"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free and good men die like dogs. There is also a negative side." – Hunter S. Thompson.Doc Gonzo may have been talking about the record industry, but the above statement is the type of beautiful blanket that fits just about any art-for-commerce enterprise -none so well, perhaps, as the movie business. And within that business we call show, that axiom has possibly never been embodied quite so well as in X-MEN ORIGINS: WOLVERINE.
Nobody thought it was going to win Oscars, but it would have been nice to shoot for (at least) a Kid's Choice Award. In a way, the latest Marvel Studios release represents everything that's wrong with comic book films: it abandons continuity, it depends upon irrational concepts, and it takes gigantic liberties with established, franchised characters who have come to life first in another medium.
If all these things are true, and I assure you that they are, then why is it so darn watchable?
Well, for one thing, it was cast fairly well. Anybody who has seen Hugh Jackman in anything -even Swordfish- will have notice that he's got the kind of charisma that skips entire generations. He's a cool, likable guy who has proven (in other films) that he knows how to act. So have most of the other cast. Danny Huston was oscarworthy (though not nominated) in The Constant Gardner, and terrifying in 30 Days of Night. Liev Schrieber should be called upon to portray Orson Wells in everything, following his performance in RKO 281. And Ryan Reynolds, who will never likely be nominated for anything loftier than an MTV Movie Award, has earned himself his own franchise after his performance as Deadpool.
It helps that all of the thus-far listed performers have truly, signature voices. It would be an easy pot-shot to say they hired a bunch of Voice Over talent to perform live in an action film, but the problem with this film was not the performances. It was the material. The script never attempted to be anything loftier than popcorn fodder. And that's what this film is: enjoyable but average popcorn fluff.
How did we know this would happen? The film's producer, Lauren Shuler Donner (executive producer of such masterpieces as Volcano and Freewilly 3), revealed that this was "just a comic book movie," in virtually every interview she gave; a sentiment that Joel Schumacher shares regarding his rape of the Batman franchise. That's the attitude that ruins the majority of comic book films, be they Constantine (another Donner production) or Catwoman. It's this idea that these executive producers -who know nothing about comic books- somehow think they know better than the people who made these projects optionable in the first place: Hubris. It's my guess that the closest to reading a comic book that Ms. Donner has ever come has been reading the "coverage" that her assistant put together for her after reading a handful of graphic novels and trolling wikipedia. And if I'm wrong, Werner Herzog will eat his shoe, but I digress...
Certainly, there have been a handful of really good and even great comic book films. In every case, these films have been the product of a filmmaker who is incredibly passionate about the project. Lauren's husband Richard Donner was a huge Superman fan, who had been working up his resume until he felt he was ready to tackle his dream project. And he was not the studio's first choice! But they took the project seriously. They paid Godfather scribe Mario Puzo more money than anyone had ever before been paid to write the screenplay. They paid Marlon Brando more money than any actor had ever before been paid to appear in little more than a cameo as Superman's father, Jor-El. They conducted a year-long search for an "unknown" actor to become the face of the franchise. Underneath it all was a high concept, empowering an even higher objective: You Will Believe A Man Can Fly. Well it all worked, and Warner Brothers set the template for the Oscar-worthy superhero film, succeeding beyond any possible income projections. Of course by the third film, the studios had succumbed to bean counters instead of creative types, and decided that since Superman was their biggest hit in recent years, and since Richard Pryor was the biggest box-office attraction, that the two should marry. Good Grief!
Sam Raimi is the biggest Spiderman fan on planet earth, and it shows in his first two Spiderman films. Bryan Singer read the mutant menace plot in Chris Clairmont's Uncanny X-Men stories as his personal battle against prejudice, growing up gay in a time when it was not as "easy" as it is now. His two films were very good. Christopher Nolan's encyclopedic knowledge of the Batman mythos shows in his incredibly respectful and realistic rebuild of that once dead franchise. His take on the Joker, and inspired casting of that role, has given comicdom it's very own Citizen Kane.
Of course, even when the director is obsessed with a project it can wind up being bad. Certainly Zach Snyder had done his research on Watchmen, but he used the comic book layout as a shot list (instead of just inspiration) for the action. He failed to utilize the motion picture format's strengths -instead highlighting sequential art's limitations. It was no enviable task, perhaps an impossible job at which to succeed, and the level of proficiency achieved was commendable, but in the end it was just enough to truly disappoint. Lastly, life-long Will Eisner fan Frank Miller should be banned from movie sets for life after his terrible realization of The Spirit, proving to most that Sin City was probably just a Tarantino & Rodriguez film with Frank's name slapped onto it.
