What Separates Good Marvel & Bad Marvel?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- Thanks to Keeps for sponsoring this video! Head to keeps.com/theelk to get 50% off your first order of Keeps hair loss treatment.
________
Examining the Marvel Cinematic Universe and identifying the one element that usually determines whether the movie is good or bad.
Merchandise!! -
entertain-the-...
Listen to my D&D Podcast (Of Mice and Men and Monsters) right now by clicking here --
omamam.com
PATREON - / entertaintheelk
INSTAGRAM - @EntertainTheElk
TIKTOK - @EntertainTheElk
TWITTER - @EntertainTheElk
Head to keeps.com/theelk to get 50% off your first order of Keeps hair loss treatment.
*What do you think separates Good Marvel from Bad Marvel?*
I'd say a sense of purpose, sometimes it feels like it's going through a checklist for broadest appeal but when they really are trying to convey a certain idea it makes it unique enough to enter the good range
@AtheJbaka you clearly didn't watch a Marvel movie. Or understand Scorsese's quote.
Well good writing and good characters that’s what makes good marvel bad marvel is like watching a zaitoichi movie it’s boring and you realize there are 23 of these.
Same thing that separates Good Movies from Bad Movies, The Writing.
@@TomEyeTheSFMguy that was about Hollywood caring about IP and franchise, and squeezing out modestly budget films, I think. It’s been awhile since I read the quote. Though I think people should stop asking directors about Marvel and other superhero flicks.
I can't believe you didn't mention the poster-child for this issue, Wandavision, which starts off as an intimate character study and, somewhere past the halfway point, devolves into a meaningless and nonsensical barrage of CGI and big external stakes that don't mean anything.
Yes !
I was so engaged in the emotional story, but they had to ruin it with the last 3 episodes. Were they worried that the public would be bored without CGI and big comic-book magical twists ?
I think one of the reasons I think Ronan works enough in the first Guardians films is that he plays it so straight and seriously, he does contrast nicely to the varied bag of emotions and goofiness that are trying to stop him from doing anything bad because, they live in the galaxy that stands to be ruined by him, as Quill pointed out from Rocket's remark about what the galaxy ever did for them. Plays well into the comedy of it in a way. I think of it like the first Ghostbusters in a way.
I disagree, I think that quality with Ronin highlights a problem with early MCU imo. The straightness in contrast to much of the GOTG crew idiosyncratic goofy personalities (which is only exemplified at the end of the 3rd act with Peter's "dance-off" moment) is used to highlight and endear the protagonists to the audiences not add much of substance to the villain. So I don't think that's what made Ronan "work enough" but a reason the GOTG characters excelled. They seemed not to be interested at all in fleshing out their villains or giving them distinctive qualities but make them as bland as possible to highlight how charismatic and fleshed out the protagonists were.
@@themadtitan7603 Agreed. Ronan was an obstacle, tied to the Thanos/Infinity Stone plot in some way, and evil for reasons. There was little substance to him, only contrast for the protagonists' personalities. Unfortunately, I don't see how he'd do better in such a movie.
"the more they care, the more they'll worry"
I think this is why ep 4 of stranger things hit so hard. They did a great job allowing the audience to care about everything that happening
Episode four of stranger things 4 is my favourite episode of the show
I don't know if I agree about the first Avengers film. Whatever you want to say about Joss Whedon (and I'm likely to agree with you) he did a miraculous job in telling the stories of six separate protagonists in a big-stakes fight, and managed to make it feel personal. I think the reason they could gloss over some of the specific plot points, the reason each character could feel weighty while having an abbreviated story-arc, was because the protagonist wasn't Steve, Bruce, Clint, Natasha, or even Tony, the protagonist was the Avengers.
That sounds like some film-school waffle, so let me elaborate. The story hinges on all these characters coming together. They're all strong personalities with widely varied backgrounds and often conflicting values, and they have to "put aside their differences and become something more" as Nick Fury states. So what does that mean? To my mind, it means they have to put aside their subjective points of view, see the world through one anothers' eyes, and find a shared stance on what's the right thing to do, and how to go about it. And each one goes through this process in their own way. But they each must overcome the same basic problem, who they think they are. Steve thinks he's a soldier. Tony thinks he's genius. Clint and Natasha think they're mercenaries. Thor thinks he's a big brother. And Bruce thinks he's a monster. And each of these personas stand in the way of them becoming heroes. So ultimately, they're all on the same journey, they're all trapped in a persona that only separates them from one another, and keeps them from doing the right thing. Steve has to defy orders, Thor has to let go of his hope to "fix" Loki, Clint and Natasha have to choose a side, Bruce has to accept the monster inside himself instead of fighting it, and Tony has to admit that there are some problems you can't out-smart, that sometimes, you have to jump on the grenade. They all overcome the trap of their individual personas to unite. That doesn't mean they stop being individuals, it just means they find something more inside themselves by joining the team.
