Listen to the episode on Spotify.

Ron: Hello and welcome to a new episode of Stereo Geeks! Today we’re talking about Thunderbolts*. I’m Ron.

Mon: And I’m Mon. This is a spoiler-free review of the film, so you’re in for a treat. 

Ron: Before we start our episode, we would like to acknowledge that the land we are recording on is the traditional territory of many nations, including the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat peoples. It is now home to many diverse First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. We also acknowledge that Toronto is covered by Treaty 13 with the Mississaugas of the Credit.

Mon: While we are making this land acknowledgement, we understand that this is not enough and that positive action is required by the people of Canada to make substantive change for the Indigenous nations and communities whose lands we now reside on.

[Music]

Ron: Thunderbolts*, and note the star at the end of the title, brings together a rag-tag group of anti-heroes to fight a political threat. This is, I believe, the 36th film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and is part of Phase 5. It follows 2025’s Captain America: Brave New World and the 2021 Disney+ show The Falcon and the Winter Soldier. There are also connections to Ant-Man and the Wasp, and of course Black Widow. 

Ron: In the film, we’ve got Yelena Belova, played by Florence Pugh. Sebastian Stan returns as Bucky Barnes or the Winter Soldier. Wyatt Russell is back as John Walker, aka the US Agent. Hannah John-Kamen plays Ava Starr, aka Ghost. David Harbour reprises his role as Alexei Shostakov, the Red Guardian. And finally, Olga Kurylenko as Antonia Dreykov, aka Taskmaster. But can they get out of their own way long enough to be a team? Because they’re going up against Julia Louis-Dreyfus’ Valentina Allegra De Fontaine, and her right-hand person, Mel, played by Geraldine Viswanathan.

Mon: That’s a large cast of returning characters. And, of course, we also have a brand new character in this film – Bob Reynolds, played by Lewis Pullman.

Ron: Tell us about Bob, sis.

Mon: So, Bob, he’s a pretty unassuming fellow. All the promo pics of Bob show him looking dishevelled, in jammies. He doesn’t look like a superhero. But in the comics, Bob is a big deal. That’s if the characters can remember him – Bob faces a similar situation as Peter Parker post-Spider-Man: No Way Home. 

Bob is the superhero named Sentry – the Golden Guardian of Good. Yes, it’s a mouthful. Sentry, the comic book character, was a fascinating PR stunt conjured by Paul Jenkins and Jae Lee in 2000. They did this whole thing where they suggested that Stan Lee had thought up a superhero before he made Marvel’s first family, the Fantastic Four. Sentry was then retroactively incorporated into Marvel’s history. It was all very clever, and it’s the kind of narrative we’ve seen meted out in other comics since. 

Sentry’s story is obviously a little different in Thunderbolts* – but I really love how the film plays with Bob’s comic introduction, adapting it for the MCU, while hitting the beats of the comic’s story. 

Ron: Now that we’ve established the cast, let’s discuss the film itself. Obviously, no spoilers. I have to say, I don’t know how to feel. I enjoyed the film, yes. It had some absolutely outrageous laugh-out-loud moments. I was surprised that John Walker of all people made me guffaw, but he did.

Ron: The first act was very strong. It’s the meeting of the Thunderbolts section and I got almost Defenders vibes from it. That was fun. The primary villain is sympathetic. The effects for the villain’s powers? Excellent! The story is solid, but it doesn’t feel like it’s doing anything new. That’s not a bad thing but Thunderbolts* could have explored a lot of different angles with its cast. I think it was afraid to delve into the horrors of its characters’ lives.

What about you? 

Mon: Yeah, the film left me feeling confused. It’s actually so much harder to talk about Thunderbolts* because of that confusion. I like that it isn’t necessarily trying to be like other films. But at the same time, visually, it felt derivative at times. 

