"Well, after X-Men hit at the box office, all the studios started buying up every comic property they could get their hands on..." - Brodie in "Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back"
Here we are, ten years after that line was uttered in a movie written by sometimes comic book author Kevin Smith and it certainly has an air of truth about it. Fanboys of the world have seen 4 X-Men related movies, 3 Spider-Man flicks, 2 Batman movies, 2 Fantastic Four's, 2 Iron Man pictures, 2 Hulk movies, a Superman Return, and a fanboy dream finally come true in Watchmen; that's in the last decade (or so) alone that they've all come to the big screen. Those are just some of the marquee names!
That says nothing of the smaller, lesser known properties, like "Whiteout", "Red, "Scott Pilgrim vs. The World", "Jonah Hex", "Constantine", "30 Days of Night", "From Hell" or "Hellboy" movies.
Then you've got TV properties that are completely comic book like "The Avengers", "The Brave & The Bold", and "Young Justice" cartoons as well as multiple "Spider-Man" toons, or "Walking Dead", "Smallville" and "Birds of Prey" live-action shows. And of course there's the comic book inspired series' like "Heroes", "The Cape", and "No Ordinary Family".
And on top of all those that have come and gone, we have the above embedded "Captain America" and "Thor" movies coming this year. Also "The Dark Knight Rises", "X-Men: First Class", "Wolverine", a "Spider-Man" reboot, a "Superman" reboot, "Ghost Rider: Spirt of Vengeance", "The Avengers", and those are just definite ones on the horizon.
An "Ant-Man" movie has long been rumored in conjunction with "The Avengers", "Preacher" has been in development hell forever, "Powers", "Aquaman", "Black Panther", "The Crow" remake, a "Spawn" sequel/remake, the "Wonder Woman" and "Hulk" TV projects, and who knows how many other projects that have been rumored, discussed, and never seen the light of day.
I discovered a wonderful website, ComicBookMovie.com, that had a pretty extensive list of damn near every comic book related project I had ever heard talk of, plus some I never knew. "Harbinger"? "Suicide Squad"?? "Werewolf by Night"???
How niche can we get with these things?
I suppose that is the point of all this preamble: where does a line get drawn? Have movie studios taken to comic book movies as instant money makers? Or do they simply mine them for established stories that are instantly familiar to a similar fanbase? Or is it a little of column A and column B?
Obviously I'm leaning towards BOTH, otherwise I wouldn't have even put it out there eh?
The marquee properties like Spidey, Supes, and Bats are sure-fire money makers even when the movies themselves are critically panned. "Batman & Robin" is without a doubt one of the worst movies of ANY genre, but still grossed $238,317,814 worldwide on a $125,000,000 budget, plus $58,492,667 on rentals.
A more recent critical failure like "Spider-Man 3" got $890,871,626 worldwide on a $258,000,000 budget with $124,104,508 in US DVD Sales. And these are two movies that were "failures" to the point that their respective studios rebooted the franchises (Batman after 8 years, and Spider-Man after 4 years).
On the other side you've got movies like "Scott Pilgrim" that raked in only $47,738,549 box office worldwide, $14,114,518 in US DVD sales so far, and with a $85,000,000 production budget. Or a highly anticipated adaption like "Watchmen" that got "only" $185,258,93 worldwide gross with a $130,000,000 budget....it didn't even make back it's budget in US box office. For a movie as long awaited as "Watchmen", that's atrocious.
Not every comic book movie equals money obviously, nor do they equal quality. "Jonah Hex", "Ghost Rider", "Elektra", and "Daredevil" are just some examples of movies that hit both nails on the head. Disappointing to fans and critics alike, these are a small sampling of movies that were so bad they may never see sequels OR reboots: "Ghost Rider" being the only exception but that's because Nicholas Cage has apparently made his own deal with the devil to get it done.
So why plug away at properties that aren't on the level of a Supes or Bats? My theory is that there is a built-in audience and built-in stories when you use any adapted property. Comic books have a loyal fanbase, one that is likely to give ANY comic book movie the benefit of the doubt just to see if the studio can pull it off. The stories are largely written for you, especially given that most movies involve an origin story of some sort, and all the writer has to do is adapt it to the screen. Unfortunately there-in lies the other side of your built-in audience...the hyper-critic.
