I want to watch the Marvel Movies..where should I start?

[Baron Tanks]

I'll cast another vote for watching them in order. If you want to condense your list, skip IM2 (although you've already watched it) and Thor 2 as the most forgettable ones. I actually found I had a much bigger appreciation for Cap 1 having recently rewatched it, i.e. after having seen both Cap 2 and Avengers. He works a lot better knowing what he'll grow in to, rather than starting where it started, if that makes any sense.

Thor 2 only shines in the scenes shared between Loki and Thor, everything else is either forgettable fluff or downright grating (the less said about a certain Natalie P. and Kat D. the better). I'll give credit to Star Wars as performed by flying Viking ships though, that credit is honestly earned. I actually enjoyed The Incredible Hulk and was disappointed to not see Edward Norton return. Of course we learned that it was his own fault and hindsight allows us to see that Mark Ruffalo basically improved on him in every point. But the character work done by Norton is enjoyable, although again, the rest of the movie is quite forgettable. You?ll find that that goes for all of the Marvel movies, where plot is the least interesting thing.

IM3 stands out as a character piece on Tony Stark, Cap 2 subverts everything you learned about the Captain and the MCU up to that point and Guardians of the Galaxy works because it drops all pretense and is just a fun romp elevated by an amazing soundtrack. So in my view, skip IM2 and Thor 2, perhaps The Hulk. Cap 2, IM3 and GotG are the standouts, the rest is good as simple entertainment...

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

I'd watch them in release order, since most of them build towards a larger story arc.

I own them all and rewatch them from time to time, though some more often than others. Cap2 and Guardians have been played pretty heavily lately. Hulk is the only exception. I own it, but don't care to watch it since it has little connection to the rest of the films.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

You should obviously start with Howard the Duck.

And then move on to Superman Returns. After that just watch any Marvel movie at random and they'll seem like masterpieces!

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

Hulk was the one I was definitely going to skip...concept doesn't interest me at all

For me it's mostly because the whole thing feels like a comicbook film that exists in a pre-MCU world; fairly naff CG, bland vanilla romance, etc. It doesn't really feel a part of the other films. Having a completely different actor really doesn't help, either, and the consensus is that Ruffalo's Banner tops Edward Norton's. (plus, I think Ang Lee's Hulk - as much of a misfire as it was - is a far more interesting film)

I do not recommend skipping ANYTHING, since everything is important to something else.
It's all connected together.

Anyone saying you can watch them out of order, or that certain movies don't have much to do with anything, clearly haven't been paying attention or don't have the foresight to know what they're talking about.

Are you saying/typing that with a straight face? You expect someone who just wants to see what all the MCU fuss is about to piece together continuity from two TV shows as well as all the films? Pft... I love the continuity, but for most people it's just incidental context (whose references might pass them by), and that's completely fine.

The success Marvel Studios have had is built on attracting people who don't really care about the intricate plot threads, as well as Marvel fans who get to play 'which character/arc is this leading to and how will it differ from the various versions on the page'.

 

[Ieyke]

I'll cast another vote for watching them in order. If you want to condense your list, skip IM2 (although you've already watched it) and Thor 2 as the most forgettable ones. I actually found I had a much bigger appreciation for Cap 1 having recently rewatched it, i.e. after having seen both Cap 2 and Avengers. He works a lot better knowing what he'll grow in to, rather than starting where it started, if that makes any sense.

Thor 2 only shines in the scenes shared between Loki and Thor, everything else is either forgettable fluff or downright grating (the less said about a certain Natalie P. and Kat D. the better). I'll give credit to Star Wars as performed by flying Viking ships though, that credit is honestly earned. I actually enjoyed The Incredible Hulk and was disappointed to not see Edward Norton return. Of course we learned that it was his own fault and hindsight allows us to see that Mark Ruffalo basically improved on him in every point. But the character work done by Norton is enjoyable, although again, the rest of the movie is quite forgettable. You?ll find that that goes for all of the Marvel movies, where plot is the least interesting thing.

