The Difference between Christopher Nolan and Zack Snyder

(photo courtesy of batman.wikia.com)

Well I recently watched Batman Begins (2005)and it still holds up despite the release of Batman vs. Superman. Batman Begins is a superior film to Batman vs. Superman because it’s just a good, well made film. It’s not even an issue of comparing the two as superhero films.  They should be compared as films. Are they good or not? Batman vs. Superman benefitted from having a comic book extravaganza because it featured, if only briefly at times, many characters in the DC comic book pantheon.  Batman Begins was done well in order to correct the comic book extravaganza that wrecked the Batman franchise in the 90s. One of the reasons Batman Begins was able to win converts is that it was a good film. By superhero standards it’s a great film. In terms of storytelling technique Batman Begins set a high standard in terms of incorporating the superhero in the real world or the world as we know it. By discussing the difference between  Batman Begins and Batman vs. Superman I will discuss the difference between Christopher Nolan and Zack Snyder. The primary difference is that Nolan is a very good filmmaker particularly when it comes to building his own vision for a particular story and Snyder is not. I won’t use Man of Steel here because Nolan played a significant role in crafting the story.

One of the primary differences between  Begins and BvS is the tone as well as the delivery. Firstly, Snyder botched Batman’s origin story in BvS because it was more stylistic and superficial instead of offering any real glimpses into the character of Bruce Wayne. One of the most embarrassing scenes in Snyder’s take on Batman’s origin story is when he falls through a hole in the surface into the bat cave. After he falls the bats predictably swirl around him but what comes next was more stylistic than concrete. As the bats swirl around the young Bruce Wayne he begins to rise to the surface in a most holy fashion. It is a foolish scene and so is the one where his parents get shot in such dramatic fashion. In Begins Nolan’s approach is a grim affair but it is also portrayed in a realistic way. We understand from the outset that Bruce fears bats because after his fall he was swarmed by bats in the cave. He is also tormented by the murder of his parents. Ra’s Al Ghul teaches him to embrace his fear and become one with it and so how he becomes batman makes sense in the long run.  Snyder tries to simplify all the work Nolan has done by letting us watch a young Bruce rising towards the light and so accept that he must become batman. It therefore shows that Nolan knows how to build his story and explain the fundamentals of an issue that eventually lead to the stylistic or superficial elements that come later. Snyder on the other hand seems to struggle with the fundamentals and more readily embraces the superficial elements. This would explain the numerous dream sequences in BvS which are very superficial in Snyder’s case whereas the flashbacks in Begins convincingly reflect psychological trauma.

Now it has been recently revealed that Snyder deleted a scene from BvS because it was considered too dark. He seemed to be pushing for a very grim affair in this film. Something akin to the dark world in  Sin City. Snyder fails here as well.  There is nothing wrong with a grim film once it can be balanced out by more hopeful elements. Snyder killed off superman in order to drive home his point. He exaggerated in order to convey an issue where he would have been better served to elaborate on the fundamentals. Superman’s, supposed, death did not need to lead to the creation of a justice league because that could have been done with the doomsday fight alone. The holy trinity (Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman) would have already recognized the need to stand together following the doomsday fight.  In that sense it could have been much more hopeful if Doomsday was defeated and the three heroes got together and showed some level of camaraderie even though they were battered and bruised. This is what Nolan did so well in Begins. He did not need to drive home is point by having a main character die. In The Dark Knight it does seem as if Nolan was prepared to take it to a whole new level by having James Gordon killed but he brought him back to the relief of the audience. Nolan toyed with the grim elements but he balanced it. In The Dark Knight Rachel Dawes does die and Harvey Dent becomes Two Face but Rachel Dawes is not a major character like James Gordon. Her death was designed to push Dent over the edge. In Begins Nolan is trying to explain the fundamentals that lead to the creation of Batman’s partnership with other real world individuals in the fight against crime. His major ally is James Gordon but there is also Lucious Fox and Alfred. It’s still a team and we see how all of them come together to make things happen and this partnership leads to the defeat and death of Ra’s Al Ghul. This is not the case in BvS and we don’t necessarily get a sense of how the holy trinity function as a partnership. This would have been better illustrated if Superman didn’t die. If Snyder explained the fundamentals in terms of the  three coming together for a common cause then this film would have been better and it could have simply be called The Justice League: The Dawn of Justice. There would have been no need for Superman’s, supposed, death to create a rallying cry. Nolan by seeking to build the fundamentals of the story succeeds in Begins where Snyder fails because he (Snyder) cannot explain the fundamentals. This is why Snyder has been called out for the ‘Martha’ incident because it reeks of gross superficiality.

