Why Dr. Strange is a Branded Product and not a film.
The rise of the Marvel Cinematic Universe reminds me of a gluttonous multinational company. Think Unilever or P&G.
Both have specific product lines (Avengers, Hulk, Lux, Dove- you get the idea) that resonate with a large set of consumers. Every year a set of product and brand managers sit around a table and put their heads towards how they can milk their existing product lines even further. One easy way is to create a brand extension. This is how the boardroom conversation happens, one can imagine.
“A lot of people are buying Ponds Face Cream. How about launching Ponds Face Wash?”
“Please elaborate.”
“Well, we’ve the teenage girls demographic already hooked on to us. If they see a face wash with our name on the same shelf, right next to it, aren’t they likely to suck that up as well ?”
“That’s genius. Please go ahead. Let’s keep the margins even better on this one though.”
Now, think of people sitting around the boardroom in a big Hollywood Studio making a decision about the next superhero film. The argument to churn out more superhero films couldn’t be any different.
“We already have a bunch of suckers who bite this superhero shit under our brand, so let’s produce more of it. But let’s give it a different face and still connect it to our Universe. So people feel that they are buying something new but trusted. And yes, let’s keep the ticket prices higher.”
In the last 9 years, Marvel’s Cinematic Universe has given us 14 films. Hollywood’s most prolific living filmmaker Woody Allen in the same time has released 9 films. (10 if you count his disastrous association with Amazon Studios). In the next 3 years, we will be subjected to 8 more films from the Marvel Universe. This strike rate of production belongs more to a billion-dollar product conglomerate than a Film Studio.
This really begs the question that till what point will visual delight continue to override substance of story and emotional investment with characters. Maybe, I am too old-fashioned to get this anymore but the point of watching a film used to be to sit back and go on an emotional journey. It was something to empathize with, to get inspired from and to learn about eras and people who went through extraordinarily difficult situations and made their peace with it.
I remember watching Schindler’s List and feeling so insignificant. Pursuit of Happyness inspired me to try harder every time I failed. Flipped made me regret not having a childhood romance. I went over different scenes in these films in my head so many times and remember feeling the hair stand on me, because something about these stories (and many many others) made me feel something in the gut.
On the other hand, sitting with an ill-sized 3D glass and watching Benedict Cumberbatch conjure up weapons with his bare hands, yesterday evening was the stupidest thing I have done in a while. And it’s not as if I am anti-superhero films. I loved The Dark Knight (who doesn’t) and Deadpool and Ironman. But I also think, I had my fair share of He-Man when I was five years old. Into my mid-30s, this is the farthest thing I want to do with my precious two hours on a weekend.
I understand that this universe works more for children than anyone else. But I think this oversimplification of good versus evil and good eventually winning over with glitzy weapons is perhaps a stupid idea for a five-year old too. And if your child is going crazy about the next Marvel film, it probably speaks a lot about your intelligence too.
Which brings me to the next point of creative fatigue that invariably seeps into anything if it’s done three or four times in a row. The typical approach a studio has to deal with this is to get a new director or a writer at the helm. But at the end of the day, the crux of the film remains the same, no matter whoever comes riding in to save the day. (Remember what happened to Batman Versus Superman?)
So what still compels a studio, to continue to invest in sequels as unthinkable as Ant-Man 2 ? The answer goes back to that boardroom discussion. “Better margins, this time.” A simple Wikipedia check on the Box Office and Production costs on these films reveals this.
Ironman 3 recovered it’s investment ~6x times. The first installment recovered ~3x.
Thor 2 recovered it’s investment ~4x times. The first installment of Thor recovered ~3x.
The story is the same across all the franchises. As a Hollywood Studio, Marvel has it’s task cut out. It has to compete in a race with the likes of Sony, Fox and Universal (all of whom ironically have bought over some of Marvel’s other character rights like Spiderman and X-Men) and ensure they have a share of the customer’s wallet too.
If along the way, they have to compromise on the quality of stories being told, it’s a small price to pay for a game with much larger stakes. And for that if Ant-Man 2 has to screen at a neighborhood theater, so be it.
But don’t watch it. Just don’t.
While we don’t know whatever happened to the man who screamed “The Emperor’s naked”, it is still worth a shout.
