Director Chloé Zhao says she totally understands the divisive response to Eternals
However, the Nomadland Oscar-winner also explains that she isn't here to make everyone feel comfortable
Aux News Chloé Zhao
When Eternals arrived in theaters last November as the 26th feature-length entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it faced a new level of scrutiny for one of the biggest franchises in the world. With a large ensemble cast of never-before-seen characters and a story that spanned centuries and the cosmos, Eternals took the biggest risks of the four MCU movies released in the back half of 2021, but they didn’t all land with many viewers. Director Chloé Zhao, previously acclaimed for Nomadland and The Rider, was at the center of the conversation.
From gatekeepers’ confusion that an Oscar-winner known for her naturalistic style could also want to make a blockbuster action flick to comics readers’ apprehension over changes made from the source material, Eternals posed a challenge for those who walked into the theater with specific expectations.
Upon its release, the film received a 47 percent on Rotten Tomatoes with a 78 percent audience score; its successor, Spider-Man: No Way Home, garnered a 93 percent approval rating from critics and 98 percent from the general public just over a month later.
In a new interview with Empire magazine, Zhao speaks out about the preconceived notions that Eternals was up against.
“When people have that feeling, like they need to put order into things, they need to understand it by putting it into boxes,” she tells Empire. “It is not about us, it is about them. And I say that lovingly, because they have a level of comfort [with] how their entertainment and their world–their beloved Marvel, or their beloved indie filmmaker–functions. That’s the order of the logic of their world that’s being disturbed. So I appreciate their passion, to try to make sense of it.”
“The truth is that nobody is one layer,” Zhao continues, “In this case, we truly stepped out of the box that I think the world put us in, and met in the middle because of our shared interests. And by truly doing that, it made a lot of people uncomfortable on both sides. But there are also people who are more comfortable with the order of their world [being] disturbed. And then they look at our love-child and go, ‘Oh! This touches different sides of me!’ I like that. So I completely understand the divisiveness coming from critics and the fans. Because when you take this to extremes that are seen as opposition—the world I come from and the world of Marvel, that has been divided in a way that’s so unfair and unfortunate—and to merge the way we did, I actually see the reaction as a testament to how much we had merged with each other; how uncomfortable that might make people feel.”
Of course, Zhao was not the first Sundance darling to make the jump to the MCU, with Taika Waititi, Ryan Coogler, and Destin Daniel Cretton all helming previously released installations–and returning for more. Little Woods director Nia DaCosta recently wrapped the Captain Marvel sequel The Marvels, due out in February 2023. Now, imagine if Wes Anderson directed an X-Men movie…
173 Comments
Can someone just say it: Chloe Zhao is not that good a director? She cut many other women in line because of her wealth and connections. There, I said it.
Uh…yes and no. I went to see Eternals and walked away not hating it but definitely with a “that didn’t feel like a Marvel movie” vibe. Which is ok. If this is the new path Marvel is on, that’s totally their choice. The movie didn’t make me “uncomfortable”, whatever that means. It made me question the path that Marvel is taking though.
But coincidentally, after arriving home, I was flipping through the channels and saw Winter Soldier on and I clicked on it. And it hit me, THAT’S what I want in a Marvel movie. Not Eternals. I might be in the minority and if I am, that’s fine. The world can move forward without me.But there’s a consequence if enough people feel like I do. It’s going to hurt their bottom line ultimately. I don’t necessarily want to see Iron Man 8 but…I think I’d rather see Iron Man 8 than another Eternals movie?
I’ve watched it again and I’m reminded of the 2017 Power Rangers movie. If you take it as it’s own thing, it does an incredibly job fleshing out each Ranger and building the team such that you really care about them and want to see more of them.But, like Eternals, that means it takes a while to get in to the big action that people would normally expect from that kind of movie.And, like Eternals, it caught audiences and critics alike off guard so they weren’t sure how to respond. The difference is Marvel has momentum behind it and ways to disperse those characters while Power Rangers just sorta fizzled out.Which is unfortunate. Because I wanted to see more of those specific characters. And with the origin out of the way the sequel could have had way more action going for it.
I think I felt the same way, I found Eternals boring compared to the normal Marvel fare which isn’t always the greatest but I always find engaging, I suspect introducing so many characters in one movie might have been one of my issues.
I don’t hate Eternals I just don’t care about it.
I haven’t seen it (I’m one of the people who’s in the ‘Superhero Fatigue’ camp), but I do applaud Marvel for taking chances and bringing in fresh perspectives to their house style. Sometimes it’ll work out and become something greater than it could have been otherwise, sometimes it will fail. But that’s the nature of trying new things.
Yeah, but it felt like another company’s version of a superhero movie. And not as good as if Marvel had done it. And yet, Marvel did do it! I appreciate them taking chances too (Into the Spiderverse…Wandavision…Loki) but in the end, it’s got to be good or dare I say, great, if they want their incredible run to continue.I mean, nothing lasts forever. For Marvel to have done what they’ve done is amazing. I’d like for them to continue with that but imho, Eternals ain’t it. And I’m afraid that they’re banking their Phase 2 (or is it 3?) on this new road and if it is, they’ve got an uproad hill to climb.But I’m fully aware I could be wrong. Time (or TVA) will tell.
Actually Phase 4, although it’s probably more like Phase 5 (The Preview). Almost everything since Endgame has been seeding or actively exploring the multiverse in one way or another, but Eternals was much more about a new cosmic threat that probably won’t actually show up for a while.
I think it just comes with the territory, given the strategy that Marvel’s taken. ‘Give a promising director a nine-figure budget because it will raise their professional profile and it might give us magic’ has had a decent return on investment. I really liked the Guardians movies, and will definitely see the third one. I really liked The Winter Soldier. A lot of Marvel movies were fine.