So it's not all that important if we don't know the personal backstories of each character. It's the tapestry, the bits and pieces of each one combined, that paint a larger picture of a group-protagonist. Who they are doesn't need backstory, it just needs their interactions. The way they bounce off of one another tells us who they are, and establish the real stakes. What are the real stakes? Can they overcome their false personas and become the heroes the world needs? Or will they stay trapped in their stunted notions of who they are? For each character, this choice is unique, yet it's all the same arc. So almost uniquely, this movie managed to tell a single story with multiple protagonists, the story of a how individuals come together for the greater good.
I think i might have to disagree with your take on no way home. The weaponized nostalgia is spot on (i totally fell for it myself) but the stakes for me seem much more personal. Peter doesnt have strange use the spell for selfish reasons, its for his friends. Although the stakes are world ending rather than return these villains to there reality where theyll die he gives them a second chance. And when he needs strange to fix everything he makes the choice to remain unknown to his friends and the whole world, all for their benefit. Although the scale is massive the stakes are deeply personal i thought.
That's what I thought too
Bro who cares if it weaponised nostalgia, the movie is 10 times better for it
ironman 3 is one of my favorite mcu movies and it does not get enough love
Yeah I think it gets such a bad rep because of the Mandarin thing. And that sucks because I honestly found it pretty good otherwise.
For the most part, I agree with everything said, but The Avengers films, for me at least, have elements that thread through the films that ground them as individuals even if not directly linked to the plot. These moments help me to care for the protagonists and therefore engage me in their participation. Age of Ultron is easily maligned, but the after-party sequence has those human elements of comradery, the team shook after the Johannesburg altercation leading to many members of the team evaluating many of their positions on the farm, etc.
These movies succeed because people like the characters constructed and how they interact and play off of each other (for the most part). There are tons of franchises that have got massive CGI flashing lights, yet they've made this one last and stay engaging for the most because people ask "I can't wait for Shang-Chi to meet Kamala Khan" after seeing their own developments individually; they make you want to see the dynamics in a conversation. In the big crossover events, these moments, for me, hold together the weight of the huge stakes.
I agree. In Endgame, Thor is a great example of this. After feeling worthless because he failed at pretty much everything, he eventually just gave up. The only thing that could pull him out of the gutter wasn't a speech from Captain America or the "snap out of it" smack from Rocket, but the comfort and advice from is long dead mother. Then right after, Mjollnir still returns to him and he realizes that he is still worthy.
And that's just Thor. equal attention and care was extended to Steve, Tony, and Natasha, and maybe a few others.
It's kinda sad that you need 14 movies all threaded together to appreciate the little character moments. That's the problem with these thrill-ride franchises.
Meanwhile, films created with artistic integrity can give you profound character development in 14 minutes.
Also, most Marvel movies don't actually have stakes, for the reasons explained well in this video. It's not traditional filmmaking, it's a product made by a room of executives that know nothing about art... And you're buying it.
@@28Pluto Bah. What a contemptible snob you are! YOU'RE "kinda sad"!😠
@@28Pluto okay guy. Go brood somewhere else.
@@28Pluto You such a buzzkill, man. I can watch Infinity War and Godfather 2 on the same day and enjoy both. It's sadder you can't and trynna deny others.
Superman is a great character and can be extremely relatable it's just a matter of making the character drama work rather than making him a symbol that becomes meaningless. Anyway when he said that about captain marvel being like Superman, neither of those characters are necessarily bad, just they get fucked by the writers who are making their movies
🧢
Yeah I always hate when people say a character is boring cause they're too powerful. It can work, just takes skill. Too bad no one ever seems to make it work in movie form. Apparently there are some good Superman shows atleast.
Superman and Lois is proof that with the right writers Superman can be engaging and worth watching. I mean yeah, it is a CW show that can trip a little into soap opera territory but they manage to dodge most of the obvious pratfalls a lot of soaps, including CW shows, tend to fall into.
@@darksideofevil13 It's because Hollywood doesn't do power scaling well. It's why they haven't got Superman right since the 70s that was because the tech made him be just grounded enough.
The Avengers films can have the big stakes because they’re built on the back of the films leading up to them. Those films help us understand and care about the characters on a more personal level that allows us to get invested when we see all of them together dealing with these threats they couldn’t manage alone
I think Iron Man 2 and 3 are actually some of the weaker entires in the MCU, and show why having personal stakes isn’t enough to make a great film. You also need a great story to match those stakes.
13:29
Because Universal held the films rights to Hulk
I like the premise but have to disagree with some of it. Iron Man 2 is largely panned as one of the weakest movies in the MCU, and I feel the spy/thriller aspect of Cap 2, along with the reveal that Hydra has been infiltrating SHIELD for years makes it one of the top movies. Stakes mean a lot, but small stakes don't always make for great movie, especially in the MCU.
But the core emotional stakes in Winter Soldier is Bucky/Cap which is very intimate, and I think without that it would be worse than Civil War
Your videos are very well done and thoughtful!
The line about we know how it will end but the small stakes can still surprise us is definitely something I’m going to keep in my back pocket
This was such a well thought out video essay and agree on pretty much all of what you said. The problem I ended up having with Infinity War and Endgame with the snap is that it solely focused on the Avengers disappearing and isolated it to just Wakanda and whatever planet Iron Man and crew were on. If it was supposed to be 50% of all life in the universe then why not focus more on people? It really felt like they were limiting the impact of the story to only focus on characters with half baked emotional stakes. I really wish Marvel would tend to focus on character development versus action and spectacle at this point.