Mon: And yet, the film isn’t just a by-the-numbers action flick. It wants to go deeper by exploring the darker aspects of these characters’ lives. And it’s funny without punching down. I enjoyed myself. I laughed. I love these characters (some more than others), but there were so many missed opportunities here that I still kind of felt deflated at the end. I wanted more.

Ron: Yeah. More of the characters, right? This film is essentially Black Widow 2. And I kinda wish we’d known that going in. Because, I was expecting an ensemble film, and this is decidedly not an ensemble film. It’s a Yelena Belova movie. Not a bad thing, by any means. I absolutely adore Yelena. I needed Yelena as our protagonist and I am delighted that she is. But the marketing for the film positioned it as an ensemble. Despite us avoiding the trailers, that’s the message we got. But it’s not realised in the execution.

Mon: Nope, this isn’t an ensemble. And that’s the biggest missed opportunity for me. Most of these characters have been part of the Thunderbolts in the comics in some form or the other. Now, they may have done that because of the film, or the film had these characters because of the comics – I don’t know how the cards were stacked. But, Bucky has led the Thunderbolts in a few runs. Not gonna lie, I was under the impression that Bucky would be leading. He does not. 

Mon: Listen, I’m down with Yelena getting the spotlight – the ladies of the MCU have been sidelined so often. But, here too, Yelena’s spotlight does come at the cost of the other superhero ladies. 

Mon: I like that this movie is a ton of fun. And it’s really different, tonally and formula-wise, from most other MCU films. But the characters are its biggest draw and we don’t get to delve deep enough into most of their arcs here. 

Ron: I don’t know about anybody else but I was excited for Thunderbolts* primarily because of the ladies. And Bucky, of course, because he’s our guy. But the ladies were the biggest draw for me. I didn’t expect to love Yelena as much as I did when I watched Black Widow, but she absolutely stole my heart, and kept it in Hawkeye. I got more than what I wanted from Yelena in this film. I am delighted to have spent so much time with her.

Mon: Yelena is a great character. And she’s so well-rounded in this film. She has such a deep arc. We learn more about Yelena – we laugh with her, cry with her. That was truly amazing. Of course, it shouldn’t be a surprise that Yelena gets so much development because one of the two writers of Thunderbolts* is Eric Pearson. He co-wrote the Black Widow film. So, obviously Yelena is the main character here. 

Ron: I have loved and missed Ava Starr since the second Ant-Man movie. I was partial to her because of the show Killjoys but Ava was such a sympathetic villain. I have been waiting impatiently to see her again. She’s a character who lives with chronic pain and I was hopeful that this film would lean into that and really explore, in a fantastical sense, how chronic pain impacts a person’s life. Unfortunately, I set my expectations too high. Ava has a much smaller role in Thunderbolts* and her perspective isn’t explored at all. She’s wonderful to watch but so underserved. I’m a bit upset about that.

Mon: Disappointed, mate. Disappointed. I kept looking for Ava because Hannah John-Kamen is such a striking actor. She’s so measured and cocky, but carries layers. Also, not gonna lie, she looked gorgeous in this film. But she didn’t get more backstory; she didn’t develop any dynamics with the other characters, that left me gutted. She’s not a fully-formed character. Just a plot device.

Ron: But the character that I really wanted to see and I am so disappointed about is Taskmaster. She was such a cool villain in Black Widow, nigh unstoppable. Her ability to copy any moves she observed made for incredible action scenes. I definitely wanted to see that again. But more than that. By the end of Black Widow, Natasha Romanoff was able to save Taskmaster. And I was so excited to see her again. This physically and emotionally scarred woman who’d been through hell and had found her way back. You don’t get to see female characters with scars on the big screen. I needed that. And that’s where Thunderbolts* completely let us down. I’m devastated. I needed to see Taskmaster live a full life and this film crushed my hopes.

Mon: Yeah, I am actually angry about how Taskmaster is treated in this film. I completely agree with you – seeing a female character like her on screen get a full character arc would have been a game changer. But once again, she’s just another plot device. This gave me Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness vibes, and how Sam Raimi completely misunderstood Wanda’s character development. 

