#(if the previous version *does* get posted soon - much later than it was queued for - i'll just delete it)

[purplecyborgnewt]

[buzzdixonwriter]

Super Duper Supermen

This will be a long one, so pour yourself a cuppa and settle down.   We may seem to meander, but we’ve got a destination.

. . .

I’m tired of superheroes.

I’m tired of a lot of genre fiction.

Part of the reason is that too much of the current material is ugly and loud, but the real reason is it isn’t fresh, it isn’t fun.

I tried watching The Boys.  I got to the end of the second scene of episode one and realize, “This ain’t for me” and turned it off and went over to YouTube and watched guys build model airplanes.

At least they look like they’re having fun.

. . .

Look, superheroes are a power fantasy and they’re okay for little kids who want to believe there’s always going to be a mommy or daddy who will protect them, but they’re an absurd genre at best and when you start taking them seriously -- and recently even the funny parodies and spoofs take themselves Too Damn Seriously -- they become horrific.

What prompted me to realize this is an article posted on The Vulcan by Abraham Riseman “The Boys Is the End of the Superhero As We Know It.”

Highly recommended, by the way.

. . .

It’s not like Riseman was the first to make this observation.

30+ years ago Gary Groth observed:

“Superman is one version of the hero with a thousand faces -- to employ the title of Joseph Cambell's excellent book on the subject -- and his appeal should therefore not surprise us.  But Superman is a crude version of the hero; if you will, an elementary one.  Unlike his more developed analogues in all the world's great religions, Superman does not offer love or goodwill, self-knowledge or contemplation as keys to man's salvation.  He offers his own physical powers.”

And he ain’t the only one.

Alan Moore recently chimed in:

“They have blighted cinema and also blighted culture to a degree. Several years ago I said I thought it was a really worrying sign, that hundreds of thousands of adults were queuing up to see characters that were created 50 years ago to entertain 12-year-old boys. That seemed to speak to some kind of longing to escape from the complexities of the modern world and go back to a nostalgic, remembered childhood. That seemed dangerous; it was infantilizing the population.

“This may be entirely coincidence, but in 2016 when the American people elected a National Socialist satsuma and the U.K. voted to leave the European Union, six of the top 12 highest-grossing films were superhero movies.  Not to say that one causes the other, but I think they’re both symptoms of the same thing — a denial of reality and an urge for simplistic and sensational solutions.”

. . .

I don’t like cruelty.

I used to enjoy old weird horror films back in the day -- movies like The Reanimator -- because I appreciated their absurdity and never took them seriously.

When the torture porn sub-genre came along, I lost interest in horror films.  

The Babadook is the only modern one I’ve seen in the last 5 years and I enjoy it because like earlier horror films (and here I include both classic Universal / RKO movies and the artistry of Mario Bava and Dario Argento) it’s essentially a very dark fairy tale, not an exercise in cruelty for the sake of cruelty.  

Violence doesn’t turn me off.

Sadism does.

And sadism is all about power and fascism is all about power, so when I remark on modern superhero and thriller and horror stories as being fascist, I know whereof I speak.

. . .

Superhero stories may not necessarily be tales told by idiots, but they are full of sound and fury, and signify nothing.

Ultimately superheroes fail because:

they can’t lose

they can’t win

There is no finality in the superhero genre.  The damn Joker keeps crawling back, Les Luthor constantly schemes, Dr. Doom and Galactus pop up whenever things lag in the sales department.

Superheroes as a genre are failures insofar as they can’t permanently deal with these existentialist threats, nor can they step out of the way to let others deal with them.

Superheroes promise salvation but deliver bupkis, slapping a band-aid on a cancer and telling us it’s all better.

They can’t permanently defeat their greatest threats, yet neither can they be truly harmed by them.

I’ll grant you the occasional Captain Mar-Vel but they are very minor exceptions to the rule.  Gwen Stacy was bumped off in The Amazing Spider-Man #121 in June 1973, first reappeared as a clone in May 1975 then several times thereafter, and most recently shows up as Spider-Gwen in Edge of Spider-Verse #2 (September 2014).  

As Roy Thomas aptly observed:  “In comics they’re only dead if you have a body and even then only maybe.” 

(In fairness, there’s no finality in most formula / genre fiction either, but we’ll get to that in a bit.)

