When Will Superhero Movies Go For Different Ending Plots? [Major Spoilers]

[Shpati]

For the past 10+ years almost every Superhero movie I watched has the same ending plot.

Spoiler

Batman Begins - Batman has to save his city from the toxic gas.
The Dark Knight Rises - Batman has to save the city from the nuclear bomb.
The Dark Knight - It wasn't as bad, which is why it was pretty awesome in the theaters. It was more of a personal storyline ending.

I'll cut this trilogy slack because the trilogy after all does mainly involve Bruce Wayne/Batman and his love for Gotham City and his oath to protect it.

Spider-Man 1: I don't remember it having a "save the city from X" kind of plot, which is why I liked it.
Spider-Man 2: Spider-Man has to save the city of Dr. Octopus' bomb.
Spider-Man 3: Can't really remember it.

X-Men 1: Sort of, if I remember correctly, Magneto's radiation would only affect those UN people.
X-Men 2: This one was more personal, which was awesome.
X-Men 3: Even though the movie was bad, they didn't have the X-Men save the world or city from a bomb.
Wolverine: Not the cliché plot ending.

Lot of people give the Wolverine movie and the X-Men movie a lot of hate, including me (not 1 and 2 though), but it was nice to have a superhero movie without the cliché plotline.

The Avengers: They had to save the city/world from that portal.

Spoiler

STOP READING IF YOU HAVE NOT WATCHED MAN OF STEEL YET!!!!!!!

Then I just watched Man of Steel and they went with that plotline. Superman have to save the entire planet from X (the beam that turns Earth into Krypton.

Point is, I don't watch comic book movies for the ending plots anymore. You know what the final plot is going to be 9 out of 10 times. I noticed it is even a more popular plotline for the more popular superheroes.

Spoiler

I think it is a easy route for the writers to have a dangerous variable (usually a bomb or portal) that will decide life and death for millions of citizens and the good guys. And it is up to the heroes to stop it.

(I cannot speak for anyone else, but maybe some of you can agree with me)

 

[Anno_Domini]

The Dark Knight broke the mold.

 

[spider-neil]

The Dark Knight broke the mold.

In what way? What's great about TDK is the Joker, the plot is similar to BB and TDKR. Bad guy wants to destroy Gotham.

 

[metaphysician]

What alternative ending plot would you suggest? Honestly, the definition you provide sounds so broad as to be virtually useless; any kind of villainous plot going beyond the individual would fit it.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Oh, and I'll count Watchmen as doing something far different than the norm as well. In a way, the villain wins by the end of the film.

In what way? What's great about TDK is the Joker, the plot is similar to BB and TDKR. Bad guy wants to destroy Gotham.

Please don't tell me the reason you give TDK a 10 is only because of Ledger's Joker.

And Batman taking the crimes of another man and becoming a murderer. THAT'S breaking the mold of just "hero saves city from villain" type of ordeal.

 

[spider-neil]

Please don't tell me the reason you give TDK a 10 is only because of Ledger's Joker.

Pretty much, I though Batman was under utilised and the Dent/Two-Face personality change (for me) came out of left field but I loved Joker and the action and the themes so it gets a 10.

 

[Pink Ranger]

It's telling that the major film series you cited are also the strongest ones, overall at least.

Maybe it's a sign that what works, works. The Fantastic Four is one that has a different set of circumstances: the heroes first band together to save people from an accident that they pretty much caused themselves, and then the final battle is just for self preservation against an enemy with little else at stake. And that movie sucked donkey *****.

 

[Shpati]

What alternative ending plot would you suggest? Honestly, the definition you provide sounds so broad as to be virtually useless; any kind of villainous plot going beyond the individual would fit it.

I did get a little carried away, so my bad on that. But still.

Spoiler

The Amazing Spiderman: Some kind of smoke bomb about to destroy the city.

Man of Steel: Special Beam to destroy the world.

That's it. That's on par with the plots of video game missions.

Writers can do better. Not all hero movies have to have the hero save their city or world from a bomb or portal. Writers can still go with the "save the city" story, but in different ways. It doesn't have to a special bomb/weapon or some sort of portal. You can get more creative with it.

Probably with Man of Steel 2 they could do a different ending plot with Lex Luther.

Oh, and I'll count Watchmen as doing something far different than the norm as well. In a way, the villain wins by the end of the film.

Please don't tell me the reason you give TDK a 10 is only because of Ledger's Joker.

And Batman taking the crimes of another man and becoming a murderer. THAT'S breaking the mold of just "hero saves city from villain" type of ordeal.

Exactly. The Ferries did involve a bomb, but it was more of a test for the citizens of Gotham and not necessarily a quest to save their lives. TDK was way different, which was awesome.

 

[kedrell]

None of the Iron Man movies fell into that type of ending.

IM1: Save Pepper and stop the bad guy from making off with the tech and selling it on the black market(supposedly) but mostly, it was personal at the end between the two.
IM2: Save the Expo patrons but ultimately, it was personal again.
IM3: Save the President and Pepper but once again, it was mostly personal.

