Wednesday, April 6, 2022

SUPER HERO CINEMA: MORBIUS (2022)

MORBIUS


It's been 24 years since Wesley Snipes blindsided audiences with the legendary portrayal of the vampire hunter BLADE from Marvel comics. And it's been 22 years since the first X-MEN film and the beginning of the super hero film boom. It feels like we've come a long ways since then in certain instances and in other ways it feels like we're still stuck in the same rut as we were then. Morbius seems to exemplify both of these sentiments somehow. But Morbius is only following in the same footsteps as 2018's VENOM and 2021's VENOM: LET THERE BE CARNAGE. Having watched both Venom films, and for anyone else whose seen those movies, should know exactly what they'll get in Morbius. 

COMIC BOOK DIGRESSION RANT (skip this)

Morbius is one of my favorite comic book characters and I was really looking forward to this movie. Curiously, I love Morbius not for any connection he has to Spider-Man, but rather his solo adventures and later his associations with Ghost Rider, Blade, Doctor Strange, Werewolf By Night, and the Midnight Sons. Typically whenever Morbius appeared in a Spider-Man comic the story was more or less a repeat of his origin story: bloodlust takes over Morbius and Spider-Man has to defeat him to bring him back to his senses. When Morbius is allowed to step away from Spider-Man the character is allowed to grow and develop. Morbius' character endeared to me when he was more or less independent from Spider-Man.

During the late 80s and early 90s Morbius returned in the pages of Doctor Strange and signaled the major return of vampires to the Marvel universe (vampires were completely wiped out by Doctor Strange a few years earlier). After teaming with Doctor Strange, and then an obligatory battle with Spider-Man, Morbius received another solo title and really found his place in Marvel that worked best: alongside Ghost Rider, Blade, and the horror heroes the Midnight Sons. A vampire flourishing in a horror setting rather than a family friendly super-hero setting? Who knew?

MOVIE TRIVIA

Morbius nearly made his motion picture debut WAY BACK in the first Blade movie (he's actually in an alternate ending for the film. Another related fun fact: Werewolf By Night debuts in a cut alternate ending for Blade Trinity just like Morbius) but due to various reasons and licensing agreements New Line Cinema was unable to use Morbius (probably because Sony had the rights to Morbius). It had long been my hope that Sony didn't have the rights to Morbius, mainly because I wanted to see Morbius with Ghost Rider, Blade, and the other horror heroes which were all at Disney. But given the way Disney has been adapting the more obscure Marvel characters I doubt Morbius, when eventually adapted by the MCU, would even remotely resemble the character I love from the comics (at least that's what the cynicist in me says. My faith in the MCU had been shaken to say the least). So, maybe it's a good thing Sony has him instead.

THE VENOMVERSE (skip this if you want too)

When Sony released the first Venom film in 2018 the MCU was at its peak! That year alone saw the releases of BLACK PANTHER, AVENGERS: INFINITY WAR, and ANT-MAN & THE WASP, all of which I really enjoyed. Then Venom came out last that year and felt like a massive step backwards. Venom felt like a throwback to the super hero films of the mid 2000s and essentially like Sony hadn't learned anything from all the progress of the MCU. Little did I know that "the Great MCU Disillusionment" was just around the corner. Other than Sony's Spider-Man films, I haven't really enjoyed anything from the MCU since 2019. It mainly comes down to what seems like nonsensical writing and disrespectful adaptations of the source material. And a tiresome formula and structure.

During the Great Disillusionment I revisited Venom and found it more enjoyable than before. That doesn't mean the movie became better, more punctuating just how much I wasn't liking the MCU anymore. Breaking it down to its core elements, Tom Hardy's performance didn't endear me like it did so many others, but I did enjoy Venom's character and their dynamic together. Although, Venom simply doesn't work without Spider-Man. He can have his own adventures, yes, but Venom at least needs Spider-Man in his origin story. His powers, appearance, and personality are all informed by his relationship with Spider-Man. 

VENOM: LET THERE BE CARNAGE was more of the same, showing once again that Sony had learned nothing... or that this "2000s throwback" esthetic was truly the style they're going for. I did think the action sequences were far better here though and the movie was still fun. But the core problem is still the same: the core foundational element (Spidey) was missing.



THE HORROR SUPER-HERO GENRE PROBLEM (skip this too!)

