Yep it’s that time of year again. Time for the Midwest to get thawed out. Nope, just joking (sorry, Midwest). It’s summer movie time!
Summer movie blockbusters have been a tradition since 1975
when Jaws came out, and the tradition was solidified with the first Star Wars
in 1977. There have been some movement
in the kinds of summer blockbusters.
There’s always been the monster flick (Jaws to Cloverfield), the science
fiction flick (Star Wars to Looper), the Superhero flick (Superman to The
Dark Knight Rises), the action flick (Raiders of the Lost Ark to the Pirates
franchise), and the high-level comedy (Ghostbusters to… well, who could beat
Ghostbusters?) and animated (from Little Mermaid to Brave).
A summer blockbuster has to be made for a lot of money (a hundred million
dollars isn’t too much to ask, and it could be too little), is hugely promoted
as an “event” and makes a lot of box office money (hopefully) and even more money
in DVD sales and action dolls.
Summer blockbusters try to meet the entertainment needs of
the broadest possible audience. So it
will include a lot of elements: laughs (good to have a well-known comic),
action (need at least a couple ‘splodies), high stakes (life and death is
preferable), surprise (plot twists if you can, but a good jump if nothing else),
and visual spectacle (pretty colors and special effects).
Mix it up, and you’ve got your blockbuster.
There are certainly some that are better than others. I don’t know of anyone who has Cutthroat
Island on their top list. But a film
being good or bad has nothing to do with sales.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen was pretty much panned by all
critics, both professional and amateur, yet it grossed 836 million dollars
worldwide, making it (currently) the 34th highest-grossing movie of
all time.
I’ve often wondered why a movie that is so loudly disliked
makes so much money. This means that
some people—heck, an awful LOT of people—liked this movie enough to not only
like it, but watch it a number of times while it was still in the theatre. Perhaps some of this is because of the visual
spectacle, which is tough to repeat at home.
But some of it is because the likes and dislikes of the person who
watches a number of films (e.g. critics) differs from the person who only
watches a few movies a year. But more on
that another time.
There is also a discussion about what actually makes a
summer blockbuster “good”. We all
recognize the genre that includes the elements I listed in the first few
paragraphs. But what makes a “good”
one?
Recently, many people have pointed to the movie Inception as
beginning a trend of blockbusters that are good, by which they mean “smart.” Certainly with Inception there is a lot to
take in, especially in the first half, and it is a visual feast. It is a deeply complex world, with
psychological insight, and with much of the mind-bendy stuff that I think is
just wonderful. (I’ve loved that ever
since Winnie the Pooh and the Blustery Day turned the book sideways to get
Tigger down from the tree. Oh, sorry:
Spoiler alert).
But frankly, for a
person who is used to mind-bendy stuff, Inception was just okay. They laid out the plot of the second half
before you got there and didn’t divert from that outline. Despite the difficulties to overcome, none of
us really thought there was any real danger.
To me, the stakes just weren’t high enough, and despite the visual
feast, it just wasn’t enough to keep me interested. We’ve got exposition the first half and no
new ideas in the second half, which just isn’t enough for someone who is used
to Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.
This doesn’t mean that we don’t have smart summer blockbusters. I think Nolan already made his smart summer
blockbuster with The Dark Knight, a year before Inception. While plot-wise it is a bit of a grab-bag,
there are some great, thoughtful ideas and philosophical parables galore.
Other people like there to be solid, well rounded characters
in their movies, and I have to say that these are hard to find in summer
blockbusters. As entertaining as
Captain Jack Sparrow or Peter Venkman are, there isn’t any kind of a character
arc, and their characters just have a few tricks that they keep us entertained
by. Usually the heroes and heroines of
the summer blockbuster doesn’t have enough time to think, let alone develop as
a character. But this is where Pixar has often given us an option. Although often in a fantasy realm, Pixar
gives us character development we can believe, notably Woody in Toy Story. He turns from a jerk to a likable,
sympathetic character that we are 100 percent behind by the end of the
film. Frankly, those toys are some of
the most believable characters in movie history.
Another mark of an excellent summer blockbuster is a coherent
plot. All blockbusters have plots, but
in the effort to stuff as much heart-racing, belly-laughs, and eye-popping in a
couple hours or so as possible, the plot often becomes convoluted or just
lost. Occasionally a piece of a plot
just gets dropped, as if the filmmakers forgot that it was there.
I think this is why Inception spends so much time on
exposition, to help us keep the plot in mind amidst all the rolling and
scene-changes. The trend is to go to
more complicated plots. I could point to
Pixar again, but people could say, “Well, those are kids movies. They HAVE to make sense.” Okay, I’m leaving that one alone. But what about Back to the Future? That’s a time travel movie that made sense to
all of us. Everything made sense, it was
smart and had fun (if not deep) characters.
It was really entertaining, and it all made sense. Classic plotting, really.
I know that most of you have gone through all this text and
are saying: What about Iron Man 3? Well,
let’s see how Iron Man 3 goes on my scorecard of what the best summer movies
include (mild spoilers below):
Laughs: 9/10—Shane Black, the writer, really gave it his
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang best here, and Downey Jr. handled the lines very well. Lots of laughs in this movie.
Plot: 7/9 Generally
good, but there is a long section in the middle of Tennessee that we seemed to
have forgotten why we were there, as the “discovery” in that place was just
lost.
Character: 7/9
They really tried hard on this level.
They gave Tony Stark some PTSD, and some relationship troubles. I wish they would give Gwyneth Paltrow more
to do, because if she was given more depth they could hit it out of the park, I
think. On the other hand, the kid in
Tennessee had a great rapport with Stark, and I’d love to see him come back
into the franchise.
Smart: 5/7 Tony is
smart, but here they are trying to make him out to be Bruce Willis more than
the genius he was made out to be in the first Iron Man film. Not that I mind, but it’s not an especially
smart film.
Surprise: 10/10 Here
is where I will disagree with a number of my friends who panned this film, I
think. I went into the film having
missed the trailer and reviews—right where I like to be. And I was surprised again and again. There were a lot of twists and turns. Sure, the army of robots wasn’t interesting,
but they didn’t spend a lot of time on it in all the energy turning Tony Stark
into a bare-fisted action hero.
Stakes: 8/10—Pretty high, in as much as they were believable. A new kind of super power, in the hands of people
with a seemingly endless bankroll.
Yeah, kind of scary. And to see
Stark face real danger was excellent.
'Splodies? Check. |
Action: 8/10—The action is up and down. Buildings explode, characters are in serious
danger. Frankly, I’d rank the action in
this film as higher than the first two Iron Man films.
Visual: 5/10 There’s very little here that we didn’t see in
the first two films.
Overall, though, Iron Man 3 gave me what I wanted:
entertainment. Lots of laughs and surprises
and I can forgive a couple missteps in the plot. Frankly, I had a good time. While I might expect something different from
an art film or a smart sci-fi, I got more than I hoped for in a superhero
film.
And that’s why I think Iron Man 3 is better than
Inception. Because, as a summer
blockbuster, it was fun. I smiled, I
laughed, I was surprised. I really
enjoyed myself. And that’s good enough.
No comments:
Post a Comment