Directors and their AntiSuperhero Movie Views

[Spider-Aziz]

i dont necessary think the character should dictate a budget. I feel like a batman movie should be cheaper than a dr. strange movie. one doesnt require cgi and the other does since it involves magic.

Mel spent 72mil on Braveheart back in 1995, adjust it for inflation that is prolly a fairly big budget

Talking from a big experience, then.
I can appreciate that critique he had of the budget more.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

The budget should depend on the audience. The Avengers or Batman? By all means, spend away. Unless the movies are horrible, those are practically guaranteed to do a billion dollars.

An unknown/untested hero such as Dr. Strange or ones that have shown to have a smaller fanbase like X-Men, those are where spending should be kept under control.

Definitely.

 

[Abudefduf]

seems like hes just a bit jealous that his movie is being overlooked because everyone is talking about suicide squad or some random horror movie.

I honestly have no idea. I guess that could be the reason, I don't know.

The thing is, I have no problem with him saying he dislikes the genre... that's absolutely his prerogative. I just take issue with his choice of words. "I wish people would get tired of them"... he's basically saying that he wishes people would stop finding joy in those movies because he can't. What a self-absorbed individual.

 

[DA_Champion]

I honestly have no idea. I guess that could be the reason, I don't know.

The thing is, I have no problem with him saying he dislikes the genre... that's absolutely his prerogative. I just take issue with his choice of words. "I wish people would get tired of them"... he's basically saying that he wishes people would stop finding joy in those movies because he can't. What a self-absorbed individual.

It's not uncommon or shameful for people to want specific fads to go away. Not just superhero movies but also everything from apple products worship, to facial hair peacocking can annoy specific people, not everybody is excited about every fashion and some hate specific transient fashions. That's all right.

I remember disliking croc shoes myself. Also, was never a fan of Starbucks.

Among internet users of my generation it's very common to say that the 1990s produced little of cultural value. Supposedly all TV, music, food, comic books, movies, and fashion in the 1990s was bad. I personally assume that's just blindness because they, like me, grew up in the 1990s.

 

[Abudefduf]

It's not uncommon or shameful for people to want specific fads to go away.

It kind of is when said fads are completely harmless and are actually a source of entertainment for countless people. It's literally Grinch level of pettiness.
Again, not saying they shouldn't dislike or criticize the genre, that is absolutely fine.

 

[DA_Champion]

It kind of is when said fads are completely harmless and are actually a source of entertainment for countless people. It's literally Grinch level of pettiness.
Again, not saying they shouldn't dislike or criticize the genre, that is absolutely fine.

It's very non-trivial to convincingly say that major trends are "completely harmless".

 

[Abudefduf]

I didn't say that all "major trends" are harmless; what I said is that some are, like the one we're discussing right now. And that only a very self-absorbed, petty person would want to take away from others something they enjoy just because he/she feels left out or is annoyed by it. Again, that's exactly what the titular villain does in How the Grinch Stole Christimas.

 

[DA_Champion]

I didn't say that all "major trends" are harmless; what I said is that some are, like the one we're discussing right now. And that only a very self-absorbed, petty person would want to take away from others something they enjoy just because he/she feels left out or is annoyed by it. Again, that's exactly what the titular villain does in How the Grinch Stole Christimas.

Even in the case of comic book movies as a major pop culture phenomenon it's hard to argue it's harmless. There's no shortage of plausible problems one can point out.

 

[Abudefduf]

No doubt about that, and there's nothing wrong if one wants to point out and discuss those problems.

I guess I should've used another word than "completely"... how about "mostly". I think the superhero movie genre is mostly harmless and I don't understand the overblown hate it gets from people like Mackenzie. But I guess that's to be expected when something becomes so popular.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Hollywood always jumps on trends and beats them into the ground. Always have, always will. It goes back to the Silent Era.

Even the New Hollywood Era of the 70s where all these critics want to return to had an onslaught of bad detective movies and horrible disaster films.

If it wasn't CBMs, it would be something else.

 

[Rowsdower!]

