There's been a lot of talk recently about Edgar Wright's untimely departure from Marvel's "Ant-Man". Not to mention the various reactions to the latest Spider-Man and X-Men films. And we can't forget that Bat-fleck picture. So much superhero content, so little time, right? The point is, we as fans now have a better idea of not only Marvel's direction, but Warner Brothers', Sony's, and Fox's as well. Which got me thinking: which shared superhero universe will come out on top? Marvel seems like the only true instigator, since "The Avengers" got the ball rolling for the other studio universes.
But with four separate film series now established, which one is doing the best, which is destined to fail, and which has the most potential? One could just say Marvel Studios and leave it at that. But as great as Marvel is, if any comic book fan were asked which superheroes got them hooked on the genre, it'd probably be a character from any of the other three studios. Spider-Man, Wolverine, Superman, and Batman are the most iconic superheroes on the face of the Earth, after all. If done right, their franchises could rival Marvel's. Or could they? That's what I'm here to find out. Let's take a look, shall we?
Disney's Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU)
Content: 9 films, 1 television show, and 5 short films released, 4 films and 6 TV shows in various stages of production. (June 10, 2014 UPDATE: Doctor Strange film confirmed due to director announcement, meaning 5 films in active development)
Strengths: A now fully established shared universe and brand name. Access to thousands of characters. Seemingly limitless ideas for films and shows, across multiple genres (sci-fi, fantasy, noir, adventure, space opera, etc. etc.) Faithfulness to comic book source material. Semi-consistent quality, ranging from fantastic at best to simply mediocre at worst. Having an entire studio set up in-house devoted to superhero content. Inspired casting choices, including the recently announced Charlie Cox as Daredevil and Josh Brolin as Thanos.
Weaknesses: Attempting to maintain a consistent continuity means the audience could suffer from continuity lockout. Recasting for major actors could be a problem in trying to maintain said continuity. Overabundance of shows and films could eventually lead to superhero fatigue and over saturation. In setting a specific brand and tone in place, majority of films lack individual identity. Most of these films rely on inorganic humor that negates serious dramatic impact. Some films may exist purely to advertise/forward the shared universe, in place of telling standalone stories.
Final Word: This franchise is by far the best of the four in terms of where it is now and where it's going. Despite a few rough patches (most of the Phase I solo films, the first half of Agents of SHIELD), the MCU is turning out consistent, entertaining products that are only improving (read: The Winter Soldier, second half of Agents of SHIELD). However, the above weaknesses could be a huge problem down the line. Edgar Wright's departure from "Ant-Man", heavily rumored to be due to script arguments, is troublesome. This isn't the first time the studio has fallen out with a director over creative issues (Thor 2's Patty Jenkins, Iron Man 2's Jon Favraeu).
It shows that the executive vision trumps the director's vision, and what once was a passion project could turn into another cog in the machine. The first "Iron Man", which got the MCU rolling, succeeded due to a strong directorial vision. Another B-lister like Ant-Man needs that if it's to find success, so it can find its own identity within the Marvel brand. A strong director like Edgar Wright could have provided that, but his leaving only calls into doubt Marvel's relationships with its directors. (June 10, 2014 UPDATE: Horror director Scott Derickson being handed Doctor Strange is promising, but the recent announcement of "Yes Man" director Peyton Reed replacing Edgar Wright still calls into question the overall quality of the final product, since the Ant-Man project was largely Edgar Wright's vision.)
Marvel's biggest road block is compromising between honoring the director's vision and keeping it consistent with the larger universe. If this compromise can be struck, the studio will continue to find success. Ultimately, as long as the studio has a plan and keeps the films of a consistent quality, this shouldn't be much of an issue. Definitely the best of the four 'verses in terms of consistent entertainment, especially now that they're expanding into television and Netflix to realize its lesser properties. Unless people grow tired of the Marvel brand, I expect this franchise to continue for a good long while.
