The artist is Icarus. It is dangerous to fly so high, to dare so much -- yes, they can fail and plummet spectacularly. Francis Ford Coppola is an artist. Yes, he made some real shit. He had a run of films that were genius; he had a run of films that prostituted his talents.
It's complicated. THE GODFATHER was a studio assignment that ended as great art. The later corporate films were literally recompense for earlier artistic endeavors. But he's an artist. The moneymen, the suits, have no love for the artist.
They never want another period like the 1970s where the lunatics (the artists) were running the asylum. Spielberg, Lucas, and Cimino almost guaranteed that those days were over. Then there was a revival of the cinematic artist in the 1990s centered around the likes of Miramax.
So, yeah, cinematic art flourished in the ugliest of conditions. Pop culture has made inroads and now we get film and television adaptations of cultural icons from comic books. Cyclopean budgets, incredible talents in front and behind the camera. And yet, are any of them great?
Not simply good, but great: art. For the superhero films, I don't believe so. That's not to say that it won't happen, but I don't think it has happened yet. The emotional investment and catharsis achieved in some of the films is similar to that of soap operas.
Tears were shed over AVENGERS: ENDGAME because you had a relationship with the characters for over a dozen films. Like a soap opera, it was both high drama and familiarity. An artist can move you in a moment -- they don't need a twenty hour commitment to do so.
There's been good superhero films, but perspective has been lost. Ultimately, they're product. All art is product, but this is product that begins with a capitalistic entity -- not an artistic entity. The suits must love that *their* Intellectual Property has so many defenders.
Whilst once dangerous artists, now in their Twilight, are reduced to mere Knights of the Doleful Countenance. Enjoy your superhero films, but know that they come with a price. You want art from an a comic book adaptation? There's at least one. Not from a superhero comic though.
A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE directed by David Cronenberg, adapted from the comic of the same name by John Wagner and @Vincelocke. It's a masterpiece. A daring, visionary director helps to achieve art in a comic book film (any film, really).
But so too does it help that it was not fettered by decades of bad writing, continuity issues, and characters that (as corporate Intellectual Property) cannot be changed, cannot grow, cannot die, et cetera. A story of people, of consequences, from beginning to end could be told.
Housekeeping for the nitpickers: 1) This is just my take, 2) Coppola's non-film pursuits have allowed him to make films in his Twilight. They've mostly been noble failures [the best kind], 3) Yes, there have been emotional moments in earlier Marvel/superhero films.
But they were mostly achieved because of prior familiarity with the material. @JRichardKelly's SOUTHLAND TALES might have been a success if the same engagement was given to his film. 4) The MCU has killed, and un-killed, characters just like the comics.
Those that are *truly* dead are only dead because the actors wanted to retire from the MCU or the MCU no longer wished to pay them. There will undoubtedly be a reboot at some point. 5) Bela Tarr doesn't need a twenty hour commitment, but he'll take it if you'd give it to him.