Nolan’s expert explanation of the fundamentals means that he is able to introduce several characters without making the area seem overcrowded. Snyder on the other hand, because of his stylistic and superficial approach, makes the area seem overcrowded because he can’t distinguish who or what is important to the story. Snyder’s superficiality becomes especially rank when it comes to the numerous dream sequences and Luthor’s reference to the coming of Darkseid. Snyder thinks he’s telling a story by doing this but instead he isolates the viewer from the story. It is because of the many interludes that the BvS story seems very hollow and trite in its conception.  Goyer and Chris Terrio must also be singled out. The superman issue was weak because the story should have been about Batman vs. Superman only. It would have simplified the issue because, as many people have commented, there is no dawn of justice. BvS would have worked if it focused on how these two characters have different approaches to addressing the world’s problems. It never had to be about the two of them actually fighting. Batman should be clearly more seasoned than Superman and there would be nothing wrong for the two of them to come together to fight Luthor. Simplifying the story is the only way this film could have worked effectively but it couldn’t be simplified because that would require building the fundamentals. Snyder is incapable of building fundamentals. The two heroes didn’t need to be connected through Bruce Wayne’s tower collapsing or their mothers having the same name. Those kinds of connections are more emotional than realistic. Batman would have begun doing some serious investigations once Zod announced his arrival. He wouldn’t have to wait for his building to come crashing down. In Begins Wayne  and Gordon have a connection because Gordon consoled him immediately following his father’s death however if Gordon was corrupt then the connection would not be realistic.  Batman must still have observed or done his investigations to determine if Gordon was one of the good cops ‘one of the few’.  There is a very important scene in Begins when Gordon refuses to take a taste of corrupt dollars. A very important scene because what would be the point of their emotional connection if Gordon was corrupt.

Nolan introduces other characters that are similarly submerged because of the rampant corruption and glorification of crime in Gotham. The idealists have been smothered or extinguished.  What Nolan does well is have them come together in a way that doesn’t seem superfluous or empty. In Begins the characters are either idealists or realists. The realists are very corrupt or unwilling to provoke change whereas the idealists are given to wishful thinking. It’s Batman that galvanizes and brings them together which is a point the joker made in The Dark Knight when he addressed the mobsters. The Joker understood clearly that batman was the epicenter of the positive movement. In Snyder’s case he would have required a more fundamental epicenter to explain the creation of the justice league. He tries to have this done with the death of superman. Nick Fury and his SHIELD operatives brought the Avengers together. Where Snyder missed the boat is that there is no epicenter in BvS so all the characters seem empty. In Begins Nolan makes it clear from the outset that crime is the number one issue to be dealt with and he introduces Ra’s Al Ghul to identify a difference in crime fighting styles. Ra’s is more in line with the ‘eye for an eye’ approach and batman takes the new testament, ‘be your brother’s keeper’, approach. Batman supports rehabilitation whereas Ra’s believes there is no other way but eradicating criminals. Other characters like the Scarecrow become involved but in more subordinate roles. A character like the scarecrow is not just a typical villain but one that represents how ingrained corruption is in Gotham. He represents something. In BvS we have Luthor who doesn’t really represent anything apart from being a harbinger for Darkseid. There is no elaboration on the reasons for his hatred of superman.  Gene Hackman’s Luthor  in Superman (1978)was more sophisticated because he had plans that were foiled by Superman. His plans had nothing to do with Superman; he had to take him out for good reason. Hackman’s Luthor was just a man willing to do dastardly things to get what he wants for his own aggrandizement. This is the Luthor we all know.  He represented the forces of destruction that lay beneath the surface as the great light of the world, Superman, flew around town. Luthor certainly represented something significant in such a scenario but not in BvS. So Snyder never found a way to make his characters relevant or truly representative of something. Nolan did find that in Begins and, again, this is because he stuck to the fundamentals. This would also explain why Nolan could introduce several characters without them seeming superfluous. They represented something.  BvS acts more like extended commentary on this or that instead of actual character building within the context of the dawn of justice.