Marvel has so many different people working on different projects – I think they fail to share the emotional weight of the characters’ backstories from one project to another. That’s how it felt with Ghost, and definitely with Taskmaster. I’m gutted. 

Ron: That’s a good point. Though not as egregious, but was it just me, or did we not get to see Bucky bond with any other characters? I can’t help but compare Thunderbolts* to Brave New World where we got these incredible relationships for Sam Wilson, with his sidekick Joaquin Torres, his mentor, Isaiah Bradley, and his friend, Leila Taylor. Bucky doesn’t get any of that in this film! And maybe it’s unfair to compare the two since these two films are nothing like each other, but Sam and Bucky are two sides of a coin for me, forever connected by their love for Steve Rogers. I’m upset Bucky doesn’t get to make new friends.

Mon: Yep, you’re taking the words right out of my mouth here. Bucky’s very much an outsider in this film. He’s almost shoe-horned in, like the studio were like, oh yeah, that guy Sebastian Stan, we owe him a project. When Bucky’s on screen, he’s cool and all, but who’s his person here? And more importantly, why doesn’t he get a person?

Mon: Considering that amazing bromantic episode in What If…? Season 3, where Bucky and Alexei become buddies, I was expecting something of a bond or rivalry between the two in Thunderbolts*. After all, Alexei was convinced he was greater than Captain America. Bucky was Captain America’s best friend. Surely, this was a golden opportunity for them to partner up. 

Ron: I agree. I think watching What If…? Season 3 spoiled us for Bucky’s potential as a partner and friend to people who aren’t Steve and Sam. Not just Alexei, but pretty much anyone in this film could have been a foil to Bucky. He’s got history with Walker. He could have bonded with Yelena about their Russian connection. Or with Ava about living a life that others controlled. But we don’t get any of that. Bucky’s seriously short-changed here. And dare I say it, but I feel like Red Guardian got a bigger role than Bucky. Which is pretty sad considering it’s Bucky!

Mon: For sure, mate. Alexei definitely got more development and screen time than Bucky. I didn’t mind Bucky being a silly dork, but also a cool-as-hell action hero, but he goes where the wind takes him. I couldn’t figure out what Bucky’s deal was here. Also, we still don’t know why Bucky went in to politics!

Ron: That mystery continues. But it’s tied to Valentina. Who we should probably talk about. First up, Julia Louis-Dreyfus is clearly having the best time with this character. The hair, the smirk, the condescension. She’s used to being the winner in every room and she doesn’t like that position being threatened. I love her performance. She’s great. Valentina herself? I don’t know what to make of her.

Mon: Am I the only person who is completely uninterested in Valentina as a character? Can she just be and leave the storylines to the other characters? Does she have to be a thing? 

Ron: Yeah, where are we going with Valentina? She’s been in a TV show and a couple of movies and she’s not grown at all. I see her as the anti-Nick Fury but we know a fair amount about Fury. I don’t know anything about Valentina except that she was married to Everett Ross for some bizarre reason. What’s her deal?

Mon: We get a scene about her past in this film, and it, honestly, irritated me. Because there’s that urge by creators to try to make us sympathize with female characters – as if women can’t just be power-hungry monsters. I wish that flashback had been given to someone else, and Valentina had just been left to herself. 

Ron: Let women be monsters! Because that’s what John Walker gets to be. That man is a jerk. Everyone tells him he’s a jerk. Yet he keeps being a jerk. I was worried about meeting John again after his unconscionable behaviour in The Falcon and the Winter Soldier. But somehow, he’s managed to make an even worse life for himself. Dude is an epic disaster but has gaslit himself into believing otherwise. He needs so much therapy. I really would have loved to see more scenes of him and Bucky. And Bucky just rips him a new one every time John opens his mouth. I would have loved that. But alas, they barely get a few seconds together.

