Comic book movies forever?

You ever wonder if the fact that so many adults in their 30s and 40s still look to comic book content as their primary source of entertainment is going result in an ever lowering bar of entertainment fare?

Adults who never seem to tire of comic book and star wars/star trek reboots makes me wonder if the tastes of current and future generations are going keep growing more and more juvenile. And then there's the cosplay crowd. Adults with a reverence for content that used to be the purview of ten year olds.

Are most American no longer outgrowing this sort of thing? Avatar being a perfect example of the fatuous. Unobtanium. Un. #%&*$#. Ob. Tanium. Spell it out a bit slower, and in bolder, harder to miss letters, Mr. Cameron. Please. No, really. Any high school writer worth his or her salt can do better than that. The Dark Knight is like 1 in 1,000 for being a pop culture comic book movie that attempted and accomplished more than that.

Would the tastes of most of today's audience even allow for a movie like Citizen Kane, Easy Rider, The Last Picture Show, Casablanca, etc. to be made? These were not sideshow art films, but major cinematic events in this country. Sure, there's non-American Christopher Nolan (the Alfred Hitchcock of our time?) who asks more of himself and of viewers. There used to be Joss Whedon, though he seems reluctant to move beyond his "oh, so clever and meta self aware" schtick, that's played out and a stylistic straightjacket. But then there's freaking JJ Abrams, and all his variant, who embraces brainlessness like a second skin.



Ugh. Grow the hell up, America.



(I feel like freaking Ignatius J. Reilly.)

It's all marketing focused to the current largest spending group. They rely on nostalgia and what could attract the current 30-40 year old male market.

Is it good? Sometimes, not all of it is bad.

Is it too much? It is starting to be saturated, yes.

Does that make people stupid? Why? You can have a drink of fine wine, or a glass of Kool-Aid? Does drinking the Kool-Aid make me immature? What if I drink Wine afterwards, am I mature again?

So no, I see no correlation. You can watch trash and enjoy if you want to and you can still catch the nuances of a more mature and deep movie too. You don't necessarily need to outgrow the less serious or grow into the mature themes. I'll enjoy both (when they are actually good), thank you very much.

But I agree that the selection of good cinema (well acted, good cinematography, good story/script) is much less available in a time of the year when most people can enjoy it.

But every time I bring this up, someone will say - 'It does not matter because Hollywood will do whatever brings in the monies at that particular point in time", as if filmmakers were not also seeking to create something with deeper meaning for posterity. They are artists, and artist want to produce art, not trash. But looking at the results, trash sells good, I guess, and artist got to eat.

P.S. When I hear someone say "To enjoy this, you have to shut down your brain" - Well, I have a better relationship with my brain than with a forgettable CGI fest, and I have found it sometimes entertains me better as well. So no, I still rather keep my brain switch ON and find entertainment that stimulates my mind. Even when watching grown men in tights.

Which is why there need to be more directors like Nolan and the District 49/Elysium director, who at least make an effort to put one foot in visceral CGI action and one in actual ideas and characters who aren't laughably shallow.

But this comic book movie trend is tiresome, and it encourages #%&*$# everything, except things that go boom.

And my point is that I wonder if American's entertainment/escapist/popular art tastes are becoming increasingly juvenile. I think there's a good chance that, viewed en masse, they are. Junk food all the time.


And to one of your other points...no, of course it's not a binary either/or in terms of choices. I'll be seeing the new Mad Max movie, for sure. But hell, the ratios are janked up out of proportion in terms of what "the machine" feeds us. And people seem more than content to lap it up. Is that the future?

The quantity of crap movies is overwhelming, but there are still a handful of non-stupid ones out there.

For example, I have really enjoyed all of the Wes Anderson movies I have seen.

The business dynamic of Hollywood has changed a lot in the past few years. The international box office is now just as important and sometimes even more important than the domestic box office. This means an emphasis on action, heavy-cgi films since those aspects transcend the language barrier. Indie art-house films are still being made but I agree with Pepper that the ratio has changed significantly compared to what it was in the past.

