Avengers: Infinity War doesn't just bring the many threads of the Marvel Cinematic Universe together, it manages to make up for some of the studio's biggest mistakes on the way. The epic team-up culmination of the MCU is great on its own merits, make no mistake, but just as Thanos enters the fray with Earth's Mightiest Heroes fractured after Captain America: Civil War and strewn across the cosmos, neither is Infinity War entering a totally balanced arena. Much of that is how its narrative is informed by eighteen other movies - the film uses assumed familiarity with the previous entries to great effect - but there are franchise concerns too that are a little more complex.

Nobody would deny Marvel's success over the past ten years, nor that it has only continued to become more staggering in recent times: last year, movies in the MCU made $2.6 billion worldwide, while just two months ago Black Panther smashed records in every direction, and the reviews from fans and critics alike typically match. Yet throughout the Marvel Cinematic Universe there's been a growing number of consistent issues. The movies are notoriously formulaic, and even with the hiring of directors like Taika Waititi or Scott Derrickson, entries usually feel like the filmmaker in a restrictive playpen rather than them truly making something unique.

For Infinity War, these problems risked overspilling. While before the overall quality of the Marvel machine has won out anyway, there was the underlying justification that each movie was part of a bigger story and thus many slip-ups were forgiven in deference of the franchise. That doesn't hold for the culmination; what's this all been worth if the payoff is poor (see the depreciation in opinion of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey when it became clear the trilogy it started wasn't up to much)? Thankfully, the Russos beyond mere justification and actually tackles those previous issues head-on.

Is Avengers: Infinity War a "perfect" or "flawless" movie? No, of course not; having such an unprecedentedly large cast and telling a universe-spanning story means it's operating on an immense scale, and so creaks and smaller elements struggle. But what's exciting is that these are problems with this specific film, not franchise-endemic concerns continuing. If there is a Marvel formula still operating, it's proven to be no longer a problem.

  • This Page: Marvel's Villain Problem

Marvel's Villain Problem

Thanos in Avengers Infinity War and Marvel Villains

The most oft-cited issue with Marvel is their villain problem. Namely, despite almost unanimously being at the core of a movie's plot, the villain and their scheme always come as an afterthought. Characters like Ronan the Accuser in Guardians of the Galaxy or Malekith in Thor: The Dark World are commonly cited as being almost comedically forgettable, but even the serviceable Ego in Guardians Vol. 2 or Kaecillius in Doctor Strange don't quite land as impressively as they should.

The key problem is a lack of active development in these characters, mainly because Marvel movies have traditionally been so heavily hero focused; the priority is making sure the protagonist and their arc is well rounded, so anything outside of that bubble is a secondary concern. This is also why many villains tend to simply be dark mirrors of the hero, and often their true nature is revealed in a twist; both save time and power the main element. This has been baked into the formula since the first Iron Man, where Jeff Bridges proved so instinctively menacing that a lot of his scenes were cut. Of course, not everyone has quite the same menace as Bridges, nor as easy an arc as Iron Monger, and so it was applied without full thought as to why.

Recently, things have admittedly improved. Michael Keaton's Vulture and Michael B. Jordan's Killmonger stand out in particular for the real-world grounding to their relatable motives; they definitely needed to be stopped, yet it was hard not to agree with at least where both were coming from. They also benefitted from effective twists - incredibly shocking in Spider-Man: Homecoming's case - that challenged and forced the audience to question everything about them. Essentially, Marvel, understanding that its character work was top notch, applied the method of hero deconstruction to their foes.

Thanos Is Marvel's Best Villain Because They Treat Him Like A Hero

Yet if either of those felt like notable exceptions working against the trope - that there was so little competition was key to the "best villain claims" - Thanos indicates the methodology has changed. He's the big CGI foe with an extreme goal and despite three prior appearances next to no established personality; each of these should ruin him. Yet, he's the best thing in the film.

