Marvel Studios: 11 Years and 21 Movies Ranked

With Avengers: Endgame just about to hit theaters, I and everyone else obsessed with movies whether professionally or otherwise have decided to look back to the beginning in 2008 and rank and talk about the 21 movies which have been released prior to the epic finale of phase 3 and of the entire Marvel story line thus far.   The feature films in the MCU could arguably be the most consistently entertaining, crowd pleasing group of movies ever released by a studio, but that doesn’t mean they are all equal nor that they don’t have their share of issues.

The secret to Marvel’s success and consistency, in my opinion, is a deep understanding of their characters and themes.  While they have had an issue giving life to their villains at times (and certainly not all the time, there are a few great villains in their canon), they otherwise give us three dimensional, exciting, witty people we can get deeply invested in.  Where they fail is in lack of stakes and in being so true to visual and storytelling formulas that all their films look and feel far too similar, creativity gets lost to what is seemingly studio mandate.

From their worst to their best, here is how I feel about the pre-Endgame MCU feature films.

21.  Thor: The Dark World (Taylor; 2013)


Underwhelming writing, dull cinematography, and a cast which doesn’t seem to want to be there make for Marvel Studio’s worst film by a rather large margin.

If any of the MCU films can be called downright bad, it would be Thor: The Dark World. The villain problems extant in much of the MCU is at its worst here with a villain so basic, so lacking in any personality or distinguishing traits that he’s nearly impossible to remember for most.  The heroes aren’t much better with Chris Hemsworth not being used to the best of his ability, yet, and obvious lack of chemistry between most of the cast, and supporting characters who don’t seem to have much of a reason to be in the film beyond exposition and snark.  Even Tom Hiddleston, the best part of the first two Thor movies, is somewhat wasted here as Loki is only in half the film and his character is written inconsistently.


20.  Iron Man 3 (Black; 2013)


Much like Thor: The Dark World, Iron Man 3 is a mess of a movie with dull villains and an unnecessarily complicated story line.  The exploration of Tony Stark’s PTSD after the events of The Avengers is a fantastic idea, but the idea is poorly executed and diluted by too many unrelated subplots.

Iron Man 3 does take its fair share of risks, something I wish more Marvel Studio’s films would do, but in this particular case those risks don’t pay off and can be actively aggravating.

I admit to this low of a ranking being subjective.  I did not see Iron Man 3 until many years after its release by which time I had seen a few MCU films which already grappled some with Stark’s PTSD and so the impact wasn’t as great as it could have been had I seen the films in order.  I decided to not take that into account in my rankings, however, as this demonstrates one of the many ways personal experience can impact one’s investment into and enjoyment of art.

19. The Incredible Hulk (Leterrier; 2008)


The Incredible Hulk is sort of the poster child for what makes a bad MCU film.  It understands the character of its protagonists well enough, but it again has dull villains (yes, that will be said a lot throughout this list), is predictable, takes no risks with its story, and outside of its action sequences has little creativity in its technical aspects.  The tensions between Edward Norton and the studio are also well known, and almost certainly played a part in The Incredible Hulk‘s lack of inspiration.

William Hurt’s role as General Ross was arguably the movie’s highlight, and his return in later films was appreciated.  Hulk – not a smash.

18.  Iron Man 2 (Favreau; 2010)


Iron Man 2 is undeniably a mess.  It touches on Tony Stark’s irresponsibility and alcoholism, but not to the degree necessary for those themes to contain any weight.  Its story line is a little all over the place trying to grapple with more conflicts and character arcs than its running time can reasonably allow.  And, its action sequences are arguably the hardest to follow in the entire MCU.

It does have two often forgotten saving graces, however, in Mickey Rourke and Sam Rockwell as well thought out, well acted villains.  Mickey Rourke famously hated working on the film and refuses to return to the MCU, which is too bad because his professionalism still allowed him to give a captivating turn as Whiplash, but the fact that Rockwell has never returned as Justin Hammer is a little bewildering as he was excellent as well.

17.  Thor (Branagh; 2011)


Thor’s origin movie suffers from the same problems as its sequel where the cast chemistry is concerned, but has the advantage of Hemsworth being allowed to flex is comedic muscle a bit more and Tom Hiddleston has a much larger role.  The film does suffer from pacing issues, and the fact that Hiddleston and Hemsworth are separate for the majority of the film means we are stuck with Hemsworth and Portman’s comedically bad rapport for most of Thor.

The screenplay does do an excellent job of getting the primary characters personalities down, Branagh’s direction does add a distinction most MCU movies don’t contain, and Hiddleston was so great that I believe he is the reason Rourke and Rockwell were all but forgotten about from Iron Man 2.  Thor has more positive than negative, but is still far too inconsistent and rocky to be considered among even the more moderate movies of the MCU.

16.  Captain America: The First Avenger (Johnston; 2011)

Captain America - The First Avenger - 2011

By the time the first Captain America movie came along, Marvel Studios had a plan and it showed.  However, it did not have a complete formula and that also shows for better or worse.

When Chris Evans was chosen to play Captain America the general consensus was that he looked perfect for the part, but since he was just coming off of a short run as The Human Torch in the not so great Fantastic Four movies many were dubious as to his being able to give the role the calm charisma needed.  We know now that he perfectly embodied the role to the same degree Hugh Jackman embodied Wolverine, Ron Perlman did Hellboy, or Ryan Reynolds Deadpool.

The rest of the film is not quite as great.  Cap’s relationship with Bucky is near perfect, but the rest of the characters don’t fare quite as well.  His chemistry with Peggy is certainly better than Thor’s with Jane, but it’s still not stellar, and Hugo Weaving gives a so-so performance as Red Skull.  Overall, a solid, but slightly underwhelming entry into the Marvel canon.

15.  Ant-Man and the Wasp (Reed; 2018)


Ant-Man and the Wasp is a film which may epitomize both the best and the worst parts of the MCU in one film.  On the one hand, it understands the majority of its characters intimately, nailing their relationships with one another, the positives and negatives of their personalities, and what their talents and abilities allow them to accomplish on both a practical level and in a fun for the audience way.  It’s humorous without devolving into pure camp, its action is creative and exciting, and its dialogue witty but light and unpretentious.

However, it suffers from having a truly underwhelming and underwritten villain in Ghost (which is particularly annoying here since the last few Marvel films had gotten past this flaw), and it’s primary plot shows that stakes in Marvel films are not just light, but non-existent.  It’s a running gag that people never die in the comics, but the Marvel films could fix that since actors have contracts and while Spider-Man in the comics has to survive for decades to sell books, the movies not only don’t have that problem, they can’t even if they wanted to.  So, to have the Marvel films constantly resurrect their dead protagonists lowers the stakes when we know it isn’t ever permanent, to have a plot which revolves around essentially bringing a character back from a point of no return epitomizes and exacerbates that.

