The Problem with Dark Superhero Films.

Ever since it was announced, there has been much speculation on whether Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice would be any good. Would director Zack Snyder be able to do better than the overly long, stupidly grim, terribly paced Man of Steel?

Nope

Much like it's title, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice appears to be overly long, awkward, and dumb. I feel like this is a troubling sign for the DC Cinematic Universe. All the films seem to be trying to go as dark and serious as possible, which causes them to forget the most important aspect of a superhero film; it's supposed to be fun. 

That's the biggest problem with Zack Snyder's films. They're not fun. Now that doesn't mean you can't be serious and dark, we all know what happens when a movie goes too far in the other direction...

Garbage

But look at the Nolan Batman trilogy. It was able to be a dark and serious superhero film but it allowed itself to have fun while doing it. It's hard to take a world where there are a bunch of people running around in spandex, or in this case a man dressed like a bat, too seriously. That's partially why I think the Marvel Cinematic Universe has been much more successful. They are able to tackle serious topics and have very emotional moments and still have a lot of fun. 

Take a look at the first Avengers film. Throughout a massive battle on which the survival of Earth hangs in the balance, the heroes are still able to smartly quip at each other or even crack a joke. Even Captain America: The Winter Soldier which is perhaps the most serious of the MCU films still finds time to for fun and bits of humor. These bits of humor don't take away from the film, in fact they often help it out. If you have constant dismal darkness (cough cough Man of Steel cough cough) The audience will get so bogged down by the sullen teenager that is your movie that they won't be able to enjoy it. 

There are however instances where trying to be both dark and fun backfire. 

Spider-Man Vs. Batman

     As the semester is running to an end I am running out of things to talk about so now I'm posting about who is a better superhero, Spider-Man or Batman.
     Spider-Man is a teenage high school student named Peter Parker that receives his powers after being bitten by a radioactive spider. He's lived with his aunt and uncle since a young age ever since his parents died. Peter's powers give him the ability to cling to walls, and have the proportionate strength and speed of a spider. Along with that he gets a "Spider Sense" which allows him to detect danger and avoid it making it nearly impossible to hit him. Peter is also naturally very intelligent which is how he invented "Web Shooters" that allow him to swing from buildings and trap foes.
     Batman is Bruce Wayne the worlds best detective and also a billionaire. The origin story of Batman changes very often, but one thing usually agreed upon is that a young age little Bruce saw both of his patents murdered which makes him want to put an end to crime in Gotham city. The most interesting thing about Bruce is that he doesn't actually have super powers. He is a normal person that is a master of stealth, extremely intelligent. He can also afford to create a seemingly endless supply of cool gadgets.
     But who would win in a fight? This is an argument that I have gotten into on countless occasions with a surprising number of people. Spider-Man has always been my favorite superhero ever since I was a young lad so obviously I think he would beat Batman. However most people I come across do not agree with me. I attribute that to the movie portrayals of the two heroes. Batman's recent movies have been excellently done and are extremely popular, whereas pretty much every Spider-Man movie hasn't been too great.
      Thanks to the internet questions like "Which fictional character would win in a fight" can be easily answered by people with more than me. Fortunately there is a youtube channel called ScrewAttack that does just that. The team takes the two characters makes stats for them and decides a winner. Afterwards they create an animation to show the outcome.

 

Hero or Villain?

The Batman movie franchise has had a long tenure and been interpreted by many actors, directors and writers. While the characters and stories follow the general plot lines of original DC comics, their portrayals have varied from each iteration to the next. The Christopher Nolan era of Batman could be argued as one of the most masterfully depicted stories of Bruce Wayne.

Over the span of 3 films he incorporates numerous villains and delves more deeply into the darker side of Bruce Wayne's psyche. The character development seen in the films strikes me as odd, however. The villains of this trilogy seem to be more dynamic characters.While watching, I find myself enjoying the "bad guys" more often than the hero. They have more personality and pizzazz which in turn causes me to almost root for them. One of my favorite of the villains is The Joker, portrayed by Heath Ledger. Yes, he's maniacal. Yes, he's murderous. But most of all he's exciting, unpredictable and so irresistibly captivating to watch. There are so many wrinkles that begin to unfold from the moment the movie begins and for the span of the film he steals the show.
 

