Weakest MCU film?

[metaphysician]

It boggles the mind that this film and Far From Home have higher critics ratings than Infinity War.

It makes sense to me, in that both are much more conventional movies that can be watched as single standalone movies. Infinity War absolutely does not work that way, it is a sequel and climax movie to not just one prior film but the entire prior franchise. That just isn't how movies work, normally, and is not at all how critics expect to examine and experience movies. Inevitably that means a certain percentage of them will downgrade it, either from a subconsciously hindered experience, or from a conscious belief that movies *shouldn't* work like that.

( Also, Ant-Man and the Wasp is a quite good movie, and better than its own prior entry, with a really awesome mutual redemption dynamic underneath a heist comedy. *cough* )

 

[Drizzle]

I'm still surprised how well-reviewed Ant-Man and the Wasp was. If there was a film that could've easily broken the 'Fresh' status of the MCU, it would've been that one for me.

It's that Paul Rudd charm.

 

[yanksno1]

Iron Man 2: Easily the worst MCU movie in my opinion. Weak story line (if there is one), bad "viilins", and incredibly rushed. Poop jokes, really?

Captain America: The First Avenger: Right behind Iron Man 2. You have this brand new Super Soldier and you use him to sell War Bonds? I hated they gave the Hydra soldiers essentially laser guns, that totally took me out of the movie with it being set in WWII. If the Tesseract would have been one big powerful weapon, I would have been perfectly fine with that.

 

[Shuri]

Antman and the wasp. At least thor 2 had Loki and iron man 2 and incredible hulk were entertaining.

 

[KevTravels]

The first two Thor films were incredibly weak.

 

[henzINNIT]

I'm seeing a lot of Ant-Man and the Wasp in here. I consider it on the lower end of the MCU as well but the more I think about how low stakes of a film it is, the more I realize that was done purposely. I can understand why people aren't crazy about it but I still find it to be entertaining. My biggest issue with it is that Michelle Pfeiffer isn't in it much at all. I do find it amusing that for a mostly low-stakes comedy, its sequel is setting up Kang the Conqueror of all people.

It being low stakes is not a complaint I have. The first was too. The problem is how thoroughly ordinary the film is. It's a comedy that looks like a comedy. None of the imaginative use of scale and scope is there. The first film had multiple sequences designed to exploit what is cool and interesting about Ant-Man's power set. I vividly remember him bouncing around in a bath tub, among the giant ants and grass of a garden. Fight scenes in a suitcase, a scale model, and on train tracks in front of Thomas. Edgar Wright's fingerprints. He's incredibly good at action/comedy because he is always doing both at once at a high level. From what I can see, Peyton Reed is not. The sequel is mostly a sequence of 'look at this thing that's big now' gags with a child sized Paul Rudd one in the middle.

 

[NHawk19]

Iron Man 3 is the weakest IMHO. Extremis is never referenced again in the movies. Tony blows his suits up then is like meh I was just kidding. The Mandarin is so poorly handled they had a one-shot showing the real Mandarin is still out there. And Now Shang-Chi will actually show him. I think the only thing that came forward from that film is the kid at Tony's funeral.

Hulk I liked more than IM3 but it's another one that you don't need to watch to get the MCU. Sure Ross shows up in Civil War, but if you never watched Hulk you'd be fine given how they brought Bruce into Avengers. I put this above IM3 though because of Ross' involvement.

At least The Dark World sees a few more concepts added to the MCU like the aether. There's also a full call back to that film in End Game with Frigga. You also see how her death impacted both Thor and Loki in subsequent films.

Iron Man 2 may have been a bridge to Avengers but again at least it set up concepts, put Rhodes in the Armor, and introduced Black Window. Was whiplash great no, Justin Hammer was though, but there's a lot you can build on from this film. Also you can really see Tony's character evolution from this film to where he is by the time the Sokovia Accords come around.

 

[metaphysician]

So, silly question time: Why is "weak" used as a synonym for "self-contained", as if the primary virtue of a movie is not what story it tells or how it develops its character, but which toys it puts in the toybox for future movies? That kind of thinking is exactly what maimed the DCEU, killed the Dark Universe, and just finished killing Mortal Kombat.

 

[henzINNIT]

Connective tissue is fun but obsessed over way too much. For instance, it seemed like WandaVision offended a certain number of fans because it didn't live up to fan theories and expected cameos and world-building. This franchise has succeeded by paying off more than setting up.

 

[NHawk19]

So, silly question time: Why is "weak" used as a synonym for "self-contained", as if the primary virtue of a movie is not what story it tells or how it develops its character, but which toys it puts in the toybox for future movies? That kind of thinking is exactly what maimed the DCEU, killed the Dark Universe, and just finished killing Mortal Kombat.

Because "weak" is a broad and subjective term especially in the sense of belonging to this franchise. It comes down to how you want to consider the parts vs the whole.

• Is the film weak because on it's own it's a mess of a film?
  
• is it weak because of the special effects?
  
• is it weak because the story it's telling isn't self contained?
  
• is it weak because it brings nothing to the bigger story?
  
• is it weak because in the larger context characters actions seem to contradict their future other outings?

