Isn't it a funny world we live in? A few decades ago the thought that there would be a point in cinema history when the biggest blockbuster franchises would be based almost exclusively on comic books was laughable. Comics were for a niche demographic of nerds and geeks, but no more! Now they are part of ongoing series that have installments planned out years in advance, and they're some of the most anticipated movies around. But alas, it feels like we may be reaching a saturation point.
Admittedly, the first superhero movie to bring comics into the mainstream light was Richard Donner's Superman in 1978. As the old tagline went, "You'll believe a man can fly" and rightly so. It's fondly remembered as a classic, even if the series fizzled out, was attempted to be resuscitated, fizzled out again, and now is in full-on reboot mode and (from the looks of it) laying the foundation for DC's Justice League franchise, finally ready to rival Marvel's Avengers series.
I'm a little concerned that we've reached the point where there's simply an overabundance of superhero movies though. They're no longer being viewed as pieces of cinematic art (although it's arguable that they never were) but instead as cash cows. The first Spiderman and X-Men were considered gambles that paid off, but now we're at the point where all of the well known entries have been mined and re-mined. We're witnessing reboots of franchises not even a full decade old. My fear is that movie studios are overestimating the sustainable mass-market appeal for franchises that were once designed to cater to a small demographic.
I recently watched Thor: The Dark World. It was entertaining, it had some funny moments, and Chris Hemsworth and Natalie Portman provide enough appeal to both genders that it won't be just the teenage boys clambering for tickets. And I enjoyed the first Thor well enough, but the problem I had with the sequel was that - despite it's entertainment value - I barely had a clue what was going on. There was a good deal of exposition to try and explain everything, but the majority of plot devices were very abstract and mystical, and I barely understood the motivation of the villains aside from that they really like darkness. I know exactly why I was left feeling a bit confused by it all too; they were pulling material from the comic which I was totally unfamiliar with.
That's the problem that occurs when you start to move beyond superhero origin stories. You have to start pulling elements from the comics that only those who have read them will truly appreciate. Origin stories are great, because they only serve as an introduction to the character. What Marvel got right the first time around was that they used characters that even people who hadn't read the comics were at least somewhat familiar with. I've never read a Thor comic, but I was at least aware of the character when the first film came out, so I wasn't walking in blind.
But as franchises develop, the amount of material available that will be appealing to the general public dries up. It becomes a burden on the filmmakers to create something that pulls from the source material (in order to make fans of the comics happy) but isn't so dense that casual viewers aren't going to be lost. We've moved beyond the origin stories for Marvel's set of films and away from the well-known heavies like Incredible Hulk and Iron Man, and now there are franchises being born out of things like Ant-Man and Guardians of the Galaxy, which I've never heard of until now.
The difficult part will be making these films appealing to mainstream audiences who have never heard of them and aren't familiar with the subject matter. And frankly, some comic book stories just don't translate well to film, or at least are very difficult to. I like to use Captain America and the Superman reboot Man of Steel as examples of ways to do them right. As characters, Superman and Captain America are horribly uninteresting. They never undergo a significant character arc; Captain America has the same set of morals at the beginning of the film as he does at the end. Superman, meanwhile, is an immortal god who always does the right thing; if he didn't, he wouldn't be Superman. Luckily, the filmmakers were able to work their way around these troubles by adding a few more layers to their respective films. Captain America became something of an underdog trying to prove himself, and Superman was portrayed as a sympathetic outsider struggling to understand his own identity and the extent of his powers, as well as his moral responsibility of what to do with them. Both films turned out great, at least in my opinion.
But where do you go after that? What do you do once the first film firmly establishes the character of the hero? The answer, I'm afraid, is anyone's guess. The trailer for Captain America: The Winter Soldier is out, and while it looks interesting, I actually have no idea what the damn plot is. It looks like it's shaping up to be similar to Thor: The Dark World as something that only true fans of the comics will be able to appreciate.
The answer for Superman, likewise, is to introduce the rebooted Batman into the flick, which I'm totally excited for (go Affleck, go!). This seems to be a logical way to kill two birds with one stone: you introduce something that will be able to challenge Superman, as well as introduce the new version of Batman without having to worry about a standalone film being compared directly to Christopher Nolan's trilogy. As excited as I am for the next film though, I'm a bit nervous, because now there's rumor that they're also going to be introducing Wonder Woman, Nightwing, and a few other Justice League characters. While this could be cool, it's also a hell of a lot of stuff to cram into one film that's already going to have it's hands full with introducing a new Batman. I pray it's handled competently.
Superman is an example of a character that teeters on the precipice, meaning it's easy to fuck his story up, but if done properly, it can produce one hell of a solid film. And then there are simply some franchises that don't work as films. Green Lantern is a good example. A lot of people hated that film, but personally I didn't mind it. Granted, I've never read any of the comics. The only comic series I have any affinity for is Batman, but I was at least aware of the universe and the basic principles of Green Lantern when I saw the movie, and honestly, I though they pretty much delivered on the fundamentals. Some of the die-hard fans of the comics might say they didn't stick closely to certain elements in the source material or some other excuse, but all I can say is maybe the film's critical failure was due to the fact that it's just really damn difficult to make a movie about a guy with a magic ring who's an intergalactic space policeman appealing to the general public. Perhaps that's one character who's best represented on the page instead of the screen. Moving forward, especially now that Marvel and DC are entering a pissing contest of epic proportions, I feel there's going to be quite a few more instances of this as each studio tries to mine their vast archives.
But there is hope. Both the Iron Man franchise and Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy have been massively successful and consistently entertaining despite being three movies long because their characters are just naturally interesting and the filmmakers did a great job with casting and storytelling. I especially like to hold up Nolan's trilogy because instead of approaching his films as comic book movies, he approached them with the same realism as he would any "serious" genre (he's quoted as saying the framework for The Dark Knight was a crime epic and The Dark Knight Rises a disaster film). They're not just great superhero films, they're great films period. The people I know who didn't like The Dark Knight Rises were almost exclusively the hardcore fanboys of the comics because Nolan deviated substantially from the source material, but the majority of everyone else seemed to think it was excellent because it was able to stand by itself; you didn't need a bloody glossary open in front of you when you're watching it like I felt was needed with the latest Thor entry.
And of course, I could just be blowing smoke here. The trailer for X-Men: Days of Future Past looks pretty damn sweet, and despite being nervous about how the studios might handle the next Man of Steel, I still have a total raging boner in anticipation. As with all storytelling, sympathetic characters and interesting narratives will forever rule the day.
No comments:
Post a Comment