I just highlighted several elements to showcase the difference between Nolan and Snyder. The primary difference is that Nolan is a very good film maker who knows how to build the fundamentals of his story while articulating his vision and Snyder focuses primarily on the superficial and stylistic elements that mean nothing without the proper fundamentals. Everything you include into the story must be representative of something apart from its stylistic element.  Snyder does not seem to realize this but Nolan does which is why his Batman trilogy will endure while Snyder’s BvS will eventually fade.

Deadpool (2016) ****/5: the film does run out of gas but the characterization of Deadpool is pretty solid. It's a good R-rated slap in the face for the superhero films

(photo courtesy of www.npr.org)

Well I finally watched Deadpool and I thought it was a great diversion from the typical superhero fare with its very violent action and sardonic type of humour.  The R-rating is nothing new to superhero films although Deadpool is not a superhero. The Blade films were just as gory or bloody as Deadpool and yes Blade used a sword as well and he is also marvel property. The Sin City and 300 films were also very gory but there were no superheroes in those although it was based on graphic comic books. The edge that Deadpool has is the humour.  I can see why the film is so popular and yes this does look like the beginning of a beautiful franchise. The film does run out of gas towards the end but the characterization of Deadpool or Wade Wilson’s story is strong enough to carry the film.

This film is about how Wade Wilson (Ryan Reynolds) a former special force operative, who volunteers to be a part of a special  program for very personal reasons. As he becomes the subject of various experiments Wilson becomes trapped and is nearly killed by the chief medical officer.  He does emerge from the experiments with accelerated healing powers, like Wolverine, but it comes at a cost of disfigurement. He then tracks down the man, Ajax, who experimented on him so that he can return to normal.  Yes a romantic relationship had to be in it.

Positives

The primary positive is the characterization of Deadpool. He might be very humourous but there are times when he has to get serious or pause for reflection. Some of the best parts occur before he does turn Deadpool because of the grounded atmosphere in which the various interactions take place. The R-rating also helps because there is a real world quality to it with all the profanity. Well done ryan Reynolds as you seem to have recovered from your Green Lantern night mare.

Deadpool is an anti-hero and that’s fine since we don’t expect him to be saving people. He has one mission of vengeance and that’s it. It made me wonder if this is the kind of film Heath ledger’s joker would have if he ever got a solo film.  By being an anti-hero we don’t get any grand captain america talks about saving people etc.

The sardonic humour in the film is very good. It’s clearly meant to be the antithesis to the typical superhero film with all its moral values tied to box office success.

Marvel seemed to hint at the coming of a character like Deadpool and his profanity. In The Avengers Age of Ultron there are a lot of scenes referring to the use of profane language and how inappropriate it is in a kids film. At least marvel acknowledged its own limitations hence why a film like Deadpool seems so refreshing. Let it go.

The action is pretty good. Refreshing to see some blood. It does show that there really should be more blood in superhero films but we can’t see it because we’re living in the PG-13 era.

The addition of someone like Colussus points fingers at the low production budget and it does seem like it did not get the typical superhero treatment. The production budget for Deadpool is said to be around US$58 million. Most superhero films are in the US$100 million range. Deadpool, in the real world, seriously takes on the mainstream here. Deadpool provides all the important references when he talks to the audience but the low budget is there for all of us to see particularly the small scale of the locations and the isolated bits especially Xavier’s mansion.