I'd say that the Marvel (the MCU) does mostly focus on character development over action and spectacle and that's a reason that made them stand out from a lot of major blockbuster franchises out there. In fact recently, it's to the point where a lot of their projects relatively don't have a lot of action and when it's there, I'd say it's been dropping in quality recently.
I felt that Endgame did reasonably well showing how impacted everyone and everything was, especially in the beginning of the movie with Cap, Widow, Hawkeye, Ant-Man, and Tony. It got silly once time-travel started happening and 2014 Thanos got involved, but I was still invested throughout.
However, that five year gap being almost completely untouched or given weight in the movies since then (especially Far From Home, the after-credits in No Way Home with random bartender, or really anything that's come out.)
I still have The Leftovers.
The fans makes it worse as well, apparently there are some Zendaya stans that wants MJ to reunite with Peter Parker and be a couple again in the next Spider-Man trilogy, which honestly sounds like a god awful idea that not only it erases some of the stakes and weight that No Way Home had in the ending, but it also completely ruins Peter's development as a character. Not to mention that we've already seen something like that with Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone from TASM franchise as well, we don't need to see it again, a new love interest and supporting cast would be a great breath of fresh air for the franchise and audience.
I agree with most of what you’re saying, except with the conflicts not being interesting because nobody is going to die. That’s not the point of a lot of these scenes. Hulk vs Iron Man isn’t intense because we think one of them could get hurt or die. It’s watching them fight in a high populated area and Tony trying to get Hulk under control without killing any civilians. The fight at the airport is intense because whichever side your on you want to see them succeed. Rhody getting paralyzed is crucial to the plot of this movie. It’s the thing that causes Tony and Steve to have different sides in the first place. The people fighting don’t have to be in danger for the fights to still have impact and meaning to the plot
I do disagree in a way with your comment about civil war, that actions purpose can't just be good action.I agree that action that serves a narrative point/character motivation etc. is more effective. but i also feel like we should allow moments for good fighting/visuals for the sake of good fighting choreo and visuals spectacle. Again not saying you are wrong for wanting a good fight scene to mean somthinng but sometimes just enjoying the ride is also valid.
Overall, I'd say Civil War is one of the best MCU films in this department for most of its action scenes which is actually the Russos' philosophy as they've spoke about it in interviews. Even its defining airport battle despite being thought of as a spectacle, has plot relevance and I consider it to be the peak of its two leads arcs leading up to this point.
I do agree with your point that action can just be about the choreography and spectacle aspect to it, in fact I think the MCU has been failing in this aspect as of late and its led to a considerable decline in their action sequences imo.
Thanos didn’t try to kill half the universe. He did it.
…Which, for the record, doesn’t solve the problem of resource consumption.
I really disagree with Thor the Dark world being the wrong direction for Marvel.
You said there’s a macguffine that the bad guy needs and the hero needs to get this macguffine before the bad guy gets it, this formula have been used in Lord of The rings, in Harry Potter and the deathly hollows, Star Wars and Star Wars the force Awakens. It been used in good films that’s not the problem.
Also the movie puts Thor in a really emotional conflict because this macguffine kills the woman he loves, the bad guys killed his mother, his father going nuts because of the death of his mother and going to risk all of Asgard for it, he needs to rebel his father and trust his untrustworthy brother for this to come and all of that he needs to do in a limited time. This all give some great conflicts between Thor and Loki with probably one of the best dialogues EVER. The great stakes is the universe is going to die if he won’t succeed, the small stake, the woman he loves is dying, his mother is dead, his brother is dead and he cuts lose with his father. That’s not the problem with the movie
The problem is the villain that you don’t really care about or understand why he’s doing all of this.
I feel like out of the 29 films they've made I think a good 15 are really good to great and the other 14 are just there. Don't give me wrong if you love all of them that's awesome but marvel does have a shift in quality from time to time. Of course I don't expect every film they make to be a masterpiece but that's not the point, the point is to give the film the time to be the best itself can be. It's why iron Man 1, Winter soldier, Ragnarok, infinity war, Guardians 1 to name a few are so high on the list.
When I hear that Elk at the beginning I know it’s gonna be a good video.
You're a damn hero.
If you call being paralyzed from the waist down "okay" then sure, Rhodey is okay. If he wasn't best friends with one of the smartest, wealthiest men on the planet, who made him an exosuit so he could still walk, he wouldn't have been "okay."
Don't see any way to get to your merch. No store tab that I can find. Maybe good to also drop a direct link in the description text?
Wha?? Oh no. Okay good idea. I’ll do that now.
Multiverse of madness is the best example of not focusing on personal journey of protagonist
Good Directors clearly
Love and Thunder was the worst film I have ever watched
Rather, I LOVED the humour in Thor 1
Me: Is the guy who own the bar gonna get his jukebox repairs paid for? My only concern with Mrs. Marvel.
