My Marvel Cinematic Universe Ranking (Iron Man - Avengers: Infinity War)
19. Thor: The Dark World
While "Thor" was a great introduction to the God of Thunder and cemented his place in the MCU, "Thor: The Dark World" is an entry that is empty spectacle to distract fans until the next, actually important, film is released. I cannot believe that Marvel would waste a Thor film on a movie that's bland, not very entertaining, and one that doesn't even allow Thor to be the main focus of his own film which is my biggest problem with it.
You have the whole Aether issue happening to Natalie Portman's Jane Foster, Tom Hiddleston's Loki getting a lot more screen time thanks to his character's increasing popularity, and WAY more time than we need featuring Erik and the interns. Those characters took a lot of time that could've been better spent further developing Thor as an actual character. Yes, in the first film, he embarked on his journey of learning humility, but this sequel was an opportunity to learn more about him. Instead, we got Kat Dennings playing herself and way more pixilated Stellan Skarsgård than we need. This movie treats Chris Hemsworth like he's a bad actor, because he barely has any screen time and when he does, he's partnered by an out of place actor.
That "out of place actor" is Natalie Portman who looked like she returned as Jane Foster via gunpoint. Even though I wasn't a fan of her in the original, her performance in "The Dark World" makes that previous performance look like an Oscar-worthy role. Portman travels throughout this film doing her best to be the least-reactive person in the film. With all the fantastical elements that her character interacts with, Portman delivers a mere wow and puts on a grating smart aleck persona, and I emphasize "grating." As if the love wasn't forced enough, the romance between Thor and Jane works even less here because Portman clearly isn't putting any believability into the part. It's a waste of time to make Portman the focus of the film. The McGuffin, if you will, for the villain to seek out.
"The Dark World" contains the worst villain in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I, unlike others, don't subscribe to the belief that the MCU has mostly weak villains. In fact, I love most of them, but that love is not extended to the villain in this film. One could not have thought of a lamer villain than Christopher Eccleston's Malekith. The guy is all the worst antagonist cliches rolled into one crappy villain. He lacks menace and certain qualities that could make the character sympathetic despite his horrendous actions. Malekith doesn't have any background. He just shows up wanting to destroy the universe and fails quite predictably. I feel no victory for Thor's accomplishment because I knew he wasn't in any danger, which, by the way, makes all the death of Thor fake-outs feel like a bootless errand.
Brian Tyler's score is a redeeming quality of this film. The booming orchestra as well as the quieter hums serve particular scenes and the action sequences overall. Without it, the film would be even more unremarkable than it already is. There's too much CGI and most of it doesn't feel real enough. The action scenes are fun, loud, and rambunctious, but fail to keep this film afloat.
"Thor: The Dark World" is a boring and forgettable entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe that has no impact on the universe at all. I'll still return to watch it willingly, but that return may not be anytime soon.
Grade: D+
18. Iron Man 2
It's safe to say that while the MCU has not yet produced a film on the level of "Batman and Robin," "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," or any of the "Fantastic Four" films, "Iron Man 2" isn't exactly a bright entry in the MCU.
There's a slew of problems that this second entry encounters, but the primary one is that, like "Thor: The Dark World," it is simply a film to tie fans over until the next one. In this case, "The Avengers." "Iron Man 2" is just a two hundred million-dollar commercial that has nothing particularly interesting to offer, other than to introduce characters that we will get to know when "The Avengers" arrives.
I couldn't help but feel that no one feels particularly happy to be in this movie. While Robert Downey Jr. continues to be endearing, around the halfway point of the film everything started to feel oddly mean-spirited. I couldn't help but tell that some actors gave the impression that they'd rather be making a different movie. Maybe, that's because they believe that the script is terrible which it is. When you smash hit predecessor, how do you follow up that groundbreaking success? Why, have your characters act out some of the lowest form of comedy, of course. This is the only MCU film where the comedy is not good at all. There is nothing quite so degrading like Iron Man urinating in his suit. Just, why? I expect this out of an Adam Sandler comedy, not an "Iron Man" film.
"Iron Man 2" has some of the strangest antagonists in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I don't hate them like other elements of this film. It's just that the filmmakers made weird choices with the villains. Mickey Rourke's Ivan Vanko has his moments, but like the villains in "Spider-Man 3," he goes MIA for a majority of the film. Sam Rockwell is a great, comedic actor and I think it's safe to assume he was trying to apply that to his character here, but the attempt was wholly unsuccessful. Justin Hammer comes off like a discount Tony Stark, but without all the things that makes Tony great. Whenever Rockwell tries to be serious, I simply don't buy it. Rockwell just isn't funny enough to be an enjoyable character. Even though the villains can be entertaining in some scenes, they are overall two of the most lackluster villains in the MCU.
At first, swapping Terrence Howard for Don Cheadle as James Rhodes was a bit jarring, but after eight more years as the character, Cheadle is my favorite part of the film. Cheadle should've been in this role from day one as he proved to be the right man for the role and James Rhodes, as a character, gets a role upgrade. If the Iron Man vs. Iron Monger fight in the first film made me explode from all the coolness as a kid, imagine that same kid reacting to the War Machine armor. I felt like I was in heaven and while, as time's gone on, the excitement is a little lessened, I'd still take the War Machine armor over any Iron Man suit. It looked like it was ripped right of the comics.
The score is nonexistent. I couldn't remember a single song outside of some AC/DC and Ramones. People complain about how "Iron Man 3" has a serious lack of Iron Man, but "Iron Man 2" actually has even less Iron Man in it and the fights are underwhelming, except for the climax.
"Iron Man 2" is, sadly, a disappointing follow-up to the first film. It had great ideas and some fun moments, but this was a mess that definitely belongs towards the back of the pack.
Grade: C-
17. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
"Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2" is an interesting film to discuss for me. When it first came out, I was seemingly alone, in that I actually championed it as being better than the first. My theater experience was an absolute blast. The IMAX 3D was incredible, and I felt the film was up there with the greatest sequels ever made.
I only saw it one time in the cinemas and that remained the only time I viewed the film. When it eventually came to Netflix, I was extremely eager to watch it again. Sadly, "Vol. 2" wasn't as good as I had previously considered.
The script and humor are what let this movie down for me. Some attempts at humor fall flat and it feels like James Gunn and company were trying too hard to incorporate humor. Rather than let it flow naturally, most jokes feel forced which is the best description for it. The dialogue itself contains expositional moments that come out of nowhere. I'm fine with exposition as long as it's not too obvious, but "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2" doesn't even bother to hide it. It's laid on thick and overdone, which is a bummer considering "Vol. 1" didn't have that issue.
There are multiple aspects of this film that actually puts itself above its predecessor. "Vol. 2" has the better villain of the two with Kurt Russell making quite an interesting and delightfully dark antagonist in Ego. The sequel develops the world that the Guardians inhabit with colorful new planets, aliens, and technology that's quite original and oddly ingenious. Plus, I'm a huge fan of when a sequel goes slightly more mature and emotional and, lucky for "Vol. 2," it happens to be one of my favorite examples of what to do for a sequel in that aspect.
The five Guardians that we know and love get far more development as characters, though Groot and Drax while having their moments, get shortchanged in the long run. Michael Rooker shines as Yondu in this sequel. He had the best laughs of the film and was the cause of many tears. As obvious as they were about it, his death still managed to make me cry when I went to watch as a part of my marathon. Since she had very little to do in the original, I was glad to learn more about Karen Gillan's Nebula and, like Rooker, she made me tear up due to her tragic history being revealed in this sequel. Pom Klementieff joined the crew as the empath, Mantis who would prove herself to be a valuable asset to the team. I enjoyed using the character's naivety as a way to incorporate some jokes, but also to allow for some heartfelt scenes.
