What is the Marvel Studios Formula?

What is the Marvel Studios Formula?

After the mixed reception of Man of Steel and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, many fans of the DC Extended Universe were happy that "at least it isn't a Marvel movie". Just what is a Marvel movie and what does it mean to be one (besides critically and financially successful)?

Editorial Opinion
By Taggard - Apr 05, 2016 04:04 PM EST
Filed Under: Marvel Comics
If you followed the reactions from comic book movie fans after watching Warner Brother's Batman V Superman on the various forums created for such responses, you would have seen (mostly) the following types of reviews:  fans of comics in general who though the movie was ok (but had some major flaws), hardcore fans of Superman who hated the movie, hardcore fans of Batman who were somewhat mixed, and hardcore fans of the DC Extended Universe who were happy that it wasn't a Marvel style quip-fest made for children where the climax of the movie was a dance-off.  For that last group of fans, anything close to a Marvel style movie would have been a huge disappointment, even if it meant more critical and financial success.
 
But just what is the "Marvel style"? Is it fair to call their movies a "quip fest"?  Is it fair to call them "made for children"?  Is it even fair to call it a unified style at all?  Marvel movies certainly have a "feel" and they have been quite successful critically (all Marvel Studios are rated Fresh on Rotten Tommatoes) and financially, but just what do they share in common?  What is it that makes a Marvel movie?
 
If you boil down a Marvel movie, to its basics, it will have the following: a likable protagonist with clear motivations and a good heart, a fairly straightforward plot, an upbeat tone with ample humor, an unlikable villain with clear motivations, and a happy ending.  On top of that, throw in some super powers, add a few clear moments from the comic book sources, sprinkle in some Hero’s Journey elements, and top it all off with a dash of one of the standard crowd cheering moments (like the hero getting ready to meet the big bad).  
 
Now you just need to pick your genre.  Make it a redemption story and you have Iron Man.  Make it a heist film and you have Ant-Man.  Make it a team-up and you have The Avengers.  Make it a buddy-cop movie and you have Thor: The Dark World.
 
Sounds simple.  It isn’t, or at least it hasn’t been easy to repeat.
 
So are all Marvel movies quip-fests?  Captain America: The Winter Soldier wasn’t, but it is seen by many as not really following the Marvel formula (for the better).   So maybe this critique sticks.  Are they made for children?  Are comic books?  Children aren’t buying all these movie tickets, so I think that insult misses the mark.
 
In the final analysis, Marvel Studios puts out some good, funny, and light-hearted comic book movies, and I think many fans of the DCEU wouldn’t mind if Warner Brothers took a page from their playbook for the next few DC based films.
 
What do you think?  Sound off below.
 
 
 
 
RED HULK Is Getting His Own Comic Book Series Right In Time For CAPTAIN: AMERICA: BRAVE NEW WORLD
Related:

RED HULK Is Getting His Own Comic Book Series Right In Time For CAPTAIN: AMERICA: BRAVE NEW WORLD

AMAZING SPIDER-MAN #61 Kills Peter Parker In The Most Horrific (LOKI-Inspired) Way Possible - SPOILERS
Recommended For You:

AMAZING SPIDER-MAN #61 Kills Peter Parker In The Most Horrific (LOKI-Inspired) Way Possible - SPOILERS

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

Yaf
Yaf - 4/5/2016, 5:18 PM
No.
kong
kong - 4/5/2016, 5:30 PM
No this definitely isn't the Marvel formula.
Taggard
Taggard - 4/5/2016, 5:39 PM
@Kong - What is it then?
Taggard
Taggard - 4/5/2016, 7:54 PM
@Kong - Let's look at these one by one:

10. Death fake out: Happens in 3.5 of 12 movies. (Coulson's death counts for 1/2 as he wasn't resurrected in the movies.)
9: Large scale battle in the 3rd act. How is this unique to Marvel? MoS, BvS, all of the Nolan movies had this. This is common to comic book movies, not just Marvel.
8: Strong females. Don't buy this one at all. MCU has strong women cause women are strong.
7: All out humor. IM3 was a "laugh a minute" ride? Really? Those PTSD scenes weren't funny. And I mentioned humor in my formula. It certainly is part of it...and I am happy it is.
6: Science. Ummm...what? Science in a sci-fi genre? No!!! /s
5: MacGuffin driven plot. Discussed elsewhere in these comments, but the MacGuffin plots only start in Phase 2.
4: Plot resolution in post-credit scene. What? This one misses. The post credit scenes are used to set up future movies, often taken from the actual dailies from those movies. Not a single plot has been resolved in a post credit scene.
3: Every Hero's Journey is the same. I call this out in my formula. It is certainly part of why Marvel movies are universally liked...the Hero's Journey is good stuff.
2: One-Shot villains. Yup need to add this to my formula...though I am hopeful many of the villains will return.
1: The whole Phase structure. I would argue this has nothing to do with the formula.