As far as their run…every run comes to an end. Remember when every Pixar movie was a solid A? I do. But much like ‘You either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain’, studios that make great content will either make awesome cult stuff and go under, or make successful stuff long enough that they crank out a dud (and let’s face it, Marvel’s already made duds. Are you eager to do a rewatch of Thor 2 or Age of Ultron?)I don’t see any reason that The Eternals would be setting the pace or the feel for any of Marvel’s future projects, any more than any of their other less-well-regarded movies have done in the past. They tried something, it maybe didn’t work like they wanted, they’ll move past it.(Though as an aside, based on her filmography Chloe Zhao seems like a peculiar choice for a superhero film. It’s like putting John McTiernan in charge of a small-scale rom-com. Not everyone is a multitool like Ridley Scott.)
That’s funny, I was going to make a comparison to Pixar too. Although it’s not quite the same because Marvel is telling a semi-linear story through all of their output, each Pixar movie is it’s own thing obviously.I could be wrong but I thought Eternals was Marvel’s intentional turning point to their new phase? That’s why I’m kind of worried. If it turns out to be just another piece of the pie and they move past it, fine but if this is the way and they’re committed to it, that makes me nervous because I’m a fan and I like what they do generally.
Have you seen Pixar’s “Turning Red” yet. I’d suggest doing that.
I still haven’t watched Eternals yet—I love Zhao’s work and while I have some superhero fatigue, will happily watch any MCU film—but yeah, I didn’t think it was a great fit. Mind, I think it’s the MCU’s very successful execution of style with limits to what it’s going to flex about. I think she could’ve made a great superhero film about, say, an amnesiac Norrin Radd discovering he’s the Silver Surfer, then breaking free of Earth. But they asked her to do a tentpole film instead. And again, I enjoy the MCU films but they’re a little conservative. Marvel confines as well as supports.It’s funny what will work. The roster of indy filmmakers the article mentions don’t actually seem like wild bets actually compared to Zhao’s earlier work with non-professional actors playing almost their lives, though I’m unfamiliar with Short Term 12 so I can’t gauge if Destin Daniel Cretton was a longshot. Boden and Fleck maybe (but they fit in an immigrant story with the skrulls which remind me of their other movies).
And even when a studio drops the ball, it doesn’t mean it’s over. Remember when Pixar did Cars and there was talk that their golden era was over – only for them to come back with Ratatouille, WALL-E, Up and Toy Story 3 (in my view their best run of back to back films)? And the run they’re currently on is pretty great (Onward was a lesser Pixar but not a bad film but they followed it with Soul, Luca and Turning Red).My only concern with Eternals is that these characters will turn up and be dull somewhere else. But even then we’ve seen characters reinvented and improved with other filmmakers – Black Widow, Hawkeye, Thor and Wanda all spring to mind.
Im going to go way out on a limb and say that The Eternals isnt setting the direction for future Marvel movies, so I’m not sure what the hell you’re even talking about.
LOL why do people insist that one hiccup of a film out of 27 means they’re totally finished? Spider-Man: No Way Home came out after this and made tonnes of money. What are you talking about??
Because from my understanding, Marvel is pivoting away from their initial superheroes to the Eternals and beyond. Not immediately obviously but this, so I’ve been told/understand, is the beginning.
Into the Spiderverse was Sony, not Marvel Studios, FWIW.
Technically, yes.
I just thought it was overlong and boring. I didn’t think it was a bad movie in the conventional sense. It was a little self indulgent and could stand less characters and a half an hour cut. I think there is plenty of room for this type of movie at Marvel, it was just executed poorly.
Admittedly, I fall into the “love/like almost everything the MCU put out” so perhaps I’m not the best person to comment, but I’ve found that even the movies that aren’t “great” still have something to offer. Iron Man 3 was a tough watch, but I appreciate the message, that Tony Stark is more than his armor. I actually really enjoyed the Eternals, but regardless of what people think of it, the existence of the Eternals and the Celestials ties into the cosmic Marvel films, so I’m excited to see where that goes. I mean, we know Knowhere is the head of a Celestial, so if they can die, what’s next? And despite the damage that Thanos wrought, seeing Arishem in the sky has to be a pant soiling experience for humanity. Thanos had to work to inflict his passionless judgement on Earth and still leave it as a planet, a Celestial can just…be born. And you and everyone you love is gone.
Given that The Winter Soldier is frequently named by many as being the best MCU film (and this is the correct take), you are far from alone.
I still dont get the pushback at all. Eternals is easily a top 7 MCU film. Perhaps its most exquisitely shot film at that. It establishes each character, and gives them all an identity and sense of purpose, which is not easy to do with such a large ensemble. The story flows and never drops, while weaving its way through the various viewpoints. It is the most like the original 4 character movies, where emphasis was placed on the characters and their interactions rather than the shiny action pieces. For the first time since those original 4 plus Winter Soldier, gave the characters real conversations, real interactions, not just an entire movie of punch lines or set up to punch lines, that are lazy fill-ins for dialogue. It was like going to a real burger place, not just some fast food outlet. Where the burger is an actual creation, not some mass produced get them in and out as fast as possible burger place. Contrast Eternals with the horrific No Way Home, that was a mess. A movie that never knew what it wanted to be, or what it wanted to do. A movie that the only thing going for it was the nostalgia, and even then it was forced and cringe half the time. It tried to do far too much, and was worse for it. If your only metrics are the rose coloured glasses of nostalgia, then yeah i can see how people were liking the movie. As a movie, it was actively terrible, easily one of the worst of the MCU, so right along with the previous Spider-man movie in the regard. A movie, where the main character is again perhaps the least interesting aspect of the movie, overshadowed by other characters, and even other spider-men.Are we as a public so easily swayed by bright lights and shiny things now, that we dont want anything more than the base ground level of substance?
For me the main issue was the editing. That probably doesn’t fit your narrative, though.
Is it your 7th highest ranked Marvel film? Just seems an odd choice to say top 7.
For me there is a top 7 that are clear stand outs, then a very large middle of middling to meh, and a bottom. With an oceans worth of separation between the groups. Eternals is not my 7th highest ranked Marvel film, it is in the top 7.
What is your top 7, if you don’t mind answering?
First Avenger, Iron Man, Incredible Hulk, Thor, Winter Soldier, Eternals, Infinity War.