The score, composed by Tyler Bates, is just as good, if not better, than the one used in the original. I took far more notice of his work when I first saw the sequel and his grand compositions are what amplified the emotional scenes of the movie. The action and CGI are better than that of the first. We see beautiful imagery fully brought to life using the ever-evolving technology. When I saw this in 3D, it was a sight to behold and I marveled (get it) at the level of detail that was in each frame.
There are a lot of reasons to put "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2" above its predecessor, but since it has crucial flaws that were nonexistent in the first, I simply can't do that for this film.
Grade: B-
16. Doctor Strange
"Doctor Strange" is one of those films that loses some of its majesty after it exits the theater and comes to home video. Think how we all felt about James Cameron's "Avatar." It was great while it was in cinemas, but once you see it on your TV at home, some of that wonder is lost.
Visually, "Doctor Strange" is a treat. It is one of the best utilizations of CGI where the film creates colorful and abnormal environments that look like nothing you've seen before. Not only do they blend seamlessly with the film, but also stand out as a highlight of the film. This was one cinematic experience that I was able to see in the IMAX 3D format, and it was a magical two hours, like "Avatar."
But, like "Avatar," the story doesn't seem wholly original to me. While we are dealing with a whole new side of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the film, at times, feels like the original "Iron Man" in its plot structure. Stephen Strange's beginning and transformation resembles that of Tony Stark's in that film. It doesn't totally derail the film, but it does affect my experience when rewatching the film.
Though his arch may be derivative, that didn't keep Benedict Cumberbatch from making a compelling character in Stephen Strange. He could've been unlikeable and he was a tad bit in the first few minutes of the film, but I related to the character in a few ways within that first half of screen time. The character's journey in the film retains its depth and emotion and you feel that no matter how many times you watch it. Cumberbatch captures emotion well and while it wasn't an Oscar-worthy performance, he did right by the good doctor.
Chiwetel Ejiofer, Tilda Swinton, and Benedict Wong fill their parts well, serving as Strange's entry point into the mystical world. Ejiofer makes for a great duo with Cumberbatch as the hero-turned-villain, Mordo. They've got potent chemistry as partners and have distinct personalities that makes them a great duo. The character of the Ancient One could've been a cliché character, but with the unexpected casting of Tilda Swinton, she was able to bring some freshness to that type of character. Swinton continues to show how great of an actress when she manages to successfully capture the blurred line between good and evil. For a brief point of time, you don't know whether her character is on the hero's side or not and congrats to Swinton for doing that perfectly. The second Benedict attached to this film, Benedict Wong, brings a lot of laughs as, well Wong, but sadly, he doesn't offer much beyond that.
Mads Mikkelsen is alright as the villain, Kaecilius. He's not a weak one, the character has strong and very reasonable motivations for being the bad guy, but he's not a great villain like what I'd call the other MCU baddies. Rachael McAdams is nothing terribly remarkable as the love interest, Christine Palmer. She fills in the role with nothing to her character whatsoever which, unfortunately, doesn't make the character terribly exciting.
All heroes have a great theme attached to them and Doctor Strange got a theme that was appropriately grand and mystical. The score, composed by Michael Giacchino, is one of the best scores in the MCU, utilizing mostly brass instruments with a hint of harpsichord layered on top of it.
As a whole, "Doctor Strange" does a lot of things well, but it doesn't challenge itself in the end, which negatively affects the film in my ranking as the films above it took more risks that resulted in a bigger payoff.
Grade: B
15. Thor
For its first three movies, the Marvel Cinematic Universe had stuck to Earth, telling stories involving Iron Man and the Hulk. That all changed with "Thor" as we got an expanded scope and a small taste of how wide this universe would eventually get.
Beginning the Chris trifecta, Chris Hemsworth was the first Chris in a long line of Chris's that would eventually join the MCU. While people questioned if Marvel Studios could pull off making a movie around this hammer-wielding god, at age nine, I was wondering if the actor who briefly played Captain Kirk's father, could make this character not feel goofy. Let it be known that he didn't and his first performance was a treat. His tale of humility made the origin story one of the best origin stories for a superhero movie.
Tom Hiddleston is great as his brother, Loki. His origin is told as the B storyline of the movie and, unlike the sequel, the original "Thor" understood how much Loki should be in the film. He doesn't overshadow Thor in his own film and Hiddleston manages to be just as involving as Hemsworth. While I believe that the character is overrated, I think the guy still has a lot of menace in this film.
"Thor" has one of my favorite supporting casts of any superhero film. You have Anthony Hopkins as Odin, Idris Elba as Heimdall, Stellan Skarsgård as Erik Selvig, and, of course, Clark Gregg as Phil Coulson. All of these actors turn in good performances, despite having not a lot of time in the film. They are all great to watch and the script gives them so much to do with so little screen time. It's actually impressive how well this film is written and directed.
This may have been his only entry in the universe, but I think it's fair to say that Kenneth Branagh made his mark on this franchise. A lot of what he created in "Thor" went on to become the basic look for what Thor's world would look like in future outings. This film is home to a lot of the director's signature styles. From the Dutch angles to the elegance of the sets, all of it was appropriate for this film and Branagh made a treat both in visuals and themes.
Truth be told, there is not a lot of criticisms I would throw at "Thor." I suppose there are some points where the film is merely fine as apposed to other MCU films. The pacing does tend to slow down during the middle of the picture. Plus, Natalie Portman has little chemistry when acting alongside Chris Hemsworth. She has one good scene, but she is otherwise bad and this romance, if you can even call it that it's so forced, is one of the worst I've seen in superhero movies.
"Thor" deserves high marks for being the first to really expand this universe and it remains a good film with an even better message.
Grade: B
14. Iron Man 3
When "Iron Man 3" was first announced, I wondered to myself if making a third installment was a good idea after the disappointing "Iron Man 2." I decided to remain optimistic. After all, they changed things up behind the camera, replacing Jon Favreau with Shane Black as director.
Black's previous credits included directing "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang," another film featuring Robert Downey Jr., and serving as a writer for a few of the "Lethal Weapon" movies and "Last Action Hero." Having not seen those films, I don't know if "Iron Man 3" had the same style that was featured in those films, but it wasn't like the previous two films and I appreciated that. It was exactly what the character needed. Shane Black rose the stakes as well as the scale while focusing on character more than spectacle, plotting the film around Tony's trauma of the events that occurred in "The Avengers."
Robert Downey Jr., while maintaining his snarky persona as the character, takes a break from doing just that and adds much more drama to Tony's character. Upon revisit, it's refreshing to see the character with a new sense of personality to him. A lot of people hate that he's not Iron Man-ing much in this film, but the film shows that it can stand on its own two feet without relying on CGI-heavy action sequences. It gave Downey the opportunity to be a more of an actual actor than a caricature.
One cannot talk about "Iron Man 3" and not mention its most prominent point of contention. The huge debate when it comes to "Iron Man 3" is its treatment of its villain, The Mandarin. After the marketing, which teased Stark going head-to-head with Ben Kingsley's The Mandarin, people went berserk and predicted that this seemingly dark and sophisticated threequel might be the best Marvel movie ever because of the early looks of its antagonist. All that hype made the surprise all the more devastating for some.
