Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase I Discussion

[RIPPA 29,823]

Trying to see if this works better

 

For discussion of the Phase I movies

 

• Iron Man
• The Incredible Hulk
• Iron Man 2
• Thor
• Captain America: The First Avenger
• Marvel's The Avengers

For those who are like me and are behind on the movies - I can safely post here.

 

And no one cares but my order of these is. MY LIST HAS NO CREDIBILITY~!

 

Avengers

Iron Man

Thor

Iron Man 2

CA: 1st Avenger

Hulk

[Brian Fowler 13,560]

Well you have the right ones at the top and bottom.  Your middle is, indeed, lacking that sweet sweet credibility. 

[RIPPA 29,823]

Well I know you and Mark are the only people who like Cap.

You two are fools. FOOLS~!

[Brian Fowler 13,560]

It was basically a perfect movie...

[Bustronaut 4,221]

Hey!

[RIPPA 29,823]

Hey!

 

I don't know if this world is ready for a movie that you and Fowler agree on

[JLowe 75]

I'm with Rippa on that order, I think, although I'm not sure if I actually really liked Thor or it was just better than I expected.

[Eivion 2,799]

So where are we supposed to discuss things like Agent Carter and Agents of SHIELD?

[RIPPA 29,823]

So where are we supposed to discuss things like Agent Carter and Agents of SHIELD?

 

I forgot about them - let me create a Marvel TV Thread

[Niners Fan in CT 13,174]

I think the only one that outright sucked here was Iron Man 2. I liked Hulk despite Norton being a terrible Bruce and J liked Cap despite them fast-forwarding through the war in two minutes.

[Victator 4,635]

Well I know you and Mark are the only people who like Cap.

You two are fools. FOOLS~!

I love it.

[BillThompson 70]

It was basically a perfect movie...

 

It was pulp Americana storytelling at its finest.

[BrianS81177 2,977]

The biggest shame of the phase 1 movies is that Hugo Weaving got some bug up his ass about appearing in comic movies, because for my money he's been the best villain in a marvel film to date.

[Big Fresh 4,541]

The biggest shame of the phase 1 movies is that Hugo Weaving got some bug up his ass about appearing in comic movies, because for my money he's been the best villain in a marvel film to date.

...you can't be serious.

[BrianS81177 2,977]

Totally. Loki was great in the first one, but has gotten watered down since. 

[twiztor 785]

Cap is my personal favorite of Phase I, but i'd still watch Avengers over it 8 out of 10 times.

 

Iron Man 2 wasn't bad, but is clearly the worst of all Marvel movies not including the word "Hulk".

Ed Norton's Incredible Hulk movie wasn't as bad as the first, but that doesn't make it good either.

[Big Fresh 4,541]

Totally. Loki was great in the first one, but has gotten watered down since.

And Winter Solider? Alexander Pierce?

[BrianS81177 2,977]

Winter Soldier would be my number 2, but he didn't get enough screen time in my opinion.

[Matt D 10,684]

Tim Roth pre becoming a monster was the best.

[pipGofern 489]

I love Cap, too. I'd put it right with IM, Cap 2, and Guardians as the best of the Marvel movies right behind Avengers. I don't agree with a lot of Fowler's movie opinions but I totally agree with his sentiment that it's a damn near perfect movie. My only complaint is that they had to end with the ice treatment to get him into Avengers because I could've easily watched 1 or 2 more WWII Cap and his Howling Commandos flicks.

 

My oddball Phase I opinion has always been Hulk. The vast majority hate it but I loved it - I should probably admit here I'm a child of the 70s who grew up asking my mom for ripped shirts because I was obsessed with the Bixby Hulk show and the fact Norton made an unapologetic tribute to that show probably biases me a bit.

 

But, yeah, I'd definitely rank Hulk above either of the two Thor movies. Neither of the Thorii were bad or anything, just outside Hiddleston they seem really paint-by-numbers.

[Bustronaut 4,221]

Now that I have a giant TV, I've decided to seek out Lee's Hulk on Blu-ray and see if the effects hold up as well as I thought they had on my old TV.  This was brought to mind by The Norton Hulk being on EncoreHD, and its Hulk looked *terrible*

[Casey 5,439]

Why would the Ang Lee Hulk look any better than a Hulk movie that came out years later?

[Bustronaut 4,221]

ILM

[Casey 5,439]

....Point taken.

[Bustronaut 4,221]

So, I rewatched HULK with a more critical eye, and the Hulk himself stands up wonderfully. 

 

The plot, not so much.  Having all the key players tightly interconnected screams of conservation of characters to save money, a hallmark of pre-2K comic adaptations.  Also, there are times when it looks like Ang Lee has just discovered the "filters" menu on Photoshop/After Effect/Premiere.  I *did* like how they build from dark, obscured shots of the Hulk to full figure, brightly lit shots, as if transitioning from older comic book adaptations to a new era, which, sadly we had to wait another 6 years for.

 

So congrats to ILM for making a digital character 12 years ago that they could reuse in the next Avengers movie without tweaking it.  In fact, at points the Hulk looked more realistic than Eric Bana.

 

Hulk is still *much* better than The Incredible Hulk, which is an adaptation of an adaptation.  We've all seen Multiplicity, we know what happens to clones of clones.