How the “Marvelization” of Cinema Accelerates the Decline of Filmmaking

As hard as it may be to believe, some of us have nev­er seen a movie belong­ing to the Mar­vel Cin­e­mat­ic Uni­verse. If you’re one of those unini­ti­at­ed, none of the count­less clips incor­po­rat­ed into the Like Sto­ries of Old video essay above will tempt you to get ini­ti­at­ed. Nor will the laments aired by host Tom van der Lin­den, who, despite once enjoy­ing the MCU him­self, even­tu­al­ly came to won­der why keep­ing up with its releas­es had begun to feel less like a thrill than a chore. As if their CGI-laden sound and fury weren’t try­ing enough, there’s also “the con­stant quip­ping, the annoy­ing self-aware­ness, the fact that every­thing has to be a fran­chise now.”

Van der Lin­den labels a cen­tral fac­tor in the decline of the MCU “sto­ry­telling entropy.” Clas­sic films, you may have noticed, con­cen­trate prac­ti­cal­ly all the ener­gy in every facet of their pro­duc­tion toward the expres­sion of spe­cif­ic themes, sto­ries, and char­ac­ters; at their best, their every line, ges­ture, cut, and inven­tion rep­re­sents the tip of an artis­tic ice­berg. Take, to use a pop­u­lar exam­ple, the lightsaber intro­duced in Star Wars, which Van der Lin­den calls “not just a weapon, but a metaphor” that “sym­bol­i­cal­ly com­mu­ni­cates a lot about the phi­los­o­phy of its wield­er, and about the larg­er world that it exists in,” con­dens­ing “a mul­ti­tude of mean­ings and ideas into a sim­ple, sin­gu­lar object.”

It does so in the first two or three movies, at any rate. In the decades since, as the Star Wars uni­verse has grown ever vaster, more com­plex, and con­cep­tu­al­ly unwieldy, so the pro­lif­er­a­tion and mod­i­fi­ca­tion of the once-mar­velous lightsaber has turned it into some­thing mun­dane, even banal. So it goes with sto­ry­telling entropy, a phe­nom­e­non that afflicts every nar­ra­tive fran­chise com­mer­cial­ly com­pelled to grow with­out end. That process of expan­sion even­tu­al­ly turns even the most cap­ti­vat­ing orig­i­nal mate­ri­als dif­fuse and unin­volv­ing to all but the hard­est-core fans — by which point it has usu­al­ly become obvi­ous that cre­ators them­selves have long since lost their own pas­sion for the sto­ries.

Most MCU view­ers will admit that it has pro­duced miss­es as well as hits. But Mar­veliza­tion, as Van der Lin­den calls it, has also inspired oth­er, imi­ta­tive cor­po­rate fran­chis­es to pump out glob­al­ly mar­ketable con­tent fierce­ly pro­tect­ed by intel­lec­tu­al prop­er­ty lawyers — and has even drained the inter­est out of realms of film and tele­vi­sion that have noth­ing to do with super­heroes, swords, or sci-fi. Hol­ly­wood has always been about the bot­tom line, of course, but only in recent decades have mar­ket sat­u­ra­tion, cross-plat­form strat­e­gy, and max­i­mum crossover poten­tial come to dom­i­nate its pri­or­i­ties so com­plete­ly. From the MCU or oth­er­wise, a Mar­velized movie is one that, at bot­tom, has no press­ing need to be made — and that we, ulti­mate­ly, feel no press­ing need to see.

Relat­ed con­tent:

Why Movies Don’t Feel Real Any­more: A Close Look at Chang­ing Film­mak­ing Tech­niques

Based in Seoul, Col­in Marshall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities and the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les. Fol­low him on the social net­work for­mer­ly known as Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.


by | Permalink | Comments (40) |

Sup­port Open Cul­ture

We’re hop­ing to rely on our loy­al read­ers rather than errat­ic ads. To sup­port Open Cul­ture’s edu­ca­tion­al mis­sion, please con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion. We accept Pay­Pal, Ven­mo (@openculture), Patre­on and Cryp­to! Please find all options here. We thank you!


Comments (40)
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
  • Caleb Joseph says:

    Wow, a 130 year indus­try based on lying.

