Now, before I start with my article-essay-rant, I must admit a few things. I love Marvel. Not just the comics, I love the movies. I grew up with a father who was a fan of the classic franchises like Ghostbusters, Back to the Future, Indiana Jones and most of all, Star Wars. I know it's easy to sequel shame, but I love the fact that they explored worldbuilding over various stories. The MCU scratched that itch for me, for a long, long time. It still does, just not to the same degree. I don't think it's as dead as folks say. Thunderbolts was fun, Spiderman broke a trailer record a month ago, and Doomsday will make a boatload of money. But it's not as culturally dominant as it used to be. Now, when I talk to my friends, all folks in their 20's, and I ask what they are excited for, I don't hear any MCU projects, I don't even really hear the massively popular Dune Movies. I have been hearing about Chris Nolan's new film, The Odyssey, a likely 3-hour mythological epic based on the book by Homer.
I'm not surprised by my fellow “Cinefile” friends, but I am confused to all ends why people who watch maybe 10 movies a year and would normally say something with a more prevalent cultural basis are choosing that. I am even more confused how not a soul is talking about the second largest franchise of all time releasing a film in less than a month, so much so, I forgot about it until now. Why has there been such a change from even 5 years ago?
I think, as a viewer and a fan, that these franchises being so massively discussed has led to them being afraid to take significant risks. They have too much spotlight to mess up. I don't think the MCU would take the risk of hiring an actor with a notable negative history, such as what they did with RDJ in 2008, and what's sad is that they took risks that created the foundations of what we used to love about the MCU. Now I'm not saying they should go and hire a bunch of controversial actors or anything, but the "Product" has become undeniably stale.
On the other hand, looking at what films defined last year culturally and in the common discussion, they all changed the status quo:
Sinners - An R-rated Vampire Action/Horror film set in the Jim Crow Era South. A film that took risks at every turn, risks I doubt major studios would take.
Superman - The Outlier, but in a weird way, a reversion. Ironically, going back to what made Superman work with Hopecore, it was going against what was popular over the last 10 years in Bummer Superman. Gunn also made a genuinely weird, sincere, unfashionable film, and it worked.
Marty Supreme - A protagonist who is not the hero in the slightest. An indie studio with one of its biggest films ever. Anxiety coming out of the pores.
One Battle After Another - A nearly 3-hour PTA film with intense action, where it does not pull its punches with it's charaterizations.
What stands out to me about these films is that, unlike the control seen in major franchise films, the directors have a level of freedom not seen in a movie like Avengers: Endgame. Aside from Superman, they are all loosely based on novels or original stories. Even with Gunn and Superman, he has the level of freedom I argue no comic book movie director has had since maybe Nolan with the Dark Knight trilogy. What this shows to me is that people want to watch and talk about original stories again. They miss being pulled into a world they haven't seen a million YouTube videos about. I was born in 2004, but this is what I imagine it was like going from the blockbusters of the 80's - the same ones I grew up watching - to the new Independent movement of the 90's and the rise of the filmmakers that caused a deeper love of film for me.
So where am I going with this? I don't know, maybe I'm pointing out something well known. Maybe it's superhero fatigue, maybe the studio system is broken. Or maybe, and dare I say hopefully, what people want is changing. I gave Nolan some flowers earlier, and he has the ability to take risks because he's him. But looking forward, not at what the audience wants for the next 5-10 years but how film will change, I can name maybe 4 feature-making Gen Z filmmakers (Shoutout Kane Parsons), but my theory is that the 2020's and 2030s filmmakers will resemble the 1990's filmmakers quite a bit. They will have seen firsthand an oversaturation of movies made for the sole reason of money. They will have also seen a tremendous rise in the celebration of independent filmmaking. They will have seen movies that are strange, passionate and most of all not just made for money, be praised on Letterboxd. Maybe they'll even be making a run and gun, maybe even writing a Peliplat article to give their art team more budget.
Thanks for my rant,
Max
Share your thoughts!
Be the first to start the conversation.