List gets a lot of stuff way wrong and the stuff it gets right, I mostly mention,

kong
kong - 4/6/2016, 7:20 AM
@Taggard -
Kurban
Kurban - 4/5/2016, 5:52 PM
Nah, this is fairly accurate. It's why Marvel succeeds and DC fails. Marvel's 'formula' is the ideal one for comic books with enough repetitiveness to breed familiarity but also enough difference between films so as to be fresh and new.

DC just makes me want to [frick]ing kill myself and burn all my Superman comics.
DarthMoose
DarthMoose - 4/5/2016, 7:05 PM
@Kurban - lmfao
LMdecoy
LMdecoy - 4/5/2016, 6:17 PM
I think this lists a lot of elements of the "Marvel Formula". What about how most of them are driven by a MacGuffin and the villains for the solo films are usually "antithesis villains". The MacMuffins are, of course, the Infinity Stones, and the "antithesis villains" include Iron Monger (more like "antithesis father"), Whiplash (had an "antithesis father"), Aldrich Killian ("antithesis inventor"), Red Skull, Loki (though somewhat to a lesser extent), Abomination, and Yellowjacket.


That being said, I'm still a big fan of the MCU and totally look forward to each of them before they come out (even if some, like Dark World, are disappointing).

Taggard
Taggard - 4/5/2016, 7:00 PM
@LMdecoy - I think the MacGuffin point is great, but more a feature of the Phase 2 stuff. Not much of a MacGuffin in Iron Man, Thor, CA; TFA or Iron Man 2. The Avengers introduced the Age of MacGuffin. Still an awesome insight into how the Formula has evolved.

The antithesis villain, however, is spot-on! Maybe not for the team-up films, but certainly for the origin stories.

Thanks for the thoughts!
LMdecoy
LMdecoy - 4/6/2016, 4:23 AM
@Taggard - Yeah, the MacGuffin element seems like a new element to the formula once they decided on Infinity Stones. It's a shame, too, because in the first Captain America film the Tesseract was a key element and yet they made that film not feel like the main goal was for the hero to take it from the villain. I think Guardians of the Galaxy and Thor: The Dark World really suffered by focusing too much on Infinity Stones in the plot.
The "antithesis villain" formula might reach farther than simply the MCU, as many comic villains are opposites are some element of the hero that they battle. I think it's better when the villain doesn't have the same powers as the hero. That's often enough. Magneto is the opposite of Prof. X ideologically, but they have different powers.
Generally, I think the X-Men, Spider-Man, and Batman have the best villains because they are not simply reverse potrayals of the heroes. I know every hero's got multiple villains that aren't all "antithesis villains", but usually such villains get the best run against the hero and becomes his or her arch-nemesis. Maybe it's much harder to write a story where different-ability characters have to match wits and strength and skill than it is to have the hero fight someone just like them but "evil".
Armpitwebs
Armpitwebs - 4/5/2016, 6:28 PM
Great points.
I put forth that another component in the Marvel formula is that they are guided by individuals who ensure that the core traits that have made these characters popular and even beloved are, for the most part, properly translated to the films.
I wish DC/WB had the same.
Taggard
Taggard - 4/5/2016, 7:01 PM
@Armpitwebs - You and me both! Thanks for the thoughts.
SpideySupes94
SpideySupes94 - 4/5/2016, 11:36 PM
I disagree.
Kyos
Kyos - 4/6/2016, 2:01 AM
a likable protagonist with clear motivations and a good heart

...Superman? :'(
Taggard
Taggard - 4/6/2016, 12:52 PM
@Kyos - Don't we all wish.
crawley
crawley - 4/6/2016, 4:14 AM
The Marvel studios formula is a book called Save the Cat.


Django79
Django79 - 4/19/2016, 4:32 PM
Marvel's Formula is that they get good talent in their films. They give people who haven't necessarily made too much big stuff and show promise and trust them and allow them to flourish. Look at James Gunn, Russos, Joss Whedon, and Jon Favreau. None of them made big blockbusters before, and only did some small stuff here and there and some good TV stuff, yet Marvel took a chance on all of them and the results were glorious.
View Recorder