  • Shadowtag says:

    Could­n’t even read the arti­cle thanks to the giant obstruc­tive ads. What I could read seems to depend on not real­iz­ing this is what movies have been like for decades and just blam­ing super­heroes for a pre­vi­ous­ly exist­ing prob­lem

  • Shadowtag says:

    Could­n’t even read the arti­cle thanks to the giant obstruc­tive ads. What I could read seems to depend on not real­iz­ing this is what movies have been like for decades and just blam­ing super­heroes for a pre­vi­ous­ly exist­ing prob­lem

    And of course your com­ments don’t even work

  • Michael Feldman says:

    I’d have to dis­agree with the entire­ty of your premise. The major prob­lem fac­ing film now is that the pan­dem­ic not only took peo­ple out of the habit fre­quent­ing their local cin­e­mas but scared both film mak­ers and the­aters away from giv­ing films a chance at the box office before slap­ping them into streaming(and that prof­it source).
    As far as movie mak­ing specifics: many Mar­vel movies have won­der­ful orches­tral scores AND well placed usage of pop songs. Act­ing has been strong with broad cast­ing of new­bies, up and com­ers and well estab­lished vet­er­ans.
    Back to is ear­li­est days Hol­ly­wood had series/franchises. When they find some­thing that works, they keep work­ing it as long as the pub­lic likes it.

  • Mark Graff says:

    So you’re a hater. We get it. Say “entropy” again…

  • J. Montes says:

    So you haven’t even both­ered to watch any Mar­vel movies yet here you are rant­i­ng about them?

  • Passing By says:

    “…some of us have nev­er seen a movie belong­ing to the Mar­vel Cin­e­mat­ic Uni­verse…”.

    So you are talk­ing about some­thing you know noth­ing about. Go watch the first Guardians of the Galaxy (it has no ties with oth­er movies, that hap­pens else­where), and then maybe you will have an inkling of what you are talk­ing about.

    Most of the films on any genre are garbage. Super­hero films are no excep­tion, of course. But you can’t form an opin­ion on any genre if you haven’t watched any of its great­est sto­ries.

    Your argu­ments sound old; I have read them a lot of times thrash­ing Star Wars, any Spiel­berg before Schindler’s List, Matrix, Lord of the Rings… It is always the same.

    Seri­ous­ly, try them. The good ones. You may be in for a treat.

  • LondonTom says:

    What a hor­rid arti­cle? Does Mar­vel and the MCU have its prob­lems? Sure. Is to blame for the rest of Hol­ly­wood try­ing to unsuc­cess­ful­ly copy the infin­i­ty saga? (Even itself and Dis­ney strug­gle) absolute­ly not.

    What utter tosh when you haven’t even seen the films you are foam­ing at the mouth over. Pure non­sense you’ve writ­ten. No facts, no solu­tions offered just a bash­ing a film you haven’t seen.

  • Reality Check says:

    The same tired trope, com­plain­ing about block­busters. The­aters are real­ly expen­sive, so skip the rom-coms and indie art films. Super­hero movies are suc­cess­ful because they are escapism and a genre that appeals to a wide audi­ence. I’m not pay­ing pre­mi­um prices and con­ces­sions unless it’s a big film with lots of action, tech, or sci-fi.

  • Andrew H says:

    Can you even SEE through that high brow of yours? Your “arti­cle” is noth­ing but pre­ten­tious film school dri­v­el.

  • Stuart says:

    They seem to for­get the enter­tain­ment aspect of film. Not every­thing has to be an art project. The seem to also for­get this has been the same through out his­to­ry. Jesters jug­gled balls and fell down to enter­tain and get laughs. The only real dif­fer­ence between some of their lit­er­ary mas­ter­pieces from the dark ages, is time. You think sto­ries of swords in stones and drag­ons were told in tav­erns and on town stages for lit­er­ary art. They were sto­ries of enter­tain­ment. Sto­ries to suck the audi­ence in and have them for­get about the com­ing black plague. Not every on was Shake­spear or Chaucer. But they were prob­a­bly not intend­ing to cre­ate his­tor­i­cal works of art and we’re just try­ing to enter­tain. And in truth the art and inde­pen­dant films are also for enter­tain­ment but to a more spec­i­fied audi­ence. But I guess it gives them rea­son to turn their nose up at every­one else and makes them more intel­lec­tu­al. I say more close mind­ed and igno­rant.

  • Douglas Goldstein says:

    Block­busters are destroy­ing cin­e­ma. CGI is destroy­ing cin­e­ma. Sequels are destroy­ing cin­e­ma. Remakes are destroy­ing cin­e­ma. And so on. Cin­e­ma has been in a con­stant state of being destroyed for as long as I can remem­ber and as long as there are writ­ers lament­ing the way movies aren’t the way they used to be when they were kids, cin­e­ma will con­tin­ue to be destroyed.

  • Kevin says:

    West­erns, Musi­cals, War films, Film noir, Hor­ror and Thrillers, Come­dies, and now Super Hero films. These were all gen­res that crit­ics said where destroy­ing “film” when stu­dios tried to copy the suc­cess of the box­of­fice hits of those that did well. So your crit­i­cism does not stand out as unique over the past cen­tu­ry. What is unique is your unabashed pride in cri­tiquing some­thing for which you have no first hand knowl­edge.