Mon: I was worried about John too, but I kinda dug his smug self getting his comeuppance, and his hero moments in this film. He doesn’t get an arc either, and very little development, but he gets more action and screen time than Bucky. Hmmm… I guess I really just wanted more Bucky in this film.

Ron: Everybody wanted more Bucky in this film. We need more Bucky in our lives.

Ron: I do want to give a quick shoutout to Geraldine Vishwanathan, who does a solid job in this film. Her role isn’t very large but she’s one of those actors who brings a very lived-in feeling to her characters. So you always feel like you’re getting a character who’s been around in the world longer than you’ve seen her. 

Mon: While Thunderbolts* is funny and action-packed, it does deal with some heavy subject matter. Some of the characters are clearly suffering from depression. There’s some mention of self-harm. And addiction plays a huge part in the storylines for some of the characters. It can be distressing to watch.

Ron: There was so much dialogue in Thunderbolts*, particularly from Yelena, that spoke to me. Or rather, it felt like the dialogue was plucked from my brain. Yelena really goes through it in this film. She’s struggling. She’s alone. She’s in a dark place that she can’t punch her way out of. Damn, did I feel all that.

Mon: True. But the film doesn’t lean into any of those aspects enough for the other characters. All these people are troubled, and in pain – emotionally, if not also physically. A true ensemble would have explored all their pain, brought them together through that. 

Ron: I know we explored a lot of this dark stuff for Bucky in The Falcon and the Winter Soldier, but it would have been really helpful for him to impart some knowledge to the team. He’s been living with PTSD for a very long time. He could have shared some tips with the new crew.

Mon: Bucky got therapy, and Bucky got a friend. A friend Marvel refuses to let him hang out with, but you get the point. He could have been the glue that binds these hurting people together. It was right there – the chance for them to do something unique to represent broken souls, lonely people, mental illness, physical suffering, found family. They missed taking advantage of that and making Thunderbolts* a really grounded film.

Mon: Ok, the person representing many of those issues is Bob. So, dude, we have to talk about Bob. What did you think of Lewis Pullman’s performance?

Ron: I have never seen this man in my life. Although apparently we have. We saw him in Top Gun: Maverick. But his casting wasn’t an easy process. Steven Yeun was cast as Bob earlier but had scheduling conflicts because of the SAG-AFTRA strike. 

Mon: Oh man, I just remembered. Steven Yeun had been fancast as Sentry for eons. And they went with Pullman. Hmmmm…

Ron: This film would’ve been quite different with Yeun in it. I could’ve seen him playing a version of his Nope character. He would have been amazing. Pullman is very sweet and makes Bob quite endearing. So I like him. Is it anything new? No. But I liked him.

Mon: I was very skeptical about this casting. As you said, we’ve apparently seen Pullman in Top Gun: Maverick, and I remember him, not at all. So when I saw the promos, I was like, what is happening? But you know what? I thought Pullman was great. He plays the silly, dork who needs saving. He carries off playing an arrogant, powerful person. And he hit the emotional beats of his character beautifully. Honestly, I’m impressed. 

Ron: We’ve obviously got to talk about the action scenes because there are plenty. I would say the action isn’t as visceral as Black Widow, which has some of the best in the MCU. It’s not as technically complicated as Brave New World, which had so much stunt and flying work, but was well-accomplished. But we did get lots of hand-to-hand combat and a variety of fighting styles which was very fun to watch. The Thunderbolts* fighting each other made for a lot of entertainment. When they have to fight the big bad while saving people? Chef’s kiss. Loved that sequence so damn much!

Mon: Yeah, the action was fun. It’s definitely not out of this world, but it’s made to be enjoyed, and I can’t argue that these scenes, especially among the characters, were super enjoyable to watch. 

Mon: Having said that, my major criticism, aside from all the character issues mentioned before, is the pacing. Look, I love me some action. I also love me some quieter character moments. But there has to be a balance and a cadence to both. The action needs to get your heart pumping, and have you leap out of your seat with adrenaline. And then you calm down with touching moments between the characters. We get that here but some bits are too repetitive, and the action is not that fluid.

