The best Marvel Studio movie

[Wolvieboy17]

^^This.

 

[psylockolussus]

Story in Thor? lol

Visuals and characters sucked.

The Loki guy had no charisma.

Iron Man pretty much beats every Marvel Studio movies in all departements.

But i'm not saying Iron Man was a masterpiece, far from it. It's just that all the elements from story to acting to directing to the visuals to what we wanted out of the character all came together so well like perfect jigsaw puzzle. The other movies had too many flaws. I like some of the Captain America but there was never a moment where I said "this is Cap!". While on Iron Man I had this huge smile all the way though thinking "this is Tony, this is Iron Man!". When he went back to the middle east with his new armor and started to kick some terrorist ass it was such a great wish fullfillement moment like "this is what a super-hero should be doing!".

No RObert DOwney Jr is annoying and not funny.

 

[Lord]

I was surprised for the Loki love as he was pratically a whining brat with father issues, still i'm kind of liking him more and liking the idea of he pratically becoming the Doctor Doom of the Marvel Cinematic Universe until they get the FF rights back

 

[psylockolussus]

Because he was most complex and the other villains just wanted power.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

No RObert DOwney Jr is annoying and not funny.

Says you.... and no one else.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I really cant believe how Thor isnt closure to IM and CA, especially the latter which which I thought was good and not great. I really do think Thor is the under-rated GEM of the Marvel movies so far, and I cant understand why, since its release, so many have come to criticise it since its release.

 

[El Payaso]

Thor had great action and some of the actors were very good. But characters like Portman's and her little one-liners friend along with the romantic plot were absolutely subpar. Iron Man, due mainly to RDJ, handled comedy brilliantly, not to mention that the relationship between Stark and Pepper was very good, again thanks to the actors.

Sadly (or not?) I couldn't see Capt. America before it was taken out of the theaters.

 

[Eggyman]

Thor.

I hated Cap. Iron Man is good but only because of RDJ, otherwise I find the films bland and the action boring--the directing is terrible and static.

The Incredible Hulk would take second place for me.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Thor had great action and some of the actors were very good. But characters like Portman's and her little one-liners friend along with the romantic plot were absolutely subpar. Iron Man, due mainly to RDJ, handled comedy brilliantly, not to mention that the relationship between Stark and Pepper was very good, again thanks to the actors.

Sadly (or not?) I couldn't see Capt. America before it was taken out of the theaters.

I wouldnt say Portman's character wasnt good, she was essential to Thor's character arc, she taught him humility amoung other things. Darcy was simply there for comedy value, so I didnt mind her character either, in fact there wasnt a character I disliked in Thor.

Thor.

I hated Cap. Iron Man is good but only because of RDJ, otherwise I find the films bland and the action boring--the directing is terrible and static.

The Incredible Hulk would take second place for me.

I would have to agree with this to an extent, take RDJ out of both movies and they would immediatly lower in entertainment value, same could be said of Sam Rockwell in IM2 also. And definately agreed about the action scene's, in both movies they were amazingly sub-par.

 

[El Payaso]

I wouldnt say Portman's character wasnt good, she was essential to Thor's character arc, she taught him humility amoung other things.

I'0m not sure what else did she teach him, but about humility; he smashed the glass against the floor. She says something like 'no no, you don't do that,' and Thor goes 'ah ok.' Sure, that sounds like teaching/learning humility, but it beats me how badly and painfully simplistic that came off.

Now it beats me how such a insipid girl made such an impression on Thor, a god that lives amongst the bavest, hottest female warriors ever. I'm supposed to believe it happened because, as the average love interest, it's supposed to be that way. That's why the whole nostalgic ending didn't work for me.

Anyways, the functionality of the character didn't make the portrayal any better. I mean, Portman's acting was really average.

Darcy was simply there for comedy value, so I didnt mind her character either, in fact there wasnt a character I disliked in Thor.