  • Jake Forrest says:

    I love the Mon­ey Pit.

  • Romeo says:

    Super­heroes are insuf­fer­able, as well as their fans.

  • Romeo says:

    Oh broth­er, give me a break. Any­one thinks Mar­vel movies (at their best) are any­thing com­pa­ra­ble to the best movies have to offer, has an utter­ly impov­er­ished movie taste palette.

  • Ben B says:

    Just make good movies. That’s it. They’re enter­tain­ment first, then every­thing else close after.

    It’s also dumb say­ing “Mar­veliza­tion” and putting pics of a char­ac­ter that’s both before Mar­vel itself and The MCU that put it to screen. It’s not even his fault, it’s been hap­pen­ing for *decades* before, but maybe it’s Peter Jack­son’s fault?

  • S says:

    Wow, this arti­cle real­ly got Mar­vel fans’ Super­man box­ers in a twist. They seem to argue both that Mar­vel movies can stand up to the best that cin­e­ma has to offer AND that movies are “just enter­tain­ment” and don’t need to be any­thing more than low­est com­mon denom­i­na­tor. They can’t stand the article’s being so “pre­ten­tious,” while also being dead seri­ous about their cho­sen genre of art. We’ve often been brow­beat­en with the phrase “don’t yuck someone’s yum,” the eter­nal mantra of those too defen­sive and inse­cure to enter­tain any opin­ions at vari­ance with their own, but to that I say: equal­ly impor­tant not to yuck someone’s yuck.

  • Mike says:

    Tak­ing aside the prob­lem that this arti­cle feels bare­ly half fin­ished, on an add rid­dled web­site, I see at least two glar­ing ironies in this arti­cle.

    One being that using Star Wars as your counter argu­ment to what real con­tent is, is quite pos­si­bly the worst exam­ple to use, giv­en how bas­tardized and main­stream fast paced dri­v­el Star Wars has become over the last 30 years, it only end­ed up mak­ing this arti­cle seem far­ci­cal and satir­i­cal in nature. But i guess you did kind of allude to how Star Wars has changed since the begin­ning in sim­i­lar ways, but that does­n’t real­ly help your argu­ment.

    The oth­er irony is this arti­cle seemed more like click bait and was hard­ly very clear about explain­ing a clear argu­ment. Which I found amus­ing because you essen­tial­ly said the MCU is click bait. So a clas­sic exam­ple of ket­tle meets pot.

  • Sean says:

    The first Guardians is about cap­tur­ing the Infin­i­ty stone — lit­er­al­ly it sets off the chain reac­tion that builds to Infin­i­ty War.

    Mar­vel movies are gen­er­al­ly a blur, to the lay per­son some moments are good, to super fans they love every beat… Good or bad with cult like behav­ior. I love Guardians by the way, not hot on all the oth­ers and some are just plain awful (Antman 3 which I went to the cin­e­ma to watch — the new Cap­tain Amer­i­ca with red Hulk — OMG). Love Spi­der­man.

    Cre­at­ing strong­men super­heroes has only served a nar­ra­tive that only some strong dude will save us… No won­der the US is in such dis­saray.

    Check out the Dis­ney­iza­tion of Soci­ety a book from 1999 that lit­er­al­ly pre­dict­ed this arti­cle and every­thing else about Dis­neys cul­tur­al influ­ence.

    Thank­ful­ly Dream­works stepped up against Pixar — oth­er­wise the US would have no ani­ma­tion sec­tor any­more.

  • Fomdoo says:

    Is this the mod­ern ver­sion of com­plain­ing about sound or col­or being added to films?
    Some peo­ple hate change.

  • Dd says:

    The movie indus­try has always been about repeat­ing dif­fer­ent ver­sions of the same old sto­ries they tri­umph in some areas and fail in oth­ers in the cin­e­mat­ic uni­verse with the MCU and DCU uni­verse they dumb down so many char­ac­ters to appease dif­fer­ent audi­ences that they fail to con­nect to true com­ic book fans. I’m so tired of the com­i­cal side of heroes they need to spend more time on seri­ous­ness of what it takes to be a hero get the out­fit right along with their true strengths and char­ac­ters. But until then just keep look­ing for­ward to fran­chise and sequel.

  • Mlu says:

    Didn’t even read this iron­i­cal­ly uno­rig­i­nal essay about uno­rig­i­nal cin­e­ma com­plain­ing about how comics are not art.

