The Superhero Movie Explosion: How Much Is Too Much of A Good Thing?

Are there too many Comic Book Movies coming out?


The last decade of film has certainly been a boon for comic book fans. Since Bryan Singer revitalized a near-dead and buried genre (thanks, Joel Schumacher) with X-Men, the comic book film has steadily gone from strength to strength. Almost without exception (X-Men 3, I’m looking at you) the post-X-Men comic book film industry has only become larger, more successful, to the point where it seems that a film with a costumed do-gooder comes out every other month (it doesn’t, it just feels that way).

The four major players in this game are 20 Century Fox, with their X-Men franchise, Sony, with the ongoing (and recently rebooted) Spider-Man saga, Warner Bros, with their rights to the DC stable of characters, including Superman, Batman and the Justice League Of America, and Marvel, with… whoever they have.


In the last three years, however, the comic book film (henceforth known as CBF) has taken on a new life. Marvel’s The Avengers, directed by Joss Whedon and featuring a huge stable of the studio’s characters all in a single film, was a monumental success, the likes of which Hollywood hadn’t seen to that point. The Avengers quickly became one of the highest grossing films of all time (it currently sits third, behind Avatar and Titanic) and made Hollywood sit up and take notice of exactly what fans wanted.

Until The Avengers, Marvel had steadily been producing a series of films (starting with Iron Man) based on their IP’s, all with loose connection to a shared universe. A lot like comics themselves, Marvel had a plan for their characters’ cinematic lives, a plan that involved the eventual team-up that brought Thor, Iron Man, the Hulk and more into a single film – it was a comic fan’s wet-dream made real, and the box-office proved it. The fact that it was an awesome film anyway only helped.


But it made Warners, Sony and Fox all take notice. The only other CBF series to do Avenger-level box office had been Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy, which concluded at the end of The Dark Knight Rises. And none of those films were set within a larger universe; Nolan expressed that he always intended them to be a stand-alone universe, not burdened by the weight of a larger DC pantheon. Yet, Warners saw the numbers and figured they could imitate Marvel’s template for success. Their first real attempt at setting up a shared universe, Ryan Reynolds’ Green Lantern, bombed. 2013’s Man Of Steel, while a financial success, met with a lot of criticism as far as the opening salvo in a new universe was concerned. The announcement that the sequel, currently known as Batman vs Superman, would pave the way for an inevitable JLA flick to rival The Avengers, was largely unsurprising. What has been surprising is Warner’s apparent inability to successfully translate their plans for the fans – everyone from Wonder Woman, Aquaman and even the Martian Manhunter (if you know who that is, you’re a true fan, otherwise you’d be as in the dark as half the planet) set to appear alongside Supes and Bats at one point or another – Man Of Steel 2 has almost become a defacto Justice League film, and fans are rightly worried.


Recently, Sony has come out with their grand plan for the only Marvel property they have the rights to – Spider-Man – and it involved a number of spin-off films featuring villains and all manner of other ephemera. Speculation is rampant that Sony are eying off a Sinister Six storyline (I had to Google it too, you know) that features all of Spidey’s villains as a kind-of anti-Avengers, although how general audiences will buy into it remains to be seen. The addition of three villains to the Spider-Man reboot franchise sequel, Amazing Spider-Man 2, in the form of Electro, The Rhino, and apparently the new Green Goblin, has fans thinking back to past missteps with overpopulated films like Batman + Robin, or the more recent Spider-Man 3, which saw a rapid rise in critical bile thanks to having far too many villains for the heroes to battle, and for audiences to follow.

20th Century Fox have so far resisted the explosive glut of planning ahead; the X-Men franchise is set for a major boost with 2014’s Days Of Future’s Past bringing together the original X-Men cast, as well as the newer versions from Matthew Vaughn’s First Class, in a single film. Fox have also ensured people are aware of their plans post-DOFP, with the introduction of Apocalypse in 2016’s X-Men: Apocalypse.


Marvel remain the studio benchmark for planning, and executing their plans, with considerable success. Phase 1 of their Avengers universe paved the way for Phase 2, of which we are currently in the middle of – thus far, Iron Man 3 and Thor: The Dark World are the two Phase 2 films we’ve seen, with Captain America: Winter Soldier and Guardians Of The Galaxy still to come (not to mention the Paul Rudd-starring Ant Man) – and the studio has released information about films for the next decade, including the eventual Avengers 3! The success of a well-planned cinematic venture of the kind Marvel has managed, brings their competitors hot and ready to try and emulate it. Is this explosion of advanced planning, and the glut of CBF’s to come, a good thing?

