Misunderstood mythology of superheroes by Bea
I have already mentioned how stunned I was by negative reviews of BvS, but my astonishment turned to horror while reading such phrases as: not Marvel golden standard of superhero movies, wait for another Marvel movie, kids deserve to cheer for their heroes etc. A dawning suspicion was confirmed when Captain America: Civil War premiered and many critics triumphantly informed the public that this movie was everything that BvS should have been (sometimes even providing a list of requirements): Civil War gets everything right that BvS did wrong; What Civil War Did Right (That Batman V Superman Got Wrong); What Marvel is getting right; How it succeeds where BvS failed etc. I know a notion that BvS was never meant to do/get the same things as Civil War and both movies have only superficial plot similarities would be ridiculous to those people. Who would think that BvS had completely different goals which the movie achieved perfectly!
The number of times when critics mentioned that BvS should have applied the ”golden standard of superhero movies” was mind-boggling for me. At this moment, I started to suspect we live in the Matrix, created by somebody with a strange sense of humor. I was extremely naive to think critics had a mission to offer knowledgeable, insightful, and unbiased opinions on movies, to analyze them with their professional skills, educate audiences, and promote art. It is abundantly clear now they don’t do it – they advocate standardized, formulaic filmmaking, at least in the superhero genre. There are only few critics who have the sense of professional mission and responsibility to society. A substantial fraction of the audience, on the other hand, wants more than the ”golden standard of superhero movies” – they want originality, meaningful themes, unique visions, memorable music, non-homogenized cinematography, and non-formulaic storytelling. They want art – so the audience’s and critics’ roles are now reversed. Let me remind you, that synonyms for ”standard” are not: extraordinary, unique, unparalleled, striking, unprecedented, fantastic, phenomenal, great, creative, exceptional, innovative, groundbreaking, beautiful, game-changing or breathtaking. The synonyms are: average, common, normal, prosaic, routine, unexceptional, and unremarkable (Merriam-Webster Thesaurus).
This is the current state and future of superhero movies that majority of critics promote – average, unexceptional, and unremarkable products. Definitely they think that those movies are not and shouldn’t be art, because art is not standardized or formulaic. Would anyone think it is acceptable to add several cool elements to a Gustav Klimt painting? Or add some sounds to any of Hans Zimmer compositions? Would it be all right if I asked my 12-year-old daughter to add some funny sentences to a Doris Lessing novel? These are rhetorical questions that don’t need to be answered. Yet they did it to Zack Snyder, Chris Terrio, and the whole group of talented people, who worked hard to create something unique and meaningful. This conviction that such ”fixing” is acceptable (even desirable) is so strong that a popular critic did a rewrite of the Martha scene from BvS (in a laughably awkward, superficial, infantile, and long-winded manner) but thought it was actually better than Terrio’s work and presented it to the public.
When reflecting on ‘Blade Runner 2049’ Denis Villeneuve said: “I have no regrets. I cannot do movies thinking about the outcome at the boxoffice. It’s an art form. I don’t sell shoes.” We could wonder why ‘Blade Runner 2049’ was allowed to be a work of art but Justice League was treated like a pair of shoes. For financial reasons? We should remember that a superhero movie has more possibilities of turning profit because of factors like commercial partners and merchandise, and doesn’t rely so strongly on the box office returns. Because it’s a part of a cinematic universe? One can understand a strong desire to appeal to a wider audience, but it doesn’t mean we should accept turning art into a corporate product that gives an impression it was done according to the list of requirements. We must never forget that standardization and formulas are the antithesis of art. “Works of art make rules; rules do not make works of art” (Claude Debussy).
What happens when people are told constantly there is only one proper way to make a movie and it’s the best they can dream of? Most people believe now that the best way of making movies is making them by a committee, because it ensures that directors adhere to the studio’s vision. Let me quote a post of one of the fans, that is spot-on in my opinion:
”Keep on dumbing down the content. Manufacture controversy over the competition, emphasis to keep it light, keep it dumb, or be hated. Push out all intellectualism in the market, make stupid the status quo. Make more for less. Quantity over quality. Abolish originality. Use a template for dialogue and scenery. Funny is key. No real drama, no real threat. Make so much that the audience starts to think this is normal. Starts to think this is the highest achievement. Corner the market, dictate the content, dictate consumer needs by creating a market where there’s no reasonable alternative. Ridicule those who disagree. Condemn those that dare to deviate. Keep people happy, don’t challenge their minds, don’t raise questions, just keep people consuming. So it goes. So it goes.” (18).
It’s natural that a film studio executives want the movies they produce to be highly profitable. Nobody claims they shouldn’t, but appealing to kids to sell more merchandise isn’t the only option. It should be pointed out that adults buy merchandise too and it’s more probable they would buy expensive, high quality stuff (like Hot Toys figures or collectors editions), because they are not financially dependent on their parents. What’s even more important – movies are also products that are sold to customers, but it mustn’t be forgotten they are more than products – they should also be works of art. They shouldn’t be just generic, consumer-fitted products, made according to a checklist, and forming a formula. Pharmaceuticals and fertilizers are products that must be done using a precise formula. Movies aren’t. Turning work of art into a corporate product is NEVER a step in the right direction. Even if the studio earns more money as a result of pandering to consumers’ taste, there is no challenge, no potential of mental and spiritual change that can influence the world. We all lose – as individuals and as society. “Business must be run at a profit, else it will die. But when anyone tries to run a business solely for profit…then the business MUST die as well, for it no longer has a reason for existence” (Henry Ford).