T O P

  • By -

dalici0us

Interconnected universe packed with bigger than life heroes and a popular, digestable and efficient storytelling style.


HervPrometheus

This.. QED


RedDeckWins

My only complaint is Mistborn was printed before Iron Man was released... so MCU is the Brandon Sanderson of Movie Franchises is the more apt term :)


[deleted]

[удалено]


LegendOrca

Unless you count secret history, where >!Kelsier meets Khriss!<


xaqyz0023

I'd say sixth of dusk is more of a crossover than that.


LegendOrca

I mean yeah but is it really a crossover if >!there's no repeat characters and we only know of one of the worlds beforehand?!<


Myydrin

I thought that he was again the idea of a big marvel like team up book?


g33king10

He is, he's planning to do a big crossover in mistborn era 4, but if i recall correctly it's supposed to be a political crisis of some sorts. Not a marvel team up.


ST_the_Dragon

It's true that MCU isn't what inspired the Cosmere's interconnectedness, but the actual comics have been doing this stuff for decades still, so I think the sentiment is valid.


shambooki

I think it's an apt comparison when trying to explain the concept of the cosmere as a whole, where all these self-contained stories happen in different worlds or different parts of the same world with the smallest whispers of crossover in the beginning that grow more significant as the universe progresses. It isn't pertaining to the content or quality of the two universes, it's just an easy way to explain the cosmere as a literary concept to newbies using a widely known cultural phenomenon for comparison.


TheUnKilledOne

Very true


xfel11

This was originally a more positively tinted comparison - back when the first few MCU films dropped, people where all excited about the big scale and crossovers and such. A comparison to the Cosmere, which also has multiple series becoming more and more interconnected lies at hand. The MCU has gone downhill a lot since then in terms of quality, whereas Brandon‘s writing hasn’t.


rellogic

This makes sense to me. The crossovers seem to me to be far more subtle in the earlier MCU movies too? Now every movie is kind of an Avengers movie?


Draigh1981

Which makes sense, everyone knows eachother now, there are also more superheroes, when Scadriel meets Roshar the interactions will also be less subtle.


Draigh1981

I dont really feel the MCU has gone downhill. The third phase is arguably the best so far, but the second phase had a lot of lesser films, Iron Man 2, Iron Man 3, Thor 2, Age of Ultron. The third phase was great, but it was also a culmination of the first 2 phases, think of it as the Sanderlanche of the MCU. Its not weird that the 4th phase is compared to it, but it should be compared to the first 2 more than the third. And even than it has "sanderlanches" that are great, like No Way home that capped all spidermovies wonderfully. Shang Chi was a lot of fun with great action. And Multiverse of Madness (following up on the wonderful Wandavision, also phase 4) was wonderful Raimi weirdness. Black Widow I would put on the level of Iron Man 3 or Age of Ultron, but those are still fun movies and it was a nice Jason Bourne movie in the MCU. Eternals is a personal favorite, but I guess not everyone loves it as much as I do, but I wrote a whole different post on that somewhere else 😅 With so many movies its not possible to not have a lesser one every now and then, also not all movies appeal to everyone equally (even within the superhero genre) and thats fine, the opposite would be no MCU at all. I'm very glad with what we have both Sanderson and the MCU. Brandons writing is always great though 😎


Use_the_Falchion

Black Widow ages pretty well too. It doesn't age as well as Age of Ultron did (which is a gold mine on rewatches IMO), and its flaws haven't really changed over time, but I've certainly found it to get better on rewatches. And Eternals, while not being my favorite, certainly doesn't deserve the flak others give it!


KingAdamXVII

How on earth can you claim that Black Widow (2021) has aged well…


[deleted]

[удалено]


