The Marvel Cinematic Universe: A Blueprint for Sustained Enjoyment

Cinema’s most recent decade has partially, if not primarily, been defined by the Marvel Cinematic Universe, once a trend that has since become the status-quo of the movie business.

On Medium, I’ve only ever written about individual films. I’ve yet to explore something as enormous as the Marvel Cinematic Universe, in part because it’s a daunting task at face value.

So why the sudden change of heart? Well, like most people, I watched Spider-Man: No Way Home over the Winter Holiday and, in truth, it’s the most fun I’ve had at the movie theater in roughly 8 years. I don’t think I need to explain why it’s such a fun film; you’ve likely seen it, so you are aware of its more energizing beats (also, I was partially raised and bred by the Raimi Spider-man Films, so… yeah).

What’s fascinating about No Way Home is that it demonstrates the best that the MCU has to offer. Its box office numbers alone are emblematic of this, but what is the secret sauce here? Why are Spider-man movies, like most (though not all) Marvel projects, so successful?

Marvel films feel tight, despite the numerous characters and plot threads that inhabit them. This intimate feeling helps foster a sense of camaraderie, though this certainly doesn’t come without its drawbacks.

To properly answer this query, we must first juxtapose the highs of the Marvel Cinematic Universe with the lows, the peaks with the valleys. For sake of time sensitivity, let’s put two recent Marvel products under the microscope: Spider-Man and The Eternals.

We’ve talked a bit about the Spider already: the plot is purely dependent on the history of the character. This is an obvious point, but what may not be so obvious is that No Way Home is a movie that somewhat succeeds in transmitting a greater message. This, my friends, is when Marvel is at its best.

Pain and grief underscore the emotional undertones of No Way Home, and Tom Holland’s perseverance when experiencing each of these feelings demonstrates a clear evolution in his character. Apart from the moment that many say is the best scene from the movie (you know which one I mean), I’d argue the second-best scene is the ending: for the first time, we get to see Tom finally take control of his own destiny.

No Way Home is fleshy, daring, risky, and it leaves you with a rather poignant feeling of introspection. This is the height of the MCU, the studio’s Magnum Opus (for now), a gem that is part of a greater collection, one of the House of Mouse’s glimmering Infinity Stones.

Eternals exemplifies the worst Marvel has to offer: in spite of the film's handful of strengths, it ultimately exists to illustrate the fragility of the Marvel blueprint.

So why does Eternals not enjoy such laudable reception? What is the central difference that distinguishes good Marvel movies from bad ones?

First off, Eternals is visually stunning. The effects are impressive, most of the fight scenes are engaging, and the sheer diversity of the film must be acknowledged and appreciated. These are indisputable strengths, but such strengths are overshadowed by far more potent weaknesses…

The cast is simply too large, especially when considering this is the first time we are being introduced to any of these characters. The plot is meandering, building up to a twist that is so expected that Shyamalan himself likely cringed in pain when he watched it. The film is ambitious, though to a fault, and this results in a sense of pride that makes the script think it can skip over relevant context and backstory that is greatly needed. Oh, and the villain sucks… I’d use a more concrete term here, but I feel the word ‘sucks’ perfectly encapsulates whoever or whatever that villain was.

Unlike No Way Home, the message of Eternals is simplistic and straightforward: the film solely exists to introduce you to these characters as they are. No more, no less; there are no great evolutions witnessed here, no irreversible consequences, no grander intrigue. The movie is a freshly-wrapped present that, when opened, is revealed to be unshakeably hollow and empty.

This is when the MCU is at its worst; even one of the studio’s leading producers said, “Well, we don’t necessarily need to make another Eternals movie.” When the company that is unrivaled at recycling its tried-and-true formula in scripts that are twins to one another, says that they won’t recycle said formula for a particular property or IP, you know they’re not proud of that property’s quality or results.

At their very core, Marvel films are designed to be fun, and it’s perhaps unfair to ask for anything else other than joy, excitement, and a temporary escape whenever you put one on.

Nevertheless, Eternals still made a ton of money. It recouped its budget and then some, overcoming the hesitancy of COVID by boasting solid-enough box office numbers to dominate the Number 1 spot for a few weeks.

Even when Marvel makes a mistake, they’re successful. This wasn’t the case until they were purchased by the House of Mouse, who has made a plethora of mistakes throughout their own existence, yet has seemed to never financially waiver because of such shortcomings.

So why is this? Why is it that when Marvel makes a bad movie, that bad movie still makes a ton of money? Truthfully, this is because the name Marvel now exists as a stamp for fun, and they achieved this stamp by generating a blueprint for sustained success, both amongst their audience and amongst their audience’s wallets.

It doesn’t matter if a Marvel movie is fun or not, all that matters is that Marvel is fun.

That feeling of fun harkens back to a powerful weapon Marvel has excelled at developing ever since the House of Mouse purchased them: Nostalgia. The weaving of nostalgia through Marvel properties isn’t exclusive; the House of Mouse has gone about injecting nostalgia into its Star Wars properties, which have certainly been much more unimpressive (both critically and financially) than Marvel.

Nostalgia has become the House of Mouse’s way of generating success.

The House of Mouse’s past was defined by imagination and innovation, while its present and future are likely to be underscored by clinginess and nostalgia. Marvel, now an offspring of the Mouse, has demonstrated that either pathway can generate financial success.

Look, all is fair in love and war (and believe me, the movie business can, very often, turn into war), but that doesn’t mean that solely using nostalgia as your blueprint to success isn’t lazy. Because it is; simply looking back instead of forward, taking from the past rather than inventing for the future, that is laziness in its rawest form.

Perhaps this is why I’m a fan of the ‘Old Marvel’. The first Iron Man, Captain America, and Avengers movies are my favorite Marvel products.

But wait! See what just happened? I fell for the trap — I admitted to being a fan of the old, and Marvel will now use this raw feeling of attachment to generate an even stronger feeling of nostalgia by, and I’m just guessing here, putting ‘Cap’ or ‘Tony’ in the next Dr. Strange movie, or providing flashback sequences in the next Avengers film.

Nostalgia is powerful, gripping, a temporary high, but a film shouldn’t be lauded purely because it’s nostalgic.

As much as I was disappointed with Eternals, I get that some people enjoyed it. And if you did enjoy the film, I fully understand, because it’s getting harder and harder for most people to keep Marvel or the House of Mouse out of their viewing patterns. Plus, who am I to tell someone whether something is fun or not?

So know that I’m not writing this far-too-long piece to sap away at all of your pent-up fun. Marvel movies are fun, and that, my friends, is the entire point of their existence. You don’t watch Marvel movies to have your perspective of the world changed, you watch Marvel movies because they make you feel good.

They’re immersive, energizing, an escape from the lows of reality, and a supplement for the highs of it.

That is what this Universe teaches me…