I sort of thought I was alone in my dismay that movies
seem to have turned to plumbing the depths of ten year
olds' interests for their material, so it's nice to hear
others echo my outlook. But maybe it's just that the
stuff aimed at ten year olds is what gets the big promotional
budgets? And those who were around then will recall that
fifty years ago, the ubiquitous complaint about television
was that it was aimed at ten year olds (which as a ten year
old I took as an insult, I though it was aimed at eight year
olds).

I think that it reflects the fact that CGI now allows for an adequate visual representation of superheroes which simply wasn't possible before (think of "Dick Tracy" and whatever came before it), and the fact that comic books are the last untapped reservoir of stories that have already proven to be commercially successful. So it's a low risk/high yield combo that Hollywood loves so much.
That would explain the producer's side.
Why the audience is still so enamored by comic book movies ... well, some explanations have already been offered in this thread.

For each Citizen Kane - how many hundreds of idiot movies was made at the same time? Take a look at the movies created in each decade - only a handful are remembered. You remember Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton, but what about the scores of other movies from then? They were forgettable, and have been forgotten.

Take a random year - like 1959 when Ben Hur was released and take a look at "notable movies released" - how many of them do have you heard of, or much less seen?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_in_film#Notable_films_released_in_1959

Of the Academy Award nominees for best movie in 1959 I've heard of (and see) two.

PV1 hinted at another major factor. At least since the massive success of "Twilight" the market has been driven by the teenage demographic. People over 25 are leaving the multiplexes in droves in favor of Netflix, On Demand, etc. Teenagers are still going to movie theatres though because of the social aspect and Hollywood studios are catering towards this trend. So perhaps this might explain the seemingly higher number of immature films mentioned by the OP.

The changes in budgets have driven this as well. The difference between a high-budget adventure film and a lower-budget character study used to be under a couple of million dollars (if you go back pre-1970).

Nowadays the difference in budget is over ONE HUNDRED million, or even double that, for the big epics. There are still low-budget films being made for a lot less, but no one hears about them.

Why? Marketing. Marketing enough so "everyone" can hear about the film costs as much as a lower-midrange film's entire budget! No studio will spend $25m to market a $5m film!

It's not that these films aren't being made anymore, it's that the ones we HEAR about are indeed catering to as wide an audience as possible to get that money spent on the film and marketing back, and remember the publicly-held studios and investors want to see 2x the gross minimum and it better be in the tens of millions. They're not looking to make a $1m film and get $10m back, that's chump change. They spent more than that marketing Lucy alone!

The independent scene makes the cheaper films.

The fallacy is expecting a big budget film with independent film sensibilities. The ability for films to straddle that barrier is getting harder and harder, but they still exist independently.



The Jedi Master

There will always be action movies. These are just the current generation, after a few decades of uber-action movies that incredibly repetitive and crappy. Die Hard---great! Lethal Weapon---Great! First Blood----Great! Then the crap hit the fan and we got inundated by movies like Rambo 3, Tango and Cash (although it was funny), Commando, Universal Soldier 1-who knows how many...it finally petered out to just the Expendables, which is somewhat fun in that campy all-star cast way.

These are the new action movies. At least they use far better actors, more imaginative plots due to the scifi type nature and they don't ruin great novels because they don't have the time to present them right (I'm looking at you Ender). They have ongoing plots, crossovers between the movies and that makes it fun.
These movies aren't replacing "movie greats", these are just the next evolution of swith-off-your-brain-and-enjoy-it movies.

Comic Book sales have always flourished during wartime and the CB movies are following the same trend. People want a fantasy and see the hero overcome evil as an escape from dark times. The current bleak world socioeconomic climate is what is bringing us these fantastic movies. Speaking of which, Guardians of the Galaxy comes out on Friday!

