Movie Buffs

FaulknerCannes

FaulknerCannes · Mar 25, 2015

Sigh. Another day, another rant against ignorant fanboys...

Look, I loved superheroes - past tense - I really did. They used to have such potential to tell rich stories in the books, such as political thrillers, existential crisis, religious debates, or even just a little humble Aesop. But you know what? Enough is enough!

Yes, I know not all superhero movies suck, but there remains an underlying problem that everyone seems reluctant to address whenever I come across YouTube comments. Superhero movies have become a genre in itself, with their own cliches so distinctive that they've became as much a genre as the horror genre, the bottom-feeder of all movie genres nowadays.

First and foremost, let's talk about the main reason I'm here - character deaths. This often happens in superhero stories, and it's been addressed by Cracked recently, the main reason why my current rant exists in the first place, because the comment section just pisses me off with their illogical evaluations, not to mention a thorough disrespect for the movie medium.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWpQeJNxiNQ

I understand the idea of an opinion, but claiming that "characters deaths being cheap bluffs" is somehow okay because they are "superhero movies" is really insulting to my intelligence. Yes, this happens a lot in comic books - but these are not comic books! These are movies! When you adapt a story from one medium to another, the general idea is that you follow the rules of that medium!

And you know what the funny thing is? It's not even a rule that's restricted within movies only! It's a storytelling trope that's considered a cliche in all forms of stories, be it literature, movies, video games, and even comic books! It's called "Deus ex Machina", and it's generally agreed that this is one of the weakest way of telling a story, considering that it's a contrived plot-device that rescues a character for the sake of progressing a plot. It's lazy, and it loses tension the more times you do it! How is "losing tension in the story" a subject of opinion?! HOW?! It's a writing technique, for Christ's sake!

Sigh. Pardon my French. It's just... so insulting, these fanboys. God, I'm getting a headache.

You know, it's been ongoing for many years now, my gradual detest for superhero movies. I mean, after Iron Man 2, if Winter Soldier didn't come along, I would have given up much sooner. But it's just ridiculous, the kind of mentality these superhero movies are breeding in movie-goers. I actually want to watch Citizen Kane, and Casablanca, and other great movies that you people watch instead of watching these casual mainstream movies after talking to these people. I mean, really, movies as a medium have excellent storytelling throughout history, and somehow, superhero stories, one of the lowest denominator in the realm of stories, is going to change that history of tradition?

But you know what's the worst part? They are 'entertaining' to people... whatever that means. Transformers was entertaining too, I guess. Whenever I mention that franchise, people would say, "Oh, but superhero movies are critically acclaimed!" No, it's not! Except the few exceptions like Guardians and Winter Soldier, 7 or 8 out of 10 times, you'd have a generic storyline about some superpowered hothead beating the crap out of bad guys! This is Bond movie material! It's as shallow as that! I'm surprised there isn't a super villain stroking a cat on his lap!

And because of these poorly conjured excuses, people are going to keep paying for these bad movies, and what's going to happen to actually good movies like Birdman, Whiplash, and Nightcrawler (coincidentally titled after comic book superheroes) in the future? Sure, they are fine now, but with Marvel announcing 20 movies per year or decade, who knows what's going to come for the movie industry in the future. Am I, as a movie fan, going to have to deal with these casual movie fans who thinks that the best movie ever was Guardians of the Galaxy? Seriously? Screw that! I'm going to watch The Green Mile and Shawshank Redemption!

And you know, it isn't just character deaths. It goes far, far worse than that. Do you know that certain people are saying "It's okay to have an entire movie composed of one-liners"? I mean, sure, an action movie that's stupid do that every now and then, granted, action movies being a genre on its own, but with the filmmakers recently commenting on how "superhero" isn't a genre, the results are surprisingly different from their hypocritical views. You don't see one-liners in drama movies, or romance movies. You get punchlines in comedies, sure, but one-liners that make the characters look cool? That's a trope that's present mostly in action and superhero movies, and it gets terribly annoying after a while. And really, which writing guide online will tell you that "one-liners for the sake of one-liners" is a good thing? Is that even a real storytelling technique?

Of course, it doesn't end there. Generic character archetypes are okay too, because they are adapting from the same generic source that's the books themselves. So we are no longer telling a good story; we are selling promotional movies for the comics. Got it.

