Back in 2013, noted director Steven Spielberg predicted the inevitable "implosion" of the movie industry, based mainly on the seemingly impossible high budgets of superhero movies. Well, the year is 2016, and in case you haven’t heard, there’s a handful of superhero movies due; and by a handful I mean seven. Seven separate comic book movies, six of which have connected to either a Marvel or DC cinematic universe, and all of which are expected to turn a hefty profit. This is a stark (pun intended) new trend in the media industry, capitalizing on an existing nerd subculture that went untapped for half a century to potentially net billions of dollars in revenue. Last weekend Captain America: Civil War was released, and at the time of this article's inception it has generated over $207 million in domestic gross revenue. In this piece we'll break down ramifications of the superhero craze and how it has shifted studio and viewer priorities, not necessarily for the better.
The first major effect of the Marvel model is this idea of a connected universe, it’s nothing new in the media world (Andy Griffith Show and Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C., if you’re too young for that joke / reference look it up) however; Marvel has turned it into a monster. If you’re a Marvel fan you HAVE to see whatever they put out, even if you’re not interested in the specific movie or hero because they’re sure to work it into Avengers somewhere. To their credit, this is a great business model, they’ve grossed over $3 billion with a B domestic box office since Iron Man was released in 2008. This has led to other film companies flocking to the model, most notably Warner Brother who in 2013 tried to jump-start the D.C. cinematic universe with Man of Steel, a movie met with moderate reception. This year they were slated to really kick their universe into another gear with Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice, a movie so bad that the name Martha is a major plot point. This isn’t just unique to Warner Brothers though, other studios have followed suit. Some do it well (Fox the X-Men Universe) and some, let’s just say, don’t. Nevertheless, everybody wants to be Marvel.
Now is this a good thing? Many would argue yes, as we get to see some of our favorite movie characters interact with one another, but does it risk harming quality? Batman vs. Superman is a great example of this. Not only were we given universe introductions to characters such as Batman, Alfred, and Lex Luther, key components to the specific story, but we were also introduced to Wonder Woman, Cyborg, Aquaman, Flash, and Darkside, all of whom figure to play large roles in the upcoming films in the universe, but have very little direct impact on the narrative being woven in front of us. Why introduce them now? Because it's what they think the fans want - classic characters interacting on the big screen. However, this hinders the film's ability to tell a coherent narrative, and cheapens the moral and ethical struggle playing out on screen. Focusing so much on winking at your audience at every turn takes a compelling story, and turns it into a trailer for Justice League.
The next major effect of the superhero mania is the investment in these tent pole projects. Summer blockbusters have always been around for companies like Warner Brothers, Disney, and Fox, but this new manifestation of superheroes has begun to suck up more amounts of capital than ever before. Batman vs Superman and Captain America: Civil War had production budgets of over $250 million; compare this to older superhero movies like X-Men ($75 million) and Fantastic Four ($100 million). This kind of resource dedication means that cuts have to be made somewhere, and so far we see that the sacrifice has been to creative and independent projects, starting on the whiteboards of the studio executives, and ultimately ending in the minds of consumers. There is a tangible trade off; no it’s not that there are less independent films being produced, but the distribution and studio investment in these films have sharply declined. One study showed that films from major production company subsidiaries, (these are independent film arms from your big companies - think Fox Searchlight and Sony Pictures Classics), faced a wide release decrease of 37 percent, from 82 percent down to 55 percent. When these independent films fall by the wayside, less and less people get exposed to artistic film-making as they lose the chance to see creative new concepts, and are sucked up into the frenzy of pop culture that dominates the conversation. I’m not shifting onto superheroes 100 percent of the blame for the problems facing the independent film industry, but at minimum they attract some resources that would have gone to major production companies subsidiaries, and take some of the cross over audience for their features that may have gone to an independent movie had it had a wide release or more resources from the major production companies.
The implications of superhero movies are far reaching, and over the next decade it’ll be interesting to see where the film industry is and whether or not consumers are overloaded and exhausted with people in capes. Who knows, maybe Avatar and Guardians of the Galaxy share a connected universe. As far as the independent film industry goes, those of you who care about little movies like Whiplash, Wild, and Nebraska (all of which I highly recommend), go find an independent film house, dig up some creative new directors on Redbox, or fall in love with the writing of Mark Duplass or James Gunn online. Only time will tell if Stephen Spielberg’s prediction will come to fruition, but no matter if they “go the way of the western or not” their cultural impact on film has left a lasting impression.