14.  Avengers: Age of Ultron (Whedon; 2015)


What Marvel having a cinematic universe allows it to do better than any series of films before or since is have large event films with dozens of characters and gigantic action scenes which don’t need the usual exposition and set up since this has already been done in other movies.  Personally, I enjoy these large event movies more than the smaller films (spoiler alert as to which films are going to be toward the top of this list) as they allow me to see something on an epic scale done in a manner few if any films prior to the MCU have been able to accomplish.

Avengers: Age of Ultron most definitely has the touch of its director Joss Whedon with witty dialogue, a light tone which uses self awareness and verbal prestigitation, and death to evoke an emotional reaction.  Unfortunately, these very qualities undercut the film’s tone giving us a villain more snarky than scary (though not dull, at least), a film with emotional beats more manufactured than earned, and an action movie which depends more on what the characters say than what they do.

Add to all that inconsistent tone and many scenes which have little to do with the main story and break the narrative flow, and that makes Avengers: Age of Ultron the worst of these large event films.

13.  Ant-Man (Reed; 2015)


One thing Marvel did in its second phase of films is start branching off into different genres than straight comic book action dramas.  In Ant-Man we got Marvel’s first heist movie with all the fun and large supporting cast heist movies generally entail.

Going with the Scott Lang version of Ant-Man rather than the original Hank Pym version was a bit inspired as it allowed Ant-Man to be portrayed by Paul Rudd with his “aw shucks” brand of hilarious charisma rather than an Ant-Man who is incredibly intelligent but otherwise bland as Pym is in the comics.  It also created a far more interesting character dynamic than Pym’s origin had in the printed version.

Unfortunately, Ant-Man was severely hampered by a plot far too similar to the other Marvel origin movies, including the usual lackluster villain, and the comic, light-hearted tone means the film didn’t even have high stakes tension to lean on for excitement factor.

12.  Dr. Strange (Derrickson; 2016)


The fact that a movie as solid as Dr. Strange is this far down the list speaks to why the Marvel Cinematic Universe has struck such a chord with general audiences.  We’re not even halfway through the list and we’re to films that aren’t just good, but have positive qualities which far outweigh their negatives.

Dr. Strange is nearly perfectly cast, it has trippy, creative visuals, it separates the magic of the Marvel world from the fantasy magic we are used to from traditional fantasy films, and it is written with a deep understanding of its characters without being afraid to change their more problematic elements.

All that being said, Dr. Strange still has horrible villain problems, the only interesting factor involving the villains is how the ultimate enemy is finally defeated, and is predictably formulaic to an extreme.  Benedict Cumberbatch is perfect for the role, and Ejiofor as Mordo showed a lot of promise as a future villain, so I have to believe that the second solo Dr. Strange film will be superior.

11.  Spider-Man: Homecoming (Watts; 2017)


The only entry in the MCU not distributed by Disney/Marvel Studio’s, Spider-Man: Homecoming is a solid entry for Sony, one of the best of the Spider-Man films, but not quite good enough to break into the top 10.  Sony made the very intelligent choice to not make Spider-Man: Homecoming and origin story, figuring most likely correctly that its audience already knows this story and more than a little sick of it.  Another aspect of Spider-Man: Homecoming which demonstrates a lot of intelligence on the part of its creators is a phenomenal cast including the rare for Marvel movies fantastic villain Vulture played by Michael Keaton and Tom Holland as Spider-Man the first person to take on the role who is excellent as both Spider-Man and Peter Parker.

The very personal story line of Spider-Man: Homecoming allows for one of the most intimate character studies in a Marvel movie to date of both Peter Parker and Adrian Toomes (Vulture) but it also makes for much smaller stakes than we are used to in an MCU film.  I do like the fact that this means for his first MCU feature we get a “friendly neighborhood” Spider-Man, I don’t like that this makes for a movie which has very little to say beyond its surface.

Still, what we get is enough to make it a strong entry in the MCU, the second best live action Spider-Man film after Spider-Man 2, and while its themes of working class man who gets screwed over by the powers that be are shallow, they are enough to make for a bit more than just surface level investment.

10.  Thor: Ragnarok (Waititi; 2017)

Film Box Office

I’ve stated that Marvel has never made a truly bad movie, except possibly for Thor: The Dark World, but past this point we go beyond mediocre and good into exceptional.  Which if you have already calculated the very simple math means I believe that nearly half of the output of Marvel Studios enters the exceptional category (though, I don’t believe any approach anything resembling a masterpiece).

Thor: Ragnarok is the first Thor film to recognize and utilize Chris Hemsworth’s talent for comedy to its fullest extent, which makes sense since it is directed by Taika Waititi the New Zealander responsible for What We Do in the Shadows.  What doesn’t make sense, yet absolutely works anyway, is that this comedic tone is taken in a film which focuses on gladiatorial combat, the end of the universe, and the goddess of death.

The first Marvel Universe film which is a straight-up comedy also deals with its darkest subject matter (until we get to Infinity War) but Waititi somehow manages to balance the light tone with the heavy stakes without turning to cynical dark comedy.  It’s an amazing feat, and I hope that Waititi and Marvel Studios can somehow find a way to work together again sometime down the line.

9.  Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (Gunn; 2017)


This was perhaps the most difficult film for me to place on this list as it does the thing I love most in a film better than any other Marvel movie, and that’s use the fictional and the fantastic to grapple with a theme relevant to reality.  In Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2‘s case its using superhero space opera to cast the light from a semi-warped mirror onto the dysfunctions present in most every family on Earth.  It sheds that light primarily onto those with “daddy issues”, but it also tackles sibling rivalry, being overly attached to a parent, and issues prevalent in foster families.

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 also has the best cinematography of any MCU film.  Somehow, Gunn managed to get away with more than just the standard practical but farthest away from anything which could be considered art cinematography of the other Marvel Studio’s films and gave us a few scenes, in particular the opening credits scene of all things, which have a definite artistic personal style to them.

Even though GoG 2 does two things better than any other MCU entry, though, I can not rank it any higher than this because it suffers from the same villain problems as most other Marvel films (though not quite to the usual degree) and its comic tone never finds a true balance and is often downright distracting in it inability to just let a tender emotion sit and stew with the audience.