I kinda feel like Spielberg is the last person who should be ripping superhero movies when he's spent a good portion of his career making sci-fi films. Superhero films generally are a subgenre of sc-fi, so if you're not going to turn your nose up at movies about alien invasions, then I don't see what wrong with films about super soldier serums and thunder gods.

Also, Spielberg is partially responsible for unleashing Bayformers onto the world. He should be ashamed of himself.

 

[Punk!]

It could also be that they have legitimate criticisms, and that given their extensive experience and demonstrated aptitude these views might be valid.

Here's Mel Gibson's quote:
I look at them and scratch my head. I'm really baffled by it. I think there's a lot of waste but maybe if I did one of those things with the green screens I'd find out different. I don't know. Maybe they do cost that much. I don't know. It seems to me that you could do it for less. If you're spending outrageous amounts of money, $180 million or more, I don't know how you make it back after the taxman gets you, and after you give half to the exhibitors. ... What did they spend on 'Batman V Superman' that they're admitting to? And it's a piece of ****.

He's making legitimate points that people on this forum have made.
- The costs seem hard to justify;
- BvS is a piece of ****;

It's true. Nothing wrong with what he said. It's just his opinion. It is ridiculous that these movies have to cost so much. Not only it makes it harder for the studio to break even, but it also makes them more afraid to take risks and also leaves less space for other types of movies. No reason for a movie to cost 250M$. Look at Deadpool. Good action sequences, good CGI, pretty entertaining and cost 60M or so. I know high profile actors like Affleck cost a lot of money, but that's only because studios enable them. If all the studios suddenly said to these actors: "You know what, from now on you won't get more than 10M for these movies", what do you think the actors would do? Stop working? Probably not. They would have to accept it. The problem is that studios don't do that. The same can be said for VFX companies who charge millions and millions of dollars for any simple CGI effect. They only charge that because studios accept to pay that kind of money.

 

[HaplessHenchman]

I don't have a problem with Gibson's overarching point about movie budgets. As a self-proclaimed cheap skate myself, I can sympathize with that point of view.

 

[SuperAl]

It's true. Nothing wrong with what he said. It's just his opinion. It is ridiculous that these movies have to cost so much. Not only it makes it harder for the studio to break even, but it also makes them more afraid to take risks and also leaves less space for other types of movies. No reason for a movie to cost 250M$. Look at Deadpool. Good action sequences, good CGI, pretty entertaining and cost 60M or so. I know high profile actors like Affleck cost a lot of movie, but that's only because studios enable them. If all the studios suddenly said to these actors: "You know what, from now on you won't get more than 10M for these movies", what do you think the actors would do? Stop working? Probably not. They would have to accept it. The problem is that studios don't do that. The same can be said for VFX companies who charge millions and millions of dollars for any simple CGI effect. They only charge that because studios accept to pay that kind of money.

labor laws are a bit more complicated than "because the studio accepts to pay it". There are unions in hollywood, if all the studios stop paying actors their worth, but still expect to make billion dollar box office films there would be a huge backlash. the mcu has had its fair share of controversy for not paying the avenger's cast very well other than RDJ. If the MCU decided to cut their salaries in half, theyd all walk and the franchises would be ruined. the fx people sometimes get ripped off by studios too, just look at sausage party, not getting paid overtime, having their jobs threatened.

 

[Punk!]

labor laws are a bit more complicated than "because the studio accepts to pay it". There are unions in hollywood, if all the studios stop paying actors their worth, but still expect to make billion dollar box office films there would be a huge backlash. the mcu has had its fair share of controversy for not paying the avenger's cast very well other than RDJ. If the MCU decided to cut their salaries in half, theyd all walk and the franchises would be ruined. the fx people sometimes get ripped off by studios too, just look at sausage party, not getting paid overtime, having their jobs threatened.

Maybe they could share a % of the profits with the actors, instead of offering 30M or 50M right away. That becomes part of the movie's budget. Not sure if any laws actually force studios to pay THAT MUCH in advance.

 

[Punk!]