Thanos curbs all of the cited problems by not just being a fleshed-out antagonist but the focus of Avengers: Infinity War. He is the main character - to the point the text at the end promises his return, not the recently-decimated Avengers - and so the movie gets more time and freedom to go deeper into his psyche than any prior. The Russos paint a driven being whose greatest strength is a conviction in his horrific goals, and torturously sacrifices everything to get it; while the fact he wins come Infinity War's ending definitely solidifies his stature, the emotion on show as he gives up "everything" to get there is what makes Thanos great. The competent realization of Thanos, with CGI so refined you can see his stubble, and John Brolin playing it entirely straight, is a staggering bonus.

Does this mean the heroes suffer as a result? Sure, but we know them by this point. Avengers: Infinity War applies the shorthand that benefited Jeff Bridges to the heroes, knowing that Captain America can turn up without introduction and get straight to it (what exposition of previous movies there is played as personality-building). The villain is given the protagonist treatment, and no foe can ever be the same.

Ultron in Avengers Age of Ultron

Marvel's Comedy Problem Is Really About "Fun"

But what's a good villain if they can't truly be menacing? Early on in Avengers: Age of Ultron, the eponymous android presents his chilling view on life to the Maximoff twins: "Everyone creates the thing they dread. Men of peace create engines of war. Invaders create Avengers." And then he fumbles. "People create... smaller people? 'Children.'" He laughs, adding "I lost the word, there." before jumping back into his speech. It's a jarring moment that challenges our understanding of the character - he's connected to the internet and all of human knowledge, yet doesn't know the word "children" - and undermines the threat he poses going forward.

This type of almost self-deprication was always part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, with Iron Man's improv-heavy production creating some incisive comedy, but didn't take off fully until Joss Whedon entered. He packed The Avengers full of quips that mostly worked in grounding what was then a highly-ambitious team-up, but over Phase 2 it became the norm and in the hands of less skilled screenwriters and directors more generic, hampering films like Thor: The Dark World and the entire character of Ultron. And while Marvel's addressed many of its formula elements in Phase 3, this aspect has only got worse, from the Cloak of Levitation undercutting Doctor Strange's hero moment to just about every emotional scene in Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 forcing in a cheap yuk. Humor has a place - Thor: Ragnarok, for better or ill, is a straight-up comedy - but far too often jokes are misplaced (even in the more grounded and serious Black Panther).

However, the talk of comedy and it undermining scenes is really just systemic of a bigger problem. "Fun" is the real enemy. It's the most common word typically used when describing new MCU entries, present in nearly every review you can read. The problem is that "fun" used on such a mass scale is scant praise; it's at best diverting, an admission that a film is moderately enjoyable but not enough to describe as actually "entertaining" or even "good". Really, it's the best you can hope for when anything more is followed up by a gag; bar Civil War and Black Panther, every Phase 3 has fallen into this trap, giving the sense that Marvel is mostly content providing a rather superficial action adventure that doesn't go much further.

Read More: It's Not Enough For The Marvel Cinematic Universe To Be œFun

Avengers: Infinity War Is Perfectly Balanced

Fun was a key fear with Avengers: Infinity War: how can it balance the now-inherent comedy and the bigger stakes? The trepidation was doubled by the cast, with the Guardians and Avengers bringing their own uniquely comedic tones that didn't immediately gel. When Thanos was shown in the trailer saying "Fun isn't something one considers when balancing the universe, but this does put a smile on my face", it looked like we were in for another "fun" time.

Thankfully, in the finished film, everything is - as would impress Thanos - perfectly balanced. Grand, universe-threatening beats sit right alongside quippy meetings without clash. The individual sequences set in New York, Space, Edinburgh, Wakanda and beyond each intercut between each other mostly well - the only exception being staunch traditionalist Okoye wishing she could have a Starbucks a minute after Gamora's death - and when characters collide it's played realistically; Tony Stark even gets an exasperated long take at the Guardians, almost acknowledgement on Marvel's part at how ridiculous things can be.