Negatives

Although the characterization of Deadpool is strong the story itself does run out of gas towards the end. The early parts are good but once Wade Wilson becomes Deadpool and starts slashing away it becomes a bit repetitive and his single minded mission doesn’t offer much dimensions. There is one dimension when he takes some time off to heal in the care of his black and blind sidekick. By the end however we know enough about Deadpool’s antics and it does get to be a bit of a drag. If  Deadpool’s characterization was bad then the whole film would have suffered and that is testament to the acting and the toned down, real world visual element.

Apart from the sardonic humour it doesn’t have much to  say apart from what takes place in his sordid romantic affair. It really is an anti-hero film because typical superhero films are now expected to make grand statements about humanity whereas Deadpool’s only motive is revenge. It’s a very single minded pursuit and that won’t be for everyone or those that prefer superhero films to have some major statements about heroism.

It’s still a good film. Not exactly great because it does run out of gas but the characterization of Deadpool is strong enough to carry the film.

Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) ***/5: A poorly conceptualized film although it’s a comic book extravaganza. Tries to do too much

(image courtesy of bgr.com)

Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice is a poorly conceptualized film although it’s a comic book extravaganza. As a comic book extravaganza the film had  all the materials to make something happen but the film goes out with a whimper. DC and Warner Bros. have regressed with this film and if they want to salvage anything from this debacle they should fire Zack Snyder and bring back Nolan or get a director with some quality.  The film has some redeeming features  but because of the poor conceptualization some of the characterizations are poor. This film threatened to boil over into a Batman and Robin scenario except that this is a more grim film.  Snyder promoted the serious nature of the film but he made his source material very evident in this film. He merely copied instead of assimilated the source material which is Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns and the famous comic book story The Death of Superman. The storylines in those books were very good but here bits and pieces of them are added on without any real sense of direction. By adding those source materials in bits and pieces some people have claimed that there is a good film underneath. There is not a good film somewhere because of how Snyder and his co writers have adapted the storylines from these two films. Either comic  book storyline from the The Dark Knight Returns or The Death of Superman , could have been adapted into a film of its own and it would have been more successful.  The Death of Superman could have been adapted into Man of Steel 2 and The Dark Knight Returns could have been adapted to a new Batman film before the 2 heroes collided. Just imagine a film entitled Superman: Doomsday or The Death of Superman. BvS is just poorly conceptualized and there is no real objective here. BvS is a comic book extravaganza and Warner bros. clearly hasn’t learnt the lessons from Batman and Robin. They didn’t need to play catch up to Marvel with their own rich source material.  Instead everything seems forced.

This film stars Ben Affleck as Bruce Wayne/Batman as he tries to come to terms with the all powerful alien popularly known as Superman (Henry Cavill). Their paths eventually collide in a not so good way before there is some resolution. They eventually have to grapple with Lex Luthor and his nefarious schemes in creating the doomsday creature. Lex Luthor  seems to be making way for a very powerful foe (Darkseid?) to come. A foe they will be fighting in the Justice League which opens next year.

Positives

Although the film is poorly conceptualized there are some positives or redeeming features which, if in the hands of a better director, can be utilized much more effectively.  The first positive for me is the casting. They got that spot on. We all know about the design of superman from Man of Steel but Ben Affleck isn’t bad as Batman/Bruce Wayne although he does comes across as a bit stodgy at times. The real win in terms of casting is Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman. She certainly has the look. She plays the undercover role as the mysterious and  beautiful Diana Prince well and she also captures the look and feel of the powerful  amazon warrior known as Wonder Woman. In the hands of a good director the Wonder Woman film, slated to be released next year, will do well. The other supporting roles were also very well cast. Jesse Eisenberg’s Luthor is the weakest cast member because his Luthor is merely a rip off of Heath Ledger’s Joker in The Dark Knight. He does provide a menacing air but we all know what the joker is capable of. They could have gone for a more mature Luthor who is sinister on the inside yet sparkles in the public eye.  The original Luthor from the superman animated series was a very effective villain because he had his hands in everything related to metropolis. It was always difficult for Superman to take him down because of this particularly as many people in metropolis depend on his corporation for their livelihoods. How else could DC have a famous storyline about Luthor running for president. You would never get this from Eisenberg’s portrayal of Luthor. The really suave and more mature Luthor from the animated series would not have exposed himself so easily as the luthor  in BvS. He would have been much harder to take down.