This isn’t a total surprise – the director, Jake Schreier, is a comedy and character guy, not an action person. The action isn’t that bad, it’s pretty good. The trouble is the balance. There were times the film slowed to a halt. We lost time with some characters because we kept coming back to the same characters, but the story beats weren’t moving. There’s not as much exposition-dumping as expected, but some of it was sloooooow. It was annoying. 

Ron: That’s so interesting that you didn’t like the pacing. It didn’t bother me as much as it did you. I thought the first half handled the action well and the ending had some great moments. But the middle bit, I agree, could have been tightened up a bit more. Or we could have been given a few more perspectives. That’s probably what was lacking in Thunderbolts* the most. The lack of multiple character perspectives. And that’s why it can’t be called an ensemble film. We only really see the story from Yelena, Valentina’s and Bucky’s POVs, and sometimes Bob’s. It would have been so much richer if we’d got to see the world through Ava’s eyes, for instance.

Mon: Some of the best moments of the film were Bucky’s hair, and also Bucky’s hair. Hoo boy, that hair is memorable. 

Ron: Oh, you’re too funny. Bucky’s hair is spectacular though. Actually, every moment Bucky was on screen made me happy. He was lovely and sardonic yet heroic. I wanted more of that.

Mon: I can always do with more Bucky. 

Mon: I also really loved some of the effects in the climactic battle. I can’t talk about it, but ufffff… One moment actually made me gasp out loud. Loved it!

Ron: Yes. Speaking of other best moments, Yelena has a couple of great action scenes and I loved her scenes with her dad. Alexei is such a disaster but he loves his children. It was really sweet. Of course, my favourite moment is a massive spoiler so I can’t talk about it. I will say, I saw that coming, but it was very heartfelt nonetheless.

Mon: I didn’t see it coming, and I loved it. I was internally going ‘awwww’, it was so cute. I needed more of those cute moments. 

Ron: There’s a lot of humour in this film and I was expecting it. In fact, I was a bit worried that the promos I couldn’t avoid had lied to me. That this film would turn out to be too dark and not funny at all. But it’s hilarious! Even some of the serious moments are hilarious. You’re half-terrified your favourite character will die but also laughing at the way they’re being killed.

Mon: This film is ridiculously funny. The combo of director Jake Schreier and writers Eric Pearson and Joanna Calo brings the laughs to the fore. They do a great job of weaving in the humour during some of the darker scenes, without undermining the emotional heft of it. At other times, they just lean into the laughs. I’m so glad we got a somewhat happy film to spend time with in the MCU.

Ron: I’m still confused about my feelings for the film. I got a Yelena movie and I’m still pumped about that. But I didn’t get enough Ava, Taskmaster, or Bucky, and I love all of them too much not to feel disappointed about it. While the film is very enjoyable, I wanted the chemistry between the characters to really pop. And it doesn’t. The reason why the Avengers films worked was because the chemistry was insane. Hell, Bucky’s here because Sebastian Stan had ridiculous amounts of chemistry with Chris Evans and Anthony Mackie. These characters are fun together but they aren’t electric!

Mon: I had a lot of fun watching Thunderbolts* – the humour is great, the action is nice. I loved seeing these characters on screen after they’d been missing for so long. But there were missteps that dampened my complete enjoyment of the film. I ached for more of some of the characters; I needed better pacing. I was also left confused because Thunderbolts* isn’t trying to say anything – it’s a story in a franchise and it’s advancing the narrative of that franchise. Not much happens in the way of sending a message. I kinda like that. We can just have fun with Thunderbolts*. And we do. If only they’d taken advantage of the gravity the characters brought with them. Ugh, what a miss. 

Ron: True. We wanted more character moments. Like in The Eternals. But it was still a fun film. And Bucky’s amazing hair is a winner in my book.