Are people/critics getting tired of the Dark & Gritty Movies?

[Rowsdower!]

Hahaha yeah.

I think people can't figure out what they want from these films. Maybe the Superman/Zod fight really did feel WAY TOO LONNNNNNNNNG for most people, but I didn't get that at all. First of all, it wasn't any longer than any other climactic battle in a film. Could things have been done better? Should there have been less destruction? Perhaps. But I wonder if the people who say that have actually read a Superman comic book. The Superman/Doomsday battle pretty much leveled Metropolis. And yeah, fine, not everyone likes that story, but it got people reading Superman comics again in the 1990s.

 

[Breogan]

Are people/critics getting tired of the Dark & Gritty Movies?

What the title says.

People have been asking that same stupid question since....

...well, forever.

Like "Dark & Gritty" is something new. It's not, it never has been. And the answer is still and will always be no!

Who cares what people/critics think. They are morons t:

 

[Greens]

The premise of the thread doesn't make sense. If you want a fun family movie, go watch that. If you want a movie with a darker subject matter, go watch that. Both types of movies still exist. The only reason "dark and gritty" is mentioned so much is because of the Nolan movies, which is stupid because dark and gritty existed before Nolan was even born. It's a lame argument with the assumption that Nolan somehow changed film as a whole with the Dark Knight trilogy which is absolutely false. This whole thing doesn't go further than our CBM bubble.

 

[Black Narcissus]

The premise of the thread doesn't make sense. If you want a fun family movie, go watch that. If you want a movie with a darker subject matter, go watch that. Both types of movies still exist. The only reason "dark and gritty" is mentioned so much is because of the Nolan movies, which is stupid because dark and gritty existed before Nolan was even born. It's a lame argument with the assumption that Nolan somehow changed film as a whole with the Dark Knight trilogy which is absolutely false. This whole thing doesn't go further than our CBM bubble.

Yeah, I think this argument is only for CBM.

 

[Heretic]

Watchmen came out in comic shops with a revolutionary creative vision. Eventually, some publisher released Bloodfire...a guy who has AIDS (not because of his own actions...he was injected with it intentionally by an evil doctor)...and because of this his hands can shoot fire. I bet if you asked, the creator of Bloodfire would see his creation as an extension of the "gritty" tone set in Watchmen.

That's kind of how these things work. You have a revolutionary artistic vision...and then less talented minds only pick up on a few surface details while completely overlooking the incredible depth required to make it such a revolutionary vision...and a bunch of garbage follows that is supposedly in the same genre.

Rage Against The Machine and Limp Bizkit both rap over heavy music. That doesn't mean that Killing in the Name and Nookie carry the same emotional weight. You don't call Limp Bizkit geniuses because of Rage, and you dont discount the vision of Rage because of Limp Bizkit.

 

[dude stannis]

Why must it be one or the other? I love that I can look forward to a dark, heavy, mythic CBM and a hilarious, endlessly quoteable CBM fairly regularly.

 

[HaplessHenchman]

Why must it be one or the other? I love that I can look forward to a dark, heavy, mythic CBM and a hilarious, endlessly quoteable CBM fairly regularly.

Exactly! Both approaches can be appreciated. I'm perfectly happy having both "dark and gritty" and "hokey family fun" (or however you want to term it). Since when did diversity become a bad thing?

 

[terry78]

I don't think adventure and fun loving has to be hokey, to an extent. Look at stuff like Goonies and Indiana Jones. Spielberg has always been an expert at a hybrid of merging dark subject matter with fun filled escapism. Those two are hilarious as **** but you still realize that the danger they're facing is very real with possible death looming all the time for the heroes. Basically I think most comic book movies need a tone of, "this stuff is serious but we're not so far up on our ass that we can't acknowledge that it's too serious."

 

[Black Narcissus]

Eh, I like the different contrast from DC and Marvel. I might be a bit tired of the recent marvel films going right for the jokes and when the action starts, I feel no danger for our heroes... Most of the dramatic parts are starting to fall flat for me.

 

[Greens]

Eh, I like the different contrast from DC and Marvel. I might be a bit tired of the recent marvel films going right for the jokes and when the action starts, I feel no danger for our heroes... Most of the dramatic parts are starting to fall flat for me.

I have the same feeling.

 

[3dman27]

Man of Steel has Metropolis getting obliterated, Jonathan Kent encouraging Clark to *not* save people, and Superman breaking the villain's neck. If that isn't dark, what the hell would be? Superman as serial rapist?

I should hope not

 

[3dman27]

Dark, edgy, whatever you wanna call it, has no effect on a film's perception IMO. The light hearted films that get stellar reviews are great films. The dark films that got stellar reviews are great films. The light hearted films that got trashed where trash. The dark films that got trashed were trash.

The only reason this has become a (very stupid) topic of discussion is because Nolan's Batman films got great reviews and brought in a lot of dough, so a bunch of dumbass producers took that as a sign that dark tone automatically equals good film, which is certainly not the case.

this a super hero movie doesn't nessasrily have to be batman 66 but it doesn't need to be watchmen either

 

[The Shape]

Are people getting tired of talking about how people are getting tired of dark/gritty movies?