cradlea1 hour ago

I know its treading on holy ground at this point, especially on this site, when anyone addresses something about shared cinematic universes, but Ive got a bone to pick with them. Firstly, its been a great run for Marvel over the past few years, with only one film that most would call mediocre (Iron Man 2) and it looks like it will continue. To add to all of that, now were getting a DC and Universal Monsters shared universe, along with massive expansions of older franchises (Star Wars being the biggest draw). Its all incredibly exciting.

But, theres a point of contention here: while it may be many a fans dream to see so much content pouring out of their favorite franchises it must be the strangest thing as one of the bigger creative forces behind it. Think about it: if youre a director, unless youre the head of the centre-piece film (i.e. Avengers, Justice League, Star Wars: Episode xyz), youre not the shepherd anymore; youre just another dog. The real shepherds are the Feiges, Tsujiharas (kind of), and (unfortunately) Orcis of the industry. In a medium where directors usually reign weve gotten to a point where its the most TV-like studios (ones that have showrunners) that are making the biggest bucks. Marvel films, the Transformers franchise, you name it they all have the same heads of creativity behind them. Franchises are turning the film medium into extended TV. And now with the advent of streaming companies like Netflix, Amazon, etc. releasing full seasons of shows in one day, it seems like the roles have reversed. Fincher and Scorsese are making the jump to HBO with more intent than just being executive producers and True Detectives proven that a single directors vision (Cary Fukunaga in this case) for a show can work in tandem or even outweigh the whims of the producers/writers. Its a really strange time and I hope that its not an outright switch of practices between film and television.

Theres a reason why directors were the end all be all of creative decisions on films and the same goes for showrunners/writers for TV. Films arent really meant for long form storytelling that doesnt already have a beginning and end planned; I mean why do they keep on quasi-rebooting Bond all the time? Because they never have an end planned for him and because its so difficult to think of one that fits the messes theyve made (great as they are) from the films prior. Hence reboot after reboot. Why arent shows rebooted as often as films are? Because each thread of the particular franchise/universe has been so meticulously laid out for 5-10 seasons its impossible to try and revisit the stable of characters and environments that have already been introduced.

Maybe Im being too conservative about what films and TV should be fitting them into boxes, which, in and of itself, is contrary to the idea of creative media in the first place but Ive liked films being one-off tales and TV being the long adventures theyve been because it just works so well. I cant imagine Star Wars being able to pull off its charm on TV and weve seen what Star Trek is like on film (excluding the JJ Abrams pseudo-Star Wars/Trek films of the past few years) and the spark isnt there aside from (SPOILERS) Spocks death in Wrath of Khan. Its alright to have a few stragglers here and there between mediums, but Im hoping we never get to a point where films become dragged out two hour long episodes of a series and TV show episodes become short yet unsatisfying collections of films.

But hey, those are just my two cents.

Originally posted here:

Open Discussion January 7, 2015