It doesn't end there, no. Generic storylines about the hero saving the day. When uh, who's that guy... *Googles* Joseph Campbell, that's right. When good ol' Jo' came up with the monomyth technique, you know what some writers said? They said that it's a dangerous technique that shouldn't exist, because it makes writers think that they should just follow a formulaic pattern with this so-called 'Hero's Journey' instead of creatively making their own stories. You know who supported 'The Hero's Journey'? The same guy who made the Star Wars prequels, George Lucas himself. Yeah, that's right. In terms of superhero movies, there exists a very formulaic pattern that repeats itself very often. The hero meets villain and defeats him, the end. Yes, I know that there are exceptions, hence the use of the word 'often' not 'always', but generally, the storyline often goes like that. And that's just lazy writing.

There are plenty more cliches out there in the superhero genre (yes, I'm going to call it that from now on), such that these movies have become a plague that's almost as bad as slasher movies. Worse than slasher movies, however, they make money. That's the terrible part. Also, critics are starting to appreciate them as real movies, when there were standards to follow. In fact, there have always been standards in the realms of literature, iron rules on what trope is bad, what storytelling technique is ineffective in conveying tension and emotion, etc. Let's not let a bunch of teenage superhero nerds ruin that for us just because they didn't watch enough movies to know what they are talking about.

Thank you.

Sigh. Another day, another rant against ignorant fanboys...

Look, I loved superheroes - past tense - I really did. They used to have such potential to tell rich stories in the books, such as political thrillers, existential crisis, religious debates, or even just a little humble Aesop. But you know what? Enough is enough!

Yes, I know not all superhero movies suck, but there remains an underlying problem that everyone seems reluctant to address whenever I come across YouTube comments. Superhero movies have become a genre in itself, with their own cliches so distinctive that they've became as much a genre as the horror genre, the bottom-feeder of all movie genres nowadays.

First and foremost, let's talk about the main reason I'm here - character deaths. This often happens in superhero stories, and it's been addressed by Cracked recently, the main reason why my current rant exists in the first place, because the comment section just pisses me off with their illogical evaluations, not to mention a thorough disrespect for the movie medium.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWpQeJNxiNQ

I understand the idea of an opinion, but claiming that "characters deaths being cheap bluffs" is somehow okay because they are "superhero movies" is really insulting to my intelligence. Yes, this happens a lot in comic books - but these are not comic books! These are movies! When you adapt a story from one medium to another, the general idea is that you follow the rules of that medium!

And you know what the funny thing is? It's not even a rule that's restricted within movies only! It's a storytelling trope that's considered a cliche in all forms of stories, be it literature, movies, video games, and even comic books! It's called "Deus ex Machina", and it's generally agreed that this is one of the weakest way of telling a story, considering that it's a contrived plot-device that rescues a character for the sake of progressing a plot. It's lazy, and it loses tension the more times you do it! How is "losing tension in the story" a subject of opinion?! HOW?! It's a writing technique, for Christ's sake!

Sigh. Pardon my French. It's just... so insulting, these fanboys. God, I'm getting a headache.

You know, it's been ongoing for many years now, my gradual detest for superhero movies. I mean, after Iron Man 2, if Winter Soldier didn't come along, I would have given up much sooner. But it's just ridiculous, the kind of mentality these superhero movies are breeding in movie-goers. I actually want to watch Citizen Kane, and Casablanca, and other great movies that you people watch instead of watching these casual mainstream movies after talking to these people. I mean, really, movies as a medium have excellent storytelling throughout history, and somehow, superhero stories, one of the lowest denominator in the realm of stories, is going to change that history of tradition?

But you know what's the worst part? They are 'entertaining' to people... whatever that means. Transformers was entertaining too, I guess. Whenever I mention that franchise, people would say, "Oh, but superhero movies are critically acclaimed!" No, it's not! Except the few exceptions like Guardians and Winter Soldier, 7 or 8 out of 10 times, you'd have a generic storyline about some superpowered hothead beating the crap out of bad guys! This is Bond movie material! It's as shallow as that! I'm surprised there isn't a super villain stroking a cat on his lap!

And because of these poorly conjured excuses, people are going to keep paying for these bad movies, and what's going to happen to actually good movies like Birdman, Whiplash, and Nightcrawler (coincidentally titled after comic book superheroes) in the future? Sure, they are fine now, but with Marvel announcing 20 movies per year or decade, who knows what's going to come for the movie industry in the future. Am I, as a movie fan, going to have to deal with these casual movie fans who thinks that the best movie ever was Guardians of the Galaxy? Seriously? Screw that! I'm going to watch The Green Mile and Shawshank Redemption!

