https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottm...where-freddy-vs-jason-succeeded/#7e582d53666e
Scott Mendelson is not someone I usually agree with but the initial premise of the piece was so bizarre that I couldn't not share it.
Edit: Right when I post the thread they change the title of the article.
We are a week out from Warner Bros./Time Warner Inc.'s Justice League, which means all we can do is wait. The embargo drops very early Wednesday morning, the All-Media is Wednesday night in LA and by Friday morning we'll have the first day's business from China and the Thursday night previews. But by pure chance, I found myself watching the Ultimate Edition of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and New Line Cinema's Freddy Vs. Jason within a few days of each other.
While these activities were not connected (I just finished Dustin McNeill's Slash of the Titans, which recounts the decade-long development process and countless discarded screenplays for the horror movie event), it was an enlightening bit of cinematic rewatch. Sure, Ronny Yu's 2003 smash is still a lousy movie, and Zack Snyder's superhero smackdown is still a noble failure that just barely works in its longer variation. But watching them both back-to-back only highlights that, to the extent that they fail, they fail for the exact opposite reasons.
Reading through the bazillion attempts at crafting a Freddy Vs. Jason movie, the thing that sticks out is just how overplotted the initial tries were and how painfully underplotted the final product turned out to be. Sure, the film still feels choppy as hell (it is a two-hour story whittled down to a 95-minute movie), and the dialogue is painfully expository. Ironically, Robert Englund is downright terrible as Fred Krueger, although that's partially because most of his dialogue is the "explain the plot and my emotions to the audience" variety that turns much of the film into a bad kids cartoon ("We've gotta open that cabinet and get that file!").
Conversely, and again I should note that I (probably) like Dawn of Justice more than you, Batman v Superman gives us the exact opposite experience. Director Zack Snyder and writers David Goyer and Chris Terrio give us a multilayered plot with a strong topical bent (it accidentally became a metaphor for the 2016 election, with "Bernie Sanders" realizing that "Hillary Clinton" wasn't the devil, but too late to stop "Donald Trump"), quirky supporting characters (Jessie Eisenberg, Holly Hunter, Jeremy Irons, etc.) and some crackling dialogue (I still love Luthor's monologues). But they offer deconstructive versions of the lead characters and a plot that makes the title match almost beside the point.
Ben Affleck's Batman is essentially hanging over the edge of the abyss while Henry Cavill's Superman is torn apart by self-doubt and the full weight of how his actions affect the world around him. If this were the tenth movie in this DC Films universe, that would be fine. But as something of a backdoor pilot/introduction to an entire cinematic universe, audiences and fans weren't crazy about seeing a wholly deconstructed version of their favorite superheroes in a deeply cynical real-world environment.
At least in terms of pleasing the masses, you can give us a darker/cynical world like Captain America: The Winter Soldier or you can give us a zany/daffy universe like Batman: The Brave and the Bold. But if you don't keep the characters themselves somewhat classical, then A) you risk alienating the audience and B) you lose the core thrust of the proverbial fish-out-of-water element. Seeing a grimdark Batman and a grimdark Superman in a grimdark universe worked about as well as sending Austin Powers back to the 1960's and 1970's.
Come what may, Freddy Vs. Jason gave audiences what they wanted and absolutely nothing more. While, arguably, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice gave audience essentially everything they thought they needed while depriving them of what they wanted. Freddy vs. Jason screwed up the plot and supporting characters while it nailed the title characters. Batman v Superman did almost everything right except nail down the title characters and give them a justifiable reason to beat the crap out of each other.
Would a simpler, more crowd-pleasing (and more kid-friendly) Batman v Superman, one which featured classic heroes doing battle, been better received? We may find out in a week. All reports seem to indicate that Justice League will feature somewhat classic interpretations of the iconic DC Comics heroes. And, speculation alert, it would seem that the 119-minute running will leave little room for more than a simple "aliens invade, Batman and Wonder Woman assemble the team, the Super Friends save the Earth" narrative.
Since the DC Films franchise is essentially starting over after Justice League (less interconnective tissue, more stand-alone movies, more aspirational superheroes), this film is going to act less like a season finale and more like a season premiere. The good news is that the ($112 million worldwide on a $30m budget) success of Freddy Vs. Jason (and arguably Wonder Woman) proves that fans will be at least somewhat forgiving as long as they get classic versions of classic characters doing their thing with style.
So if you want some idea of how Justice League will play compared to Batman v Superman, you might want to watch Freddy vs. Jason. Or you could watch the three-part "Secret Origins" pilot for the 2001 Justice League animated series and the 2014 animated movie Justice League War, but that's an essay for another day. One week to go, folks...
Scott Mendelson is not someone I usually agree with but the initial premise of the piece was so bizarre that I couldn't not share it.
Edit: Right when I post the thread they change the title of the article.