Top 7 MCU Films1. Thor 2: The Dark World
2. Iron Man 2
3. Ghost Rider 2
4. Catwoman
5. Howard the Duck
6. Batman vs Superman
7. Eternals
Reading this, it almost feels that films are subjective and there is little point about being condescending towards audiences who didn’t like the same thing.Out of curiosity, are you by happenstance someone who is also astonished that people seem to like some movies that you didn’t?
Eternals was boring and had too many characters, No Way Home was a ton of fun on film. Are we as a public so easily swayed by bright lights and shiny things now, that we dont want anything more than the base ground level of substance? I mean, there was an awful lot of that in Eternals too, but it was all presented in a slower more boring way, with too many boring other characters in it doing boring things, it looked good and was shot well though, you got me there.
You had me at the beginning and then lost me at No Way Home.
Why, it’s almost like different people have different taste, and your own taste is no more valid than anyone else’s in spite of your obvious belief otherwise!
I think you’re the only person I’ve read who was this enthusiastic about Eternals, outside of Zhao herself. I was mainly going to dispute the idea that Eternals is divisive, because even the positive reviews tended to be fairly tepid, “It’s not the worst Marvel movie…Zhao has some nice compositions when it’s not being messed up by the special effects” kind of stuff.
I liked The Eternals too, Rogers Aching Ticker. It took Zhao’s strengths (a sense of earth and sky, and a more relaxed feel to the acting), and added The Marvel Formula to it.
It was, to quote Mark Kermode, “not without flaws”, but it largely succeeded in what it set out to do — show us God-Like Beings walking among us and using more of the real world than the MCU tends to. While I really enjoy most Marvel movies, there’s no denying that seeing Cleveland subbing in for everywhere from New York City to Sarkovia gets a bit samey after a while, in the way that their television series all being set on the ABC Productions Backlot does. (Though not to the same degree by any means!)If Marvel had handed this over to John Favreau, the Russo Brothers or one of their other “house directors”, it would have utterly faceplanted because the story had a much bigger arc than usual, and needed a director who understood huge scales that weren’t ginned up for green screens in pre-vis….
Not sure why you’re in the greys now, but I’m glad you enjoyed the Eternals. It’s just a perspective I haven’t seen much of, since the discussion on the movie has seemed a bit bloodless on both sides. Even people who really disliked it don’t seem too passionate about disliking it, and when it’s criticized (for example, I think Dowd had it pretty low on his post-No Way Home Marvel rankings) I haven’t seen much protest. Personally, I haven’t seen the movie yet, so I hope it’s as good as you say.
I’m not sure why I’m in the greys, either — I must have really ticked off the wrong person working for G/O Media or Kinja!I really hope you enjoy it, or at least don’t feel it was a waste of time. I’m no expert on THE ETERNALS, but I read some issues when it first came out. It’s very late-period Jack Kirby, full of Gods and Monsters and Big SF Ideas, kind of like Olaf Stapledon — if Stapledon had gone for Big, Brawny God-Like Men and Women! At least most of the cast here doesn’t look like Nautilus Mutants, and the cast is nicely varied and very good, even when their roles don’t give them as much to do as they might get elsewhere.
I think that’s spot on. I also really enjoyed it and felt it provided just enough of a breath of fresh air for the MCU, but it didn’t have the “X factor” that might inspire me to vigorously defend it. I’m mostly just confused that the critical reception was so poor, when it seemed at least as coherent as anything else in the genre, and it’s a little more thoughtful and a lot more diverse than most — both of which are elements that usually impress critics much more than general audiences.
It was mostly just boring until it turned into standard superhero stuff.
No Way Home was for all those people who say all Marvel movies follow the same template, because it took the template, danced around on it, broke it and then made you forget about it.
What other superhero movie has the hero help all the villains and basically lose in the end. It was chaotic from the start because that was the nature of the very story they were telling. It used nostalgic elements to support and further the story. It’s also the first time we get an in-story explanation for why we’ve seen three different live-action Spider-Men in the past two decades. If you didn’t like the style of nostalgia or storytelling, then I can see how you didn’t like it. As a movie it was interesting and entertaining, easily one of the best of the MCU, and where the main character and story matures to finally become Spider-Man.
Funny that you say that because I enjoyed Iron Man 2 more than Eternals. It’s decidedly at/or near the bottom of my MCU list (along with Iron Man 2).
I’d watch Thor: The Dark World again before I watched Eternals again. I really disliked it
“It was like going to a real burger place, not just some fast food outlet. Where the burger is an actual creation, not some mass produced get them in and out as fast as possible burger place.”Well, that’s something now isn’t it.
It’s definitely a lower tier Marvel movie in my opinion but only because it’s kind of boring.
I find it hard to believe feelings were so strong about “The Eternals.” It wasn’t amazing by any stretch of the imagination, but it was a much-needed stretch of Marvel’s imagination. It was weirder, existed on its own terms, and, ultimately, the final product was good. I don’t understand how anybody can be ‘uncomfortable’ with it as audience members. If there’s any real damaging fault to the movie (and this would be inevitable considering how many characters are involved in the source material) is that it tries to pidgeonhole characters into roles while denying the charisma of others. As a result, the stories that really seemed worth telling are glossed over. But I ain’t mad at anybody for it.
I don’t doubt for a moment that there’s a bunch of dumb toxicity around this movie; there always is. It’s kind of disappointing that Zhao seems to be handwaving criticism as “people didn’t like it because it’s different” when most of the critiques I’ve encountered have been way more nuanced and specific.
From an MCU perspective, they should have just let it exist on its own terms, by explicitly setting it on an alternate Earth. Then you wouldn’t have the clumsy dialogue about where the Eternals were when Thanos invaded. And in the climax, when the Earth is literally being cracked open like an egg, you don’t have to wonder why no other superheroes show up to see what’s going on or help (yes, I know, that’s a common complaint about superhero movies, but in this case, the narrative stakes were just set way too high).