The cap movies are the best at balancing character and stakes IMO.
6:59
I really enjoyed No Way Home.
They just honed it as they went on, for the most part..
Captain America:Winter Soldier is the best 👀.
The theme of this video is waaaayyy to broad for what the video is about.
I really enjoyed that. I’m not really into the Marvel movies but this made me consider them differently. Particularly Captain America. The context of him being out of his time gives him a lot more depth.
the bad ones exist
Its very simple
Good marvel is the 90s cartoons, the ps1 and ps2 games, the 60s to early 90s comics.
Bad marvel is the modern comics, the MCU and any media that goes for that boring style.....
Nothing, its all bad
False
It's simple. Good Marvel is the comics. Bad Marvel is the mcu
I wish Marvel would involve their characters in more "street-level" conflicts. I was hoping Moon Knight would be closer to something like Daredevil as opposed to an international adventure instigated by warring Egyptian gods. I thought maybe they could build up to SOMETHING like that and start off with a more intimate, internal conflict. Maybe they're apples and oranges but I think Daredevil's "you don't get to destroy who I am," is like peak triumph over a protagonist that I don't really feel from most Marvel films. I guess narratively that isn't the concern when realms or dimensions are at stake but, regardless, it feels less personal to the protagonist and less engaging to watch.
That's exactly my fundamental issue with the type of story they chose to go with in Moon Knight in the first place. An intriguing aspect of the character to me, as someone who's not read their source material and merely done lots of research on the character, is that personal, gritty street-level aspect enhanced with supernatural and theatrical elements and that's not what we got in the show.
In typical MCU fashion, they felt the need to ramp it up to a world-ending event where most of the show is a goose-chase to a McGuffin before the villain gets to it. Inspired by older blockbusters like Indiana Jones and Steven Spielberg's sci-fi films that exuded a sense of wonder and adventure and while there are Moon Knight stories that are more adventurous in nature, for his MCU introduction I would've preferred if for his MCU introduction, they did so in a visceral character-study that would've dived deeper into his character, psychology and jewish heritage as that to me would've been more refreshing to see in the MCU than another adventure superhero story.
It doesn't surprise me that episodes like 5 and series premiere had me the most hooked and episodes like 3 and 4 is where my investment considerably dropped.
This is why Purple Man from Jessica Jones is the greatest MCU villain by far. What is more personal than a villain who *could*, if he *wanted* to, basically destroy the world, but instead chooses to use his powers to basically just stalk and rape *you personally*. That's really what it boils down to. What if you had someone who followed you around torturing you and had super powers to never face consequences. What is more scarier than that? Certainly not "the galaxy will disappear in the blink of an eye." No one can feel or anticipate or comprehend reality ending in a flash, but we can definitely guess what it would feel like to have someone knock on your door and then force you to do every disgusting and violent thing he wants for as long as he wants and there is nothing you can do to end that.
@@dannyfratina3901 Jessica Jones season 1 is one of the best things I've ever seen, couldn't get into season 2 but may rewatch the whole thing again as this comment just reminded me of how excellent that first season was.
They could have done ALL that CGI godly mess season 2 and beyond. It just seems too formulaic. As they KNOW people hate when they end their movies and shows in some big dumb CGI fight. Yet they keep doing it.
Another thing that makes a Marvel Movie bad (or not as good as it could've been) is the villain. That has been a recurring thing in the MCU that they fixed mostly.
I disagree most of the mcus villains have been great
@@cloudsombrero It's a shame they resort to killing them off so often though, rather than having some recurring ones.
As much people seem to have recently forgotten, their villain problem was considered to have been largely fixed by Phase 3. With villains like Vulture, Killmonger, Thanos, Hella and even ones were retroactively looked back on with fondness like Helmut Zemo.
@@lrb662003 the lack of reoccurring villains is just so it doesn't feel been there done that. But I do agree it would have been nice if Ultron or baron strucker would have stuff around but I feel thats led to alot of actors who wouldn't have taken rolls having to take rolls since they're one and done
@@themadtitan7603 whiplash, Obadiah stane, abomination,Loki, hela, Ultron,winter soldier, ,yellow jacket, Justin hammer, fake mandarin, crossbones, Ulysses, kilmonger, vulture, thanos, Ronan, ego, scarlet witch are all solid and that's not even getting into the shows
Gotta disagree that no way home got too big. At the heart of it all is the main Parker struggle of having to take responsibility that comes with his powers even to the detriment of his desires. Something that was touched on in the previous films but not fully explored like it was in nwh
Yup. That's why people love spiderman. Without that, he has no weaknesses. He has super strength, agility, spider senses, intellect, mild mannered, humorous...the ultimate unlikable Mary Sue. His eternal internal struggle is why he is probably the most universally liked superhero aside from superman and batman and no way home nailed this and this video did not get that at all
@@alanlee67 The ultimate Mary Sue. Sit down. He get's beat up by everyone everytime he shows up unlike another Mary Sue. He's also lost in every single movie. Liz, his secret identity, and lastly being Peter Parker. Also, his intelligence, cleverness, and charismatic humor combined with his interesting powers are exactly what makes him lovable. Superman and Batman's popularity has been gradually eroding. They are far from universally liked by this point. Spider-Man has only been growing in popularity.
