Categories
Reviews Stories In Focus

Marvel, DC, and the Battle for Longevity: A Review of Two Studios

Superhero movies have enjoyed an enviable run the last several years at the precipice of popular culture. Their prevalence in the mainstream, especially as of late, has been attributed to the use of serialization as Marvel’s and now DC’s method of organizing their release schedules. Both studios have taken a variety of comic book properties and put them all under one roof, building what is referred to as a “Shared Universe”, where each individual franchise is able to stand alone to be enjoyed on its own merits while simultaneously feeding into the stories of others, contributing to the development of an overall joint-storyline.

MarvelDCThis is nothing new for Marvel. They kicked off the serialization boom in 2008 with the release of Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk, the first two additions to their “Cinematic Universe”. Even that early on, their first several films alluded to a promise of something great on the horizon. They hinted at some event that in a pre-Avengers world would have been difficult to imagine. Many on Marvel’s current roster of superheroes would be completely unknown to the average person ten years ago (Ant-Man? Star Lord?) further highlighting their ability to make great movies regardless of who’s attached to the project. Marvel’s most worthwhile endeavors have also been their riskiest ones.

DC has been trying the same thing. Having seen the overwhelming critical and financial success of Marvel’s Cinematic Universe, it was inevitable they would want to attempt something similar. But while Marvel had years to grow their universe organically, refining their filmmaking formula with each release, DC has been stuck playing catch-up. Results thus far being relatively lackluster.

Marvel isn’t at all superior to DC in terms of source material. Christopher Nolan’s Batman films are some the best that the genre has to offer (DC!). While their grittiness and darker tone worked for them, Marvel has instead built its track record on films that may appear more light-hearted by comparison. It doesn’t mean they don’t also explore dark thematic content but composition-wise, their releases are a stark contrast to the dourness of something like The Dark Knight. Marvel’s films feature larger-than-life characters, sharp, witty dialogue, vivid set pieces and explosive action scenes. Guardians of the Galaxy, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and the Avengers films have closely embodied this formula but deviated from it enough to make each distinct in its own right, achieving excellent results.

Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice certainly have positive qualities. They are suitably cast, well-acted, and look great on a technical and aesthetic level. However, when it comes to telling a simple, compelling story, DC falters. To be fair, their shared universe project currently has only those two films in its body of work but their common thread, director Zack Snyder, seems unlikely to be able to move either franchise forward in any meaningful way.

Snyder’s frustrating tendency to over-prioritize visuals and special effects while neglecting things like script and character development continue to hurt these films. The unfocused structure of Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman and the  uneven pacing throughout are problems not even unique to DC. Repeated viewings of Iron Man highlights how slowly the plot can drag in the second act and how it leaves the story out to dry. The difference is that while Marvel’s films have their issues, their sense of humor, script, visuals, and characterization are usually enough to counterbalance the negatives. DC’s first two films may be truly cinematic, but their lack of heart and substance prove to be the biggest hindrance to their quality.

All the best superhero movies, the ones that leave an impression are the ones that speak to the heart and not the eyes. It’s cutesy, but it’s true. I may use a still from Man of Steel as my phone’s wallpaper because it looks good but I don’t own the movie on DVD. Between that and say Guardians of the Galaxy which one would you want to watch again? Hopefully choosing between Marvel and DC won’t always be this easy.

Categories
Stories In Focus

Movie Review: “Thor: The Dark World”

Before diving into the actual film itself, can we just take a moment to admire the genius that is behind the Marvel franchise? This brand is a money-making juggernaut, and its momentum is now unstoppable. To introduce each superhero in their own separate movie before combining them all into the behemoth that was the first Avengers film was completely unprecedented and truly brilliant.

Courtesy of media-imdb.com
Courtesy of media-imdb.com

With that being said, I felt as though Thor 2: The Dark World is the 5-minute breather that Marvel had to take before cranking out A+ superhero movies again. The movie exceeds expectations as far as special effects and fight scenes are concerned, and Chris Hemsworth (Thor) and Tom Hiddleston (Loki) put on great performances. However, the writers who created the storyline seemed confused as to what movie they were writing. Allow me to explain.

The plot begins thousands of years ago, when Thor’s grandfather led the forces of Asgard in a war against the Dark Elves. Their leader, Malekith, had created a super weapon—otherworldly floating goo called “the Aether” that turns everything into darkness—but he was defeated before he could deploy it. The Asgardians, unable to destroy the Aether, decided instead to “bury it deep where no one can find it.” Surely, this problem will never surface again thousands of years later.

Fast forward to the present; Thor has returned to Asgard, leaving his love-interest, astrophysicist Jane Foster (played by Natalie Portman), behind on Earth. While searching for a way to contact Thor, Jane stumbles into an alternate dimension, where she comes into contact with—whoops, it wasn’t deep enough—the Aether. This alien fluid enters her body and refuses to leave. Malekith and his army, who have been in suspended animation and conveniently forgotten on their starship all this time, are awakened by Jane’s meddling and come looking for the Aether.

So now Frodo, Sam, and their friends must try to destroy both the Ring and Sauron before they usher Middle Earth into a new age of darkness.

Oops, I mean:

So now Thor, Jane, and their friends must try to destroy both the Aether and Malekith before the latter usher the universe into a new age of darkness.

It seems as though director Alan Taylor just copy-and-pasted some of Tolkien’s ideas, which takes away from some of the originality that defined the first Thor. However, with that said, I’d still recommend seeing this film in theaters. The battle scenes are breathtaking, and with the storyline of The Dark World taking place all over the universe, it’s really a sight to behold on the big screen.

Perhaps the biggest draw would be to see the character development that occurs in Loki and Thor. The uninspiring script is transcended by the now revealed backstory of these two characters and their relationship between each other. During the course of the film, we learn that Loki may not be the all-around villain that he was portrayed to be in the recent Avengers movie, while Thor makes some self-realizations of his own. Watching these two interact is as satisfying as watching the action sequences.

In conclusion, I enjoyed this film enough to say that it is worth the price of admission. Thanks to the success of the Avengers, every Marvel film from here on out is a must-see anyway. It does not matter if Chris Hemsworth was replaced by a trained monkey at this point. As long as there is a 3-minute clip after the credits roll of a sneak preview of Avengers 2, that movie ticket is money well spent.