When it comes to the superhero genre, David Cronenberg's not interested. The director of such films as The Fly, Scanners and The Dead Zone considers it "adolescent in its core." Christopher Nolan's Batman films don't even make the cut.
While promoting his new film Cosmopolis, Cronenberg was asked if he'd ever direct a superhero movie. He replied, "I don't think they are making them an elevated art form." With that, our minds went to Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy. If anyone's helped the genre, it's him. But Cronenberg doesn't see it that way. "I think it's still Batman running around in a stupid cape," he said.
"Christopher Nolan's best movie is Memento, and that is an interesting movie. I don't think his Batman movies are half as interesting, though they're 20 million times the expense. What he is doing is some very interesting technical stuff, which, you know, he's shooting IMAX and in 3D. That's really tricky and difficult to do. I read about it in American Cinematography Magazine, and technically, that's all very interesting. The movie, to me, they're mostly boring."
So why can't the superhero movie be an elevated art? According to Cronenberg, its roots are holding it back. "A superhero movie, by definition, you know, it's a comic book. It's for kids. It's adolescent in its core. That has always been its appeal, and I think people who are saying, you know, 'Dark Knight Rises is, you know, supreme cinema art,' I don't think they know what the f**k they're talking about."
We can understand Cronenberg's position. But there are plenty of comic books that delve into dark and serious territory. Unfortunately, people tend to look at their more colorful characters and mistake them for childhood fare. They're not all goofy and over the top.
What do you think of Cronenberg's argument? Can superhero films be high art?
(via Next Movie)