Well, when a character meant for comedy only doesn't make me laugh (but gives me a headache for so much eye-rolling instead), I consider that a problem.

Anyways, by comparison, love interest and humour in Iron Man was much much better.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I'0m not sure what else did she teach him, but about humility; he smashed the glass against the floor. She says something like 'no no, you don't do that,' and Thor goes 'ah ok.' Sure, that sounds like teaching/learning humility, but it beats me how badly and painfully simplistic that came off.

Now it beats me how such a insipid girl made such an impression on Thor, a god that lives amongst the bavest, hottest female warriors ever. I'm supposed to believe it happened because, as the average love interest, it's supposed to be that way. That's why the whole nostalgic ending didn't work for me.

The thing was though, we knew as soon as they laid eyes on each other there was a connection, this was portrayed brilliantly through the acting during the scene were Thor lands and this was expressed through no lines and just looks on the actors faces, this is why he reacts so humbly to being told off, I think if anyone else would have he would have reacted differently.

Anyways, the functionality of the character didn't make the portrayal any better. I mean, Portman's acting was really average.

Well, I wouldnt say it was average, just that she was over-shadowed by the other great actors on show.

Well, when a character meant for comedy only doesn't make me laugh (but gives me a headache for so much eye-rolling instead), I consider that a problem.

Fair enough, she was hit and miss for me, some parts I liked and some I didnt, but nothing she did annoyed me so it didnt bother me.

Anyways, by comparison, love interest and humour in Iron Man was much much better.

I wouldnt say the love interest was better, just their relationship, and I found the humour in both movies to be equally as good, add to that mostly better acting in Thor and DEFINATELY better acting scene's and this is why Thor is the better movie for me.

 

[El Payaso]

The thing was though, we knew as soon as they laid eyes on each other there was a connection, this was portrayed brilliantly through the acting during the scene were Thor lands and this was expressed through no lines and just looks on the actors faces, this is why he reacts so humbly to being told off, I think if anyone else would have he would have reacted differently.

I'm not sure what was so "brilliant" about it, but I remember just the obvious stuff. Some glances here and Thor is inexplicably shy, making it the whole more unbelievable since he's an arrogant god - once again - surrounded by female goddesses with more personality in one toe than Portman is the whole movie. Portman's character hardly serves as an excuse for such a raving and sudden love.

Well, I wouldnt say it was average, just that she was over-shadowed by the other great actors on show.

More or less the same. She wasn't better than many other characters in the movie. Loki, Odin, Coulson, even that brief Haweye cameo had a higher presence and more intensity than Portman.

Fair enough, she was hit and miss for me, some parts I liked and some I didnt, but nothing she did annoyed me so it didnt bother me.

Still, RDJ alone beat that character every single time.

I wouldnt say the love interest was better, just their relationship,

Which is a lot to say already. Even so, Tony and Pepper had a whole background that became more believable because both of the actors were fantastic. You can feel Pepper has something to offer that most of the bimbos Tony gets involved with lack of. I can't say the same about Portman offering something you can't find in any Asgard's female warrior.

and I found the humour in both movies to be equally as good,

Except that Downey Jr. made it all better.

add to that mostly better acting in Thor and DEFINATELY better acting scene's and this is why Thor is the better movie for me.

No way. Hiddlestone, Hopkins, and maybe Skarsgard and Gregg were good. But Portman and Dennings were dissapointing, and even when Hemsworth had some carisma on him, he coudln't touch what Downey Jr did.

 

[MucasMan]

I'm not suprised to see Iron Man 2 do so badly; it was all CGI flash and no sustance. In the next Iron Man, I would like to see (as in the original comic book) IM battle with alchohol, and the Manderin.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Sorry, in which alternate universe did IM 2 do badly? You realise it was one of the most successful films out there? And did we see different movies, because I'm pretty sure we did see Tony battle somewhat with alchohol and identity...

