I live in Australia and I haven't seen Thor yet, but that's mostly because with the exception of the crappy front rows seats, the tickets are practically sold out. As to your point: the film is rated M over here, meaning 13 and up, so the equivalent of being rated teen. So yeah, maybe aimed at teens. But think about it from a business standpoint, they really really want 'The Avengers' to reap some f**king green, and having one of the set up films not being an adults' movie, good way to double your audience for the 'big picture'.
The Big Picture: Done With Dark
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I can't agree with Bob on this one.
In my opinion, while not every reboot needs to be 'gritty', that doesn't mean making a gritty reboot is a bad idea. The fact that many reboots are gritty doesn't change that at all. And of course, it has to fit the source material - if they ever make a live action Strawberry Shortcake movie, it shouldn't be 'gritted up'. But in some franchise's case, it really is the only way to go.
Batman is probably the best example.
Even if you look into the comic, Batman simply isn't a very cheerful figure at his core. He's a kid who saw his parents murdered in cold blood. He represent vengeance and justice. He's a vigilante. He uses fear and many underhanded tactics that are usually privy to bad guys, to get results. Heck, if you go far back enough, Batman even used guns in those early comic books.
Characters like Robin have been introduced to make Batman more likeable and more 'humane', both from a marketing and characterization point of view. No matter how many zany adventures he's been through and how many Saturday morning cartoon he shows up in, nothing will change the fact that Batman is a guy's who's extremely traumatic childhood has driven him to dress up in a costume and beat criminal up.
Now you take Batman to the movies, and you have the so far awesome 'Nolan-verse' movies, which are pretty much has dark and gritty as it gets. But here's the thing - if you look at the first cycle of movies...
The first two had Micheal Keaton and Tim Burton. And while I personally don't think they aged very well, those movies were dark. Gotham city was spooky, creepy, gothic. The bad guys were violent and evil. Batman was one of the first PG-13 movie I saw and it gave me nightmare
, and I know I'm not the only one. Devito's penguin in the second one was horrific as well. You can say what you want about those movies, but they weren't exactly kid movies - even thought they were about a character marketed to kids.
And then come the Batman Forever. The silliness is cranked up to 11, and so are the colors. Robin is introduced. The bad guys are much more 'colorful' (Gone is the sleeky purple of the joker or the black & white of the penguin and catwoman... instead we get practically glow in the dark Riddlers and one of the worse looking Two Face ever) and are more crazy funny than crazy scary.
And then there's Batman & Robins, which goes even more over the top in both color, zaniness and wackiness... and at this point, the bad guys aren't scary anymore. More importantly, Batman isn't scary anymore. He stops being this man filled with pathos who's pain and hurt have turned him into a vigilante and becomes a bored millionaire dressed in a costume.
I know there's more wrong with the last 2 movies than just the tones and the theme... but it's a huge part of it. When my younger self walked out of Batman Forever, my first reaction was 'Where did the grittyness go?' - it is in my opinion a huge part of why those movies are now looked at with disdain. Yet... if we go with your arguments here Bob, those movies should have in fact been better or at least, in a better direction than the rather gothic Batman and Batman Return.
To go full circle with Thor... yes, he's a magic space viking with a hammer. But even the Marvel comic draws pretty heavily on the 'real world' Norse mythology - which are not a happy place. Odin is the gallow god after all. None of the norse gods are nice guys and most of them have plenty of angst and drama in their background. While a Thor movies doesn't need to be gritty to be good since the source material isn't very gritty at all to begin with(And I'm looking forward to seeing it!) - there's definitely room for somebody to think it could be gritty since not everyone is familiar with Thor the Marvel character (whose is a rather obscure hero compared to Superman or Spider-man), while I would think quite a few more people have at least a passing idea who Thor the Norse god of Thunder and War is.
If the movie were about the 'real world' Norse gods coming to 2011 Earth instead of the comic book norse gods, it certainly would be a lot grittier and meaner after all. I mean Thor is the god of war (among other things) of a people that was known for martial prowess, sailing, raiding, pillaging and raping (I know that's not all they did, I'm just talking about reputation here). Geez... could it be a gritty and violent movie? What do you think? And not every critic (or movie goer) is a comic book fan or not all that much about the Thor character in the first place. So no, it doesn't come as a surprise that people are surprised that the movie is kid friendly.
In my opinion, while not every reboot needs to be 'gritty', that doesn't mean making a gritty reboot is a bad idea. The fact that many reboots are gritty doesn't change that at all. And of course, it has to fit the source material - if they ever make a live action Strawberry Shortcake movie, it shouldn't be 'gritted up'. But in some franchise's case, it really is the only way to go.
Batman is probably the best example.
Even if you look into the comic, Batman simply isn't a very cheerful figure at his core. He's a kid who saw his parents murdered in cold blood. He represent vengeance and justice. He's a vigilante. He uses fear and many underhanded tactics that are usually privy to bad guys, to get results. Heck, if you go far back enough, Batman even used guns in those early comic books.