Marvel are currently treading a double-edged sword. With the enormous success of Phase 1, they have given themselves a fair amount of license to try some new things, things that may not succeed as well as known product like Iron Man. Guardians Of The Galaxy represents their biggest gamble to date, a film based around a group of weird and impossible creatures (such as Groot, a talking tree, and Rocket Raccoon, a talking… um, raccoon) that represent Marvel’s more cosmic side. The idea being that if audiences can attach to the Guardians, and be successful, this opens the door for even more IP’s to come to the big screen. Inevitably, the showdown between the Avengers and Marvel’s Big Bad, Thanos, will occur in Avengers 3, but if Guardian’s is successful, well, the sky truly is the limit.


The only thing stopping Marvel now is audience disfavor, something highly unlikely considering most people will lap up whatever the studio puts out. Even their wobbly television series, Agents of SHIELD, is showing signs of improvement. Were Guardians to flop, and flop big, things might look a little shaky for the larger Marvel cinematic universe. Marvel would probably rethink their plans and keep their films grounded on Earth – although people seem willing to venture into space already, thanks to Thor’s Asgardian exploits – although it does seem likely this might occur.

One has to wonder, though, if people are going to become tired of keeping track of all these multiple universes? Were DC to finally get their act together and produce a series of films to rival Marvel’s, would the onslaught of multiple CBF’s per year (look to 2015’s current release schedule to see what I’m talking about) begin to wear out their welcome – dilute the pond, so to speak? Is all this planning and expectation of success going to come crashing down when audiences find the Next Big Thing to follow? Whereas previously there were only two players on the block (Warners with Batman and Superman, and Fox with the X-Men), now it seems like every studio is searching for their slice of the pie. Is there enough pie to go around? Personally, I think so, but it needs to be managed carefully.


The answer lies in quality. Marvel have done the unthinkable, by producing not one or two, but an entire series of films of good-to-great quality – there’s not a single bomb amongst any of their Avenger’s Universe films, even if Iron Man 2 is held up as the weakest of the bunch retrospectively. DC, meanwhile, had Chris Nolan’s superb Batman trilogy, before hitting a critical speed-hump in Man of Steel, a financial success but one with a sharp divide among the critics. The Man of Steel sequel (whatever it’s called in the end) needs to knock it out of the park, otherwise Warner’s grand vision for the Justice League might (yet again) be put on hold. Fox’s X-Men franchise is bubbling along nicely, and they seem to have things under control with Days Of Futures Past, while it remains to be seen if Spider-Man’s future is as rosy as we all hope it is over at Sony, once Amazing 2 comes out.

As a comic book fan, and as a CBF fan, I truly hope we see more and more (and increasingly better and more complex) superhero films from all the major players. Interweaving plot threads and concepts between franchise films provides audiences with reasons for coming back (much like the comics they’re based on, I’d wager!) and gives film-makers license to do some crazy stuff, but there’s a chance (at least in my opinion) that the glut caused by the Avenger’s massive success might eventuate in films of lesser quality, and an implosion of production on these expensive tent-pole projects. Quick turnaround normally means less creative care, you know. Which would be a shame, because there’s a lot of material to be mined from the vast history of all these characters, and it would be disappointing to see them put back on the shelf.

What do you think? Are there too many CBF’s coming out? Do you even care? Let us know in the comments below!!

Who wrote this?

20 thoughts on “The Superhero Movie Explosion: How Much Is Too Much of A Good Thing?

  1. Not huge on comic book movies (even though I will watch most of them). I don't think it is an issue with too much of them coming out. It basically is just another genre like the romcom or crime drama. Up to the viewer which ones to watch.
    My recent post As featured on… Flixchatter

  2. I think audiences will get burned out eventually. Too many shared universes from all the major studios will ultimately lead to an implosion of the entire genre. People will stop going. A lot of these early films worked because they are using Tier 1 (Batman, Superman, X-Men, Spider-Man) and Tier 2 (Thor, Captain America, Iron Man) characters. The ones that most people know. Now they are digging deeper into the Tier 3 characters, the ones the public don't know. Doctor Strange? Ant Man? I've heard of them, but couldn't tell you shit about them. Those films are going to be much harder sells to the general masses. I think that a combination of using lesser-known characters and having too many shared-universe films will fatigue movie-goers and the entire enterprise will fail.
    My recent post Kids on the Slope, Mawaru Penguindrum

    1. Good point, Brik! You're right about the second-string characters being not so much of a draw in the overpopulated CBF schedule – honestly, I've never read a Dr Strange comic (and I've been reading comics since about '88) and wouldn't have a clue as to his origin, cast roster, or rogues gallery. Selling him is going to be a stretch, I think. Ant Man not so much because they'll focus on the "small vs large" elements (effectively reprising Honey I Shrunk The Kids!) and it might work well. Plus, put "from the director of Hot Fuzz" on it and there's an audience already.

      I think Marvel are brave taking the chance, and I really hope they succeed, so I'll be going all-out to support whatever they do in the future, but I think you're right in that the glut will eventually overwhelm the general population.

