Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

Richard Wilson4 said:The only good parts are how much it looks like the comic and the hot British actress. Everything else sucks, even for a mindless summer blockbuster.

Captain America: The First Avenger deserves better

It definitely could've been handled better. Personally, I thought Thor hit a bit harder, but hey, that's just how I see it...🙂.

The movie is your typical high-octane American blockbuster. Personally, I enjoyed it; I’ve always had a soft spot for this kind of pacing—plenty of action, a bit of romance, and that classic trope where the hero has to sacrifice everything for his country 😁, plus Atwellica is absolutely stunning! That said, I suspect most of us on this forum are really holding out for The Avengers. Now, that would be something special!

Michelle Hill38 said:Why do they keep pushing that Adolf Hitler stuff? I mean, seriously, what the hell 🤣 could they have done to at least handle it properly.

rustyorca13 said:Hail Hydra😉

Richard Wilson4 said:It’s just this pathological need for political correctness. If you actually pay attention, you won't even see a single swastika in the movie, and most of the action takes place in Europe during World War II.

It isn’t about being politically correct—it’s simply that the organization's greeting is Hail Hydra, not Sieg Heil. Besides, the Marine Corps wears a stylized eagle on their covers, so we can safely assume there's a swastika in its talons.

ruggedfalcon28 said:

It isn’t about being politically correct—it’s simply that the organization's greeting is Hail Hydra, not Sieg Heil. Besides, the Marine Corps wears a stylized eagle on their covers, so we can safely assume there's a swastika in its talons.

Even the guys over at Half in the bag are scratching their heads wondering why there isn't a single swastika in sight.

Richard Wilson4 said:Even the guys over at Half in the bag are scratching their heads wondering why there isn't a single swastika in sight.

Besides—if you actually look closely at one of those three SS officers inspecting the cabbage patch—the lead guy clearly has a red armband with a swastika on his left sleeve.

I don't know why it took me this long to finally sit down and watch this movie.

My friends kept telling me it was a total snooze fest. Personally? I thought it was great. Just goes to show that everyone has different tastes—you can't just rely on what other people say. You've got to see it for yourself.

Anthony Hayes8 said:At this rate, Ryan Reynolds will have played three comic book heroes by the time he's done with Green Lantern. :)

Man, what a joke—the guy has zero actual acting talent.

OT: Captain America: The First Avenger was boring as hell and honestly, the character just gets on my nerves. Chris was way better when he was playing Human Torch in Fantastic Four.

I popped this one on Blu-ray yesterday—and honestly, when you pick a movie like this, you're basically expecting non-stop action from start to finish followed by some massive, epic showdown. Instead? I got a bit of a letdown—there was barely any action, and that final confrontation felt pretty weak.

It’s the same old story we saw in Iron Man 1 and 2—with these kinds of flicks, I'm really just looking for a steady stream of small action beats leading up to one massive finale—not getting bogged down by all this heavy drama, as if it were some serious prestige drama. 3/5

briskeagle3 said:I popped this one on Blu-ray yesterday—and honestly, when you pick a movie like this, you're basically expecting non-stop action from start to finish followed by some massive, epic showdown. Instead? I got a bit of a letdown—there was barely any action, and that final confrontation felt pretty weak.

It’s the same old story we saw in Iron Man 1 and 2—with these kinds of flicks, I'm really just looking for a steady stream of small action beats leading up to one massive finale—not getting bogged down by all this heavy drama, as if it were some serious prestige drama. 3/5

guess you must've hated Spider-Man then😁

What an absolute disaster of a movie. I honestly couldn't bring myself to sit through more than thirty minutes before I just had to turn it off. The script was utterly lifeless, and the acting? Well, it was borderline unbearable—it felt like every single actor was simply playing a carbon copy of the exact same role they’ve performed in every other project they've ever done, which makes one wonder if that was actually the intention behind the casting process. Between the predictable dialogue and the formulaic plot points, the whole experience was just mind-numbingly tedious. I'd give it a 1.5/10. I realize that, strictly speaking, I should have watched the entire thing to provide a fair critique, but even those first thirty minutes were too much for me to stomach... especially since I couldn't find a single reason to care about how any of this would end.

That’s the core issue with movies like this—they try way too hard to be taken seriously. We all know that fairy tales actually offer more realism and better life lessons than these flicks where reality is just reduced to a black-and-white zone. You've got this ultimate, invincible hero fighting against ultimate evil, except the villain actually has an Achilles' heel while the "good guy" is basically flawless.

When a movie is going to lie to my face, I at least want that lie to be believable—to have some sort of logical foundation—rather than feeling like it was scripted for a six-month-old baby (and honestly, even babies aren't buying these tropes anymore). The audience has evolved, the world has changed, and information is easier to access than ever; it’s only natural that I want the story to make sense.

Now, look, I wasn't raised on comic books about infallible, all-powerful superheroes, so maybe I don't have the standing to critique this.

My heroes growing up were characters like Zorro, The Lone Ranger, and Commando Mark—though by puberty, I couldn't stand their nonsense anymore, so I pivoted to the incomparable Mr. No and eventually Alan Ford.

Still, this movie is still better than Iron Man 1 & 2, where you're basically dying of boredom. And what kind of "superhero" is he if everyone knows his secret identity (Iron Man)? His enemies could easily exploit that—it's just silly. The only thing that comes to mind as being genuinely good in this genre is the X-Men franchise.

