Just curious, what changes would you all have made to IM3 and Thor TDW to bring them up to Cap's level?
As everyone says, they had so much potential. So if Marvel got redos on both, what would you change?
For me, I'd tone down the humor by A LOT for both movies. Honestly, the humor killed them for me. It wasn't as bad in IM3 (still really bad), but for TDW....Let's just say Thor's greatest enemy wasn't Malekeith or Kurse or Loki.
-Explain the removal of the arc reactor in more detail. The shrapnel in his heart was killing him in Iron Man 2. If it was that easy to do away with, then that makes that whole film basically pointless. Partly even makes the whole series pointless! It also directly contradicts what he tells Banner in Avengers. I don't think the idea is symbolically bad, it was just handled beyond sloppily and was just tacked onto the ending. All you needed was like, one scene setting it up! Come on guys!
-Killian's introduction. I liked Killian's plan and his point on being the man behind the curtain. That said, the reason he hated Stark was sort of weak. I think you could have had the same motivations and goals with a better set-up.
-Stark is sort of dumb in this movie: I love the PTSD and all that, but Stark himself is stupid in this movie. He gives Mandarin his address, yet arms himself with an armor that isn't weapons capable? Why? Why not have that upstairs, so he can save Pepper if need be and fight with one that IS combat ready? Makes Tony look dumb. Or even better: House Party protocal when the attacked him! Why have the armors sit down stairs helpless as your house gets trashed when they can help you via remote control? Also, I get the symbolism of the clean slate protocal, but logically, it makes little sense. If the Chitari come back, Tony won't be prepared.
I think these are the biggest fixes. I'm honestly not against the comedy in the movie. Largely, I think the comedy in IM3 works pretty well.
Thor: The Dark World
-Less comedy. I don't think the comedy is as bad as many on here say it is, but I do agree at several points it is over done. One great example: Thor putting hammer on the coat rack is hilarious. That was fine. But the rest of the scene seems to be more about Selvig's pants than the plot. I honestly think they went too far with Selvig, and Darcy as well (though I don't think Darcy was AS bad as most say).
-Jane Foster. Of the main MCU love interests, Jane Foster is the worst. I like the idea behind her, and they have good moments with her. But, by and large, all she does is stand around with a doughey eyed expression as she worships Thor with her eyes. She doesn't do much else, and thus her relationship with Thor isn't as engaging as Tony/Pepper or even the material between Steve/Natasha in TWS. In Thor 3, they need to find a way to make the Thor/Jane plotline more engaging. I think in this film, the best moments surrounding Jane happened when Odin or Frigga were with her. Not really Thor. That's a problem.
-Action variety. I don't think Thor should be TOO over powered in these movies. Remember, we need to believe that Thor needs the Avengers to beat threats and that he himself can't do everything. But, at the same time, I do agree with Thor fans that when he doesn't have Mjolnir, he seems helpless. He also doesn't have a fighting style. He swings the hammer around or uses lightning. I agree, Thor requires more creativity. This is actually why I LIKED the world jumping. It gave the movie a spark of creativity in watching Thor deal with a threat and added variety to the action. But, outside that sequence, largely he does the same stuff.
-Tighter story. My notes on the action and comedy are smaller complaints. But, I do think the story in the film itself FEELS like it went into filming 1 or 2 drafts early. The movie does at times seems to struggle on what type of movie it wants to be. It has moments of absolute brilliance, and other moments where things just sort of stop and it meanders to the next thing for a scene or two. This was probably the movie's biggest issue (much like the writing behind how IM3 ends is that movie's biggest issue as well).
Have Jane die by Malekith's hand and use Sif to her fullest potential. Dammit all, I was heartbroken at how she got short-changed in that movie after such a promising opening sequence
[BLACKOUT]Or just change it to two hours of Jaimie Alexander on screen, that would have been fine haha[/BLACKOUT]
Seriously though, my love of Sif aside, her and the Warriors Three needed more screentime and ideally, cut out Midgard altogether. Yes Jane is meant to be the character we can view Asgard through, but she's dull. And annoying. Thor movies should explore Asgard, and not be on Midgard. That's a SHIELD threat then.
