Will Comicbook movies break their structure?

[TheComicbookKid]

We've gotten the point of origin movies feeling redundant and repetitive from reboots and abundance.

We've now gotten to the point of comic book movies "borrowing" heavily from other movie styles.

So I wonder if we will ever get to the point where comic movies break the structure of the hero/villain story in three acts? Or having to end with a huge fight?

If so what characters do you think would benefit?

 

[CK Spider]

It's not "their structure", though. Only the so called "artsy" - I'd say every movie is art, but here we go - movies even atempt to break from the classic three-act structure, and even many of them actually have three very identifiable acts. I don't see why super-hero movies would go on that direction. There's infinite space for variation within the classic mold, so I don't see a reason to break it.

Ending with a huge fight, though, this is enterely another matter. I could see some super-hero movies that are actually very light on action, but this doesn't have anything to do with the three-act structure.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

It's not "their structure", though. Only the so called "artsy" - I'd say every movie is art, but here we go - movies even atempt to break from the classic three-act structure, and even many of them actually have three very identifiable acts. I don't see why super-hero movies would go on that direction. There's infinite space for variation within the classic mold, so I don't see a reason to break it.

Ending with a huge fight, though, this is enterely another matter. I could see some super-hero movies that are actually very light on action, but this doesn't have anything to do with the three-act structure.

I meant hero and villain meet within a three act structure. Just a story about the Shadow beating a drug ring in three acts with no fight.


Or a Flash movie told out of order.

 

[CK Spider]

I meant hero and villain meet within a three act structure. Just a story about the Shadow beating a drug ring in three acts with no fight.


Or a Flash movie told out of order.

Those may happen with time, at least on the lower budget side of things (I mean Deadpool/Logan budget). I don't see why not. Some experimentation is bound to happen. Just bear in mind, to use your own example, a movie told out of order may still be a hero-meet-villain three-act piece. Pulp Fiction, for example, is told out of order but has very clear structure and character arcs when you know how to rearrange it. But I get the gist of what you're saying and I'd argue we're already seeing superhero movies diverge from the norm. Just look at Homecomig and its larger focus on high school drama and GOTG Vol. 2 and its care for character moments over the usual artificially complicated plots.

 

[writer0327]

I doubt it. CBMs are mainly giant blockbuster films with $100M+ budgets and a lot of jobs riding on their success. Why be risky trying something new when you have a pretty solid tried and true formula at your disposal?

Maybe in the next generation of CBMs, we'll see more nuanced takes. We're getting a lot of different things done on TV shows, so maybe some new risky approaches will be tested there. But as far as feature films are concerned, those have to appeal to the masses.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The closest we are going to get to a film ending on a non-action scene is something like TDK which ends on a tense standoff with Two-Face. And even then it was immediately preceded by a big action scene.

That's just what the genre is, and straying away from big fights is going to alienate a ton of people. Even something like Spider-Man Homecoming had complaints that the stakes weren't very high.

Superhero films are a subset of the action genre, so to not end on a big action scene is going to be very rare. I can probably count on one hand the number of true action films that spend the last act without a major action sequence. Raiders of the Lost Ark does it and umm... Even a dark, serious film like Blade Runner ends on a fight.

 

[OutOfBoose]

I felt Deadpool was quite unorthodox with it's jumping between timelines right till the final confrontation. In comparison to other CBMs, at least.

 

[2kt09]

We've gotten the point of origin movies feeling redundant and repetitive from reboots and abundance.

We've now gotten to the point of comic book movies "borrowing" heavily from other movie styles.

So I wonder if we will ever get to the point where comic movies break the structure of the hero/villain story in three acts? Or having to end with a huge fight?

If so what characters do you think would benefit?

Assuming we're exclusively talking about superhero-based comic book movies.

It's a subgenre that has always prided itself in borrowing from other movie styles as I'd imagine the comic writers are certainly influenced by the franchises/shows/flicks they watch.

"Caper" CBM's have been 5+ act structures for a while now. I see your definition is acts involving the hero & the villain in the same room. Ending on an extravagantly big set piece seems relative to the hero or story involved. Since there are more of them and event-type ones at that,
it certainly gets harder to not borrow from each other.

It seems like the only things left that this specific subgenre can do is:
1) not make an action movie
2) not have a villain or a hero

For sure, the movies can do more in not trying to be so much at once and just stick to that main genre it's emulating OR actually attempt a wholly different style of storytelling, which I used to be convinced was only possible with lower budgets.

So...Dr Strange, Ant-Man, The Flash, Venom, New Mutants, Dr Doom, Green Lantern Corps, Spawn, Hellboy...would benefit

 

[DrCosmic]

We've gotten the point of origin movies feeling redundant and repetitive from reboots and abundance.

We've now gotten to the point of comic book movies "borrowing" heavily from other movie styles.

So I wonder if we will ever get to the point where comic movies break the structure of the hero/villain story in three acts? Or having to end with a huge fight?

If so what characters do you think would benefit?

I mean... there aren't a lot of comic book heroes that are really designed to work outside of the traditional villain escalation. I think you could do something interesting with Sandman.

You also have the issue with blockbusters in general, that they cry out for that. It's no mean feat to find a comedy which doesn't have an action ramp-up of some sort in the third act, to say nothing of an action movie that is also supposed to make hundreds of millions, to say nothing of something that's supposed to set people up to want more in the sequel, not think deeply about what just happened.

I think there's a lot of potential to be mined there, such as a superhero story that works more like a biopic, covering their lives where their villains, if any, are second act issues, victories of the highlight of their life. There's also something to be said for a rom-com formula, where a movie is about two people coming together, and the 'antagonist' is a sideshow because the real obstacle is the pride of the two individuals. You could also adapt this to a hero finding a sidekick the way I Love You, Man did for Bromances.

I think Logan took bits of these different approaches, honestly, and the movie didn't actually need Rice or Pierce, and even X-24 was a bit of a sideshow to me. He didn't make the movie stronger imho. I think any other films that take this approach will be in the more exhausted franchise variety.