Mary sue is the one who doesn't have any internal struggle as the only threat to them besides a power dampener is men not taking them seriously. Peter Parker is poor and struggling through life socially and financially. What life struggles did the Real Mary Sue have besides people rejecting them?
@@knightofkorbin888
I think the exact point of Alan's comment was that Spiderman would be the ultimate mary sue if it weren't for the fact that he's poor and almost always fails to balance his hero life with his personal one. Which... is true...
Isn’t so much of this argument just; films are good when you establish clear stakes? The essay doesn’t seem to find any formula for when a Marvel film is good or bad… even the perception of stakes is subjective. You can say ‘I knew no one would die in civil war’ but you can’t transpose your foreknowledge on every viewer! Ultimately yes a Canny film critic needs subversive stakes or a movie that can’t be predicted to be fully invested but execution-wise it’s clear marvel always tries to balance personal and epic stakes. Sometimes they just don’t succeed
I would argue infinity war was actually really personal stakes, not to any hero but to actually Thanos
I think another thing that makes Carol Danvers unrelatable is her disregard for Earth. Her viewpoint of “Earth has other heroes” may be true, but it comes off as callous. How is a viewer supposed to find her heroic when she can’t be bothered to check on her home planet unless summoned there?
I think that could be interesting from another angle. It's similar to how Dr Manhattan sees things in The Watchmen. The problem is more just that she's kind of just absent from all films except her own, so we never really get to have much interest in her and she isn't very relevant to the plots of the shared films.
@@krombopulos_michael But they haven't done anything with it. They just keep having her act like Earth is not even on her list of concerns, which has the knock-on effect of abandoning her best friend and her friend's daughter. The way Monica gets angry at the mention of Carol in WandaVision paints her as this neglectful, inconsiderate jerk, and everything else reinforces it.
True, thought that could be mitigated by a good sequel that shows she's had to keep real busy for the past 25 years on the galactic side of things. They could even show Fury try to page her during the age of Ultron, but the weight of her responsibilities, whatever they are, made her have to choose to ignore it (and have that be a tough decision for her).
@@jedshaffer5956 I agree MCU Captain Marvel is a dull character but I won't call her absence on Earth callous since she's only been in two films properly so far (with a 3rd appearance in Shang-Chi's post-credit scene). In Captain Marvel, she's stripped of her memories and I don't know if she fully regains them by the end of that film before taking off to help the Kree. And in Endgame, she has a minor role.
I mean she points out that there are thousands of planets with nobody to help them and that's her job, it's not callous.
I liked the Spider-Man movies.
Spiderman movies were one of the best because of how much toll each movie took on Peter. If you just roll and see all that that happened to Peter, he would have easily turned into a supervillian. But he had great support from May and Happy and kept going. The coffee scene in NWH hits so bad due to this reason
So with that conclusion; you’re saying that Infinity War was not a good marvel movie?
Infinity War/EndGame weren't good movies due to the MCU timeline is kinda in reverse "The War of the Gems" happened before the "Civil War" in the comics
Captain Marvel is too powerful… but Thor and Hulk aren’t? Got it.
He's wrong! In reality CM is unlike the other characters and people don't like that....for some reason.
Wow, I really whish Marvel had kept those 3 minutes of Captain America adjusting to the future. When I first saw Avengers, I hadn't seen Captain America the 1st Avenger yet so while I thought he was cool, I didn't know anything about him and was often confused.
I have to disagree about Infinity War and Endgame. I think the stakes work incredibly well and are very much felt in those films. This can be exemplified by the way they affected audiences both during and after both films. I also have to disagree about Iron Man 3. I mean, I literally worked on that film (I was a production assistant) and it's one of my least favorite Marvel movies.
Hey man! I'm an aspiring filmmaker and want to get my toes in the large ocean that is the film industry. Do you mind adding my instagram and talking there? @danielsilud.vfx
instagram.com/danielsilud.vfx/
I like Iron Man 3. Love IW and EG though.
The large the ego of the corporate executive board, the worse a movie is.
Now plot a graph of release date vs. IMDb rating.
I like this essay and I agree with your points about stakes. I really prefer when Marvel films have lower stakes!
However, I do think you miss something important and it's clear with your comment about the airport fight in Civil War. That scene has a purpose and it's not to make us fear someone will die. It's the violent culmination of the title and sets up the ending where Steve and Roger are no longer battling ideologically, they're personally fighting. Rhodey's injury shows us that this conflict will have a cost and that Steve and Roger aren't going to be ok. And that sticks. For a while. What's important about that scene is what I believe really makes the difference: character.
Superhero films are about characters. The story is usually serviceable, and that's ok if the characters work. In most Marvel films, they don't. Thor Ragnarok works because Thor's finally likeable again. He's relatable, fun, and has a personal journey to resolve. Loki is the only interesting character to support Thor 2's slog. In the first Captain America, the first half is so much better because Steve's journey through all of that is engaging. Red Skull is dull and fighting Hydra doesn't give Steve much to do. Civil War works where Ultron fails because it relies on our interest in these characters and pushes its strongest characters, Steve and Tony, to the front of the conflict.
