What Makes A Comic Book Movie Artful?

Superhero movies have brought back the fans who grew up loving the comics and have introduced a whole new generation to these beloved characters. Since its beginning, the genre has exploded into a million-dollar industry. Over time, studios saw the great promise in these properties and began to expand their movie universes. Marvel and DC have gone on to create countless sequels, reboots, and even TV shows, celebrating our favorite heroes.

The comic book movie, however, while raking in the dough, has become some of the biggest targets for criticism. The negativity tends to stem from a combination of the content in the stories, to the volume of titles that come out each year. Some audiences point out how the genre has just become a means to cash-in on a trend. Other criticism leans towards superhero movies using plot lines that are too similar, or containing flat characters with only single-minded goals, with no real feeling other than being an archetype.

The work at times gets written off as standard explosions and thrills, with no sense of depth. Other opinions also lean towards the fact that these pictures are simply there just for that: flashy experiences just to keep us excited and our adrenaline pumping.

However, for their mass audience appeal and large commercialization, some have proven the ability to be masterful films. Artful pictures that detail driven characters with multiple dimensions to their personalities. There are stories that may entertain us, but also add to the depth of these characters, or ask us intricate questions.

With this in mind, what exactly constitutes an artful comic book movie? Here we will be discussing six films, comparing two at a time. We’ll be comparing some of the best with some of the worst.

Captain America: Civil War VS Suicide Squad

The Russo Brother’s Civil War is an astonishing feature of fantastic action, with a solid undertone of drama. The story revolves around Captain America vs. Iron Man in a tale of political discourse that tears the Avengers apart. Taking a look at both sides, the film asks its audience who they think is right and why.

David Ayer’s Suicide Squad is an ambitious attempt, with the idea of taking a bunch of baddies and forcing them to work together. What had moviegoers primarily excited (or concerned), was the DC film universe’s introducing the ever-popular Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie), along with their new Joker (Jared Leto).

The two productions both encompass the idea of “teams coming together”. Like Joss Whedon’s work in The Avengers, one of the goals in such a movie is to create a sense of chemistry within a team, one that balances drama and comedy. We as an audience want to not just root for our characters when they beat up someone, but get to know them as people.

In Civil War (with a main cast of roughly 11 heroes), we get an understanding of where everyone is coming from. While the film focuses mostly on Captain America, Iron Man, and the Winter Solider, we get to understand everyone’s personality and their desires. We see Spider-Man as a kid who trying to make sense of his abilities, and Wanda Maximoff who is torn between making sense of power and place in society.

The film has immensely terrific fight scenes with everyone firing off and bashing away at one another. What also aids Civil War, however, is that the audience is able to partake in a conversation with their characters in the overall conflict. Strong writing and acting allows us to feel for a majority of the cast, and not view everyone as a punching bag. Not only do audiences get to partake in the political questions of the film, but they get to see the development of their favorite heroes.

Suicide Squad is the utter opposite of Civil War. Beyond blandish fight scenes, the movie’s worst atrocity is its characters. Off the bat: this is a story really about Deadshot and Harley Quinn. Everyone else in the actual squad is just there so the production can have its name.

Killer Croc, Captain Boomerang, and the rest of the crew get but minor snippets of witty dialogue, and zilch story or character development otherwise. Even the Joker, one of fiction’s greatest villains, comes off as an over the top parody of past predecessors. And when the movie focuses on Quinn and Deadshot, we get quick, flat flashbacks, that try and give us an idea of who these characters are. We as the audience never get a sincere spectrum of their development, emotions, or beliefs (and some of these characters we’re seeing for the first time).

In the end: When it comes to teamwork, we should be able to experience chemistry between our characters. Instead of getting a glimpse of a character’s past or their beliefs, the audience should feel an intimate sense of connecting with them. Where Civil War has its superheroes portrayed like real people with goals, Suicide Squad is nothing but soulless characters with no ambition or personality beyond a stereotype.

Batman Begins VS Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice

While we could discuss Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy as a whole, we’ll specifically focus on Batman Begins. Grounding the cape crusader in a more realistic Gotham, Nolan masterfully explores both Bruce Wayne’s inner desire for justice, and Gotham’s rot. Since his work on Memento, Nolan knows how much to share, leaving quite a bit of trust to his audience. Through dialogue and framed shots of the city’s underbelly, we are able to understand the situation that Gotham is in economically and socially.

Contrasting scenes of Bruce Wayne at a dinner party, to roaming about the crowds of homeless outside, paint a picture of the Dark Knight world. In doing this, Nolan is also able to create a window into what Batman sees, and the reasoning for his actions.

Zack Snyder’s Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice (BvS), takes place after his 2013 Man of Steel picture. Now that earth has been introduced to Superman, it must decide how to treat this new alien life-form. Is he for us or is he against us? How does he distinguish right from wrong on our planet?

In the aftermath of Man of Steel, this universe’s Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck), finds himself at odds with Superman. Considering him a menace to human beings, he begins his plan as to how he will take down a man faster than a locomotive. This of course happens until the two have to join forces to fight a common enemy.

Both of these pictures strive to tell compelling stories of personal philosophy, and give their audience a sense of emotion through their settings. Nolan’s Batman Begins sometimes gets written off as the superhero movie that made all superhero movies “dark and edgy”. I would have to disagree that the tone is all that distracting; if anything the picture uses its tone to have the viewer understand the critical period (and history) of the city and its inhabitants. BvS, however, is an attempt where the use of tone feels overdone.

