In Defense of the MCU

Do these comments look familiar? “The MCU is too reliant on jokes and never takes there movies seriously.” “There’s no stakes in any of the Marvel movies; we know the hero’s not going to die, so why should I care?” “Marvel never has any good villains (except Loki).” “The MCU color palette is just off in almost all their movies.” “The MCU has become predictable; introduce hero, introduce villain, set up conflict, tell jokes, have hero fight villain, villain dies, hero wins. Rinse, lather, repeat.” I’ve seen comments like these in more places than I should for the past year or so and every time someone makes one of these comments, I just want to jump on Marvel’s defense and argue the commentor’s criticism. I’m well aware the MCU has had its detractors since day 1 (every franchise has had detractors since day 1; and yes, that includes something as universally beloved as Toy Story), but I feel I’ve read these comments so many times, they’ve just become predictable and don’t hold much water when you actually think about them.

“Marvel is too joke heavy.” No they’re not; humor is meant to keep the story upbeat and fun as opposed to drab and miserable. In between those jokes are genuine moments of heart, character development and intense drama (i.e. Hawkeye’s motivational speech to Scarlet Witch in Age of Ultron, The Ancient One’s last moments in Dr. Strange, Ant Man continuously shrinking, and of course, Yondu’s death in Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2).

“There are no stakes; the hero always lives.” Wait, you mean the hero actually over comes the odds, beats the villain and saves the day? It’s almost like, *gasp*, it’s a superhero movie. Seriously though, you do realize the whole point is for us to root for the hero, to see him/her win when the villain is acting out his/her evil plan. How disappointing would it have been if at the end of Iron Man 3, Aldrich Killian kills Tony Stark and succeeds in mass producing Extremis? Or if Dr. Strange failed to stop Dormarmu from being summoned? It’s a hero’s duty to save the day, either in comics, tv shows or movies.

“Marvel never has good villains.” Like Erod, I think this argument is a load of bull. Your in the wrong franchise if your expecting the over-the-top Green Goblin, or the psychotic Joker, or the relatable and powerful Magneto. The villains in the MCU are good on their own merits. Obediah Stane was very charismatic and sinester, especially when he pulled out Tony’s arc reactor and left him for dead. The Red Skull was a ruthless Nazi commander who was the perfect opposite to Captain America. Many people point to Malekith from Thor: The Dark World as the embodiment of the “boring” villain stereotype. While I’m in the minority as I feel he posed a great threat to Thor, I will agree that I would’ve enjoyed the trickster version of the character and have him and Loki go at it. Also, there Ego the Living Planet who’s quite literally the most self absorbed, evil maniac in the MCU thus far. What did you expect from a dude called Ego? The villains aren’t bland or boring (“except Malekith” not the point -.-) as some would assume; there’s more to them then just being an opposite to the hero.

“The MCU has an ugly color palette.” I just don’t get this criticism; I think the color palette looks fine. Maybe it’s because I’m used to it. Maybe it’s because it’s different for other people. Or maybe it’s because the color palette in general is the last thing ANYONE watching these movies gives 3 rat’s backsides about. I don’t know.

“They’re all the same.” *facepalm* There in the same category, but no 2 films in the MCU are the same. Dr. Strange may have a similar feel to Iron Man, but Strange does not end up captured by terrorists and tortured in a cave. Guardians of The Galaxy Vol. 1 maybe a race to the MacGuffen plot, but it’s nothing like Thor: The Dark World in any way, shape, or form. And are you seriously going to tell me Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Ant Man, and Dr. Strange are all the same movie because their origin stories? Last I check, Iron Man was an action comedy, Thor was a sci fi fantasy, Captain America: The First Avenger was a period piece, Ant Man was a heist thriller and Dr. Strange was a straight up fantasy.
And the whole checklist above doesn’t just apply to superhero movies; it can apply to a comedy, a drama, a thriller, a sci fi fantasy, a musical, even. Some of the MCU films don’t follow that structure exactly anyways. In Civil War, Zemo got what he wanted: the Avenger disbanded. In Captain America, The Avengers, Dr. Strange and Spider-Man Homecoming, the villain is introduced before the hero. Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Thor: The Dark World, Iron Man 3, Captain America: Civil War, Ant Man, and The Incredible Hulk were more focused on building character development then cracking jokes. Loki, Zemo, Vulture, and Abomination lived at the end of their respective films and Bucky turned good again in Civil War. And also, the hero doesn’t need to die at the end unless the story calls for it. You’re right to assume Marvel is saving the major casualties for Infinity War, but that doesn’t make the previous conflicts any less impactful.

Overall, I feel as though these arguments in particular are nitpicks at best and shallow at worst. That’s not to say the movies are perfect; Quicksilver and Frigga were given the ax too soon, Betty Ross, Blonsky the Red Skull and real Mandarin are nowhere to be found, Steve and Sharon Carter’s kiss in Civil War came out of nowhere, and I feel Spider-Man: Homecoming should have mentioned Uncle Ben, or at the very least show a photo of him as it almost felt like they pretended he didn’t exist. You can have a contrasting opinion to the general consensus of the MCU, but don’t be like Confused Matthew and give shallow, baseless and factually wrong arguments.