So the airport scene establishes that Tony and Steve are willing to fight to resolve their issues, that the divide between them is widening, and that people will get hurt from this. It's fun, but it also shows that the fun part of the movie is over as the rest gets darker and more personal.
I don't watch The Boys but I've seen clips of it and what I like about it is that they decided to keep things real upfront and plain gorey. If someone died, they die, horribly and violently. Superhero movies out here playing.
For instance, Mjolnir is a very powerful weapon and it's extremely heavy. Thor hurling it to you or swinging it at you should literally damage you real bad if not kill you. Yet they make it seem like it's a toy.
You should watch the Boys, and Invincible while you're at it!
@@Vivi_9 I've watched Invincible and funny thing is it's an animation series that's employs some level of realism to its super-powered characters & abilities. It gets bloodier each episode.
The problem with trying to determine "good" and "bad" Marvel is that those terms are very subjective from an audience perspective. I know people who love Thor: The Dark World and while I don't I can't say that my opinion overrides theirs.
Art means different things to different people and is appreciated in different ways. At the end of the day it's all about personal opinion.
Looking at the thumbnail, I can't help but wonder why Thor's the worst Thor movie, MCU Fans constantly say that The Dark World's the worst but Thor? That makes no since
I like tdw better than thor..
With a name like “Entertain the Elk,” how could the merch NOT be fly?
:)!!! Glad you like it.
Civil War is actually one of my least liked Marvel films. It feels like a rushed mess that isn't particularly written well and it feels like Avengers 2.5. The comic book version isn't great, but it's much more interesting than the film. Also, Zemo's plan is pretty stupid and it's a minor miracle that it worked at all. I also didn't really find him that engaging until Falcon and The Winter Soldier where they had time to flesh his character out a lot more. Tony Stark wanting revenge sort of makes sense, but it's not like Bucky had any choice, he was brainwashed after all. It also seems like the writers decided the superhero registration act (from the comics, I can't remember if they called it that in the film) wasn't a good enough reason to divide the heroes so they kind of switched gears part way through which makes it feel unfocused. Then, to top it all off, it doesn't have that much of a lasting impact afterwards. Rhodes ends up being fine and the team gets split up for a short period, but you don't really feel it all that much until Infinity War. Maybe you could make the case it influenced them being "defeated" in Infinity War and/or Stark's reluctance to help in EndGame, but I think that's a bit of a reach.
You're entitled to your opinion, but a lot of your complaints seem like you didn't pay attention to the movie from your first viewing and that's just how you remember it now. I'm not saying that is the case but it seems that way to me to some extent based by your comment. Also the Zemo "miracle plan" criticism is mind-numbing short-sighted by this point.
@@themadtitan7603 I’ve seen it four times (because I watched it twice by myself and twice with my kids). The truly mind numbing thing is Zemo’s plan hinges on Iron Man being an unforgiving dick, not taking two minutes to think, and a 40 year old VHS tape still working.
Brainwashed or not, Bucky killed his parents and alongside with the stress that was building up since Avengers 1 is what caused him to break and lash out. That's why he says to Cap "I don't care. He killed my mom". It's not about being rational in that moment but letting his emotions out (in an unhealthy way which fits Stark).
Rhodey can still walk but he needs a device to do so which might make him feel less human (this is alluded to in Endgame).
And yeah, Civil War was one of the reasons why Thanos was able to win in Infinity War. Divided they fell.
Are u saying the Spider-Man with mysterio is better than no way home? Stop it.
A movie never works in spite of Jeff Goldblum. A movie works because of Jeff Goldblum.
I think the problem is not about relatable and more about making the viewer understand "why is this happening?" and if that makes sense for the universe and the characters.
Maybe if you're 8 years old, but most people that appreciate real filmmaking are adults and therefore want characters that feel real and not just "hero person does cool thing."
@@28Pluto that sounds like something a teenager would say.
Ragnarok. Is Not. Good.
When I tell people that Guardians 2 is my favorite marvel movie I always get surprise. Which i'm surprised by, cause like it's so good at being a great marvel movie but also a great movie about struggling with identity and what it means to be a man. I"m shocked how many people look over that film.
It’s so good
I actually preferred it because it made me more sympathetic to Quill. I didn't find him relatable or funny in the first one.
That movie is super underrated.
I've watched it many times now, and still tear up during _that_ sequence.
An overindulgence on stakes disregards the type of movie you're watching. Bright lights and CGI are pretty good reasons to love and be engaged in movie if the purpose of the movie is to deliver action and excitement. It's difficult to make a movie about Black Panther, considering that while in his suit he is indestructible, so as a filmmaker, create action and excitement for the movie when he is in his suit. Make the Black Panther cool for those moments and for the rest of the film, attack some deeper themes.
In SPITE of Jeff Goldblum? Excuse me?
In spite of the all the zaniness, of which Goldblum is a part. But I love Goldblum!
