SuperHero overkill

googled eyes

I love ( for the most part) comic's, movies, tv shows etc. but looking at this image of Marvel and DC planned movies for the next 5 years I think the genre will burn out before 2020.





Marvel/Disney are planning at least 3 movies a year from next year on.DC have at least 2 a year. I think obviously they are striking while the iron is hot (fair play to them). Looking at the above images part of me thinks its going to be great but they could end up turning people off the genre by saturating the market.

Agent Coulson

Just like Rom Coms it will even out over time and find its place in the marketplace.

Right now it is the blank check for the film companies to make money.

googled eyes

Sure that's Hollywood I guess. Very little originality anymore.

Looper007

Until the audience tires of them the studios will throw the money into them. For me a vast majority of them have ranged from meh to Excellent (captain America Winter Solider and Guardians of the Galaxy been two of my favourite films of the last few years) but I do think its a tad bit overkill right now and I do see a time some of them not making the big money. My worry is the artistic side of things are been held back by producers who don't want to think outside of the box ( the fact Edgar Wright was pushed off Antman and Josh Weadon been told to go by the numbers for Avengers Age of Ultron)

johnny_ultimate

Part of me is inclined to go with the old wisdom of 'take them or leave them'. It's not like there's a shortage of viable alternatives out there, and like everything we're all free to ignore or watch them as we see fit. All that remains true.

Yet... As the genre reaches hyper saturation I do need think there are some more concerns worth raising. With seven or so films a year planned for next year and the year after, you're looking at prime multiplex real estate being dominated by superhero movies for maybe a third to a half of the year. That does highlight that there's inevitably less variety out there even just in blockbuster terms, and worst case scenario might be pushing out smaller films that might have gotten a bump in visibility if the superhero films weren't so prevalent.

It also represents a sort of extreme commodification of cinema on a scale we haven't seen before. Make no mistake, studios have been milking genres and franchises for a long time, so the commercialisation of movies is definitely nothing new. And one could argue something like Harry Potter, James Bond or Star Wars are the predecessors in terms of 'uber franchises'. But both Marvel and DC are pushing branding and franchising in directions they've never been pushed before, on a frankly dizzying scale, and fair to say sometimes at the cost of the individual films themselves. The examples of directors and writers being restricted in what they can and can't do are worrying, and hopefully there'll be more of these films willing to do their own thing rather than conform to the rules and styles of the two 'extended universes'. The Dark Knight films (and indeed Burton's ones), love 'em or hate 'em, were unmistakably the works of a singular director with a unique vision of the material. More films like that will IMO be incredibly important to avoid creative rot.

It'll be fascinating to see how audiences react to all these films coming out. One flop would have significant repercussions. And as the series become more convoluted, it'll be curious to observe whether they lose more casual viewers along the way. Certainly as more and more less iconic and familiar heroes are introduced, it's very possible that they'll risk preaching to the converted at the cost of less accessibility.

pixelburp

On principal I don't dislike the superhero films themselves - god knows if as a younger fella if I was told the 2010s would be flooded with competent, popular superhero films I'd have been so happy - my problem is how teeth-grindingly formulaic they've become. Like it's down to a fine art at this stage and the Marvel films in particular are just running off a checklist, never deviating from a narrative that's quickly becoming as hackneyed as the monomyth itself. Even the trailers all look the same.

The third-act orgy of destruction has become a particularly deadening experience to me; arguably the worst offender was Captain America 2. While I didn't love it as much as others, it still managed to strike an interesting balance between the real-world and the superhero one, while channeling old-school, Cold War espionage films. The inclusion of Robert Redford was especially inspired. But then everything had to explode and the requisite city-levelling destruction had to kick in because it's a SUPERHERO MOVIE. And then of course there was Man of Steel... dear god. Just for once, I wish the resolution of a Marvel flick was an emotional one, a proper rounding off of a character arc. Maybe just a one on one between hero and villain.

ceegee

Cant see interest waining too much in the next few years.

Marvel may have a couple of films which dont do megamoney at the box office but GOTG and avengers will be surefire moneyspinners. Hard to know how some of the new franchises will do, but I wouldnt worry too much about people not knowing the characters, bar hulk and cap america, the avengers and Gotg characters were pretty much unknown to most audiences. They also have the tv shows to lead in to the likes of Inhumans to boost awareness.

DC will need to monumentally screw up to not draw money with their films. A film universe uniting batman, superman, wonderwoman, flash, will make massive money if done anyway right.

