Serious, dark, edgy, humorous, quip, light hearted… these tend to be fan terms, and depending on where ones preferences lay, can be accentuated in overly positive or negative ways, depending on whether one wants to criticize or praise a movie or cinematic universe… really though its about execution, relativity and balance. Man of Steel is considered dark, and gritty, because many have a perception and assumption that Superman, the character and idea, is bright and cheerful. Guardians of the Galaxy is considered light and breezy, but it has moments where a young boy struggles with losing a parent to a devastating illness. Since the rest of the movie, is cheerful, and so the dark parts, serve to accentuate and compliment the films heart and humor.
A good movie will use a mix of positive and negative story telling, to various effect, even if it leans (sometimes heavily) one way more than another. If effective, it can magnify good parts of a movie, if ineffective, it can make a movie feel disjointed, uncommitted or messy. Marvel and DC, don't have exclusive rights to such ideas, and for many of the people behind the movies, there is probably a lot of passion and sincerity with wanting to deliver great stories to people (as well as companies wanting to make money…) but often that also means, that a lot of creators will want to surpass expectations, or change expectations… I'm a fan of Aquaman, in the comics, but in the past, the mainstream media have depicted Aquaman as being a joke… moviemakers will probably want to address that in a way, buy emphasizing heavily on Aquaman being a badass… Superman? Taken seriously as an icon, definitely, but the people behind Man of Steel, probably felt that many people overlooked Superman as a one dimensional boy scout character with no gravity, urgency depth, or relevance in todays world… so I don't think the intention was to make Superman purely a darker, gritty, character… the intent was probably to make him feel more adult, real, and heavy, and so moments of hope and inspiration would feel more gravity, because he struggles more, is a bit more introspective, and bears the weight of the world on his shoulders… as opposed to running the risk of being too campy, bright and thus not taken seriously…
In contrast, cast an actor like Robert Downy Junior in Iron Man, and his acting and charisma can allow for a bit more color, quips, and people would take that seriously, because less assumptions and perceptions held about Iron Man, and we have a talented thespian playing the role.
Its… a lot more nuance than a movie studio attempting to be either light and funny, or dark and edgy. Its about playing to potential strengths and trying to minimize potential weaknesses, and to further complicate things, playing to or subverting the potential audiences expectations and desires. Marvel could potentially benefit from having more darkness than it already has… because that would subvert many peoples expectations, in ways that they could appreciate… but not because they are "borrowing from DC" just like DC could potentially benefit from more light hearted and silly moments/tone… but not because it is trying to "copy" Marvel, but because it could also subvert some peoples expectations, (and also hit on some peoples actual expectations/desires) and both also potentially risk alienating fans expectations in negative ways too. Also, consider what they are trying to do with Power Rangers and Transformers in the past… Kids cartoons? Movie people want them to seem more adult and serious… polarizing many people in the process… I mean, I understand, I myself, I'd love to see a gritty live action remake of Captain Planet…
Log in to comment