I don’t really think the dialogue about where they were when Thanos invaded is clumsy at all. It’s necessary, because the audience needs to know. It’s simple and straightforward, with Dane asking a direct question. And it’s believable, because we learn that not only was the group specifically tasked to not interfere, they were essentially programmed to obey, and the movie is about them breaking free of that directive. I’m not sure how it could have been any better, honestly. The conversation about the Avengers feels a lot more forced in comparison.I also don’t think it’s too likely that anyone else would have had the time and ability to show up for the final confrontation. It was set nearly as far away from most existing characters as possible, with only the Wakandans being even possibly in range. Strange or some other sorcerers could have shown up, but the timeline on this is actually still sort of iffy I think, and it’s not impossible that No Way Home is happening concurrently to Eternals. Events have been recontextualized by later movies and directorial decree before.
I don’t really think the dialogue about where they were when Thanos invaded is clumsy at all. It’s necessary, because the audience needs to know. It’s simple and straightforward, with Dane asking a direct question. And it’s believableIt’s only believable if you don’t bother thinking about it. Eternals exist to defeat Deviants. Do you know who else is a Deviant? I’ll give you a hint, he’s tall, purple and bald.It was the most useless and hilariously bad explanation I’ve ever seen. Eternals should have came out before Infinity War and Endgame. That’s truly the only way their story would make any sense in the MCU.
Thanos is not a Deviant in the MCU. I understand the comic book backstory to some extent, but the movie clearly establishes a whole different mythology.
Has it specifically been stated that Thanos isn’t a Deviant in the MCU, though?
No, it hasn’t.
OK, dude. There’s a huge plot hole that nobody involved in the production caught in the movie that you coincidentally don’t like, and so certainly don’t have any reason to be anything but entirely objective about.
OK, dude. Obviously they’re aware of it, they just chose to ignore it. That doesn’t make it any better, nor does their terrible explanation for the Eternals absence. I’m not normally one to nitpick comic/MCU differences, but this is a big one that needed to be addressed better. A throwaway line about him not being a deviant would suffice.
Officially, Thanos is a Titan, the last of his species, and according to everything I can find, is only 1000 years old. Beyond that, it’s implicit that Thanos is not a Deviant, because the history of Deviants is covered in Eternals, and it doesn’t leave any possibility for Thanos to be considered one. It’s also
basically tautological, since the Eternals on Earth are tasked with
defending against Deviants, and nothing else, and they weren’t allowed
to interfere with Thanos.
Starfox is also presented directly in the movie as Thanos’s brother — though the Internet still says they’re half brothers. In any case any familial relationship, adopted or otherwise, rules out the possibility of the Titan species also somehow being Deviants, at least in any meaningful sense.
Thanos was born on Titan in the comics as well.
Sure, but in the MCU, Thanos *is* a Titan. His motivation in Infinity War/Endgame is directly related to the extinction of his species, which had a whole culture and society. The Deviants in the MCU were not capable of anything like that.
It’s never been established if he is or isn’t, in the MCU.
“It’s never been established if he is or isn’t, in the MCU.”
I’m trying to figure out how to square this correct statement with your hyperbolic earlier post that absolutely requires Thanos to be a Deviant.
He’s a deviant in the comics. The MCU has never specified he’s not, so it’s safe to assume he is. What’s so confusing about that?
At the very least that would mean it’s equally safe to assume that he’s not, so again your one-way hyperbole is unwarranted. (Even leaving aside for the moment that the MCU did actually show his backstory as being markedly different than the comics version, and the Deviants also being markedly different, so it’s actually much more warranted to assume that the MCU is different.)
Because one of the Eternals is directly asked why they didn’t fight Thanos, and they answer that it’s because they only fight Deviants. Ergo, in the MCU, Thanos is not a Deviant.
agreed with the stakes. i was also, frankly, more interested in seeing an earth-destroying god baby being born than i was seeing the eternals stop it.
That could have been interesting: don’t let on that it’s in an alternate reality until the very end, when someone says something that directly conflicts with the rest of the MCU (e.g. that Howard Stark is still alive and never had any children, or something) to clue us in that this isn’t the same world. And then bring the Eternals into the MCU down the road.
I strongly suspect that the Celestials will play a bigger role in the cosmic MCU down the line. But re: your comment regarding the end of the film, the fact that no other superheroes doesn’t strike me unusual. It took Phastos’ whirlygig and Makkari’s superspeed to locate ground zero. From the emergence to the end of the Celestial, there wasn’t any global awareness. Plus, the remaining superheroes are scattered or occupied. The Avengers don’t exist at this point.
That was my take. A brief appearance by Doctor Strange, Captain Marvel or any other invincible MCU superhero would have made the whole final boss fight more believable to all MCU fans.
yes, I know, that’s a common complaint about superhero movies, but in this case, the narrative stakes were just set way too highIt’s also a complaint that, really, with the shared universe they’ve brought on themselves. No one’s wondering why Superman isn’t showing up to help out in the Burton Batman movies because you can just happily assume that they take place in separate movie realities. But when you’ve explicitly made it clear that the Avengers exist in the same reality as the Eternals, the question of why they aren’t helping out with this whole end-of-the-world deal becomes a lot more glaring.
That’s what Jack Kirby wanted The Eternals to be in the first place. It was a “what if the ancient astronauts who inspired the gods and heroes of mythology were superheroes?” story, unconnected to anything else.
A few issues in, Marvel made him shoehorn into the rest of the shared universe.
There’s no way that isn’t gonna be an episode of What If.
Most of the reviews I saw thought it was good but then they were torn on whether it was a good movie ruined by Marvel elements or a bad “Marvel movie.”Which, to me, suggests that she accomplished what she set out to do. People went in expecting a tired and true comic book movie but got something a bit more and weren’t sure how to take it.I’m glad she’s acknowledging the criticism instead of doubling down and insulting the people who didn’t like it.She seems to get it. Critics wanted more of the not-Marvelness and Marvel fans wanted more of the Marvelness. She tried something, feels comfortable with what she made, and also seems to hope there will be more attempts to find that balance.