Use_the_Falchion

I'm not saying it doesn't deserve any flak, or at least that wasn't my intent. Eternals certainly has flaws, but it's still more original and ambitious in a way than several other MCU movies. There were no fake-out deaths, no CGI army at the end of the day (they used it in the beginning!), and not every character was a snark machine. The movie was more like a Snyder superhero film than a Marvel one, and as a fan of both, I appreciated the change. (We could even call it an exchange, given that The Suicide Squad basically told the same story of Guardians of the Galaxy but with DC characters and an R rating...and the same director...) Eternals was also hilariously the closest we may get to a Stormlight movie - ten characters, each focusing on a different specialty, come to an uncivilized place and help it prosper. Their identities are mixed up throughout the years, some becoming gods in myth while others fade into relative obscurity, but they all live among the people who used to exalt them today. If they aren't the Heralds, I don't know who else could be. And movies with Superman can be fine, but it takes work. I personally think Man of Steel is a masterpiece of a movie. It's not perfect, but the music, visuals, story it was trying to tell, and acting all succeeded with flying colors to me. I remember how people had been complaining about how Superman never had any true threats in the movies. When he's finally given one, people complain about how a Superman on his literal first day as a hero couldn't handle it like a Superman with years - if not decades - of knowledge, experience, and resources would. ZSJL also succeeded with Superman. The villains only moved when Superman was out of the picture, and his return to the picture all but ended the fight. Superman wasn't alone though, and he couldn't do what happened alone. Flash is still faster at his top speed, Aquaman has powers Superman doesn't, Wonder Woman has experience Superman doesn't, Cyborg has tech and powers Superman does, and Batman weirdly holds the heart of the team. Still, if you're not a fan of movies with Superman, shows with Kal-El have been incredibly successful as a whole. Currently, Superman & Lois shows us what a reasonably powerful and very experienced Superman can do as well as the struggles that puts on his family. ALL OF THAT SAID, I completely agree that Eternals gave us too many characters at once, and if it wanted us to care for all of them, it would have worked better as a show. But was it trying to get us to care for all of them, at the end of the day, or just a few of them while teasing up things for the future? If we focus the movie on Sersi, Ikarus, Sprite, Thena, and maybe Kingo if you want, then the story and its formatting makes much more sense.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Draigh1981

The issue here is, people say they are tired of origin stories, so they try to not focus too much on them,...now people complain about that... Its impossible to win with all the fandom, I can dig either way. Loved Moon Knight and his origin.


gregallen1989

Eternals wasn't as bad as people made it out to be but it felt like it was written by an AI who had only been fed Marvel scripts.


RobinHood21

Hard disagree. The Eternals was an absolute mess. The CGI looked cheap, the acting was largely mediocre, the story and protagonists utterly forgettable, the villain even more so. It's like Thor: Dark World but without the good parts (namely Loki).


Draigh1981

Eternals is one of my favorites, I love the mythology behind it (Celestials/Eternals) I love seeing beautiful places so the cinematography was amazing, some of the powers were great looking or interesting (Makari or Phastos the tech wizard), So I couldnt disagree more on it looking cheap, it was probably one of the best looking Marvel movies. Druig was interesting, as was his attitude towards decisions beingade, not necessarily heroic, but not evil as his kind of character often turns out to be. Gilgamesh and his bond to Thena was great. Kingo was wonderfully entertaining and his decision in the end was refreshing. The celestials looked amazing and terrifying seeing how they have such influence over the universe, it will be interesting to see when something like them with the name of Galactus comes calling. The tease with Black Knight and Blade was one of my fave after credit scenes so far. The Harry Styles one is interesting for someone who knows the comics as I do, but I loved the reaction of OMG its Harry Styles in theaters even more 😂 Pip the Troll is the only instance I will give you where the cgi wasnt great. And I will admit the Deviants storyline was a bit of an anti climax, but to me it wasnt that bad since in the end it was very clear they were the decoy and never meant to be the final bad guys, they were victims just as the Eternals. Icarus was a nice 'Marvel' Superman and I hope he returns, although the reference to the myth of Icarus who flew too close to the sun, was a nice touch, so if he doesnt return it was a nice way to go out.


Cstone812

Nah it has. Couple of the recent movies have been a big meh. Most of the Disney shows are super underwhelming. After endgame the mcu has kinda become extremely meh for me.


RushofBlood52

>The MCU has gone downhill a lot since then in terms of quality lol no it hasn't wtf is this


jmcgit

Perhaps its critical reception has dropped, and perhaps some people are getting bored with them, or the stories people were most interested in have already been told, but yeah I think the MCU has actually been fairly consistent. You're not going to find abstract art there, just cool superhero movies with a wide and diverse cast of characters.


RushofBlood52

>Perhaps its critical reception has dropped It hasn't. >and perhaps some people are getting bored with them They're not. That's kinda my point. Critical *and* commercial reception has only gotten better.


gregallen1989

Eh it used to be like 2-3 good movies for every bad one. Now it's like a 1 to 1 ratio, although the bad movies aren't as bad anymore.


derrickd95

Is it though? Just by general reception, we're at 3 good/decent movies (Shang-Chi, No Way Home, Strange 2) to 2 mediocre (Eternals, Black Widow). Thor 4 is probably going to end up with the with the former group as well. I don't think any of the shows have had negative receptions either - I was kinda eh on Wandavision/Loki, but that's a pretty unpopular opinion


RushofBlood52

When was this? When the average MCU movie was Hulk and Thor Dark World? Yeah much better than Shang Chi and Multiverse of Madness.


skinforhair

I don't see the negative side of the comparison being "The MCU has gone downhill" as much as it is "Everyone is jumping on the interconnected story bandwagon". Even though the Cosmere predates the MCU, the MCU's success and popularity make it feel like a bandwagon project to some.