  • Marcus Kempton says:

    This is the result of gen­er­a­tions of tele­play writ­ing for the big screen

  • Jj says:

    Leave it to a white guy that lives in Korea to have sharp insight on North Amer­i­can Cin­e­ma…

  • Ct says:

    I hate mar­vel, but this arti­cle is even worse. Your era is not unique. You are not unique. Noth­ing about this is new and you clear­ly have no idea what you’re talk­ing about.

  • Josh says:

    First of Super­man’s DC no self respect­ing mar­vel fan would were super­man box­ers and movies are just enter­tain­ment every one just needs a rea­son to wine all the time or com­plain you don’t like it don’t watch it it’s that easy

  • Drew says:

    I watched the entire shared uni­verse of Uni­ver­sal mon­sters- most­ly from the 30s and 40s.

    There is some­thing specif­i­cal­ly not new about run­ning a fran­chise into the ground with crossovers and sequels.

  • Drew says:

    The video keeps talk­ing about Order and Dis­or­der and does­n’t jus­ti­fy the use of these terms.

    Also, I think he only ever watch­es action films and wants to talk like that rep­re­sents all of cin­e­ma

  • DTCMD says:

    Based in Seoul. Please, stay there.

  • Nathan Webster says:

    Its not real­ly Mar­veliza­tion, its Di$neyfication. Mar­vel Comics of the 60s, 70s, and 80s were fan­tas­tic, but what you see on the screen every time is a piss-poor rep­re­sen­ta­tion of that sto­ry­telling. They can’t even both­er to read their own back­log of great sto­ries. Hol­ly­wood and Di$ney specif­i­cal­ly twist every­thing that’s good into some­thing bad. Every sin­gle time. They are too cheap and biased to hire prop­er skilled tal­ent, so even their best efforts bare­ly reach sec­ond-rate.

  • JP says:

    I am among those who has nev­er seen any of the 78 Spi­der Man films.There are those who actu­al­ly believe there are dif­fer­ences between them.

    I’m with Mar­tin Scors­ese. They aren’t cin­e­ma. They’re video games. Theme parks.

    Thank­ful­ly, there are still peo­ple mak­ing real films about real peo­ple.

    And when that ends?

    We’ll always have Paris.

  • Chris says:

    If peo­ple ever just grew up any­more and actu­al­ly put away child­ish things, then maybe it would­n’t be such a prob­lem. If you’re in your 30s, even 40s and you’re still watch­ing this stuff, it’s time to put the toys away already.

  • John Watson says:

    The MCU is a vic­tim of it’s own suc­cess. The episod­ic style releas­es are exact­ly what com­ic book fans want­ed from com­ic book adap­ta­tions, con­sid­er­ing it’s the only way to por­tray sto­ries with­in a shared uni­verse accu­rate­ly. The fact that it pulled in loads of causal view­ers and had them invest­ed in the sto­ry, basi­cal­ly meant that at some point the band­wag­on would fade. The facade of Mar­vel’s tran­scen­dent reach was des­tined to shrink down to pri­mar­i­ly life long com­ic book fans, which is a frac­tion of the casu­al fan­dom. Quick release con­tent isn’t prob­lem­at­ic for fans of month­ly episod­ic releas­es in com­ic book form. We’ve expe­ri­enced fluc­tu­a­tions in qual­i­ty on the phys­i­cal pages of comics all our lives. See­ing it occur in cin­e­ma isn’t jar­ring in the least when you’re hip to the sta­tus quo of the com­ic book medi­um.

  • Jeff says:

    I like that movie too

  • NightRAPIST says:

    Bruh call­ing Lord of The Rings cin­e­ma is fun­ny it’s almost as bad as a mar­vel movie you could­n’t use actu­al cin­e­ma? Like Cin­e­ma Par­adiso? City of God? Car­l­i­to’s Way? The French Con­nec­tion? Fuck man I don’t dis­agree with you but for fucks sake know what you speak before fuck­ing writ­ing jack­ass

  • Cosmo says:

    Clear­ly show­ing why so many aver­age movie lovers can’t stand art pre­ma don­na movie crit­ics.

  • David says:

    I hard­ky ever post on the inter­net. I am also annoyrd at the giant ads and the con­stant mov­ing of the text fir said ads.

    Lets have a con­ver­sa­tion over the dom­i­nance if ads when sim­ply try­ing to read some­ones opin­ion. An opin­ion based off bias but i was atleast will­ing to read your arti­cle before com­ing to my con­clu­sions.

    So refresh­ing, a new insight.
    Im con­fused why you would even write such an arti­cle.

  • David says:

    Well said

  • Adrian says:

    That’s what fabs said about Star Wars,The Matrix etc. Not sll movies are like that and those LOTR grit­ty epic movies stopped after King­dom of heav­en.

Leave a Reply

Quantcast