Characters like Robin have been introduced to make Batman more likeable and more 'humane', both from a marketing and characterization point of view. No matter how many zany adventures he's been through and how many Saturday morning cartoon he shows up in, nothing will change the fact that Batman is a guy's who's extremely traumatic childhood has driven him to dress up in a costume and beat criminal up.
Now you take Batman to the movies, and you have the so far awesome 'Nolan-verse' movies, which are pretty much has dark and gritty as it gets. But here's the thing - if you look at the first cycle of movies...
The first two had Micheal Keaton and Tim Burton. And while I personally don't think they aged very well, those movies were dark. Gotham city was spooky, creepy, gothic. The bad guys were violent and evil. Batman was one of the first PG-13 movie I saw and it gave me nightmare
, and I know I'm not the only one. Devito's penguin in the second one was horrific as well. You can say what you want about those movies, but they weren't exactly kid movies - even thought they were about a character marketed to kids. And then come the Batman Forever. The silliness is cranked up to 11, and so are the colors. Robin is introduced. The bad guys are much more 'colorful' (Gone is the sleeky purple of the joker or the black & white of the penguin and catwoman... instead we get practically glow in the dark Riddlers and one of the worse looking Two Face ever) and are more crazy funny than crazy scary.
And then there's Batman & Robins, which goes even more over the top in both color, zaniness and wackiness... and at this point, the bad guys aren't scary anymore. More importantly, Batman isn't scary anymore. He stops being this man filled with pathos who's pain and hurt have turned him into a vigilante and becomes a bored millionaire dressed in a costume.
I know there's more wrong with the last 2 movies than just the tones and the theme... but it's a huge part of it. When my younger self walked out of Batman Forever, my first reaction was 'Where did the grittyness go?' - it is in my opinion a huge part of why those movies are now looked at with disdain. Yet... if we go with your arguments here Bob, those movies should have in fact been better or at least, in a better direction than the rather gothic Batman and Batman Return.
To go full circle with Thor... yes, he's a magic space viking with a hammer. But even the Marvel comic draws pretty heavily on the 'real world' Norse mythology - which are not a happy place. Odin is the gallow god after all. None of the norse gods are nice guys and most of them have plenty of angst and drama in their background. While a Thor movies doesn't need to be gritty to be good since the source material isn't very gritty at all to begin with(And I'm looking forward to seeing it!) - there's definitely room for somebody to think it could be gritty since not everyone is familiar with Thor the Marvel character (whose is a rather obscure hero compared to Superman or Spider-man), while I would think quite a few more people have at least a passing idea who Thor the Norse god of Thunder and War is.
If the movie were about the 'real world' Norse gods coming to 2011 Earth instead of the comic book norse gods, it certainly would be a lot grittier and meaner after all. I mean Thor is the god of war (among other things) of a people that was known for martial prowess, sailing, raiding, pillaging and raping (I know that's not all they did, I'm just talking about reputation here). Geez... could it be a gritty and violent movie? What do you think? And not every critic (or movie goer) is a comic book fan or not all that much about the Thor character in the first place. So no, it doesn't come as a surprise that people are surprised that the movie is kid friendly.
I enjoy "dark and gritty" as much as the next guy, but can we stop pretending that this is what passes for mature. If the original source material is dark or suitable for a darker re-interpretation, then that's OK. However, shoehorning it in to appeal to a more grown-up demographic is ridiculous.
I watched the first Transformers, it made no sense so I ignored the sequel. The only person I know who enjoyed Transformers is a 13-year-old boy who has the hots for Megan Fox. These properties are made dark and gritty ostensibly to appeal to adults, but it is the kids who want to watch them because they seem edgy.
Also, Care Bear with a machine-gun says it all.
I watched the first Transformers, it made no sense so I ignored the sequel. The only person I know who enjoyed Transformers is a 13-year-old boy who has the hots for Megan Fox. These properties are made dark and gritty ostensibly to appeal to adults, but it is the kids who want to watch them because they seem edgy.
Also, Care Bear with a machine-gun says it all.
i at times try to get myself in to superhero comics (mostly marval and dc)but every time i step in to the shops (store), i seem to be sarounded with grim and pritty depressingly complex stories about death and nagative chooses on depressing plots with depressing characters.
there are some that did light up or made me feel good like all star superman or the classic new justes leage. so i'm not comprable seeing well known or unknown heros being tourtherd and superheros going pycho on people and being bruded.
so bob if you could one day make the 10 ten possotive marvel, dc or other comics with superheros in them or similer.
like your thoughts bob.
there are some that did light up or made me feel good like all star superman or the classic new justes leage. so i'm not comprable seeing well known or unknown heros being tourtherd and superheros going pycho on people and being bruded.
so bob if you could one day make the 10 ten possotive marvel, dc or other comics with superheros in them or similer.
like your thoughts bob.