8.  Black Panther (Coogler; 2018)


There is one reason and only one reason that Black Panther isn’t far enough up on the list to make it the best of the Marvel solo origin movies, and that reason is that starting with Iron Man we had already seen this film 5 times before in the MCU.  Man lives morally questionable lifestyle, said lifestyle threatens man’s life, man makes better choices and acquires superpowers simultaneously, man meets his villainous mirror image, man overcomes villainous mirror image in final battle to make up for past self is the Marvel solo movie formula, each one having one variation on the theme, and Black Panther is no different.  But, this no different is the 6th time it was no different.

Beyond that, though, Black Panther is brilliant.  There’s the obvious fact that it highlights a continent and a culture which too much of the world is largely ignorant of.  While T’challa may not be the first black superhero to lead a film, not even the first time for a Marvel movie, Black Panther is the first superhero film to have a very predominantly black cast and, in my opinion even more importantly, crew.   It has a solidly African American message, too, which may be handled with the subtlety of a jackhammer, but not every movie needs to be subtle, and it being primarily a big budget, epic scale, superhero action movie I can definitely forgive it not making its audience discover its themes.  In fact, that was absolutely the right way to go in a film of this sort.

Black Panther is also the very rare Marvel movie which has a villain more interesting than its hero.  Its costumes won it an Academy Award, every aspect of its production design was incredible, and even its soundtrack was excellent and original.  Except for its way too derivative plot, Black Panther is top notch superhero origin movie material.

7.  Captain Marvel (Boden & Fleck; 2019)


Captain Marvel is far from a perfect movie.  It tries to do too much in its just over 2 hour running time to maintain consistency.  Its tone is a little all over the place, its humor is inconsistent, and its the rare Marvel movie which neglects protagonist characters as well as its villains.  But, this all occurs because Captain Marvel is an incredibly ambitious, risk taking movie – a quality far, far too rare in Marvel films – and those risks make for a unique experience among the MCU, and while that uniqueness occasionally is discordant, it more often adds up to a very powerful experience.

The risk that always works is its overtly, and also sometimes not so overtly, feminist themes.  Wonder Woman was an inspirational film, and it was wonderful to see a well made movie about a woman with godlike powers finally do well with both audiences and critics, but Captain Marvel not only has all those same qualities, but it also intelligently scrutinizes the way women are treated by their male peers (lest anyone think that means this movie “hates men”, may I point out her closest companion throughout the movie is a man).

But, what sets Captain Marvel just ever so slightly above Black Panther in my esteem is the fact that it finally breaks the MCU solo origin movie formula.  Rather than show a man overcome his past both literally and metaphorically, we get to see a woman gain power through her own heroism, then realize there is nothing wrong with fully embracing that power despite what the men around her whisper in her ear.

6.  Avengers: Infinity War (Russo & Russo; 2018)


This is the ultimate example of what the Marvel Universe was created to do.  It would be impossible in any other circumstance to make a movie with dozens of protagonists all with established personalities, motivations, and backgrounds.  Even a television show, which in many ways the MCU resembles more than any other series of films, would take multiple seasons to establish a cast of characters as Marvel has, and a television series wouldn’t have anywhere near the budget a feature film has.

Avengers: Infinity War‘s genius is that it does even one better than would seem necessary, though.  Not only did Marvel studios have the patience to wait for 20 films so that it could tell a story so epic in scale without having to use the majority of its running time for exposition and character development, it wrote its villain as its protagonist so that we still do have that exposition and character development for a singular character for which it’s most important.  This also has the not incidental side effect of making it so Avengers: Infinity War does not have the MCU’s usual villain problem.

Avengers: Infinity War is not the smartest, most emotional, most artistic movie in Marvel Studio’s canon.  But its epic scale, particularly where the sheer number of characters is concerned, has arguably never been matched in any film before.  It does that without sacrificing cohesion or audience investment, and that’s damn impressive.

5.  Iron Man (Favreau; 2008)


The movie that established the MCU is still one of its very best.  Prior to 2008, Iron Man was at best a third stringer superhero.  If you said the name people had heard of it, though it’s just as likely it was because of the Black Sabbath song as the comic character, but they probably couldn’t say much more.  As someone who collected comics for a while in my teen years, I still had never bought a title in which he was a main character. But, post 2008 Tony Stark is a household name just as much as Clark Kent or Bruce Wayne.

The secret to Iron Man‘s success (and Dr. Strange‘s, and Thor‘s, and Ant-Man‘s, and Black Panther‘s, and The Incredible Hulk‘s if it can be considered a success) was that the story came from the character and his growth and experience rather than the other way around.  Tony Stark isn’t a man reacting to circumstances beyond his control, he’s engineering his own fate and everything that happens to him from his accident, to his change of heart, to his battle with his former partner comes naturally as an extension of who he is.

Iron Man is not just the first of the Marvel movies, it’s still the best of the origin movies and it’s the movie that defined what the Marvel formula was to be (at least until Captain Marvel – we shall see what happens from here).

4.  Captain America: The Winter Soldier (Russo & Russo; 2014)


Captain America: The Winter Soldier has as much, if not more, in common with The Bourne Identity as it does with other superhero movies.  This, the second Captain America movie, was the first of the Marvel movies to play around with genre by giving its audience a political spy thriller instead of straight comic book action/adventure.  Its success both with audiences and with critics meant it wouldn’t be the last Marvel film to incorporate different genres into its story and tone.

What made the success of The Winter Soldier more surprising than perhaps any other factor, was its directors.  Prior to this movie, Joe and Anthony Russo were known for directing comedies.  Television situation comedies for that most part, at that.  Many thought prior to The Winter Soldier‘s release that the heads at Marvel Studios had lost their marbles and had made their first major, possibly studio ending, mistake.  What the heads at Marvel had actually done was demonstrate their genius, or at least their luck, in a grander fashion than ever before.

The Winter Soldier is a fantastic film on its own merit even if none of the other Marvel Studios films had ever existed, but it ended up being more as much of the storyline still going on derives from this movie.  The first Captain America movie defined his character, but this is the movie that defined his place in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and thus the path of the MCU in general to a very large degree.

3.  Marvel’s The Avengers (Whedon; 2012)


The first big Marvel event movie had huge expectations partially due to the quality of the films leading up to it, partially due to Joss Whedon helming the project, and partially just from pure hope that it could be as much fun as the idea seemed.  It not only met those expectations, it exceeded them and became one of the top grossing movies of all time as well as a critical success.

It was made in the days before Marvel Studios forced the same visual style on all of its directors, and so had some truly fantastic visuals including a long, unbroken shot during its final fight scene which has been equalled in artistic and technical merit only by the opening credit sequence of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 mentioned earlier.  It also had Joss Whedon’s style tattooed all over it from its witty dialogue, to its subversion of both character and genre, to its use of humor and drama when least expected to heighten the impact of each.

