Does anyone hate MCU films?

[luprki]

Because we're fans on the internet. Because the comic book movie genre has grown so much since 1999, perspectives change as we have a wider ranger of stuff to compare and have seen the genre develop further. Because we don't all think the same. Something else. A bit of everything. Take your pick.



I think I agree. Everyone's just talking past each other. In retrospect, this should've remained a "safe place" for non-MCU fans.

I agree with you on all of this.

[Powerboy]

Are you kidding? The DCEU by far is the most hated not only superhero movie franchise, but the most hated movie franchise of the last decade or so, period. Only the Star Wars prequels come anywhere close. The MCU is put on a pedestal by the vast majority of the internet, let's not act like the vocal minority here and there means there's any real hatred for it.

Ask yourself who's the most hated superhero movie director? Answer, Zack Snyder (hated mainly for his DCEU films).

What's the most hated superhero movie? Answer, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (DCEU) Followed very closely by Suicide Squad (DCEU).

Most controversial and mocked scene? Martha scene in BvS (DCEU)

Most hated superhero movie performance? Any one of the following: Jared Leto in Suicide Squad, Henry Cavill in Man of Steel and BvS, Ben Affleck in Justice League, or Jessie Eisenberg in BvS. All are DCEU movies.

Think of the way the majority of the internet leapt to James Gunn's defense when his controversial tweets resurfaced. I know for a fact of it was Zack Snyder in his place that wouldn't have happened. There's no contest, whether It's deserved or not the DCEU is far more hated then the fawned over MCU.

True. Some of the "reviews" of DC movies, especially fan reviews, have bordered on psychotic. Even the biggest point of the "professional" reviews seems to be "They aren't fun" which apparently has now become the main and only requirement for the genre.

[jetengine]

True. Some of the "reviews" of DC movies, especially fan reviews, have bordered on psychotic. Even the biggest point of the "professional" reviews seems to be "They aren't fun" which apparently has now become the main and only requirement for the genre.

....can you actually read what you've written ? Just stop and read it again slowly. YOU ARE CRITICISING PEOPLE FOR WANTING FUN. Like....damn. Its a superhero movie ffs

[luprki]

Whether it’s DCEU, MCU or XCU doesn’t matter, they all have some good and bad. One is no better than the other. The only real difference is Disney spends more on marketing.

[Midvillian1322]

Whether it’s DCEU, MCU or XCU doesn’t matter, they all have some good and bad. One is no better than the other. The only real difference is Disney spends more on marketing.

Where you get this from? Endgame was estimated at 200m in marketing but Infinty war and most big budget Marvel movies is at 150m- 175m. BvS was estimated at 175-200m and Justice league at around 180m. Marvel is spending appropriate amount on marketing for the Budgets of they're movies. But marketing costs has risen across the board for all studios. If you do some research you will see Rise of marketing costs in North America is one of Hollywodds biggest concerns.

[Theleviathan]

True. Some of the "reviews" of DC movies, especially fan reviews, have bordered on psychotic. Even the biggest point of the "professional" reviews seems to be "They aren't fun" which apparently has now become the main and only requirement for the genre.

Well, when the stories aren't War and Peace, it's usually a good idea to at least make them enjoyable.

No one will confuse the Infinity Saga as a masterstroke of writing either. What it is, however, is a masterpiece of entertainment. It has only two peers worth even mentioning in the same breath: Potter and Star Wars.

[luprki]

Where you get this from? Endgame was estimated at 200m in marketing but Infinty war and most big budget Marvel movies is at 150m- 175m. BvS was estimated at 175-200m and Justice league at around 180m. Marvel is spending appropriate amount on marketing for the Budgets of they're movies. But marketing costs has risen across the board for all studios. If you do some research you will see Rise of marketing costs in North America is one of Hollywodds biggest concerns.