. . . 

Before we delve deeper, let’s be clear as to what we’re discussing when we say “superheroes”.  

They don’t need to possess “powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men”.

As noted above, they just have to be:

always victorious

never in real danger

You can bash ‘em / trash ‘em / slash ‘em / smash ‘em and they still bounce back -- heroically -- to save the day.

Break both legs, riddle them with machine gun bullets, hit them with a car, cave in their skulls with sledgehammers, and yet somehow they summon up the super-human reserves needed to keep in the fight.

Mind you, in the real world there are people who display super-human endurance in horrific situations and not merely survive but go on to achieve incredible success.  They don’t do such things every year (as do heroes in movies), much less every month (comics) or every week (television). They sure as hell don’t make a career out of it.

Let’s veer away from brightly colored naked people flying & fighting to superheroes in a different genre than costumed crime fighters.

Mike Hammer is a superhero.

Sherlock Holmes is a superhero.

Philip Marlow might actually be a literary character.

Look at the criteria:  Can they lose?

Never in Hammer’s case.

Rarely for Holmes (and when he does, it’s always with bittersweet irony).

Frequently enough with Marlowe that one can’t anticipate if any of his stories will end with him victorious (yeah, he solves mysteries, but always at profound personal cost, and in more than one novel he ends up realizing he’s been a sucker all along).

Here’s another example that snaps the dichotomy into ever sharper relief:  

Samuel L. Jackson’s Shaft is a superhero.

Richard Roundtree’s Shaft is just a hero.

Roundtree’s Shaft is aware he can fail.

No “macho bullshit irony” as they say over at the Church of the Sub-Genius.

. . .

Superheroes don’t grow -- they decay.

They never truly use their power for good (because that would involve changing the world) nor do they adequately protect the innocent.

They serve no true function except to entertain and to be exploited.

Series novels and television shows can feature character growth, but the concept has to be baked in from the beginning (Jan Karon’s Mitford series and Armistead Maupin’s Tales Of The City books are two examples that spring immediately to mind).*

More typically, in series fiction the character/s show little actual growth; they are more or less the same at the end of their adventures as they were at the beginning, maybe a little greyer, maybe a little creakier, but essentially the same person.

Sometimes, particularly in military or nautical or police series, they may start out as a callow cadet but soon wise up to the stalwart hero we want to see.

As perfect an example of superhero decay can be found in the Die Hard movies.

The original’s superhero character, Detective John McClane, implausibly goes through a night of hell yet actually shows some character growth:  By the end of the film he’s able to swallow his pride and admit to his wife he was wrong.

A very farfetched movie but an emotionally satisfying one.  We’ll overlook a multitude of injuries that would have rendered him hors de combat in reality in exchange for the movie actually being about something.

All that gets chucked out in the first sequel, Die Hard 2, where the characters are thrown into a contrived situation to mirror the first film without the satisfying emotional growth but with far more ridiculous action;  Die Hard With A Vengeance jettisons McClane’s marital relationship except as an afterthought and ups the absurdity of the story (indeed, it’s best viewed as an action comedy); Live Free Or Die Hard totally trashes all the character growth before it; and A Good Day To Die Hard not only trashed previous character growth but went so badly over the top that it and the star’s aging out hopefully are the one-two punch needed to end the series once and for all.

. . . 

Look at non-superpowered / non-comic book superheroes and see how they fare.

D’Artagnan and the Three Musketeers are superheroes (conversely, Cyrano de Bergerac is not because the focus of his story is on who he is and not the what but the why of his actions; all the cool sword fighting is just bonus material).

Natty Bumpo is a superhero; anybody who can jump into a birchbark canoe from a tree branch 30 feet overhead without crashing through is a superhero because that character simple Can Not Lose.  

For that matter, most 1950s TV cowboys and virtually all Italian Western protagonists are superheroes.

Tarzan is a superhero. 

James Bond is a superhero (the SPECTRE / Blofeld arc in the novels and short stories actually do end up with him going through significant growth and personal change, ending with Smersh brainwashing him and sending him back to assassinate M…but then the British Secret Service intercepts him and a couple of paragraphs later he’s all better and off after The Man With The Golden Gun).