Marvel’s The Avengers created the template for the huge event movie of today, and remains one of its best examples still.

2.  Guardians of the Galaxy (Gunn; 2014)


Guardians of the Galaxy was Marvel’s greatest risk not only because it was a property which not even die hard comic book nerds had much familiarity with let alone the majority of its potential audience whom had never heard of it at all, but also because it had to be an origin story for an entire group, not just a single person, and could thus very easily have lost focus. done a disservice to its characters, or more likely both for a movie this large in scale with this many moving parts.

It not only pulled off giving us five fully fleshed out, engaging, charming protagonists within an epically scaled space opera along with just as fully formed side characters, Guardians of the Galaxy and director James Gunn created the tone which would propel forward not only the rest of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but which would also be copied by movies such as Baby Driver, Suicide Squad, Atomic Blonde, and many more.

It broke the mold on Marvel movies and action movies in general, created a new one which everyone wanted to get their hands on, made household names of characters whom nearly no one had heard before, and did it all in a movie seemingly cram packed with too much material for anything to get the attention it deserved, yet somehow was actually perfectly paced.  Its only real glaring problem was, say it with me, the villain, whom even by Marvel standards was especially bland.

1.   Captain America: Civil War (Russo & Russo; 2017)


Like Guardians of the Galaxy, Captain America: Civil War somehow managed to have its cake and eat it too by being both one of Marvel’s epic event movies and a piece which was personal in scale by focusing more on character than on plot.  It has the large scale action and fight sequences with many characters and moving parts to keep your heart racing and your eyes glued to the screen, but at its heart is a movie about duty, friendship, and responsibility and what those values mean to different people.

Captain America: Civil War‘s secret to success was to focus not on the accords nor the assassination attempt, those were merely excuses to move forward the action, but on Captain America’s friendships with both Bucky and Tony Stark and the lengths to which he’ll go to protect those people and ideals which mean the most to him.

Everything great about any individual Marvel movie is present in Captain America: Civil War, except for the occasional brilliant camera work.  It has relatable, engaging characters who change and grow throughout the movie, it takes risks in making those we’ve always seen as heroes before into the villains here, it has some of the greatest action sequences ever put into a Marvel movie which means they are in the running for greatest of all time, period, and it does all this while also having themes with far more depth than all but a handful of the other Marvel films and it introduces two characters brand new to the MCU on top of all of that.  If Marvel ever manages to top this movie, it will only be because they somehow managed to add art to their formula, because aside from that missing factor Captain America: Civil War is a near perfect comic book movie.


Spider-Man: Homecoming (Watts; 2017)

Spider-Man: Homecoming is called such because it is the first Spider-Man film since Marvel originally sold the rights to the character and those surrounding him to Sony way way back at the turn of the millenium.  Since then Sam Raimi has made three movies featuring the character being played by Toby Maguire, one of them actually really good, and Andrew Garfield took on the role twice, and was meant to play him a third time, but Sony realized they didn’t really know what they were doing.  So, while Sony did not give the rights to Spider-Man back to Marvel, they did turn to Marvel for help, and the result is an agreement in which Sony retains the rights to produce and distribute the Spider-Man solo films, but Marvel gets to include him in their cinematic universe, Sony gets to include the Marvel Universe in their films,  and Marvel oversees the writing on the solo films so that the character and the world he is in are done justice.  Spider-Man has left his bubble created by Sony and has come home to the world he began in.

We got to see a bit more than a glimpse of Marvel’s take on Spider-Man last year in Captain America: Civil War. and regardless of what you thought of the film as a whole, though it was well received, you were looked at really funny if you didn’t agree that Tom Holland was a fantastic choice as the actor to portray the wall-crawler, and that the writing of the character was spot on.  Now we get to see how Tom Holland does when he has to take the spotlight for more than twenty minutes, and when given the chance to anchor an entire story surrounding him, Tom Holland shines even more brightly.


Spider-Man: Homecoming is more than just a superhero movie, it is also a coming-of-age character piece which uses the superheroic conflict as the means through which our teenage protagonist grows into, if not manhood, then at least his next stage in life.  Tom Holland gives us a spot on Peter Parker and Spider-Man, showing his vulnerability, his awkwardness, horrible luck, and his friendly but nerdy nature as Peter Parker, then changing into the wise-cracking, blustering superhero when the time comes as a means to hide what is really a lack of confidence.  This is a facet of the character that has been missed in all the earlier cinematic incarnations, the fact that his jokes are really just a way of covering up his inferiority complex, and it is fantastic to finally see it realized on the big screen.  Another part of the character that we apparently needed Marvel on board to see is his remarkable intelligence, and that we get here, too.  Only his youth and inexperience keep Peter Parker from being one of the preeminent brains in the universe of Marvel comics, and we see that in Spider-Man: Homecoming, as well, both his genius and the inexperience that holds him back.

A character piece is best when there is more than one strong character, however, and definitely get quite a few here.  I could write quite a bit about the crew of high school friends that surround Peter in his everyday life or about Marisa Tomei’s unique but great take on the now not-so-decrepit Aunt May because they are all very well written and acted, but instead I’ll tell you that Michael Keaton as Adrian Toomes a.k.a. Vulture is not only a very well written and well rounded foil, I believe that he is the best villain yet in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (though, not quite the Netflix shows).  While he may not have near the charm of Tom Holland’s Loki, he makes up for that in being a real person. This is the first Marvel villain with real motivations, real ambitions, and isn’t just a stereotyped cartoon that is around solely for the good guys to overcome.  Vulture in the comics is not only a bad villain, he is one of the worst villains ever put to page in 4 colors, however he is a good foil for the very early Spider-Man still learning his powers.  Spider-Man: Homecoming realizes this, modernizes the character, makes him far more threatening than just an old man in a suit that can fly, but not so threatening that The Avengers would take much notice of him. While this would probably be enough to make a good foe for Spider-Man’s first solo outing, they go the extra mile and make him a character with motives we understand and can even see ourselves going along with under the right circumstances as well as a character who challenges the teenage Spider-Man’s intelligence and ethics, allowing Peter Parker to grow as a person as well as as a superhero.