IM3 stands out as a character piece on Tony Stark, Cap 2 subverts everything you learned about the Captain and the MCU up to that point and Guardians of the Galaxy works because it drops all pretense and is just a fun romp elevated by an amazing soundtrack. So in my view, skip IM2 and Thor 2, perhaps The Hulk. Cap 2, IM3 and GotG are the standouts, the rest is good as simple entertainment...

The hindsight appreciation of Captain America is going to be a running theme:
==================SPOILER WARNING======================

Spoiler

Thor 2 is going to seem WAAAY more significant when Thor:Ragnarok and Avengers:Infinity War come out.
I don't get why people have a problem with Jane Foster OR Darcy. Jane's just kinda whatever, but Darcy's hilarious.
That whole movie was about 1000x more sci-fi and hilarious than I thought it'd be.

Iron Man 2 is becoming more and more significant all the time.
Two movies later it becomes obvious that the element Tony Stark "invented" is derived from Howard Stark's study of the Tesseract.
Justin Hammer's Hammer Drones are a precursor to Tony's Iron Legion in Iron Man 3.
Anton Vanko's father is now showing up on Agent Carter, and the history of him and Howard Stark is being explored a bit.
60's era Howard Stark is becoming a more integral part of the MCU. He's showing up in flashbacks in Ant-Man working with Hank Pym, and it's POSSIBLE that 60's era Howard Stark and Hank Pym will turn out to be the original creators of Ultron's programming.

Iron Man 3's Extremis evolves into the Deathlok project on Agents Of SHIELD.
The Iron Legion drones are the foundation for what will become Ultron's drone legion.
Killian's explanation of how he stole the identity of the Mandarin for himself (thinking it was just a myth) and Trevor Slattery is a continuation of every Iron Man movie showing that the TRUE Mandarin and his Ten Rings organization are lurking just below the surface of all sorts of terrorism and villainy.

Winter Soldier sets up Crossbones assassinating Captain America and Bucky taking up his shield.
The dissolution of SHIELD of course changed EVERYTHING about Agents Of SHIELD.
Maria Hill ending the movie going to work for Stark Industries is a precursor to Stark and Hill "privatizing global security". Hill's SHIELD secrets, combined with the Iron Legion, and whatever "dormant peacekeeping program" Stark digs up, eventually becomes Ultron.
Falcon, of course, will get to be an Avenger, and eventually become Captain America when Bucky quits.

Thor is my least favorite MCU movie, but it lays all the framework for the Tesseract in CA:TFA, the Cosmic side of the MCU, and the Infinity Stones that are taking center stage.

Guardians Of The Galaxy, of course, sets up Infinity War, Thanos, Infinity Stones, Captain Marvel, Adam Warlock, Inhumans, Nova, etc.

When Age Of Ultron comes out, Iron Man 2, Avengers, and Winter Soldier are probably going to turn out to've told us more about Black Widow's story than we realized (since apparently there's a lot of her background in AoU).

I suspect the Ant-Man movie's success could very well lead to a 60's era Ant-Man series featuring Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne as Ant-Man and Wasp, with 60's era Howard Stark and Jarvis, and maybe appearnaces by middle-aged Agent Carter, and young Nick Fury.
Perhaps we get to see why the original Ultron project got scrapped in the first place (assuming Hank and Howard were the original creators).

etc etc

The Incredible Hulk is pretty good and it actually gets better the more often you watch it, which is kinda odd, but it's the LEAST integrated into the rest of the MCU.
It has LOADS of potential to suddenly become tied into all manner of stuff, but as of now....*shrug*
The plot of individual MCU movies are solid, but not all that complicated.....because they're all just parts of a much more massive story.


The MCU certainly has its weaknesses (mostly the under-usage of villains that aren't Loki), but it all just gets better and better the more you watch and put together what's going on.

