I know it's been a while, but I'm currently in the middle of my massive MCU marathon, over 115 hours of material at this point, in preparation for Civil War, and I've noticed something I think is worth sharing.
Now we all know that one of the MCU's biggest flaws is its villains. Many of them are one-dimensional, forgettable, and are too easily defeated or never heard from again (seriously, we need the Leader!). But I realized something that I think the MCU has done right, that many previous CBMs got wrong, and I haven't heard anyone mention it yet, so I'm stepping in.
Remember back before the MCU, whenever you had a new superhero origin film, how forced the villains always seemed to be? Obviously every hero needs a villain, but it always seemed to me a little forced how the villain always seemed to get their powers right after the hero got his.
Look at Spider-Man (2002). Peter Parker happens to get bit by a spider, and an extremely short time after that, Norman Osborn decides to do what any scientist knows is stupid by experimenting on himself and ZAM now we have a villain for him to fight. It's not organic, it's blatant.
In many films, the villain had to be written in, usually as a response to the hero. Now this isn't true of every CBM, but it happens more often in sequels.
Look at the Dark Knight trilogy. In Batman Begins, the main villains are in play before Bruce becomes Batman. Mobsters, Dr. Crane, and Ra's Al Ghul are all working towards their goals before Batman shows up. Bruce becomes Batman in response to that. But what happens next?
In The Dark Knight, one criminal steps up his game in a big way in response to Batman by becoming the Joker. No explanation of where he came from, no real motivation. And a lot of people say that's what makes the Joker great, but it also makes him very easy to write. If you don't have to explain anything, you don't have to worry about it. You just know that Batman needs a villain, so here he is.
Move on to The Dark Knight Rises, and your main villain, Talia Al Ghul, is out for Revenge. This is basically
Man of Steel is terrible about this as well. Of all the time that has passed since Zod and his followers were exiled, and Kal was sent to earth, it just so happens that when Clark comes out as Superman to save Lois happens at nearly the exact time that Zod et. al miraculously, with no explanation, free themselves and come to Earth. It's lazy writing. In BvS, Luthor. Jr. has no motivation. No in-story reasoning for his actions, but the movie needs a villain, so he's stuck in there anyway.
The X-Men films feature more organic villains, in terms of the government. But the actual "villains" of the X-Men lore are usually put in the spot of the hero as a result. So that's a whole different situation.
Now, look at the MCU. What I've noticed, and what I love, is that the villains were around first, and the heroes are mainly stepping up because of them. It may not be as "cool" as a mysterious figure like the Joker, but it's more organic to the story, and gives the villain more understandable motivation. I mean, General Zod was literally written to be programmed to do what he did, so that the writers wouldn't have to actually create any motivation for him.
Iron Man: Obadiah Stane was playing his game long before Tony Stark was even running Stark Industries. This is a villain that has been planning for decades and acts before we even have a hero. But his actions - giving the kill order on Stark, is what creates the hero. Stane may have gone out without a bang, but his character makes more sense in that world than Zod somehow showing up just as Superman puts on the costume. Then in the sequel, again you have a character who has been in the game for decades, Ivan Vanko. Ever since his father Anton was rejected by Tony's father Howard, his rage has been building. It's organic, it makes sense, even if the villain himself is lackluster. And Justin Hammer is just like Obadiah Stane, a greedy business man who wants what Tony has. Iron Man 3 used a flashback to establish that Killain, again, has been working on his plan for years, and that has progressed until the point of the film.
Captain America: In The First Avenger, Johann Schmidt had become the Red Skull before Steve Rogers ever picked up a shield. Abraham Erskine fled to seek out a hero in response to the Skull's existence. If the Red Skull had not been created, Erskine may have never finished his work. As Schmidt progressed with his plans, the need for a hero to stop him increased. It fits the story. And the followers of that man continuing his work into The Winter Soldier was a great twist. We didn't suddenly have dozens of villains for Cap to fight without explanation, we had hundreds of villains that were simply biding their time, waiting for their moment to strike.
Hulk: General Ross was a villain (though not 100% a dick) before Banner got angry. And the Hulk was caused due to the actions/lies of Ross himself. Seeing a pattern here?
Thor: Loki and his brother have known each other for centuries, with Loki's mischief ever growing. Thor's education in humility came as the result of Loki's tricks.
Ant-Man: Darren Cross had been working on his Yellowjacket suit for decades, and Scott Lang was trained in response to his danger.
Guardians of the Galaxy: These various characters need to band together to stop Ronan, who has long been a threat to innocents.
Do you see what I'm talking about? The MCU villains may not seem as menacing as villains in other franchises, but I believe that's because they're written to be more "realistic" and easier to relate to. I think the concept that the "villains" are mostly ordinary people, people that we know, that turn out to be evil, is more understandable, and honestly, scarier, than monsters that show up randomly to give the new hero something to punch.
No comments:
Post a Comment