What are the Problems with the MCU?

[Thor-Ul]

Long ago I read/learned that there are only about 35 plots in all fiction. We're actually twisting arcs, etc from thousands of years ago.


So I don't have expectations that there is some great plot that no one has used/found.

Serialized fiction of most forms ends up using Soap Opera conventions, to keep characters or situations changing.

There are mostly 3 main roles for your main type characters.

Victim
Victimizer

Redemptionist.

That is all, friends.

It is possible. I mean, DNA is only made of four proteins. It is the combination what can made a lot of new different forms.

[the illustrious mr. kenway]

Up until Winter Soldier and Civil War, I don't feel like the MCU did the shared universe aspect that well outside of Avenger films.

After Endgame, the MCU spread itself too thin with the Disney shows with most of them feeling like they were better off as films. A compromise would've been to let new characters have shows while the old favorites stay in the films.

[DragonsChi]

Disney.

When Marvel started out they had a clear plan and vision. When the Disney merger ( or whatever you would like to call it) happen they let the plan go on with minor interferences. Once that plan was complete they started Corparteizing the brand and the results are predictable.

When you stop caring about producing good quality products and start focusing on turning money as if it was butter in a barrel you get some weird gooey substance only those who have zero options would choose to eat.

It’s Simple.

[Albert1981]

I don't mind the shows much (though I haven't really watched them, apart from a couple of episodes of Loki), but I don't think they should be essential viewing for the movies. Let them be an optional extra. If you're going to use characters and plot elements from the shows in the movies, do a better job bringing movie-only audiences up to speed without making them feel like they missed something.



True. The superhero genre, MCU or non-MCU, is at its best when it actually tells stories through the prism of other genres. TDK is a crime film. Logan is a Western. GotG is a space opera. Ant-Man is a heist film. WW is a war film. And so on.

I think you can skip the shows and still understand the movies. BUT the experiences of watching the films ARE enhanced by watching the television stuff. In the 2010s, viewing a couple of MCU movies each year was not too big of a commitment. And folks would be FAR more likely to watch EVERY MCU instalment. So most people watching MCU projects on the big screens would be largely caught up on what the heck is going on in the broader cinematic universe. Like even that new Deadpool movie will have TVA material included in it. And the two Loki seasons were not part of the "main" MCU timeline. Some viewers love that Loki is connected to Deadpool. But a lot of people will not understand what is going on. And the TVA timeline stuff is a bit complicated to understand in my opinion.

[Omega Alpha]

The MCU spread itself too thin and had too much faith in minor characters. They should have an X-Men and F4 film out by now

[Oberon]

It is possible. I mean, DNA is only made of four proteins. It is the combination what can made a lot of new different forms.

Yes, in any media with 'soap' like character arcs, the changing roles allow for changes or mutations in the plots.

A person's never seen twin comes back from the dead, is possessed by the Devil but redeems themselves by

donating their right lung to their twin. (this has elements of 3 different actual soap plots- numerous, since they're repeated by other soaps,lol)

[gurkle]

The MCU spread itself too thin and had too much faith in minor characters. They should have an X-Men and F4 film out by now

Faith in minor characters is pretty much the core of the MCU, though. Feige realized that characters most of the public didn't know, like Iron Man, could be just as successful as the A-list characters Marvel had sold the rights to like Fantastic Four and X-Men, because superhero comics have a small audience and movies have a big one.

The MCU Fantastic Four and X-Men will help if they turn out to be good, but they're not guaranteed to do any better than a Guardians of the Galaxy movie. I don't think there really are any A-list superheroes who always do well except Batman and Spider-Man.

[Maestro 216]

Faith in minor characters is pretty much the core of the MCU, though. Feige realized that characters most of the public didn't know, like Iron Man, could be just as successful as the A-list characters Marvel had sold the rights to like Fantastic Four and X-Men, because superhero comics have a small audience and movies have a big one.

The MCU Fantastic Four and X-Men will help if they turn out to be good, but they're not guaranteed to do any better than a Guardians of the Galaxy movie. I don't think there really are any A-list superheroes who always do well except Batman and Spider-Man.

They squuezed the well by the time we got an Eternals film.

