DC's Change into more Palpable Material: Reaction to the Justice League Trailer

Most people have consistently criticized DC Films for their dependency on darker, more serious themes compared to their rivals at Marvel Studios. While there can certainly be some hindrance to the identity of a franchise by gearing the films encompassing it in a dark overtone, I had never found that to personally be the issue with DC Films. Man of Steel was certainly not the happy-go-lucky Superman story many people are familiar with, but it succeeded in analyzing what a Superman in the real world might look like: how he might impact the lives of others, what his fears and doubts about his affect on the world might be. For all of the criticisms of Man of Steel and director Zack Snyder (and it's got it's fair share of criticism to have), it most certainly isn't the fault of the tone that the film fails in areas.


The same can be said for Zack Snyder's follow-up, Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice. Folks might have been burned out with the dark and edgy DC Films tone (again, another fair critique since that's what we were exposed to in all DC films after The Dark Knight), but it's my opinion that the tone is not the primary problem of the versus film. The ultimate issue of BvS was its muddled plot, mixed with tons of exposition in the effort to set up the several films that would follow it. Not only that, but the disconnect in messaging from the film to the audience, in terms of expectations for the film's overall goal, was completely mishandled. Batman V Superman can certainly be described as a mess, but the tone definitely isn't the primary issue.


Enter Suicide Squad, a DC Film that arrived just 6 months after Batman V Superman, and give it to a studio so desperate to seem appealing to its audience that the retroactively edit what most likely would've been a dark, devious film featuring B-level DC Comics villains teaming up to go on a live-or-death mission mandated by a shady government organization, and change the tone of the film to be somewhat of a dark action-comedy featuring great musical hits every 7 minutes. The issues with Suicide Squad are actually more easily identifiable, in the splintered story, weak antagonist, and mismatched direction. And while I personally love Suicide Squad, I'm not going to bury my head in the sand and pretend not to see it's problems.  But the tone is not one of them.


Wonder Woman thus gave audiences what they were clamoring for: a hero to support, to get behind, because Wonder Woman herself saw the best humanity could offer, and fought for it. Not dissimilar to a classical Superman or the modern Captain America, Wonder Woman restored the idea that the world is worth saving not because it happens to be the place where we live, but because the beings that live on it are capable of great things. And unlike the modern Superman, Wonder Woman was able to see that from the beginning, despite her own tribulations with them. Nevertheless, Wonder Woman was the DC Film audiences responded to the best, and DC executives most likely attributed that to the tone of hope.


So, we now see a Justice League film advertising both stakes and lighthearted fun: a Batman that is more charismatic, a Flash that cracks wise, a rock-star Aquaman. The color palette is of a brighter, more vibrant choice. The camera seems to be shooting sharper, clearer imagery. The CGI seems to be the best DC has had thus far. Justice League offers a culmination of a story started since 2013's Man of Steel, with both a change in identity of the franchise and attitude to filmmaking.

Now, this could also be because previous director Zack Snyder had to step down due to a family tragedy, and director Joss Whedom (The Avengers, Avengers: Age of Ultron) has since made his mark on the film. Both are comic book fans, both grew up reading comics like The Justice League of America, but it's clear that Joss likes to stick more in the realm of comic books when creating his superhero projects, while Zack takes after Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight Trilogy) and tries to ground his films as much as he can, while remaining true to the comic book aesthetic. Clearly, DC Films, tired of losing to their competitor in the critics' favor, have taken it upon themselves to borrow more elements that make Marvel films fan favorites than they originally planned.

I'll say this much: Justice League looks fun. It looks like high-octance, action-packed, superhero fun. The cast looks great, I'm interested in seeing how the humor turns out, and I'm engaged in seeing where this franchise goes as a result of the new direction, both in the overall tone and the narrative results of the film. I only hope that DC doesn't become "Marvel 2" as a result of them reading the wrong signals from the audience. Dark is okay. Dark can even be good! Look at the Marvel-Netflix TV series like Daredevil and Jessica Jones, it can be done well. DC Films doesn't have to sacrifice it's entire identity as a film series just because people are misconstruing the problems with their films. Again, Justice League looks like it's gonna be a good time at the movies, but I just wish it wasn't so obviously a change in trying to steal some of the Marvel glory.