Crucially, emotion is allowed to happen unincumbered. Heart-wrenching beats, especially those relating to Thanos, play out without any attempt to add levity. The Soul Stone sequence is slow and torturous, and after Doctor Strange gives up the Time Stone it's reality, not gags, that come crashing down. That "fun" line doesn't even make the cut. This means deaths, sacrifices and personal anguish have the required gravitas, leaving audiences shook, and also make the moments of levity stronger as they're sparser and better integrated as a result.

Marvel's Lack Of Conviction

While both of the previous concerns are the commonly-cited issues with individual Marvel movies, it's not where the MCU has most struggled on a grander scale. Everything discussed creates the formula, but that predictability is only enabled by a bigger ethos: Marvel's lack of conviction. They play it safe with such predictability, keeping things within a clear-defined franchise box that is at once comforting and unambitious, to the point the studio has essentially created an artificial ceiling to what they can do.

Most often, we talk about death. Ten years and eighteen movies, yet while plenty of mentors and villains have bit the dirt, the only noteworthy hero to fall in that time is Quicksilver, a character created just so he can be killed. Along the way, the likes of Nick Fury, Pepper Potts, Loki (twice), Groot and Bucky have all "died" only to be brought back, often in the same movie. All of this erodes the sense of any fatal threat, making death expectation something of a fool's speculation. In part, this comes from fans over-theorizing on films - especially ones based on a medium where death it notoriously impermanent - but is still fed by Marvel, who have shrouds of secrecy that usually hide nothing major.

This goes wider and really comes from a reluctance to commit properly to an idea. Despite being a storytelling medium, it often feels like everything in the MCU exists in service to the universe, which means movies often don't have the lasting ramifications or purpose they need to pull off what they're attempting. Take Thor: Ragnarok's destruction of Asgard, which not only suffers heavily from comedy and "fun", but is so abstracted it lacks the sense it matters or lasts. You get this tonally too, with movies often said to be evoking a specific genre yet really only ever providing lipservice (the only real exception is Captain America: The Winter Soldier as a 1970s espionage thriller, and that still cast Robert Redford to cover over the cracks).

It's all rather disheartening, and when applied to characters can be weakening. The consistency of its heroes is Marvel's real ace, allowing them to brush off narrative and timeline problems with ease, but because the Avengers must always return, arc closure is impossible. As great as Tony Stark's journey may be, his flip-flopping on destroying and making more suits across Iron Man 3, Age of Ultron and Civil War is confounding and despite the handwaved explanation in the latter (by way of his fractured relationship with Pepper Potts) feels the product of wider story mandates.

Avengers: Infinity War Show Marvel Can Commit

Avengers: Infinity War effortlessly corrects that. The film obviously has Thanos' finger snap, which in spectacular fashion puts paid to the restrained approach to death and defeat. The heroes lose because they do not - cannot match - the villain. Sure, there are complaints it's somehow lacking in true stakes because we know the vanished heroes are returning - just as we had with everyone before - but that's not the real point; the cliffhanger is intended to provide the villain with victory, removing any illusion of fun and making him more menacing for Avengers 4. For all the context that can be applied, it nevertheless shows Marvel fully committing to a bold idea where story consideration is key.

But to hone in on just the ending is to do a disservice to the rest of Infinity War. The entire movie is driven by a conviction comparable to that of Thanos. That is, to tell a big, unprecedented ensemble sci-fi epic that connects up the characters of the previous 18 movies. It's by design ambitious, but the greatness comes from the handling. It makes a giant CGI foe collecting magic MacGuffins feel thematically weighty and of much greater importance than any description suggests. There's no sense of worry in it being ridiculous, or even of the undertaking being too difficult; Benedict Cumberbatch in a sentient cape giving up a green rock to a mo-cap Josh Brolin is one of the most earnest and moving experiences you'll have in a movie all year.

-

Avengers: Infinity War gets so much right by itself, but it's far too aware to simply let that be it. It's cleared up plot holes, brought back long-dead characters, pretty much fixed the timeline, and so much more. The Marvel formula remains, yet it's been shown just how far the envelope can be pushed.

Next: What Is Avengers 4's Title? We Have A Cool Theory

Key Release Dates