Maybe it’s because I’m getting (more) crusty as I age, but I’m certainly in an op-ed writing mode nowadays here on BOF!
James Gunn said something this past weekend that I’ve been saying right here on BOF for years, and I’m not about to pretend otherwise just because he’s the one who said it.
Over on Threads, a fan posted about the DCU’s foundation — SUPERMAN, PEACEMAKER S2, SUPERGIRL, CREATURE COMMANDOS, CLAYFACE, LANTERNS — and asked, “What is this building towards???” Gunn’s reply? He agreed with the notion that he doesn’t need to lay the foundation for one totally interconnected universe. He dislikes the idea, and I’m quoting him because I couldn’t have written it better myself, that “individual stories aren’t meaningful unless they lead to something else.”
He’s 100% right.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Marvel Studios didn’t invent the shared universe with the MCU, but it certainly popularized the concept with mainstream audiences in a way nothing else had, especially in the superhero genre. Over time, moviegoers, especially fans, began to expect films not just as stories unto themselves, but as chapters in a larger narrative. Every ending became a bridge to the next thing. Every post-credits scene became a tease and clue about what was coming down the road. Every film essentially became a commercial for the next one. For many fans, connectivity went from being a bonus to being the point.
Then DC chased that model straight off a cliff with the DCEU. Everybody was worried about connectivity. Almost nobody was worried enough about excellence. The result was a cinematic universe that never found stable footing because too many films were focused on building something rather than being something.
Gunn’s counterargument is CLAYFACE itself.
Think about what this movie is. An R-rated body-horror film centered on a Batman villain which the mainstream audience has no clue exists. Directed by James Watkins, starring Tom Rhys Harries, made for around $40 million. No Batman. No Superman cameo. No homework required. It exists for one reason: To be a good horror movie.
And what happened? It opened at #1. Audiences gave it an A- CinemaScore, the same grade earned by SUPERMAN and THE BATMAN, and it pulled in a 94% audience score.
I’ll be honest with y’all: I had questions about CLAYFACE. A $40 million R-rated body-horror film built around Clayface isn’t exactly the kind of project that screams “box office success” on paper. Yet, I applauded the concept because it was something different…and something that Disney/Marvel Studios would never do. But that’s exactly why its success matters. It wasn’t sold as a piece of homework for the next chapter of the DCU. It was sold as a movie that looked worth seeing.
And don’t just take Mr. Gunn’s word for it, take the director’s. Per his interview with GAMES RADAR, when James Watkins pitched his take to Gunn and producer Matt Reeves, both told him, “Great, do it. And there was no mandate to try and match or change or do anything.”
Watkins added:
There was this notion that, ‘This is what we’re going to create for CLAYFACE, and this feels right for this story.’ I like the standalone nature of this story. I didn’t have to worry about any concerns for a greater universe.
No mandate. No homework. Watkins never had to worry about what was going on in the greater DCU. That’s not a studio note, that’s a philosophy.
Imagine that.
Now, before anyone fires up the comments, no, Gunn isn’t saying connectivity doesn’t exist. Gunn says that the Superman saga runs from SUPERMAN through MAN OF TOMORROW next July, and characters cross over from project to project. What he’s saying is that those stories don’t exist solely to serve that larger narrative. That’s a huge distinction.
If this philosophy sounds familiar to longtime BOF readers, it should.
It’s one of the reasons I’ve never bought into the idea that they have to rush a DCU Batman onto the screen. If the success of your universe hinges on Batman showing up as quickly as possible, maybe the rest of the universe isn’t standing on its own two feet yet.
More importantly, it’s why Batman has thrived on film for nearly four decades.
Christopher Nolan didn’t make three episodes of a TV show. He made THE DARK KNIGHT TRILOGY, a complete filmmaker-driven saga with a beginning, middle, and end. Matt Reeves isn’t building toward some massive crossover event. He’s telling a crime story in Gotham City. Batman has never needed a shared universe to succeed. He’s needed talented filmmakers with a vision, passion, and the freedom to execute it.
Let CLAYFACE be a horror movie. Let LANTERNS be a detective story (it was great!). Let SUPERGIRL (I actually liked it, but ‘m a sucker for Krypto!) be whatever kind of story it wanted to be. Let the universe be a place where stories happen, not a checklist of content designed to funnel audiences toward the next chapter.
That’s all Gunn is asking for across the DCU…kinda.
If connectivity isn’t the priority and individual stories matter more than building toward some giant crossover, then why have a shared universe in the first place? Why not simply focus on making the best DC projects possible, regardless of whether they’re connected? The whole point of a shared universe is that things eventually come together, right?
That’s not a criticism. It’s just pointing out the obvious conflict between saying “the connections don’t matter” and building an entire cinematic universe around, well, connections.
And if individual stories truly are the priority, then the argument that DC needs a DCU Batman right now becomes a lot less convincing. In fact, it almost becomes moot.
We already have a Batman franchise. It’s called the Reevesverse, and it remains arguably the most anticipated DC story on the horizon.
If the quality of the story is what matters most, then there’s no reason to force a second live-action Batman into the picture before the first one has finished telling his story.
Again, chase excellence, not connectivity.
I’ve written that sentence (or various versions of it) on this site for years, and I’ll keep writing it because the lesson never changes: Audiences don’t fall in love with universes, they fall in love with stories.
Sounds like James Gunn mostly agrees. – Bill “Jett” Ramey
View original article here Source