So I think we can all agree that it takes just as much effort to make a bad movie as it does to make a good one, so you might as well start with the best possible materials:
A good script.
A passionate director.
The right cast.
That's three quarters of the way home right there!
It's pretty easy to see, judging by the first weekend take of Wolverine, that there will be many more of these X-Men Origin films, and probably an outright sequel to this particular one. But it must also be crystal clear to those would see that the second week drop-off shows the public's word-of-mouth falls pretty far short of "must see."
Someday, producer hubris will be seen as a bad thing, and to observe Dr. T's quote at the top of this column, perhaps the marketing department will transcend the shallow money trench and leave these comic book characters with (gasp!) a little dignity. Ok, that's asking a bit much, but maybe they'll learn to assemble focus groups within the actual demographic of the project, rather than dig a swath across the whole of civilization. After all, by attempting to please too many, they ultimately please none.
Until then, we can laugh about the monumental misfire of Howard The Duck and wax poetic about the victory of Dark Knight.
Even if we're ultimately left sweating bullets over the upcoming Sandman, Torso, and Captain America.
3 comments:
An executive Producer is a Producer once removed.
A Producer does the work. Lauren Shuler Donner PRODUCED X-Men 1 & 2, Free Willy 1, St. Elmo's Fire, Pretty in Pink, Dave, You've Got Mail, etc.
Eat your shoes Werner Herzog because although I did not grow up reading X-Men comics, I read them for the first X-Men and continue to do my homework gladly.
If you were happy with the casting, who do you think is responsible for that?
Go pick on someone else.
I'm glad that the casting was successful to the extent that it was, but it wasn't enough to carry a whole movie. The second X-Men film is excellent, not only because it was cast extremely well, but because it was an excellent story told with gusto by a filmmaker with conviction.
But nobody reads back issues of Variety, and we're two films along in the series. While I'm in no hurry to draw the ire of one of the most powerful women in Hollywood, I find it surprising that someone can do so much research and yet still miss the central element to an ongoing story: Character.
The Wolverine character is complex and the history is lengthy. It's a difficult time line to follow even for comic fans, but in the right hands it could have been as good as Dark Knight.
"X-Men Origins: Wolverine" seemingly strived for "good enough" and nothing more. It was paper-thin story-wise. I find it hard to believe that anybody could have read that script and thought awards would be in order. And if you don't take it seriously enough to aim that high, then what's the bloody point?
It was the latest in a long history of comic book films just thrown out there for the lowly comic book fan. It was taken for granted that fans would go and see it on the merits of the established character and casting alone. That's the kind of hubris that makes comic book fans disdain the Hollywood treatment of their beloved comic book heroes. When filmmakers get it right, the fans of comicdom reward them: Superman I and Spiderman and Dark Knight were all box -office record holders. They each rate among the most successful films in history at the time of their release. Why? Because they were great films made by great filmmakers.
Wolverine was little more than a throwaway sequel. Sometimes a little mindless fun is refreshing, but it's ill-advised to treat a character so beloved as a disposable money-maker -especially if you're aiming for a franchise. Well they got my money, and since I have expectations of quality when I fork over my money even after being fooled time and time again, I guess it's really shame on me. I should have known better.
It's not a terrible movie. It's (as I said) disposable fluff, neither awful nor awesome, and that's what's heartbreaking. It could have been great, and greatness was clearly never in the cards.
I may have been wrong, and Mrs. Shuler-Donner may actually have read a series of collected graphic novels to get up to speed on things. For my error in speculating otherwise I will apologize. Will she apologize for dropping the ball on a chance to knock it out of the park?
Here was a film that had a proper budget. Here was a film that had marquee names. Here was a film that had fantastic source material.
What happened?
Where was the script?
Where was an experienced director passionate about the project?
Where was feedback during this process from the fan community? It would be desirable to get feedback from the target demographic, would it not?
I refuse to believe that Lauren Shuler-Donner is a thin skinned person who can't take criticism. There's no way she could have made as many films as she has if that were the case ("Dave" is an excellent film, that probably wasn't the easiest film to get greenlit). If something I wrote rang true enough to warrant a personal reply I hope it has done so with the intent that future films involving comic book characters avoid the pitfalls I saw in this one.
Raise the bar a little. There's no reason why a film adapted from comics can't win an Oscar. No reason, I hesitate say, unless that's all they're meant to be: comic book movies.
Post a Comment