There are so many more coming this summer, and I don't want to see any of them. I feel like it's such a waste of resources.
Is the public ever going to get sick of superhero movies?
|by Anonymous||reply 26||04/17/2013|
Not a fan, either, OP.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||04/17/2013|
Me, too. I can't believe we live in an age where the driving cultural force in this country is Marvel Fucking Comics.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||04/17/2013|
Just like zombie and vampire pictures, superhero movies will never go away. For each generation, there is a whole new audience for them. This is nothing new. Its been this way for decades.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||04/17/2013|
R3: I'm not sure that I would agree about superhero films being a constant or even often revived genre, at least not anything remotely like their popularity of the past couple of decades.
In the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, I recall the occasional Superman film and a scant few others, but that's spread across decades. This Wiki chart seems to support that, with more films of that sort coming out in a single year now than were issed in a decade or decades in the past.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||04/17/2013|
Eventually. Somebody will come out with a surprise megahit, then other producers will copy that, then we'll have a new trend.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||04/17/2013|
I really hope the new Superman movie spends plenty of time covering his origin story. I just don't think they can cover that enough.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||04/17/2013|
I loved the 70s/80s "Superman" movies and even liked the Brandon Routh update from a few years back, but I have no desire to see this new version. Why do we need another dark, brooding superhero?
|by Anonymous||reply 7||04/17/2013|
I's become so bad they almost instantaneously remake them. The remake of Spider-Man's origin story came just ten years after the first one.
And now they've reached the bottom of the barrel so we're getting such loser characters as "Ant-Man" and "Guardians of the Galaxy." They've got to stop.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||04/17/2013|
R4 The chart shows that the craze started in the early 80s after the first Superman film. It built slowly and steadily for a while and by the late 80s early 90s is when we really start seeing them much more frequently. Going back twenty, thirty years? That's decades. Maybe not a lot of decades, but if we use the Disney formula of a new audience every seven years*, we are now going on our fourth "generation".
*before the advent of home video/dvd, Disney would re-release their older films every seven years or so, the reasoning that there was a whole new audience or generation for them.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||04/17/2013|
Thanks for that Disney info, R9. Interesting.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||04/17/2013|
Superhero films are the new "westerns."
|by Anonymous||reply 11||04/17/2013|
[quote]Why do we need another dark, brooding superhero?
Probably because we live in dark, brooding times. I read once that during a good economy, teenage sex comedies and lighthearted films are more popular. When the economy is bad, the films take on a darker and less happy tone. Look at the '70s. Terrible economy, energy crisis, Watergate, loss in Vietnam and the Cold War going strong. What were the most popular films then? Disaster movies and films set during the Depression (with an occasional man eating shark thrown in for good measure). The theory is film goers wanted to see people having an even worse time in life then they were. Films are a form of escapism, but they also reflect the times they were made.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||04/17/2013|
It's getting really annoying. Also, what happened to the mid-budget movie for adults? Silver Linings Playbook was the last one. It seems like the major studios are pooling all their resources for these big bloated superhero epics, and spending close to nothing on smaller films with higher returns.
And Man of Steel looks like such a piece of shit that Superman Returns will seem like The Godfather in comparison.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||04/17/2013|
Glad I'm not the only one. Superhero movies seems so 20th century - like comic books.
I can't believe anyone gives a shit about them still.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||04/17/2013|
They're unethical. There are finite resources on this planet and we blow through them making another Iron Man and another Superman and another Captain America while children starve and infrastructure crumbles? Late capitalism is truly theatre of the absurd.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||04/17/2013|
r9, this also coincides with the rise of the marketing departments and number crunchers telling the studios "what the kids out there want".
All of the studio consolidations brought the merchandising aspect to the fore also.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||04/17/2013|
CG is a major reason also. I wish they'd make slightly more adult superhero movies, more in keeping with Pfeiffer as Catwoman. I could handle a kinky Spiderwoman or a lezzed up Batwoman
|by Anonymous||reply 17||04/17/2013|
I enjoy superhero movies but enough with the zombie shit. What new angle can be done on zombies?? It's all been done to death.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||04/17/2013|
R16 Thats a very good point. For a long time merchandising tie-ins were somewhat limited. I know I have seen ads for merchandise related to Gone with the Wind and Wizard of Oz. And of course Disney really milked it for everything it was worth, but those were the exception and not the rule. I would guess the real game changer was when Star Wars came out and the merchandising of that went through the roof. It now is at the point where it seems they make a film simply to support the merchandise, and not the other way around. In my mind the worse offender was Return of the Jedi. The weakest of them all and those fucking Ewoks.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||04/17/2013|
r17 that's not going to happen for the merchandising reasons I mentioned above.
Apparently Darren Aronofsky wrote an amazing script based on the darker, Miller version of Batman. (I can't remember if he used a specific comic or not.)
The studio rejected it because it wasn't PG-13.
According to rumour, it would have been a mid-level R rating.
I've never seen it on the internet; I'd love to read it.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||04/17/2013|
R18 dont you mean they have been done to undeath?
|by Anonymous||reply 21||04/17/2013|
I don't think the public has ever been as into them as the media has led us to believe. But, they're what studios make in the summer. If you're thirsty, you'll drink anything. They're a delivery device a for merchandising bonanza. They have explosions. Once they've beaten the superhero horse to death, another genre that can contain explosions will be rolled out.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||04/17/2013|
That's interesting, R20, because both The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises were both mid-level R movies that got PG-13 ratings because of studio influence. As much as I enjoyed those movies, the whole time I was watching them I thought they weren't for kids at ALL.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||04/17/2013|
It's now spreading to tv with comic books like The Walking Dead being made. (And called "graphic novels" instead of comic books)
|by Anonymous||reply 24||04/17/2013|
It only takes a modicum of intelligence to know you won't get sick of them if you don't go to see them.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||04/17/2013|
You will continue to see superhero movies for one and ONLY one reason:
Teenage boys are the largest consumers of theater concession stand junk food.
Theater owners make their profits selling outrageously marked up junk food. Teenage boys will blow all their money at the concession stand instead of sneaking food and drinks purchased before the movie at Walgreens like sensible adults do. So as long as teenage boys continue to blow their allowances at the concession stand, superhero movies are here to stay.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||04/17/2013|