Our hero however seems to take the back seat to these master villains. Bruce Wayne as portrayed by Christian Bale is more and more as the trilogy progresses a self-righteous, self-loathing billionaire with a perceived obligation to his city. He seems to be the only character that tries to escape their true self. He does this by becoming Batman. At first a noble pursuit, Batman soon becomes an escape for Bruce. He uses it to avoid the constant pressure of being a celebrity, the pain of lost loved ones and a possible means to a final end, his death. Throughout the series this character is pretty static, filled mostly with anger and grief with occasional hopeful moments which are usually snuffed out. While he's not as exciting to watch as say The Joker or Bane, his role is the backbone on which the story is built. His unwavering and steadfast behavior is what allows him to survive again and again no matter what he faces. While he may not be as likable, he is still the hero.


Next time you find yourself watching The Dark Knight trilogy, ask yourself, "Who's better?" The Hero? Or the Villain?

Commissioner James Gordon series on Fox?

Between the three most recent Batman movies with Christian Bale and now this new Batman movie with Ben Affleck, there's been a lot of talk about Batman and it's clearly become a popular topic. But recently I came across an article talking about a new TV series about Commissioner James Gordon called Gotham. The series will be about James Gordon in the early days before he met Batman. It's very much playing with the Smallville idea they did with Superman but just applying it to Batman.... except Commissioner Gordon, not Batman. Fox finally landed the show from Warner Brothers for next fall after a bidding war and the DC vs Marvel battle continues. Bruno Heller, creator of the Mentalist, was also picked up as the dominant writer for the show, telling the origins of Gotham City and how it got to where it is. They are talks of playing around with a lot of old villains from the comic books and I can only imagine how they will play with Wayne Industries.

I think this is an incredible idea. In fact I think it's a better idea than the new Batman movie they're making. After the trilogy of amazing Batman movies Christopher Nolan did, I think it's still too soon to make anything that will even compete with those. The James Gordon spin off is a great way to leave that legacy untouched but also develop it more. James Gordon was a major player in the trilogy but not big enough where he could go untouched. It's also a nice bit of fresh air in the midst of the dozens of cookie cut out detective shows.  It combines the whole super villain aspect which is just so interesting to me. Plus there is such a huge amount of villains and characters to pull from all of the different Batman and DC universes so this show in my mind has a lot of potential. Next Fall with fox gives me hope for good TV again.

Marvel vs DC Comics

     One of the most popular super hero movies as of the last 5 years has been Iron Man.  Since Disney Corp. bought Marvel in 2009, the superhero movies have been coming out of the box office like crazy. DC Comics has been trying to compete with The Dark Knight Series and now Superman: Man of Steel.  But the truth of the matter is that Marvel is several movies ahead of DC and has been generating a lot of revenue.  Because of this DC Comics plans on using Christopher Nolan as their weapon in the competition for superhero movies.

     This clash of studios is great for the industry and for the comics themselves.  A lot of merchandise and advertisements has been and will continue to pour into the market.  The two big blockbuster movies from each of these studios for the summer is Iron Man 3 and Superman: Man of Steel.  I have high expectations for both movies and I look forward to seeing them.  If all goes according to plan Christopher Nolan will continue to produce/ direct the DC films including the Justice League.  It is exciting to see what these companies have in store for an audience who is in superhero mode.

Nolan In The Deep

As I lie in my bedroom, my eyes slowly, slowly closing, checking Facebook right before I pass out into my first full night of sleep in God knows how long... I SEE THIS:

Christopher Nolan Taking Over Justice League, Bringing Bale Back As Batman

And then I explode and die at the same time.

The idea of Christopher Nolan running the entire DC Universe is an exciting one for me, considering that Joss Whedon (another critically acclaimed writer/director) has more or less taken charge of the Marvel Universe, and these two opposing viewpoints bring a very interesting contrast in tone to the table.

The movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe have very much adopted the tone of comic books, with larger-than-life characters, bright colors and snappy repartee. Conversely, Nolan's Batman universe is filled with steely grays and muted blues, telling the story of the Caped Crusader in a gritty, down-to-earth way. He has furthered this vision by producing DC's new Superman movie, Man of Steel, with one of the main questions during production being "how would the world react if Superman existed?"