Modesty Blaise is a superhero.

Claire Starling is not a superhero, but Hannibal Lecter is (don’t give me that; even if you’re evil, when you’re the central character of a series of books / movies / TV shows you’re a damn superhero).

They’re all superheroes because they can’t lose and they can’t change their world and more importantly they can’t change themselves.

. . .

There is one exception to the above re superheroes, and that’s in the realm of sci- fi and fantasy stories.

Occasionally we find a character who becomes a king (viz Howard’s Kull) or a demi-god (viz Herbert’s Paul Atreides) and does alter their world for good or ill.

That, of course, is the ultimate power fantasy.

. . .

Fascism focuses on the Will and the Act.

It is a philosophy of movement.

It’s a philosophy that attracts the weak and the sadistic, because it promises protection from and power over others.

It’s a philosophy that actively seeks conflict, not necessarily overt violence, but the promise of same is always there.

. . . 

A brief sidebar to the other side of the comic book spinner rack.

Funny animals are essentially anti-authoritarian.

From Aesop forward to Carl Barks, their characters, filled with all too human foibles, can and do fail.

And when they win?

Ah, then it’s almost never by force or action, but by cleverness.

Funny animals are tricksters, accurately sussing out a situation and maneuvering to gain the best outcome for themselves without obtaining dominance over their opponent.

Bre’r Rabbit and Bugs Bunny.

Ducks Donald, Daffy, and Howard.

Superhero stories seems obsessed with keeping everything orderly and in continuity.

Without continuity, anything goes, and that’s fatal to the superhero trope as it annihilates authority.

Funny animal stories rarely feature continuity and when they do, it’s rarely rigorous.  If Porky Pig needs to be a businessman or a farmer or a studio executive or a traveling salesman, so be it.

He’ll be something else in the next story.

As tricksters, funny animals are bounded by one rule: They may save themselves and seek justice, but they will pay a penalty if they try to use trickery for selfish gain.

Howard the Duck -- “trapped alone and afraid / in a world he never made” -- is just trying to stay survive.

Daffy Duck -- greedy little miser that he is -- inevitably gets it in the neck when he tries to cheat someone.

Donald Duck -- floating somewhere between Howard and Daffy in his motivations -- finds no guarantee of success and reward, yet achieves success often enough to keep striving.  

He may battle mummies or a reluctant coke machine, his stories may take him around the world on an adventure or no further than his kitchen to fix dinner.

It doesn’t matter.

Who he is makes his stories compelling far more than what he does.

He’s not on a power trip.

He doesn’t feel he has to win every time.

And as a result, he has a much richer life than Bruce Wayne or Tony Stark.

. . . 

“So whaddya sayin’, Buzz?  ‘Superheroes is bad’?”

No.

I deny no one their pleasure.

But I also think there are times when we have to demand not just more of creators but of ourselves as an audience with the media we consume.

I only saw the first two scenes of the first episode of The Boys.

That was all it took to convince me not to watch it anymore.

For similar reasons, I have no desire to watch Mad Men or Breaking Bad or Better Call Saul or Game Of Thrones.  

I’ve picked up a strong enough vibe from each to know I’m not going to connect with them.

I’m certainly not saying you can’t enjoy them if you like.

Bu I am saying we’re cheating ourselves by not demanding more.

And until we start demanding more, the studios and streamers are only going to offer us less and less variety.

C’mon, people, we deserve more than that.

  © Buzz Dixon

  *  I’m sparing you a whole long analysis of The Mary Tyler Moore Show because frankly it goes too far afield of this essay’s central thesis and besides I can use it for another blog post in the future.

[salmankhanholics]

★  Box Office Prediction: Movies that will make Rs. 100 cr, Rs. 200 cr & Rs. 300 cr in 2017 !

February 6th 2017

The New Year has just begun and a couple of films have already hit screens, but the big ticket films are yet to see the light of day. Like last year, this year too we at Bollywood Hungama quite literally are sticking our necks out vouching for these films, which in all likelihood will be big money spinners at the box office.

So here are the films that we expect will be making it big at the box office in 2017. But, learning from last years’ experience, this year we have further categorized the films into segments based on their estimated box office collections.