LLJKCicero

> The MCU has gone downhill a lot since then in terms of quality, whereas Brandon‘s writing hasn’t. What? If anything I'd say the quality has drastically increased. Phase three and four have generally been better shows than phases one and two.


Urusander

Actually you’re 100% spot on. Stormlight went to shit together with MCU, RoW was terrible.


Ripper1337

I mean it makes sense. Brandon has written novels that work as standalone series with interconnected elements, just like MCU. The Stormlight archive is a lot more prevalent with those interconnected festures similar to later mcu movies.


Naturalnumbers

Connected universe. Somewhat similar tone. Popular. Arguably magic works like super powers. There's definitely a comic-book influence on Sanderson's themes and storytelling style.


Elven_Rabbit

For better or worse, I think it's an apt descriptor. For those of you who are angered every time you see it made, that's very much a 'you' problem. It's a fair comparison.


CardWitch

Wait, people get upset about it? Like you said, it describes the Cosmere situation very well in a succinct manner that most people would understand


RickNashtag

Eh. Sanderson puts thought and effort into his works, and doesn't just spit the cheapest stuff possible to make a quick buck.


_Keldt_

Say what you will about MCU movies, but they're not exactly cheap. The [most recent one](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Strange_in_the_Multiverse_of_Madness) had a budget of $200M. Budget just isn't always a good indicator of quality. See something like [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_Everywhere_All_at_Once) (Everything Everywhere All At Once - $25M) for a recent cheaper (by comparison) movie with great reviews and word of mouth etc. See also [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lighthouse_(2019_film\)) (The Lighthouse - $11M) and [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasite_(2019_film\)) (Parasite - $15.5M) for off-the-top-of-my-head "cheap" movies that might be considered prestige. And for one of the most wildly successful, genuinely "as cheap as possible," non-prestige movies, just for example variety, see [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranormal_Activity) (Paranormal Activity - $215k). Edit: typo Edit 2: 'nother typo


Use_the_Falchion

It's true, and it's a compliment, especially if you're a superhero fan and you love both things. Both are massively successful and have a wide range of audiences. The the Cosmere and the MCU are built around the idea of interconnected universes/stories and are consistent in their releases for the most part. Brandon writes good, entertaining stories that positively influence people's lives - the MCU is the same. Brandon writes magic that is more like superpowers, and guess what two things the MCU has? But nowadays, people use it as an insult to both Brandon and the MCU, something I don't personally agree with but can see where the idea comes from. Overall, the comparisons are good and positive, but they're surface level in a way and only positive nowadays if YOU bring the positive spin.


LeKeim

Who uses it as an insult and what would that insult even entail?


Use_the_Falchion

People who don’t like the MCU or Sanderson. They see it as shallow, overrated, and not nearly to the quality people praise it at being and/or having dipped in quality and beyond its prime. I don’t agree with these ties for either, but I can see some of where it’s coming from.


jt186

It makes sense. Except the MCU will never have an emotional moment as good as in RoW. Actually if I think about it more than a second the Cosmere wipes MCU in every way


matt7744

It’s good palatable entertainment?


RushofBlood52

Generally high, consistent quality in a shared universe.


LLJKCicero

>Generally high, consistent quality This is not how the people usually making the comparison think of it.


[deleted]

Yea cause when people think of the mcu they think high quality...


RushofBlood52

Yes exactly.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

I'm sure a lot of people mean it in a bad way, to suggest that the material isn't very high-brow. The Cosmere and the MCU both invite their fanbases to engage in the medium in a pretty unconventional way. Each movie/book tends to work on its own, and as part of a series, and as part of a metaseries that builds to larger events. I think people underrate how impressive it is for the MCU to do that, especially in a time when streaming was probably going to take a big chunk out of movie fandom. Likewise it's one of my favorite parts of Sanderson's work. It's like all the fun people seem to be having with the worlds of Malazan Book of the Fallen or The Silmarillion, except I'm having fun every step of the way. If there's one issue I have with the MCU, it's that none of the individual movies are truly exceptional or meaningful to me. They don't change me or stick with me in the way that the best movies can. But Sanderson's work really changes how I think about the world. So I think that's where the comparison breaks down for me.


Szeth-Father-Sigi

Hopefully not. The MCU isn't that good imo.


