As Iron Man 2 is currently proving, superhero movies are pretty popular. (So is Robert Downey Jr.) With movie studios focusing more on franchises, superheroes are carving out a permanent place in the future of cinema. Despite the genre's recent success, it's far from perfect. One of the writers over at io9 wrote an
interesting article about one major flaw of recent superhero films. I recommend reading the article--it's insightful and interesting. But for those of you who insist on being too lazy to click the link, the gist of the article is that recent superhero films focus on a much too small scale; we need bigger, world-threatening plots.
The article outlines the mini-plots of nearly every superhero movie since the original Superman (the
1966 Batman movie is curiously absent) to show how the entire world just isn't at stake nearly often enough anymore. It also brings up a larger question, which I think is more interesting: What exactly makes a good superhero movie?
Ironically, it's actually not superpowers. No, seriously--what are the two most successful recent superhero franchises? Nolan's Batman series and Favreau's Iron Man: two superheroes who are actually just normal people with abnormal wealth, intelligence, and access to technology. Yes, Spider-Man also deserves mention, but I'm saving him for later. The more super-y superheroes, like the Fantastic Four and Superman himself have been less successful over the past decade or so.
100% of Fantastic Four's financial success is due to Jessica Alba.
This leads to Item
#1: People becoming superheroes. Sure, we like to watch Batman kick the crap out of the bad guys, but we enjoy it even more because we've seen his struggle to get to the point where he
can kick the crap out of them. He had to travel to Asia, get thrown in prison, and go spelunking before he became a superhero. Same thing for Iron Man: Tony had to get kidnapped, spend weeks playing shop in a cave, and have an obviously-metaphorical change of heart. Fantastic Four? They just had to get hit by "cosmic energy": instant power-up. Superman? Please, there's hardly even any discovery. (The recent Superman Returns takes away all of this interest by starting when he's already an established superhero.) A large part of the first Spider-Man's success was Peter exploring his new-found
puberty-powers. Audiences (made almost entirely of normal people) like watching normal people make themselves into something greater. "More than just a man," as it were.
Okay, so you've used your genius-level intelligence and multi-billion dollar inheritance to train yourself and build awesome suits--now what? You need someone to fight, obviously.
Item #2: Worthy adversaries. What would Batman be without his rogues gallery? (A brooding eccentric.) As the io9 article points out, the recent trend is to make it someone personal: your mentor (Batman Begins), your best friend's dad (Spider-Man), your mentor (Spider-Man 2), your DA buddy (The Dark Knight), or...uh, your mentor (Iron Man). It seems more personal and more important.
Little-known fact: Lex Luthor taught Superman everything he knows.I disagree with the article's assertion that this trend puts the films on too small a scale. I agree that it's possible, but not that it's automatically a problem. There should be a balance. To me, it makes sense for early villains to be personal because the hero hasn't yet learned to deal with the whole saving-the-world aspect of his identity. But, once Iron Man's ego is running just as well as his suits, sure--put the world at risk. I would like to point out, however, that some superheroes (e.g. Batman) traditionally exist within the realm of their respective cities, and in such cases, the city can serve as a satisfactory replacement. When Gotham was being overrun with fear toxin in Batman Begins, it was only within the city, but it felt like the world was at stake.
Those cover plot elements, but production is just as important. If you're going to have a successful superhero, you're going to need someone who feels like that supehero. Item
#3: A fitting actor. Note that this isn't "a good-looking actor" or even necessarily "a good actor". Obviously you don't want Megan Fox up there as Wonder Woman. But Tobey Maguire felt like the nerdy teenager that Spider-Man has always been. Favreau has talked about his fight to cast Robert Downey Jr. because RDJ had the kind of past that would help him connect to the character in a way that a 20 year-old couldn't (it also helps that RDJ gives Stark-like
press conferences). Christian Bale is a generally scary guy--just like Batman! But he also showed Batman-levels of dedication when he gained 100 pounds to fill the Batsuit. Brandon Routh's failure as Superman was that he felt like a supermodel more than a superhero. Superman should look like the embodiment of justice, not just a pretty body. (There was also some unnecessary digital shrinkage.)
Super embarrassing.So, put this all together and what do you get? Well, it depends--on the director.
Item #4: A great director. Sometimes you find someone who gathers the entire crew to screen Blade Runner and tell them that's how they're making Batman. Or someone who will fight passionately for the right actors for the villains and heroes. Other times, you get the guy who directed Taxi. Remember Taxi--the one with Jimmy Fallon and Queen Latifah? (I don't either.) The director has to be right for the film. Brian Singer was great for the X-Men. Superman not so much. Sam Raimi was awesome for two of the Spider-Man films, but took a giant dump on the third. Ang Lee didn't do so well with the Hulk, but Louis Leterrier trimmed it down and made it better (Ed Norton helped).
So how can you tell if the director is right for the job? Well...you can't, really. Sometimes, you should be able to tell (Hint: if the guy directed Daredevil and Ghost Rider, keep him away from your film), otherwise you just have to hope. Maybe we should have expected that the man behind Memento would give us a darker Batman that we had ever imagined. But who expected the awesomeness of Iron Man from the guy who directed Elf? (Marvel Studios, apparently. And don't get me wrong--Elf's funny. But nothing like a superhero movie.)
Maybe this entire article is a really long way of stating the obvious: a good script, a good lead, and a good director will make a good movie. Clearly, those things help. But superhero movies are a little more involved. The script has to balance ridiculous action with serious character emotion (oops, Hulk). The actors aren't just playing characters, they're playing some of the best-known characters of all time. And the directors? They're working with hundreds of millions of dollars. Imagine if someone gave you that much and said, "Make something good." Feel the pressure yet?
A good superhero movie is hard to make. That's the bad news. The good news is that we've got two films with amazing potential slated for 2012: Joss Whedon directing RDJ and a bunch of others in
The Avengers, and Christopher Nolan's
third Batman film.
Dear 2012, please come sooner.
"Yes, Watson?"
