It’s no surprise the newest Marvel film is smashing box office records left and right. After the initial trailer for “Avengers: Endgame” earned almost 300 million views in 24 hours, the hype train began to slowly but steadily cruise toward the station.
Most pre-sale tickets ever? Check. Fastest film to hit $100 million? Check. Highest opening day ever? First film to make $1 billion over opening weekend? Double check, and it’s likely we can fill more boxes if the film doesn’t lose traction.
This very well may be the only opportunity to dethrone James Cameron’s “Avatar” for total box office revenue, but the achievement could come at a cost. Yes, audiences are obviously still enthralled with watching their favorite comic book characters on the big screen. Yes, a film starring a talking raccoon and Paul Rudd may be remembered as the most iconic film of our generation.
Max Rothenberg | Argonaut
But while “Endgame” is the culmination of 10 years of world-building and character development in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), it also marks an almost eerie turning point for the superhero genre as a whole.
It’s incredibly risky to try and one-up what makes “Endgame” so special, since it relies on fan service, big budget CGI and prior interaction with Marvel lore. Without so many years of setup and integration, the film would just be another mind-numbing experience.
Let’s take “Justice League” for example. With only two characters (Wonder Woman and Superman) having prior solo films, the resulting ensemble experience was 120 minutes of rushed character exposition and introductory dialogue. By the 100 minute mark, I had just started to figure out each character’s name and a little bit of their personality.
Imagine a world where Batman, Cyborg and the Flash all had comprehensive origin stories prior to their inevitable teamup. Not only would each solo film likely crack at least $500 million, but I can almost guarantee “Justice League” would be sitting higher than a 40% on Rotten Tomatoes and less actors would walk from the franchise as a result.
Continuity breeds success, and multiple actor changes and soft reboots will continue to confuse DC fans and moviegoers for years to come (I’m looking at you, “Joker” and “Suicide Squad 2”).
“Joker” in particular looks like a surprisingly grim, horrific take on the classic character, but are we supposed to believe we’re capable of moving on already from Jared Leto’s horrifically awful interpretation?
Yet, this may be the very strategy film studios try to employ going forward.
Sure, there may be another Avengers film within the next decade — and let’s be frank, it would be monetarily foolish to not even try. But until all of Disney’s newly acquired X-Men and Fantastic Four are eventually introduced and built up over a long period of time, the term “Avengers” just won’t resonate with audiences in the same way.
Genre burnout is a very real term, and millions of people are likely already feeling it after their decade-long journey grinds to a halt. After such a cinematic conclusion, further films may very well feel like a step down — or even worse, like a current DC flick.
Just within the next year, we’ll presumably be bombarded with “Dark Phoenix,” “Spiderman: Far From Home,” “The New Mutants,” “Joker” and “Birds of Prey.” In the following years, we’re set to have dozens more.
We didn’t ask for most of these, and in the grand scheme of things almost none will have sequels.
From here on out, keep an elevated focus on quality and continuity. Certain films, like “Wonder Woman 1984,” give me a glimmer of hope that studios are on the right track.
Hopefully it’ll be a long time before we see another “Endgame,” because even if the waiting is rough, the payoff will be so much more rewarding.
Max Rothenberg can be reached at [email protected]