MovieChat Forums > Black Widow (2021) Discussion > The 4 lowest rated MCU movies since Thor...

The 4 lowest rated MCU movies since Thor: The Dark World


In order of lowest rated first:

1. Captain Marvel
2. Black Widow
3. Ant Man & The Wasp
4. Black Panther

Even if you set aside The Avengers Movies, and The Guardians movies, that still puts them at the bottom of the pile under 7 movies with 5 white different male leads.

If all of those movies had been great, I would be welcoming the Marvel Diverse Universe with open arms. But the proof is in the pudding. Clearly when you prioritize check boxes over story telling and talent, then the product suffers.
Now to be fair, Ryan Coogler was clearly qualified for the job, and Black Panther just barely makes it on to this list. Part of the reason that movie sucked was also the terrible CGI at the end, which has to be firmly laid at the feet of Disney, who clearly didn't believe in the movie enough to allocate the proper budget. It is still striking that all 4 of these films sunk to the bottom though. It's hard to say why Ant-Man and The Wasp turned out not so good, I think Peyton Reed may just be a bit of a pedestrian director and was exposed by having to carry this one totally on his own.

But Captain Marvel and Black Widow clearly showcased what happens when you hire directors who just aren't qualified for the job. Cate Shortland was hand picked by Scarlett Johansson, and initially didn't even want to take the job. Imagine how many directors are clamouring over each other to get the shot at a Marvel movie?
Now I am not saying she is a bad director. There was clearly some good character work in Black Widow. But that it not enough to pull of this kind of movie. In an interview she said "the action scenes give the audience a break". That quote demonstrates she just does not understand the genre, and certainly has no love for it. A lot of the blame has been laid at the feet of Marvel for shoehorning in ridiculous CGI action scenes that clashed with the tone of the movie. But that is the fault of the director. Sure, Marvel has all of the machinery to handle the special effects and choreagraphy, but it is up to the director to integrate that into the story and give their unique flavor. I get the impression that Cate Shortland just had no interest in the action scenes and left it up to the studio to put it all together.
Take Taika Waititi for example. He didn't have any experience with big budget special effect action movies, but the action in that movie was clearly elevated by directorial choices he made.
The Russos talked at length in interviews about making the crazy action scenes in the Avengers movies as grounded in physical reality as possible. Because they actually cared.

So we have Shang Chi coming up, a movie directed by a person whose main qualification it that he is Asian. Eternals directed by an Asian Woman who didn't seem to have much of a CV to speak of. Captain Marvel directed by a black woman. I mean, it's good that Marvel are putting their money where their mouth is and putting "diverse" people not just in front of the camera. But is it going to make the movies good? Kevin Feige said that Marvel are working very hard to make the MCU as good as they can, and are not taking their foot of the gas. But this really looks like taking the foot of the gas. If he had taken this approach to phase one, would there even be an MCU now? Almost certainly not.

It's noteworthy on the other hand that spider-man, Doctor Strange and Fantastic 4 all have white male directors. No one ever really talks about Taiki Waititi being aboriginal do they? I wonder why. Along with Thor 4 and Guardians of the Galaxy 3, I would put money on those being the best Marvel movies to come out in the next few years. It's almost like Feige regards the rest as practice school.

reply

2 of the films listed are in the better half of the MCU films.

reply

You contributed literally nothing.

reply

I only contribute to discussions as much as the other person. Your entire essay is based on a premise you didn't even care to justify. So you start with nothing, I add nothing.

reply

A fact is not a premise. They are the 4 lowest rated movies based upon millions of user ratings. That is not a premise, it is a simple fact.

reply

Most of the film audience doesn't bother to rate movies, and there's no proof that those who do rate them, actually saw them, or rated them only after they saw them, or only rated them once. We know what certain movies (Black Panther and Captain Marvel are two) elicit from those devoted to lauding or trashing for certain reasons that have little to do with their actual quality. Some measures have been taken to try to deal with that phenomenon, but they haven't stopped it entirely -- they can't.

So, it is a simple fact that user ratings are flawed as a measure, and that's the only support for all the conjecture you provided.

And for the record, I've only seen two of the four movies you mention; I haven't rated them.

reply

This movie was pretty good and easily better than the other 3 . And FTR, I like Thor TDW better than Ragnarok.

Not a fan of SJ or the Black Widow character, but I still liked the movie overall. I HATE PC SJW woke garbage in movies and didn't think this flick had any of that, despite the ample opportunities the director/ producer/ writers had to insert that kind of message given the premise. I thought that this movie had more depth than the average Marvel production, in terms of character development and emotional range.

7.5/10 and way better than Captain Marvel IMO.

reply

Curiously you've listed three MCU films I particularly liked so hopefully I'll enjoy Black Widow as much.

reply

So which MCU movies did you not particularly like (post Thor: The Dark World)?

reply

The Captain America ones don't work for me though I was happy with the conclusion of that story arc. I was disappointed with the first Guardians of the Galaxy - possibly because I'd already seen the second when I caught up with it. And I thought Dr Strange was more about fractal special effects rather than a proper story.

reply

The top 5 rated non-Avengers movies are:

1. Guardians of the Galaxy
2. Thor Ragnarok
3. Iron Man
4. Captain America 3
5. Captain America 2

You seem to rate the movies exactly oppositely to the majority of people, so you probably will enjoy Black Widow.

reply

Fair enough. I should probably target Black Widow as my first cinema visit since early last year then.

reply

The ratings have little to do with the race or gender of the leads (except for a semi-organized block of racist and misogynist voters on iMDB), and more to do with them being about minor characters or about having poor scripts.