Another positive was the detective work in the film not just from Batman’s side but Lois Lane’s. It was fairly well done but it didn’t lead to any striking revelations.

The other positive for me was the presence of a major villain in the form of Doomsday that was woefully underutilized.  Doomsday should have been the subject of an entire film not just the final minutes. A being this powerful would eventually bring the future members of the justice league into play because his impact should be global. This is why I did not like how doomsday was created.  If he had to be created the way he was then I still would not have liked his limited screen time. There was no method to his madness. No explanation whatsoever is provided apart from how he’s created by luthor. As a result Doomsday becomes a hollow shell.

One thing they also got right was the formation of the trinity: Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman. Wonder Woman is the buffer between Batman &  Superman.  They are truly the original members of the Justice league. Wonder Woman could have played a more effective role when batman and superman come to blows but that role seemed to be reserved for  Lois Lane.

Negatives

The main negative of this film is that it is poorly conceptualized. The storylines from two famous comic book stories are supposedly melded into one. If Snyder managed to meld the two effectively then this would probably have been a great film . The story of The Dark Knight Returns is Batman’s story and superman plays only a supporting role. The Death of Superman is Superman’s story. These are 2 major story lines that were sacrificed at Snyder’s altar. These stories were 2 big to be crammed into 1 movie. What Snyder and Warner Bros. should have done is broken this film up into 2 or 3. It would be titled only The Dawn of Justice Pt 1 or The Dawn of Justice: The Dark Knight Returns.  The posters would feature Batman’s logo and would have adapted the storyline of The Dark Knight Returns  storyline, particularly the part referring to the cross over with superman and without his faked death. It would be a meeting of the 2 only with some fisticuffs involved obviously and could have even featured other minor characters like Green Arrow.  The next film would have been The Dawn of Justice: The Death of Superman. This film would have featured Superman’s duel with Doomsday and the need for earth to be protected by superman in light of these galactic threats.  In fact there could have been a part three  entitled The Dawn of Justice: Wonder Woman. There would have been some cross over between the 3 but it would be more limited. Each film would have been told from different perspectives. Then for the Justice League film to be released next year they would all unite. It would have been somewhat similar to the marvel model but all three films would have been anchored by a particular story related to each character which would have made their stories much more enriching. It would make these characters more pronounced in the public eye. It wouldn’t be just like Marvel because these three films would deal with the famous DC trinity. The original Justice League members. Well if we’re pushing it then they would probably have to include films for the Flash, Green lantern and maybe the Martian later on. These films, if done well, would have given marvel nightmares. BvS as it stands just won’t do it even though marvel is now running out of gas.

What we get from BvS instead are snapshots of what could have been. I am not going into any nitpicking because that would be useless. Suffice to say that DC did not have to rush to keep up with Marvel. Their source material is already so rich that if they made just one of the 3 films proposed by me then marvel would be having sleepless nights. Particularly if it was a good film. Why would DC hurry to catch up with marvel. They already dominated the 1980s and 90s. Marvel was like a mouse to the large DC cat. DC already showed with its Nolan films that it can compete with Marvel by telling comic book stories in its particular style. With BvS they got too bogged down into thinking they have to play catch up. If DC and Warner Bros. held its nerve then when Marvel’s project is finished with The Avengers: Infinity Wars, DC could have taken over completely with their Justice League films. DC did not have to rush because, historically speaking, their comics do have the better story lines.

