Overall Rating: 2/10 (Stinky!)

  The Morbius movie is a potentially interesting mess of boring characters, tired plot, weary dialogue, and a tone that, like the action sequences, leave me with whiplash. This is unsurprising. We knew that Morbius was going to be a stinker, and if you didn’t know before the movie came out, the overwhelming attitude in the wake of its release is almost impossible to miss (especially if you are reading this review, which if you are, thank you so much!).  

        I don’t want to retread the opinions that are currently being circulated right now. We get it – the movie is bad. Instead, I would like to look at the single interesting aspect the movie sets up and then fails to add any meaning throughout the entirety of the plot. I’m referring to the early sequence where we learn why Morbius dubs his friend with the name ‘Milo’. It’s a blink and you’ll miss it scene, but while growing up in a hospital, Morbius explains to a boy named Lucian  that he will now be called Milo. This is because Morbius refers to every boy who ends up being his bed neighbor as Milo. Lucian is understandably confused by this, so Morbius explains that Lucian is one in a long line of children that Morbius has watched die, and to protect himself from the emotional pain that causes, has elected to call them all by the name of the first kid he met when he came to the hospital. The original Milo’s face and attributes have been long forgotten by Morbius by the time Lucian arrives. 

       All of this happens within four or five lines of dialogue, and then is never brought up again. Lucian is then called Milo by all the characters in the movie, even his doctors. This nickname persists 25 years into the future and is the only name he is ever called throughout the movie. Unsurprisingly, the movie does nothing with this. This is just a minor detail that is only barely referenced at the end where Morbius refers to Lucian (he actually mispronounces Lucian as [Loo-shin] when it was established his name is [Loo-cyan]) by his birth name when dealing a killing blow to his friend turned villain.  

      This is such a huge problem for the movie. Especially a movie that has been marketed as an anti-hero movie that “breaks the line between hero and villain”. Sidestepping the discussion of how Morbius actively refuses to emotionally connect with his best friend could have been an interesting decision for the character. Instead, this movie is determined to make zero decisions with its characters. It’s so incredibly frustrating because if competently written, this could genuinely be an interesting depiction of a Marvel anti-hero. Having a main character who is constantly in proximity to death be unable to emotionally connect with his best friend would provide a lot of context to Morbius’ hero/villain status (something the movie tells the audience is important, but never actually earns it being so). This would invoke at least a crumb of curiosity during this movie, which it currently does not do. Morbius is a desert, and this character decision may look like an oasis, but it's nothing more than a mirage.  

       Morbius is a failure as a narrative, a movie, and a character. Not just because of the regular recycling of superhero tropes, but because the movie dangles interesting character decisions and yanks them away before any development can be had. 

     While the average superhero movie is nowhere near this absence of quality, I can’t help but notice that this is a growing pattern within this genre. “Underdeveloped” is a word that I frequently find coming to mind when trying to describe most cinematic superheroes. I have a personal theory as to why this is. Modern superhero movies are simply not interested in writing interesting characters. Instead, they introduce characters with intriguing qualities and then let audiences imagine possible scenarios of how this will be explored, and then never explore them within the text of the movie. They are taking advantage of the literal decades of prior characterization these properties have accrued for fans to use in their personal interpretation of the movies. Why would studios like Marvel take a chance on alienating some Spider-Man fans by having a Spider-Man make unique decisions and have unique character development when they can start the process on screen and have fans overlay the rest.  

      Morbius is an interesting case study for this because you can clearly see this. No one has any sort of personal history with this character (and if you do, then I urge you to read anything other than superhero comics) so the game of setting up character arcs/growth/decisions and then relying on fans to fill in the gaps just doesn't work. Fans can’t flesh out Morbius' character with their own preconceptions because nobody cares about Morbius.  

    What we need to do going forward is understand that most superhero movies pull this trick. If you want to see what the critics are complaining about for the next MCU movie, do your best to leave your personal interpretations and expectations of the character at the door. It’s difficult, but I promise you that you will be more able to see the lack of development these movies often have. As for poor Morbius, he will inevitably show up in another movie down the line but I seriously doubt if he will return as a headliner.