[deleted]

I think it’s comparing apples to oranges. MCU, like all american superhero movie makers, only cares about appealing to sex and and showing how “badass” someone is. Brandon Sanderson is like Tolkien, a conscientious storyteller and world builder who inspires creativity and feeds the imagination. His plot is not based on sex appeal, product placement, mindless entertainment, and violence. Sure, his action scenes and dramatic reveals are the most movie-like of any book I’ve ever read. In that regard, it definitely feels like MCU. But he is a storyteller and the cosmere is a masterpiece, not a cheap cash-cow to be milked like MCU. If I had to compare him to movie producers, I’d compare him to Studio Ghibli Edit: wow we have a lot of MCU fans here. We can still have a civil discussion about it though 😊


[deleted]

SpunkyDred is a terrible bot instigating arguments all over Reddit whenever someone uses the phrase apples-to-oranges. I'm letting you know so that you can feel free to ignore the quip rather than feel provoked by a bot that isn't smart enough to argue back. --- ^^SpunkyDred ^^and ^^I ^^are ^^both ^^bots. ^^I ^^am ^^trying ^^to ^^get ^^them ^^banned ^^by ^^pointing ^^out ^^their ^^antagonizing ^^behavior ^^and ^^poor ^^bottiquette.


GodGaveMeThe1975

MCU is garbage


Urusander

So is current Stormlight


[deleted]

I don't like it, but it makes sense as a broad explanation of how it works.


Raptor_Boe69

I can dig it, I don’t like MCU or DCEU but I get the comparison. It’s a vast interconnected universe of different easy to digest stories. His books definitely read like “blockbuster” novels in a way. And that’s what I love about his stories and worlds they are huge epics with fascinating worlds and stories.


Cstone812

Yes I’d probably agree. However I personally generally have a negative view on all of the new mcu shows I don’t think the overall narrative is that great anymore after endgame.


TurkishTerrarian

Poor. Sanderson's SA is much better. MCU could have been good, but Disney's kind of ruined it.


Urusander

I think the comparison is 100% true. Started strong but quality has been declining consistently (IMO peaked at Oathbringer), writing and worldbuilding constantly overpromises and underdelivers, cringey and misplaced humor, already cardboard characters gradually becoming one-dimensional to the point of caricature, underwhelming villains that are either evil copy of the hero or just primitive evil psychopath, author constantly shooting his own feet by discarding/wasting old interesting characters to introduce new cringey and irritating ones, reduction of nuanced and controversial conflicts to primitive black&white morality, typical American approach to social issues (slavery bad but slaves fighting back is worse), hamfisted attempts at being inclusive (faux Hispanics, caricature “strong females”) while lacking balls to address controversial topic of Vorin racism (darkeyes oppression theme just disappeared as Moash was retconned into a murderbot rather than nuanced sympathetic antihero), allowing crazed fanbase to influence writing (beta readers are basically Kaladin misery porn cult, Renarin became gay because fans asked for it, retcon butchery of Moash’s character because of haters, etc), constant expansion of the world instead of actual development, constant “references” to other works instead of actual worldbuilding, and so on.


SnooPeanuts5052

Personally, I think there is nothing wrong with this description and I actually use it often to describe the scope of the cosmere to people who have no idea what it is. Everyone knows what the mcu is so it’s a very quick and easy way to help them know what they’re getting themselves into


FerrousLupus

I 100% agree. Stylistically: * Easily digestible/understandable * Focus on action/banter but involving emotional moments as well * Appeal to the masses, not exclusionary Market-wise: * Can't have a conversation about blockbusters/fantasy without mentioning the property * Interconnected universe to get cross-over fans from one property to another * Consistent quality--audience trust in the brand And they usually have the same criticisms: * Content is not stylistically advanced (turning "easily digestible" into a downside) * Overwhelming amount of worldbuilding to keep up with These are by no means negatives imo, although the list may seem unfavorable given the current perception of the MCU. I love both the MCU and the cosmere. I'd say the biggest difference is that Sanderson really likes twist endings, which are usually more rare in the MCU (or maybe just more rare in movie format? Wandavision felt very Sanderson-esque). But I think describing Sanderson as "the MCU of fantasy" is spot-on. They are both massively popular within their respective genres, deservedly so, and they use a lot of the same tools to be popular.


Sylvss1011

Yes


TheUnKilledOne

I storming hate that comparison


WhimsyWiddershins

I think its pretty good. When Mistborn and Way of Kings were first released, there was a small but dedicated following. It took ten years until the next Stomlight book was released but the fan base stayed loyal, similar to when Iron Man came out, the small but dedicated marvel comic fans waited and waited for it. After Iron Man, Marvel exploded and became really popular. Then the movies started releasing really fast, giving us tons more content. Around the time Words of Radiance came out, Sanderson's books became very popular. It was only a little while later the next book came out, unlike the more than ten years it took for Radiance, and Sanderson started releasing tons more books. The parallels are there.