And you know, it isn't just character deaths. It goes far, far worse than that. Do you know that certain people are saying "It's okay to have an entire movie composed of one-liners"? I mean, sure, an action movie that's stupid do that every now and then, granted, action movies being a genre on its own, but with the filmmakers recently commenting on how "superhero" isn't a genre, the results are surprisingly different from their hypocritical views. You don't see one-liners in drama movies, or romance movies. You get punchlines in comedies, sure, but one-liners that make the characters look cool? That's a trope that's present mostly in action and superhero movies, and it gets terribly annoying after a while. And really, which writing guide online will tell you that "one-liners for the sake of one-liners" is a good thing? Is that even a real storytelling technique?

Of course, it doesn't end there. Generic character archetypes are okay too, because they are adapting from the same generic source that's the books themselves. So we are no longer telling a good story; we are selling promotional movies for the comics. Got it.

It doesn't end there, no. Generic storylines about the hero saving the day. When uh, who's that guy... *Googles* Joseph Campbell, that's right. When good ol' Jo' came up with the monomyth technique, you know what some writers said? They said that it's a dangerous technique that shouldn't exist, because it makes writers think that they should just follow a formulaic pattern with this so-called 'Hero's Journey' instead of creatively making their own stories. You know who supported 'The Hero's Journey'? The same guy who made the Star Wars prequels, George Lucas himself. Yeah, that's right. In terms of superhero movies, there exists a very formulaic pattern that repeats itself very often. The hero meets villain and defeats him, the end. Yes, I know that there are exceptions, hence the use of the word 'often' not 'always', but generally, the storyline often goes like that. And that's just lazy writing.

There are plenty more cliches out there in the superhero genre (yes, I'm going to call it that from now on), such that these movies have become a plague that's almost as bad as slasher movies. Worse than slasher movies, however, they make money. That's the terrible part. Also, critics are starting to appreciate them as real movies, when there were standards to follow. In fact, there have always been standards in the realms of literature, iron rules on what trope is bad, what storytelling technique is ineffective in conveying tension and emotion, etc. Let's not let a bunch of teenage superhero nerds ruin that for us just because they didn't watch enough movies to know what they are talking about.

Thank you.

Gringoamericano

Gringoamericano · Mar 25, 2015

I admit, I don't watch superhero movies. However, you seem to be going off the fact that "artsy" cinema would sell well if it weren't for the oversaturation of schlocky films. I can assure you that that isn't the case.

For example, you state that Slasher films weren't very profitable, however they were clearly profitable enough to warrant at least 5 sequels per franchise (looking at franchises like Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, and Halloween). Also, if you were to look at top grossing films of each year, you would find such artful masterpieces such as Shrek II, Die Hard 3, Armageddon, Top Gun, and Independence Day. Oh, weren't those the days, huh?

Getting rid of super hero movies will not get rid of the schlock. It will simply create a hole to be filled with more and more schlock. The fact is that people love schlock. If you were to give the average person a choice between a Michael Bay film and an Alejandro Jodorowsky film, they would go with something by Mr. Bay.

Speaking of quality cinema, you act as if there is a shortage of it. I can assure you that that is definitely not the case. Just in the past year, we've had movies such as Inherent Vice, A Most Violent Year, Foxcatcher, and Nymphomaniac. However, I'm guessing you weren't aware of them cause your taste in cinema seems to be informed by whatever lands on the Oscars (or even worse, Reddit's or IMDB's top movies list).

The best movies aren't always the most profitable or mainstream ones. While there have been exceptions (such as 2001: A Space Oddysey), the mainstream cares more about what's entertaining rather than what's artsy. Rather than expecting the mainstream to change to your tastes (or for Hollywood to spoonfeed you movies that cater to you), it'd be better to go out and actually find and support movies that you believe are quality.

I admit, I don't watch superhero movies. However, you seem to be going off the fact that "artsy" cinema would sell well if it weren't for the oversaturation of schlocky films. I can assure you that that isn't the case.