I wanted to like this movie and there was a lot of stuff in it that really worked for me (including maybe the cleverest meta gag I’ve ever seen in a film), but the editing just felt off in a way that’s hard to put into words.It never felt like cuts lined up to anything nor shots could breath properly, if that makes any sense. The camera never seemed to move, if the zoom or angle changed it was always a cut; and shots that should’ve been grandiose just felt abrupt.It was like watching one of those slideshow screensavers; it was really distracting.
“(including maybe the cleverest meta gag I’ve ever seen in a film)“
Okay, I’m curious. Spill! Was it the mention of Superman? The reuniting of Robb Stark and Jon Snow?
ok so to pick up on it you need to know that:
a) In the comics, the Celestials were the unseen aliens in 2001: a Space Odyssey
b) Pink Floyd were slated to score 2001, before Kubrick decided he liked his placeholder soundtrack betterWhen the Eternals’ ship first arrives on Earth, there’s a brief moment where it resembles the Monolith from 2001 (and the characters play a similar role, boosting humanity’s development). Then comes a needle-drop: Time, by Pink Floyd.Maybe gag was the wrong word, but idk what else to call it.
Ah, that is clever. Thanks.
Easter Egg? Homage?
Maybe.
Eternals felt like a Phase 2 movie to me. I didn’t hate it, but it felt long. Just so very long. And despite using characters the general public knew nothing about, and making the bold choice of having Zhao direct, the whole movie felt like it was playing it too safe. (And man, the standard MCU quips just did not fit in with Zhao’s style. One or the other, Marvel!)However, I can see Marvel taking the right lessons from this and make a better sequel if they feel so inclined.
i also thought for all the discussion about using real locations and lighting the superhero costumes looked really stupid and distracting in those real locations.
Considering superhero movies and the MCU especially really was getting more brighter and colorful that really started to match the comics medium it was surprising how dark and boring the color pallet was for The Eternals. It felt like a superhero movie made in 1999
I *wish* Eternals had felt more like Mystery Men.
Would watch.
Mystery Men is the best movie to feature the Smash Mouth song All-Star!
I don’t know that anyone HATED the Eternals, or was mad about Zhao directing, or mad that it deviated from source material.I think the response was just more…meh. It took risks within the MCU, but also just wasn’t a terribly interesting movie? A lot of wonky weightless CGI didn’t help.It wasn’t horrible, just not up to what people expected from the MCU.
This is mostly true of the critical response, but I’ve seen plenty of rabble on the internet decry Eternals as the worst thing ever put on film. People say that about everything of course, especially if they have some other axe to grind, but it seems like some people were just waiting for an MCU movie to finally get a bad RT score so they could justify their grievances over Marvel movies in general.
The people that were vocal about their hatred for it tended to have a fair amount of racist and homophobic dog whistles, so there’s that.
I agree that the vast majority of the people where underwhelmed, at most. I was disappointed that it was just, so…unmemorable. It suffered from “ensemble-itis” for one thing. With such a huge cast, one character gets to shine at the expense of everyone else, or no one gets much at all. The Avengers movies avoided that with a decade or so of movies introducing the individual characters. The Eternals did not. Add Jack Kirby’s 70s acid-trip source material (that almost no muggles have any knowledge of), and you’ve got a recipe for mediocrity.
I couldn’t tell you for sure where most of the characters ended up, and I have no particular interest in seeing them again. It wasn’t terrible; it was fine. It’s just that I expected more from a Marvel movie.
Always dog whistles but never a dog. Maybe most people just didn’t like the movie. I haven’t seen a single fan give a shit about the source material. (No true Marvel fan gives a shit about the Eternals of the comics, too).
This was very much my opinion as well. It just slid off my brain. It was totally fine while I was watching it but nothing about it really stuck with me. And yea, a big cast of completely new characters didn’t help. Even immediately after having seen the movie I couldn’t tell you more than three people’s names and it was hard to pin down exactly what powers people had beyond Angelina Jolie’s light swords, and the legally distinct versions of Superman and The Flash.
I wanna say it’s the worst Marvel movie but I’ve never seen Thor 2. I’d definitely say it’s in the bottom third. It was long, boring, and didn’t make a lot of sense. That might seem like a simplistic critique, but does it have to be more complicated than that? It’s not good if I look at the runtime and say, “How can there seriously be another hour of this?”
Thor 2 is a lot more fun than Eternals.
Aw man, you just described nearly every tentpole Marvel movie of the the last 15 years.
I’m so glad I saw Thor 2 before I learned it’s supposed to be the worst MCU film because I thought it was fine, maybe even adequate?Iron Man 2 on the other hand …
i always thought thor 2 was a vast improvement over the first one and it still baffles me that the company line from fans is it’s the worst one.
I think the response was just more…meh. It took risks within the MCU, but also just wasn’t a terribly interesting movie? A lot of wonky weightless CGI didn’t help. It wasn’t horrible, just not up to what people expected from the MCU.That’s the problem: it was done by Marvel to try to get some Real Cinema™ clout for its franchise, except none of what it does is in anyway groundbreaking, or even interesting, outside of a non-MCU context. It’s new and novel and daring and groundbreaking if all you’ve watched is Marvel films, but to anyone else…meh. And the Marvel fans can’t stand that.
I know two people that felt cheated out of a $15 movie ticket when we saw it. I was mostly indifferent to it. I’ve watched it a second time and fell asleep so it’s somewhere at the bottom of my MCU list.
I guess I feel less cheated because I waited til Disney + to watch it for free?But I also paid $20 to buy Spider-man: No Way Home on digital to see it for the first time, and while it wasn’t the best movie ever, I think it was money well spent.
It was well crafted but just felt empty. I wasn’t “challenged” by anything. The Eternals themselves just aren’t that interesting. They had little life or personality. They felt like they were supposed to be background characters, emotionless sages our real and much more human heroes have to deal with or something. I’m not someone who thinks a superhero has to have “cool powers” either but even their abilities were boring and not very distinct. They just “had power”.