I kinda feel like Spielberg is the last person who should be ripping superhero movies when he's spent a good portion of his career making sci-fi films. Superhero films generally are a subgenre of sc-fi, so if you're not going to turn your nose up at movies about alien invasions, then I don't see what wrong with films about super soldier serums and thunder gods.

Also, Spielberg is partially responsible for unleashing Bayformers onto the world. He should be ashamed of himself.

I don't think he is ripping superhero movies...he said Nolan's Batman movies are beautiful films, so he obviously has nothing against the genre. He probably just believes these movies won't remain as popular as they are now forever. You will always have people interested in super heroes. But for these movies to make a lot of money you need to have the masses interested in them.

 

[jmc]

Wasnt exactly sure where to post this but it seems like more and more directors are coming out against the superhero genre for some reason.

First we had Steven Spielberg predicting the end of superhero films. Mel Gibson recently bashed big budget superhero films and now we have David Mackienzie, director of Hell or High Water bashing the genre, hoping they disappear. Are they angry that their movies are being overshadowed?

I think if there's any resentment it's because all the major resources at studios are being filter towards these big blockbusters movies hoping for massive paydays at the box office. The mid-range movie has all but vanished meaning you're either stuck doing smaller films or being recruited to essentially be a tool for the studio. I believe the is the crux of the angst.

 

[Batmannerism]

It could also be that they have legitimate criticisms, and that given their extensive experience and demonstrated aptitude these views might be valid.

Here's Mel Gibson's quote:
I look at them and scratch my head. I'm really baffled by it. I think there's a lot of waste but maybe if I did one of those things with the green screens I'd find out different. I don't know. Maybe they do cost that much. I don't know. It seems to me that you could do it for less. If you're spending outrageous amounts of money, $180 million or more, I don't know how you make it back after the taxman gets you, and after you give half to the exhibitors. ... What did they spend on 'Batman V Superman' that they're admitting to? And it's a piece of ****.

He's making legitimate points that people on this forum have made.
- The costs seem hard to justify;
- BvS is a piece of ****;

Yup, find it tough to argue with Mad Mel on that one. I mean, his days of making epic scale films are in the past, but he's still not wrong about B v S.

Would be interesting to get his opinion on Civil War.

I think it's wrong to dismiss criticisms from high-profile filmmakers out of hand, upon careful analysis they might not hold up, but they certainly deserve enough respect to be listened to.

However, Spielberg can't talk too loud though, after the unbearable POS that was Indiana Jones and the crap of the crystal skull. He's had a few big budget flops, so really his criticisms have to be put in context. This of course does not mean he isn't a great director and has created absolutely riveting cinematic magic (Jurassic Park, ET, Schindler's List, Close Encounters, Jaws.... the list goes on). Any film-making insights he has still carry a lot of weight, it's just we have to balance that with the realisation that he's not perfect (but when he's great, he's among the very greatest of all time).

Who is David McKenzie again ?

 

[sweetre15]

What really bugs me though is the anti-comic movie or the call for originality seems to come from some with a very rose-tinted lens.

Almost 80% of the classic movies people love from the "good ole days" of Hollywood were based on a novel and/or stage play....even back when Comic Book adaptations were relegated to old film serials and radio dramas.

- Casablanca

- Gone with the Wind

- Maltese Falcon

- Streetcar named Desire

- Scarface

- Godfather

- The James Bond franchise as a whole

- Rambo: First Blood

- Lord of the Rings

- Matilda

- Frankenstein

- Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde

- Les Miserables

- Hunchback of Notre Dame

- Ben Hur

- Wizard of Oz

- Gentlemen Prefer Blondes

- Seven Year Itch

- Cactus Flower

Etc....and that's not scratching the surface.

I don't mind people not being fond of the CBM genre or "oversaturation" of any kind but the hypocrisy behind the sentiment bothers me because no one complains about the infinite novel adaptations, the prominence of play adaptations, or when the market was oversaturated with hard boiled detective movies, monster movies, sword and sorcery movies, western movies etc.

I think a more productive sentiment would be the call for balance in Hollywood and not just hoping a "genre" of movies go away when it's just gonna get followed up by the next trend where those same people will complain and say they're "sick" of it then rinse and repeat.