
The Three Crumbling Pillars Of The MCU: What's Going On?
But of course, the general sense is that post-Endgame, the MCU has been lost at sea to some extent, and has not and likely will not reach the peak of Endgame and everything that came before. Why? You can say the ever-cited 'superhero fatigue' or the fact that movie tickets cost too much, but in the context of Marvel, it's more than that. In my view, there are three main pillars of the MCU that have had cracks shooting through them for years now.
Too Many Releases, And Too Many Disconnected Releases
Even Marvel realized eventually that dumping out something like three shows and three movies a year was overkill, and will allegedly tone that down from here, but it took more than a half decade to figure it out. It was overwhelming and many fans would just throw up their hands and be content to miss one film or another.
Marvel has previously said that their movies felt too much like 'homework,' where'd you have to watch X other movie or show to know what's happening in the next movie. While that was true to some extent, The Marvels had three characters that required viewing of a first film, and two separate TV shows to know all the leads, that didn't happen all that often.
Rather, it was that the stories were mostly disconnected, not leading toward any sort of ultimate goal that made any amount of sense. There was this vague idea for a minute that Kang would be the new Big Bad, first introduced in Loki, of all places, and then he showed up in the third Ant-Man movie, of all places, and was beaten by…ants. You can see the problem.
Elsewhere, what did we have? Black Widow, a prequel film that should have been made years earlier for it to make sense. The Eternals, a moonshot full of people no one had ever heard of. Now more recently Thunderbolts, an assembled cast of C-listers from over the past 6-8 years or so. While they are throwing many of these characters together for the new Avengers movies, this has not been a coherent, connected plan.
Abandoned Heroes
This has two meanings, namely that post-Endgame, characters were simply lost. Iron Man was famously killed. Captain America time traveled, aged and has never been seen again. Hulk showed up in co-star and cameo roles at best, and was never the full focus of a film. Thor had one great movie and one so bad it killed hype for his character.
There has not been an ability to build up a core cast like this again. Recently, Sam Wilson's new Captain America (mantle passing, in that case, was also a big problem) was tasked with assembling a new Avengers. Which would be…who, exactly? After all these years, it feels like we don't have a re-formed cast that makes any sense.
Also by 'abandoned heroes,' we have one-and-done offerings. That would be the aforementioned Eternals, but also Shang-Chi, who was built up to be a hugely important character and then never got any sequel. None of these new-era heroes have gotten more than one movie focused on them specifically, something that was not the case with Iron Man, Captain America and Thor especially in the run-up to the various Avengers movies.
The Nostalgia Trap Card
One point here is that well, there are still huge-earning movies in this era, two of the highest being Spider-Man: No Way Home and Deadpool and Wolverine. These movies were entertaining, sure, but they both relied heavily on audience connections not with the story, but with the mere appearance of characters they used to love. In Spider-Man, of course, that was two previously Spider-Man in the form of Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield. In Deadpool and Wolverine, it's easy to even lose count, from Chris Evans taking up the mantle of Johnny Storm, Ben Affleck-era Jennifer Garner Elektra, Blade. They threw everything at the wall.
You are eventually going to run out of nostalgia to pull from here. Even now, what's the big focus of the upcoming Avengers Doomsday? The return of a slew of FOX-era X-Men past the Deadpool and Wolverine ones, and then the return of Robert Downey Jr. himself, which I would consider a different form of nostalgia, in this case for a better era of the MCU itself, even if he's playing a different role. The story is that the MCU's biggest star is somehow back.
Those are my takeaways from what's going on. There's more past that, but it's been rough, and I'm not sure when it's going to get better from here.
Follow me on Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram.