I wasn’t even disappointed because I wasn’t expecting much. It didn’t make me furious like Last Night In Soho made me furious (a movie that was almost amazing but instead was just terrible). I felt literally nothing for the Eternals.
Most of the characters were pretty dumb, which was not super surprising considering all they were trained to do was fight the deviants, and they weren’t all that good at that. About half of them were useless in a fight. And they had a rule to not mess with humanity and they did it just about all the time. If you’re a billion year old celestial that’s gonna make robots to do a job,why don’t you make good ones? You’re not new at this. Just make a bunch of that Superman guy and call it a day. Deviants dead. Job done.
It was beautiful but kind of boring.
The most memorable part of the movie, for me, was when Ikaris gets compared to Superman, which was weird because…he’s clearly Marvel’s answer to Superman…and I guess DC Comics exist within the MCU? It was just confusing and weird.
I liked the scenes with the big ship and the Celestials, they were awesome looking.Oh and the one where they drink the dude’s spit booze, that was the only time the characters really felt like actual ‘people’.
There was an article online that compared Marvel with DC, and the conclusion was that Marvel is more popular because the characters spend more time out of costume than in costume. “Eternals” tried to do that, but the feeling was more of outsiders looking in, same as in the comic books. That could explain why the movie didn’t resonate. that was the only time the characters really felt like actual ‘people’.
“
A lot of wonky weightless CGI”
I love the MCU films and shows, but that describes the climax of almost every single one of them.
I think you can certainly argue that the MCU at large is guilty of this, but I think it sticks out in the Eternals for reasons that are hard to quantify.It might be the designs of the characters and costumes. The very uniform, shiny skintight look of the Eternals’ suits tend to lend themselves to CGI slickness, along with the ropy sinewy designs of the Deviants. I think editing also plays a role. The way the Eternal/Deviant fights are filmed just really seems to be choppy and full of bad shots that really hammer home the non-physicality of it all. One of the most egregious examples was Pip the Troll at the end of the film. I recall this as being strikingly bad CGI, with awkward movements and textures reminiscent of a Playstation cut scene, rather than a mutli hundreds of millions of dollars film.
The Pip CGI was definitely jarringly bad, as if it had been added at the last minute. I don’t think any of the other CGI was bad at all, but that was very noticeable in the theater. I haven’t watched the home release yet, but I had wondered if they would clean that up a bit.
I’ve only watched it on Disney+, and it still looks very bad.
I just have no idea whatsoever what it was about. It looked cool, but it was too much too fast for me.
i found the stakes way too big and abstract to care one way or another, and i really didn’t like any of the eternals as characters. they spent the whole movie talking about how great humans were, but never really showed it, and the very plot of the movie indicates that we wouldn’t even have survived if not for the eternals…and we only exist to birth new gods or whatever…so by the end i was like ‘eh, it’s not worth it just let us all die, whatever’.it did make it canon that DC comics exists in the MCU, so that’s something.
This is such a weird take to read. Not because how one should feel when watching the film, but because I didn’t that is all in line with the general criticism I read about it.My perception of the critical response was rather there was an acknowledgement of what Zhao and the film was trying to do, but because of trying to juggle so many things while being forced into a MCU film mold it really didn’t succeed in them. Again, not a claim that nobody liked it, but the general feeling of the negative views on it. Which were by the way much closer meh than active pushback on what the film did.There are always kind of the film maker responses that make me sigh as I never expect someone to apologize for a film they did, unless there was something genuinely offensive about them, and to defend their artistic choices. However when they go this route of basically inventing a criticism, it’s just… Again sigh.
My family and I saw it. We didn’t *dislike* it, but never felt compelled to rewatch it either. Just very meh.
I definitely didn’t hate Eternals, and didn’t understand the strong hate takes it was receiving at first, but it was definitely one of more forgettable hum-drum MCU films, back there with Thor 2 and Iron Man 3. There were too many characters, Selma Hayek was barely in it, the big deception of Ikaris was obvious from the beginning, it was just very meh. I feel making it look good was the focus too often, there were too many shots and scenes that existed because they looked cool. What’sHisFace crying about the bomb being dropped on Hiroshima was one of them, it was a cool shot, they wanted a pretty CG shot of a destroyed Hiroshima, but that’s all it was. Why wasn’t What’sHisFace upset at the atrocities Japan committed? Why wasn’t he in some random village in China that was full of burnt, raped corpses that the Japanese left behind? He clearly knew what was happening across the globe during WWII, but decided to just go to Hiroshima of all places, because the devastation looks epic in 4K and IMAX. Shot well and pretty yes, but very meh.
For a Marvel movie about abortion I quite liked it.
Philosophically, this movie not only asks the question “would you kill Baby Hitler”, but would you kill Baby Hilter when he was only halfway out of the womb?
But you have to admit the scene where the Eternals all shit in buckets elevated the superhero genre to a new level of authenticity and raw intimacy.
The problem with Eternals is that it wanted to be a deeply ambitious trip through time and space with fascinating, mythical characters, but it just ended up being a Marvel movie – a Marvel movie with much worse writing than usual, at that. There was definitely an effort to tone down the quipping, but then what’s left is just a bunch of characters bluntly stating the plot, their thoughts, their motivations, etc. It also doesn’t help that Gemma Chan and Richard Madden had no chemistry whatsoever – their romance is supposed to span millennia, they fucked on the banks of the Euphrates, and yet they just act like coworkers in an on-again off-again fling.
*whispers* …but they’re robots.
For me, the problem with Eternals wasn’t that it was different or ambitious – that was fine. The problem is it introduces an enormous cast of characters for us to get to know, then dumps a ton of exposition on us about those characters, then we learn that everything the characters know (that we just learned) is wrong, and then we have another giant exposition dump. It’s at least two movies worth of material crammed into one, with little room for anything but plot and action sequences. Shang-Chi had a similar problem with “Here’s the backstory. Just kidding! HERE’S the backstory. Just kidding! Here’s what’s REALLY going on.” But it had a much smaller cast of characters to juggle.Imagine if this Eternals movie was all about getting to know the characters, getting the band back together, with more time to hang out with these people and learn to care about them. THEN movie 2 is all about learning their true purpose and saving the world.