But Black Panther was one of the best MCU movies.

reply

I actually didn't argue anywhere that it had anything to do with the race or gender of the leads.

reply

cool post the only thing i might add is those characters are kinda boring anyway compared to main big dawg A list Spiderman, Iron Man, Cap, Thor, Hulk etc (the ones mentoned are B even C list - which is actually where Iron Man, Cap, Thor were pre MCU)

reply

By what criteria is Black Panther at a low rating?

Also, Waititi is not Aboriginal. He’s Maori.

reply

IMDB rating.

reply

IMDB is probably the worst site to determine any kind of ranking.

reply

oh, and what is the best?

reply

I wouldn’t go with only one source, for starters but IMDB is possibly the least reliable.

reply

the lease reliable of which sources?

reply

Audience scores, obviously.

reply

IMDB is audience scores. Which rating would you refer me to as being more reliable than the IMDB rating?

reply

Any site where people don't rate a movie a 10 or a 1 based on their own hang-ups before the movie even comes out. I don't think Metacritic, Google, Rotten Tomatoes, or any similar site has the problem as far as I can tell. IMDb somehow attracted a lot of trolls.

reply

RT did, but they made some changes as did imdb -- yet they're all still deeply flawed as support for what alienzen is pitching. Most film-goers do not rate films on these sites, and of those who bother, many have an agenda, like you say, or they're of a certain demographic. Iow, ratings are not really a representative x-section of the audience. So, to use imdb to prove something about the quality of Black Panther and Captain Marvel, two of the most "review bombed" films in the past few years (which helped inspire those changes imdb and RT made), doesn't make much sense.

https://www.theringer.com/tv/2019/6/12/18661850/imdb-rating-system-problems-chernobyl

reply

When I mention RT, I'm referring to audience scores, not critical reviews. As it is, Black Panther is generally regarded as one of the more popular movies by fans. I doubt it's in the bottom four anywhere else. Chances are, Incredible Hulk or Iron Man 3 would be there somewhere.

reply

I'm only referring to the audience -- or those who pretend to be. RT changed their policy after Captain Marvel or The Last Jedi, I can't remember -- and I think they have verified ticket purchase now, to give certain scores/reviews slightly more credibility. And I don't think imdb allows for scores prior to release like it used to (I remember every GofT ep would get 9.something before it even aired.) I would think the OP would be interested in BO and critics' reviews as well, but then again, the thesis would fall apart if all was taken into account. Instead, the fishiest of them all was used exclusively.

But there's really no way to know aside from maybe something having really long legs in the theater, and then shown in endless rotation on basic cable.

reply

Captain Marvel, the movie was ok-ish (was the "I'm just a girl" song really needed?), yet I do have a problem with the character herself; she's way too overpowered. They should have nerfed her character before introducing her, because, after her, they made Thor way stronger, and gave Tony that magical nanotech suit, which took away from all the fun. (Granted, Tony had to fight Thanos somehow, but still.)

Black Widow was always unique in the MCU, there was only Nat, and because of that, she got a pass when she fought more powerful beings. Now, we learn that there are hundreds or thousands of BWs in the world just like her. She's not unique anymore. They should have give us a Nat & Barton movie instead, about what happened in Budapest, the place they talked about twice in different movies. Why was it so important for Dreykof's daughter to show up anyway? Couldn't that have stayed as a red entry in Nat's ledger? Is Nat an angel now?

I only know Taskmaster from the Spiderman game, but the way TM was depicted was such a waste. And why did they use a male stuntman, which clearly shows during the scenes (and that in a movie about superior females!?)? That error is on the director.

AM&TW was a family-friendly kids' movie to begin with.

I think Chadwick Boseman should take most of the credit for BP's success. He was pretty convincing and likable as a king and leader. Other actors may make a good BP but not every actor has the charisma needed to depict a king the way he did.

In an interview about Civil War, the Russo's talked about how they brought in the team responsible for the action scenes in (I think it was) John Wick. I always liked that about them, they're at the top, yet they admit they had to bring in a team for certain scenes. That just shows how serious they approach their job. On the other hand, it's important directors leave needless "messages" (like the all-female hero scene in Endgame) out of their movies (what was that supposed to mean anyway?).

reply

"they should have nerfed her character before introducing her, because, after her, they made Thor way stronger, and gave Tony that magical nanotech suit, which took away from all the fun."

They didn't need to nerf her, she was never this powerful in the comics. They powered her up ridiculously to make her the most powerful Avenger, because....she is a woman I guess.

They didn't make Thor stronger. I am not sure what you mean. If anything they nerfed him. Iron Man get's upgrades all the time. That is part of the fun. He wasn't hugely more poweful than he was in other movies.

reply

If it's for that reason, it seems silly then. She's so powerful, they had to write her out of Endgame, and made her reappear only during the end fight as a deus ex force (yet she was unable to take the gauntlet to the van without help).

In Ragnarok during the fight with Hela, Thor passed out and met Odin, who told him he's stronger than himself. Then we saw him in IW taking in the force of a sun. He got stronger for sure.

Ironman got his upgrades with every movie, true, but that nanotech suit was pure magic with healing power. He had to fight Thanos, sure, but it was a bit too much.

reply

Yeah that was what annoyed me most about the girlpower scene. Captain Marvel could have just flown through the entire army anyway.

If Thor was stronger than Odin he would not have been beaten up by Thanos. Odin was the most powerful being in the Universe, which is why Thanos waited until he was dead to take the infinity Stones.

reply

> Odin was the most powerful being in the Universe, which is why Thanos waited until he was dead to take the infinity Stones.

Interesting point, I never thought of that.

reply