I’m talking about franchise, not individual movie. On average the MCU marketing cost $130m, DCEU averaged $80m and XCU is only $60m

[Blind Wedjat]

Here's the thing about MCU criticism and MCU fans:

It's very rare to find an MCU fan that truly thinks all the MCU films are flawless. Very rare. On average, you'll find most MCU fans will admit or believe in the following:

• That Iron Man 2 was an extremely poor sequel.
• That The Avengers is aging a bit (though still a classic).
• That the Mandarin twist in Iron Man 3 was terrible, disrespectful to the comics and made the film worse off.
• That Thor: The Dark World was a terribly mediocre film with the film's worst villain
• That Avengers: Age of Ultron was a disappointment of a sequel.
• That Ant-Man would have been a better film if Edgar Wright was still on board.
• That Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol 2 took its humour way too far.
• That Thor: Ragnarok made Thor more likable and popular at the expense of doing the story or the lore justice.
• That Black Panther is an overrated (if not the most overrated) MCU film.
• That Ant-Man & the Wasp is completely forgettable.
• That Captain Marvel is an extremely bland film.
• That Avengers: Endgame has one of the worst/most confusing use of a plot device (time travel) in the MCU.

I only don't agree with two of these points here, but these are very common criticisms and shared opinions with the MCU fandom. If these things aren't being simply ignored by some of the users here, it does not surprise me that some people don't know of these criticisms because they aren't in the fandom. This is usually what happens when people from the outside try to look in and analyse a fandom and usually generalise based on one experience, perception or preconceived notion.

At least from what I've seen on here, other comic book websites and forums, social media, YouTube and in real life, there are only a few films which most MCU fans consider to be outright great movies out of all of them. The majority of the rest are just passable, good enough films and there are at least two to five films they consider to be bad films. Moreso you will find that most aren't a fan of MCU's depiction of Spider-Man, Hulk, Thor, and other characters or storylines.

Renegade Cut on YouTube on his analysis of DCEU film and culture pointed out that most MCU fans can admit one of the films is flawed or not good one way or the other mostly because they have other good films they can fall back. Whereas with the DCEU (keep in mind this video essay series was made before Aquaman and Shazam had been released) it's a lot harder for fans to admit Man of Steel or Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice was flawed because they didn't have anything to fall back on (as well as other reasons he mentioned but aren't relevant here). I'm sure some have come across hardcore MCU fans that will never admit a negative thing about the MCU, but it isn't the only franchise that has such fans and I doubt they're the majority.

[Blind Wedjat]

The problem with the criticism sometimes thrown at the MCU is that it's simply bad criticism. This bad criticism usually comes from fanboys from a rival studio or franchise that simply want to say something bad because they have a personal stake in some online fanboy war. Most of the time, these criticisms ignore basic facts, are hypocritical, or try to pass of a subjective opinion as an objective criticism.

Example #1: The MCU has no stakes or consequences (ignores basic facts).

Saying a superhero movie has no stakes or consequences really doesn't make any sense, yet this was a frequent criticism thrown at the MCU, usually by DC/DCEU fans. In a superhero movie, something is always at stake. A city, the world, the lives of loved ones, the protagonist's life. These things are always hanging in the balance in an MCU film. If there are bad guys in a superhero movie, there are stakes. Consequences are results or effect that are usually unwanted. This happens in every MCU film. People get hurt, property is destroyed, relationships fall out, civilians are hurt or are killed.

The reason why this was thrown around so much is because the meaning of both words were twisted to say that there isn't enough death in the MCU, typically death of main characters. But characters don't have to die for there to be stakes or consequences. The two don't necessarily have a causality between them. But this was used as way of saying the MCU films weren't realistic or mature, and therefore not good. A film doesn't have to be mature or realistic to be good, and the MCU does not go for hyperrealism or explicit maturity. It has never been part of their brand and doesn't have to be. The MCU usually adapts elements of realism in regards to visuals and practical approaches to production and costume design.

Example #2: All MCU films are the same and generic (ignores basic facts and hypocritical).

The MCU has established a brand as regards to their style and approach to movie making. This isn't an entirely unique thing, as many film studios such as Disney, Warner Brothers and MGM did develop and in-house style and brand in the past and it still exists today. The difference between Marvel Studios and these other studios is the Marvel Studios only has one ongoing franchise and is only making one kind of film within that franchise: superhero movies. Obviously the MCU doesn't possess films like Logan or Joker, but their films have slight differences. Some films are more serious or comedic, take inspiration from different genres, or play around with the typical three-act structure. More recently we're starting to see the unique style of the filmmaker come through with films like Black Panther and Thor: Ragnarok. Marvel Studios has had issues with directors and actors in the past, especially regarding artistic freedom, but when fanboys of the DCEU, X-Men films Nolan Batman or Raimi Spider-Man try to argue with fanboys of the MCU about this, it always come across as hypocritical.