Thargor

pixelburp wrote: »

On principal I don't dislike the superhero films themselves - god knows if as a younger fella if I was told the 2010s would be flooded with competent, popular superhero films I'd have been so happy - my problem is how teeth-grindingly formulaic they've become. Like it's down to a fine art at this stage and the Marvel films in particular are just running off a checklist, never deviating from a narrative that's quickly becoming as hackneyed as the monomyth itself. Even the trailers all look the same.

The third-act orgy of destruction has become a particularly deadening experience to me; arguably the worst offender was Captain America 2. While I didn't love it as much as others, it still managed to strike an interesting balance between the real-world and the superhero one, while channeling old-school, Cold War espionage films. The inclusion of Robert Redford was especially inspired. But then everything had to explode and the requisite city-levelling destruction had to kick in because it's a SUPERHERO MOVIE. And then of course there was Man of Steel... dear god. Just for once, I wish the resolution of a Marvel flick was an emotional one, a proper rounding off of a character arc. Maybe just a one on one between hero and villain.

Completely agree, just said Im not giving them any more money in the Ultron thread, its gone beyond boring now.

Tefral

Genius move out of Marvel and DC though. They have brought the comics and the merchandise back to the five and six year olds.

Only "nerds" read comic books years ago. Now everyone knows everything about them.

Adamantium

When this is all over in 2100, I mean 2040, I see The Dark Knight and Watchmen being part of a small group of about about maybe 4 or 5, as the Terminator 1/2, Die Hard, Aliens of their time and worthy of dissection critically.


The Marvel factory is likely to seen in the same way the 80's macho-man testosterone of the 80's transplanted to the 2010's, but without any of the damn fun and bloodshed, there's something to said for cheese and sincerity if done right

Edge of Tomorrow is the action film that feels so out of place in the current climate, and was a solid gold classic, it also based on a little known book (so technically not comic), the middle ranged blockbuster is almost dead compared to previous decades. Looper is another example. Do we count Scott Pilgrim as a comic adaptation, didn't do well at all.

Action movies stopped being R and young adult novels are adaptable trilogies, and their influences are bleeding into franchises like Terminator. Tell me Paramount is not going after Hunger Games money with Emilia Clarke in Terminator and I'll call you liar. :pac:

AssasSins Creed's a film could be incredible giving the cast and crew, and Ubisoft have set up their own studio (like Marvel), and that is likely what draw money from Marvel and DC. "GOOD" Videogame adaptations are going cause a ruckus for them.

cronin_j

cronin_j wrote: »

Genius move out of Marvel and DC though. They have brought the comics and the merchandise back to the five and six year olds.

Only "nerds" read comic books years ago. Now everyone knows everything about them.

The problem is that comic sales aren't actually rising based on the backs of the films. One of the largest problems which has been highlighted by many writers is that a lot of 13 year olds are now faced with the decision between paying to see the film or buying the comic and most are opting for the former.

TheDoc

When the **** was Gambit announced?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Thargor

Whats the point in a Gambit film in this PG Marvel fluff? They're never going to show anyone being killed so is it just going to be a guy setting off explosions that don't do anything except knock enemies over?

Mickeroo

Thargor wrote: »

Whats the point in a Gambit film in this PG Marvel fluff? They're never going to show anyone being killed so is it just going to be a guy setting off explosions that don't do anything except knock enemies over?

Gambit is one of the X-Men so will be made by Fox I'd imagine.

Thargor

Oh yeah what was I thinking, and I suppose he does have an interesting enough story outside of the Louisiana cliche in the cartoon.

OU812

I'm suffering from Superhero Fatigue already. Didn't enjoy the new avengers movie at all because I found myself not caring for any of the characters.

What I would love to see is a standalone Harley Quinn / Joker movie which would be an origin movie for her & a warped love story of sorts. They've got a great backstory.

tunguska

Most of them leave me feeling a bit unsatisfied(Captain America The winter soldier being the exception) but I dont mind them so much, I mean at the end of the day its my decision to pay money to watch them so I cant moan so much. Having said that, I really would like it if someone would make a superhero movie that wasnt the same old same old. The same plot is redone over and over but surely someone can write something that works on a smaller scale and is a bit more intelligent.

Joeface

Wow.............by the time they get to end of that list they will have descended to Power Rangers kids tv or Joel Schumacher stuff (actually very close to it at the moment) ......and then They will probably talk Terence Malick into rebooting Batman and have him rub his chin for 3hours while pondering the Jokers make up.

If it was just stand alone movies it might work , but the over tie in of Marvel "see how its all connected", some of the X-Men stuff is kinda awful now . The more content they release the more damage they are actually doing to the quality stuff they started with.

