3. how many times can you do compelling movies about people who are barely competent at their job but somehow still succeed? with kick ass, hit girl stole the show because she was great at her job. that is usually a better route to go on since exceptional people are usually very entertaining people (who do you want to be, harlem globetrotters or washington generals?)
in this sense, the writer is asking hollywood to take action movies down a path of diminishing returns. eventually, you run out of reasons to base a movie around people that are not noteworthy, and if they are not, then why make a movie about them? the creativity required to pull that off is going to drive down the average quality of action movies even lower than it is today.
i think a good middleground is to give heroes a fatal flaw, like a greek god. jealousy that causes him/her to mess up, etc. the most recent bond flicks have actually made bond less super. his spy game is kinda weak though he is a more dangerous killer than connery's bond.
2. i sorta agree with the point about gritty for the sake of gritty. batman works well gritty because of the underlying themes in the origin story and modus operandi of the hero. superman, on the other hand, has an origin based on a loving midwestern adoptive family and a method of crime fighting that has him adopting the colors of america and posing as a trustworthy protector of the weak. if superman is to be gritty, it should either only be during a temporary emotional crisis or some kind of problem that he deals with privately while putting on a nice face for the rest of the world. antything else would seem like he was becoming poochified
Poochie - Simpsons Wiki
1. im not a fan of parody movies to begin with, but political correctness is not as huge a motivating factor as white people like to whine about. i guess it basically is true that nostalgia is satisfied now through remakes.