Comic book fans are going to shred the movie to bits for every flaw that doesn't jive with proper continuity or show the hero in the "proper" characterization. They will spread the word to other fans who haven't seen the movie yet about how Wolverine's memory got erased with a bullet, how Superman has a son, or how the end of Watchmen isn't like the comic. They will encourage other fanboys not to see these movies, these fans will read on websites everything that made the movie not EXACTLY like the comic, and they will poo all over it.
Hell, even a movie almost identical to the source material like "Watchmen" will get shit for being too close to the original material thus inaccessible to those who haven't read the "greatest graphic novel in the history of time". I guarantee both "Thor" and "Captain America" will catch hell for something that's not "just like the comic book", if they haven't already from the trailers. It's a lose-lose situation in that regards, the die hard fans will always be the harshest critcis, but the box office grosses on the financially successful adaptations make it well worth the risk for comic book studios, as well as for the company that owns the source material.
Even TV stations gets into the game with two series running right now in "The Cape" and "No Ordinary Family". I haven't watched "The Cape" at all, but I watch "No Ordinary" every week...and I'm not sure why to be honest. It's not terrible, but it isn't good. It's like a sitcom in that every week the family does the same "hide our powers" schtick, deals with the same problems in a different way, and there's a slight progression in the larger story some weeks. And I do mean slight, the show has been running for 13 episodes, with 6 more to go, and the viewer hasn't learned jack about how they got their powers, about why Stephanie's boss has his own super power army.
We do know both kids make the same stupid mistakes every single episode, we know Katie is the cute nerd who pops me by making X-Men references for everything, and we know that Michael Chiklis is better than this, at least anyone who has watched "The Shield" knows this. A friend of mine referred to this show as a rip-off of "The Incredibles" which was a rip-off of "Fantastic Four", and well I can agree, I also see this as what "Heroes" would have been if it was as advertised. "Ordinary People With Extraordinary Powers" was the tagline I believe, and essentially that's what "No Ordinary Family" is, and ordinary people aren't all that interesting. Good effort, not a terrible show, but certainly the TV medium trying to cash in on superhero drama.
So I ask, where will it end? Will it end? Will comic book property adaptions reach a saturation point with the general public? Action movies certainly did in the 80's as evidenced by the dropoff in the careers of Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone after a certain point. And it's not like Hollywood has really established a true action hero since their time...well, maybe Jason Statham.
At first I thought Warner Bros/DC were doing things the right way by taking their time to put out the core movies and not rushing things out just to do it. That certainly seemed to be the case with Christopher Nolan's Batman flicks, but then I read that the Green Lantern movie already has a sequel written, possibly to be shot before the first gets released, as well as talks of fast-tracking a "Flash" movie, and I get worried. I've already got my doubts about Marvel's ability to pull together a unified film-world across so many different movies, and it seemed like Jon Favreau had the same concerns in leaving the "Iron Man" franchise.
Will this glut of movies in the next few years bring an end to the comic book era of Hollywood? Or will the (hopefully) high quality of the few outweigh the downsides of the many? Can one bad movie bring an end to everything? Or will we have another "Dark Knight" in "DK Rises" that forces everyone else to up their game?
Only time will tell, but one thing I can say is that it is a great time to be a comic book fanboy/movie nerd. Never before have we had so many options, never before has our beloved medium been so exposed to the masses, and hopefully that means more fans coming on board and building the industry. I know so many people who are now obssessed with "The Walking Dead" because of AMC's TV show, who asked to read "Watchmen" after seeing the movie, or wanted to see what was up with "Green Lantern" to prepare for the movie. Some will check the source out and stick around, some will stick with just movies, but it can be a good thing for more people to come into "our" industry and say hi.
Just please, Marvel/DC and their ilk, don't forget about the little guys that have been supporting you through thick and thin....we loved you through chromium covers and we'll buy all 14 "Flashpoint" tie-ins as long as you treat us right.
| Worldwide: | $185,258,983 |
No comments:
Post a Comment