But, if you go to a comic book movie to see action and characters are just a nice bonus, you still will not be disappointed.  The film spreads out its action set pieces at excellent intervals and all of them show off the agility, strength, intelligence, and big mouth of our favorite costumed arachnid.  Special effects have advanced a bit since Andrew Garfield’s turn in the red and blue suit, and an awful lot since Tobey Maguire’s day, and we can get a real sense of the speed Spider-Man has, as well as the limitations in scenes such as a hilarious bit in which Spider-Man finds himself in the countryside rather than the city and realizes he can’t swing on his webs to the rescue, like never before.  The action bits take on true creativity as Spider-Man and Vulture learn from one another over time and learn to counteract the regular strategies the other uses, making for action that relies on the intelligence of the pro and antagonist as much or more than on their superpowers.

Spider-Man: Homecoming is not content to be just a good action movie and character piece, though, it also is finally a well realized coming of age story.  It’s not a movie about beating the bad guy as much as it’s a movie about Peter Parker growing into the man he needs to be.  This is going to be a journey made over multiple films, so I don’t think this movie is meant to show us the end of his personal growth, but the true catharsis at film’s end is not that Spider-Man beats the bad guy, but how, and what he learns from this in his life as Peter Parker.


The film does have some flaws.  The fact that it is in the Marvel Universe and the writing was overseen by Kevin Feige added a ton to the film, but the way Iron Man and Happy Hogan were included in the action was awkward.  Happy is given a role of Peter’s watchdog, which seems odd enough on its own, but then he performs these duties by acting as if he doesn’t want them.  Tony Stark himself, also, only seems to be in the movie as less a mentor and more a harsh critic until the end when he suddenly turns 180 degrees without our being shown the change of heart.  This all adds up to a really awkward and unnecessary tie in to the rest of the MCU which probably would have been best left out and merely hinted at.  They also do something odd with an incredibly iconic Spider-Man character, nearly as iconic as Spider-Man himself, that makes for a character who may as well be someone else entirely, just with the same name, and while we will have to wait and see how that plays out in future films, it just seems like a really unusual decision in a film that otherwise manages to nail nearly every major part of the Spider-Man mythos.


Final verdict:  Spider-Man: Homecoming finally brings us the Spider-Man from the comics to the big screen, and does so in a way that isn’t merely action packed, but also thoughtful and with characters as well rounded and authentic as you could hope for in a comic book movie.   I left the theater knowing that I had just seen the best portrayal of Spider-Man himself ever put on screen, but not sure if the movie itself was better than Spider-Man 2, my favorite of the previous Spider-Man films.  I decided that not only was it better, but that it was a great movie for all the same reasons, just that they took everything Spider-Man 2 did to another level.  Yes, I did say Spider-Man: Homecoming is a great movie, and therefore I wholeheartedly recommend it to all but the most ardent detractors of the modern superhero movie.

Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2 (Gunn; 2017)

In 2014, Marvel Studios took a pretty big chance, which ended up having a huge payoff, in bringing us Guardians of the Galaxy, a Marvel property which was largely unknown even to comic book fans, let alone those who had never picked up a comic in their life.  In Guardians of the Galaxy movie fans got a fast paced space adventure with incredibly charismatic characters and just the right amounts of adventure and humor.  It was the best “Star Wars” movie since The Empire Strikes Back (I went there).  Three years later, and the Guardians are back, minus Groot but plus Baby Groot, except this time we already know and love these characters and are familiar with their schtick and how they fit into the Marvel Universe, so can Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2 have the same impact as the original?

This time around, the characters are just as, if not more, charming as in the original.  Chris Pratt as Peter Quill (Star-Lord, man) is still the leader of the Guardians with Zoe Saldana as Gamora, his right hand bad ass assassin, Dave Bautista as Drax the overly literal Destroyer, Baby Groot voiced once again by Vin Diesel, and Sean Gunn and Bradely Cooper both working to bring weapons expert Rocket (don’t call him a Raccoon) to life.  Michael Rooker is also back as Yondu in an expanded role from the first Guardians of the Galaxy, and he deserves special mention as he and Dave Bautista are, in my opinion, the two true stand outs in the cast. Last time around, while the Guardians did ultimately end up as a complete group, there was still some definite pairing up going on with Quill and Gamora being one team, Rocket and Groot being a second, and Drax being the unfortunate fifth wheel.  This time around, the relationships are much more advanced with every character having quality time with each of the others and now very established ties to each other, making their interactions far more dynamic than the first time around – most of the time, but I’ll get to that in a few paragraphs.


The visuals are of the quality we’ve come to expect from Marvel, with very proficient camera work and excellent special effects even if neither is ever terribly inventive.  The art direction on display, however, is definitely unique.  We are shown that the galaxy is a diverse place with equal parts ’60s psychedellia, dystopian grunge, and medieval retro pastiche making up its reaches.  The settings don’t always make a lot of sense, even within the confines of the story, but they are always creative and eye catching.  Even the opening and closing credits hold onto those creative and eye catching visual elements, with the opening credits being one of the most visually dynamic pieces in the entire film and a great way to open things up.

The script is well done with its dialogue being its stand out element.  The plot does have a few pacing issues unlike the first film, and the methods used to move it along can get a tad clunky, but overall it’s a story that does its job of drawing you in and raptly holding your attention, so even the few lulls aren’t obvious in the moment.  The dialogue, though, is the best I think has ever been written in a Marvel film.  Every single line is full of character, is crisp and entertaining, and this is by far the funniest Marvel film made to date with quip after quip, joke after joke, I was laughing so hard I had tears in the corners of my eyes for Guardian of the Galaxy, Vol. 2‘s entire running time, and I have never really found Marvel films quotable before despite how entertaining they are in general, but I’ve found myself wanting to quote many lines from this one, virtually biting my tongue even as I write this.


This, however, leads me to the films largest flaw, and the flaw large enough that it keeps me from ranking it among Marvel’s best.  Can a movie be too funny?  The jokes are non-stop, one after the other, often verging into straight on slapstick territory, yet the film has a lot to say about familial themes.  Every character in the film deals with daddy issues on some level, with the exception of Baby Groot, and we see the Guardians and their various acquaintances playing the parts of a family unit in the film and all that entails.  It’s the point of the movie, showing when a family is at its strongest and when it can hold you back.  Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2 has a lot to say about family, and it could say it well, except that it undercuts every serious moment in the film save one with a joke.  Sure the jokes work, but Gunn and the cast did not know when to let the humor go for a minute and let a poignant moment sink in.  I will say, though, that the part of me that’s more analyst and less film fan finds it fascinating that the movie’s main weakness is also its greatest strength.