Thor was really good, I saw it with a friend, there was a lot of laughs in the Cinema, everyone got to hear me go postal about Source Code (NO! NOT EVEN SCIENCE!!! WOULD LET HIM ALTER TIME!)
But seriously, I actually want to point out that Thor is about Arrogance. He's a rude, spoiled asshole who only thinks of himself and glory and the entire movie is about him coming to terms with becoming humble. Throw in Loki's own crisii of where he belongs and who's side he's even really on. And you have a damn good movie.
Seriously, see Thor.
Also everyone in the Cinema found it funny that they showed trailers for Green Lantern and Captain America back to back.
I wont spoil the stinger at the end, but lets just say the tag line that 'Thor will return in The Avengers' just led everyone to going "No Shit!"
But seriously, I actually want to point out that Thor is about Arrogance. He's a rude, spoiled asshole who only thinks of himself and glory and the entire movie is about him coming to terms with becoming humble. Throw in Loki's own crisii of where he belongs and who's side he's even really on. And you have a damn good movie.
Seriously, see Thor.
Also everyone in the Cinema found it funny that they showed trailers for Green Lantern and Captain America back to back.
I wont spoil the stinger at the end, but lets just say the tag line that 'Thor will return in The Avengers' just led everyone to going "No Shit!"
Actually I'd say that LoEG is a pretty good example of a gritty reboot, even though I quite enjoyed it. Black Dosiier was pretty upbeat though.Axolotl said:
From Hell on the other hand... I don't think that it's possible to do Jack the Ripper without grimdark. It's a story about a guy killing and dismembering several prostitutes. I don't think Moore made it any more or less disturbing then it already was.
No denying that. But it is a campy batman movie, and it sucked. The other campy batman movies also happened to suck.lord.jeff said:
There's a pattern there - now it doesn't mean a good campy batman is movie is impossible to do, but it does show that 'dark and gritty' batman works. And if it works, why not do it? Why rail against it? There is room for dark and gritty in media.
Batman: The Brave and the Bold isn't a 'live action' movie.
Agreed entirely...although I think there's a more complex dynamic going on here than Bob has addressed: the power of marketing. Movies like Transformers walk a weird line, trying to appeal to three levels of audience: the kids, who like the toys; teens, who like action and sex; and the parents, who liked the toys as kids, sex and action as teens, and now want to feel vaguely entertained while they haul their kids and teens in to see the movie. Only the hardcore nerd-geek fans who don't (usually) don't have kids and are still suffering from arrested development get all worked up over whether or not the movie reaches their comfort zone of perceived "maturity."
The point I made was about life action movies I suppose. Like I said, as far Batman (live action) movie go, dark and gritty has been proved to work... campy, well, Schumacher failed miserably at it. Keep in mind I have never claimed it couldn't be made or couldn't work... I don't personally think it could to be honest, but I've certainly been wrong before.lord.jeff said:
Cartoon and comic books in general are better medium for campiness than anything live action. It's much easier to have 'campy' become cheesy or over the stuff when it's real people doing it. I'm fully aware that they are more 'four color' batman comic out there who works very well.
I saw Thor the other week; and it took me back to the first time I saw 'Superman' when I was 10. This character is larger than life, he fills any room he walks into. Although the two have a different journey to take, both movies concerned themselves with building up the hero.
As for the subject at hand; certain heroes lend themselves to the grim and gritty set, Batman is one, Spawn is another. However, such an approach is not appropriate for Superman, or Captain Marvel.
In Thor's case it also helped to make his triumphant return to his full status by movie's end far more appealing. Even the romance doesn't suck, but best of all, its not a totally happy ending. The ending is a good one, but is more bittersweet.
As for the subject at hand; certain heroes lend themselves to the grim and gritty set, Batman is one, Spawn is another. However, such an approach is not appropriate for Superman, or Captain Marvel.
Umm yes it did. Marvel filed for bankruptcy and Valiant went under. The industry hasn't made the same amount of money in years.Scrumpmonkey said:
Tv tropes has a pretty good article on it:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheGreatComicsCrashOf1996
If you want to see an example of the Avengers done well with all the siliness you mentioned above PLUS a socialite, a nuerotic but outstanding scientist, an EVIL a.i., a foreign King, a being of living energy, AND an egotist deadeye secret agent (okay a couple of those) then you should check out Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes. It's a series that just debuted this year and I can't wait to get it on DVD. It NAILS what superhero stories are all about to me.Lord_Kristof said:
Just throwing that out there. (It's worth it just for the Wasp's performance actually.)
Bob, I think this ep. was your Magnum Opus. Seriously man, thank you for saying what I've been thinking and debating with my friends ever since DCs poorly chosen "let the fans decide if Robin lives or dies" campaign which heralded the end of my comic collecting days. Well done. I couldn't say it any better, so I won't say any more. Bravo Zulu m'man!