The Hans Zimmer score in this film is one of the worst offerings I have heard for a superhero film. The choral aspect of the score  was  very contrived. Hans Zimmer did well in Man of Steel  but he really blew it here.

The Batman storyline was very contrived and more supernatural than natural. It reminded me of  Batman Forever.  Batman is shaped more by his dreams than his actions in the real world.

Doomsday was underutilized and could have been more effective if this was just superman’s movie.

Luthor was a weak villain and seemed like a carbon copy of Heath ledger’s Joker.  The Luthor from the comics would have been a better fit. The motives  of the characters  in the trinity are weak or poorly defined.

Zack Snyder should be fired from the project. He wrecked Watchmen and there is every chance that he will wreck the Justice League.  The only reason this film is doing well at the box office is because batman and superman are hot property. The question Warner bros. should ask is: Would Snyder’s film be doing well if it were not for the characters of batman and superman?

Some people should not confuse comic book extravaganza with a good film. It’s good to see certain characters  on screen but it’s even better when most things work from the perspective of the story.

Why Batman vs. Superman and Captain America: Civil War means that the Golden Age of superhero films in the 21st century is coming to an end?

(image courtesy of forbes.com)

(image courtesy of nerdist .com)

The films Batman vs. Superman and Captain America: Civil War will be released shortly. Just before the summer explosion. Batman vs. Superman will be released by the end of March and Captain America: Civil War in May. The two films are expected to make a lot of money and their storylines are largely focused on the conflict between familiar superheroes which are now household names. Both films feature numerous super powered individuals battling each other and probably the usual commonplace villain. This plethora of characters is welcome at the box office but the high level of quantity does not necessarily imply a qualitative shift. This means that not much change is forthcoming and we are now in the overextension or overproduction phase. Batman vs. Superman has a total budget of around US$400 million for example or $250 million without marketing costs.This over extension or overproduction means that the golden age for superhero films in the 21^st century is now coming to an end. By the time The Avengers: Infinity Wars and the Justice League films appear there will be no profound shift just a massive outlay in terms of the typical superhero outing. The original foundations have already been laid and so we’re now in a phase where it’s difficult to be surprised. I know there will be some twists and turns in the films themselves from a superficial point of view but the original foundations won’t be altered. For that to happen a decisive shift in how we view superheroes will have to come about. This won’t come about for now. For the next couple of years the most that can happen is the addition of new characters or films about different characters. Deadpool is only a minor diversion from the norm. It reminded me somewhat of Blankman in the 90s particularly the comedic tone. The diversion is not a substantial one.

A golden age is an age of prosperity and flamboyance. It represents the coming together of many elements into a massive whole which is very positive for whoever is involved. Everyone engaged has their part to play. Everyone benefits in some way, even the minor players. It does not mean that the status quo is equalized but it does mean that whatever benefits were normally derived have been enhanced significantly. Everything that’s produced turns into a massive/surplus profit. For this Golden Age to emerge a significant foundation has to be laid before there is a significant coming together of all elements into the massive whole. We saw this with the release of The Avengers in 2012 for instance. The problem with golden ages is that they are so similar to the boom periods of economic growth where the bust normally follows.  The bust normally follows from the crisis of overproduction where a spate of unsaleable goods are produced or when value is not materialized in sufficient quantities. Overproduction lays the basis for the bust. Some see it coming where others don’t. For someone to reach the stage where they are overproducing it must mean that they are prosperous in some way. The Golden Age therefore represents the peak of development for  a particular entity and also the beginning of its decline. It’s inevitable because every entity is finite or lays the basis for the creation of a new one. Some can accept it and some can’t accept that their time is limited. For the new entity to emerge the previous one has to expire or enter the stage of oblivion. When you rise and then you fall that is a commonplace phenomenon. It has happened to everyone and anything; from empires to rich individuals to the egomaniacs. It’s a historical fact and so I am not trying to come with an agenda against superhero films in general. It is clear based on the production values of these films that we have entered the overproduction phase. It’s the overproduction phase that normally means that the end is coming. The end can be a good thing because decline can be gradual. Decline does not have to be so rapid that an entity collapses immediately. This is why you have the Silver and Bronze Ages which indicate a more gradual decline from the massive prosperity or power or brilliance or wealth in earlier times. When the decline is complete then a new way will emerge. It may take some time but it will come.