Fans were furious to find that Ben Kingsley's Mandarin was nothing more than an alcoholic, drug-addicted, washed-out actor with a cockney accent. I'm not an avid comic book reader and I actually found the twist brilliant and surprising. It was slightly disappointing though, that the "real" Mandarin was Guy Pearce, complete with dragon tattoos and a history that rips-off "The Incredibles." I put "real" in quotes because as we saw in the short film "All Hail the King," the actual Mandarin has yet to be revealed. And yes, those shorts are canon.
Out of the three "Iron Man" films, it's natural that "Iron Man 3" has the best CGI and action scenes. The mansion attack, a surprisingly practical rescue of the Air Force One crew, and the grand finale where a bunch of Iron Man suits show up to save the day all impress and don't go on for too long. All of the Iron Man suits have their own unique design to them and not one frame of CGI looks like it needs more time rendering.
I like "Iron Man 3" more than most people. It has flaws, some too big to ignore, but it provided an entertaining and interesting story that showed who Tony Stark really is beyond his iron suit and quippy attitude.
Grade: B
13. Guardians of the Galaxy
Out of all the risks Marvel has taken in the last two years, "Guardians of the Galaxy" is perhaps the biggest risk that they have taken. Even though a select few knew about Iron Man and Black Panther before their cinematic debuts, even fewer knew about the Guardians of the Galaxy prior to their 2014 film. To know that they hired the guy who wrote the two, early 2000s "Scooby Doo" films to direct a film featuring a foul-mouthed raccoon and a talking tree, sounded like a horrible idea and the makings of a flop.
Per usual, Marvel took advantage of the peculiar situation and managed to produce a space opera on par with "Star Wars." Arguably, it's a little too similar to that of the original "Star Wars." When I last watched this film, it was a day after I had watched the original "Star Wars" (in its original edition, no less), and I noticed some similarities in plot structure.
While the plot is a little familiar, it's the car that makes this film and they put the right actors in the right roles. You got Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Vin Diesel, and Bradley Cooper. All five actors did wonderful in their roles. Many people doubted the choices for some characters, but it's very clear now that there was no other actor for these characters. 2014 was a star-making year for Chris Pratt and the role of Peter Quill/Star Lord is what put him on every studio's "must have in our film" list. Zoe Saldana plays another brightly-colored alien as the lethal assassin, Gamora. After considering other actors like Jason Momoa and Patrick Wade, Dave Bautista was cast as Drax the Destroyer. He manages to be one of the most emotional characters in the film. It's a shame the character became a walking punch line in future appearances. Bradley Cooper could've been annoying as Rocket, but thanks to the actor's delivery of the well-constructed dialogue, Rocket was an endearing character. Perhaps the only time you can tell it's Vin Diesel, he plays Groot, the talking tree with a limited vocabulary. The character emotes well with having one line to say throughout the film.
Even with a few blemishes, the movie would be fantastic if it didn't also have Lee Pace's Ronan the Accuser. Again, I don't agree that Marvel Studios has a "villain problem," but like Malekith from "Thor: The Dark World" and the villain duo in "Iron Man 2," Ronan has no personality or entertainment value. Some defend this villain by saying that Pace plays the character in an over-the-top manner, but if that were the intention of the director, the character wouldn't be responsible for the film's darker moments. While defeating the villain through a dance-off was a clever way to subvert expectations, the movie makes its villain look incompetent by having him get distracted by it. It was disappointing, but it did spawn that great moment in the gag reel where Pace's Ronan actually accepted the challenge.
Both this film and its sequel are among the most beautiful films in the Marvel universe. With creative locations, and aliens that are every color of the rainbow, it's a feat for the eyes in every frame. Then, of course, we have the iconic Awesome Mix Vol. 1. Collecting random songs from the 70s, James Gunn combined them in a soundtrack that was popular for years following the film's release. Accompanying the soundtrack, Tyler Bates composed a touching and rambunctious score, which manages to highlight the wackiness and the great fun that these characters are.
Without the huge minuses against it, "Guardians of the Galaxy" would be higher in my personal MCU ranking.
Grade: B+
12. Spider-Man: Homecoming
Does this drive a stake through the MCU timeline? Yes. That aside, this was one of the best Spider-Man films I'd seen in years.
"Ferris Bueller's Day Off" is one of my favorite comedies of all time, so when I heard that director Jon Watts would be making "Spider-Man: Homecoming" a John Hughes-style comic book film, I got pumped real fast. (A clip from "Ferris Bueller" even makes an appearance in the film.) I think it's fair to say that Jon Watts succeeded in his mission. Peter Parker often acts a bit like Matthew Brodick's Bueller, albeit a tad bit more responsible version. The high school setting certainly emanates that feel that John Hughes's films had. Beyond "Ferris Bueller", I got some "Sixteen Candles" vibes from how Watts would cut between shots and how he films the high school location.
While the director does nail down the high school feeling and makes it blend nicely with the heroics taking place, "Homecoming" feels like a big-budget TV movie at certain points. Especially when the film is focusing on the titular Homecoming. Come to think of it, the movie does, at times, have the same feel as Disney's "Sky High", another superhero film that was centered around a Homecoming. It's not an everlasting feel; the film does ratchet up before it does, but I would've liked to have had a more prestigious feel with the picture. A theatrical film should not have the feel of a TV film.
After having fifteen minutes worth of screen time in "Captain America: Civil War", Tom Holland did an incredible job cementing himself as a different interpretation of Peter Parker. He tries doing something that previous iterations didn't do. That is, learning responsibility without Uncle Ben. You might think that we start the film with him being responsible, but the irresponsible actions he makes throughout the film say otherwise. Holland may have sufficient chemistry with his fellow high school students, but I feel that he's at his best when alone, having those character-defining moments. I think it's too early to call Holland the best Spider-Man. Personally, I still prefer Tobey Maguire, but he did right by Spider-Man in this debut film.
Michael Keaton as the Vulture is one of the most impressive villains in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Keaton seems to be very good playing winged, often fowl, characters. That's enough puns. The fact that the antagonist is connected to the hero is nothing new, especially to Spider-Man, but what separates him from most MCU villains, is that he's got grit and a whole lot of conviction for why he's partaking in illegal activities. Keaton's a lot more menacing than one night expected. The scene where he deduces who Spider-Man is, is one of my favorite moments in this entire franchise.
Other than the TV movie-like tone, my only other problem with the film is with a majority of the high school students. Laura Harrier is good as Liz, but the other students were grating one way or another. I found Jacob Batalon's Ned unnecessarily selfish, Tony Revolori's Flash Thompson too crude, and Zendaya wasn't entertaining at all. I know a lot of people laughed at her jokes, but I did not enjoy her at all.
"Spider-Man: Homecoming" may be flawed, but I feel that the film is so good at times, that it makes the flaws feel more like nitpicks. This wasn't a groundbreaking MCU, but it was a great opportunity to have an entry be a self-contained film.
Grade: B+
11. Thor: Ragnarok
As you can tell from their placement in this ranking, the first two films for Thor didn't impress me all that much. Granted, the first one was an above-average superhero film, but the sequel was the worst out of the all the nineteen MCU films.
Though it was fitting for the first film to take him seriously, the sequel started to take the character too seriously and it eventually got boring. Enter "Thor: Ragnarok," the third Thor film that discards almost everything from the first two films, in favor of using Chris Hemsworth's greatest strength as an actor: humor.
