THE BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN CHALLENGE

So the big shocker out of SDCC was that visionary director short-attention-span pot-banger Zack Snyder's MAN OF STEEL sequel will feature a Superman/Batman showdown.  People got all excited and I get why.  The clash of those particular titans was nothing short of DY-NO-MITE in Frank Miller's The Dark Night Returns.  So, when Harry Lennix was brought out to read the dialogue from that epic graphic novel, that's exactly what it evoked.

Say hello to my little friend.

Now, let's be sure to temper that with the follow-up statement that it will be "inspired by" the events in that book, not an actual telling of those events.  This makes sense given that we're dealing with a much younger Superman and, presumably, a somewhat chronologically-matched Bats.  This also however, presents the problem I wish to discuss today.

Who do you root for?  In TDKR(-eturns, not -ises), you rooted for Batman. Hands down. It was his story, and even though he had clearly gone off the deep end, Miller had done a bang-up job of transforming Kal El into a phony government shill AND it was exciting to see Bruce Wayne team up with Oliver Queen to fight dirty against outwit the superfella.

But now it's a Superman story, and only the second in this iteration.  We've only just met this version of the man in blue.  He's young, he's likable, nobody owns him.  So, what, he's just supposed to take it the hard way when this screw-loose vigilante in bat suit starts hurling Kryptonite batarangs his way?  And for that matter, why would the Bat go after him in the first place?  They better answer that pretty darn well before the fists start flying.  (And I'm sure they will.  Maybe it's because this last Son of Krypton lets cities get destroyed.  Who knows?  Think maybe young Bruce's parents were killed in one of those falling skyscrapers?  I mean, a boatload of people were, so why not them?)

Or maybe Superman will go all cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs this time (like, maybe, Mola Ram makes him drink the blood of Kali Ma from a skull or something - I don't know, it's a placeholder...) and they'll call in the caped crusader to reel him back in. [Possible sample dialogue - BATMAN (growls): It was the black sleep of Kali!]

But you see the challenge.  Right now, it's Superman's good will to lose.  We just got to know him.  In theory we kind of like him (well, some people do, anyway).  BUT...In one two-and-a-half-hour movie, they need to get us up to speed on how Clark is doing in his new life at the Daily Planet, show how he uses his super skillz to save the city on a day-to-day basis, introduce the new Batman, give us a villain worth   his or her weight in evil-doing, then come up with a DAMN GOOD REASON why this new Batman and this new Superman would come to blows?  That means at least a two scenes where things seem okay, one or two more where things start to turn, and one big betrayal of some kind that makes the conflict simply unavoidable. (Problem #2: Which city to destroy in the confrontation this time?)

That's a lot of water to carry in one movie.  And I'm predicting right now that it won't be anywhere near as powerful and resonant as it was in TDKR (you know which one I mean).  It can't be.  That battle was borne of decades of these two growing sick of each other and their differing philosophies.  This disagreement will have all of twenty minutes tops to percolate.  Now, some fans might think that's okay, as long as the fight achieves total physical/audio-visual/CGI kickass-osity.  But I say they're wrong.  This one needs to mean something.  It's not some villain of the week, we're talking about here.  It's the two most important characters in the DC universe.

So...yeah...  Let's not all get too excited just yet.  I mean, who knows?  Maybe they'll do some Superfly Level 10 Story Math-nastics and blow our collective mind.  But somehow...I doubt it.

As always, I'd love to hear your thoughts on the matter.

OO

ATTENTION STUDIOS! (This is for your own good...)

ATTENTION STUDIOS: The audience doesn't give a crap if you make money.  They don't care if your movie was number one or number ten in its opening weekend, or even if it missed the top ten by two cents.  The audience only cares if it's good.