With a scant few exceptions, Hollywood has yet to crack the super-hero horror genre. Keanu Reeves' CONSTANTINE, Matt Ryan's CONSTANTINE, the 2019 SWAMP THING television series, the Dick Durock SWAMP THING trilogy (the two movies and the television series), the Nic Cage GHOST RIDER films, the MAN-THING movie, and the dead on arrival HELSTROM series (they couldn't even spell the name right!). Hell, let's throw in the PUNISHER trilogy of films too. I'm sure I'm forgetting some, but the pattern remains the same, regardless of quality (some of which are great!) they are all viewed as failures for various reasons. The BLADE trilogy remains perhaps the closest to success that this subgenre has ever achieved.

What's the answer? How does Hollywood make this subgenre succeed? Truly I don't know. Making a movie is complicated. There are lots of moving parts and lots of egos involved and board room members to satisfy. There are also conflicting ideologies on the genre too, marketing, and accessibility. Not to mention a lot riding for a studio that dumps $100 million dollars into a project. 

Rarely does a property succeed when it doesn't know what it needs to be. Ghost Rider feels like the perfect example here. 

"Tell me the premise," asks a studio exec. 

"Based on the classic Marvel comics, a man sells his soul to Satan and then has to battle demons and even literally descend into Hell. He basically melts the brains of rapists and murders as his special brand of punishment."

"Hmm..." says the studio exec. "How much money will this cost us?"

"A hundred million for the heavy amount of effects."

"It's a Marvel property? It sounds a little dark. How about we lighten it up. Inject humor and comedy, no darker than PG-13 (we don't want the kiddos to miss out), and lose the Satan and Hell stuff. Make sure to setup the crossover with Spider-Man and the Fantastic Four! And it has to make a billion at the box office," says the exec.

"But... but... that isn't Ghost Rider..."

"Not my problem. Now go make me a movie," says the exec.

Let's look at DEADPOOL and LOGAN. While not horror films, these movies are examples of super-hero films outside of the genre that succeeded. These films fully committed to the story they were trying to tell. They didn't inject antithetical elements because they were "super-hero" movies. They went all in with what they were doing. Let's look at, arguably, the greatest success of the super-hero horror subgenre: 1998's BLADE. Most audiences didn't know they were watching a Marvel super-hero movie. What they were watching was one of the finest examples of action-horror ever produced. 

I don't know how to make a movie and I'm probably the last person you'd want to ask about quality tastes in pop-culture. But I know this much to be fact: the horror super-hero genre needs to fully commit to what it is if it is going to flourish. Lower those budgets (because you aren't going to make a billion on a horror movie), lean into the R-rating, and embrace the darkness.

BACK TO THE MOVIE AT HAND


THE SYNOPSIS

Dying from a rare blood disease, Dr. Michael Morbius attempts to create a cure by using dangerous and unorthodox methods that result in transforming him into a monstrous blood-drinking beast. Lusting for human blood, can the nobel prize winning scientist and genuinely good man control his bloodthirst or will he feast upon the populace of New York City?

INITIAL IMPRESSIONS

I really wanted to like this movie. Morbius, being one of my top favorite characters, is one that I've longed to see receive a feature film for years. Trying to maintain objectivity is always a challenge, so reacting to Morbius has been a whirlwind of emotions. Biases aside (or as much as they can be), Morbius feels like its following in Venom's footsteps. It feels like another throwback to the super-hero films of the 2000's. The film goes through the classic origin story tropes as predictably as ever to the effect of feeling dated.

The film does keep a good pace, but in doing so jumps around quite a bit. Many have levied criticism against this and yes, there are some elements that feel rushed. Sadly Tyrese Gibson's SIMON STROUD (a classic character from Morbius's comic) is under-serviced a bit (although I wasn't a fan of his partner, the goofy Agent Rodriguez so I was glad he wasn't in the movie anymore). But the film wouldn't be serviced any better if it was bloated with another plot, so I'm not sure how they would've serviced Simon Stroud any better. If anything is needed it's only a few minutes of little transition scenes to help makes sense of the narrative flow. I do wish Tyrese Gibson's character was integrated into the plot better though.

Speaking of the performances, I thought the primary cast was great. I thought Leto's performance was wonderful. It felt like I was seeing a faithful adaptation of Morbius on screen (and its been a long time since I've seen comic book source material respectfully adapted). Another aspect that shone brightly was Morbius' origin story (once again, true to the comics albeit modernized). I didn't realize just how great and powerful Morbius' origin story was until seeing it depicted in earnest here. Michael Morbius, though motivated also by self-interest, is equally dedicated to helping others. This makes seeing such a good person transformed into a monster all the more compelling.