As for IM3, the shrapnel ending is what annoyed me most. You can't just remove one of RDJ Iron Man's key plot points in a 2s throwaway line. A year on, I shouldn't still be utterly clueless as to how he's alive.
I thought all three movies were very good, but CA: TWS is exceptionally good. It's in a class by itself. I've really enjoyed all of the Phase 2 movies so far, but TWS is especially high-quality, so it gets my vote.
Have Jane die by Malekith's hand and use Sif to her fullest potential. Dammit all, I was heartbroken at how she got short-changed in that movie after such a promising opening sequence
[BLACKOUT]Or just change it to two hours of Jaimie Alexander on screen, that would have been fine haha[/BLACKOUT]
Seriously though, my love of Sif aside, her and the Warriors Three needed more screentime and ideally, cut out Midgard altogether. Yes Jane is meant to be the character we can view Asgard through, but she's dull. And annoying. Thor movies should explore Asgard, and not be on Midgard. That's a SHIELD threat then.
As for IM3, the shrapnel ending is what annoyed me most. You can't just remove one of RDJ Iron Man's key plot points in a 2s throwaway line. A year on, I shouldn't still be utterly clueless as to how he's alive.
Them just hand-waving Pepper being cured of Extremis in one throwaway line was also annoying, since they'd set it up to be this big problem that they weren't sure how to fix. That was BS.
I loved Iron Man 3 but just not nearly as much as TWS. The plotting and writing of TWS is just so polished and tight, with perfect character moments be they emotional or humorous and intense complex exciting action. Every character had a time to shine - Fury and Widow have never been better as characters or used as effectively - while none took away from the focal point that was Steve.
I dont think Shane Black cared about the Marvel Cinematic Universe at all. I doubt he was ever into the comics. He just wanted to mess with the character and put his own stamp on it.
For IM3:
-Tone down forced humor
-Actually use Rhodes as Iron Patriot more than what they did
-Have Tony as Iron Man more than what they did, especially in the end
-Actually have Kingsley as the true Mandarin in the movie
-Cut the kid scenes to minimally if not all of it.
Agree with all of this, especially the 3rd one. I was by far most offended by the revelation that Tony wasn't even in the armor most of the time. What the hell? I'm betting they thought they were being creative with that one. Real cute.
For TDW: -No Darcy or assistant
-Very little Jane
-Very little Midgard
-More Sif and the Warriors 3
-Better villain
-A better threat to Asgard
-No streaking or pantless Selvig -Much more serious tone
-Better script in general
-And all those awesome scenes that were cut, would've been in the movie
Can't be said any better. Everything you mentioned, especially the bold, would have improved the movie and its frustrating to know Marvel is capable of such greatness as TWS but is satisfied with putting out mediocre films like Thor 2, pandering to imaginary audiences who they think are demanding overdone humor and boring love stories, when its pretty clear all we want is a great story with great action. I liked TDW, but it could have been so much better. Disappointing. Honestly, every moment spent on earth is time i'm almost positive most fans would rather be spent somewhere - anywhere - else. You have this huge universe to play with, go nuts with it. We live on Earth, we get enough of it.
Darcy goes without saying, she's the worst. But Jane is the catalyst for all of this, because her presence demands entertainment killers - namely Earth and romance. Much as I love Natalie Portman, the first Thor film without her will undoubtedly be the best one. Even Sif would be a more interesting angle if they simply insisted on having a love story. Which, as Cap 2 proved, is totally unnecessary to a great film.