Can't wait! Looks like good scifi, less comic book. The soundtrack is a hoot. LOL

Entertainment is always a reverse mirror. During the relatively peaceful and prosperous 90s music, films, TV, all got very dark. People's lives were good, so they were drawn to the bad. When the 21st century arrived and it hit the fan, the reverse happened, and people were drawn to more uplifting entertainment to balance out the bad in their lives.



The Jedi Master

+1

Exactly this!


@ All - And we shouldn't forget that brain dead movies have existed from the very earliest days of film-making. Every medium (e.g. film, music, visual art, tv shows, etc.) has its examples of thought-provoking art and it has plenty of examples of mainstream entertainment.

I refuse to grow up. It is my entertainment, and I don't need some deep, thought-provoking movie to entertain me.

I do play games, after all, don't I?

Bring on the Transformers, and the altar of Michael Bay.

PS: Growing up is not maturing. I am mature, and I provide for my family as necessary, and raise and train my son to do what is right and not be a nar-nar. But I won't grow up. I still play with toys, LEGO, and video games. And that's OK.

A friend of mine was in IT for decades, now he is a bus system dispatcher. Smart guy, tons of data floating in his brain when working. The other day we went to a movie...he doesn't do complex and intellectual movies...as he put it:

"I just wanna park my brain at the door, munch on popcorn and watch a trainload of action and 'splosions! That's it, just gimme mindless action!"

Why? I think its because hes under so much info, so much stress and data, that he's deliberately seeking out entertainment that doesn't require mental processing of him.

And I'm convinced he's FAR from alone.

You want interesting complex and nuanced scripts in your movies? Gotta start looking beyond Hollywood mainstream. Two favorites of mine are the Brazilian police/commando epic Tropo De Elite and its sequel. It reminds me of Micheal Mann's own police movies. Complex, multiple points of view. Difficilt questions raised. The ugly is in your face, not glossed over as either a movie joke or ignored.

Yup, this. Thanks Rick.

I work for a civil engineer and I use AutoCAD all day. Heck, I even manage the software. I don't want to see a movie that makes me think too hard. If I want to think hard, I will go to work.

I think we have a different definition of what "turning your brain off" means.

I do not mean it in a sense that you are going to watch a fantasy/sci-fi/action movie and therefore, you need to let go of the possibility/reality of it happening. That would be SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF and in fact, in order for a movie to work, it has to be done right. Some thought has to be put on it. Within it's own world things in the movie have to make sense. This is usually established early when the premise of the movie is established. And yes, you are still using your brain for making sense of that.

Examples -

An unknown virus causes people to turn into Zombies. This works, as long as it is not explained too much.

A tornado is formed at sea, exactly above a shiver of sharks, picks up the sharks in its wake, and the tornado eventually hits a beach town and the sharks eat everyone. WHAT?!!?

So what do I define as turning your brain off?

Some movies just disregard common sense and the common human experience as part of their plot. They create a disconnection with me (as the audience) If you don't believe what is going on on with the characters, then you are just not going to like what you see.

A lot of people in this forum were infuriated at Prometheus. No one was bothered with it being a sci-fi fantasy. The problem was that some of the character actions do not make sense. Some premises are too wild to be accepted (running around after alien cesarean anyone? Intelligent woman character that can't make a right/left turn?). To really enjoy it, you have to "shut down your brain", ignore the character issues and just look at the nice CGI (I know I did, but had not watched again since). If you are telling me that you NEED to go to movies like this from time to time, then by all means, knock yourself out.

Using my brain does not mean that the movie needs to be cerebral. It just has to make sense within itself.

Right, I completely understand what you are saying. And you are also right that "turning your brain off" can mean different things to different people. Take any of those Step Up! or Larry the Cable Guy movies for example. Those films may have entirely plausible plots with consistent internal logic but IMHO, those kind of films make me feel like my IQ points are literally fading away.

Good Points.

