The more "cosmic" side of Marvel is arguably an area where the comic book publisher is less successful... even wild, star-spanning creations like Galactus and the Silver Surfer only really work when they're in Earth's orbit. Consequently it's a sensible move to fully introduce this element of its world by encasing it in comedy, a move which enabled it to cross over to mainstream audiences and become a sizeable hit. Whereas heroes like Iron Man and Thor were not as well-known to the general public as Spider-Man, the Hulk, or many of the rival DC characters, Guardians of the Galaxy took this a stage further by taking characters almost completely obscure and elevating them into cinematic A-Listers.
Yet while sufficiently engaging and containing enough charm to get by, there's no real element of humour in Guardians that doesn't appeal solely to the lowest common denominator. A rude Jackson Pollock joke aside, this is a film content to appeal to as many people as possible, with glib, "easy" humour that never threatens to tax its popcorn-chomping audience. It's a much-loved Marvel movie by many, and no one would ever expect Marvel to adopt Wildean wit as part of its arsenal, but it's not a favourite here.
Doctor Strange is a decent entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and Benedict Cumberbatch, while not particularly imaginative casting, brings together one of the better performances of a Marvel hero. However, there's the constant signs of the character being slotted into the "product" framework, rather than the film being slotted around the core character. While Dr. Strange began as a very arrogant surgeon, he wasn't the quip-a-minute Tony Stark xerox that's sometimes presented here, as the wacky hi-jinks featuring a cloak with a mind of its own go against the surrealistic, darker and downright odd moments of the comic book.
This is Dr. Strange by the way of Inception, not a true representation of the comicbook on screen, and the climax does strain towards green screen overload. The use of mild bad language in Marvel films is also always slightly troubling considering how many younger fans they attract, but if ever a Marvel character didn't need a couple of "assholes", "shits" and a "bullshit", it's Dr. Strange. While these films exist to make money more than they ever exist to make art, the somewhat cynical recreation of one of Marvel's more esoteric, aloof characters into standard Hollywood fare can't help but be troubling. A character like Dr. Strange should be an original, not following a carefully formulaic path laden by others. Dr. Strange is a okayish, maybe even good film, but it could, and should, have been a great one.
The film also brings up the subject of race-swapping characters. Although there are instances of Marvel characters being changed to minorities onscreen (perhaps most famously with Johnny Storm in a 2015 Fox Fantastic Four movie, along with pretty much every single character in Spider-Man: Homecoming, but also here, with Baron Mordo played by Chiwetel Ejiofor) this is not generally regarded as being a bad thing as minorities are underrepresented onscreen. However, the opposite also occurs here, with the male Tibetan Ancient One of the comics being played by Tilda Swinton. Such matters are perhaps too complex to go into in any great detail in a short overview, though the oddest example of race swapping in a Marvel movie arguably occurs in Thor: The Dark World, which presents audiences with a black elf.
A very tonally odd film, as an unnecessarily violent exploration of vivisection meets humour that wouldn't amuse anyone above the age of ten years old. It's symptomatic of the entire problem with the MCU, in that the films are pushed towards a 12A rating by unneeded graphic content, including swearing, yet only contain humour that the children too young to see them would appreciate.
To go forward, Marvel either has to get back on board with something more family-friendly, or have humour a little more sophisticated than just putting "Drax says something dumb" into the script. There's also concern over the increased usage of CGI over recent Marvel films, escalated to such an extent that it's layer upon layers of unreal imagery.
If all this sounds negative, then this is still a watchable (albeit overlong) film. The combination of glibness and overtly sentimental platitudes can grate, but RSC actor Chukwudi Iwuji details a fine performance as the High Evolutionary. It's just a shame that so many of Marvel's wilder concepts are thrown away on "humour", with the intriguing possibilities of Counter Earth just delivered as for cheap laughs.
There's definitely bits to pick out and enjoy in Thor: Love and Thunder, but the problem is, it's two films bolted together. The tale of a man driven insane by the death of his infant daughter and Jane Foster dying of terminal cancer, it's a bad mix with Taika Waititi's hi jinks attitude to the franchise. In particular, Hemsworth's increasingly wearying "himbo" version of Thor is even more ridiculous when he gets back together his astrophysicist girlfriend, highlighting how truly silly the "I'm not very bright, ha ha" joke version of the Thunder God is.
So, it's a bit of a mess, though does have slightly more purpose than the trailer (which contains scenes not in the finished movie) seemed to suggest. Christian Bale manages to straddle the line between his usual intensity and Marvel's more... "operatic" (or, if you will, hammy) excesses. The somewhat esoteric character of Eternity is left even more unexplained than it ever was in the comics, and it's a tonal mess, but somewhere in there is maybe half a decent film...