Snyder has his iconic dark chrome visuals play to the moodiness to our two protagonists. What BvS strives to do in creating this “dark world” is have a bunch of characters’ spout bits of catchy sentences laced in philosophy. The issue here is that while those ideas sound really interesting and make one excited to learn more, the characters just ramble on and never go into detail. Time and time again this continues, and it all just makes for wasted dialogue that doesn’t give an authentic somber mood, but just makes the character’s angst-ridden.

When it comes to the personal beliefs and philosophy of characters, we see Christian Bale’s Batman, suffer with wanting a normal life. We see his small actions in striving to escape his endless nights of fighting for justice, just to see him return to them. In The Dark Knight, we even get to see him consider his actions in taking down the Joker (making for intriguing development of his morals).

What BvS attempts to do is have the philosophy land on the shoulders of Superman. The movie is riddled with questions in regards to if he exists, then what does that say about the existence of God? And even moments with Superman questioning his own right to act as he pleases. Again, these are all rather interesting ideas, until Superman just decides to flip the table of logical action over.

Superman’s issue with Batman in this movie is that he’s a vigilante hunting down bad guys… does anyone see the issue with that? What are you, Kent?! Honestly though, the logic between Superman’s thoughts, and then acting in a manner in which he criticizes others for, make all his intriguing dialogue to go out the window.

In all its dry dialogue and dry characters, it actually takes quite a long time to see the two even fight. BvS suffers from an identity problem where it didn’t know if it wanted to be a moody philosophical film, or a big bright blockbuster with two of fiction’s greatest heroes. The Ben Affleck Batman has some great action moments, but completely loses the essence of what his character stands for when he starts killing people.

In the end: Any film mood should be authentic and never forced on an audience. In Batman Begins, setting is used in specific moments to capture the essence and feel of characters and their background. The pressures of society weigh down on our protagonist in how he decides to live his life.

We see how the city reflects Batman and vice versa, and from there the tone of the picture is formed. With BvS, we have nothing more than a work that strives to be that. Color palettes and bland philosophical quotes do not add tension to a story.

Logan & X-Men Origins: Wolverine

 Gavin Hood’s X-Men Origins: Wolverine has become one of cinema’s worst jokes. Attempting to share the origin story of our favorite cigar smoking Canadian Wolverine, Origins makes for horribly flat drama. Overly comedic moments of acting, along with characters we have no means to care for, litter the movie. What tries to make for a thrilling drama becomes a bland revenge tale with a ton of characters producers thought would be cool to throw in.

Along his journey, Wolverine goes from point to point in hunting down the bad guys that took his wife and tried to control him. The villains are just bad for the sake of being bad otherwise. They have no depth to them that adds any layers to their goals, and Wolverine is essentially the same. Everyone’s direction is fairly straight with zero emotion, leaning more towards goofiness.

On the other hand, James Mangold’s Logan is an utterly heart wrenching tale. [Spoilers], the X-Men are dead and it’s just Logan and Charles Xavier. One day a girl named Laura comes into their life, who we find out was created from Logan’s DNA. She has escaped from a government facility, whose goons are now attempting to hunt down Logan and the gang.

Many will look at this film and immediately notice the amped up violence (perhaps the most intense among all of Marvel’s movies). But what makes Logan an astounding masterful film is the character himself. This isn’t the Wolverine we’ve come to know for several movies beforehand… this is an absolutely broken, hopeless, destroyed human being. His pain for the life he has endured, the people he has lost, and burdens he must wear, are etched into his body.

So many scenes capture this brokenness, whether it is through body mannerisms or dialogue. As our group tries to make it to their destination, we see an Xavier who is slowly slipping away, striving to bring Logan back from this darkness. While the film moves forward in its plot, the true story is that of what is within Logan.

The writing is never over the top, never touching the line of melodramatic, but crafted to an elegant somber rhythm. This isn’t a Wolverine you are cheering for, but a Wolverine your heart breaks for, witnessing him wandering into decay. One aspect that aids in this emotional tale is the relationship between Logan and Laura. As their journey progresses she strives to create a bond and be closer to him. He, however, finds it difficult to show anything but rage. Having lost so much and not being able to save almost everyone he loves has crippled his ability to be close to people.

With all this in mind, what makes Logan an interesting film isn’t really its story, but how that story feeds into a character study. Logan is perhaps one of the most unique mainstream pictures to tackle loss, depression, and hopelessness. The superhero genre is primarily known for its happy ending tales of the main character or team besting the bad guys… Logan is the opposite. The way Logan ends is sincerely crushing.

It’s a tear jerker that asks some essential questions about how we may handle our own pain. Specifically, in mind when it comes to this question: how do we cope when we feel we’ve lost everything?

In the end: For high convincing drama that asks an audience to feel something, a film must give them someone to feel for. In Origins, Wolverine is nothing more than a basic hero, slashing his way through everyone he comes by. His quest leads him to characters with no personality to them, creating a story with emptiness. In Logan though, we experience someone who we strive to understand clearer. His mission is straight forward, yes, but what drives us to peel back the layers is the character himself. We see someone with no hope, and sit at the edge of our seats wishing he finds peace.

In Conclusion

Superhero movies have grown to tell more than your basic do-gooder fighting the bad guy. All the characters we root for in their battles are more than their muscles and war cries. They are people who laugh, cry, and feel.

There are plenty of pictures that get shipped out with glitz and glam, hoping to make a quick buck. We see how those films don’t last long however (on screen or in our hearts). But the stories with the characters and messages we love, those remain with us long after the credits have rolled. The comic book movie has proven that it can be more than just flashy clichés, but that of well-crafted drama.

Do you think comic book movies have the power to be artful?