Not that humor doesn't have a place - in Iron Man movies, with Tony's personality its a key component. But even there it can be overdone, and in the other films (Thor, for example.) a more serious tone would serve to make the movie more suspenseful and force the writers to focus on the script quality and not have to worry about if 8 year olds in the audience are laughing or not. And there is so much in Thor's mythos that would act as a great canvas for a Winter Soldier type movie. Having us nervous on the edge of our seats is a much better plan than having us sitting back in the chair chuckling.
The two most critically acclaimed comic movies so far have been Winter Soldier and Dark Knight - hey Marvel, guess what those two have in common that the rest of your chucklefest circus acts didn't?
I laughed maybe twice during TWS, slightly, and it was by far my favorite comics movie of all time. Hey, Marvel Studios? You don't have to tickle our funny bones every 3 minutes....we're with you for good. Shut up and take our money. Just focus on not wasting it with useless characters and tone-interrupting gags.
Tony not being in the suit was huge theme in IM 3. The whole movie was about him being a hero without the suit ("You can take away my suit etc etc I AM Iron Man"). I loved the Barrel of Monkeys sequence, when hes in the boat at the end I thought it was a really cool idea.
Well and good, but i'm perfectly fine with watching him be a hero in the suit and just knowing he's a hero without it. I don't need a movie about Bruce Banner fighting crime either. Finding out Tony hadn't been in the suits felt like being lied to. In a bad way.
Well and good, but i'm perfectly fine with watching him be a hero in the suit and just knowing he's a hero without it. I don't need a movie about Bruce Banner fighting crime either. Finding out Tony hadn't been in the suits felt like being lied to. In a bad way.
Thank you for the co-sign on my response. It's really just too much to name that I would change with those movies, especially TDW. Jane really is the catalyst for the clown show that goes on and not to mention she has zero chemistry with Thor to me. Now Sif, that's a female character who I much rather see with screen time and more development. And she sizzles onscreen with Thor, they have great chemistry. Sif is just BOSS though, one of my fave female Marvel characters.
And I agree with you about preferring Tony in his suit. I do as well. Because as much as people and fans enjoy his personality, he rather annoys me after awhile as Tony for too long. He's much more tolerable when he's focused and in serious mode. Like the his save the day in Avengers, even though it was Iron Man focused, I still enjoyed seeing that side of him.
Have Jane die by Malekith's hand and use Sif to her fullest potential. Dammit all, I was heartbroken at how she got short-changed in that movie after such a promising opening sequence
[BLACKOUT]Or just change it to two hours of Jaimie Alexander on screen, that would have been fine haha[/BLACKOUT]
Seriously though, my love of Sif aside, her and the Warriors Three needed more screentime and ideally, cut out Midgard altogether. Yes Jane is meant to be the character we can view Asgard through, but she's dull. And annoying. Thor movies should explore Asgard, and not be on Midgard. That's a SHIELD threat then.
As for IM3, the shrapnel ending is what annoyed me most. You can't just remove one of RDJ Iron Man's key plot points in a 2s throwaway line. A year on, I shouldn't still be utterly clueless as to how he's alive.
Agreed with everything regarding Sif and the Warriors! Sif is severely underused and left aside for wack a** Jane. I honestly don't get or see the appeal, but surely they can give as much development to an actual female character with purpose and power as well. I mean how hard is that? Anyways, I pray they get this right in Thor 3 because I will be all kinds of pissed if I have to endure more foolishness that was TDW.
-Explain the removal of the arc reactor in more detail. The shrapnel in his heart was killing him in Iron Man 2. If it was that easy to do away with, then that makes that whole film basically pointless. Partly even makes the whole series pointless! It also directly contradicts what he tells Banner in Avengers. I don't think the idea is symbolically bad, it was just handled beyond sloppily and was just tacked onto the ending. All you needed was like, one scene setting it up! Come on guys!
-Killian's introduction. I liked Killian's plan and his point on being the man behind the curtain. That said, the reason he hated Stark was sort of weak. I think you could have had the same motivations and goals with a better set-up.