I think comedy has a lot more leeway in distorting reality and exaggerating character traits to get a laugh. Humor is another relative concept. Larry the Cable Guy could be a genius of comedy to some, I guess.

But I can't explain Step Up!... that is beyond human comprehension.

Exactly, and they have been making comic book hero movies since the 50's

That's true but they weren't the massive box office successes they are today. Back then comic book films were relegated to B movie status. I think it was the success of "Superman" in 1978 that changed all of that.

This does not work for me. ever. Rabies, mutated slightly so the
deranged state lasts a bit longer, that I could buy. But they'd be
just normal people, on their way to a horrible demise.

Really, the group noun for sharks is a "shiver"? Is that cuz they're too cool to school?

Give me Guardians of Galaxy over The Butler any day....if that makes me less grownup so be it.

Who's to say you are more grownup because you like what Oprah likes

Well, Disney owns Marvel Studios...

Disney owns a lot.




The Jedi Master

I impressed myself there: I've seen quite a few of those. A whole bunch of them are pretty famous, mind, so it's not really surprising. Even the award winners that are listed there - Although I haven't seen them all its really only a couple I am unfamiliar with.

As for the comic book movies. I was never into comic books when I was a kid, save for Commando comics and then 2000AD. I've seen a bunch of them - I liked the Iron Man films - but I'm not that bothered either way. Mind you, its really just Super hero stuff I don't like so I'm probably a lousy person to comment. Dredd was my favourite movie last year, and I'll watch the Hellblazer TV show like a proper fanboi too...

I do get both points, though. Still, there are some great films out there getting made.

Tell me about it! It is as if every film coming out is about superheroes, robots, or teenagers in dystopia!




I got a good laugh out of this article at The Onion
http://www.theonion.com/articles/marvel-reimagines-green-goblin-as-lefthanded,36507/


Marvel Reimagines Green Goblin As Left-Handed
News in Brief • Entertainment • Comics • ISSUE 50•29 • Jul 21, 2014
NEW YORK—In a month that has already seen several key changes to popular comic book characters, publisher Marvel Comics revealed Monday that a new version of Spider-Man archenemy the Green Goblin would be left-handed. “We felt it was time for Marvel to give the Spider-Man series an exciting new perspective, and we’re confident readers are going to agree when they catch sight of obsessive Oscorp researcher Dr. Charles ‘Lefty’ Langkowski,” Marvel chief creative officer Joe Quesada said of the change, which will come in an issue that follows the left-handed scientist, who accidentally spills a biogenic serum from his clumsy right hand and subsequently transforms into the unhinged, Halloween-themed supervillain. “From throwing his signature arsenal of Pumpkin Bombs with his left hand rather than his right, to leaning in the opposite direction while riding the Goblin Glide, it’s a fresh, new path forward for the character, and everyone at Marvel is excited for fans to follow the ‘Sinister Southpaw’s’ reign of terror.” Reactions to the announcement have reportedly been mixed, with a number of readers praising the introduction of a more relatable figure, while others expressed frustration that the Marvel Universe still lacked an ambidextrous character.

That Onion article is great!!

Yeah, the teenagers in a future dystopia genre is really grating on my nerves and another film of that genre comes out today in theatres! I hope it bombs.

No kidding! Geez, we watched that movie Divergent the other night. Then we saw the trailer for The Giver.
Can we just watch Equilibrium? We already own it, and it's better than these super-kid movies.
I don't argue though, my wife read the Hunger Games, Divergent and shimmery vampire books, so we'll see them all.
It's a hell of a lot better than getting dragged to see Titanic. It's chick scifi, but at least it's scifi.

Logan's Run did it decades ago.



The Jedi Master

Why would you get dragged to see a film that was in theaters 17 years ago??

And no, Titanic was worlds better than any of the Twilight flicks. *shudder*



The Jedi Master

Because 17 years ago I got dragged to see it.

I think Jedi just pulled a Drax and read things too literally.