Over the course of the past year, there have been abundant rumors regarding a possible DC Justice League movie to combat Marvel's immense success with the Avengers, which has scared me as a massive fan of the direction of Christopher Nolan and Zak Snyder's DC superhero movies. But more importantly, I think that DC would lose their biggest weapon: their unique voice and tone. The Dark Knight trilogy was an entirely different entity than the Marvel movies, and as Green Lantern demonstrated, DC can't beat Marvel at their own game.

If the DC universe (including the Justice League) can be united under Christopher Nolan's vision, they have a chance of continuing to combat Marvel's movie dominance. Otherwise, they will be poorly imitating, in typical Hollywood fashion, and they will lose.

Also, as a continuity junkie, the prospect of Christian Bale returning as Batman in the Justice League, alongside Henry Cavill as Superman, makes me happy all over.

Tip of the Arrow

As a huge DC Comics fan, I am surprised that it took me so long to at least give the CW's Arrow a shot, pardon the pun. Perhaps I was worried about being disappointed. Either way, I finally gave the show a watch and my thoughts are conflicted.



Bullseye
Let me get this out of the way first: the action sequences in the first episode were absolutely top notch. Featuring some incredible camera angles (such as what looked like a shoulder mounted GoPro while parkour-ing) and some unrelentingly fast-paced choreography and stunts, these sequences by far supplied the flashiness that a show needs in its pilot.

I don't know if this will remain this away over the course of the rest of the season or if it is only because they needed said flashiness in their pilot, but the production value was very high. From a massive rave party in the city's event center to a chase sequence spanning multiple industrial locations, every scene is something visually fresh and new.

One particular flashback scene literally elicited a "WOAH!" reaction from me, and for the sake of avoiding spoilers, I will not say what happens. If they have a scene like that every episode, this show will have the dark edge it needs to avoid straying into the teeny bopper drama genre like Smallville did.

Missed the mark
Some of the visual effects did not sell, especially on the island. Some very 2006-ish matte painting, ala Lost, and some obviously composited explosion effects unfortunately lowered the bar and detracted from our hero's origin story.

Just like the visual effects, some of the actors did not sell as well as I'm sure the producers would have hoped. Our protagonist, Oliver's sister, whose name escapes me, provides a very two-dimensional conflict within the episode. Similarly, the character Laurel's plot line fell flat, leaving me to wonder whether these actresses were chosen simply because of their undeniable good looks.

Arrow is a drama on the CW and it shows in the writing. Featuring some glaringly obvious lines that can only be explained by the network asking the writers to dumb the script down for the lowest common denominator, this show lacks the intellectual edge found in Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones (I understand that it is airing on a broadcast network. For example, in one scene, Laurel tells Oliver that she wish he would have died in the boat accident five years ago. Two scenes later, when she apologizes, she delivers the awkwardly stilted line of "I'm sorry about what I said... that you should have died in that boat accident five years ago". Yuck.

Fortunately, the pros by far outweigh the cons, and the interesting flashback-based means of storytelling and adrenaline-pumping action sequences will keep me returning for the next few episodes, at least until I get a better grasp on the direction in which Arrow is heading.

Arrow pilot

On October 10, 2012, the world premiere of the new show Arrow was aired on the CW.  Arrow is a new tv show about a superhero, and is based off of the fictional character "Green Arrow" from DC Comics.

There has only been one episode released so far, but I feel like I already know the storyline for the rest of the season, or maybe even seasons.  The main character, Oliver Queen, played by Stephen Arnell, is a found billionaire playboy.  He is found on a deserted island in the middle of the ocean after his yacht was shipwrecked.  He returns home and you find out he has developed almost superhuman capabilities on the island.  I have never read the comic, so whether there is more to the story (which there probably is) I am unaware of it at this point.  He plans to use these abilities to become a Bruce Wayne/Batman-esk vigilante.  He sets up his "bat cave" or headquarters in an abandoned warehouse and proceeds to start his take-down of what seems to be a corrupt corporate world in his city.

The story also has many sub-plots as well.  There is the typical romance with the woman who cant get to close because he is dangerous and has broke her heart and all that.  There are also obvious family issues that he must resolve and survive.

Overall I thought it was pretty good.  Executive producers and developers are Greg Berlanti, Marc Guggenheim, and Andrew Kreisberg.  I would recommend you watch the pilot because it would help explain pretty much everything even though you could probably grasp it if you decided to jump in.  It aires Wednesday nights on the CW.