 

[Zhukov]

Surely you would just watch them in the order that they were released?

There aren't any complicated timeline shenanigans to navigate.

 

[DaWaffledude]

Okay, FYI, and F everybody else's I for that matter, The Incredible Hulk is a great movie and everyone who doesn't love it exactly as much as I do is wrong.

There are dozens of us! DOZENS!

OT: Release order, which other people have listed. They're all solid enough, just don't expect anything mind-blowing.

 

[MSfire012]

As most have already commented in this thread, you should really just watch them in order of release (Although sometimes it isn't entirely necessary).

If you plan on skipping anything, skip The Incredible Hulk and just watch the opening credits and the Tony Stark scene on Youtube.

As for Agents of SHIELD and the One Shots, they aren't entirely necessary either (However, it is worth noting that lately SHIELD has been expanding the universe a lot).

http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/5395/A-Marvel-Cinematic-Universe-Timeline Before I leave I'd also like to share this with the rest of this thread. It is an excellent timeline for the MCU as a whole.

 

[Frezzato]

Hey now, don't forget about the movies that made the modern Marvel movies possible. I'm talking about Singer's X-Men movies, which by today's standards are quaint. X2 was a good step though, and X-Men Future [sub]Future[/sub] [sub][sub]Something[/sub][/sub] really helped fix the mess that was X3.

You can ignore all the Spider Man movies, but I would watch the first Blade if you haven't already. And the first Men in Black was thoroughly entertaining I thought[footnote]I know that was Malibu Comics, but aren't Malibu and Marvel related somehow?[/footnote]. I also liked the third one. That reminds me, I heard the latest Punisher was pretty good. I should go hunt that down.

 

[Baron Tanks]

Snip

Just want to respond to your comment about the women in Thor 2. I just felt Jane Foster was a complete non-presence in the movie. I feel there is nothing to separate her from any other love interest, she just refuses to bring character. I feel you kind of agreed with that though. Now on the matter of Darcy, that's just going to be a matter of taste. Where you find her hilarious, I found her dialogue and actions just headscratching and annoying, it made me groan more than laugh. She's basically the Jar Jar Binks of the Thor franchise in my opinion, a forced type of funny that just does not resonate. But, having made that point, I guess it's just a different kind of flavor for everyone. It's not objectively bad per se, it just did not resonate with me personally at all. And it hurts the film in that respect because it already has so little to offer otherwise and a fair amount of time is spent with this character.

 

[Ieyke]

Snip

Just want to respond to your comment about the women in Thor 2. I just felt Jane Foster was a complete non-presence in the movie. I feel there is nothing to separate her from any other love interest, she just refuses to bring character. I feel you kind of agreed with that though. Now on the matter of Darcy, that's just going to be a matter of taste. Where you find her hilarious, I found her dialogue and actions just headscratching and annoying, it made me groan more than laugh. She's basically the Jar Jar Binks of the Thor franchise in my opinion, a forced type of funny that just does not resonate. But, having made that point, I guess it's just a different kind of flavor for everyone. It's not objectively bad per se, it just did not resonate with me personally at all. And it hurts the film in that respect because it already has so little to offer otherwise and a fair amount of time is spent with this character.

Jane's the "Everyman" character. The character in this circus of insanity who represents what is normal and provides contrast for all the insanity. Without a whole load of time invested into exploring the nuances of her character, she's just not going to stand out alongside superheroes. She's not really meant to.
That said, I do think it's a bit unfortunate that Jane's not a medical doctor. Seeing her become the team medic for the Avengers and kinda the "team mom" could be hilarious.
Have her constantly going "Dude, Hawkeye, you're not invincible. Stop leaping out of buildings!" and "Dammit, Tony....I JUST fixed that arm." while at the same time being completely impressed at what they do, and like looking up to Natasha and trying to learn from/train with her, or whatever, would be great.