For example, you state that Slasher films weren't very profitable, however they were clearly profitable enough to warrant at least 5 sequels per franchise (looking at franchises like Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, and Halloween). Also, if you were to look at top grossing films of each year, you would find such artful masterpieces such as Shrek II, Die Hard 3, Armageddon, Top Gun, and Independence Day. Oh, weren't those the days, huh?

Getting rid of super hero movies will not get rid of the schlock. It will simply create a hole to be filled with more and more schlock. The fact is that people [i]love[/i] schlock. If you were to give the average person a choice between a Michael Bay film and an Alejandro Jodorowsky film, they would go with something by Mr. Bay.

Speaking of quality cinema, you act as if there is a shortage of it. I can assure you that that is definitely not the case. Just in the past year, we've had movies such as Inherent Vice, A Most Violent Year, Foxcatcher, and Nymphomaniac. However, I'm guessing you weren't aware of them cause your taste in cinema seems to be informed by whatever lands on the Oscars (or even worse, Reddit's or IMDB's top movies list).

The best movies aren't always the most profitable or mainstream ones. While there have been exceptions (such as 2001: A Space Oddysey), the mainstream cares more about what's entertaining rather than what's artsy. Rather than expecting the mainstream to change to your tastes (or for Hollywood to spoonfeed you movies that cater to you), it'd be better to go out and actually find and support movies that you believe are quality.

FaulknerCannes

FaulknerCannes · Mar 26, 2015

Yeah, I know what I said was a bit of a stretch, particularly the "superhero movies are ruining good movies" part of my rant.

At least you agree with me that these superhero flicks aren't exactly top-notch movies though. I'm just so annoyed by this blind hype going around superheroes lately.

FaulknerCannes

FaulknerCannes · Mar 26, 2015

Continuing my campaign on the criticism of superhero movies, here's another article I found that I thought was rather interesting, so I felt like sharing it with you guys:

http://whatculture.com/film/10-problems ... wledge.php

I think my favorite point made by the article was this:

"I’ll quote Roger Ebert’s review of Thor: “Here is a film that is scoring [77%] on Rotten Tomatoes. For what? The standards for comic book superhero movies have been established by Superman, The Dark Knight, Spider-Man 2 and Iron Man. In that company, Thor is pitiful.”

I've shared Roger's view on the skewed perspective for a while now, ever since Guardians of the Galaxy was given its 'top-notch' and 'superb' rating. And you know, it's not just Guardians, which can be excused for being very funny, but even movies like Thor and Thor 2 get a free pass from movie-goers, being described by many as "it was a good movie".

Really? I could understand if you tell me it's a "mediocre" or "average" movie, as opposed to "a s***ty movie", but "a good movie"? I mean, I would even take "it's an okay movie". Just saying. I'm flexible.

Meanwhile, horror and slasher movies, with equally shallow plot but nevertheless entertaining, have continued to receive the sledgehammer blow of 20% or 30% ratings as they've always had, despite some of them being more rich in storytelling than Generic Archetypes of the Galaxy. Hm. That's peculiar, huh?

Food for thought.

Continuing my campaign on the criticism of superhero movies, here's another article I found that I thought was rather interesting, so I felt like sharing it with you guys:

http://whatculture.com/film/10-problems-marvel-cinematic-universe-nobody-seems-acknowledge.php

I think my favorite point made by the article was this:

"I’ll quote Roger Ebert’s review of Thor: “Here is a film that is scoring [77%] on Rotten Tomatoes. For what? The standards for comic book superhero movies have been established by Superman, The Dark Knight, Spider-Man 2 and Iron Man. In that company, Thor is pitiful.”

I've shared Roger's view on the skewed perspective for a while now, ever since Guardians of the Galaxy was given its 'top-notch' and 'superb' rating. And you know, it's not just Guardians, which can be excused for being very funny, but even movies like Thor and Thor 2 get a free pass from movie-goers, being described by many as "it was a good movie".

Really? I could understand if you tell me it's a "mediocre" or "average" movie, as opposed to "a s***ty movie", but "a good movie"? I mean, I would even take "it's an okay movie". Just saying. I'm flexible.

Meanwhile, horror and slasher movies, with equally shallow plot but nevertheless entertaining, have continued to receive the sledgehammer blow of 20% or 30% ratings as they've always had, despite some of them being more rich in storytelling than Generic Archetypes of the Galaxy. Hm. That's peculiar, huh?

Food for thought.

The Plague of Superhero Movies

About / Info

Forums & RPG

Literary

Resources