none of the MCU movies come close to Nolan's Dark knight series

[Mr.Marion]

Sure, Guardians of the Galaxy was very good and my favorite marvel movie, but that whole universe is pure cringe, especially the Avengers.

They found a way to make box office record breaking films, good for them, but aside from that, they don't come close to the art that nolan's dark knight films were. everything, cinematography, plot, directing, actors, etc.

[PNGwynne]

I don't agree. None of those films is particularly rewatchable, even with Ledger's noteworthy performance. The third installment was dreck.

[drquest]

The first two Nolan Batman movies were fine, third one was a train wreck.

A lot has been written about the formulaic Marvel movies over the years. It's formulaic because they defined and refined the superhero movies. I'm still amazed we have such an even playing field with superhero's residing on earth, and all of the cosmic and quantum realms that have been presented to us. It opens up so much for the future movies and the audiences are embracing it.

The MCU is my happy place, and has been for several years now at the movies.

[Brue]

I Echo the thoughts of all of the responses so far. The first two were good movies. The third one was terrible. I have gone back and re-watched all three. The first was not nearly as entertaining the second time around. The second was a good re-watch. The third was even worse than I remembered it. Marvel movies have given us 22 film so far. At least three of those maybe five are as good or better than the (first 2) Nolan Batmans. All of the MCU films work better than the third Nolan Murphy. Even Iron Man 3 was better oh, and it was a bad movie.

[Hedji]

Hey, it's your opinion that matters, not anyone else's. I've learned that unpopular opinions on the internet, no matter how articulately stated, no matter how loudly yelled, won't change anyone else's mind. At best, you might find someone who agrees with you.

So enjoy what YOU like.

But now you know how I feel when I yammer about how great the Phantom Menace is.

[WannabeMego]

Hey, it's your opinion that matters, not anyone else's. I've learned that unpopular opinions on the internet, no matter how articulately stated, no matter how loudly yelled, won't change anyone else's mind. At best, you might find someone who agrees with you.

So enjoy what YOU like.

Perfectly Said & I agree 100%...unless the post was meant to entice a reaction...then you get what you asked for.

[PNGwynne]

That's true--it's an opinionated thread receiving opinionated replies, all fairly brief. It's certainly not personal. And I've been here long enough to recall many members liking the DK trilogy. I'm a Batman fan and was not one of them--but I think many MCU movies are mediocre, too.

I liked GOTG, Ant-Man, and a few others. I loved the first Cap movie. My personal criterion of "success"--aside from specific artistic qualities which inform it--is, am I willing to purchase it on home video and rewatch it?

[monitor_ep]

I did not like the Nolan Batman run do to the fact that Nolan said he did not like the Batman mythos and wanted to avoid most of the comic book stuff. There were some other stuff he said that just got me madder. From what it boiled down to he should have done pulp style characters instead of comic book characters.

[Earth 2 Chris]

I love the first two Nolan films, but they gradually become decidingly NON Batman films. Nolan was a bit ashamed of the source material. The MCU films are NOT. These are comic books brought to life. And since they are adapting that source material, are ultimately more successful.

Chris

[palitoy]

More importantly, my dad can beat up your dad.

[Nostalgiabuff]

agree with most of the responses. I liked the DK trilogy but don't really have any interest in rewatching any of them, even though I do have them on disc. I have watched and rewatched most of the MCU movies many times and still enjoy them. to me, there are really only a few MCU movies that are not really re-watchable....IM3, Black Panther and maybe Thor the Dark world

[hedrap]

It really comes down to the core of each. Marvel is high drama. That's what Stan was after, that's what everything was built on, so that's what works. When Marvel deviates from it, you get dreck like Ang Lee Hulk or Trank FF. For as much as the Ultimates book influenced the aesthetic, they ended up making a billion by following Stan and Jack into soap opera fantasy dressed as sci-fi.

So Fiege, who was less of a comic fan than Nolan, lucked into a gig on X-Men and saw a lot of material to mine in Marvel. Faithful to the source material is bogus. If it was true, where was Death or Adam Warlock in the Infinity movies? He was a teen of the Spielberg/Zemeckis 80's era and Favreau and the Russo's were comic fans of that period. It's a great convergence of people who shared a similar mindset. That's why Whedon didn't work. He's an angry nerd who wants to be revered like Stan Lee. He had no interest in adapting the Avengers. He wanted to be known as the guy who co-equally created it.

The problem for WB/DC is these are characters not created in unity like Marvel. DC heroes each have different fathers and all of it jammed into a universe. Nolan, like Burton, got this and realized you can only expand the Batworld to what makes sense and the JLA really doesn't. Imagine Bernthal's Punisher in Endgame and he's leading the Avengers.

Nolan's problem is the same as Snyder and Burton. They want to be authors of a movie and not commercial directors. When Galt and Tale of Two Cities or Silent German Expressionism is a person's influence for a Batman film, they're lost in their own heads. It's the opposite of the Russo's who are TV directors with no discernible directing imprint, but they're solid for Marvel because they grew up reading comics and are great with actors and ensembles.

[Earth 2 Chris]

Faithful to the source material is bogus.

I strongly disagree. When you are bringing in storylines and Easter Eggs from the comics left and right, leaving out a few things like Warlock do not make you unfaithful. When I can sit in Endgame and the comic panels and covers that inspired the moments in the film flash in my mind...how is that not faithful to the source material?

Chris

[Brue]

That's true--it's an opinionated thread receiving opinionated replies, all fairly brief. It's certainly not personal.

yep. i never understood the reason behind posting defense of opinions about opinions. I see it often. it always perplexes me.

[hedrap]

I strongly disagree. When you are bringing in storylines and Easter Eggs from the comics left and right, leaving out a few things like Warlock do not make you unfaithful. When I can sit in Endgame and the comic panels and covers that inspired the moments in the film flash in my mind...how is that not faithful to the source material?

Chris

First of all, I've never argued for a 1:1 translation. That's never been my thing. But the ambiguity of "faithful" when MCU - Winter Soldier, Ultron, Civil War, Infinity - takes liberties and gets credit for being "faithful", while Nolan does not when by MCU standards, Batman Begins is as faithful to Year One or the summation of story parts that TDKR was. Leaving out Adam Warlock is not a small change, just like not killing Cap in Civil War wasn't. Movie Thanos and TDKR Bane are both heavily altered from their comic counterparts.

I agree about comic panels, but at the same time, that would make Zach Snyder the greatest comic-movie director, ever.

It is about concept and the heart of what makes a character that character, but then that's also subjective. Outside the Ultimates, when was Thor ever portrayed the way he is on film? When was Stark this big of aOther than a few moments in the first Avengers, they've done nothing with Hulk which is core concept.

What we're actually referring to is the spirit. The more MCU moved away from Ultimates/2K storylines and towards 80's Marvel, the better things got. Conversely, the more WB focused on Alan Moore and Frank Miller, the worse things got because what they made was purposely antithetical to what made the DCU.

The main thing I respect about Endgame is how they retconned everything to have consequence because the Russo's knew the MCU really had no weight of actions for the entire span. I think what Marion was getting at is consequence is where Nolan's Batman worked so well. He and Goyer spent a good deal of time flushing out the idea of escalation, and that did not exist in movie sequels before Begins/TDK. TDKR had the same theme until WB wanted changes made.