Superhero films have had Golden Ages before. There were golden ages involving numerous films with  Zorro, Superman, Batman, Captain America, Spiderman, The Green Hornet, Dr. Strange and Captain Marvel. These films were released from the 1930s to the 1970s but they were made as appendages. They were hardly taken as seriously as we take superhero films today. A lot of them were television films or released straight to television and could not justify the big budgets of today. The first modern Golden Age began with Superman (1978) and ended in 1989 after the abysmal Superman 4: The Quest for Peace  in 1987. There were other minor superhero films released during that period like Flash Gordon , The Incredible Hulk films, Howard the Duck, Supergirl and others. But up until 1987 Superman films led the way and were responsible for the upsurge in appreciation/$$$ for these sort of films in the cinemas. The next Golden Age began in 1989 with Batman and ended in 1998 following  the abysmal Batman and Robin (1997). Other minor superhero films were released during this time from the abysmal ones like Captain America, The Fantastic Four, Justice league of America, Steel to films like Blade, The Crow,  Spawn, Darkman,  Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Men in Black and others. Despite these other films Batman clearly led the way commercially and artistically even in the area of animated films like Batman: Mask of the Phantasm (1993). So it’s only fitting that the Golden age ended with Batman and Robin particularly when one is looking at it from the perspective relating to prosperity.

The next golden age began with Spider-Man in 2002 and is the most extensive and significant golden age because many superheroes were revived during this era including Batman in Nolan’s trilogy, Superman in Man of Steel (no I don’t include Superman Returns (2006) even though it made US$200 million at the north American box office), the Hulk and Captain America. There was also the introduction of the likes of  Iron Man in 2008 and Thor and lets not forget the X-Men and The Guardians of the Galaxy. This golden age is now nearing the end but it is one of the most significant golden ages because more heroes have been given an opportunity to shine because of the massive upgrades in technology to enhance the visuals and smarter storytelling. The sort of storytelling that makes these heroes seem relevant in 21^st century society and not as super powered individuals whose battles are far removed from society. The Dark Knight is clearly the most significant film from the perspective of serious storytelling in comic book based films. Iron Man (2008) was also very good and to some extent Captain America: Winter Soldier. We might even see a Wonder Woman film soon with a lot of feminist issues.  Marvel has lengthened this Golden Age with its 3 phase project which is supposed to lead up to The Avengers: The Infinity Wars. DC also has plans for the Justice League which will follow from Batman vs. Superman. One knows that this is a major golden age because most superhero films make in excess of US$150 million at the North American box office, even Antman.

So why does Batman vs. Superman and Captain America: Civil War represent the beginning of the end? One just has to look at why the 2 previous golden ages ended. This third golden age could easily be broken up into 3. Spiderman alone has gone through several changes to the point where he will be included in Captain America: Civil War. The original spiderman franchise produced by Sony collapsed qualitatively with Spider-Man 3 in 2007. It was then revived with the title The Amazing Spiderman. The spiderman franchise did well in terms of the box office for Sony but now they’ve decided to tie him to the mast of the Avengers. The collapse of the spiderman franchise can represent its own golden age. The same applies to Nolan’s take on Batman which influenced the new direction for superman in Man of Steel which now leads into Batman vs. Superman. Then there  is the marvel phase which began with Iron Man in 2008. I have concentrated all these films into one massive golden age because of the direct competition between companies producing these films. This never really happened to a great extent in the previous Golden ages. Superhero films are now taken very seriously in terms of generating profit for film companies like Warner Bros., Walt Disney, Paramount and Sony. Actors like Robert Downey Jr. are being paid large salaries; salaries unheard of in the two previous eras. These films generate billions at the Box office (North America and the rest of the world) and are capable of attracting those that thought that comic book based films were for the nerds only. A man dressing up as a bat seems logical when compared to the 1960s.

