Andorhas been positioned by both critics and the fandom as the savior oftheStar Warsfranchise, the clear high point of Disney’s mismanagement of the once-illustrious brand.Tony Gilroyhas gotten a lion’s share of credit for preventing the franchise from spinning out into total oblivionwith how he had his writers and directors handle the origin story of Cassian Andor (Diego Luna). If any other major Hollywood franchise needs a similar savior, it’s the MCU, which is desperate to regain some social clout with their upcomingThe Fantastic Four: First Stepsand thenext fewAvengersfilms.Kevin Feigeshould listen to Gilroy, as he recently espoused a theory as to why Marvel’s storytelling is often so flawedthat should be heavily considered.
Tony Gilroy Hates the Tesseract From ‘The Avengers’
In an exclusive interview with Slash Film, Gilroy discussed how,before he came on board,Andorwas pitched as being about Andor and K-2SO (Alan Tudyk) hunting down a “disc,“presumablythe Death Star plans. Gilroy insisted this notion had no storytelling potential whatsoever, because then the duo would just be spending nine straight episodes trying to keep getting the same disc. This led him to shift into discussing Marvel’s long-established storytelling device of using MacGuffins to motivate the plots, particularly highlighting the Tesseract fromThe Avengers. He argued thatthe reason Marvel movies “fail” is that their stories are just about chasing the proverbial Tesseract. While he didn’t expand on his initial point or dig into it any deeper than that, I think he’s mostly on to something when it comes toMarvel’s tendency to rely on a formula that they’ve cracked before.The use of them may have made sense early in their universe building, but Marvel has continued to useMacGuffinsas a crutch, even when it doesn’t make sense or drags the film away from its more important character dynamics.
In semi-defense of Marvel’s canon,not every single film has relied on MacGuffins, and a handful ofthe Phase One filmswere totally free of them. BothIron ManandIron Man 2,Thor, andThe Incredible Hulkall had plots that were entirely about character development and were spurred on by villains with specific motivations. It wasn’t untilCaptain America: The First Avengerthat a proper MacGuffin was introduced, the Tesseract, which later became crucial to the plot ofThe Avengers. Once the concept of the Infinity Stones was introduced,it made sense to orient each major film around a Stone as a way of leading up to the mega-crossover ofAvengers: Infinity War.
Even though they weren’t explicitly explained as Stones untilGuardians of the Galaxy, having themserve as key anchors for various films gave them a general road map to followand built gradual emotional investment into the tragic conclusion of the master plan of Thanos (Josh Brolin). When he gets all the stones to snap out half of the universe, it hurts because the audience recalls how much pain and strife the heroes had to go through just to acquire those Stones in the first place. However, post-Endgame, the increasingly risk-averse Marvel got so comfortable using this plot structure thatthey didn’t stop to ask if they could do any other kind of story.
Marvel’s MacGuffin Logic Sacrificed Character For Plot Logistics
There’s already been so much dissection of why it feels like Marvel has struggled of late, and I think a decent chunk of it is becausethey kept applying the MacGuffin logic to films that really didn’t support it. Most notably, many recent films have tried to turn entire characters into living MacGuffins—where plots revolve around just finding a particular person that will do a thing that somebody needs.Doctor Strange In the Multiverse of Madnesshad America Chavez (Xochitl Gomez) being tossed around like a rag doll between Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch) and Wanda (Elizabeth Olsen) for their own purposes, which sacrificed the time that could have been spent making her a more fleshed-out character.Eternalswanted to ponder heady concepts like false mythology and our place in the universe but kept distracting itself from that exploration by having to split its characters up just to find them, like the objectives in fetch quests.Thor: Love and Thundersacrificed any semblance of interpersonal chemistry byzipping through its plot points and lazy comedy to sprint for a cheap-looking lightning bolt propthat will somehow unlock a supernatural goal that isn’t properly explained.
The 10 Best Movie MacGuffins of All Time, Ranked
One plot device to rule them all.
Over and over, Marvel’s recent films have tripped over themselves to convince us that plot is the same thing as story. That motivation can be supplied simply by saying, “this object is important, got it?” What it seems like they forgot is thatpeople first fell in love with the films not because of the search for shiny objects, but for the friendships and connectionsthat were made along the way. We liked the romance between Steve (Chris Evans) and Peggy (Hayley Atwell), the familial comradery that blossomed between the Guardians, and the spiky infighting of the Avengers trying to come together as a team. It was because all the human elements were satisfyingly fulfilled thatall the surrounding fireworks and fisticuffs seemed like they meant something.Thunderbolts*succeeded because it cared less about plot goals than it did about the dynamics between the characters, andThe Fantastic Four: First Stepspromises to actually dig into the stress of a family dynamic. Marvel needs to keep that same energy and unshackle their films from the pressure of being dragged around by the nose.
Avengers: Infinity War
The Avengers and their allies must be willing to sacrifice all in an attempt to defeat the powerful Thanos before his blitz of devastation and ruin puts an end to the universe.