Thor: Ragnarok is a full out comedy, with one of the range's more sombre characters placed through a post-Guardians filter and coming out the other side almost completely unrecognisable from the character we'd seen before, more Kevin Beckman from Ghostbusters than Thor. Although this ranks higher than either of the previous Thor movies, they have to be more respected for their earnest attempt to stick to the core character. It's not that superhero movies can't have jokes, more that the quality of the jokes on display here are so easy and lowest common denominator. There'd be no point in opting for intellectual comedy in a PG-13, but here a variety of mugging, pratt falls, slapstick, dick jokes and "the Devil's Anus" make up the runtime.
Director Taika Waititi claimed that around 80% of the dialogue was improvised, and it shows - but not necessarily in a good way. While actors in other Marvel movies have clearly gone off script (most notably Downey Jr.) here the entire film is punctuated by stifled grins and ad-libs. By turns funny and gratingly indulgent, what makes it all jar a little is that so many momentous events take place within it. That Loki's plans after ruling Asgard only amounted to having Matt Damon play him on stage can be forgiven in a film where everything is "just a laugh"... but far less forgivable is that the death of Odin, the destruction of Asgard and Thor being half blinded are more or less played for "yuks".
Such a curmudgeonly review of a light-hearted, inconsequential film may seem to be taking comic book movies way too seriously, though an example of the level of wit can be gleaned by the fact that arguably the best line in the movie - "he's a friend from work!" - was suggested by a child who had visited the set. This is not to speak ill of the child (who was visiting as part of the Make-A-Wish foundation) but just to point out that the rest of the cast and crew couldn't come up with material as good as that suggested by an infant. This is a film where scatalogical humour is the order of the day, and the old "ass guard" joke actually finds its way into a Marvel movie.
Cate Blanchett does well as Hela, the Goddess of Death, though while the movies must be allowed to plough their own path away from the source material, the truly anal may recall the Lee-Buscema story where the character is killed, but has to be brought back to life in order to restore the universal balance of death itself. Such logistical musings don't seem to matter here, and the film is, if nothing else, bright, pacey and watchable. Such slights are not to suggest that Marvel Comics must be taken as a sacred text, or that the only humour allowed in the films should be high brow, but more to acknowledge that there's more to the world of comedy than Thor talking about having seen the Hulk's penis.
Since his first appearance in Civil War, Tom Holland's solo outing as Spider-Man was much antipicated. As a final film, it's one that fulfills all its promise... yet somehow still manages to disappoint all the same. While Holland is endlessly likeable and his chemistry with Robert Downey Jr. (reportedly the reason why he got the job) is immense, it's once more a unique character pushed in an unnatural direction to fit a "formula" in Marvel's cookie cutter production line.
It perhaps doesn't matter that Peter gives up a lot of his independence in this film to pander to the box office appeal of a guest-starring Iron Man... what's more important is that Peter's academic intellect and neuroses are shaved off to make a crowdpleasing event with little in the way of depth. The superhero genre is a much-maligned one in films, and, while it's perhaps never quite produced its own caped Citizen Kane, there are some worthwhile entries making up its number. For Spider-Man particularly, then, while perhaps not high art, the Sam Raimi movies (even the much-slated third entry) and the underrated Andrew Garfield films had more to them than this effort.
Presenting a Peter Parker without a neurotic side is not the complaint of a comic book purist; it's a fundamental part of the character. Superhero films make necessary changes to appeal to certain demographics. While readers of the Lee-Ditko era may get distracted by all the race-swapped characters and a Vulture who appears much younger and hirstute than on the page (though Michael Keaton's 65 years would be about right, he remains impossibly youthful), such things are mere decorative deviations from the four colour page. There's even a case to be had that the Vulture is improved by getting extra background and motivation.
Peter's characterisation, however, is not just a trivial decorative element... while having the powers of Spider-Man in real life would be tremendous fun, Spider-Man was never about celebrating his own lot, but being ravaged by guilt; the retooling of the character even appears to have omitted Peter being responsible for his Uncle's death, something that underpins the entire character. Here Peter learns that "with great power comes great responsibility" only by being a slapstick klutz and having Tony Stark treat him like he's spent the entire film's duration forgetting the safe word. It's a fun, watchable movie, high up in this list, but at its centre is something really quite hollow.
The original Guardians of the Galaxy was a watchable but overrated movie, and consequently this likeable sequel saw over-hyped audiences largely disappointed. It was still popular, but not to the tune of the original, although the box office take was even greater. It perhaps doesn't help that the narrative is so unfocussed, though it pleasingly goes even further into "cosmic", with Watchers, Celestials and Ego the Living Planet (the latter sadly not fully realised as he is in the comics, which would have worked in the Guardians' more comicbookish world.)
With a less focused, more esoteric plotline, it lacks the simplistic appeal of the original, even if baby Groot is undeniably cute. Yet the film is also bloated, an extra 15 minutes on top of the original's already-overlong runtime causing it to drag in spots. Some of the humour - particularly with Drax - tries a little too hard, and the Stan Lee cameo shows that less is definitely more. But it's a more worthwhile picture at heart, even if the pruning of at least half an hour would have made it, if nothing else, more clear in intent. The final dissolution into pure sentimentality might seem an odd move, though it typifies the broad, very Americanised culture at the heart of these films.