Mike Gold: The Great Superhero Movie Backlash
Most critics seem to be sick to death of superhero movies and teevee shows. Even many of those who are enthusiasts of the superhero genre.
If this was a reaction to Batman v Superman or the Fantastic Four movies or Amazing Spider-Man 2, I’d be more understanding. Now that the embargo has been lifted, I’ve read the “advance” reviews of Guardians of the Galaxy Volume 2 and, while it did garner some very good notices, it is clear to me that a rather large gaggle of such critics really went far out of their way to put some hate into their criticism. The comment most typical to these writers is some variation of “Well, yeah, it’s fun and entertaining and the performances are solid, but it’s too much like the first one.”
Besides, I doubt anybody ever told John Wayne there were too many westerns. Well, maybe John Ford, but I certainly doubt anybody ever told John Ford there were too many westerns.
Are superhero movies a fad? I don’t think so. We’ve always had a lot of them, but the passage of time has painted them with a nostalgic afterglow. Zorro, Sherlock Holmes, Tarzan, Flash Gordon, James Bond and their ilk have been in the theaters for over a century, and the industry is still making movies about these same guys.
Each movie should be evaluated on its own merits. If it’s a remake of a great movie, okay – the bar is higher as the filmmakers must justify why they’re remaking a great movie. But the argument should be about quality and not quantity. When it comes to sequels, let us remember that there have been quite a number that many critics define as superior to the original. Godfather II and From Russia With Love come to mind. Rotten Tomatoes gave Spider-Man 2 (the one that was good and not Amazing) four points over its well-received predecessor.
There’s a more direct way to say all this.
Before sitting down to watch a movie, pull that stick out of your ass. And don’t get wrapped up in the capes.
I agree with everything you wrote… except Superman and the Mole Men was a great movie. It didn’t need Perry White or Jimmy Olsen. It had Phyliss Coates.
I can’t argue that, George. It was a great movie, except it ran 56 minutes. Even in 1951, that’s too short for a B flick. Then again, it was done on an eleven dollar budget and every petty of that was on the screen.
Twice.
I loved SUPERMAN AND THE MOLE MEN, too! Plus, Phyliss Coates, the definitive Lois.
“Phyliss Coates, the definitive Lois.”
Yes! I have been saying that my entire life!
Ah, for the good old days when we knew what Lois Lane actually looked like. These days her appearance seems to change significantly from artist to artist, book to book, month to month.
When it comes to MOLE MEN, I still miss Jimmy and Perry. A nice establishing scene in the Daily Planet offices and a bit of banter between the four would have been wonderful, and it would have made the initial Clark-to-Superman reveal all the more interesting.
Yeah, I’ve been carrying this since I first saw it, probably an early rerun of the 1953 teevee rebroadcast