It’s been well over a year since I posted the last post of
this segment. For those of you who aren’t familiar with the concept it was created
out of my disdain and disappointment for both Ridley Scott’s ‘Exodus’ and Neil
Blomkamp’s ‘Chappie’. I had been heavily anticipating both films and was
ultimately let down by them so I tried to pinpoint exactly where they went wrong
based on another film of a slightly similar nature by contrasting, comparing
and analysing them both in tandem and trying to work out what one movie could
have learned from the other.
As I said before I haven’t revisited the series in a while
because there haven’t actually been that many films that would fit into this
kind of analysis. There have still been disappointing movies, but few of them
have had any attributes that can be contrasted with other, more successful
films in their field. I was considering making one that compared ‘Terminator 5’
and J.J Abrams’ ‘Star Trek’ but frankly I didn’t want to have to think about
that 2015 monstrosity any more than I had to.
‘Batman v Superman’ on the other hand is still a film that
fascinates me. I didn’t like it at all but I can’t stop thinking about
precisely why it turned out the way it did, and for such a heavily anticipated
film that had spent so many years in development. It almost reminded me of
another film that had been massively (that’s still too small a word)
anticipated, ‘The Force Awakens’. Consider the similarities, both were
speculated on and discussed from the moment the idea was pitched to the moment
the film first appeared on a cinema screen. Both had to reunite fans that had
been divided by previous movies (the prequels and ‘Man of Steel’) and establish
a whole new franchise for a new generation. But when it comes to the critical
consensus one is rated at 93% on Rotten Tomatoes while the other sits at 29%.
So what happened, and what could one learn from the other?
Even before the actual release of each film there’s a
comparison to make; the marketing. When you look at each trailer for ‘The Force
Awakens’ it’s one of the best examples of how to sell a movie without giving
the plot away. Each trailer worked to established the movie’s tone, character,
style while it fuelled speculation and still kept the plot intact.
As for ‘Batman v Superman’ well that first teaser trailer
had the unfortunate fate of being leaked and subsequently released the same
week as Han Solo first uttered “Chewie, we’re home” and was heavily criticised
for its sombre and seemingly joyless tone. Anyone who was nervous that ‘Man of
Steel’s’ bleakness would carry over to this was proven right. Then the SDCC
trailer redeemed all of that, it was epic, stylish, full of jaw dropping
moments and actually got us excited (rightfully so) for Ben Affleck’s Batman.
But then we got another trailer and wow, did that one burst the bubble. Never
mind that it was essentially the film’s entire plot in just over two minutes
but looking at how uncoordinated, inconsistent, awkwardly paced and poorly
composited as well as the fact that it served to undermine the movie’s entire
premise and title (the last shot depicts Batman and Superman working together,
as in not fighting, and then the title comes up as ‘Batman v Superman’, who thought that was a good idea). The third trailer
was a significant improvement but the damage had already been done.

As well as that ‘The Force Awakens’ stuck true to its source
material while introducing new elements. It understood the tone of the ‘Star
Wars’ universe, the characters that inhabited it and stayed within the realm of
its own possibilities. ‘Batman v Superman’ on the other hand strayed somewhere
between pandering to its fans and completely misunderstanding the characters.
It pandered by inserting needless references to Aquaman, the Flash, Cyborg,
Darkseid, Doomsday and all before shoehorning in the famous Death of Superman
storyline. As for all of the visual call backs to ‘The Dark Knight Returns’
maybe Snyder should have paid more attention to the panel in which Batman
breaks a gun in half and declares that “this is the weapon of the enemy, we do
not need it, we will not use it” or when he states that a “a gun is a coward’s
weapon, a liar’s weapon”. These new additions that are made to the story are
inherently against the core philosophies of each character.


But going back to that point of alienating your audience. ‘The
Force Awakens’ did a great job at being accessible to all audiences. I honestly
know a number of people whose only experience with ‘Star Wars’ comes from ‘The
Force Awakens’ and they enjoyed it very much (I admit I don’t have any way to
prove it so you’ll just have to take my word for it) but a for people I don’t
know then how about BBC film critic Mark Kermode who admitted prior to his
review that he had never been part of the ‘Star Wars’ fandom but found himself
completely engrossed by ‘The Force Awakens’ only to find ‘Batman v Superman’
incomprehensible.
I’d say ‘The Force Awakens’ was able to reach a much wider
audience as well. Now, to a certain generation Han Solo will always be the wise
mentor just as Obi-Wan was for another. ‘The Force Awakens’ was fun enough be
enjoyed as simple entertainment, an achievement in filmmaking or a brilliant
continuation of the saga. As I’ve said before ‘Dawn of Justice’ as too
melancholic and miserable to be entertaining, too poorly constructed to be a
filmmaking achievement and too inaccurate to be enjoyed as an adaptation.
I really want to stress the idea of fun though. I’m not
saying that you can’t have dark and complex blockbusters (‘The Dark Knight’ for
example, or ‘Empire Strikes Back’) but they succeed by firstly establishing a
tone that is consistently dark, as opposed to Snyder who seems to mistake it
for murkiness, and they are tightly constructed films. A sprawling mess like ‘Dawn
of Justice’ is not tightly constructed and is also not much fun, so as a result
it’s much easier to see its shortcomings. Is ‘The Force Awakens’ a perfect
movie? No, but I became so engrossed and involved within the film and has such
a good time watching it that its shortcomings ultimately don’t bother me that
much, because of how fun it was.

As well as that I would say there’s a difference between
leaving an open ended story from which to expand upon and just not bothering to
finish storylines because it’s easier to end them in a sequel. Can you guess
which film did which? People have called the ending of ‘The Force Awakens’ a cliff-hanger
but I think that implies that there’s some kind of immediate danger. Instead we’re
not worried about Rey at this moment, we are intrigued to see where her journey
will take her, and in fact the same could be said for every character. I mean
who doesn’t want to know what happened to Kanjiclub right (obscure references).
I know I’ve praised the hell out of ‘The Force Awakens’ but
as I’ve said before don’t think it’s a perfect film, there are issues. But the
rest of it is so brilliant, and entertaining and true to what ‘Star Wars’
should be that I always end up loving it. My reaction to ‘Batman v Superman’ is
in fact the exact opposite. I know I’ve talked a lot of shit about it and I don’t
think it’s a terrible film, there is some good stuff. But the rest of it is so
poorly made, miserable and inaccurate that I’ll always end up disliking it.
No comments:
Post a Comment