Yes! I think you’ve articulated why this didn’t engage me. “Star Wars” excepted, it’s usually a bad sign when a film starts with a long, scrolling block of text explaining the backstory. All that effort to get the audience to understand who these people are and why we should care, and then halfway through we learn that it’s all something else entirely.
If something is “divisive” that usually means it creates two very distinct (good/bad) responses. Zhao’s “the divisiveness coming from critics and the fans” doesn’t make sense, nor does this article’s “divisive response to Eternals”.It doesn’t even seem like Eternals itself is “divisive”; there isn’t much divide between mild enjoyment and mild dislike!
Yeah it’s not a ‘you love it or you hate it’ type of thing, it’s a ‘pretty much everyone is kinda meh on the movie’ type of thing. There were some good parts and then some long boring parts, don’t think anyone’s arguing about that.
The “divisiveness” seems to be between “this was boring and bad” and “this was boring but still pretty okay”
That’s not divisiveness, though. Divisiveness is the *creation* of divisions, not the existence of divisions.
I genuinely enjoyed Eternals. I felt it did a good job of establishing a group of characters and make it feel like really did know each other. I thought the scope was pretty grand. It would be nice to see more of these characters.
It’s very fun that she responded to criticisms that she made up.
Are you sure you aren’t racist and dumb? Because what I got from this interview is that if you didn’t get it you’re racist and too dumb to appreciate art.
I don’t think I was, but then you called me racist and I’m pretty sure that was the incident in my life that turned my racist!
If we can drag this inciting incident out another 20 minutes, it can be a subplot in The Eternals!
Wait for the Magic Hour to shoot it!
I still haven’t seen Eternals (and NWH for that matter) but is Eternals like the Last Jedi of marvel?
I’ll probably watch it one day (maybe on an airplane going somewhere), but I gotta say that every still they use in promotional posters or articles about the film tend to be so… drab? A scene with a bunch of people standing in the desert looking like they’re waiting to do an audition for a film doesn’t make me want to see this movie.
I liked The Eternals a lot, which is saying something since I never warmed to them in the comics, even the later Neil Gaiman thing. I think no one expected it to break box office records or be the giant hit that, say, a Spidey movie would be. It was a different direction and a side path from most of the MCU stuff, and some fans might not be cool with that. And .. [spoiler, I guess, so watch out] – I thought keeping Dane Whitman’s secret till the very end (and even then not revealing the whole thing) was fun. Made me want a sequel or two and I hope that happens.
I would also like a sequel with Zhao at the helm. It wasn’t the greatest Marvel movie, but it at least failed in a way that was ambitious and interesting. It would be interesting to see how she would build on her experience with the first movie.
Viewers: Marvel’s movies are all the same!Also Viewers: lol wtf is this
Eternals didn’t feel like a Marvel movie, and besides having that throwaway line that mentions the Avengers, I think the final fight could have included an Avenger or two, because it was Earth that was in peril, and there’s no way our famous superheroes weren’t aware that someone evil was afoot. I wonder if it was Zhao’s choice not to include them at all. The movie is watchable but also forgettable. Has a sequel been announced?
Usually they get a director who adapts to Marvel’s way of doing stuff or the director has enough personality to shine through a bit. I don’t know if Zhao was either. Personally I thought her directing was just bland, as was a lot of the story. I didn’t hate it but its not even one I’d put on to kill time.
Eternals was like if you went on a hike with someone you really like and when you got to your lunch spot, you zoned out appreciating the view while they were telling you a story that’s really important to them, but they keep losing their place and leaving details out.
suspiciously specific
Put “suspiciously specific” on my gravestone, please
And then, at the end of the hike, you killed a baby.
It should have been a series.
It didn’t make me uncomfortable. It just didn’t engage me very much. I had similarly low expectations going into “Shang-Chi,” but that wound up being a pleasant surprise.
“It is not about us, it is about them. And I say that lovingly, because
they have a level of comfort [with] how their entertainment and their
world–their beloved Marvel, or their beloved indie filmmaker–functions.
That’s the order of the logic of their world that’s being disturbed. So I
appreciate their passion, to try to make sense of it.”
Well, there’s a wordy backhanded compliment to fans if ever I ever one.
Look, to any filmmakers (or artists in general) out there, I don’t think this is really all that difficult or cerebral to understand. When you make something, some people will like it and some won’t. You can try to justify it any way you like, but bottom line it always comes down to subjective perception and you have no control over that. If you don’t want to be in a popularity contest, then try a different profession.
*if ever I saw one.
I liked Eternals. It was pretty good. They had cool powers, the premise was interesting, and the photography was beautiful. Sure, it wasn’t the best, it won’t be anyone’s favorite, and it has many flaws, but it was better than Black Widow. The cast was great, but it would have been nice if they had more interpersonal scenes to show off chemistry where it is, like between Makkari and Druig. And any scenes where Sersi could have that would help better sell her relationships with the Starks would have improved the movie dramatically.
It was definitely better than Black Widow. Strong agree on Makkari and Druig. I think it struggled with being both intimate and large scale in terms of scope (time scale & geography) and number of characters. I’d love to see a sequel now that the characters are established.
her talking all loftily about this movie is very funny, because it was the most standard marvel movie I’ve ever seen. please return to making interesting movie!
The problem with the Eternals is that they are bad characters. Even the comic books have dropped them half a dozen times. They are too far outside of what everyone else in the comics is doing. They are basically flat DC characters ported over.Zhao style perfectly paired with the Eternals. She basically made a movie that was a flat version of the Snyder Cut. She completed the assignment and I think for a lot of moviegoers that’s not half bad.
No one walked out of the Eternals uncomfortable. Most of us just walked out bored.
I liked the Celestials since I like sci-fi stories about ancient cosmic aliens, like Babylon 5, Mass Effect, Stargate, etc. But I wish they had gone more cosmic and Kirby with the rest of the movie.