-Stark is sort of dumb in this movie: I love the PTSD and all that, but Stark himself is stupid in this movie. He gives Mandarin his address, yet arms himself with an armor that isn't weapons capable? Why? Why not have that upstairs, so he can save Pepper if need be and fight with one that IS combat ready? Makes Tony look dumb. Or even better: House Party protocal when the attacked him! Why have the armors sit down stairs helpless as your house gets trashed when they can help you via remote control? Also, I get the symbolism of the clean slate protocal, but logically, it makes little sense. If the Chitari come back, Tony won't be prepared.
I think these are the biggest fixes. I'm honestly not against the comedy in the movie. Largely, I think the comedy in IM3 works pretty well.
Thor: The Dark World
-Less comedy. I don't think the comedy is as bad as many on here say it is, but I do agree at several points it is over done. One great example: Thor putting hammer on the coat rack is hilarious. That was fine. But the rest of the scene seems to be more about Selvig's pants than the plot. I honestly think they went too far with Selvig, and Darcy as well (though I don't think Darcy was AS bad as most say).
-Jane Foster. Of the main MCU love interests, Jane Foster is the worst. I like the idea behind her, and they have good moments with her. But, by and large, all she does is stand around with a doughey eyed expression as she worships Thor with her eyes. She doesn't do much else, and thus her relationship with Thor isn't as engaging as Tony/Pepper or even the material between Steve/Natasha in TWS. In Thor 3, they need to find a way to make the Thor/Jane plotline more engaging. I think in this film, the best moments surrounding Jane happened when Odin or Frigga were with her. Not really Thor. That's a problem.
-Action variety. I don't think Thor should be TOO over powered in these movies. Remember, we need to believe that Thor needs the Avengers to beat threats and that he himself can't do everything. But, at the same time, I do agree with Thor fans that when he doesn't have Mjolnir, he seems helpless. He also doesn't have a fighting style. He swings the hammer around or uses lightning. I agree, Thor requires more creativity. This is actually why I LIKED the world jumping. It gave the movie a spark of creativity in watching Thor deal with a threat and added variety to the action. But, outside that sequence, largely he does the same stuff.
-Tighter story. My notes on the action and comedy are smaller complaints. But, I do think the story in the film itself FEELS like it went into filming 1 or 2 drafts early. The movie does at times seems to struggle on what type of movie it wants to be. It has moments of absolute brilliance, and other moments where things just sort of stop and it meanders to the next thing for a scene or two. This was probably the movie's biggest issue (much like the writing behind how IM3 ends is that movie's biggest issue as well).
Tony not being in the suit was huge theme in IM 3. The whole movie was about him being a hero without the suit ("You can take away by suit etc etc I AM Iron Man"). I loved the Barrel of Monkeys sequence, when hes in the boat at the end I thought it was a really cool idea.
NOOOO. That was a horrible decision. The barrel of monkeys sequence was awesome, but the fact that Tony was never in the suit totally ruined it for me. It wasn't nearly as heroic or nerve-racking as it would've been.
I don't know that I can vote now,having only seen TWS once,I'd rather see it again first.
But judging by first impressions alone,I'd say I enjoyed Thor TDW most of the three.The biggest problem it had was not quite digging in and mining the material for all it's worth.Flesh out Maliketh,show the effects the Ither had on Jane.And yeah,some of the Darcy and especially Selvig stuff should've been re-thought.But overall,the Thor/Loki team up,Jane in Asgard,Kurse being a bad***,Loki still scheming for the throne,it just felt like the most fun IMO.
I don't know that i can vote now,having only seen tws once,i'd rather see it again first.
but judging by first impressions alone,i'd say i enjoyed thor tdw most of the three.the biggest problem it had was not quite digging in and mining the material for all it's worth.flesh out maliketh,show the effects the ither had on jane.and yeah,some of the darcy and especially selvig stuff should've been re-thought.but overall,the thor/loki team up,jane in asgard,kurse being a bad***,loki still scheming for the throne,it just felt like the most fun imo.
