Okay, *SPOILER ALERT*, if you've not seen these movies don't read this commentary. This is a lesson I think Warner Brothers needs to take to heart as it goes forward building it's own film-verse, in response to the massive success of Marvel's cinematic universe. These are things to think about.
I enjoyed MAN OF STEEL. It was a good movie and worth seeing in the theater. The acting wasn't terrible, as it sometimes was in SUPERMAN RETURNS. The writing was pretty good. But the film was not great. I can handle a 'good not great' film, as it can lead to better work down the road. BATMAN BEGINS was a good film, not a great film. The films that followed were indeed 'great'.
However, I feel these characters from top to bottom deserve great film making. Good is not good enough, not really. It will keep the franchise going but it will not cause a phenomenon. I want to contrast MAN OF STEEL with THOR: THE DARK WORLD. The latter was a truly great film. And even the original THOR film was significantly better than MAN OF STEEL. What accounts for the difference?
The truth is that the THOR films embraced the godlike scale and the cosmic settings of the comic books. Half of the first THOR movie took place on other planes and planets, and 80% of the new film was set in such places. I think MAN OF STEEL went off-track by focusing too much on Superman's beginnings. We all knew about those beginnings, we all know who Superman is and where he comes from. Instead, we needed a giant cosmic-level story that took place primarily off of the planet. We needed a character of the scale of Brainiac or Darkseid. The reasons for this are manifold.
First the action sequences are more interesting when they take place in new settings. On alien worlds you can play with the surroundings and make fight scenes which are superficially similar to what we've seen before and make them something wholly new.
Second, story lines can go directions that we aren't used to. There are just limits to earth-bound storytelling. In point of fact, this is exemplified all the times in the comics. Many of the best and most memorable stories take place as giant space dramas. This introduces the novelty that is necessary for making films that are successful.
Third, this stays true to the elements that have made the comics so successful. Go with what works in other mediums. Earthy and gritty stories work well for some characters, but not so much for others. Superman is godlike. Embrace that don't limit it. MAN OF STEEL accomplished some of this by embracing the connection to messianism present in the comic books. And that was very enjoyable. But Jesus Himself is only an interesting figure because He embodies the Divine. Jesus sacrifice is fascinating because it reveals a cosmic significance and a cosmic struggle. Jesus' defeat of the devil is what really makes us care about Him. Without a cosmic scale that drama would just be a footnote in history. I didn't think that the inclusion of Kal's home world and other Kryptonians as the center of the action properly captured a cosmic scale. What would've was a fight in a cosmic context, and a more galactic or universal threat.
You saw a similar problem with the GREEN LANTERN film. GREEN LANTERN should've been THE LAST STAR FIGHTER with green rings. Instead it was the story of a human being who became a cosmic cop. Very little time was spent in space, when in fact nearly the whole film should've been set there. You robbed GL of his most interesting aspect: that of his cosmic context.
Wonder Woman should be the THOR of DC. We need to see her on a kind of CLASH OF THE TITANS scale, working as much or more in other worlds as this one. Take us on a journey, show us what we've never seen before. The intellectual properties are good, now play to their strengths. It isn't that hard.
No comments:
Post a Comment