Now, you may have figured out a pretty good hustle, banking on the opening weekend crowd to make back most of your budget before people realize your movie's just not worth it. It worked really well for a good long time.  But then TV got good.  Real good.  And video games went from two-minute, three-life diversions to became deep, fully-interactive, rich and immersive stories.  Now your little hustle isn't producing like it used to.  So, what do you do? MORE! LOUDER! FASTER! SHOCK AND AWE, SHOCK AND AWE, SHOCK AND AWE!  (Oh and you gotta see it in 3-DEEEEEEE!)

Please listen to me, Studios, because this is for your own good.  People love their stories. They'll turn anything into a story.  They'll translate sporting events into stories. They steal their stories, they love them so much.  They write their own versions, they love them so much.  They tell them around tables and in restaurants and bars, and on playgrounds and in school, and even n their minds while they sleep because they love them so much.

But explosions are not stories. Explosions are brief moments of of empty, albiet spectacular, activity.  Robots are not stories.  Robots are tools used to do work humans don't want to do.  A cool shot or special effect is not in itself a story.

So, in reminding you how to do your jobs, let me ask and try to answer three questions:

1) What is a story?
2) What is entertainment?
3) What is good?

Question #1 may be the easiest to answer.  A story is a series of linear events that change a person forever. Sounds simple enough, right?

Question #2 is pretty easy, too.  Entertainment is an emotionally satisfying experience.  If people step out of their lives for whatever reason - need for escape, a desire to laugh or cry, or simply to pass the time - they want that time to have been spent well.  They may not always use these words, but this is always what they're after.

Question #3 is the bitch. It's easy to tell a story and with a little effort, you might get an audience to say, "It was okay. Decent rental."  But you need more than that, especially with what it costs to make a movie these days.  You need that same guy to come back again and again, to bring his friends and sing to the world about how great this story is.  When that guy sits down in a theater he's making a deal with you: "I'm giving you my time. There's only so much time to give. Make my sacrifice worth it.  Show me that you thought this through, that you've looked at something real that we all experience and came up with a way of looking at it that actually helps me get through it.  Show me who I am in this crazy world and how I can come out of it on top." That's your task no matter what kind of movie you're making...and it's a tall order. So difficult is that to achieve, in fact, that you often look like like you'd rather not even try.

"But, you don't understand. Movies cost so much to make and people aren't going to theaters anymore.   We gotta give them something bigger than they can get at home or, to be honest, we'll never make our money back."

Nobody cares.

"But don't you want us to keep making movies?"

Not like this.

"But this is what people pay for!"

They're starving for better but they'll take anything.

"But Man  of Steel made $400 million!"

Nobody cares but you.

"People want spectacle.  They vote with their dollars."

Not when it's empty spectacle.  Then they'll steal off the internet.

"Okay, Smartguy, so you tell me what they want!"

All right, then...

It's not the war, it's the farm boy who thinks he's missing it and the princess who falls for the scoundrel.

It's not the Nazis with the supernatural weapon, it's the archeologist who needs to stop them making it up as he goes.

It's not the shark, it's the three unlikely friends teaming up to hunt it down.

It's not the extraterrestrial, it's the kid who befriends him.

It's not the UFOs, it's the family man who's affected by their contact.

It's not the building with the terrorists, it's the cop who can't believe he has to stop them if he ever wants to patch things up with his wife.

It's not the Mafia, it's the hopes of one father for his favorite son.

All of these movies were blockbusters.  All of them broke the hundred million mark in a time when tickets cost a fraction of what they do now.  All of them are watched again and again and again in homes.  What do they all have in common?  Oh, come on, that's an easy one.  Fine, I'll tell you.  They all have, at their centers, identifiable characters with real human emotions.  The spectacle is secondary to the truth.  This is what we all want when we settle down in our chairs, alone in the dark, to lose ourselves in a movie.  We want to see someone on the screen that is us.  We want to see someone going through a problem like ours and we want to see them prevail.  Now, whether that takes place in outer space or net to the kitchen sink doesn't matter one bit.  What matters is that we can see ourselves in them. What matters is that we can identify. You give them that and you'll make your money.  Trust me.

Do you get it now?  Somehow, I don't think you do.

- OO