This is one of the films from the Marvel Cinematic Universe, that you have to watch multiple times in order to appreciate it. When I watched this for the first time, I didn't like it so much, but on second and third viewings, I realized what I missed. That is, you shouldn't be upset about this film not taking things too seriously. This is a comedy of cosmic proportions. Could you really fault a movie that includes a spaceship shooting rainbow fireworks out of it as an attempt to distract the bad guys in it? No. That said, I think the film was a little too flippant when dispatching characters and other elements of Thor's world.
Director Taika Waititi brought new life to the "Thor" films by adding more color and more humor than ever before. That's saying a lot because the Marvel Cinematic Universe has a lot of humor and color to it already. The costumes are creative, the color choices are unique, and the new characters that Thor meets throughout this film are hysterical, including Taika Waititi's character, Korg. While Thor delivers a lot of laughs, it was Jeff Goldblum as The Grandmaster that delivered the biggest and most memorable quips. I pretty much love everything I see Jeff Goldblum in, except for "Independence Day: Resurgence," and it was smart on Waititi's part to bring him into this riot of a film.
I wasn't huge about the villain of this movie, Hela. Cate Blanchett is a great, talented actress. She's done villains really well, but Hela didn't impress me all that much. While she had an interesting point of view and was a good fit for the overall story, I felt that Hela was too overpowered and that's why I didn't find her too interesting. Hela takes a lot of fatal wounds in this movie and is seemingly unaffected by any of them. How is it that she's immune to any wound when she's supposed to be as powerful as Thor who takes wounds and is actually affected by them? I know that this is a movie that you're not supposed to have those kinds of problems, but if that were the case, we'd have to treat this movie as perfect.
The CGI is lackluster for a "Thor" film. It's the most recent of the three, yet it's the weakest in visual effects. Sakaar is rich with color, but the other locations look pretty dry and fake, especially the sequences in Norway. This is a one hundred and eighty million dollar production. Why not just go to Norway and film there? Instead, the Norway in this film looks like it came from a TV show, which should be a quality that a theatrical film shouldn't have. Mark Mothersbaugh composes the score and it's fun, but unremarkable in the end. I remember some cool beats, but nothing made me to want to revisit it. What did make me want to revisit it was the return of Patrick Doyle's theme in the very end of the film. That was good, but the rest of the score is alright.
I liked "Thor: Ragnarok." Unlike most people, I didn't jump out of my seat screaming, "This is one of the best MCU films ever," but I had a great time still.
Grade: B+
10. The Incredible Hulk
This'll definitely be a polarizing entry for a lot of you readers, but when marathoning all these films together once a week, I was surprised to find films that were better than I remember them being. This was one of them.
"The Incredible Hulk" has been called the black sheep of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Its lack of connections to the rest of its siblings has made it relatively easy for people to place it low on their personal rankings. If it weren't for a few tie-ins, I'm not sure it would be considered a part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
While it doesn't exactly hold many ties to the MCU, it is still an MCU film and, after so many films, I applaud it for feeling different from its siblings. It's a month younger than "Iron Man" and almost ten years later, I love that it feels different from the other offerings.
Before Mark Ruffalo replaced him and became the best portrayal of Bruce Banner/Hulk, Edward Norton was great in the role for a brief period of time. Considering that there were difficulties between Norton and the studio, I am pretty surprised that he turned out as good as he did. The character background for Bruce is well-developed and Norton makes the role engaging. The story is straight out of the comics where Banner is trying to rid himself of his destructive alter-ego. Norton plays Banner as a tortured individual, a man that's had enough and just wants to be free of his curse. I feel for him and while his acting isn't perfect, I do give Norton a lot of credit for his part.
For many viewings of this movie, I had always thought Liv Tyler did a poor job in the film. That all she had to offer was to be the simple love interest and nothing else. Rewatching the movie, I think that Liv Tyler is undersold in it. She actually gives a good performance as Bruce's love interest, Betty, and their dynamic together is actually interesting. The romance feels genuine and you really feel that they want to be together and would be if it weren't for the Hulk.
In the 2003 "Hulk" film, one of the major complaints was its overall lack of action and that when there was action, the opposing forces were underwhelming. People wanted to see the Hulk fight an individual with equal or greater strength. Yet, when "The Incredible Hulk" comes and gives us the Abomination, a character that's slightly stronger than the Hulk, everyone seemed to get upset with the film for having a weak opponent. I'm sorry, but I'd take the Abomination over giant, mutant poodles any day. While the film does hit the nail on the head about the "absolute power corrupts absolutely" allegory it is aiming for, I still enjoyed the villain and the climatic fight between Hulk and Abomination is still awesome all these years later. I agree, it's a little too similar to the climax of "Iron Man," but as a viewer who wanted to see Hulk smash, I was deeply satisfied.
Craig Armstrong's score is one of the highlights of this movie. It adds to the tragedy of Bruce's situation as well as amplifying the chaos whenever the Hulk appears. The opening credits is where it shines the most, but when Bruce is one the run and traveling across the world, we get a few heartfelt beats here and there.
I think that if this film was released today, with Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner, it would be a much more well-received film. As it stands, "The Incredible Hulk" may not be the best MCU film, but it is significantly better than Ang Lee's "Hulk" and that's not a bad consolation prize, my friend.
Grade: B+
9. Captain America: The First Avenger
Of all the MCU films, I've seen "Captain America: The First Avenger" the least. That is strange considering the titular hero is my favorite superhero bar none. Prior to my revisit for the marathon, I remembered the film to be a boring slog that didn't have a lot of entertaining elements and that made my revisit one that I was not looking forward to.
To my surprise, "Captain America: The First Avenger" felt like a completely different film upon my revisit. I always considered it to be the weakest of the "Captain America" films, and while that still remains, that's no longer because it is lacking in any way.
He wouldn't become my favorite superhero until "The Winter Soldier," but even when I first watched this film, I recognized the incredible performance that Chris Evans gave and after all these years, it's still as good. Who would have thought that after playing the cocky and irresponsible Johnny Storm, Chris Evans would later play a character who is, in short, the complete opposite of the Human Torch? Ignoring all his future performances, this film proved how right Marvel was in casting Chris Evans. He embodies everything I love and relate to in Steve Rogers/Captain America. In the same way that Hugh Jackman, Christopher Reeve, and Robert Downey Jr. embody the on-screen portrayals of their famous characters, Chris Evens is up there for me. I believe that he did everything right and he would only continue to get better and better.
The supporting cast, while not as prominent as our titular hero, is just as exciting and well-developed. When you hear that "The First Avenger" is set in WWII, you assume that female characters will be scarce, but then Hayley Attwell's Peggy Carter comes in and kicks butt alongside our hero. The two actors form a unique and tear-jerking romance that is totally believable. The two have real conversations getting to know each other, but what's even better about Carter, is that she's more than just the love interest. She manages to be her own character and, obviously, that was enough to get her the short and television series. Frankly, I'm surprised that the character is as underrated as she is, what with the whole "strong, female characters" trend that's happening.
Speaking of underrated, the Red Skull is seemingly overlooked when it comes to MCU villains. I know Hugo Weaving didn't necessarily enjoy his time with Marvel, but he killed it in this role. He was menacing when I was nine and he still remains menacing. People talk about Loki a lot, but Red Skull was a very interesting villain. I've been saying for years that the Red Skull is out there and not to toot my own horn, I was correct and I'm glad that the character was brought back in "Avengers: Infinity War" although with a different actor.
