Superhero movies & Romance: How Much Is Too Much?

[mego joe]

I think different characters are more prone to having romance as an intergral part of their story.

Daredevil/ Elektra worked.

SUperman/ Lois works ala S:TM.

SR could have worked but there really wasn't any romance between them.

If that is the nature of the story then romance will work.

Looking at Batman'89 it's much more effective if you consider Vicki to be Silver St. Cloud, since that is the story they were actually doing. SIlver is one of the few women Bruce has actually loved and been invloved with.

 

[OptimusCannabis]

This concept actually fits into an idea I am working on. In a recent exercise of categorizing movies I noticed the two rarest genres were Sci-Fi and Romance movies. Based on the theory that new, fresh, and innovative movies truely are the best, I conceived the idea of writing a screenplay based in the genre of Romantic-SciFi.

It IS a genre that is really untapped. I can only think of a few movies that would actually fit into this category and I like them all very much. The Fifth Element is the most known example of this. Brave New World, based on the Aldous Huxley story and released straight to TV, is another example. The best example of this is probably the cult classic Brazil. Most sci-fi movies do have some form of romance and love story involved but not enough to actually call them a SciFi-Romance movie.

A SciFi-Romance movie needs to have the love story as the heart of the plot(no pun intended.) Twelve Monkeys is another good example of this, but it's no Brazil. In Twelve Monkeys the focal point is still the army of the Twelve Monkeys and Bruce Willis trying to stop the oncoming disaster they represent. The love story with Madeline Stowe is still very intrigual to the main storyline though which is why I classify it as a SciFi-Romance movie.

As for romances in superhero films, it's as good idea as any. It all really depends on the writer and why he is incorporating a certain love story into his screenplay. Is he doing it just to do it or is it truely an important part to making the story better? Lois Lane WAS NOT integral to the Superman Returns movie, no more than Jimmy Olsen. As much as people will hate to admit it, X-Men 3:The Last Stand was a good example of a proper romance angle between Wolverine and Jean Gray. It was so because it added drama to the final battle and conclusion that could not have existed without the love story. It would not have been as dramatic if Wolverine was trying to destroy some random villain. The romance only added to the overall story and the movie was better because of it.

I'm sure I could write pages more on the subject but it's not like I'm getting graded or anything.

And remember... you can't spell ROMANCE without M-A-N.t:

 

[Dr. Fate]

This concept actually fits into an idea I am working on. In a recent exercise of categorizing movies I noticed the two rarest genres were Sci-Fi and Romance movies. Based on the theory that new, fresh, and innovative movies truely are the best, I conceived the idea of writing a screenplay based in the genre of Romantic-SciFi.

It IS a genre that is really untapped. I can only think of a few movies that would actually fit into this category and I like them all very much. The Fifth Element is the most known example of this. Brave New World, based on the Aldous Huxley story and released straight to TV, is another example. The best example of this is probably the cult classic Brazil. Most sci-fi movies do have some form of romance and love story involved but not enough to actually call them a SciFi-Romance movie.

A SciFi-Romance movie needs to have the love story as the heart of the plot(no pun intended.) Twelve Monkeys is another good example of this, but it's no Brazil. In Twelve Monkeys the focal point is still the army of the Twelve Monkeys and Bruce Willis trying to stop the oncoming disaster they represent. The love story with Madeline Stowe is still very intrigual to the main storyline though which is why I classify it as a SciFi-Romance movie.

As for romances in superhero films, it's as good idea as any. It all really depends on the writer and why he is incorporating a certain love story into his screenplay. Is he doing it just to do it or is it truely an important part to making the story better? Lois Lane WAS NOT integral to the Superman Returns movie, no more than Jimmy Olsen. As much as people will hate to admit it, X-Men 3:The Last Stand was a good example of a proper romance angle between Wolverine and Jean Gray. It was so because it added drama to the final battle and conclusion that could not have existed without the love story. It would not have been as dramatic if Wolverine was trying to destroy some random villain. The romance only added to the overall story and the movie was better because of it.

I'm sure I could write pages more on the subject but it's not like I'm getting graded or anything.

And remember... you can't spell ROMANCE without M-A-N.t:

Have you ever seen Starman starring Jeff Bridges as an alien who assumes the form of a recently deceased painter and has an intergalactic romance with the widow, played by Karen Allen? That's the first thing I think of in terms of "Romantic Sci-Fi".