No bomb, portal or whatever about to destroy a city/world in sight

 

[psylockolussus]

I'm pretty sure if X-Men and Fantastic Four had a cross-over film, they would save the world too!

Anyway, saving the world is not really an issue, its a superHERO film anyway. They aren't superheroes if they don't they save the day from the bad guys and if they would just deal with their personal problems.

 

[DrCosmic]

Why wear a costume if it's all personal, and the people know who you are anyway? Why do you even need super powers to tell a personal story? That's not so that it can't be personal, but X-Men 2, which you liked the personalness of, was completely about saving the world from Brainwashed Xavier and Cerebro.

Now, usually the first movie is only about saving a small area, but after that... saving the world is what superheroes do in comics. It's why they have unique super powers and costumes, not so they can make expensive version of a revenge movie. Now, it'd be cool to see some films do that, Nemesis is a great property to adapt for that, as is Kick-Ass and I'd love to see The Boys or Jupiter's Legacy done live action.

But tl;dr answer: when comics stop having the same ending plot.

 

[kedrell]

Why wear a costume if it's all personal, and the people know who you are anyway? Why do you even need super powers to tell a personal story?

Were you referring to my post with this? Because the answer is rather self explanatory regarding Iron Man.

 

[spider-neil]

Superhero plots don't bother me. A good screen writing rule is; simple story, complex characters.

Star Wars is a very simple story indeed as is Terminator.

 

[PunyGod]

...

 

[Victarion]

I'll give you BB. The machine was out of the left field and didn't seem to have any symbolism attached to it.

However, everything you saw in TDK was Joker challenging Batman, Gordon, and Dent. The film wasn't merely about saving Gotham from someone who wanted to destroy Gotham. Listen to Joker's scar stories. Each of them indicates that the Joker was disgusted with the legal system. So, Joker wanted to attack the standard-bearers of the Law in Gotham: Gordon, Dent, and Batman. Dent through Rachel, Gordon and Batman through Two-Face. At the climax of TDK, it isn't a city that's saved--its Gordon's wife, child, and Dent's legacy (I see from your post that we pretyt much agree on this point).

Similarly, the nuclear bomb in TDKR is a symbol: it was created--like the Batman--to improve Gotham. In the end, the Batman persona and the nuke were threats to Gotham. The Batman persona became a threat when Joker fixated on it, and again when Bane set out to prove himself the better son and successor to the League of Shadows. The nuke--created to provide Gotham with sustainable energy--became a threat in the hands of Bane and Talia. Bruce stated that he created the Batman to shake Gotham out of apathy. It is ironic that Bane and Talia used the nuke for that same purpose (by keeping the US Army from marching on Gotham and shutting down the revolution)--and to greater success than the Batman persona (as Dent's death is what enabled the Dent Act). I concede that, yes, it is a bomb. However, the aforementioned qualities are what elevate it above the portal in Avengers, Ock's machine in Spidey 2, and Rasputin's plan in Hellboy.

I don't think Spider-Man or Spider-Man 3 fell victim to the common ending trope. In Spider-Man, the stakes were personal and the city wasn't in danger. Same for Spider-Man 3, though I felt Sandman and Venom had better motives for going after Spider-Man. Ironic, given that I feel Sandman and Venom were both lacking in good development. Still, Sam wasted Norman's character too early in Spider-Man. Thus I'd put Green Goblin, Sandman, and Venom on equal footing in terms of character development.

 

[weezerspider]

Superhero plots don't bother me. A good screen writing rule is; simple story, complex characters.

Star Wars is a very simple story indeed as is Terminator.

That is a great point. Plot driven films typically lose their luster on multiple viewings because the main draw is finding out what happens next. Once you've seen it, you know the main draw. However, I don't think complex plots are a bad thing, if done right.

In regard to the topic, I agree more superhero films need to 'break the mold'. As a super hero story, the climax is almost guaranteed to put some citizens in danger, but it can be much smaller and more personal for the hero. Like Spiderman, The Green Goblin puts the kids and MJ in risk of getting hurt and Spidey has to save them, but it was a personal test for Spiderman from GG. He must make the heroic choice, the kids or the woman he loves. TDK kind of mixes a few different things. The Joker puts the bombs on the ferries to test the people of Gotham and prove to Batman that he's right. Yet, Batman's still obviously trying to physically save them from harm. Also the climax involves a very personal moment between Dent, Batman and Gordon with Batman saving Gordon's son and taking the fall for Dent. These are two of the better endings and there are a few more that move from the mold.
The Avenger's and Man Of Steel had climaxes that fit their stories perfectly though. You need a massive global threat to legitamize the need to bring all of The Avenger's together. The Alien invasion did that. Similarily, Man Of Steel is so ingrained into Sci-Fi and focuses on Clark's origin, its only a natural full circle to have it end with Kryptonians coming to earth to face Clark.