While I'm focusing on "The First Avenger," I would like to point out Joe Johnston's work as the director of this film. The man, who was partially responsible for the visual effects and character designs of the "Star Wars" and "Indiana Jones" franchises, did right by Captain America. He successfully adapted the character and made him not seem overly cheesy. The USO-style montage was cheesy, but in all the right ways. The man is very good at making period pieces and he clearly applied his experience with not only "Indiana Jones," but with "The Rocketeer" as well, to make this dazzling period piece. "Back to the Future" and "The Polar Express" composer, Alan Silvestri, makes a rousing and exciting adventure theme that matches the quality of the best John Williams scores.
Instead of going the way of some of the later MCU films, "Captain America: The First Avenger" is a film that only gets better with age.
Grade: A-
8. The Avengers
Whenever I make my ranking for the Marvel Cinematic Universe, I always find it difficult to rank the original "Avengers." I ask myself if I should rank it high because of its unique accomplishments at the time, or should I rank it lower.
I love this movie. Do not misunderstand; this is in my top ten favorite superhero films of all time list. I just find some of the resolution to be a bit spotty, there's a plot point that doesn't make sense, and it runs into a common problem where some of the second act is a bit too slow for my liking.
Otherwise, this was a movie event that kept my jaw-dropped throughout and I still have that feeling with multiple revisits. Marvel did everything right. After carefully staging the five solo films, they all culminated in this massive picture. Everything that its followers are lacking, they got perfect and I couldn't be happier with the film for achieving so much.
All of the cast manage impress. It's kind of funny that we questioned whether a single film could juggle so many characters, yet "Infinity War" has just come out and that has three times as many characters as this does. Each of our heroes have an opportunity to show off and the chemistry between these stars is off the charts. Robert Downey Jr., unaffected by the failure of "Iron Man 2," returns and his commanding presence is felt overtime he's on screen. While the character was stuck in a costume that's less like Captain America and more like Captain Puerto Rico, Chris Evans stole the show and we able to get subtle hints of the hidden conflict between Rogers and Stark. Mark Ruffalo has some of the most iconic moments and his debut as Bruce Banner/Hulk didn't feel jarring, as he was the replacement for Edward Norton. Chris Hemsworth, Jeremy Renner, and Scarlett Johansson round out the crew and the three of them had some effective, character-driven scenes that I find interesting to this day.
I'm mixed on Tom Hiddleston as Loki. Sure, he still makes for a compelling force to serve against our heroes, but for a menacing antagonist, he doesn't work. The character gets his butt kicked one too many times of him to be intimidating. For most of the film, he doesn't even do anything too frightening. First, he sits around in the Helicarrier prison, awaiting rescue. Then, he rides around a jet ski, expecting his army will do all the work for him. He is a memorable antagonist, but not the best villain that Marvel Studios has offered these last ten years.
Not surprisingly, the movie has dazzling visuals and incredible action sequences to support this picture and neither lets the movie down. In fact, I'd say it amplifies it. Has it started to show a tad bit of age? Yes, but that's the nature of CGI: the next generation will always succeed the last.
Marvel pulled off something that many thought impossible and that alone gets "The Avengers" high marks. It's just not my personal favorite.
Grade: A-
7. Ant-Man
I think "Ant-Man" is an installment that's a little more (forgive the unintentional puns) forgotten than some of the more recent MCU entries which is a shame. It's way better than people give it credit for.
In a universe where "Guardians of the Galaxy", "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2", and "Thor: Ragnarok" have come along, "Ant-Man" remains the funniest Marvel Cinematic Universe movie in my opinion. Edgar Wright was involved with this film for a really long time and even though he left due to creative differences, the humor has his fingerprints all over it. Typically, the MCU films are funny, but the humor in this film is different from the humor in the other films. It's very outlandish and creative. Basically, the type of humor that you see in an Edgar Wright movie.
Its inventiveness with its humor, but also the genre-bending done with "Ant-Man", are its greatest strengths. It skips having everything be complex and is actually a heist film in the same vein as "Ocean's Eleven," the 2001 remake at least. That's an apt comparison because the film does the heist element so well, you'll swear that Steven Soderbergh directed it himself. Rather than having it be all high-stakes fare, the film is energized by its smaller stakes and is able to remain entertaining without being too formulaic.
If Captain America were to, hypothetically, be erased from existence, than Ant-Man would be my favorite superhero. Not because of what's in the comics (I haven't read much of the character's stories), but because of Paul Rudd's performance as this character. There are those actors that we believe were perfect for their superhero characters. As mentioned in my segment about "The First Avenger," there are those actors that are so good as their superhero roles, that you feel like they were born to play them. Paul Rudd is one of those instances, albeit on a smaller scale (that pun was intentional). While not being the most righteous of dudes, the movie is able to take Paul Rudd's Scott Lang and make him a sympathetic and likable character. You feel for his trials and that's because Rudd does sympathetic surprisingly well. You want his character to succeed and be more close to his daughter and the film tugs at your heartstrings without being overwhelming.
The MCU has had a significant increase of female heroines in the last few films. Some of those are quality characters. Others, are disposable and unnecessary. Not just in the MCU, but out of all the heroines in the Marvel library, the Wasp is favorite and Evangeline Lilly couldn't have been a better choice to play a slight variation of the character. Where other heroines tend to feel like their inclusion in the plot feels forced, Hope's inclusion isn't. The story's tied together so tight, that Hope's character development is directly tied to Scott's development. I was glad to find that she was as developed as Scott was. Naturally, she kicked a lot of butt. Hope made for a great action hero and was so good, that I was a tad bit sad she didn't suit up in this first installment. Although, that made me a lot more excited for "Ant-Man and the Wasp."
While Paul Rudd, Evangeline Lilly, and Michael Douglas turn in great performances as their characters in the movie, Corey Stoll was the best performance of the film in my opinion. I know a lot of people deemed his Darren Cross/Yellowjacket as another disposable Marvel Cinematic Universe baddie out of the age, accusing the character of forced and lack of character development, but there was something that set him apart from the rest of the Marvel baddies. Stoll had an interesting way of playing a villain. For the first part of his screen time, he keeps his cynicism on the down-low, but in the latter half of the movie, Stoll's Cross becomes more unhinged and he played the transformation beautifully.
I'm surprised that "Ant-Man" isn't as universally loved as the other Marvel pictures. It's a fresh, heartfelt, quirky, heist film that doubles as a superhero flick and manages to juggle all of these traits perfectly.
Grade: A-
In a universe where "Guardians of the Galaxy", "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2", and "Thor: Ragnarok" have come along, "Ant-Man" remains the funniest Marvel Cinematic Universe movie in my opinion. Edgar Wright was involved with this film for a really long time and even though he left due to creative differences, the humor has his fingerprints all over it. Typically, the MCU films are funny, but the humor in this film is different from the humor in the other films. It's very outlandish and creative. Basically, the type of humor that you see in an Edgar Wright movie.
Its inventiveness with its humor, but also the genre-bending done with "Ant-Man", are its greatest strengths. It skips having everything be complex and is actually a heist film in the same vein as "Ocean's Eleven," the 2001 remake at least. That's an apt comparison because the film does the heist element so well, you'll swear that Steven Soderbergh directed it himself. Rather than having it be all high-stakes fare, the film is energized by its smaller stakes and is able to remain entertaining without being too formulaic.