To those who are wondering how this movie specifically plays into the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and whether it can be seen without knowing much about the rest of the movies Marvel has created, Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2 is practically a stand alone entity.  The only references to other films in the Marvel canon are to the original Guardians of the Galaxy, and even those are more character references and not needed to understand the story going on here.  The future world building that goes on in most Marvel films also seems to be absent here, though it is possible they are just more subtle about it than is often the case and we will see ripples from this movie in future Marvel installments, but importantly even if that is the case it is never distracting nor even obvious.  Anyone can see this movie without having seen another Marvel film in their life and still enjoy it just as much as someone who has seen every Marvel Studios movie to date.


Final verdict:  Marvel films are always entertaining, they have yet to release an outright dud, and Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2, while not being one of Marvel’s greatest, is still excellent and continues the tradition of high quality we now have come to take for granted from Marvel.  While Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2 may take the humor a bit too far at times, it is still Marvel’s funniest movie to date, never, ever letting up on the laughs while also giving us plenty of eye popping action taking place in eye popping settings.  You will be entertained, and you may even gain a little insight into family while you’re at it.  Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2 is highly recommended by yours truly, go make Marvel and Disney even richer than they already are, they keep earning it.




Doctor Strange (Derrickson; 2016)

Scott Derrickson is a director that you probably have not heard of before unless you are a true horror movie aficionado.   Previously, he’s brought us The Exorcism of Emily Rose, both Sinister movies, and the film which probably got him this gig, Deliver Us From Evil.  That is not a resume you’d expect from the director of a Marvel film, and particularly not from someone with the unenviable job of giving us another origin story movie which has to not only keep up Marvel’s now high standards and introduce an entire facet of the Marvel Universe which up until now we hadn’t seen – the mystical, multi-dimensional world (Asgard not withstanding, as that’s been explained away by weird science).  Derrickson was handed a tall order with Doctor Strange, and he does an admirable, if not quite incredible, job.

If you’re not familiar with Doctor Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch), well that’s what the movie is about, so I won’t spoil much for you, but he is a character who was established in 1963 – the same year as the X-Men – and has been the Marvel Universe’s resident Sorcerer Supreme for most of that time.  His adventures center on keeping mystical enemies such as demons, powerful wizards, and extra-dimensional threats at bay.  The other dimensions of the Marvel Universe, as well as magic, are the most confusing and unfleshed out bits of their lore, as you are literally dealing with the infinite.  So outside of a few integral characters and places which appear time and time again, the writers really have no rules to follow or norms to work with.  It does mean limitless room for creativity, yes, but it also means there are no true anchors from which to work with a story.  In this, the film version of Doctor Strange, the other dimensions and extra dimensional threats are left just as vague as they are in the comic source material, but magic seems just a bit better explained, even if there is still a lot of room open for real explanation.


It’s just like Earth, except nothing like Earth, and you can shift the landscape with no real consequences, except there are consequences.  Makes perfect sense.

There is a lot of good to be said about Doctor Strange, far more good than bad.  The dialogue is witty, sharp, and still natural.  The characters are detailed, true to the source material, and are the source of the strong themes of understanding your connections to the world and where you fit within it.   The pacing is near perfect, there was never a time where boredom set in, nor where I felt I needed things to slow down for a moment. The acting was excellent on all fronts, with a veteran cast giving their all.  Then there are the absolutely astounding visuals.  This film is a thing of pure beauty, from the alien landscapes, to the magical effects, and to the way a certain magical relic is so incredibly well done that a non-living object with no dialogue ends up becoming one of the film’s most entertaining characters.

The writers and Derrickson do an excellent job of showing how magic works in this world, not by giving intricacies of how and why it works, but by showing what it is capable of, how it is learned, and differentiating between different areas of study and focus.  Making a relic is not the same as casting a spell which is not the same as travelling through time and space.  Trying to explain how these things work would be a losing battle, so the film maker’s are intelligent enough to know this and give us just enough to know that they do work, that they have rules, and there is even a sort of “science” to them.


It’s not the Pythagorean Theorem, but there’s still lots of symbols and symmetry.

Where the movie falls apart, is in its finale, unfortunately.  No spoilers, but in the film’s climax the excellent visuals give way to a hodge podge of undefined, low quality imagery.  The excellent rules set up suddenly don’t seem to matter in any meaningful way, and while the final solution is creative and nothing we’ve seen from a Marvel film before (and, does an excellent job at showing why Doctor Strange is considered one of the most intelligent people in the Marvel Universe), it is given no context to show why Strange’s plan would actually work.  This is the inherent problem with magic in a fictional universe, the authors can too easily make things too fast and loose, too “anything can happen”, and without hard fast rules we lose the context of true stakes.

Doctor Strange keeps up Marvel’s reputation for excellence.  It is a very well written, well acted, and visually astonishing movie.  It has meaningful things to say, as well.  It has some serious missteps, primarily in its finale and also in the way it keeps up the Marvel tradition of not so interesting villains (we need more Lokis, Kingpins, and Killgraves, Marvel), but overall it is a worthy, if not top notch, addition to the Marvel canon.

Rating:  7.8 out of 10





What the Marvel film universe is getting right, and the DC film universe is getting wrong.

They are some of the biggest juggernauts at the box office right now, the superhero movies from the two largest and most established comic book companies.  But, while it seems like Marvel is incapable of making a bad film, churning out crowd pleaser after crowd pleaser, DC (in conjunction with Warner) is releasing mess after mess garnering critical scorn and audience disappointment.  With superhero fatigue being a very real thing movie audiences are suffering from today, DC is going to have to learn how to step up their game if they want to keep their share of the big box office gross, and Marvel needs to make sure it doesn’t fall into complacency, as well.

Before starting with the article proper, it needs to be explained what exactly the Marvel and DC Cinematic Universes are.  The DC Universe really includes only the films Man of Steel, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, and Suicide Squad.  The Donner Superman films, the Burton and Nolan Barman films, and anything animated are not included in the current DC Universe, as the film Man of Steel was meant to start a brand new continuity which will branch across all further DC/Warner live action movies.  The Marvel Cinematic Universe includes only the films made by Marvel Studios (now owned by Disney).  Any properties owned by Fox or Sony studios are not part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which includes the X-Men franchise, the Fantastic Four movies, and any Spiderman movie made before Captain America: Civil War.  With that clarification, let’s get to it.



Getting the characters right in a comic book movie should be the easiest part of the job, you would think, and also the most important.  The superheroes of these universes have been written about for decades, and in a few cases, getting close to a century.  They are some of the most recognizable and iconic characters in human history, and their writers have more character lore to work with than has been written about any other fictional characters before.  This amount of character lore makes for a huge base for any writer and director to draw from, but it also means the character’s fans can know them as intimately as they know friends and family, and it is of utmost importance to these fans that their favorite characters are treated with respect.