For a time the DCEU was associated only with Zack Snyder's style of filmmaking, and aside from the comedic Suicide Squad at the time, all the DCEU films had a similar tone (with films like Aquaman and Shazam starting to change this). The X-Men films have never deviated from the established tone of the first film (with the Deadpool franchise and Logan being the only exceptions). All of Nolan's Batman films and Raimi's Spider-Man films (and even the TASM films) all used the same tone within the franchise. So just like the MCU, they established a style or brand and stuck with it. The only difference is that the MCU is a larger franchise with far more films and franchises within itself, but being a singular franchise still it has a broad that is expected because it's part of the brand. Marvel is also not the only studio with problems of studio interference as we have learned in recent years.

Example #3: The MCU has a villain problem (hypocritical and slightly subjective).

Out of all the critics listed this has to be the one with the most truth to it. I'd argue that during Phase 1, Marvel has good villains (with the exception of Whiplash in Iron Man 2). They were competent villains in which the actors played their parts well with motives just above being "evil because why not?" Loki was the best to come out of this phase, but other villains like Obadiah Stane and Red Skull being good enough for the movie. The problem was Loki aside they weren't great villains. Come Phase 2, and this is where the villain problem started. The aforementioned Mandarin twist occured. Then Malekieth followed. Ronan was then underutilised, Ultron was too divisive and poorly written, and Yellowjacket was a bust. It took Phase 3 for the use of villains to return to the Phase 1 standard, except this time there wasn't just one Loki. The phase produced Killmonger and Thanos, two of the most talked about movie villains this decade and also cranked out praised villains like Vulture, Hela, Zemo and Mysterio. The only let downs were Kaecilius from Doctor Strange and the Kree from Captain Marvel.

However just like Example #2 when this criticism comes from the aforementioned group of fanboys, it sounds hypocritical. Spider-Man 2 being the most acclaimed of the Raimi series also has Doctor Octopus as it most acclaimed villain. Willem Dafoe's Green Goblin is mostly a meme these days and only Sandman is a liked villain from Spider-Man 3. The Nolan trilogy produced one of the best movie villains of all time, but R'as al Ghul is forgotten these days it seems and Bane is divisive, and Talia al Ghul barely left an impact. All three are also notorious for being white washed. All three villains from the TASM movies are considered bad, and the DCEU really doesn't have a single acclaimed villain yet, with the likes of Zod and Ocean Master just being passable. The X-Men films really only have Magneto (and Ian McKellen's version is far superior). If you ask me, I don't think superhero movies have many great movie villains in the first place. I'd only rank Nolan's Joker, McKellen's Magneto, Loki, Killmonger and Thanos amongst the top alongside guys like Darth Vader, Michael Myers, Keyser Soze, Hannibal Lecter, Anton Chigurh, John Doe (SE7EN), Hans Gruber, T-1000, Agent Smith, Palpatine, Gollum, Hans Landa, Scar, Freddy Kreuger, and so on. The majority simply aren't as effective or iconic.

It's not like there aren't any good criticisms of the MCU. You can find them in individual movie reviews and on YouTube or anywhere else. Check out Patrick Willems video on colour grading, Browntable's video on bad VFX, and Every Frame a Painting's video on original scores (and this response).

Tl;dr: I'm just tired of bad arguments when it comes to criticising the MCU. Like what you like and dislike what you like, but some many people are just fanboys these days that just want to talk over one another without saying anything constructive.

[Midvillian1322]

I’m talking about franchise, not individual movie. On average the MCU marketing cost $130m, DCEU averaged $80m and XCU is only $60m

Marketing is all relative to the budget. MCU doesnt have smaller films to offset it like XCU and DCEU.

Also sources please I havent looked into Shazam or Wonder Woman but SS/Aquaman/JL/BvS all had marketing budgets of 150+.. XCU has had plenty of low budget films but Dark Phoenix , Apoclypse, BvS, Justice League all had huge marketing budgets and it didnt help them at all. So let's keeps pretending that Marketing is the issue here.