If Captain America were to, hypothetically, be erased from existence, than Ant-Man would be my favorite superhero. Not because of what's in the comics (I haven't read much of the character's stories), but because of Paul Rudd's performance as this character. There are those actors that we believe were perfect for their superhero characters. As mentioned in my segment about "The First Avenger," there are those actors that are so good as their superhero roles, that you feel like they were born to play them. Paul Rudd is one of those instances, albeit on a smaller scale (that pun was intentional). While not being the most righteous of dudes, the movie is able to take Paul Rudd's Scott Lang and make him a sympathetic and likable character. You feel for his trials and that's because Rudd does sympathetic surprisingly well. You want his character to succeed and be more close to his daughter and the film tugs at your heartstrings without being overwhelming.
The MCU has had a significant increase of female heroines in the last few films. Some of those are quality characters. Others, are disposable and unnecessary. Not just in the MCU, but out of all the heroines in the Marvel library, the Wasp is favorite and Evangeline Lilly couldn't have been a better choice to play a slight variation of the character. Where other heroines tend to feel like their inclusion in the plot feels forced, Hope's inclusion isn't. The story's tied together so tight, that Hope's character development is directly tied to Scott's development. I was glad to find that she was as developed as Scott was. Naturally, she kicked a lot of butt. Hope made for a great action hero and was so good, that I was a tad bit sad she didn't suit up in this first installment. Although, that made me a lot more excited for "Ant-Man and the Wasp."
While Paul Rudd, Evangeline Lilly, and Michael Douglas turn in great performances as their characters in the movie, Corey Stoll was the best performance of the film in my opinion. I know a lot of people deemed his Darren Cross/Yellowjacket as another disposable Marvel Cinematic Universe baddie out of the age, accusing the character of forced and lack of character development, but there was something that set him apart from the rest of the Marvel baddies. Stoll had an interesting way of playing a villain. For the first part of his screen time, he keeps his cynicism on the down-low, but in the latter half of the movie, Stoll's Cross becomes more unhinged and he played the transformation beautifully.
I'm surprised that "Ant-Man" isn't as universally loved as the other Marvel pictures. It's a fresh, heartfelt, quirky, heist film that doubles as a superhero flick and manages to juggle all of these traits perfectly.
Grade: A-
6. Avengers: Age of Ultron
Yes, you read that correctly. Contrary to popular opinion, I love "Avengers: Age of Ultron" more than "The Avengers." Remember, this is my personal ranking. Feel free to share yours in the comments.
The issues that I had with the original are fixed with this sequel. "Age of Ultron" has much better pacing, keeping me engaged throughout. There are a lot less plot holes and the villain gets things done himself. He doesn't ride around on a jet ski, waiting for an Avenger to go toe-to-toe with him.
Most will tell you that "Age of Ultron" is worse than its predecessor because it shamelessly sets up future movies inside the story it's telling. I can see where the dissenters are coming from, but since Thor's time in The Water of Sight was central in creating Vision, I allowed it. Could the filmmakers have found a better way to bring that character in? Possibly, I liked the road that they went with.
In this sequel, the heroes that we know and love got a lot more depth as we continued to learn more about who they are as well as their history. With the team now formed, we get to see the unique camaraderie that exists between the actors within the very first scenes of the film. It's made a lot more special when we discover their personal views of the world and the confrontations that arise from that. It's a natural way to set-up "Captain America: Civil War", but more importantly, it's a way to truly define the heroes.
The introduction of Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch, and Vision were weaved into the story very nicely. I touched on him earlier, but how nice is it that after seven years of providing voiceover for J.A.R.V.I.S, Paul Bettany got on-screen work as Vision? The calculating and often humorous android was a character that fit Bettany's personality and he has continued to play part well. Aaron Taylor-Johnson may not be the best depiction of the silver speedster, but the brother-sister relationship between him and Elizabeth Olsen's Scarlet Witch was the best brother-sister relationship in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, until T'Challa and Shuri came along.
If anyone has ever seen a "Terminator" film, or read one the character's comic books, AI isn't taken down so easily, so James Spader's Ultron is not gone for good. I would like him to return because he made for an incredible antagonist. Complaints were made about the character being a little too humorous than what was teased in the trailers, but when one hears that this AI is the brainchild of Tony Stark, with a little Bruce Banner to boot, it is natural that this, for lack of a better word, son would have some leftover traits of his father. That was even factored into the storytelling in a way that helped define Ultron. James Spader's voice and motion-capture work made Ultron one of the most threatening villains in the Marvel Cinematic Universe to date.
With superior action sequences and CGI that equal the story at hand, "Avengers: Age of Ultron" is better than the original film, and it's a tad bit sad that this has gone down as an unremarkable film in the MCU.
Grade: A
5. Black Panther
Just when you think you have figured out the pattern of every Marvel Studios film, in comes "Black Panther" and we get a new, whole unique entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
After his initial appearance in "Captain America: Civil War," Chadwick Boseman got his first solo film as T'Challa, otherwise known as Black Panther. To join him, we got the most diverse cast of a superhero film since 1993's "The Meteor Man." Thankfully, the quality of "Black Panther" is the opposite of the aforementioned film.
Setting itself apart from the Marvel Studios library, "Black Panther" is a story that celebrates culture, family, and fighting for one's beliefs. It's also a political thriller that's in the same vain of "Captain America: The Winter Soldier."
What's surprising about "Black Panther" is that it hardly feels like a superhero film. Given the story and its settings, there's something about it that removes itself from the typical superhero story. To reiterate what I stated in my review, it simply is a great movie more than anything else. It accomplishes so much in such a short time.
Not being of that race, I can't exactly be among those that said this film spoke to them on a personal level. Given that, I still see the achievements that director Ryan Coogler made with "Black Panther." He really is culpable for part of what makes "Black Panther" such a enthralling film. To include themes that could go horribly awry if not treated properly, and to do it successfully, has to be commended. This film is able to flawlessly navigate tricky waters, without sounding too preachy. For some, it may have been, but for me, Coogler got the right mixture.
As he did in his introduction, Chadwick Boseman impresses as T'Challa. The actor elevates the writing that Ryan Coogler and Joe Robert Cole did for the character. For a relative newcomer to the MCU, it's amazing how well Boseman settles into the universe as a whole. I find him interesting the same way I find Captain America interesting. For a character that's largely all good, the combination of the writing and Boseman's acting manages to make T'Challa a far more deeper individual than initially viewed. It helps that he has such rich, supporting actors to join him.
While I personally found them short of personality, Lupita Nyong'o's Nakia, Danai Gurira's Okoye, and Letitia Wright's Shuri were entertaining and all three had a great relationship to the hero. I just can't pretend that the three had much depth for themselves. I apologize, but they just seemed like T'Challa's support staff more than anything else. The same goes for Daniel Kaluuya, Winston Duke, and Forrest Whitaker. They were enjoyable, often deep or funny, but ultimately lacking a distinct identity.
The only other character that really resonated to me was unquestionably Michael B. Jordon as Erik "Killmonger" Stevens. Jordon is no stranger to the superhero game. It certainly was a doomed production, but I found his interpretation of the Human Torch quite enjoyable in the lackluster "Fantastic Four," or "Fant4stic" if refer to that film by that name. That trainwreck didn't keep the actor down and his Erik Stevens made for the perfect antagonist and one of the best MCU villains to date. That may not mean much coming from me, who believes that most of them are great, but when everyone else says that, it means a lot.