There is nothing wrong with a new take on an iconic character, so long as the foundations that character is built on are respected.  There have been many interpretations of Batman and Joker in film over the years, most loved, a few not so much.  At the core of the character of Batman is dealing with childhood trauma.  In most modern interpretations of the character, it makes for a serious, driven man, who looks to be feared and respected more than loved or admired, and who will do everything he can to not allow the same trauma he’s lived through be inflicted on others.  Joker is his mirror image, bright and colorful where Batman is dark, but what’s most important to his character is the absolute glee he takes in making sure others suffer.  At Batman’s core is a serious protector and Joker is his maniacal, abusive mirror image.

All of the film Jokers before the current DC Universe took a different take on the character, Jack Nicholson’s was a crime boss, Caesar Romero’s a manic comedian, and Heath Ledger’s a psychotic social engineer, but all understood that at the core of the character was a villain who takes honest joy in others’ suffering.  Batman has had a great many more interpretations, the largest failure would have to be George Clooney who just saw (or more likely was just allowed to be) a comic book character and played the part for giggles.  Even Adam West’s comic interpretation at least had sanctity of life as a focal point for the character, going so far as to save a flock of ducks at great risk to himself in one of the character’s funnier moments.


Some days you just can’t get rid of a bomb.

Marvel gets this.  Iron Man in the comics is not not a wise-cracking, smart-ass, he’s actually normally rather intense and serious.  Yet nearly everyone loved Robert Downey Jrs portrayal of Tony Stark, and not only because he wasn’t a well known character.  There were many who loved the portrayal purely because of Downey Jr.’s charm, but even the most die-hard and skeptical fans of the character were brought to love this version of Iron Man and that is largely due to the fact that Marvel understands that as long as they portray him as a man struggling with, and creating more, personal demons they have the essence of the character intact and the rest can be more open to interpretation.

Thor and Superman are an interesting contrast to look at between the two film universes, as both are very similar characters at their core.  In Thor and Superman, we have to characters who are, at their essence, gods who strive for humility due to lessons taught to them by their fathers.  Both learn that despite their immense power, they are not better than humans, and Superman even goes so far as to take on a disguise that, if he weren’t good at his job, would be considered little more than a nebbish by most of his companions.  In the Marvel films, we see Thor learn this lesson then act upon it from the last part of his first solo film on.  The early Superman films also get this.  But Man of Steel and Batman v Superman give us a Superman who revels in his power, seeks to set himself apart from humanity, and is very comfortable with being judge, jury, and executioner.  There can be room for interpretation, there can even be a complete break of character so long as it’s for story reasons (such as Thor learning humility rather than starting life understanding power does not make one better), but there is no reason to believe this is the case in Man of Steel nor Batman v Superman since the issue of power not being the sum total of a man is ever addressed, in fact the opposite is often implied.

There are many other examples of this in the DC movies.  Batman is a casual killer, Harley Quinn is never a victim, Lex Luthor is a giggling idiot, and so on.  It’s strange, but it seems the people making the latest batch of DC films don’t understand their own characters.  Perhaps they do, and are just pandering to their audience by giving them what they think they will enjoy, but if that’s the case, then it is the audience they don’t understand.  Marvel understands both, and proves it over and over again with each new character they introduce.  Every major character, at least.


I’m just a really, really, really open interpretation.


Marvel released Iron Man in 2008, followed later that year with The Incredible Hulk.  One was successful, one wasn’t, but Iron Man was successful enough that Marvel Studios was confident enough to go ahead with their plan of releasing an entire series of films contained in one universe culminating with The Avengers.  These films were Iron Man 2, Thor, and Captain America: The First Avenger.  What these films all have in common is that, with the exception of the first Iron Man, they are now viewed as some of the least of the Marvel films in quality.  Marvel understood, however, that these stories were necessary in establishing the series of films they wanted to make.  It’s almost as if these five movies were nothing more than the exposition to the stories they really wanted to tell, but as even the most novice of writers knows, exposition is absolutely essential.

What starting with fairly typical action, superhero stories leading up to the first film teaming up characters from separate films allowed Marvel to ultimately do was create stories that didn’t need nearly so much character set up time and backstory to work as these elements had already been taken care of previously.  More intricate story lines with many more characters could now effectively be used within a decent time frame.  In Captain America: The Winter Soldier we didn’t need to be told where S.H.I.E.L.D. and Hydra came from, we already know.  We didn’t need backstory for Black Widow, we’d already seen that.  Instead we get to enter straight into the action, and we can use many more characters and plot hooks because we can relegate origin stories and backstories to the only the new elements, in this example’s case Falcon and The Winter Soldier himself, everything else has already been told and would just be a redundancy.

When DC started their universe, they did get this element right with Man of Steel, but after that with Batman v Superman and Suicide Squad they attempted to jump forward in the storytelling time line.  They give us many characters the audience has never seen in this particular universe before and act as if they are familiar faces we’ve been watching for years.  This Batman is older and experienced with a well established modus operandi and reputation, yet this is the first movie he’s been in.  The villains in Suicide Squad have been operating for a long time, but this is the first time we as an audience see them, and we have to learn about them through too short and very awkward vignettes early in the film rather than their being allowed to really breathe in their own feature film outings.

Then there are characters that we know feature prominently in the DC Universe but don’t have much time in the films themselves.  Joker doesn’t seem like Joker at all in Suicide Squad, but that could be because he only has minutes of screen time.  This Joker is more of a mobster than a happy anarchist, but perhaps that’s just the perception we get from his barely more than cameo status in the film.  Wonder Woman is the most fun part of the final battle in Batman v Superman, but why was she at Lex’s party?  When did she become a spy?  Why is she in Metropolis at all for that matter?  When characters are just shoed into a film for no reason other than for the film makers to get more box office gross because they put in a name people recognize with no actual character to go along with that name, all you end up with is a messy plotline.


Wonder Woman, known for her magic lasso, invincible bracelets, and invisible jet, is pictured here with…  a sword and shield?

DC seeing all the money to be had from a shared Universe decided to rush into the center of their story line, and it is not working.  They did not recognize that, even as iconic as their characters are, they still need a story to go around them.  Maybe we don’t need to see Thomas and Martha Wayne being shot yet again or the rocket ship landing in Smallville for the umpteenth time, though ironically, those two incidents we did get to see, but we do at least need to know what brought the characters to the state they are currently in and why this particular take on the character is different than others we’ve seen before.  Maybe there’s a reason Lex Luthor acts more like Joker than himself, or why Joker acts more like Two Face or Penguin, but without sufficient story, we are just left puzzling where this character came from.