I don't know that I can vote now,having only seen TWS once,I'd rather see it again first.
But judging by first impressions alone,I'd say I enjoyed Thor TDW most of the three.The biggest problem it had was not quite digging in and mining the material for all it's worth.Flesh out Maliketh,show the effects the Ither had on Jane.And yeah,some of the Darcy and especially Selvig stuff should've been re-thought.But overall,the Thor/Loki team up,Jane in Asgard,Kurse being a bad***,Loki still scheming for the throne,it just felt like the most fun IMO.
This is well said. I think that all of your suggestions would have helped tremendously, and people do tend to let the negatives make them forget the positives you mentioned (but that is justified, since people are comparing it to movies that have fewer negatives).
I hope that when we are voting for best Phase 3 film, I can cast my vote with Thor since he's my favorite character, but for phase 2 i think TWS was the best.
PS shameless plug, check out my ideal Thor 3 plot that I link to in my signature. It is somewhat relevant to this conversation, since I tried to address some of the flaws from TDW.
NOOOO. That was a horrible decision. The barrel of monkeys sequence was awesome, but the fact that Tony was never in the suit totally ruined it for me. It wasn't nearly as heroic or nerve-racking as it would've been.
I wasnt dissapointed, I thought it was awesome his suit was that advanced that he didnt have to be in it. Plus, the people were in danger, not him. He wouldve lived no matter what.
I'm curious why so many people liked Captain America more than Iron Man. They were, by my estimation, of equal quality, but while Captain America was a fairly traditional (albeit exceptionally well made and thoughtful) action film, Iron Man 3 was a very unique and fresh experience. It tried a lot of new things with the character and the genre and took a lot of creative risks that I felt were very successful. That's what pushes it over the edge for me. I'm not looking to start a fight or anything, everyone is of course entitled to their own preferences, I'm just curious about how others feel the two films stack up against each other.
It's hard to answer that one. Some of it just comes down to fanservice, but I think Iron Man 3 had a lot of good ideas, but Captain America 2 had one good idea with a lot of good things building into it. Neither one seemed fresher to me, personally.
There's a lot to like here, but a little tweaking would have put it at Cap 2 levels for me. I realize it was meant to be more kid-friendly and that RDJ probably wanted some heroic and physical things to do outside of the suit, but I would have tweaked it as much as possible.
- More Badassness - I wouldn't have taken out the comedy so much as contrasted it better. I think there'd be less home alone-ishness in podunk Kentucky, and more Rhodey elsewhere taking down terrorists. Still a wild goose chase, but something cool.
Even when Tony got to Home Depot I'd have something not too far off from the IM1 cave scene with the kid helping him instead of YinSen, have the whole 'then just build something' convo at the kid's garage, and Home Depot it there, and come out with some real cool next level stuff, not just leftovers from unfilmed episodes of MacGuyver. I'd have him write a new AI using voice recognition on a laptop while putting together a rocket launcher with a chemical fuse or something ridiculous like that. He made Iron Man in a cave, what do you think he could do in a garage?
He wouldn't stealth it, I wouldn't make him that character. I'd show why Tony Stark is awesome at being Tony Stark, not MacGuyver, and definitely not James Bond. He'd come through the front door, knocking down doors and people with mini explosive force makers on his arms and legs, dropping homemade supersonic stun weapons, some new AI controlling a remote control plane to drop some stink/smoke bomb, hurling projectiles, taking bullets... all with homemade one-use stuff. I'd even have him something prepared for the guns he steals to make that more effective or whatever. He'd be a monster. You'd get the feeling that you don't want Tony anywhere near a toolkit. You'd also have a more flowing progression you see as he goes from home alone against Brandt and Coldblood or whatever his name is, to having a sort of armor-lite orchestrator effect at the Miami hacienda, to half suit half gunman to full suit to dozens of suits. Having the hero do lots of cool stuff that accentuates the franchise is part of why Cap 2 gets the nod over IM3.
