This is an argument I don’t entirely buy. ‘This movie was good, and most of the other movies are good, but the MCU is going to collapse if it keeps making movies like this.’ If they just keep making good movies that people want to see, how is the MCU going to fail by iterating on its successful formula?

I think it’s also worth bearing in mind that we’re now at the stage where Marvel is introducing the next generation of characters, for whatever lies beyond Infinity War. That redeemed narcissist character isn’t just a familiar archetype, it’s also one of the main building blocks of the whole Avengers dynamic.

Spidey doesn’t just throw out the occasional one-liner of snark, it’s a constant, steady stream of color commentating. And it’s great. And I, too, loved how he was in Civil War. His “holy shit! This is so cool!” was entertaining.

…but it’s a trope Marvel movies have drawn on for basically every one of their origin movies

So how do you go about describing a singular person and then in less than 6 words then start describing them in the plural?

Must be why I prefer Captain America: The First Avenger, since it is not this type of origin story.

By my count, as many origins have avoided the trope (The Incredible Hulk, Captain America: The First Avenger, Ant-Man) as have utilized it (Iron Man, Thor, maaaaaaybe Guardians of the Galaxy).

Ant-Man didn’t follow that formula at all. Neither did Thor. Or Guardians of the Galaxy. So by “every one of their origin movies” you actually meant... less than half? Like, just the two you specifically talked about? Yeah, there are a number of parallels between Strange and Ironman, but going from “these two…

Really? Quill is an arrogant genius? Thor is an arrogant genius? Steve is an arrogant genius? Lang is an arrogant genius?

It’s also not nearly as universal across the MCU as the criticism seems to imply. Only origin stories follow the format, and of the debut films to date, as many have avoided that trope (The Incredible Hulk, Captain America: The First Avenger, Ant-Man) as have utilized it (Iron Man, Thor, maaaaaaybe Guardians of the…

He stood out pretty well in Civil War, I think.

While I think the comments about over-familiarity/overuse of the same kind of plot is true, I also think it gets overstated here. The specific lines: “These consistent problems slowly but surely chipping away at each new film in the MCU’s lustre. Slowly but surely, these movies have stopped being great and started…

Just like Iron Man 1? Sounds good to me. If you were comparing this to Incredible Hulk, maybe I’d be more dubious.

And really the Formula is basically a Shakespearean thing. It’s existed long before MCU and will exist long after.

It sort of feels like the video game community to me. Games like Fallout 4 or Gears sort of get bombarded with negativity because they’re “more of the same.”

Marvel is criticized (Sometimes correctly) for relying too heavily on a formula that works. DC is lambasted because they can’t find a formula that works. Which is worse? I know Dr Strange (and Spider-man, and GOTG) are going to be competent fun movies with safe choices but great moments. I have no earthly idea what to…

Oh, come on. The cloak bashing scene were one of the most funny scenes in the movie.

I wouldn’t get my hopes up. I imagine she will be X-23 in name only much as Wade Wilson was by name only in X-Men Origins: Wolverine. She will be a character to bring Logan out of a funk he is in and relate to somebody again.

I kind of think you’re giving Fox too much credit in terms of universe building and honestly, I’m not sure they even care all that much so long as they keep churning out profitable X-Men films. My guess is they’ll probably make a standalone X-23 film or put her on her own team. Meanwhile the 90's film will come out…

Static Shock was the cartoon, which utterly paled in comparison to the amazing comic Static.