 

[OptimusCannabis]

Have you ever seen Starman starring Jeff Bridges as an alien who assumes the form of a recently deceased painter and has an intergalactic romance with the widow, played by Karen Allen? That's the first thing I think of in terms of "Romantic Sci-Fi".

Yes, that is a very good example because Karen Allen's character and the love story between her and the Starman(Jeff Bridges) IS the story. That is a very good example.

 

[Dr. Fate]

Yes, that is a very good example because Karen Allen's character and the love story between her and the Starman(Jeff Bridges) IS the story. That is a very good example.

And easily one of John Carpenter's best films.

Can you imagine how crude & crass "Starman" would be if it were made today? I have a hard time thinking of actors and actresses who could do these roles as well as Jeff Bridges and Karen Black did. Well, maybe someone along the lines of Jim Caviezel could play Starman, but I cannot think of a single actress who could play the Karen Allen role.

 

[OptimusCannabis]

And easily one of John Carpenter's best films.

Can you imagine how crude & crass "Starman" would be if it were made today? I have a hard time thinking of actors and actresses who could do these roles as well as Jeff Bridges and Karen Black did. Well, maybe someone along the lines of Jim Caviezel could play Starman, but I cannot think of a single actress who could play the Karen Allen role.

Don't give them any ideas.

 

[Warhammer]

Why do some dismiss Superman Returns with having too much romance, but not dismissing Superman: The Movie or Superman II?

 

[OptimusCannabis]

Why do some dismiss Superman Returns with having too much romance, but not dismissing Superman: The Movie or Superman II?

Oh those have far too much also. They were just too old to mention. I believe those Superman movies were made for women specifically. They were part of a plot by Hollywood and the government and the new world order to get females intrested in comic books, amongst other things, and break up the american family.

 

[Dr. Fate]

Oh those have far too much also. They were just too old to mention. I believe those Superman movies were made for women specifically. They were part of a plot by Hollywood and the government and the new world order to get females intrested in comic books, amongst other things, and break up the american family.

Damn Hollywood, governmetn and the new world order.

 

[OptimusCannabis]

Damn Hollywood, governmetn and the new world order.

Yeah, and I would have gotten away with it to if not for those pesky kids.

 

[Dr. Fate]

Yeah, and I would have gotten away with it to if not for those pesky kids.

How many times are they actually called "meddling kids" anyhow? I know "pesky" came out once and a while...

 

[hammy]

^ Ha! Thousands! Someone should have given those writers a thesaurus. But it actually became part of the expected schtick, I think.

As to your question, I agree with LordofHyperTime/Deathstroke on a couple of points. It definitely depends on the particular Superhero. Batman shouldn't pine. Peter Parker, should. Superman ... he's always been interested in the girls. First Lana, then Lois ... But in any Superhero movie, I think the audience wants and expects to read or see the action and adventure, first and foremost. I do agree with Kevin Roegle that romance brings (at least to the theatres, not so much to the comics, probably) more women. We're just wired that way, I guess. But even for women the romance has to be done right and make sense to be compelling. And even still, it shouldn't surmount the basis of the story; the action and adventure that particular Superhero encounters.

SR was way over the top in the romance department, and not in a good way. Women like romance, but good and satisfying romance, not that pile of bile. Too much romance can be distracting and fundamentally change the premise of the movie too much. Why anyone (like Bryan Singer) would want to do that, I don't know. (Though I do suspect he had his reasons - they just were self serving reasons.)

Anyway, depends on the character, isn't necessary for every movie or sequel and shouldn't overshadow the superhero's ultimate mission.

 

[stargazer]

^ Ha! Thousands! Someone should have given those writers a thesaurus. But it actually became part of the expected schtick, I think.

As to your question, I agree with LordofHyperTime/Deathstroke on a couple of points. It definitely depends on the particular Superhero. Batman shouldn't pine. Peter Parker, should. Superman ... he's always been interested in the girls. First Lana, then Lois ... But in any Superhero movie, I think the audience wants and expects to read or see the action and adventure, first and foremost. I do agree with Kevin Roegle that romance brings (at least to the theatres, not so much to the comics, probably) more women. We're just wired that way, I guess. But even for women the romance has to be done right and make sense to be compelling. And even still, it shouldn't surmount the basis of the story; the action and adventure that particular Superhero encounters.

