“Captain America: Brave New World” – A Frustrating Misstep in the MCU
Editor’s Note: The Views expressed in this article are those of the author.
Watching “Captain America: Brave New World” was a frustrating experience. The film had the potential to not just be a standout entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but a successful film.
A successful film is something Marvel has needed badly since the end of Phase 3, with “Spider-Man: Far From Home” being the last movie of that phase. However, it seems Post-Phase 4 Marvel has an obsession for missing the mark.
The advertising and marketing for this movie was a poor representation of the film. The trailers were enticing, appearing an alteration to the visual aesthetic of Marvel movies. However, all of the trailers prematurely revealed the villain, undermining any suspense the film attempted to build.
The movie attempts to emulate the action style of the second installment, “Captain America: The Winter Soldier”, but the visual quality noticeably declines in the second half. Initially, it appeared Marvel had regained its footing, but the increasing reliance on blue screens and deteriorating CGI became evident as the film progressed.
The storyline is a convoluted mess, trying to tie together events from lesser-known movies and series like “The Falcon and the Winter Soldier”. Given the consensus that the series had a weak ending, the film seems to disregard its events rather than build upon them.
Moreover, it feels like a sequel to “The Incredible Hulk”, a film released almost two decades ago. The narrative focuses more on Thaddeus Ross (Harrison Ford) than on Sam Wilson/Captain America (Anthony Mackie). Since Marvel legally can’t make a sequel to Hulk as Universal owns the rights to any standalone Hulk films, they forced it here.
The film also attempts to reference “Eternals” , one of Marvel’s lowest rated movies.. As someone who watched it, I still want those two hours back, even four years later.
The constant teases for future Avengers films fail to elicit any excitement, especially since it’s only been five years since the last installment. Introducing a formidable villain like Doctor Doom so soon feels premature; such threats are better suited for a third “Avengers” movie. If the intention is to present a disjointed Avengers team, it lacks the emotional weight of the original lineup, as there hasn’t been enough time to build a connection with the new heroes. A more effective approach would be to emulate the “Star Wars” franchise by taking extended hiatuses, allowing for the introduction of new audiences and building anticipation among existing fans.
Marvel’s decision to pass the shield to Sam Wilson instead of Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan) is questionable. Sam has primarily been a secondary character without significant standout moments in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). This decision feels akin to granting the title of Iron Man to War Machine. While the intent to have a Black Captain America is commendable and could have led to a profound narrative exploring the complexities of two Americas, the film misses this opportunity. Instead, Wilson largely conforms to the president’s directives, even when advised otherwise by various characters, some of whom are Black.
Conversely, Bucky’s deep-rooted connection to Steve Rogers with their shared super-soldier serum history and enduring friendship present a more compelling arc for assuming the Captain America mantle. Additionally, Anthony Mackie may not possess the commanding presence required for a leading role in a Marvel film. In contrast, Sebastian Stan has demonstrated his acting prowess, earning an Oscar nomination for Best Actor for his role in “The Apprentice” as well as winning the Golden Globe for “A Different Man” in one year.
Films like these place undue pressure on subsequent franchise entries, particularly “Fantastic Four: The First Steps”. A straightforward solution would be to grant directors greater creative autonomy, rather than hiring indie filmmakers who may view such projects as stepping stones for financial gain and résumé enhancement.
Marvel’s reluctance to relinquish creative control stems from the fear of potential failure. For every success like “Spider Man: No Way Home” (under Sony’s control) and “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3” (with James Gunn’s full control), there’s a misstep like “Thor: Love and Thunder” (with Taika Waititi’s full control). Even when Marvel enlists acclaimed directors like Chloé Zhao (“Eternals”) and Sam Raimi (“Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness”), it’s evident that the studio often curtails their creative input.
This film had the potential to be a compelling political thriller reminiscent of “The Manchurian Candidate”. However, Marvel’s steadfast refusal to engage in political discourse renders the plot bland. While it’s not the worst Marvel movie (“The Marvels” and “Thor: The Dark World” still hold that title), it falls short of expectations. What should have been an easy slam dunk and could have led to the revival of the MCU misses the rim entirely.