Actually, there are only two truly great takes on this theme so far:
WATCHERS kick ASS
WATCHERS kick ASS

Then there's RoboCop, which was built from the ground up as a cinematic superhero; he's top-tier, and even after watching him a few times, it’s always a blast.

P.S. I watched the new Planet of the Apes on Blu-ray yesterday, and unlike this nonsense, it was a genuine thrill to watch—so much so that I immediately hopped onto IMDb to see if there's a sequel. I'm still riding that wave of satisfaction, unlike this movie, which I'd already forgotten about while it was still playing.

briskeagle3 said:That’s the core issue with movies like this—they try way too hard to be taken seriously. We all know that fairy tales actually offer more realism and better life lessons than these flicks where reality is just reduced to a black-and-white zone. You've got this ultimate, invincible hero fighting against ultimate evil, except the villain actually has an Achilles' heel while the "good guy" is basically flawless.

When a movie is going to lie to my face, I at least want that lie to be believable—to have some sort of logical foundation—rather than feeling like it was scripted for a six-month-old baby (and honestly, even babies aren't buying these tropes anymore). The audience has evolved, the world has changed, and information is easier to access than ever; it’s only natural that I want the story to make sense.

Now, look, I wasn't raised on comic books about infallible, all-powerful superheroes, so maybe I don't have the standing to critique this.

My heroes growing up were characters like Zorro, The Lone Ranger, and Commando Mark—though by puberty, I couldn't stand their nonsense anymore, so I pivoted to the incomparable Mr. No and eventually Alan Ford.

Still, this movie is still better than Iron Man 1 & 2, where you're basically dying of boredom. And what kind of "superhero" is he if everyone knows his secret identity (Iron Man)? His enemies could easily exploit that—it's just silly. The only thing that comes to mind as being genuinely good in this genre is the X-Men franchise.

Actually, there are only two truly great takes on this theme so far:
WATCHERS kick ASS
WATCHERS kick ASS

Then there's RoboCop, which was built from the ground up as a cinematic superhero; he's top-tier, and even after watching him a few times, it’s always a blast.

P.S. I watched the new Planet of the Apes on Blu-ray yesterday, and unlike this nonsense, it was a genuine thrill to watch—so much so that I immediately hopped onto IMDb to see if there's a sequel. I'm still riding that wave of satisfaction, unlike this movie, which I'd already forgotten about while it was still playing.

Same here. If someone had asked me who the bad guy was while the movie was still playing, I wouldn't have even had an answer.🤣

Honestly, all this complaining about the movie... what exactly were you people expecting from a movie based on a comic book? Clearly, absolutely nothing. But seriously, not one single person here has actually read a Captain America comic. If you had, you’d realize that out of everything, Captain America is probably the most faithful adaptation ever brought to the big screen.

Andrew Ross4 said:Honestly, all this complaining about the movie... what exactly were you people expecting from a movie based on a comic book? Clearly, absolutely nothing. But seriously, not one single person here has actually read a Captain America comic. If you had, you’d realize that out of everything, Captain America is probably the most faithful adaptation ever brought to the big screen.

That tells us plenty about the source material. The movie itself feels bloated and sluggish—fun at times, sure, but mostly just tedious.

If they had integrated the whole Hydra myth more realistically into actual WWII history, or made the core conflict about preventing the misuse of that blue energy (whatever that was) rather than just the rapid development of a weapon powered by it (which happened suspiciously fast from discovery to field deployment, if I might add), and if the CGI were more convincing, it would have been better.

As it stands, it’s just full of clunky elements monkey wrench from start to finish.

Thor, which I found much more enjoyable, also had flaws—that city sequence felt a bit too much like the Liberators—but it works because of Thor himself. His journey from an arrogant instigator to someone who actually stands for something manages to carry the rest, even if those themes could have been handled with more depth. It still holds up.

Meanwhile, Skipper Yankee remains the exact same person throughout, just starting out scrawny and ending up on steroids. There is no character arc, no meaningful struggle, and zero growth beyond running around and throwing a shield.

Quote : Swagger

Andrew Ross4 said:Honestly, all this complaining about the movie... what exactly were you people expecting from a movie based on a comic book? Clearly, absolutely nothing. But seriously, not one single person here has actually read a Captain America comic. If you had, you’d realize that out of everything, Captain America is probably the most faithful adaptation ever brought to the big screen.

That doesn't make it a better movie, period. ☕

Quote : Swagger

John Peterson3 said:That tells us plenty about the source material. The movie itself feels bloated and sluggish—fun at times, sure, but mostly just tedious.

If they had integrated the whole Hydra myth more realistically into actual WWII history, or made the core conflict about preventing the misuse of that blue energy (whatever that was) rather than just the rapid development of a weapon powered by it (which happened suspiciously fast from discovery to field deployment, if I might add), and if the CGI were more convincing, it would have been better.

As it stands, it’s just full of clunky elements monkey wrench from start to finish.

Thor, which I found much more enjoyable, also had flaws—that city sequence felt a bit too much like the Liberators—but it works because of Thor himself. His journey from an arrogant instigator to someone who actually stands for something manages to carry the rest, even if those themes could have been handled with more depth. It still holds up.

Meanwhile, Skipper Yankee remains the exact same person throughout, just starting out scrawny and ending up on steroids. There is no character arc, no meaningful struggle, and zero growth beyond running around and throwing a shield.

🙂
Honestly, Thor had some moments that actually cracked me up—man was hilarious sometimes. But Cap? Captain America: The First Avenger just wasn't even on that level.