Rs. 300 crores

Tiger Zinda Hai: Salman Khan, just the actor’s name is enough to ensure collections well over Rs. 200 crore. Now, add to this, the fact that Salman will be seen on the big screen in a Yash Raj film, directed by filmmaker Ali Abbas Zafar, the man responsible for giving one of last year’s biggest money spinners Sultan, and you know that Tiger Zinda Hai is already looking like a sure shot hit.

Coming to the film itself, Tiger Zinda Hai, which is a sequel to the 2012 film Ek Tha Tiger, will once again feature Salman Khan playing the role of an Indian RAW officer fighting crime. Going by the box office track record of Ek Tha Tiger, which ended its box office run at Rs. 198.78 cr, the film’s sequel that boasts of action sequences that will rival the first with an equally gripping story line surely makes it a strong contender for the Rs. 300 cr club. The movie is likely to emerge as the highest grosser of 2017.

Tubelight: The last time we saw Salman Khan being directed by ace director Kabir Khan, who has given us films like Kabul Express, New York and Ek Tha Tiger, it was for the 2015 release Bajrangi Bhaijaan. In fact, the film went on to collect Rs. 320.34 cr at the domestic box office alone.

Now picture the duo, viz. Salman and Kabir returning teaming up for yet another film Tubelight which is an Indo- Chinese production that also features Chinese actress Zhu Zhu, it is a no brainer that the film will be a sure shot blockbuster, aiming for the Rs. 300 cr club.

Rs. 200 crores

The Ring: The last two times Shah Rukh Khan and Anushka Sharma came together in the lead roles viz. Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi and Jab Tak Hai Jaan, they collected Rs. 158 cr and Rs. 120.85 cr respectively at the domestic box office. Now considering that The Ring directed by Imtiaz Ali is said to be a romantic drama, it isn’t a long shot that the film will manage to rake in the moolah at the box office.

Shot in the scenic locales of Prague, Amsterdam and Budapest, images of the cast shooting for the film have been going viral on social networking sites since the commencement of shooting. Given the above factors, achieving a target of Rs. 200 crores does not seem to be a challenge.

Rs. 150 crores

Raees: Shah Rukh Khan in an action-packed role! Need we say more? Though we featured Raees in the list in the previous two years, the film produced by Farhan Akhtar and Riteish Sidhwani’s Excel Entertainment will see the light of day this week. However, the film might face competition with the Hrithik Roshan starrer Kaabil that is directed by Sanjay Gupta releasing on the same day.

This clash coupled with the fact that since the film features Pakistani actress Mahira Khan, especially given the recent furore about featuring cross border talents in Indian cinema, Raees may face minute hurdles at the box office.

Padmavati: Last year, we saw the release of the Sanjay Leela Bhansali directed film Bajirao Mastani featuring Ranveer Singh, Deepika Padukone and Priyanka Chopra. Well, this year Sanjay Leela Bhansali, who is known for his more than opulent films, promises to take things to the next level with Padmavati.

Assisting the maverick director is an all-star cast comprising of Deepika Padukone who has fast become an international sensation with the recent release of XXX: The Return of Xander Cage, the energetic live wire Ranveer Singh and chocolate hero Shahid Kapoor.

Bahubali 2: The Conclusion: Back in 2015, we saw the release of Bahubali: The Beginning, a film that boasted of a grand story and even bigger visual effects. By far, being one of the most advanced films of Indian cinema to release, it went on to do well not just in the south but also in other territories across India. In fact the film, whose Hindi dubbed version was distributed by Karan Johar’s Dharma Productions, was one of their most profitable ventures in that year.

Now two years on, we see the release of the concluding chapter with Bahubali: The Conclusion hitting screens. Promising to finally answer the question that became viral sensation on social media sites, ‘Why did Katappa kill Bahubali?’, the film with high levels of anticipation is sure to do business worth around Rs. 150 cr. in Hindi language only.

Crack: The last couple of times when Neeraj Pandey directed Akshay Kumar in Special 26 and Baby, both films went on to receive not just critical acclaim but also did well at the box office. After collaborating last year for Rustom, which was produced by Pandey, Akshay will be working with the director again on Crack. In fact, just recently Akshay Kumar took to twitter confirming the same. Interestingly the actor’s confirmation soon went viral with fans keenly awaiting the release of the film.