 

[Frank Castle77]

Thor- Purely because it was a refreshing change in the superhero film genre. And with the whole fantasy/mystical world side of Marvel being introduced maybe Dr Strange is just round the corner ( fingers crossed)

Captain America / TIH/ IM - In my eyes these are all equal, they were not bad films in any way it's just that i enjoyed Thor more.

IM2- It suffered due to having too much going on they should of stuck with just having Hammer as the villain and more Stark Vs Rhodey fights but ending with a similar ending with JH in/with some kind of Mech-Suit involved.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I'm not sure what was so "brilliant" about it, but I remember just the obvious stuff. Some glances here and Thor is inexplicably shy, making it the whole more unbelievable since he's an arrogant god - once again - surrounded by female goddesses with more personality in one toe than Portman is the whole movie. Portman's character hardly serves as an excuse for such a raving and sudden love.

You could see a connection from the first time they laid eyes on each other, there is such a thing as love at first sight and both of them seemed to fall for each other. And I didnt see Thor being shy what-so-ever personally.

More or less the same. She wasn't better than many other characters in the movie. Loki, Odin, Coulson, even that brief Haweye cameo had a higher presence and more intensity than Portman.

I wont deny there were better performances, but neither would I call Portman average in the movie.

Still, RDJ alone beat that character every single time.

But RDJ was the main character, bit of a difference to a side character who was mostly throwaway.

Which is a lot to say already. Even so, Tony and Pepper had a whole background that became more believable because both of the actors were fantastic. You can feel Pepper has something to offer that most of the bimbos Tony gets involved with lack of. I can't say the same about Portman offering something you can't find in any Asgard's female warrior.

As you said, Thor has been surrounded by Asgardian female's all his life, Jane was something different, she treated him and reacted to him differently, plus he knew she was very smart and head strong and would stand up to him, something he has never gone through before, its not all about looks.

Pepper and Tony having a background did give their relationship a little extra momentum and interest, but the sacrifice made at the end of Thor hit me a lot harder than anything between Pepper and Tony.

Except that Downey Jr. made it all better.

Again, I loved the humour in both movies, neither was superior or inferior for me.

No way. Hiddlestone, Hopkins, and maybe Skarsgard and Gregg were good. But Portman and Dennings were dissapointing, and even when Hemsworth had some carisma on him, he coudln't touch what Downey Jr did.

I actually meant to type action scene's which Thor definately beats out IM on. But again, I found Hemsworths Thor a much more compelling character than RDJ's Stark. And of course RDJ would be better, he is a hardened veteran when it comes to acting, Hemsworth is still a newcomer, which made the latters performance all the more impressive for me.

Sorry, in which alternate universe did IM 2 do badly? You realise it was one of the most successful films out there? And did we see different movies, because I'm pretty sure we did see Tony battle somewhat with alchohol and identity...

I think meant that IM2 was doing badly on the poll. I too found IM2 very dissapointing at it seems a lot of others did as well.

 

[El Payaso]

Sorry, in which alternate universe did IM 2 do badly? You realise it was one of the most successful films out there? And did we see different movies, because I'm pretty sure we did see Tony battle somewhat with alchohol and identity...

Well Transformers 2 and Spiderman 3 were also very successful financially. I guess I don't need to give further comments. Now, of course IM2 was THAT bad, but still, financial success doesn't mean it was good.

And the treatment of Stark's alcoholism? Jokes about peeing inside of the suit.

Thor- Purely because it was a refreshing change in the superhero film genre. And with the whole fantasy/mystical world side of Marvel being introduced maybe Dr Strange is just round the corner ( fingers crossed)

I need to ask. And seriously so. What's the "refreshing change"? I only can think of Asgard scenes, which I found to be fantastic. but the rest was pretty average.

You could see a connection from the first time they laid eyes on each other, there is such a thing as love at first sight and both of them seemed to fall for each other. And I didnt see Thor being shy what-so-ever personally.