I don't think Carol is a Kree hybrid she was just brain washed after being jammed full of Infinity Stone juice, she's comparable to Wanda, not Quill
The ones that have specific set rules and follow logic are better. The reason iron man 1 makes sense is because that’s all there is. Same goes for most of phase 1
So refreshing to see a RUclipsr not fawning over the mediocrity that was No Way Home.
NWH wasn't mediocre, it was a mixed bag.
You've more eloquently reinforced the argument I've been using for years to tell people why 'Guardians 2' is the best film in the MCU. I love it so much for the same reasons given here but also for the fact that the father-son relationships mirror my own. Yondu telling Peter, "I'm damn lucky you're my boy", are the words I've wanted to hear spoken to me my whole life. Gunn's followup, 'The Suicide Squad', has a similarly beautiful moment in its climax involving Ratcatcher 2. These two examples are why Gunn's work outshine all other MCU/DCEU era super hero movies.
This doesn't explain why Avengers works but Age of Ultron does not.
To me the best Marvel films are the ones that can stand on their own
example wilson fisk in daredevil ..EPIC villain.can break russian skulls with a car door
wilson fisk in HAWKEYE..hiriing noob goons . destroyed by a 50 kg chick and a wearing a HAWAIAN SHIRT IN winter....
differences DAREDEVIL witters cared ABOUT details..got time to develop...
HAWKEYE writters must do all AS FAST as possible and also they didnt read any comic,,cuz dont got time,,feige got a calendar near the absurd
3:34 IM3 is highly underrated imo. Seeing Tony Stark being so deeply affected by PTSD after the events of the Avengers movie is what SOLD me on the Avengers movie. It actually improved what came before by grounding the attack on New York and bringing these characters back into the real world, just a little bit.
15:48 this undercut the whole of Infinity War for me - if they'd kept the slate of movies under wraps until after Endgame it would have had way more impact (and from a cynical marketing perspective fuelled a load of buzz as to who would or wouldn't come back).
I half disagree with what you said about Thor. Those movies truly shine whenever they focus on family, especially the relationship between Thor and Loki. Heck, I'd argue those parts are so well-executed they're the only reason we got the Loki TV show - the character had been mostly irrelevant for quite some time after all.
Still, I completely agree that they're bogged down by the grander scale conflicts with no personal stakes, which is a shame. I'm one of the few people who actually likes Thor 2, and even so whenever there's anything except Asgardian family dynamics my brain kinda goes on standby... which unfortunately includes the whole third act and most scenes with the humans, so pretty much 70% of the movie. The other 30% does rank among my MCU favourites, but I really wish they'd gone small on the stakes and big on the emotions rather than the other way around.
Great video, very much agree with your points. Thanks for the awesome content.
it’s no surprise that Ragnorok, Black Panther, ShangChi, and Winter Soldier are my favorite MCU films and Endgame and Infinity War don’t even make top 7, because i love film and the mcu and charecters not big finales
Imma disagree ENTIRELY with the praise for Ragnarock.
I thought it was a meaningless bathos ridden mess where nothing mattered and any good or engaging with the plot or story is hand waved just to get the the lame beleaguered, drawn out, glorified SNL improv that placed people out of character for a cheap laugh to cover the fact that it was a calorie free experience (with exception to Valkyrie). I’d take DW over it any day. The script itself had great ideas to explore, it’s just Waititi had no interest in pathos at all. The jokes came first, second and third…and also fourth.
But that’s non of my business…
Taika Waititi was riding a huge wave of hype at the time. The hype has caught up to Waititi and some of the shine is off this movie as well. That said, the movie did have a great intro and conclusion, and was the movie where Thor became a real character with an arc and not just a caricature. Thor was the best part of Infitity War and Thor Ragnarok planted the seeds for that. So even if the movie is over-rated, it will probably be remembered well for how it developed Thor's character.
15:40
"The moment Black Panther and Spiderman vanished, I knew this didn't really matter... We know they're coming back. It's an illusion."
I think you completely missed the point.
Nobody in the theaters was crying because spiderman died.
They were crying because Tony's worst fears were coming to fruition right in front of his eyes, and the only thing he could do was look on in abject horror as the person who was essentially Tony's son didn't just beg, but used his final breath to apologize to Tony for letting him down.
I don't know how you can look at that scene and think "he's not really dead, so the scene isn't that important."
The correct, and yes, I do absolutely mean "correct" reaction is "he's not really dead, but Tony doesn't know that, and that makes this scene that much more heartbreaking."
Your analysis of Community praises that level of committment, so I'm curious why you didn't recognize it here.
The end statement is exactly the reason why Dr Strange 2 was such a flop. Although the plot was personal to Wanda, it had very little to do with Strange (apart from a throw-away plot between Strange and Palmer), and most of her scenes used overly convoluted CGI, and fights against OP characters introduced for wow-factor only to be killed. None of them held any significance to the plot other than to show Wanda is powerful, which had already been established and could have been just as easily done if there was a Strange vs Wanda fight sequence (which there wasn’t?! Like how???). Chávez was interesting but was used mostly for her power rather than her personality, and the whole movie used way too much CGI. Again, the reason the movie failed is because it focused so little on the characters - the only time it ever worked was when we saw quieter moments (e.g Strange with Palmer at her wedding, or Wanda with her children at the end)
When marvel went woke/D.E.i is when it was ruined...