Coupled with the fact that the combination of Akshay and Neeraj is a sure shot fire starter, Akshay has been on top of his game with three films, viz. Housefull 3, Rustom and Airlift reaching the Rs. 100 crore club in a single year.

Rs. 100 crores

Kaabil: An action film featuring a central protagonist, who is visually impaired, definitely makes for an interesting concept. Well, director Sanjay Gupta’s next Kaabil is just that. Starring Hrithik Roshan in the lead role, the film promises to be an action entertainer with high octane stunts and drama making for a perfect Bollywood potboiler.

However, considering that Kaabil is releasing on the same day as the much talked about and highly anticipated Shah Rukh Khan starrer Raees, the film will have to rely on positive reviews and strong word of mouth. But, considering that the makers of the film have literally gone all guns blazing to promote the film, Kaabil looks set to make it to the Rs. 100 crore club.

Judwaa 2: Back in 1997, we saw the release of the film Judwaa starring Salman Khan. Now two decades later, we see the release of the film’s sequel Judwaa 2 that features Varun Dhawan playing a double role. Helmed once again by David Dhawan the film promises to be an action packed comedy.

Now given the fact that director David Dhawan has already proved his mettle when it comes to directing comedy films, his son Varun, who in in his own words, bases his acting skills on a combination of Salman Khan and Govinda, certainly does have the charisma to pull it off.

Half Girlfriend: Films being based on popular novels aren’t something new. After the success of 2 States, writer Chetan Bhagat’s next book to be converted to celluloid is Half Girlfriend. If the success of 2 States is anything to go by, then the adaptation of Bhagat’s second book is a sure shot winner as well.

Adding to this is the fact that Half Girlfriend will be helmed by maverick director Mohit Suri and features young stars Arjun Kapoor and Shraddha Kapoor. All that is left to be seen now is whether the box office business of Half Girlfriend surpasses that of 2 States.

Golmaal Again: Since 2006, we have seen the release of one instalment of the comedy series Golmaal. Now after three films in the franchise, we see the fourth instalment Golmaal Again gearing up to hit screens.

Once again featuring an all-star cast, the fourth film in the franchise has already begun to gather steam. If the current trend is anything to go by, then Golmaal Again will have no qualms collecting Rs. 100 crore at the box office.

2.0: Rajinikanth! Just his name is enough to get people queuing up outside cinema halls to watch his latest film. Now add to it, the fact that Akshay Kumar features in the film as the main villain, makes the film certainly worth a watch.

2.0, apart from featuring Akshay in a grey avatar also boasts of high octane action scenes, impressive VFX and is a sequel to the hit film Robot. This is definitely one film to watch out for this year.

Dark Horse

Jolly LLB 2: Back in 2013 we saw the release of the film Jolly LLB featuring Arshad Warsi and Boman Irani. While the film did decent business at the box office, it was highly appreciated for its unique content. Now a few years on, we see the sequel to the film being readied to hit screens this year. However, upping the tempo, the makers of the sequel have roped in superstar Akshay Kumar to top line the cast.

Now given the actor’s record of 2016 of touching Rs. 100 crore with each of his three films, it doesn’t seem like a long shot that Jolly LLB 2 may share a similar fate.

Badrinath Ki Dulhania: Starring Varun Dhawan and Alia Bhatt, the film which is a sequel to Humpty Sharma Ki Dulhania definitely has a good level of anticipation, given that the previous film was a decent hit. Also, given that both the box office market of both Varun and Alia has increased considerably since they last appeared together and the fact that their combination is highly loved, especially by the youth, it won’t be surprising to see the film posting impressive numbers at the box office.

Baadshaho: The last time Ajay Devgn and Emraan Hashmi came together with director Milan Luthria, it was for the popular blockbuster Once Upon A Time In Mumbaai. The film still continues to have a strong fan base amongst the television audience. Given that this hit trio is coming together for yet another potboiler, Baadshaho surely has the potential to surprise one and all with its performance at the box office.

Disclaimer: Though we have categorized the films into the segments of Rs. 100 cr, Rs. 200 cr, Rs. 300 cr based on our predictions of their collections, a plus or minus 10% margin of difference can be expected between the predicted figures and attained figures at the box office.

Rest at bollywood hungama