- At least one Mandarin vs Iron Man Scene - I think I would keep the twist, because it's so subversive and speaks so directly to what the government is on nowadays. I think it would be cool though if we had one really cool memorable scene with Iron Man (in his Home Depot suit) facing off against The Mandarin, in character, with some big giant supervillain speech claiming that Iron Man is in some death trap (even though he's not), and then we deflate it at the moment where Iron Man and Rhodey are about to KO him, Trevor is like "...aaaand scene" in his London accent. THAT would have made me laugh. Having the twist villain confront the hero on both levels, pre and post-twist is part of what gives Cap 2 the nod over IM3.
- Killian and Tony's Relationship - I think it was unclear and too subtextual. Leave the whole Bin-Laden-went-to-Harvard as the subtext. Let's hear clearly about how Killian is basically what Tony Stark was before Iron Man 1. Killian actually thinks he and Tony could be friends now, except for the fact that people like he and Tony don't really have friends and Tony is caught up in this superhero silliness. The movie never implied Killian hated Tony, but since they didn't show what the relationship was, even that Killian didn't care about Tony, then that's what people interpreted, especially if you go for the ol' kidnap your girl trick. An empathetic villain that connects with the hero is part of what gives Cap 2 the nod over IM3.
- Banner - Being there in the post credits scene was awesome, but fans, understandably hoped for more. You could almost give him Happy's role, where he Hulks out, leaves a clue, and disappears until the end of the film. That Avengers connectivity with Black Widow is part of what gives Cap 2 the nod over IM3.
Thor: The Dark World
I'd do a bit of an overhaul on the Thor movie, keep the general premise. I realize pre-production on the film was rushed, after so many director switches, but if they could do it again:
- A Thor movie, not a Loki movie - Loki had the strongest most developed arc here, and that's a mistake for a movie called Thor. Make this about his quest to become king and juxtapose that with his quest to rescue the maiden, and note that at the end he'll have to choose which one, so when he chooses, at the end, we care. Leave that tension there and play with it, focus on that.
Still have Loki in there, but don't make breaking him out this huge setpiece. Loki's not the star, he's supposed to steal scenes, not have them given to him. Makes for a much more centered and natural storyline. Keep the best Loki bits, with his mother, the Captain America bit after the jailbreak, but let him be the tour guide, the untrusted snake, who redeems himself in the end, or do his machinations go even beyond the grave. Prioritizing the fan favorite character over the main character is part of why this film can't compare.
- A 9 realms movie, not an Earth movie- I think they were just trying to save costs, but this should have been LOTR-lite here, with a "Fellowship" of Thor, Warriors 3, Sif and Loki protecting Aether-Jane and her band of hobb-er, misfits, Darcy, Eric and a cool new assistant, like Amadeus Cho or something. Heck, you could bring Hawkeye, since SHIELD would naturally be investigating huge holes in reality.
They would go to Vanaheim, and the Dark World, and a peek at Svartlefheim (Surtur's area, they make sure to keep moving there), while briefly revisiting Asgard, Jotunheim and Midgard. Thoroughly exploring the setting of the franchise as opposed to something more vanilla is part of why this film can't compare.
- No women in refrigerators - Killing Frigga was cheap and dumb. You only have three women in the franchise. Boo. Instead, over the course of the adventure, due to the hero's actions, let Eric Svelwig die, let Fandral die. Let them go out like heroes. Now you have a mission with stakes. Now it's serious business for Thor's mission, not just his angst for a character we've rarely even seen. Awesome female characters who get to shine brightly all movie long is part of why this film can't compare.