It's a shame to because a lot of people grew up reading comics
My take is that Marvel has adopted the Joss Whedon-template (quippy, serious moments aren't taken seriously, ALL characters are funny in the same way) when it comes to characterization. It's hard to care about a lot of the newer characters because their personalities all seem homogenized and are under one flavor of a template. It's getting very repetitive in character writing. Thank God for individual directors adding their own unique spin (see Chloe Zhao, Destin Daniel Cretton, Russo Brothers, Taika Waititi, Ryan Coogler). The universe needs better writing. Oh, and more people to die. There isn't enough collateral damage in any of the movies/shows they make these days
I think with Spider-Man, the smaller, more personal stories are round the corner. He has no advantage in technology, no connection to the avengers or the events of the first three phases after everyone in the MCU now have no clue who he is. It’s all about him and his personal struggles, or at least that’s the opportunity Marvel are presented with
Box of scraps!
What a terrible take stakes means nothing whitout Quality, small or Big. phase 4 shows that stakes don't matter, You can have stret level treats or the entire existece and if your script and direction are rush it destroys what Ever narrative You try to create
Ironicly no way Home is defenetly the Best of phase 4 movie cause it does both preaty well
I dunno Iron Man was always impossible to relate to. A superhero with powers and combat prowess struggle for money or work like older Spiderman or Shang Chi will easily feel more relatable than a billionaire.
13:30 He learns how to control his Hulk powers in the Incredible Hulk
The only valid answer is Korg.
Korg separates Good Marvel from Bad Marvel.
What are the worst things about marvel also is the copy, this is really obvious about sanchi and Thor with that one comedic character that's just annoying
You are making some of the best videos on RUclips. Please continue, great job.
5:46 LMFAO “it’s Barfin time!!!”
You forgot to talk about Captain America: Civil War.
Great video! the mcu is my fav movie franchise cause nothing compares to it.
The last marvel movie I saw was iron man 2. Have had no interest in them since then.
Bro u are wrong, those movies made a hell of money and attraction
Curious about how you feel about Multiverse of Madness in regards to this dilemma?
Easily goes into the 'bad' camp. Sam Raimi saved the movie from becoming another Thor Dark World and made it really entertaining to watch, but he couldn't save the story. There is two main personal struggles. That of Wanda and that of Strange.
Strange is warned of his hubris, so he saves the day using a forbidden spell he's told not to use? That's terrible. Movie 3 sets out to finally tackle this and humble him.
Wanda? Her initial struggle is understandable, but the way she executes it seems full of holes. We later learn she wants to protect all her children from all universes, which is yet again an inhuman scope.
Lastly there's America's stake of not dying, but this is the win lose dichotomy. Of course she's not gonna die.
The MCU went downhill with Endgame
Respectfully, no. You seem to be selectively missing the point that this is a "cinematic universe" and the character and story arcs over multiple movies, multiple years, are really the point here.
If you pick out and watch just one of the middle Captain America movies, you're not going to be satisfied because there's no beginning or end to the arc. But if you watch all of Captain America's appearances over a decade, there's a satisfying character arc there.
Came here to say this as well. I also just disagree in general that stakes is the biggest factor determining what is and isn't a good marvel movie. Iron Man 3 isn't forgotten because it came after the Avengers, it's forgotten because it's one of the worst Marvel movies and it has mostly low level stakes. Same with that Hulk movie that nobody remembers that didn't have Mark Ruffalo.
In the meantime if he's trying to argue that the majority of the Avengers movies weren't good, he's in the minority. In fact, most people loved them because they're not meant to be standalone movies - they're cinematic spectacles that thread multiple arcs. We're also not watching "nothing" in the Civil War airport scene - these are action movies and we are here to see cool stuff happen for its own sake as well.
@@rifkadm They really aren't that good, though. When you grow up someday, you'll realize that. I really mean that. If I had seen these movies when I was 10-20 years old, I would've loved them. I'm in my 40's and I see them for what they are. They're juvenile. They're simple, basic stories with lots of flash and colors and stupid humor and a lot of hyper-masculine cock-wagging. I loved comics when I was in high school but when I reread them as an adult, they were really poorly written and childish stories. They're great when you're a child. Not when you're a mature adult. A lot of people threw a hissy fit when Scorsese slammed Marvel movies but the guy was right. They're amusement park rides. Occasionally, you get some good stuff like the Guardians movies or Captain America, but most of it is Middle School schlock.
@@HarryBuddhaPalm Yeah man these aren't supposed to be film masterpieces or charting new territories in the world of film. They're just fun to watch. It's really not that deep.
@@HarryBuddhaPalm Gotta love that condescending "you'll see things my way when you get older" as if everyone grows up the same way and becomes jaded.
I think that's more of an MCU thing. Movie's like Raimi’s Spiderman 2 and The Dark Knight are fairly well written standouts. And the comics have gotten more mature in recent years.