I have only walked out of the cinema halfway through a film three times in my life.1. The Tree of Life: As a huge Malick fan, I just wasn’t ready for the level of whispered self-parody on display. I remember the exact moment I gave up: “Dinosaurs? Really?”2. Transformers 2 or 3: Not sure which one—all I remember is that something triggered a panic attack. (Probably boredom, am I right?)3. The Eternals: Everything—the cast, the plot, the stakes, the colours, the spaceships—melded into a sort of Etsy golden brown and that’s all I could see.
I liked the Eternals, in general. The problems with it are pretty simple to explain, though:1. These people are basically AI/robots built for a purpose, but only the two leads really act like it. Which leads the audience to wonder why the fuck we’re spending so much time with Gemma “Blank Face” Chan when she’s so very, very boring. She was truly the worst part of the movie. I will not budge on this. 2. The Deviants could have been replaced with literally anything else. They were dumb looking and that side of the plot was ill-handled.3. Too many characters in general with motivations either spelled out directly for the audience or just not talked about much.4. The sex scene was dumb and that whole romance was unearned. Might as well watch Excel fuck Word.5. Did you know a Supreme being was incubating in the middle of our planet? Literally no one, including Shield, the Sorcerer Supreme, probably Kang, or anyone else knew. Which is, ya know…dumb as all hell.Otherwise great movie. I loved the way the Eternals powers were portrayed and it had some decent set pieces. I would’ve centered the movie more on Druig.
Kang knew. He also knew it didn’t matter.
Good point: Druig was the most interesting Eternal.
Legit he should’ve been the main character. He’s the closest to humans, while also having total control over them – that’s an insane power-set to explore in conjunction with his fellow Eternals having more “flashy” powers. There’s way more there to work with than Sersi.
I wish we had gotten more Druig and more Druig & Makkari together. They had a nice chemistry.
The most surprising part of the movie was that “don’t leave your drink unattended around me” Druig wasn’t the main villain of the movie.
5. Did you know a Supreme being was incubating in the middle of our planet? Literally no one, including Shield, the Sorcerer Supreme, probably Kang, or anyone else knew. Which is, ya know…dumb as all hell.Uhh…I’m the Supreme being. If I don’t want to be found, no one is finding me. The Celestials have been doing this for billions of years and against far more advance civilizations. They know what they are doing.
This is Ang Lee doing Hulk all over again. I’m a fan of Chloe Zhao and still felt that her doing an MCU film was a weird choice. I admire how she tried to mold a Marvel movie into her own vision, the same way Ang Lee tried.
In the end, it wasn’t as deep and nuanced as a Chloe Zhao film, and not as bonkers and colorful as an MCU film that originated from Jack Kirby’s mind.
I watched 15 minutes of Eternals and it was just boring and with subpar CGI monsters. Turned it off and will never try to rewatch. Just zero energy/chemistry.
I think Eternals should’ve been a 6~8 episode Disney+ series. There were so many of them that none of them were really developed well. It was also so divorced from the rest of the MCU that even when the world was on the line, the stakes felt weak.
Maybe, just maybe, you made a shitty movie.
Ehhh….are you sure you’re just not racist?
If knowing that Kryptonians are better than the people that exist on this puny Planet you call Houston, then yes.
*kneels*
“When people have that feeling, like they need to put order into things, they need to understand it by putting it into boxes,”
I mean the box I put it in was ‘disappointingly bland for the premise’ so I mean I guess you’re right but maybe, like, just make movies that aren’t as bland?
Funnily enough I just finally got around to watching The Eternals last night. It was definitely shot in a more interesting, naturalistic way than most Marvel movies, so it has that going for it, but overall it’s just not a well-made movie. The CGI is noticeably bad throughout, the plot is boring, and only a couple of the characters get to have anything like development. They somehow took Jack Kirby’s least interesting work (he was clearly trying and failing to recapture the magic of the New Gods) and managed to make it less compelling.
“Boxes”….that’s what phrases like “illogical choices” and “wasted potential” are used for, putting things in boxes, of course.
It’s a very pretty film with some interesting ideas.
Like an Indie Film with CGI, and some great locations.
They hired an Indie Filmmaker, that’s what they basically got.
Glad they took the risk in the end. Just not the jolt of electricity it could have been.
I didn’t hate Eternals, I was more indifferent to it I guess? I couldn’t really connect with any of the characters (maybe because there were too many?) and I thought it was a missed opportunity to really push the visuals and just go full Kirby cosmic. I guess I was expecting something more fun.
It was boring and didn’t make much sense
I don’t understand why anyone would call Eternals divisive. It was a good looking movie that was also boring as hell. Like is anyone really getting into heated arguments about whether or not this movie is good like they did with The Last Jedi?Also I overall liked the direction but the opening shot of all of the Eternals in their multi-colored costumes standing side by side and looking forward was cringe bad IMO. I hated it in trailers and hated it in the movie.
I certainly didn’t hate it and it gets better as it thins out. The opening hour is a problem though, too many characters, too much messing around going back and forward through the timeline and some of the dialogue is atrocious.
Some directors have some great takes on what they want to do with the material. But usually that comes after a baseline understanding of what that material is, which is what makes a fresh take intriguing in the first place. Eternals felt like a reboot to an IP that never got that first chance to be established, so a lot of what it does just comes off muddied. That’s just my theory on why it should have connected more than it did. But I’ve got tons of theories; Maybe just because a director has some ideas, it doesn’t automatically make for a good match (see: Zack Snyder, Kathy Yan). Maybe it’s off-putting for Marvel to immediately position the Eternals as “the next big thing” after Avengers and people scoffed. Maybe the Eternals are just meh
It felt overly long, the plot dragged, and it felt inconsequential to the overall MCU. Other than that, it was perfectly serviceable.
What boxes did she think she stepped out of, exactly? I thought the movie was by-the-numbers Marvel, except that it left a lot of threads hanging in unsatisfying ways. Like a worse Thor 2.
It didn’t all work, but I give this movie ambition/degree of difficulty points. It has grown on me over the months, and I’m glad she made it, and would like to see her do another one.