Antar Bolaeisk

Joeface wrote: »

Wow.............by the time they get to end of that list they will have descended to Power Rangers kids tv or Joel Schumacher stuff (actually very close to it at the moment) ......and then They will probably talk Terence Malick into rebooting Batman and have him rub his chin for 3hours while pondering the Jokers make up.

Power Rangers is out next year.

Enjoy it while it lasts, in forty years time when all they're making is my little pony films you'll be wishing for the heyday of superhero films

Kinda hoping the next cinematic phase of cinema will be proper Sci-Fi.

Joeface

i should probably removed the power rangers reference considering I really like the POWER/RANGERS UNAUTHORIZED ...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vw5vcUPyL90 more of this please

brianregan09

at the end of the day, Yes they are tent pole franchises , But nobody is forced to watch them

And might i add I hope they continue for quite some time

Foxtrol

I’d prefer that Marvel Studios keep giving us at minimum solid (with some being great) movies and tv shows which are based in a single universe, working in harmony, than the piecemeal fashion of DC or re-boot after re-boot that has been Sony and Fox products.

I disagree that Marvel aren’t taking any risks, they are understandably not doing it with their key characters. If a solid, yet safe, Avengers movie allows more risky, though still in the same universe, options such as GotG and Daredevil then I’m more than happy.

Agent Coulson

Marvels issues are actors getting to old for the roles if the let each phase run to long.

RDJ will have aged 11 years by the end of phase 3 when in reality the 3 phases are probably set over a couple of years timeline.

Turtyturd

The age thing is something I have wondered about in another thread. Marvel obviously want the character to keep going as long as they are making money but Downey Jr won't be able to keep going, so will they just gradually swap new actors into the roles or is there a plan to wrap up the current continuity/universe and reboot it with an entirely new cast.

Looking at the pic in the there is a real lack of depth in characters and not many who I would expect to hold their own movie, especially on the DC front, although I expected the downturn to begin with GOTG so what do I know.

Gambit would be my favourite comic character aside from Spider-Man so am looking forward to that, and it could be a good chance to do a non typical comic film by focusing on the thief aspect or the theives/assassins guilds. If they wanted to do some Marvelesque connected universe stuff they could even have Sinister and The Marauders in there, but it will most likely follow the usual formula.

colosus1908

New studios will surely rise, maybe from video games since e.tc. For example a trilogy on god of war will kill anything mavel or dc have in stock, if it is done verg well of course.

.ak

I thought there was a new spiderman coming out before then, one that sony would allow enter the avengers franchise?

Also has the Venom movie been canned?

brianregan09

Gambit is one that has flop written all over it , Gambit has never even been a lead character in the X- Men his one big story had to with Apocalypse i think and he's not even in that movie

Skerries

OU812 wrote: »

What I would love to see is a standalone Harley Quinn / Joker movie which would be an origin movie for her & a warped love story of sorts. They've got a great backstory.

an R rated movie along the lines of Natural Born Killers would be good

brianregan09

I'd be 1st in line for that

Josey Wales

So are Marvel really planning both Gambit and Doctor Strange for October 2016. That will surely change.

Agent Coulson

Josey Wales wrote: »

So are Marvel really planning both Gambit and Doctor Strange for October 2016. That will surely change.

Gambit is being made by Fox.

Josey Wales

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Gambit is being made by Fox.

Oh. Suddenly I have a lot less faith in this movie.

Jon Stark

Fox have done well with their last 3 in the genre (the wolverine, first class and DofP).

There's no reason why they can't make Gambit (and Deadpool) work.

On topic though the answer is yes, I do think an over saturation is happening. You could argue that Marvel have earned the right to milk the genre for everything it's worth but I do think this never ending phase strategy is going to wear thin at some point.

As for DC and WB, I can't help but shake the idea that they are entering the rat race at the tail end of the marathon. Batman v Superman is a big deal in a number of ways but its biggest challenge is going to be establishing a universe in its own right. That isn't going to feel like more of the same.

This is vital as while BvS might be a commercial success regardless, a flat introduction is going to have a dire effect on the likes of Aquaman, Wonder Woman and Flash.

Wedwood

One thing I find with these movies is that CGI undoes the 'super' in these movies. They all end up just looking the same, the latest trend being big fights that destroy cities.