This is less of a remark on something DC is getting wrong, and more of a something Marvel is getting right as a lesson to DC in the future.  Superhero films until the Marvel Cinematic Universe had been established were all more or less the same genre of film, action adventure with a focus on a comic book character.  This is why superhero fatigue is settling in with modern audiences as long before the first Iron Man hit the screens we’d already seen this genre of films many, many times.  When they were appearing once every couple of years or so, it could still remain fresh, but now with at least 5 being released every single year, and sometimes even more, the formula and the genre have to shaken up.

Marvel got this and started releasing films in their universe that weren’t straight comic book action adventure stories.  In Captain America: The Winter Soldier we got a spy flick very reminiscent of Cold War era espionage films.  Guardians of the Galaxy brought us the Marvel version of space opera.  Ant Man gave us the superhero Ocean’s 11 style heist flick, and on their Netflix television shows the bend the genre even more with crime dramas (Daredevil), neo noir (Jessica Jones), and blaxploitation (Luke Cage), with kung fu coming in the near future (Iron Fist).  This mix up of genres has kept the superhero stories fresh, and Marvel the least likely to suffer from general apathy toward superhero films prevalent in the public at large.

With only 3 films under their belts, so far, no matter how messy they may be I can’t fault DC for not innovating with genre, yet.  They need to establish their universe first, and they are already at fault for trying to do too much, too quickly so this isn’t another mistake that needs to be mixed into their formula.  But, looking forward this is something they must recognize.  Wonder Woman will take place during World War I, which could be an excellent opportunity for just this sort of genre mixing, and the DC Universe has Batman who is also called The World’s Greatest Detective.  It would be wonderful to see him actually earn that title in film for once with a good mystery movie.


The first superhero romantic comedy?

While DC is off to a very shaky start, they are only 3 films in, and they do at least have the strength of their more stylized visuals and incredibly iconic characters to work from.  Marvel is now pretty much a juggernaut which has yet to make a bad film and will likely not be stopped in the near future unless DC manages to spoil it for them by making people outright hate the genre instead of just wanting perhaps less of it.  Learn from Marvel, DC, but don’t necessarily imitate.  Marvel understands their characters, they take the time to set up their massive and intricate story line, and they aren’t afraid of shaking things up when need be.  You need to do all this as well, DC, and you also need to stand out as your own product, and not just more superhero movies.  It’s more difficult coming to the party second, but you do have the resources to make your own universe a thing people want to experience, and not just be a spoiler for Marvel Studios, you just need to use intelligence and patience to do so.


Captain America: Civil War (Russo and Russo; 2016)

Superhero fatigue.  It’s a made up term being thrown around quite a bit in movie discussion circles of late, and with good reason.  Since the turn of the millennium when Hollywood began to wrap its metaphorical head around the idea that comics aren’t solely for kids, the superhero film has been one of the most popular genres in the local multiplex.    It began with a Spider-Man and X-Men movie every few years, with some Blade and Hellboy thrown in for good measure.  Then Christopher Nolan put his spin on Batman and suddenly audiences could not get enough.  Before Nolan could finish his trilogy, Marvel entered the movie game with their very own studio, and they showed everyone else how it was to be done with their movies which managed to strike the perfect balance between serious and light-hearted, action and character, real world and fantasy.  But, 8 years later, with two Marvel movies every year, an X-Men film every couple of years, a Spider-Man film here and there, plus more, and all of these films trying to create their own shared universes to cash in on what made Marvel a success…  Fatigue is the perfect term for what audiences, even die hard comic book fans, are feeling.

So, leave it to Marvel to recognize this and bring their A game to make us forget entirely about that feeling of fatigue, and for nearly three hours, at that.  In Phase 1, Marvel introduced to us the characters that were to make up the Avengers, and then delivered those characters as a team in a wonderfully pulled off experiment that succeeded beyond most people’s wildest dreams.  Phase 2 of Marvel’s universe was a little less focused in intent, and a little more varied in quality, but it did manage to make the films a little darker in tone without sacrificing fun, and, for better or worse, also made their movie universe much more interwoven with nearly every film referencing other films.  Captain America: Civil War is the film Marvel has decided to use to kick off Phase 3, and what a brilliant start it is.  Marvel keeps learning from its mistakes and successes and has given us a film that does nearly everything right.  It shakes up the typical hero versus villain schtick, gives us incredibly creative and engaging action set pieces, keeps the light hearted tone which keeps the narrative from bogging down too much, and still injects themes which are meaningful for the audience to ponder.


You don’t have to ponder quite that hard, Vision.  This isn’t an Ingmar Bergman film.

While, per the title, this is a film that focuses more on Captain America’s (Evans) character than any of the others, this is really more of a third Avengers film than a solo act.  The only two major characters missing from the earlier films are Thor and the Hulk, and while they are missing we are introduced to two new characters to make up their space in the roster: Black Panther (Boseman) and Spider-Man (Holland).  All the characters get quite a bit of screen time, and it’s nice to see the Vision (Bettany) and Scarlet Witch (Olsen) get some much needed fleshing out from their lack of time in the less than stellar Avengers 2:  Age of Ultron, to see characters like Falcon (Mackie) and War Machine (Cheadle) finally really get their day in the sun, and to see Black Panther so well realized as a character before he gets his own movie next year.  The true show stealer here, however, is Spider-Man.  He’s in the movie for probably only about 20 minutes, but those 20 minutes will make you ecstatic to see the character finally done perfectly, and sad that Sony had the character whom they obviously didn’t quite understand outside of Marvel’s influence for so long.

There are nitpicks to be made about the film.  A certain subplot which seems to be important ultimately leads nowhere by the end of the movie, the acting could be better, and one or two of the film’s admittedly cooler moments come out of left field when you really think about them meaning they were there purely for fan service and nothing else.  But, these really are nitpicks.  Captain America: Civil War manages to avoid most of the fan service and future film set-up pitfalls that were so prevalent in the films they released during Phase 2 of their run.  What little pure fan service that was here, was at least justified in the fun factor, and there is next to no set up for later films here, really just a throw away line or two is the extent of it.


Maybe we avoided the pitfalls, but there are plenty of other types of falls in the movie.

Is Captain America: Civil War the cure for superhero fatigue?  Maybe not.   Marvel, and Fox and Warner Brothers, will have to keep working on that with every future movie they release.  But, when you talk about the best comic book movies ever made, this is one that will have to be brought into the discussion from now on.  If Marvel keeps releasing movies like this one, even if superhero fatigue does finally catch up to me, Marvel will be the one studio that will get my butt into the theater time and again after I’m done with whatever the other studios may be trying to force feed me.

Rating:  8.4 out of 10