[Powerboy]

....can you actually read what you've written ? Just stop and read it again slowly. YOU ARE CRITICISING PEOPLE FOR WANTING FUN. Like....damn. Its a superhero movie ffs

I am criticizing people for saying that nothing in a particular genre is good unless it's "fun" in the sense of not having any substance. Many of the criticisms of the early DCEU movies were that they were not fun. But, using the MCU movies as their base, many people are now defining "fun" as "Complete fluff or enough that IF there is a serious scene, it must be undercut with several one-liners so that nobody gets bored and starts thinking the main point is, well, that there even is a point." Nobody is going to try to do another Watchmen or another Dark Knight as long as the prevailing attitude is that the Gene Hackman version of Lex Luthor or the average MCU movie is the only model of how it should be done.

And I have nothing against some MCU movies being lighthearted fluff but that's gotten to be most of them to the point that the deaths of an entire race of beings and the end of a civilization is now done as a slapstick comedy.

[Powerboy]

Well, when the stories aren't War and Peace, it's usually a good idea to at least make them enjoyable.

No one will confuse the Infinity Saga as a masterstroke of writing either. What it is, however, is a masterpiece of entertainment. It has only two peers worth even mentioning in the same breath: Potter and Star Wars.

So the problem is what is being defined as enjoyable. Now, apparently, anything that isn't War and Peace might as well be fluff and be done with it.

P.S. I know that using W&P as your example is exaggerating to make your point so I will say we are both probably exaggerating to make our points.

[Powerboy]

[QUOTE] [*]That The Avengers is aging a bit (though still a classic).[*]That the Mandarin twist in Iron Man 3 was terrible, disrespectful to the comics and made the film worse off.[*]That Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol 2 took its humour way too far.[*]That Black Panther is an overrated (if not the most overrated) MCU film.[*]That Captain Marvel is an extremely bland film.[*]That Avengers: Endgame has one of the worst/most confusing use of a plot device (time travel) in the MCU. [quote]

I agree with some of your points. Although I am getting somewhat tired of the MCU pattern that has developed, I still watch them and actually disagree on the above points.

I think Avengers still holds up.

I think the Mandarin twist was brilliant and is no more disrespectful to the comics than Thor never having been Don Blake or Tony Stark starting out right away as an alcoholic and a juvenile.

Guardians 2 did go too far but the first Guardians established that this was going to be more of a comedy series so I'm okay with that.

Black Panther is a bit overrated but it's still one of the best of the MCU movies.

Eh, I wouldn't call Captain Marvel bland. It was fairly ordinary among the current phase it was in.

I think Endgame made the mistake of really trying to explain it rather than just doing it and let the flaws fall where they may.

[Powerboy]

Usually, I'm the type of person who separates the comedy and the drama and likes them both in different ways. I even can watch old comedy shows like Bewitched and explain the serious undercurrents beneath the comedy. I loved "Hercules the Legendary Journeys". Most shows that mixed comedy and drama like that would lose me because you can't take the drama seriously when it's slapstick a minute later and you can't love the comedy when someone is dying a minute later. Yet, it somehow worked for me in a blend that worked most of the time.

I'm probably exaggerating to make a point in my growing "heavy sigh" reaction to the MCU humor or maybe stuff like Ragnorak started a trend in the MCU that it pushing it way too far to the comedy side.

[Rakiduam]

I disagree with almost all of your points. The one thing I agree on is sterile is subjective.

This is the “Does Anyone Hate MCU Films?” Thread. As anybody can see I have many reasons to hate MCU films.
But my main pet peeve is how Disney has turned the MCU into a cash grab. It’s all about box office and not about good storytelling anymore. The pre-Disney MCU was excellent with good stories and great character development. Now it’s all about let’s play it safe to get a billion dollars box office.
My last MCU is FFH, even I was expecting better than what I actually saw. That movie helped me decide, no more MCU films. I have gotten feed up with the MCU, I crave for a deep and great story, some that the MCU hasn’t done for a long time.

Wasn't pre disney Marvel just Iron man and the The Incredible Hulk? Or you are talking about gems like Fox's Daredevil and Electra? Though X-Men was pretty good, but I'm not sure how much deep could you find in FF4 1 and 2