Sony's Spider-Man Cinematic Universe (SCU)
Content: 2 films released, 2 main films and 2 spinoff films in production. (Disregarding both the Sam Raimi Spider-Man trilogy and both Nicolas Cage "Ghost Rider" films).
Strengths: Access to one of the most iconic superhero characters of all time, as well as his huge roster of villains and supporting players. 50 years worth of comic stories to draw inspiration from. A talented lead actor and cast. Interesting set-up with lots of storytelling potential.
Weaknesses: Heavy executive meddling over directorial vision. A less-than-stellar critical and box office reaction to the latest film. Possible franchise fatigue coupled with diminishing box office returns. Lack of any connection to wider superhero universe beyond the characters they own. Inconsistent tone and storytelling focused on copying other known successes instead of finding own unique path. Focus on re-visiting story beats from the previous trilogy instead of exploring other, unseen story arcs. New developments exist simply to differentiate from previous trilogy, and are not done to organically develop a new take. Entire franchise's existence is to maintain character rights, when ironically it's attempting to mimic the competition they hope to keep their characters away from.
Final Word: Despite the fact that Spider-Man is one of the most interesting superhero characters (and my personal favorite), he's really hurt here by not being connected to the wider Marvel Universe. As stated in the weaknesses, the studio fast-tracked this franchise to maintain the rights, and after mimicking the formula of "Batman Begins", they are now switching to the tone and world-building of the MCU. Not only is this tonally inconsistent, but the widely different direction reeks of desperation on the studio's part to capitalize on what is popular. Venom is the only character who could realistically maintain a spinoff, despite the fact that the two films so far haven't even hinted at that story line. The one they have, "Sinister Six" is only haphazardly set up.
At the rate they're going, future films will once again be stuffed with underdeveloped characters and story arcs with no room for proper development. If Sony stays on this path, their struggling franchise will plummet. There are three courses of action to take. One: bite the bullet and sell Spidey back to Marvel. Two: put the franchise on hiatus for a few years to build up a proper demand for Spidey's return, so the studio has time to do it properly. Three: mix up the production staff and turn out a truly great Spider-Man film, that gives Peter a consistent arc, a simple yet thrilling story, and a truly evil and complex villain to hate (my vote's for Kraven the Hunter, but that's just me). Cancel the spinoffs until you're able to prove to the audience you can get the core Spider-Man films right. While there is a lot of potential here just with the stories and characters they have access to, Sony's latest film doesn't inspire confidence that they know what they're doing.
Twentieth Century Fox's X-Men Cinematic Universe (XCU)
Content: 7 X-Men films released, 2 more X films confirmed in development, 2 Fantastic Four films confirmed in development, 3 X films rumored but not confirmed. (Disregarding the "Daredevil" and "Elektra" films as well as both previous FF movies).
Strengths: Access to huge chunk of Marvel's iconic characters. Over a decade of films with an already established tone and brand. A very talented cast of actors. Lots of promise for future films.
Weaknesses: A less-than-stellar track record with adapting Marvel characters to film. A muddled continuity between the X films that needed time travel to clear up (and even then with continuing plot holes). Lack of iconic crossover stories to adapt between X-Men and Fantastic Four. Continuing controversy surrounding the upcoming Fantastic Four reboot. Legal controversy surrounding X-Men director Bryan Singer makes for an unsure return to the franchise.
Final Word: While Fox nearly rivals Marvel Studios in terms of the quantity of Marvel-based films they've put out, only a handful of them have been any good. The "Daredevil" and "Elektra" rights have reverted to Disney, but Fox still has access to "X-Men" and "Fantastic Four." Somewhat like Sony, they could be hurt by not co-existing with the MCU. However, since X-Men and FF have dozens of iconic characters and stories to either still adapt or re-do (given past mistakes), there's no immediate need to sell the rights back. The critical and commercial success of the last three X films, "Days of Future Past" in particular, has created increased confidence in Fox's ability to honor its comic book characters. "X-Men" now has an exciting new direction, but the wild card here is Fantastic Four.