Though the super-hero origin story is a tired approach, Morbius being an obscure character with such a powerful origin story, it seems difficult to avoid not doing a proper origin depiction. I thought the look of Morbius was great. From Leto's haggard appearance at the beginning to his monstrous incarnation, all of it was spot on and visually compelling. When I looked at Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark I saw the character from the comics. When I looked at Benedict Cumberbatch as Doctor Strange I saw the character, not the actor. Similarly here, Leto looked like and embodied the character I grew up reading in the comics.



Now in regards to Matt Smith's performance... I'm torn. I fully grasp where his character was coming from. Having to deal with an extreme chronic illness one's entire life, never knowing if they'd live passed the day they were in, is powerful and leaves devastating psychological trauma. What Morbius and Milo were battling was truly cancerous. That entire through-line really resonated with me, the anger and helplessness they must've felt their entire lives. THAT I really appreciated. But I could've done without the dancing and the bar scene and other spots.

However, beginning the film with Morbius saving Milo's life and ending the film with Morbius "Saving" Milo's life (from the monster it had become) was quite poignant and powerful. This film contained far more drama than I expected and drastically downplayed the forced humor of Marvel movies, both aspects I greatly appreciated although by today's MCU standards some may find this a "slower" film.

Let's be honest for a moment. Morbius, unless it was an extremely well received all around great movie, was never going to blow the doors off of the box office. Marvel and DC both haven't done the work to generate interest in their horror characters and what work they have done hasn't been widely supported (that isn't to say that there aren't great things there though). This film wouldn't have made less money or more if the filmmakers had went all in on the horror aspects. Making it R-Rated, leaning into the darker scarier moments, and just letting the blood and gore show would have differentiated the film from its peers and showcased a new and unique aspect to the Marvel universe. You did it with Wolverine and Deadpool, both characters that CHILDREN love for crying out loud!

Marvel, Sony, if you're going to do Ghost Rider, Morbius, Blade, Werewolf By Night, and Satana and Daimon Hellstrom DO THEM RIGHT and embrace the darkness and R-Rated nature of the characters! PLEASE! FOR THE LOVE OF THE GENRE, PLEASE!

Ending on a positive note though, I think this film improved upon both of the prior Venom films. This movie demonstrates what I've always known, namely that Morbius can exist on his own just fine without Spider-Man. His origin and his character's motivations are not, even in the slightest, dependent on his proximity or relationship to Spider-Man. Venom without Spider-Man just doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I could go on arguing how Morbius' film works better than Venom's but I'll concede Venom's far greater popularity. But I'll say that Morbius, as his own independent character, is stronger.



THE VERDICT

Succinctly put, the story and acting aren't the problem with Morbius. The editing and general approach to the film is where the trouble lies. Morbius' origin story is unique and powerful subject matter (shown wonderfully here). The film displays the unique and amazing character that is Morbius, but the standard cookie cutter super-hero film structure is a disservice. The MCU has its cookie cutter structure too by the way, its style just hasn't been deemed out of fashion by the masses yet (though it is just as tired in my opinion). But which would you rather have: a film that feels fresh but barely resembles what it's adapting or a film that faithfully adapts the characters and source material but follows a familiar narrative approach?

Biases aside, let's be realistic. The critics way overreacted in savaging this film. Yes, the structure is dated, but it does the lead characters justice. The story, though missing a few transitional scenes, makes sense. And the adaptation of the source material is more faithful than the last several MCU films. Morbius is a different flavor than the MCU films, not awash in bathos and forced humor. Not perfect by any means, backwards (or traditional if you like) in its approach, which seems to be the style of all of the Venomverse films (I blame the producers for forcing this style on the film), Morbius has a lot to appreciate.

Overall Ranking: 7 out of 10

Due to the critical panning and lackluster box office, this may be Morbius' one and only moment in the spotlight. But it is my sincerest wish that we'll see Morbius return.

For more of my thoughts on all things super hero cinema check out the posts below!

And make sure to leave any comments and thoughts below!


THE MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE (MCU)

 
Fox-Marvel, Sony-Marvel, and other stuff too!
 





No comments:

Post a Comment