Batman vs. Superman and Captain America: Civil War represent the end because of the overabundance of characters and plots that are more superficial in nature. They are superficial because they have no significant impact when it comes to altering the original foundations that built these characters. Every new film is only an addition to the existing foundation and not necessarily an overhaul. The revolutionary edge that began with the original films has now worn thin. Overabundance is characterized by serious speculation and a lot of imaginary possibilities. I read comic books in the 1990s and early 2000s and that was a big time for the industry in terms of story lines etc. I was so caught up I would even buy Robin’s comic book series and Batgirl’s (the silent one). The overabundance in that era led to a lot of “what if?” storylines. What if magneto fought the Juggernaut? or What if Wolverine fought Captain America? What if Wonder Woman got together with Superman? Etc.  It became very speculative. There reaches a point where  a good,  plain old story is not enough because the demands of the audience will naturally increase. Apart from The Avengers and maybe Captain America: Winter Soldier marvel has still not produced a film that’s better than Iron Man (2008).  The film that started it all. Regardless, people will demand to see more.  The Iron man series got so ridiculous that even Pepper Potts got superpowers at one point. Tony Stark by Iron Man 3 had a mach 50 suit (just exaggerating). By the time of The Avengers: Age of Ultron he created  Ultron, a robot in his own image, Captain America was tossing motorcycles through the air with apparent ease and Thor was dipping himself in holy water to see his vision and then proceeded to bring the android to life. The Hulk has also faded into the background as a backup strong man. His story is now the most superficial of all which is why they created the romance between Banner and Black widow. So much for Betty Ross.  People will want more and now they will get it in Civil War when the heroes face off with each other which is now a “what if?” or speculative scenario just like Batman vs. Superman. Both films will be introducing many characters in order to keep the excitement high for audiences. Expect more films to introduce more and more. It has been reported that The Avengers: Infinity Wars will have around 69 super powered individuals battling the almighty Thanos. What a way to go out with a bang. If that’s not enough then there are the Inhumans. I have to admit that I am looking forward to Black Panther.  In any case the overload of characters will mean that the party will soon be over. But first we will have to wait for the Justice league Films. They will be battling some overwhelming villains in that as well which will require the service of many super powered individuals. Superhero films are becoming very similar to an animated series. There are even various television shows such as The Flash, which has been well received. There was a good series  featuring The Flash in the 90s as well.  I expect that he will be brought into the Justice League set up soon enough.

Until then one might as well relish the overabundance and the many imaginary possibilities on display. Superhero films are so spectacular that Batman vs. Superman has a budget close to US$400 million. I suspect it will do the usual billion at the box office. A cool US$600 million profit. Civil War might also reach a billion with so many characters being featured that people want to see, including spiderman. Whether or not they are good films is another question. They certainly won’t be great films because they are part of an existing structure to maximize profit opportunities and to keep some interest in the long term plans for the executives. These films won’t be altering that structure in a radical way. They are being created in order to preserve the integrity of the structure with some cool additions or some superficial twists and turns.  A lot will be diluted and overextended in order to ensure this. No wonder people are calling Civil War The Avengers 2.5. Maybe we’ll get yet another peek of Thanos preparing to wage his long awaited war to destroy all life in the universe.  The executives might reach a point where they do pull out before the crash or just keep overproducing until the audience has had enough. Batman and Robin was a glorious failure because it was so spectacularly overproduced. It became so far removed from its own reality. The same is happening now for superhero films in the 21^st century. The golden age is certainly coming to an end. We’re probably in the silver age without realizing it.