well in my opinion (did none of these creators watch an episode of Spectacular Spider-Man?).
While I'm against the idea that films need to carry over or explore or evolve the themes of previous continuities in any way (Spider-Man having relationship problems in 3 does not mean he should be separated in Spider-Verse), I do agree that filmmaker's wanting to explore different themes in their own films is generally a great thing and a net positive for us as viewers.Spiderverse is a better example of progression of the character of peter, compared to the Raimi films, because the last time we saw Peter in Spiderman 3, he and mary jane were at a breaking point and were just repairing their relationship. so seeing Spiderman/Peter in spiderverse as a now washed up hero, fighting to be Spiderman again and wanting to save his marriage to mary jane, was progression of the character on film....general film.
Perhaps, but I think filmmakers have a bigger responsibility to deliver a unique vision and compelling story - to try and make a film that only they can make. They may re-explore old themes, retell old stories, but do so in their own unique way and deliver a masterpiece. Artistic vision in my opinion counts for more than progressing or evolving from any previous entry in a franchise. A lot of people say that Todd Phillips basically ripped Taxi Driver and maybe The Comedian for his Joker movie. I don't know if there's any truth to that, I've never seen those other two movies, but if true that means Phillips didn't really progress much. That doesn't stop JOKER from being a truly stellar film and one of my favorites of the last decade. He had a vision and it was glorious.I am very pin point of film makers because I think film makers have a big responsibility to look at the past films of franchises they are now directing and see how they can take further steps in doing better.
But Nolan and Burton both made Batman origin movies (Batman, Batman Begins), both followed up with a movie still set early in Batman's career (Batman Returns, The Dark Knight). Matt Reeves is also making a movie set in Batman's early days/year two (The Batman), and seems to be going with Nolan's "more grounded world with realism" but it looks amazing so far.Chris Nolan did this, by letting good Batman films graduate from the gothic Tim Burton vibe to a more grounded world with realism
Agreed. We haven't had a great live action Spider-Man since Spider-Man 2 back in 2004! 17 years is a long time...thank god for animation!There is not one live action Spiderman film since the sam raimi films that has ever done this.
I don't know if I agree with you on progression, but I think I know what you mean now, and while I might not fully agree with it it doesn't seem bad at all either and gives something to really think about. Thank you.
Phase 1 was different. I don't know if it was the success of The Avengers, the Disney buyout, or just them finalizing the formula, but it was after that point in which the strong sense of "sameness" started pervading all their films.
Disagree. Strong disagree. I 110% disagree.
Really? I feel Phase 3 had way more variety. Phase 1 was still mostly basic origin stories, albeit fairly well done for the most part.
Origin stories that differed in tone. Phase 3 might not have had as many origin stories, but that was once the MCU had figured out how to make sure every movie felt the same. So it's variety of tones vs a variety of stories. Phase 1 had more of the former, later phases more of the latter. Ideally we'd have a variety of tones and stories, but that's what non-MCU movies are for. Just hoping that DC, Sony, and others step up their game on delivering quality to help balance out the tone thing more.
Love re-watched numerous times
Infinity War
GOTG
Ragnarok
Like re-watched more than twice
Batman Returns
Dark Knight
Batman Begins
Spider-Man 2
Winter Soldier
Thor
Avengers Endgame
GOTG Vol 2
Meh only watched once
The Rest of the MCU movies
Wonder Woman
Man of Steel
BVS
JL
Amazing Spider-Man 1 & 2
Never watched
Aquaman
Shazam
Spider-Man Homecoming & FFH
WW84
Agree to disagree - they felt very similar to me, with the typical MCU style "witty retorts a mile a minute" dialog, but if they felt like wildly different and varied tones to you, then hey that's great for you. But they definitely have a "samey" feel for me, and I'm not alone in feeling that.
I mean, is it a big deal? So the MCU has flaws and imperfections, a lack of tonal variety chief among them, that doesn't stop it from being a very entertaining and successful juggernaut. In my opinion, the MCU is lacking in tonal variety, but I'm still eager to watch every film despite the samey-ness, so who cares? Certainly not Marvel Studios or Disney as they laugh all the way to the bank on that tone.
Every movie always building up to a big battle. IMO the final act doesn't always need to be epic. It could be something emotional. Plus, I feel thr heroes need to motivate the plots more
Also, sometimes the jokes, while funny, can interrupt serious moments.
Some of the power levels are a bit inconsistent.
And the soundtracks need to be a little more memorable.
Personally, I feel the costume colors have become a bit dull. But that might be more subjective
I think diversity is improving but needs work. The female heroes don't interact with each other enough, and there aren't many PoC or interracial couples.
Romance in general needs to be better in the MCU. Most of them suck. Either commit to the couples, or drop thr romance all together
Honestly, the only couples in the MCU who felt remotely like actual, workable romances in the films were Tony and Pepper and Hank and Jan. And the latter was more about mood, since she didn't have a literal presence until the end of AMaW. I would include Wanda and Vision finally, after their Disney+ run. Even Steve and Peggy really only work because they're doomed, Endgame notwithstanding.
Steve and Peggy had chemistry but never really had a romance, so I didn't believe his ending in Endgame. Hank and Jan work, but Scott and Hope didn't at all. Wanda and Vision were pretty good in WandaVision. Every other romance aside from Tony and Pepper was absolutely pointless. One thing Captain Marvel did right was have no romance. I hope that's a bigger trend going forward