To tell a good stand alone story maybe? Have we forgot about those?
Whether you thought it was a good story is entirely something else though.
Why are you confusing "move the MCU forward" with "serves no purpose"?
Also cuz of money.
This **** reeks of entitlement and being spoiled for the last 13 years by the MCU.
Nothing wrong with standalone stories simply meant to entertain.
I’m also willing to give Feige & co. the benefit of the doubt that The Eternals do, in fact, move the MCU forward, with the payoff coming in the future. There are enough breadcrumbs in the movie to confidently make that assumption.
A few points to unpack;
I understand Marvel/Disney is in the business of telling stories via film. They do this for the purpose of making money. I concede that (and don't think my initial comment ever really disputed that). Marvel/Disney will almost inevitably chug out product/content to make themselves money.
My comment on "why tell the story with no purpose?" speaks moreso to the narrative arc in any good work of fiction (or, frankly, non-fiction). Humans are storytellers. We tell stories to fit certain needs and satisfy certain purposes inbred within our evolutionary psyche. The evidence of overarching narratives, archetypes and ethe spanning all of human civilization suggests these conclusions and commonalities as to humankind's storytelling nature.
Within the arc of the MCU, you have stories to tell. Good stories follow certain "predetermined" markers by their very nature (see above). Marvel/Disney and the universe they have created don't have unlimited capital upon which to tell any and all stories as a mere function of time; actors age out or contracts expire, interest ebbs and flows, etc. Within that limited time, you want your best stories to hit hardest across the widest scope of people. The big three all had trilogies of personal development; the Avengers rose and fell within three stories; etc.
The telltale sign of good art or product is a lack of wasted space; every move is made with a purpose. Look at The Godfather; every directorial decision, every scene; there is no wasted cinematic space. In my view of Eternals, so much was unnecessary or fleeting, or "of the cultural moment" that a significant amount of the film was devoted no non-essentials which didn't actively serve to move the dramatic structure along. In turn, the pacing suffered.
I previously highlighted that I actually enjoyed the underlying conflict / moral dilemma exemplified by the competing worldviews of Sersi vs. Ikaris. In principle, that is something I would like to see explored cinematically. But the execution on this one was so lacking, that the possibilities of that conflict were quashed under the weight of the movie's additional baggage and expectations.
I admit without greater context as to how/why the Eternals are supposed to be significant, the movie fell flat for me because it felt like almost
all wasted space--and that may be on me as a viewer. But when the film can't independently support itself to justify its purpose, you can only rely so much on the mere prospect of more to come. IM3 sucked, but you had so much of Stark across other pictures that IM3 didn't effect the character's likeability or reception in the general public. A film can't aspire to greatness solely upon the cinematographic skills of the director when the core story, dialogue, and other foundational elements aren't there.
TLDR; you uncultured swine.
