Remember the days when we had fun superhero flicks? Or movies that would see our hero save the day and get the girl just for the sake of heroism? Films like Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man, and the rest of his trilogy come to mind, with their colorful and vibrant images. Films with fun, and sometimes campy, dialogue that would have you rooting for the good guy when the going got tough. But what happened?
In 2005, director Christopher Nolan released Batman Begins, his first installment in his new reboot of the Batman franchise. The film brought grit and seriousness to proceedings, things that the previous, Joel Shummacher versions were lacking. It allowed the characters of Batman to step into the world of reality and allowed the audience to believe that these people could exist in a real world. It also, however caused a ripple effect throughout all of Hollywood. Suddenly, every character and story needed to become grittier and appeal to the fans who liked the new, reinvented Batman. We were given a new, darker Sherlock Holmes, by Guy Ritchie, a new macabre version of Snow White, in Snow White and the Huntsman, and we even felt the need to reboot Spider-Man, before we’d even moved on from the last ones, in order to make it ” more serious”. Now, it’s not that Nolan’s Batman films were in any way bad, in fact they were exactly what Batman needed, and they were absolutely amazing, but it’s ruined the fun of blockbusters because every director has tried to recapture its success.
Superheroes were no longer allowed to be super, they had to be grounded in reality and smoldered with grit. Peter Parker no longer could be a nerd, with zero coordination or luck, or have a scene where he awkwardly tries to figure out how to shoot a web. Instead he became more of a genius hipster, who road a skateboard, prevented the bullying of another kid, and scored Gwen Stacy without any help from his powers, recently in The Amazing Spider-Man. What was wrong with Tobey Maguire’s fun, and quite accurate portrayal of Spidey? Nothing, but do to the mass appeal of Batman Begins, and the even more popular The Dark Knight, Hollywood felt the need to reinvent our friendly neighborhood hero.
What is wrong with allowing superheroes to be super? Isn’t that the point of superheroes, to have a figure to look up to, when your going through rough times, where you can say “I want to be like _______ and be able to save the day, no matter what stands in my way”? Actually, one of the most widely successful comic-book movie adaptation, this years The Avengers, saw a return to the colorful world that other adaptations have been lacking. A world where you still feel the impending doom of the bad guy, but can still have a fun moment where the Hulk, comedically, punches Thor in the middle of the climactic battle or your hero breaks the tension of almost dying by suggesting Shwarma. The point is, that our superheroes shouldn’t always have to be as dark as our caped crusader. Sometimes, it’s nice to take a look into the wonderful world in which our favorite heroes reside, and just get lost in all it’s wonder. Yes, sometimes it is nice to take a step back into reality, as Nolan has showed us, but other times you might like to see movies for other reasons. To step into a world unlike our own, a world slightly more -super.
You Might Also Like...
- 5 Most Overlooked Performances In The Dark Knight Trilogy
- 10 Films That Gave The Game Away Too Early
- 5 Great Characters That Deserve Another Chance In A Superhero Movie
Want to write about the stuff you're passionate about and have your work read by an audience of over 10 million a month? Click here to become a contributor.
19 Comments
I don’t get your point. Batman is supposed to be dark, and gritty, and ‘colorful’. Sure not every superhero is like that and there are enough ‘colorful’ heroes out there, but Batman is not one of them, and Nolan finally found the way to project him brilliantly. If the rest of hollywood wants to copy him, and turn every superhero dark, then that’s their problem.
I don’t know what you are going on about.
I completely agree with you that this is exactly what Batman needs, but thats not the point. The point is that just becasue this has worked for Batman, doesn’t mean it should be applied to every other character.
Heroes are more serious and the stories have never been better. Wathcig “heroes” do the same blundering as they try –and fail– to get a date is stupid, and stale.
Why is a genre taking itself seriously and doing FAR better stories as a result a bad thing?
Jesus!
The problem is not what Nolan did with Batman. The problem is because of what he did worked all the fat cats of Hollywood want to try and ride his coattails by copying what he did even if it may not be what is best for the subject matter. Thankfully Avengers was done right, Amazing Spider Man was not.
Correct, what Nolan did with Batman was absolutely amazing. I also agree with you on the fact that The Amazing Spiderman just wasn’t done right. It seemed unnecessary and like they were trying to hard to emulate the feeling that Nolan used. However it didn’t work.
Exactly. I was just about to post the same thing. Blaming Chris Nolan for “ruining the fun” of superhero movies is like blaming Ridley Scott and “Gladiator” for the glut of sword-and-sandal action-melodramas that the rest of Hollywood started churning out on its big conveyor belt.
Such executive milking practices didn’t begin with Nolan and they’re not going to end even when Nolan hangs up his director’s hat. If just about any movie’s a success, at least one executive or studio is going to try to mimic that formula, and they usually don’t stop until after that formula flops.
Because executives are so lazy and greedy, they think that Nolan’s Batman movies were successful because they were “dark, gritty and edgy.” No, it’s because Nolan is talented enough (though not without flaws) and took the characters of the Batman world seriously.