- Keep the Aether-in-Jane but up the stakes- That was actually a good move to bring her into the story, but make it a problem. If they kill her, they can destroy Aether right now, but if they take her to Mount D-er, The Dark World, where she got it, they can free her from it, but then Malkeith may get it. Kurse constantly pursues them with the Dark Elves as they travel these worlds. The tension of having to save the problem is part of why this film can't compare.
- Love Triangle with Sif - There was a hint of it, let Sif be the one to ever so gently remind Thor and everyone else that Jane is not a god, she will die soon, one way or another, she cannot protect herself and Thor is needed to be king. Let Sif be perfectly cooly catty, while still being a badass warrior and 'one of the guys.' Also, you can add depth to Jane by having her understand that she's 'just a human' and Thor 'deserves/needs so much more' or what have you. Make that a problem. So when he chooses her, it has some weight to it. Having multiple female 'options' is part of why this film can't compare.
- Loki actually dies - Cliffhanger/Credits buzz with Hel and/or possessing Sif. Comeuppance for and redemption of the villains is part of why this film can't compare.
- They're still "gods"- I would leave that magic=science vagueness by having Odin say something along the lines of "The term 'god' is relative. In Midgard you are a god, in Asgard you are a prince, on [Planet from Guardians of the Galaxy here] you are an alien." and leave the time periods vague. Locking that down was weak. Really delving into shield and not trying to overground it is part of why this film can't compare.
-Explore Thor without his hammer- They teased something really cool they didn't deliver on: Thor calling his hammer from another realm. If Thor had been separated from Mjolnir and had to prove himself in combat with his fists grappling like he did in the mud (But with super strength), or with a sword! That would have been really cool, especially if it arrived just in time for the final battle. Totally cool. Cap getting it in without his shield is part of why this film doesn't compare.
-Explore Thor with his hammer- Let Thor work up some concentration to unleash the power of the elements. Would have been great on the Dark World. Balance it with the fact that he has to concentrate, and he gets crazy winded/disoriented afterwards. Cap's Shield getting well used was part of why the film doesn't compare.
-Explore Malkeith with Odin- Let Malkeith occupy or be in a constant battle with Asgard. Odin and Heimdall will get their good fights in, but they're counting on Thor and Jane to make it to the Dark World. Malkeith and Odin's conversations play out in a grand chess game and some great exposition. Malkeith not being on Pierce's level was part of why the film doesn't compare.
-Beta Ray Bill- Total fanservice, but I would have had the Korbinites enslaved on Svartleheim or something and the 'Fellowship' gets captured, but one of the other slaves, a Korbinite, that Darcy names 'Bill' is able to lift it, and helps free them.
I'm curious why so many people liked Captain America more than Iron Man. They were, by my estimation, of equal quality, but while Captain America was a fairly traditional (albeit exceptionally well made and thoughtful) action film, Iron Man 3 was a very unique and fresh experience. It tried a lot of new things with the character and the genre and took a lot of creative risks that I felt were very successful. That's what pushes it over the edge for me. I'm not looking to start a fight or anything, everyone is of course entitled to their own preferences, I'm just curious about how others feel the two films stack up against each other.
I think both took a lot of risks, but Cap's movie served him even better. There were times when Tony's PTSD issues from Avengers got somewhat lost in the mix with the banter and the AIM/Mandarin storyline. TWS, however, was a Steve Rogers vehicle through and through. Each moment, each piece of dialogue, every character in the movie served to help define who Steve Rogers is, while also adding depth to the supporting cast themselves. Widow, Sam, Fury, even Pierce that script was tight, and it did it practically flawlessly with a balance of humor and drama and emotion.
Also, the action scenes were incredible. The street stuff in particular elevated the film for me, as it really felt like an old-school 70's thriller with a superhero at the center of it.
Plus, the acting all over just felt fresher and on note, from Evans to SLJ to Sebastian Stan to Hayley Atwell. It was an action movie with a ton of heart.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