While they may be few and far between, the action sequences were a treat to see unfold. It was also fresh, considering we're seeing a new side of the MCU. That meant new fighting styles were displayed, new weapons, and of course, new suits. Perhaps my main issue with the film, is that the CGI quality isn't consistent. Sometimes it's good, other times it's bad and I wish we had better CGI considering the budget Ryan Coogler was working with. Although, this was Coogler's first effects-driven film, so it's forgivable.
Without its flaws, I'd call "Black Panther" a perfect movie. While the film does have flaws, this was still a breathtaking entry from the MCU.
Grade: A
4. Avengers: Infinity War
"Avengers: Infinity War" is, unquestionably, the best of the three "Avengers" films and with good reason. I chose to avoid all the marketing for the film and what I got was an incredibly rewarding experience. Not just because I avoided the marketing, but after keeping up with the franchise from the beginning, this truly felt like a culmination of everything the MCU was building towards.
To coincide with the franchise's ten-year anniversary, "Avengers: Infinity War" actually makes some risky choices. It has triple the amount of characters in the original film, a villain who hasn't had much build-up in previous entries, and is the longest film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. With so many elements, you would think that it'd all come crumbling down, that the MCU would flop after ten years of success after success. You couldn't have been more wrong.
"Avengers: Infinity War" handles the gigantic cast with some turbulence, but overall ease. The number of characters that are in this film are countless and while no single hero completely rules the film, almost all of them had their time to shine. Some stood out more than others and there were even some surprises as to who got the most amount of time. Heroes who I thought wouldn't be major characters not only were the biggest players, but I deeply cared for them. I wasn't crazy about some of the heroes prior to seeing "Infinity War," but this movie proved me wrong as the ones I was worried about, proved to be the best parts of the film.
As you may have noticed, I used "hero" instead of "character." That's because the Mad Titan himself, Thanos, owns this movie. After being teased again and again, he was finally revealed to be the villain that all the minds at Marvel thought was the most intimidating villain in MCU. They were right. Not only was Thanos intimidating, but every time he was facing our heroes, I was genuinely concerned for each and every one of them. Thanos proved to have a sympathetic personality to him and a real conviction for destroying half the universe. Through Josh Brolin's performance-capture and line delivery, Thanos had everything that makes a villain great. Thanos had the time to build his character, the power to overshadow the heroes, the mind to outsmart his foes, the soul to be compelling, and the space to be emotional as he gave all of the heroes a reality check. Did I just incorporate all six Infinity Stones into one sentence describing Thanos? Yes, I did.
As if "The Winter Soldier" and "Civil War" weren't proof enough, it's now confirmed that the Russo Brothers are pretty much geniuses. From directing indie flops to making some of the best superheroes films of all time, the Russo Brothers have come along way and their talent is in top form for "Infinity War." The action sequences are endless and entertaining, the CGI has never been this good-looking, and the cinematography is astounding as it gives the movie an epic feel to it which is never a word I use lightly. Alan Silvestri comes back to compose the film and he knocks it out of the park. I got goosebumps multiple times because the score oozed emotion from every beat.
With all the praise I give "Avengers: Infinity War," the only reason it isn't higher is because the top three have a little more depth to them than this one does. That, and it is a little overstuffed, but still, it's a fantastic threequel.
Grade: A
3. Captain America: Civil War
To me, I cannot talk about "Captain America: Civil War," without getting a tad bit sentimental on it. This film is the reason that you're reading this right now. It's the whole reason I started this blog. I went to see this film on its Thursday night premiere and I was inspired by the quality of the movie, to make a blog where I write about movies. It was a theater experience that I can clearly remember to this day, and one I will not soon forget. Feel free to check out my review of "Civil War." It's horribly written, but as David Mamet said "You got to stand being bad if you want be a writer, because if you don't, you're never going to write anything good."
The huge debate between the fans of this movie, is whether or not it's "Captain America: Civil War" or Avengers 2.5: Civil War. Because it's directly connected to "The Winter Soldier" and connects Cap's journey as a character, "Civil War" definitely deserves the Captain America name in front of it.
This past President's Day, I was walking through a comic book shop and a selection of Captain America comics were on sale. Among them, was a collection of the seven-issue "Civil War" storyline and after purchasing it, I read it and was surprised. It's often been said that film adaptations of books never fully capture the full story, but what about comic books? In the case of "Civil War," it's a little harder to tell because all the Marvel heroes in this story are spread across different film studios. Still, I believe that "Captain America: Civil War" is superior to its source material.
While the number of characters in the graphic novel will certainly sway die-hard fans, I felt that the central argument of the story was botched in the graphic novel because Cap and Iron Man were not compelling characters and did not have strong arguments to support their stance. Those issues are fixed with the film. Here, actors Chris Evans and Robert Downey Jr., along with writers Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, create legitimate reasons for their position that also connects to their already-existing personalities. Throughout this film, we see the two actors showcase how good they are in preforming these roles. Things get so tense and emotional, and the two prove that they are up to the task by being the strongest performers in the film. It's actually surprising that neither actor has received an Academy Award yet.
In some cases, "Civil War" is a diverge from Marvel's other movies. Known for injecting humor into their films, "Civil War", while having a few laughs, is one of the studio's more darker tales. You don't see Robert Downey Jr. cracking as many jokes, nor do you see such a bright color pallet. In some ways, the film darkens its environments and locations. It's not as dark as the DC films, but the movie maintains a sense of urgency with the camera movements and lighting. It's fitting, given the serious nature of the story.
It doesn't have as big a cast featured in the graphic novel, but almost every hero in the Marvel Cinematic Universe is in this movie. We even get new ones, such as Tom Holland as the third rendition of Peter Parker/Spider-Man and Chadwick Boseman as T'Challa/Black Panther. Unlike "Avengers: Infinity War," it doesn't get overstuffed and the Russo Brothers manage to weave a web that connects all these players to the story in a meaningful way.
In a franchise that's been accused of having many weak, disposable, and unmemorable villains, "Captain America: Civil War" has the second best MCU villain of them all: Daniel Brühl as Zemo. I may slightly nominate Thanos as the best MCU villain, but Zemo is a close second. Ditching the purple ski mask and abnormal abilities, Daniel Brühl as Zemo is a much more captivating character that way. Having the character be simple man with an unhealthy vendetta against the Avengers was the right way to go. We see the character endure trial and error to achieve his goal, which he does in a way that actually subverts expectations. Daniel Brühl's calm and collective mentality somehow makes the character more menacing. In "The Winter Soldier", we got two great villains, but Anthony and Joe Russo topped themselves with Zemo in "Captain America: Civil War," only to top themselves again in "Avengers: Infinity War."
While personal preference leads me to select "The Winter Soldier" as the best Captain America film, "Captain America: Civil War" was a fantastic conclusion to the character's trilogy that successfully touched on themes of agency and loyalty while having all the great thrills featured in a superhero film.
Grade: A+
2. Iron Man
The movie that started it all. In the same way that Richard Donner's "Superman," Bryan Singer's "X-Men," and Sam Raimi's "Spider-Man" are considered classics among the superhero genre, I believe that Jon Favreau's "Iron Man" should join that list.
If there is any reason as to why I love superhero films today, it is mainly because of this film. It wasn't the first superhero film I saw, that title belongs to "The Incredibles," but "Iron Man" did make me a fan of this genre. While being blown away watching it the first time, six-year-old me was only interested in rewatching the action sequences in the film. Nothing else. Now, I love everything about this film and it deserves the second-place spot.