Most movies nowadays are just cash grabs — nothing’s taken seriously on the filmmaking level, and the movies are viewed as mere products with a shiny surface, a bunch of merchandising tie-ins, and little else. It’s cynical moviemaking at its best (worst?).
It’s a mistake to try and copy Nolan’s Batman, I wholeheartedly agree. But Nolan was right nevertheless: Batman is not “super” (he’s one of the few superhero who doesn’t have an actual superpower, unless you count being stinking rich and possessing brilliant deductive skills superpowers). He is a broken man living with serious trauma. It’s not supposed to be light.
Also, care to explain why you consider Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes “darker”? Certainly not compared to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s novels and short stories.
By darker, I meant in comparison to previous film and television adaptations, not the source novels.
yeah…Aronofsky was attached to Batman: Year One…was in development hell. He was also attached to The Wolverine and that wen’t no where either. Putting [insert favorite director here] as a ‘wouldn’t that be great’ is very wishful thinking. Nolan actually made a film…actually he made 3 films- two were very good and one was INCREDIBLE. Aronofsky is a indy art-house film maker that has pretty much failed at making studio films while Nolan has elevated a genre.
But then again maybe Aronofsky could of made The Dark Knight trilogy as good as The Fountain.
Augh, the thing I hate the most in journalism (after sensationalism): historical revisionism.
1. The Amazing Spider-Man is more faithful to the comics than Sam Raimi’s. This alone undermines your entire argument as it exposes that you know nothing about comic books.
2. “What was wrong with Tobey Maguire’s fun, and quite accurate portrayal of Spidey?”
Revisionism at its worst. There were no fun scenes in Spider-Man (2002). Mr. Maguire just discovered his powers, and for some reason…decided to become a vigilante.
In The Amazing Spider-Man, however, there were TONS of fun scenes. Such as the basketball scene. Or the football toss scene. Or the skateboard stunts scene.
3. “The Avengers, saw a return to the colorful world that other adaptations have been lacking”
Seriously dude? Have you forgotten Iron Man, Hulk, Iron Man 2, Captain America and Thor? All of which were “colorful”? That’s five “fun” superhero movies right there. You keep saying that superhero movies are no longer fun, but you don’t name any specific ones other than TASM, which I disproved.
Yes, but the article is not just about superhero movies. Just because I mention them doesn’t make them the only important point. I said that it has effected Hollywood and it’s other genres as well. And you talk about making TASM more accurate. I don’t remember Pete ever riding a skateboard, or Harry Osbourne suddenly not in Peter’s life.
@ vorjay
Aronofsky was just a suggestion. I’d just prefer a filmmaker who wasn’t an intellectual fraud like Nolan. And Nolan hasn’t made any film nearly as good as the Fountain.
I 100% agree with the article though I personally think that Nolan’s bat-trilogy is one of the best movie making efforts in years, on the level of Star Wars, Indiana Jones and The Lord of the Rings.
I also was not a fan of the new Spider-Man, it was blatantly obvious that they were trying to ride the success of The Dark Knight and that unfortunatley interfered with my enjoyment of the film. What was even more disappointing to me was the fact that they did a fantastic job with the character of Spider-man(my main complaint of the Raimi trilogy is that it was not quite spidey), it was a shame they completely got the film wrong tonally.
Thankfully, The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises are both smash hits and hopefully the executives will realize that there is room for both types of films.
Time for a newsflash. Formulas that worked out well over the source of cinematic history have always been copied over and over. Nolan attacked the Batman mythos from a different angle (gasp, someone actually tried to be creative in Hollywood!) and with its success came the copycats. Strange because Cameron brought us the first truly horrifying sci-fi action many years ago in Aliens and how many copycat films have we had? Did Cameron ruined sci-fi?
Wasn’t, technically, Cameron’s formula used in Aliens, the horror sci-fi thing, actually created by Ridley Scott in Alien?
Batman should be serious and not as much “fun” as other comic book characters. I of course enjoyed and even downright loved the three Nolan Batman films and thought they were fun. Superman can’t really be dark, gritty and real, they can deal with serious themes but the character can’t be done “dark” imo.
I dont think The Amazing Spider Man, The Avengers, The Green Lantern, Captain America, Thor, or Snow White and the Huntsman can be called ” Gritty,” or ” Realistic.”
Nolan’s Batman didn’t take the super out of superheroes, all of those movies are way beyond super, he just made directors actually care about presenting a good environment and a film that is more than just a person with superpowers.
Besides, if you want a broader look, i think The Bourne Trilogy introduced the ” Gritty,” looks before Batman did.
Don’t blame Nolan. He never asked anybody to copy him. He just did what he thought was right & he was right. And everybody thinks that this ‘realistic’ & ‘gritty’ thing is the one correct formula for all movies & they just wanted to do like what Nolan did.
I agree that it’s not Nolan’s fault everyone is emulating his style. I think the problem is that because this style worked for Nolan, and those Batman movies broke box office records, everyone seems to think that’s the way to go. (Hence CW’s Arrow.)
Not all superhero movies or TV shows translate well in that style. Imagine if someone did a live action Mighty Mouse movie, and made it in the same tone as “The dark Knight.”