  3. Superb article Rodney. It will be interesting to see how they go from here. I would like to see more from DC but whether they can recreate the success of Nolan's Batman remains to be seen – I think, probably not. I'm growing into the Marvel Cinematic Universe more and more but I don't think they've produced universally great movies. Certainly, Iron Man 2 is not as bad as Thor which, apart from its funny fish-out-of-water comedy, was essentially shafted by its director – did Branagh know what he was doing? I'm not sure The Incredible Hulk has as many fans as Iron Man or Captain America either, and he was the a sticking point in the Avengers movie. But overall, they've produced some really strong entertainment and sequels to Avengers and Captain America will hopefully be great.
    My recent post The hottest movies to watch out for in 2014

    1. I didn't mind Thor, although it felt fairly constrained by what it could accomplish as a "set up" film, but I do think IM2 was a thorough letdown, really. Not that I can put my finger on exactly why, mind you. And you didn't like The Hulk in Avengers? Whassup wit 'dat?

      Here's to the next twenty of thirty years of great comic book films!!

      1. Haven't seen Thor 2 yet but was hoping for an "upgrade" given the change of director. I put most of Thor's problems at the feet of Branagh – don't think he knew how to balance the good humour with the dark fantasy.

        In regards the Avengers I thought the Hulk was one of the few weak parts of that – not the performance, but the way he works within the story. I still think screenwriters/directors struggle to make the character work logically – when does he have control of his super strength, when does he not etc.

        I'm looking forward to Captain America 2…didn't think the first film was as good as it could have been (heightened expectations and all) but I do like the character.
        My recent post Top 10 Films which should have helped rescue Malcolm McDowell’s career

        1. Fair point re: Hulk, Dan. You're right, he's a character with limited emotional connection to the audience, because he's a primal emotion made flesh – rage – and that only works for so long on screen. I think it's hard for a film to convey the Bruce Banner "is always angry" thing (it hasn't worked in either recent release thus far) because in this day and age it seems so silly… why not just go get some therapy and work through your issues, right? I think Whedon has done the best job so far of translating him to the screen in a plausible – and thoroughly entertaining – way, so I guess if future filmmakers follow that template they might get it right soon.

          Captain America 2 looks awesome – and you should check out Thor 2 as well, it's worth a look (even though it does have some flaws!) and there's even a nice nod to CA as well…. 😉

  4. I don't think Man of Steel lacks that wider world feel to it at all. If you compare it to Iron Man, as the films are both the first kickstarters for these shared universes, they are actually very much on the same page with references. The only thing that Iron Man has is a scene they tacked on at the end where Fury comes in and meets Stark. I feel everyone is hating on DC just because Marvel is so far ahead… I'd still much rather have had TDK trilogy over all of the Marvel films…
    My recent post The Trailer Park: “Legends of the Knight”

    1. I"m with you on TDK trilogy. It's a shame they've had to retool Batman so early after Nolan's work, to shoehorn him into the new "universe" they're trying to create. I get what you're saying about Iron Man, too, and you're right. What I was alluding to (badly) was that Man of Steel had the chance to really sell a wider world (because it had already worked well for Marvel) from the get-go, rather than try and make it work after the horse has bolted. I get that there were hints and easter eggs in the film, but c'mon, how many average viewers who's never picked up a Superman comic would have made any sense of them? Hardly any, I'd wager. The Wayne Enterprises satellite was a nice touch, admittedly, but it might have been nice, somewhere in all that last act destruction, to catch a glimpse of Bruce Wayne (perhaps from behind, half in shadow) or Wonder Woman (again, not a full reveal, but just enough to recognize her) to show that there are other heroes besides Superman the studio is working on. That's just me though – they had a chance to really set the stage for MOS2 and beyond, but I think they blew it a little. Iron Man was the starting point for EVERYone in the franchise building game – it really changed things up as to what people would be willing to accept and what could be achieved if a studio just had some creative balls.

  5. I can't quite tell.. are you a Marvel fanboy or not? lol. There is somewhat harsh criticism for everyone that's not Marvel, but I think that with the love of superheroes and the power that Marvel has, they should be much more criticized and scrutinized. With great power comes great responsibility, eh? 🙂
    My recent post The Trailer Park: “Legends of the Knight”

    1. I'm a DC boy through and through, mate. I have to say, the lack of success DC and Warner have had with cinematic releases (not sayin' nothin' about the animated work DC put out, which is invariably better than a lot of stuff out there) fills me with frustration that they can't get something similar to Marvel's template off the ground with any surety. Man of Steel, which I enjoyed, lacked the tangible "wider world" feel that most of the Marvel comics have, in that it's feasible for other heroes to exist. MOS didn't quite manage that, and I think throwing Batman and every other JLA member at the screen won't work as well as WB hope it will. I stand to be corrected, of course.

      In all honesty, though, I'm just happy that we're currently living in a golden age of Comic Book Films, be they DC, Marvel, or anyone else. Guess it's a little passive-aggressive reverse rage at the lack of DC's success….. 😉

Comments are closed.