Another problem the CGI brings is the ridiculous 'exaggerated physics', which now replicate the images seen in the comic books. You can understand the comics using 'super-physics' to convey a sense of action, but it actually looks dopey when used in moving images, not to mention ignoring G Forces that would make their eyeballs pop out of their head. Case in point, the relatively ordinary Captain America jumping out of an airplane into the ocean thousand of meters below.

There's very little 'super' in these movies anymore. Every X Men movie is essentially the same movie over and over.

Compare these movies to say Superman the Movie or Batman (1989) and there's very little that's memorable about the new movies.

The sooner the superhero fad is over the better I'm afraid.

Foxtrol

Wedwood wrote: »

One thing I find with these movies is that CGI undoes the 'super' in these movies. They all end up just looking the same, the latest trend being big fights that destroy cities.

Another problem the CGI brings is the ridiculous 'exaggerated physics', which now replicate the images seen in the comic books. You can understand the comics using 'super-physics' to convey a sense of action, but it actually looks dopey when used in moving images, not to mention ignoring G Forces that would make their eyeballs pop out of their head. Case in point, the relatively ordinary Captain America jumping out of an airplane into the ocean thousand of meters below.

There's very little 'super' in these movies anymore. Every X Men movie is essentially the same movie over and over.

Compare these movies to say Superman the Movie or Batman (1989) and there's very little that's memorable about the new movies.

The sooner the superhero fad is over the better I'm afraid.

I wouldn’t hold my breath if I was you. If you want to ignore box office success just look at boards, superhero threads are probably the busiest threads in the film forum (with their counterparts are pretty popular on the television forum).

Eventually superhero movies will slow down their production but they’re their own genre at this stage so they won’t be stopping completely.

brianregan09

I was waiting for someone to pile in with the reality angle and here it is in the guise of physics, for christ sake they like the comics because there supposed to be like the comics there an escape from reality

Wedwood

brianregan09 wrote: »

I was waiting for someone to pile in with the reality angle and here it is in the guise of physics, for christ sake they like the comics because there supposed to be like the comics there an escape from reality

Each to their own I suppose, it'll be interesting to see if the current crop of superhero movies have the longevity of the likes of the Christopher Reeve/ Michael Keaton movies.

The likes of The Dark Knight probably will, but I suspect most of the rest will make their money and then drop out of sight/memory.

Bowlardo

Adamantium wrote: »

When this is all over in 2100, I mean 2040, I see The Dark Knight and Watchmen being part of a small group of about about maybe 4 or 5, as the Terminator 1/2, Die Hard, Aliens of their time and worthy of dissection critically.
.

I would throw in blade...the first one. I think the main thing that makes a good superhero film is a really bad mother****er of a bad guy or at least one with a bit of charisma
Loki is the only semi decent bad guy out of the marvel films. most of them are instantly forgettable.
X-men has magneto . batman has the joker both ledger and jack.

Adamantium

Bowlardo wrote: »

I would throw in blade...the first one. I think the main thing that makes a good superhero film is a really bad mother****er of a bad guy or at least one with a bit of charisma
Loki is the only semi decent bad guy out of the marvel films. most of them are instantly forgettable.
X-men has magneto . batman has the joker both ledger and jack.

The rumour that existed around The Dark Knight Rises in its very early planning stages when TDK was in post production in early 2008, they were already planning were to go next) (i.e. if Heath Ledger hadn't died),

When Bane releases the Blackgate prisoners (as we see), the Joker would have been among them, who would have immediately started his chaos experiments in Gotham again, albeit 20 times worse than before because of the state of the city. He himself would have also clashed with Bane in a case of unexpected blowback. In the end, Batman would then have had to takedown Bane AND the Joker.

I continue to lament that I couldn't have watched THAT movie instead

OU812

OU812 wrote: »

What I would love to see is a standalone Harley Quinn / Joker movie which would be an origin movie for her & a warped love story of sorts. They've got a great backstory.

Skerries wrote: »

an R rated movie along the lines of Natural Born Killers would be good

That's exactly how I see it working

brianregan09 wrote: »

I'd be 1st in line for that

you'd be behind me

The more I think about this, the more I think they missed a trick not doing it. A very strong female lead, with the joker only being a minor character (& Bruce Wayne/Batman even more so), would have brought in a large female contingent into the genre as fans.

Maybe it'll make it to TV (possibly even Gotham, although I'd prefer her own series). I think the suicide squad is going to be very much overkill with characters so it'll be hard to get a very strong performance from any one.

Sphynxinatron

Its a shame that green lantern is coming in 2020, probably when the interest for comicbook movies has severely declined. Im fearful that after Avengers IW Pt2 and Justice League Pt2 most of the audience will stop caring.