He was when he defies Odin in one scene and starts a war and 5 minutes later he doesn't even reply to this little girl when she lectures him in earthly manners.

Now, sure first love sight can be - as in this case - such a gratuitous way to stablish something immediately without any further motivation or development. What's in Portman's character to attract Thor so instantly? We never know, and we probably shouldn't care because it's a superhero movie and those need love interests, period. I didn't see the "connection," I was merely informed there was one.

I wont deny there were better performances, but neither would I call Portman average in the movie.

I was being kind. I'd call it below average. There was no personality there.

But RDJ was the main character, bit of a difference to a side character who was mostly throwaway.

No small roles, just small actors. Darcy was a crappy character anmd the actress did little to make it any worthy (no, mispronouncing Mjonlir is not funny and doing it twice just make it worse).

As you said, Thor has been surrounded by Asgardian female's all his life, Jane was something different, she treated him and reacted to him differently, plus he knew she was very smart and head strong and would stand up to him, something he has never gone through before, its not all about looks.

Pepper and Tony having a background did give their relationship a little extra momentum and interest, but the sacrifice made at the end of Thor hit me a lot harder than anything between Pepper and Tony.

I'm glad Thor could see she was smart because other than informing us that she was some kind of scientist (and she wore glasses or something), I didn't see anything intelligent about her. And "not about looks"? In the movie it's specifically shown she's interested in the way he looks.

I am probably missing something else here since I saw the movie just once. What "sacrifice" are we talking about? He came back to Asgard with Mjonlir and all? Wasn't that exactly what he wanted?

But I could see Pepper and Stark's attraction even when they didn't act like attracted to each other. That's true acting.

Again, I loved the humour in both movies, neither was superior or inferior for me.

I'll have to insist that RDJ's improvisation is better than mispronouncing Mjonlir once and again.

I actually meant to type action scene's which Thor definately beats out IM on. But again, I found Hemsworths Thor a much more compelling character than RDJ's Stark. And of course RDJ would be better, he is a hardened veteran when it comes to acting, Hemsworth is still a newcomer, which made the latters performance all the more impressive for me.

Well, for a newcomer Hemsworth did good. But RDJ is who masters comedy and carisma here, let's not fool ourselves. In any case Hiddlestone proved to be a better actor than Hemsworth.

But yes, Thor's action - as I said earlier - had great action. That's where Thor wins for sure.

I think meant that IM2 was doing badly on the poll. I too found IM2 very dissapointing at it seems a lot of others did as well.

Like me.

 

[Frank Castle77]

My refreshing change comment was basically on the whole fantasy/mystical side of the Marvel universe was finally being introduced into these films and to show that these kind of films arent always just tech and science, not that theres any thing wrong with it being a huge comic book fan but you know where I'm coming from it's nice to have some change once in a while.

 

[El Payaso]

My refreshing change comment was basically on the whole fantasy/mystical side of the Marvel universe was finally being introduced into these films and to show that these kind of films arent always just tech and science, not that theres any thing wrong with it being a huge comic book fan but you know where I'm coming from it's nice to have some change once in a while.

I agree then. Asgard was a fantastic moment.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

He was when he defies Odin in one scene and starts a war and 5 minutes later he doesn't even reply to this little girl when she lectures him in earthly manners.

To be fair, Odin had just put Thor in his place and in the hospital scene he was shown to be not so mighty anymore, that was the start of his character change only and Portman's character only furthered this.

Now, sure first love sight can be - as in this case - such a gratuitous way to stablish something immediately without any further motivation or development. What's in Portman's character to attract Thor so instantly? We never know, and we probably shouldn't care because it's a superhero movie and those need love interests, period. I didn't see the "connection," I was merely informed there was one.

IMO you could see the connection as soon as they laid eyes on each other, I noticed it immediatly on my first viewing of the movie and subsequent viewings have made my view of this scene a lot stronger.

I was being kind. I'd call it below average. There was no personality there.