Before Captain America would go on to become my favorite superhero, Iron Man was my favorite for a while. Up until "The Winter Soldier," Iron Man was my favorite superhero and this was my favorite superhero film. A large portion of that credit goes to Robert Downey Jr. for bringing Stark's persona to life in a way that, even at six, resonated to me. Decades after its release, I always get joy out of watching Downey's debut of the character. His acting feels natural to the point that it doesn't feel like he's acting at all. The hero's journey in this film shouldn't have been as entertaining as it is, yet it was.
Despite what went down behind the scenes, Terrence Howard still looked like he was having fun as James Rhodes. Unfortunately, it was a one-time gig for Howard and I do believe that he was replaced with the right actor. Gwyneth Paltrow is well-cast as the smart and occasionally sassy Pepper Potts. She's definitely a standout amongst the myriad of female characters in these films and her relationship with Stark is something different from the superhero film formula. Considering that their arguments could get annoying, I applaud the two actors for having it be entertaining every time it happens. My favorite of this cast is Shaun Toub as Ho Yinsen. This film is discussed a lot, but nobody seems to recognize Toub's part. The actor has very little time in this film, but that doesn't keep him from making a huge impact. He has some of the best lines of this film and his good-natured attitude leads me to believe like he's the Uncle Ben to Stark's Peter Parker.
It's fundamentally agreed that one glaring crack in this iron suit is Jeff Bridges's antagonist, Obadiah Stane. While many agree that the character was good in the first two-thirds of the film, the climatic third-act action scene where Obadiah fights Iron Man in his Iron Monger suit is heavily criticized because... I don't know why. For most of the MCU films, it seems that people call the villains weak, but they don't give any reason to back their stance. As a six-year-old, the Iron Man/Iron Monger fight was one of the scenes I would always look forward to seeing again and again. What six-year-old wouldn't have their mind just blown at seeing such a thing? At my age now, I still do and that's because the fight actually has a purpose in the story if you're really paying attention.
The action sequences are the least entertaining thing in the movie, but that's only because the story's so enthralling, that they manage to succeed scenes where Iron Man's beating up baddies. I am still impressed that the filmmakers were able to design actual suits that enabled the actors to, at least, walk around in. Practicality always wins over CGI. Ramin Djawadi's score borders on being noteworthy. I love listening to it when it plays throughout the film, but I don't revisit it much outside the film. It lacks that one element that, if included, would've made it more memorable
"Iron Man" still is one of the best superhero films made and I still love it more than I did when I was younger.
Grade: A+
1. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
When I joined the Superhero Moviecast podcast to talk about the original "Thor" and "Iron Man," I called "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" my favorite superhero film. In my review of "Black Panther," I mentioned that "The Winter Soldier" is one of my favorite films, period. Assuming you remember all those hints, you likely guessed that the second Captain America film would get the number one spot in this ranking.
Predictable as this might have been, it is absolutely the truth to me. This is a PERFECT movie. It transcends the rest of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and makes those other films look like simple good movies. This film's existence is one huge magic trick. It should not be possible that two brothers who, together, directed films that didn't do well, could pull off such a feat, but they did. Although the franchise has had a lot of success in the last ten years, Anthony and Joe Russo are the best thing that ever happened to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. They are at Christopher Nolan's level when it comes to making superhero movies. Unlike most films, I cannot pick a favorite scene in the movie because I love every scene in this movie. A movie could not be this good if it didn't have as good a story and fortunately, "The Winter Soldier" has a story that's deep and thoughtfully constructed.
This film was responsible for making Captain America my favorite superhero. It wasn't just because of his impressive action scenes, but because this sequel is a character study first. Through the narrative, we learn about what makes Steve Rogers/Captain America so endearing. His personality and his morals and ideals are what I love about the character and are what make him so interesting. "The Winter Soldier" develops those traits that were set-up in "The First Avenger" by creating a conflict that directly challenges Cap's beliefs and existence while, at the same time rattling the MCU to its core as well. From the conflict, Cap is affected in a way that allows for interesting dialogue and thought-provoking themes. Chris Evans may have had a great introduction in "The First Avenger," but this film knew what Evans needed to do and utilized his abilities as an actor in such a profound way, that it's surprising that he didn't get much recognition for it.
Despite this being a Captain America film, we got to learn a lot more about Scarlet Johansson's Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow. Since she hasn't had a stand-alone film yet, the Russo Brothers took a deep dive into her character and, quite successfully, made her a more interesting individual in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Perhaps it's because of the different writers behind the script, but Johansson felt more personable as Black Widow and I commend both her and the writers for doing that with the character. Never before, have I wanted to see a Black Widow film, but I feel that the opportunity has long since past.
Anthony Mackie got a thorough introduction as Sam Wilson, otherwise known as the Falcon. For a character with a far-fetched background in the comics, the MCU's interpretation of Falcon was, expectedly, more realistic. Because of a more in-depth background, Wilson develops an interesting connection to Rogers and, for an introduction, it was unexpected to find that he was as developed as he was. Whenever I read a comic book featuring the Falcon, I found his wings to be bizzare. The flashy red and white didn't work for me and, bringing the character into MCU, I wasn't sure how well that it would translate to the screen. With a more militaristic background, the wings were made, quite cleverly, into a variation of a jetpack, but much more realistic. Kudos to this film for making like a character that I didn't think I would like.
Were it not for the Russo's ability to top themselves in "Captain America: Civil War" and again in "Avengers: Infinity War," "The Winter Soldier" would have the best villains in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The titular antagonist (I call him such since he is one of the opposing forces in the film) did not disappoint. Sebastian Stan nailed his conflicted character and his action scenes were one of the film's exemplary assets. While the Winter Soldier is an exciting villain in his own right, he is only a pawn in someone else's game. Robert Redford completes this movie. Without him, this movie would simply be great, but his presence elevates the quality of this movie beyond a mere "great." I never thought I'd see Redford play a villain the way he does in this movie. Redford's Alexander Pierce isn't your traditional comic book villain. He's a terrifying character, but with relatable morals that play into the main conflict of the film: freedom versus security.
With superhero films utilizing a lot of CGI, I love it when I see it kept to a minimum and used only when it's absolutely necessary. Now I don't believe that the filmmakers built three heavily-weaponized Helicarriers, only to destroy them in a Mexican standoff, but whenever car chases or firefights were happening, it was nice to see real people doing real things in real settings. The action sequences are significantly more enjoyable that way and way more intense. This is the most intense MCU film because there's no otherworldly element to it, making it much more real. Alan Silvestri's original score, while being used in key places, is replaced with a score composed by Henry Jackman. I find it to be an even better score that, on its own, tells the story without using a single line of dialogue.
Since "The Winter Soldier" radiates quality in every second of its 136-minute runtime, I call it the best Marvel Cinematic Universe film and one of my favorite films ever made.
Grade: A+
Conclusion
This was a long one to make, but in the end, it was worth it. So with that, what is your ranking of the nineteen films? Although it's highly unlikely, did mine match up with yours? If not, how close is my ranking with yours? Share this ranking with your friends and/or friends as well as your own ranking of the Marvel Cinematic Universe in the comments section below. Also, feel free to suggest a franchise that you'd like me to rank. Thanks for reading, I'm Dallin, the Film Fanatic, bye-bye.
Comments
Post a Comment