Let's first note that realism can be escapism. I know many people who accept Nolan's Bat trilogy on a merit of "realism," but actually view the films as "escapism." Some will argue that all films are a form of escapism, and their debate, to a point, could be considered. But I'm not going for that with this article. Within this article, I'd like to analyze a few films and put them neatly on one side or the other, and then pose the question as to which a comic book audience prefers.
Realism
Nolan's Batman Movies
Now, I understand the argument of a "man dressing up as a bat" is not something to be taken lightly in the world of realism. My counter-argument to it is that the characters don't really accept it either. The criminals in the
Dark Knight trilogy are petrified of Batman, but they also understand the absurdity of their situation. To them, too, it is unbelievable that a man, dressed as a bat, is roaming the streets as a vigilante. In that case, the
Dark Knight trilogy is still very much planted in realism.
The director himself has issued statements about the fantastical elements of his films without being
too and unbelievably fantastical. There are elements of intrigue and mystery (just how the Joker does everything he does), but those elements never detract from the tone of the film. Nolan (as director and screenwriter) decided that a hero planted in realism would have their own challenges. Batman has no powers, but is lucky enough to be a billionaire; something that makes his vigilantism possible. While unlikely, it is still realistic.
Super
James Gunn's
Super is strange. A small town hero gets the upper-hand on the local crime "family" to win back the heart of his true love. He eventually gathers a side-kick (in the form of an...*ahem...excitable Ellen Page) and even stitches together a costume for himself practically from scratch. He makes homemade weapons and uses things like wrenches to defend himself. And, just like in Nolan's Bat films, people are astoundingly shocked to see the absurd display.
Super is very much grounded in reality, though it dances on the line of absurdity. It's played primarily for laughs and shock rather than a true investment in story (like Nolan's films).
Here, we have a film on the opposite side of the spectrum falling into
realism. While it, at moments, takes itself seriously, it's a display of rampant energy, bright colors, and extreme violence. So, while one can say, "I don't like the seriousness of 'realistic' movies," they'd be hard pressed to find
that much seriousness in
Super. I'll also note that audiences are very torn over the film. Some can't stand it. Others adore it. I absolutely love it for everything it is, but understand that it's
not for everyone.
Defendor
Sort of bridging the gap, Peter Stebbings'
Defendor follows a mentally disturbed homeless man as he tracks down his arch-enemy Captain Industry as a vigilante. Defendor uses make-shift weapons, practically lives on the streets, and holds down an off-and-on job at a construction site. He's constantly in police custody, therapy sessions, and getting himself way over his head.
The movie never strays into the fantastical, except for those rare moments of high "coincidence," and follows the psyche of a man slowly dilapidating under society. There are no fantastical elements, no super powers, no incredibly larger than life characters; Defendor is a spectacle on its own merits because of its small scope and story, and killer performances from Woody Harrelson and the fantastically underrated Elias Koteas as a crooked cop.
Daredevil
Probably the movie that most closely teeters on the edge of "realism" and "escapism,"
Daredevil showcases a variety of characters with special abilities, but not at the expense of their basic humanity. While Matt Murdock can't punch through walls, he is an accomplished martial artist and gymnast. Those things are not beyond the realm of possibility; I, myself, did gymnastics for fourteen years. He also holds a job as a lawyer; another trait not out of the ordinary. And finally, Murdock is blind. Something that, when stands alone, is a very "real" handicap.
Now, of course, Murdock has an extra sense that allows him to "see," though this works (in the movie) a bit like echolocation, and to further this point, it's merely an exaggeration of something humans can
already do. So, even though all those elements pushed together make it teeter on the pure "escapism" side, they all fall within the "realism" side, separately. Elektra is also a martial artist, Bullseye is a character who has honed his skill to a near supernatural level, and the Kingpin is nothing more than a titan of stature.
It could be debated by how some of the sequences are filmed (Daredevil's Bullseye fight scene in the church, how he jumps from roof to roof) couldn't be further from realism; but the actual elements and "possibilities" (in a new film, Daredevil will probably be seen more as a free-runner than all-out gymnast) still keep the movie somewhat grounded.
Escapism
The Avengers
Let's start on one end of the spectrum and work our way over. So, we'll be starting with a movie that stars a super-soldier unfrozen from World War II, an enormous green-rage monster, a galactic alien-god, a billionaire prosthetic maker, and an agency that monitors beings of the like. The fantastical elements were already in place
before the galactic ransacking of New York City by an alien race.
I'll make a note here about the "kiddie" comments
The Avengers somehow draws with its viewings. I fail to understand how escapism movies cannot be taken seriously, merely because of their fantastical elements. Often, the themes are just as universal than the ones in heavy-set realism movies, but sometimes pushed to the background in favor for the actual story-telling. Anyone who pushes
The Avengers back as not being "serious" movie-fare in that it achieves its own goals within its own rights and completely knows its identity, is someone who does not understand the principle of genre.
The Avengers has done something Ridley Scott's
Alien movie did; it presented a unique concept and through high-energy storytelling approached how movies can be perceived (in
Avengers case, a cinematic universe) by the general public outside of their medium.
The Avengers is not only escapism at its biggest and boldest; it's the culmination of an idea that is currently working its way, through influence, onto other studios (and we all turn to Warner Brothers).
Spider-Man 2
My personal favorite superhero movie,
Spider-Man 2 features down-on-his-luck Peter Parker living a real, meandering lifestyle as a college student, and a double-life as the high-swinging superhero, Spider-Man.
Spider-Man 2 is ripe with realism that helps supply the gravity of the fantastical scenes and characters. Case in point, the infamous and beautiful train scene where the shift between heroic icon to "just a boy my age" happens in a split second.
While
SM2 is full of huge characters, large set pieces, and fantastic special effects, it's probably one of the most human superhero films to ever debut. Rosemary Harris, as Aunt May, completely obliterates every other performance in the trilogy with her scenes as she tries to give Peter money when her house is seeking foreclosure, and when Peter finally tells her the truth about Uncle Ben. They're real, emotionally gripping moments, and they're told through few words. Those two scenes are cinematic gems, to me, and I hate it when the trilogy loses its credibility because Rosemary Harris and Tobey Maguire "look funny and derpy when they scream."
I'll also go on to note how the "whiny Mary Jane" or "helpless Mary Jane" comments couldn't be more from the truth. A character who fully evolves over the trilogy, Mary Jane does not live to serve Peter Parker. She grows from an abusive family and through her
own hard work, she makes it to Broadway. She turns down
one millionaire and a famous astronaut to be with Peter Parker and then
accepts his role as *ucking Spider-Man. And then she's upset when he's dodgy and acts like a jerk? Yeah. no justification there. MJ is a strong independent character; the filmmakers just ask you to read through the lines sometimes.
Watchmen
Finally, on the other end of the scale, we have a movie with darker tone, darker themes, and a re-interpretation of history.
Watchmen's fantastical elements are fairly easy to identify, as you've got the story of a government seeking the eradication of the public superhero, near-omnipotent characters like Dr. Manhattan, and giant *ucking owls. However, the content of the movie (the extreme violence, rape implications, moral conundrums) are sometimes often associated with the "realism" that would come with Nolan's Bat films, and they often wouldn't be misplaced.
It's important to look at all the elements of the story and pick and choose what elements
make it pure escapism. By pulling out the history re-interpretation, the angry voice of the public, and Dr. Manhattan, the story is almost completely changed. This, in contrast to the
Daredevil example (taking out the sonar-sight and extreme fight scenes) is a radical difference.
So, now I pose the question to you. What movies do you find yourself more drawn to? Or are you less drawn to stories, and more to characters?