Darcy's great because she's clearly smart as hell, but rather than let herself get bogged down in seriousness, she perpetually maintains her perspective of "Holy crap, this is awesome!" and enjoys herself.
She's kinda the other end of the Everyman spectrum - the fangirl.
It's not really forced humor. It's....
Darcy is obviously able to keep up with Jane's astrophysics, but she's just not bothered about accuracy. Instead of Einstein-Rosen Bridge, she'll call it the teleport ray. Instead of Mjolnir, she calls it Mew Mew. As long as she's communicating clearly, she doesn't strain herself with being formally precise.
You don't know anybody like Darcy? Someone who'll tell you the "Thingy in her computer was making the sound of an angry falcon", but if she bothered she could tell you the EXACT piece of the computer the was making the sound and why?
I actually assume it must EXTREMELY easy to write for Darcy, since she's a very specific personality that all that type of stuff just kinda comes from naturally.

*shrug*

 

[Olas]

I would just watch them in order of release, that's how they were designed to be watched.

Personally I'd start with the 2003 Hulk movie, despite what people will tell you it's not that bad, much better than the Incredible Hulk if you ask me, which you can basically skip as it doesn't add anything to Bruce Banner's character development.

 

[Baron Tanks]

Snip

I agree with Jane being the everyday viewpoint. I just would have liked any characterisation of her, be it through humour or keeping her as a M.D. just anything. About Darcy, I'm not arguing she is an unrealistic personal, she can indeed be like that. It's just not a type, or at least this specific execution, that I enjoy to watch.

 

[Ieyke]

I would just watch them in order of release, that's how they were designed to be watched.

Personally I'd start with the 2003 Hulk movie, despite what people will tell you it's not that bad, much better than the Incredible Hulk if you ask me, which you can basically skip as it doesn't add anything to Bruce Banner's character development.

That movie('The Hulk) is not part of the MCU.

'The Incredible Hulk' half avoids invalidating 'The Hulk', so it's not impossible to kinda squint and see it as part of the MCU, but why would you?
'The Hulk' was TERRIBLE.
'The Incredible Hulk' is pretty good. Better and better every time you watch it, in fact.

The only good thing about 'The Hulk' was Jennifer Connelly, who played an infinitely superior Betty Ross, compared to Liv Tyler's weaksauce.
(I want Connelly back as Betty Ross, dammit.)

 

[KazeAizen]

I know that individually they don't have much Chronology but where should I jump in? lik for example Iron man 3 takes place after the avengers right? I've seen Ironman 1 and 2 although 2 I found lacklustre at the time

Christ how many are there anyway?

There's a bunch. They all for the most part hang together on their own or within their own continuity. i.e. Iron Man 1, 2, 3, work just fine as a trilogy but seeing The Avengers provides some context for Tony as a character in Iron Man 3. Any of the pre Avengers flicks you don't need to see any other movie. Next to that Guardians of the Galaxy can be watched anywhere at anytime. Absolutely zero context is needed for that movie.

 

[Flammablezeus]

Avengers does seem to hinge on the fact that you've seen the movies prior to it (Iron Man, Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2, Thor and Captain America) since those movies act as the character building while Avengers is basically just action and cocky/witty banter between established characters.

If you were to skip any, I'd say that the Thor movies have the least impact on the others and are probably the least memorable superhero movies I've ever seen. I still recommend that you watch all of the movies at least once though.

 

[xaszatm]

Honestly? What do you like to watch? Because the thing about these movies is that they aren't Superhero movies but different genres staring a Superhero.

Iron Man is Action
Captain America is Historical War
Captain America: The Winter Soldier is Spy Thriller
Thor: The Dark World is Space Opera
Guardians of the Galaxy is Space Comedy

and so on. Just pick the one genre you like and start there. Or start with the Avengers, if you like any of the characters, watch the movie that stars them.