Different strokes I guess, she came accross as very attractive to me in both looks and personality.

No small roles, just small actors. Darcy was a crappy character anmd the actress did little to make it any worthy (no, mispronouncing Mjonlir is not funny and doing it twice just make it worse).

I'll admit, the part you bracketted made me laugh, I didnt mind the character being there at all.

I'm glad Thor could see she was smart because other than informing us that she was some kind of scientist (and she wore glasses or something), I didn't see anything intelligent about her. And "not about looks"? In the movie it's specifically shown she's interested in the way he looks.

I think initially they are attracted by looks, both of them, they were both strangers to each other in every way possible, and then they learn more about each other and quite often opposites attract.

I am probably missing something else here since I saw the movie just once. What "sacrifice" are we talking about? He came back to Asgard with Mjonlir and all? Wasn't that exactly what he wanted?

By destroying the rainbow bridge he almost guarantees he will never see Jane again, Loki even screams this at him as he is doing it but he still does. Thats a big sacrifice and more so than anything Stark does in IM.

But I could see Pepper and Stark's attraction even when they didn't act like attracted to each other. That's true acting.

I dont think much acting was involved, Paltrow has even admitted in interviews she was extremely attracted to RDJ.

I'll have to insist that RDJ's improvisation is better than mispronouncing Mjonlir once and again.

I wont disagree, but that was hardly indicative of the humour throughout the whole Thor movie.

Well, for a newcomer Hemsworth did good. But RDJ is who masters comedy and carisma here, let's not fool ourselves. In any case Hiddlestone proved to be a better actor than Hemsworth.

I just simply thought both Hiddlestone and Hemsworth were superb, I was invested in both performances.

But yes, Thor's action - as I said earlier - had great action. That's where Thor wins for sure.

Definately, the action in both IM movies was severly dissapointing, especially the 2nd movie.

Like me.

And me, the more I watch that movie the more I dislike it.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Just in case people were being misled by the poll or simply can't read, that's a poll for which film is 'best'. IM 2 having a low score simply means people prefer other films over it. I would vote for IM 2 near last in order of favourites, but it's still right up there in my favourite comic films.

And I think IM 2 stands up much better now as a film, since the Thor/Cap blanks have been filled in. It works as a very nice Marvel connecting film, putting all the pieces in place. I think it sets up Tony's character nicely, laying groundwork for his alcoholism and personality flaws to create problems for the Avengers.

 

[DIrishB]

Captain America for me, then Thor, Iron Man, Incredible Hulk, and Iron Man 2.

Hopefully the Avengers ends up towards the beginning of that list once its out.

 

[Squaremaster316]

Out of 5 stars

IM: *** (Same pacing as Batman Begins, but with more watered-down elements)
Hulk: **1/2 (Worst. Female. Supporting. Character. In. Comic. Book. Movie. HISTORY! Oh, and also, the script was mediocre)
Thor: **1/2 (Too rushed and underdeveloped for a proper origin story, supporting cast ranged from lackluster, to annoying and pointless)
CA: * (Flat origin story, shallow love interest, poor supporting cast)
IM2: * (Numerous bad plot elements, lackluster villain, bad cliches, terribly directed scenes, bad comedy)

 

[jaqua99]

Out of 5 stars

IM: *** (Same pacing as Batman Begins, but with more watered-down elements)
Hulk: **1/2 (Worst. Female. Supporting. Character. In. Comic. Book. Movie. HISTORY! Oh, and also, the script was mediocre)
Thor: **1/2 (Too rushed and underdeveloped for a proper origin story, supporting cast ranged from lackluster, to annoying and pointless)
CA: * (Flat origin story, shallow love interest, poor supporting cast)
IM2: * (Numerous bad plot elements, lackluster villain, bad cliches, terribly directed scenes, bad comedy)

lol judging by your sig, is there a bit of bias here?

 

[Son of Coul]

Hahaha