Then again, the entire idea of a DC Film franchise was stolen from Marvel, so maybe this was the natural turn of events.

Spider-Man: Homecoming Movie Review

Let it be known that, after all my pondering and pontificating, I might be one of the only people in the world who walked out of Spider-Man: Homecoming feeling unsatisfied with the Spider-Man we may be seeing for the next decade or so. Not necessarily with the acting, action, or return to the MCU, but rather with the story presented, and the possible direction of the character.

Nobody's perfect, I guess.

The first thing I have to address is the acting, because it's good. New Spider-Man/Peter Parker actor Tom Holland definitely brings a fresh youth to the character. He's noticeably younger than his predecessors, and the story takes advantage of that by truly presenting us with a teenage superhero ready to make it out on his own, but one who might be too eager for his own good. Tom's funny, no doubt. He definitely matches up attitude-wise to Robert Downey Jr.'s returning Iron Man/Tony Stark, whose brief but notable appearances make sense within the world while not feeling too shoehorned in.


The real stand-out in the movie, in my opinion, has to be Michael Keaton's Vulture. Not often does a Marvel movie give serious time to developing their villain characters, and yet, Spider Man: Homecoming opens with his origins. And make no mistake, while sympathetic, Keaton also plays an incredibly intense and imposing villain. He's the perfect contrast to the youthful Spider-Man full of hope. Vulture is beaten down by the world, doing what he needs to do to stay up on top of it. Unfortunately, many other side-characters, like Jacob Batalon's Ned or Marisa Tomei's Aunt May are left to being conflicts of interest or light comedic elements in this particular Spider-Man film. You may think I'm being critical for a movie to have so many characters and leave them to serve specific purposes, but it leads to my central complaint of this Spider-Man movie: consequences mean nothing.

The main gist of this story revolves around Peter Parker trying to prove himself to Tony Stark after the events of Captain America: Civil War, in the hopes that Tony will officially let him into the Avengers. This makes sense, sequentially, in the life of Peter Parker, and I'll be honest, I thought this is the kind of Spider-Man story that I wanted. But with this change in the approach to the character, I found myself somewhat disconnected from Peter, far more than I ever had before in a Spider-Man story. It's not a journey about Peter just trying to do the right thing, by his family, or friends, or town. It becomes a story about the desire to be a god. Now, were I in Peter's shoes, I can't say I would choose differently, I'm simply saying that I now know this kind of Peter Parker isn't one I would elect to see over and over again. And that's not a critique of Holland's performance: it's more of a critique of the direction of the plot.

Another area I found myself oddly disappointed in was the action in the film. Save for the final act and, in turn, final fight with the Vulture, most of the action felt underwhelming, because Spider-Man didn't have to struggle too much. Not only that, but the special effects surrounding the action didn't look as sharp as other Marvel films, such as the Captain America series, have done. There's also the high probability that the action didn't resonate with me because I found the film's plot to be inferior to what I would have wanted.

I feel like, with Spider-Man: Homecoming, I start to see the cracks in Marvel's formula. And I even think of the past few films I've seen from them, particularly films like Ant-Man and Doctor Strange, where I first looked favorably, I now see to be somewhat mediocre. At the very least, the effort to get at least three movies a year out from Marvel is starting to have an impact on my enjoyment of them. This new Spider-Man is nowhere near a disaster, nor is it the best Spider-Man film ever made. It's a frustrating attempt to meld the core tenants of Spider-Man with the philosophy of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, by including one too many jokey sequences, a plethora of cameos, and a grab-bag of cliches, such as the romantic plot. That being said, if Spider-Man: Homecoming is any indication to what villains could be in the MCU moving forward, then I'm excited. I just wish the entire film had been as refreshing as the Vulture was.

Rating: 7/10