Fox has yet to prove it can do Marvel's First Family properly. The first order of business is nailing the reboot. If they can't, sell it back to Marvel. If they can, capitalize on that and find a way to connect to the now continuity-light X-Men. While the X-Men and FF don't normally intersect, seeing the two teams unite to take on a proper Doctor Doom, Onslaught, Apocalypse, or even Galactus would be enormously satisfying. There have been mistakes in the past, but in light of Fox proving they can learn from them, there is hope here. Even without the Fantastic Four, the X-Men alone have enough stories and characters to keep the franchise afloat for another decade (if there's any truth to those Gambit, Deadpool, Mystique, and X-Force spinoff rumors, that is).
Warner Brothers' DC Cinematic Universe (DCU or DCCU)
Content: 1 film released, 2 more in development, possibly further sequels and spinoffs to come. (No previous attempts at Batman, Superman, or Green Lantern films count, nor apparently do the Green Arrow, Flash, Gotham, and Constantine shows).
Strengths: The only studio with full access to an entire universe of superheroes. Potential to rival or even outdo the other three studios in terms of the amount of stories and characters they possess. Upcoming film heralds the first meeting between the two most iconic superheroes in popular culture. Following film heralds the first cinematic appearance of the world's most famous superhero team.
Weaknesses: Largely mixed reception to both their only canon film and previous attempts at non-Batman superhero films. Seeming lack of faith in any superheroes that aren't Superman or Batman. A tone that so far is heavily based on Chris Nolan when not all DC superheroes function as such. Huge controversies surrounding choice of director, writer, and cast. Cynicism over heavily marketed title, date change, direct competition with Marvel's "Captain America 3", and belief that film will suffer from "Marvel Phase One/Iron Man 2 syndrome" and overstuff film with characters for future team-ups. Too much of a case of following Marvel's lead instead of forging own path. No connection to large output of live action TV shows currently out or in development, which could greatly expand the established canon.
Final Word: Simply put, if WB got their act together and actually capitalized on the potential gold mine they have, they could easily give Marvel a run for their money. What this baby franchise needs is proper direction. A Batman/Superman team-up leading into Justice League is admirable, but too many people are worried that the films will do what Sony is currently doing and Marvel used to do. That being stuff an abundance of characters into one film for the sake of world-building. If developed organically, with characters introduced gradually, this could prove huge for WB and DC. It could herald more well-made films for heroes other than Supes and Bats, a re-do of Green Lantern, and the long-awaited solo projects for Wonder Woman and Flash, maybe even Aquaman (laugh all you want, it could be awesome.)
DC's various animated shows and Direct-to-DVD films, not to mention their recent success with "Arrow", shows there are those in the company who know these characters. If the same attention to detail can be brought to the films, WB will have success. They've lost Chris Nolan, but it's not the end of the world. Zach Snyder is an accomplished director if given a good script, and if the new film can make up for the mistakes of "Man of Steel", successfully reboot Batman, and introduce Wonder Woman as a teaser for Justice League, then there is hope. It's going to be tough, but not impossible.
The cast they've put together has a lot of unproven variables, but there is true talent among them, and these bold casting choices inspire a sense of cautious optimism. The Bat-fleck picture, if nothing else, shows Ben Affleck will at least fill out the Bat-suit well. What DC needs to focus on is nailing this film, as a proper Bats/Supes team-up can establish both sides of the superhero spectrum that the rest of the Justice League can fill out. Not only do they need to make sure the story is great, but it would also do WB good to shift the release date, so as not to cannibalize box office with Marvel.
Because WB cannot simply sell character rights to another studio, they're gambling a lot on these upcoming films. They have a lot to gain, and everything to lose. The dream of a realized live action shared DC universe is a long time coming, and this close to happening. For all DC can do, all we as fans can do is be patient and hope for the best. And at least be thankful that, for better or worse, we'll still have the Nolan trilogy, Arkham games, and the DCAU to re-visit should things go south.
No comments:
Post a Comment