When it comes to this franchise "weak" could mean a lot of different things, because the sum of it's parts continue to make the franchise better than the parts themselves. However the franchise is now taking a lot of those elements introduced and "weaker" outings and making them more important. Or dare I say stronger connective tissue. While that doesn't improve the movie per se it does up it's relevance as required watching material and improve the pay-off for watching that film.

Every time we talk "weak" it ends up being basically rank your bottom 5 and say why you put them there.

 

[Closerframe]

Thor: The Dark World because despite the monumental character growth of both Loki and Thor, the film is so forgettable and fails to make you care about the threats. Coupled with the fact that it easily has Marvel’s worst villain.

 

[Appfanincaaland]

I haven't read through this whole thread, so I have no idea how others are defining "weak", but I look at the word weak and don't necessarily see it as synonymous with bad. Therefore, I would go with The Incredible Hulk. It is not my least favorite nor did I think it the "worst". It is just a film I've seen once and have never given a second thought to watching again. I cannot remember anything in it other than the moments often included in montage type videos. Even the very few MCU movies I hate have something strong about them that have compelled me to give them another watch. TIH I just remember as blah.

 

[metaphysician]

*cough* So, what would constitute a "non-joke" Hulk story, *other* than Hulk being the strongest and using his strength to beat everyone? Or more precisely, what would constitute a good Hulk story that isn't about his strength?

 

[BoredGuy]

Had to go dark world

Outside of the boat scene with Thor and Loki, and Friggas funeral, that movie was completely useless. Underdeveloped villain, too much of the lame ass human characters. Even the portal hopping final battle was not nearly as creative as it shouldve been.

Runners up would be the two mentioned above, as well as Captain Marvel, which I didnt think was bad per se, but it was bland and unimaginative and wasted the concept and the time setting

 

[Another_Fool]

Objectively speaking, probably Iron Man 2.

Subjectively though it's Iron Man 3 for me, by a lot. Even my least favorite MCU films there are things I love. For example IM2, I love the Justin Hammer and War Machine stuff. Thor Dark World, I love anything with Loki in it. Not the case with Iron Man 3. I either do not care or hate things they did in the film and have had little to no reason to ever revisit it again. Even the action scenes did nothing for me. So yeah IM3 is a film I pretend often doesn't exist.

 

[DyeLorean]

It being low stakes is not a complaint I have. The first was too. The problem is how thoroughly ordinary the film is. It's a comedy that looks like a comedy. None of the imaginative use of scale and scope is there. The first film had multiple sequences designed to exploit what is cool and interesting about Ant-Man's power set. I vividly remember him bouncing around in a bath tub, among the giant ants and grass of a garden. Fight scenes in a suitcase, a scale model, and on train tracks in front of Thomas. Edgar Wright's fingerprints. He's incredibly good at action/comedy because he is always doing both at once at a high level. From what I can see, Peyton Reed is not. The sequel is mostly a sequence of 'look at this thing that's big now' gags with a child sized Paul Rudd one in the middle.

You perfectly articulated why Ant-Man and the Wasp was such a disappointment to me. It lacked originality. (There's an interesting parallel that I just realized with Honey, I Shrunk the Kids and the sequel Honey, I Blew Up The Kid. The second just wasn't as interesting).
Even in Endgame with a shorter screentime Ant-Man managed to do several cool "heist" stuff.

 

[henzINNIT]

You perfectly articulated why Ant-Man and the Wasp was such a disappointment to me. It lacked originality. (There's an interesting parallel that I just realized with Honey, I Shrunk the Kids and the sequel Honey, I Blew Up The Kid. The second just wasn't as interesting).
Even in Endgame with a shorter screentime Ant-Man managed to do several cool "heist" stuff.

It's been so long since I've seen 'Honey I Shrunk The Kids' but so many images still exist in my head. The first Ant-Man definitely had similar vibes at times.

 

[Green Goblin]

Thor The Dark World, nothing in it works at all except Hiddleston's Loki.

Even Iron Man 2 has it's moments.

 

[Dweet]

Thor the Dark World. Its boring. Iron Man 2 and Incredible Hulk all had a few things that were good. Dark World only really had Loki.

 

[Drizzle]

I will say that Endgame did retroactively make The Dark World a little bit better but it couldn't do a thing to help out its villain situation, which I thought was the biggest problem with the movie. Malekith is really at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to MCU villains.

 

[Dweet]

Yup Malekith was so boring. Eccleston looked kinda bored too. Pay check role.

 

[psylockolussus]

Its crazy but in a good way that I haven't seen a MCU movie as good as Thor: Dark World and Iron Man 2 in a long time.

It'd been interesting to see once a MCU film got a rotten RT rating and if that would align to people's perception of being the weakest Mcu movie.

And yeah Endgame did make TDW better, like DOFP made X3 better.

 

[Solid]

The weakest out the bunch is Thor: The Dark World. I personally enjoyed both The Incredible Hulk and Iron Man 2.

My least favorite would be probably Captain Marvel or Iron Man 3 as i skip both in every re-watch of the saga, they're filler films.

 

[Drizzle]

And yeah Endgame did make TDW better, like DOFP made X3 better.

In different ways. Endgame makes you think back on Frigga's storyline in TDW in a more thoughtful way and it actually makes her death sadder. DOFP makes X3 more bearable because it's been retconned at that point and thus you don't have to be angry about the creative decisions made in that movie like a lot of fans were pre-2014.

 

[Doctorwho12]

Black Widow