The tone of this post will be darker… sigh
August 7th, 2007
There is a term that is quickly becoming the most overused cliché in the history of movie making. Sorry that’s probably not 100% true, it generally only applies to those films that are remakes, sequels or drawn from other source material (and in the current film making climate that’s pretty much everything coming out).
It’s a disease that is infiltrating every interview, review and promotional blurb. You can almost set your clock to how quickly it gets whipped out when a writer, director or actor is cornered and questioned about their upcoming project.
“This film has darker tone to it…”
“They’re going for a darker, grittier, edgier feeling to this film…”
There are a couple of franchises that have really cultivated this effect, probably none more so than the Harry Potter films. There does not appear to be any point in reviewers writing new reviews for subsequent Potter films when all they need to focus on three main points:
- the stars are older
- the amount of money brought in and the popularity of the franchise
- the tone of the film is darker than the last.
I’ve read the same review for three Potter films now with just a changed title. It’s not that the films aren’t any darker either, they are, but it seems to be a cliché now with every director saying that their film is probably darker than the source material or the last installment.
It was a little refreshing when I read Robert Downey Jr saying that “We’re definately not doing the Batman Begins super-dark, barely-okay-to-bring-your-kids-to version.” in Empire speaking about the upcoming Iron Man film. Perhaps he will be in trouble now from Marvel for not saying Iron Man is going to be much darker than say I dunno, a park bench?
I worry that if they keep saying oh yeah this one is darker eventually they will have nowhere to go but to give us a black screen. If they continue there will be movie screens whose gravitational field is so powerful that nothing can escape once it has fallen past a certain point, called the event horizon. Even electromagnetic radiation (i.e. light) would be unable to escape, rendering the interior invisible.
Films would only be detected if they interact with matter outside the event horizon, for example by sucking in popcorn from the audience.
With the price of popcorn in most cinema chains who could afford that?
Popularity: 1% [?]
More posts like this:
Categories: Uncategorized |
My next door neighbor (who is a topic for a blog all by himself) refuses to watch X Files because it’s too dark. Literally. It’s so dark he can’t see what’s happening on the screen.
Mulder and Skully do like their flashlights it has to be said.
[Reply to this comment]
Yeah I hear the next X-Files film is going to be darker and edgier than the previous one…
giggle
[Reply to this comment]
It’s a popular idea in some film circles, I think, that darker is automatically better…
especially with the darker ending, rather than the ridiculous feelgood ending that was just tagged on to appease the audience…
maybe to make them come out of the cinema feeling liked they’d actually enjoyed a movie or something.
(What’s THAT about?)
[Reply to this comment]
See, I’ve always thought that if you are going to go dark with thing… don’t tell anyone… just do it.
[Reply to this comment]
John - I like a darker film as much as the next guy (that is if the next guy is Tim Burton as opposed to Joel Shaumacher) but I hate how hollywood types have decided that it’s a selling point on a film.
I think you can probably gather from the trailer or the images that already have been released that the Dark Knight will probably be a dark film. I don’t need some suit telling me that like it’s a badge of distinction.
And every once and a while I don’t mind a happy ending LOL.
[Reply to this comment]
I agree, I like a good dark tale, too…
but it has struck me how often I’ve heard a group of film buffs raving over some dark celluloid masterpiece or other while I’ve been quietly thinking that the piece in question was just nasty, mean-spirited or downright misanthropic.
Which is why I think perhaps the suits are responding to a general trend in perception where anything on the darker end of the spectrum, like you say, is classed as an automatic sign of quality
(or maybe the suits just don’t want to go into the light - zombie suits, resisting the afterlife… I feel a story coming on)
[Reply to this comment]
MC - I think at the end of the day that’s what I’m trying to say. I like dark films, often it is interesting to take a character and place them in a darker, unsafe place. But just do that! Don’t just say ‘oh it’s darker’ - show people!!!
Of course the media don’t help with questions like ‘this one has a darker tone to it, did you intend that?’ (That’s an actual question) I mean what do you say to that?
“No we were making the Care Bear film very much in the same light as the cartoon series but then someone tripped over and bang! Gothic Care Bears!”
[Reply to this comment]
John - maybe this all began with the critical acclaim of the Dark Knight Returns and The Killing Joke? The restoration of Batman and his return to favor inspired many a comic book to turn to the dark side. Perhaps the trend bled into the movie industry?
But I agree I think the suits are to blame. Maybe Transformers 2 will be edgier?
[Reply to this comment]
I think “darker” came out as people wanted to say “more ‘adult’” or “more ‘realistic’” and not so “cartoonie” or “comic bookie” or “kiddie”. Know what I mean? But you are right… I am tired of the old cliché myself and wish someone would come up with a better description. Also, I agree that “darker” is not necessarily better. I appreciate trying to make my favorite comic book characters come to life in real world settings but enough with the darkness already! How about just good stories?
[Reply to this comment]
Hey Tony - I hear what you’re saying about the reasons why they fall back on the term and you are completely right. More importantly I think you’ve summed up exactly all I’m asking for - good stories!
[Reply to this comment]