Pick up my sci-fi novels the Herokiller series and The Earthborn Trilogy.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Does More Freedom Equal Less Screen Time? Experts Think So
In a screen time battle, there are no winners. Either you give in and let your kids have way too much screen time, leading to increased mental health problems and other issues, or you strictly control their screens so much that they end up feeling ignored, misunderstood, and babied. It's a lose-lose situation. My oldest child is only 7, and it's already a struggle for my family. But what are we supposed to do? A new study asked experts how to actually lower screen time in kids, and the answer is something that feels completely counter-intuitive: give your kids more freedom. The Anxious Generation author Jonathan Haidt, along with Lenore Skenazy and Zach Rausch, recently partnered with Harris Poll to survey 500 U.S. kids ages 8 to 12 about their phone habits and wrote about the results in The Atlantic. They found that the majority of kids already owned smartphones, with about half of 10-to-12-year-olds reporting that 'most' or 'all' of their friends use social media, despite the minimum age being 13. (Haidt advocates that kids don't have phones until high school and social media until they are 16.) More from SheKnows Gen Z Is Bragging About 'Getting Cracked' on TikTok - & It May Not Mean What You Think Additionally, about 75 percent of kids ages 9 to 12 play the online game Roblox, where they can interact with friends and internet strangers. However, most of the children said they aren't allowed to be in public at all without an adult. Fewer than half of the 8- and 9-year-olds have gone down a grocery-store aisle alone and more than a quarter aren't allowed to play unsupervised in their front yard. When asked how they would prefer spending time with friends, the majority said unstructured play in real life. 'Children want to meet up in person, no screens or supervision,' the authors wrote. 'But because so many parents restrict their ability to socialize in the real world on their own, kids resort to the one thing that allows them to hang out with no adults hovering: their phones.' In fact, nearly three-quarters of kids in the study said they would spend less time online if there were more friends in their neighborhood to play with in person. Kids Want More Freedom Too Members of our SheKnows Teen Council shared how they enjoy stepping away from their phones for hands-on 'adventuring,' such as building a tiki hut, shooting hoops, and connecting with their friends. 'You're going out with your friends, you're finding activities to do, you're exploring, you're building something — it can really be anything,' 16-year-old Clive told us. And as a result? 'You feel double satisfaction. You had fun, and you're proud of yourself for not scrolling on your phone all day.' 'If there's a way that a kid can walk a few blocks to a store and buy something, at age 8, they should be doing that,' Haidt previously told SheKnows. 'And the kids who go out and do something, they come back and they're jumping up and down. They are so excited. It has a huge impact on the kids, but the really important thing is that it has an impact on the parents, because we don't know what the right age is to let them out. We're afraid.' Over-policing of Parents Short of getting in a time-machine and raising kids in the '80s, it's hard to let your kids roam the neighborhood when no other kids are doing it — or parents are watching out the windows and calling the police if they see unsupervised kids out and about. Take this tragedy from a family in North Carolina. Jessica and Sameule Jenkins let their 7-year-old son Legend and 10-year-old son Brandon walk to the neighborhood Food Lion supermarket and Subway sandwich shop, which was less than 10 minutes away from their apartment. In an interview with The New York Times, the parents revealed they were hesitant. 'I really thought against it,' said Mr. Jenkins. He added that he and his wife are 'very protective of our kids.' But they compromised: the boys could walk their if they stayed on the phone with their parents the whole time. 'They made it there safe,' Mrs. Jenkins said. But on the way back, Legend stepped off a grass median and was tragically hit and killed by an SUV driver. Although the driver faced no charges for the incident, the parents were charged with involuntary manslaughter with bail set at $1.5 million each. 'As many parents now control their children's every move, transgressions by parents who take a freer approach — one that used to be normal — can result in criminal charges,' stated the outlet. 'Just because parents don't have their eyes on their kids every single second doesn't mean they are bad parents,' Lenore Skenazy, who chronicles such cases as president of Let Grow, which advocates for more childhood freedom, along with Jonathan Haidt, told the outlet. 'We're blaming these parents, but they've done everything as good as they can for 10 years, and then something terrible happens.' When parents do let kids have more freedom, everyone benefits. How Parents Can Help Screen Addiction A March 2025 Common Sense Media report found that by the time kids are 2 years old, 40 percent have their own tablet. By age 8, nearly 1 in 4 kids have their own cell phone. Overall, 51 percent of children age 8 and younger have some sort of mobile device. And kids ages 5-8 spend about three and a half hours daily on screens. Other studies have shown that kids are addicted to their screens, which interferes with schoolwork, relationships, and life because they only want to be on their devices. Psychologist and author Dr. Becky Kennedy (known as 'Dr. Becky') previously talked to SheKnows about kids and screen time. She reminded us that we have to think about both short- and long-term needs for our kids. 'Sometimes short-term needs are, 'I need my kid to be fully occupied for an amount of time, so I can fill-in-the-blank: decompress, cook, answer emails, work out, have time to myself,' whatever it is. I totally understand this!' she told us. Long term needs might be: ''I want my kid to be able to access their own creativity and turn that creativity into action. I want my kid to learn to be bored, and to wait, and to know that that's part of human existence. I want my kid to learn that hard work and effort is what leads to good feelings, as opposed to only mindlessness and low effort leading to good, exciting feelings.'' '[I]t's not a way of saying long term needs should always trump short term needs,' Dr. Becky clarified. 