SR was way over the top in the romance department, and not in a good way. Women like romance, but good and satisfying romance, not that pile of bile. Too much romance can be distracting and fundamentally change the premise of the movie too much. Why anyone (like Bryan Singer) would want to do that, I don't know. (Though I do suspect he had his reasons - they just were self serving reasons.)

Anyway, depends on the character, isn't necessary for every movie or sequel and shouldn't overshadow the superhero's ultimate mission.

I enjoyed the romance in SR a lot. It was very mature, very compelling, and different to other movies in the genre. There was No whining, and the actors were very believable. And Superman was still heroic, inspiring, and saved the world above anything or anyone else.

 

[hammy]

He didn't do near enough saving of anything for my tastes. He was too busy lifting things.

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

I was going to attempt to engage a debate, but judging by your sig it would probably be fruitless.

 

[stargazer]

He didn't do near enough saving of anything for my tastes. He was too busy lifting things.

For my tastes the action was fine. It was there to support the story, not the story to support the action. It was clearly a character driven fim about Superman and his place on Earth. I loved it and didn't need for Superman to puch somebody to enjoy it. I mean, I love STM, and Superman didn't punch anyone there. If there is a sequel, No doubt we will see that other stuff, as Singer has said. SR was just a reintroduction of the character to new audiences. I guess a lot of people nowdays are too shallow and cynical to appreciate a superhero movie that actually tries to tell a story.
Patience is a virtue.

 

[bullets]

I guess it all depends on who is penning the script . If the character is in love with someone like peter parker loves mary-jane or Superman loves lois lane it should be a big part of the story . I think a good film would blend the
different dynamics of the character and his life appropriately . If the writers and director are not capable of doing that , they shouldn't be in the film industy.

 

[hammy]

I guess a lot of people nowdays are too shallow and cynical to appreciate a superhero movie that actually tries to tell a story.

I doubt that. I suspect they just want a good story, that is true to the iconic character, not a piece of crap that doesn't do him justice.

 

[cerealkiller182]

I guess a lot of people nowdays are too shallow and cynical to appreciate a superhero movie that actually tries to tell a story.

It was a cliche story, the love triangle was stupid and daytime soap-ish. It was too much of the same from what we saw. The rogues gallery is still completely unexplored.

The effects were nice. The performances were good albeit some being a little dated. But other than that the story has no interests.

 

[the a1ant]

I understand the whole thing between Peter and MJ but by Spider-Man 3 it was getting to be a bit too much. Of course that plot should'nt be taken out of the equation, but they could've toned it down a bit - it took up a huge portion of the film, alone.

 

[cerealkiller182]

I understand the whole thing between Peter and MJ but by Spider-Man 3 it was getting to be a bit too much. Of course that plot should'nt be taken out of the equation, but they could've toned it down a bit - it took up a huge portion of the film, alone.

Ithought it was handled fairly better than it was handled in SM2. SM2 love story was awful

 

[stargazer]

It was a cliche story, the love triangle was stupid and daytime soap-ish. It was too much of the same from what we saw. The rogues gallery is still completely unexplored.

The effects were nice. The performances were good albeit some being a little dated. But other than that the story has no interests.

Disagree. Yes, it was a love triangle, but it was executed in a very different way than usual. Usually, they make the hero the really nice guy who always gets the girl, and the other guy is usually the bad or at least the mean and nasty guy who wants to force the girl to love him....there was NOTHING like that in SR. Richard, the other guy, was noble and heroic, and Supes was also noble and heroic and didn't get the girl at the end. They played the love triangle in a very complex way, and it worked, IMO. Both men were outstanding human beings, and both men were very human and with flaws. IMO, this story in the romance department has No cliche. It was more like Casablanca.

 

[cerealkiller182]

^^^^I'll give them credit for not making Richard an a-hole. You definitely right about that. I was more referring to the father of the child and the entire concept of a love triangle. I also personally likeLois as a workaholic and a mother who wouldnt but her son at risk. It just put Lois in a bad light overall.

 

[Dr. Fate]

Daredevil/ Elektra worked.

I didn't find the Daredevil/Elektra romance to be all that convincing, but that's just me.

 

[Victarion]

Spider-Man 3, I feel, was too much. And here I was prior to the release worrying they would've dropped much of it to accomodate all the villains. Boy was I wrong. They did take it to a new level though, so it wasn't all that bad. Batman Returns and Hellboy handled it best, I think.