[ComicNoobie]

Faith in minor characters is pretty much the core of the MCU, though. Feige realized that characters most of the public didn't know, like Iron Man, could be just as successful as the A-list characters Marvel had sold the rights to like Fantastic Four and X-Men, because superhero comics have a small audience and movies have a big one.

The MCU Fantastic Four and X-Men will help if they turn out to be good, but they're not guaranteed to do any better than a Guardians of the Galaxy movie. I don't think there really are any A-list superheroes who always do well except Batman and Spider-Man.

None of the previous Fantastic Four movies have been well received, especially that 2015 one. And X-Men became a mess burning through their iconic story titles with poor adaptations. As a fan of the Phoenix Saga (especially the animated series one) it was painful seeing it butchered twice in movies. It wouldn't surprise me if there is a generation of new Marvel fans who consider them the B-listers from media alone outside comics. That's crazy considering how popular X-Men was in the 90s and very early 2000s. Their movies didn't have any of the impact the comics and TV shows did. It's why they're continuing 97 rather than making something original for them.

[the illustrious mr. kenway]

I don't mind the multiverse stuff but it tends be used more for fanservice than characterization.

DS2 was a mix of both. To me, the problem was the Doctor Strange, America Chavez, Scarlet Witch dynamic. It felt like 3 different plots stitched together Frankenstein style.

[lefthanded]

None of the previous Fantastic Four movies have been well received, especially that 2015 one. And X-Men became a mess burning through their iconic story titles with poor adaptations. As a fan of the Phoenix Saga (especially the animated series one) it was painful seeing it butchered twice in movies. It wouldn't surprise me if there is a generation of new Marvel fans who consider them the B-listers from media alone outside comics. That's crazy considering how popular X-Men was in the 90s and very early 2000s. Their movies didn't have any of the impact the comics and TV shows did. It's why they're continuing 97 rather than making something original for them.

X-men are a weird property, in that it is well known IP, and beloved by many, but the movies have never really done super amazing.

Even the well reviewed pre-MCU movies (X2, Days of Future Past) top out at about 700 million at the box office. Most of the films have done <500 million at the box office (not adjusting for inflation of course).
And Days of Future's Past was really trying to Jurassic World Dominion thing of trying to goose its numbers by combining nostalgia characters plus the new characters.

In contrast, Spiderman consistently performed well pre-MCU, with Raimi's trilogy averaging 700+ million, and the less well received Webb's movies also averaging 700+ million. The MCU-effect didn't really boost Spider-man's box office for the first movie, but did for the subsequent two.

So, I don't know how much better MCU X-men would do at the box office, so I agree that fans shouldn't necessarily just expect F4/X-men to 'save' the MCU.

[kcekada]

Probably a minor complaint...but we never got a payoff on this....

The promise that scene had for the MCU has long been lost, IMHO. Again, the rush to get to Endgame meant a lot of good stuff was left behind. Now, they could obviously do an Invaders story set in the days after Cap was lost -- with Cap replaced by either the Patriot and/or Union Jack -- and bring back Red Skull. Maybe throw in a B plot with the Falsworth family and Baron Blood.

I'd rather see that movie than the Thunderbolts. Seems like movie goers like WWII films, so why not?

[vitaminbee]

The problem is that when the Multiverse got introduced, it kind of took over and took any sort interesting thing away from the MCU. I don't think No Way Home was that interesting, it was nice seeing the Spider-Men back but at the loss of making something interesting. The multiverse has kind of ruined any sort of world building the MCU had going for it.

[Gnostic]

The problem is that when the Multiverse got introduced, it kind of took over and took any sort interesting thing away from the MCU. I don't think No Way Home was that interesting, it was nice seeing the Spider-Men back but at the loss of making something interesting. The multiverse has kind of ruined any sort of world building the MCU had going for it.

The multiverse was barely used. There has only be only been four projects that have explored it (Loki, What If, No Way Home, and Multiverse of Madness). Maybe five if you count Endgame.

[Frontier]

The multiverse was barely used. There has only be only been four projects that have explored it (Loki, What If, No Way Home, and Multiverse of Madness). Maybe five if you count Endgame.

On-top of other series/movies using the Multiverse too, it just felt like a lot.