'It's a way of saying we just need to think about them both.' No one is saying kids can never watch cartoons or play iPad games on a long car trip. But what experts are suggesting is that we also think about how we want to raise our kids to prepare them for the future. Teaching them how to explore and entertain themselves when they're bored. Help them gain skills to be independent and work hard at what they want. And it starts with loosening the leash and giving them a little more freedom. It's like what Clive previously told us. 'I don't know if being on my phone makes me unhappy,' the teen shared. 'But I'm 100 percent sure that when I'm really happy — like during the summer when I have things to do and I'm in my best place — I don't want to be on my phone.' Let's work together to start giving our kids more freedomsBest of SheKnows These Raw & Beautiful Breastfeeding Photos Show There's No 'Right' Way to Nurse 'But I Hate School': What To Do When Your Teen Dreads Going Back Rugged Meets Romantic in These 'Quiet Western' Names: All the Charm, None of the Grit Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Lady Gaga leads 2025 MTV Video Music Awards with 12 nominations
NEW YORK — The nominations for the 2025 MTV Video Music Awards were announced Tuesday and Lady Gaga leads the pack with a dozen nods. The Oscar, Grammy and Emmy Award winner, who kicked off her highly anticipated Mayhem Ball Tour last month, already has 18 VMAs to her credit. This year, she competes in categories including artist of the year, video of the year and best album. This year marks the third time Gaga has led the nominations. Her 'Die with a Smile' collaborator Bruno Mars follows closely behind with 11 nominations. The duo's 2024 soft-rock ballad — which took home the Grammy for best pop duo/group performance earlier this year — also garnered nods for best collaboration and best pop song. 'Apt.,' Mars' collaboration with Blackpink singer Rosé, is also up for a slew of awards, including best direction and best visual effects. The breakout K-pop star netted a total of eight VMA nominations. Other top nominees include Pulitzer Prize-winning rapper Kendrick Lamar (with 10), pop sensation Sabrina Carpenter (eight), 'Wicked' powerhouse Ariana Grande and pop crooner the Weeknd (both with seven). Alongside Gaga and Lamar, Beyoncé, Taylor Swift, Bad Bunny, Morgan Wallen and the Weeknd are competing for artist of the year. Online fan voting is now open in 19 categories. Votes are also available for video of the year, artist of the year and best new artist through the comment sections under pinned posts on the VMAs official Instagram account. For the first time ever, the VMAs will air on CBS. The show, set for Sunday, Sept. 7, at 8 p.m. ET, will simulcast on MTV and stream on Paramount+ in the U.S. For the second consecutive year, the event will be broadcast live from UBS Arena in Elmont, New York.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
'I've always played for me.' Venus Williams returns to Cincinnati Open on her own terms
MASON, OH − Venus Williams has always lived an unapologetic life, controlling what she can control while passionately committing herself to the sport she loves. That's why it's odd that her illustrious career began with something she had no control of whatsoever. On Halloween Night in 1994, Williams made her professional debut at just 14 years at the Bank of the West Classic in Oakland, California. The toughest part might have been keeping her composure while the Rolling Stones' Voodoo Lounge World Tour roared next door at the Oakland Coliseum. More: Here are the best first-round ATP matches to watch in the Cincinnati Open Right around "Beast of Burden," or maybe, "Sympathy for the Devil," Williams finished a straight-set victory over Shaun Stafford. "Mick Jagger, this is my message to you: I was playing my first professional match next to you," Williams laughed. "It was a beautiful thing and a great start." Now, the end is near, but Williams won't put a timetable on when she'll hang it up for good. The 45-year-old, who was awarded a wild card to the Cincinnati Open, made another comeback in July following a 16-month absence. Last summer, she underwent surgery for uterine fibroids, which affects up to 80% of women by age 50, according to NYU Langone Health. "This is a super important issue because so many people go through this," Williams said. More: 5 food dishes to try at the Cincinnati Open, from a lobster roll to a wagyu burger Williams never stopped hitting the ball, even when she could hardly walk. Even if it was for a few minutes, at whatever intensity she could manage. "Now, a year later, I'm in a completely different space and I have a clean bill of health, thank God. I'm ready to play and compete.' Despite a three-decade career, Williams still felt time was on her side. Time to recover from surgery, time to ramp up her serve, time to hit the ball with a ferocity worthy enough for the WTA tour. In July, Williams became the oldest player to win a WTA tour event in 21 years when she knocked out Cincinnati native Peyton Stearns in the first round of the DC Open. "Love is the key, right? If you don't love it, then get out of it if you have that luxury," Williams said. "I think a lot of motivation for me is to try to come back and play in the best health that I can. You have to live your life on your own terms. It doesn't matter what anyone else says or thinks, if you get to live life on your own terms, it's a life well-lived." Williams, a seven-time Grand Slam champion who made a run to the Cincinnati Open quarterfinals in 2019 and semifinals in 2012, knows the questions about her age are coming every time she steps on the court. But her message remains to control what she can control. She can't control her age, or that she needed surgery, but her preparation and mindset take top priority when it involves returning to tennis. "You're never too young or too old to lose. Losing knows no age," Williams said. "All that matters for me is that I'm prepared and ready. I really have to stay focused on me, play it one point at a time and try to win for myself. I've always played for me." Will this be Williams' final Cincinnati appearance? She might live on her own terms, but Williams doesn't ruminate too far down the road. Right now, she's thankful for a clean bill of health and a first-round matchup against Jessica Bouzas Maneiro Aug. 7 at the Lindner Family Tennis Center. "I'm very much in the moment," she said. "I don't think you should ever rule me out. That's all I will say." This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: Venus Williams returns to Cincinnati Open