X-MEN – The Octopquel?

Ever since Batman Begins successfully reestablished the reign of the super hero, big time movie franchises have been shamelessly cashing in on their star characters. But who can blame them? Sequels, and trequels, and quadruquels are making millions at the Box Office without even rolling out of bed. And each sequel seems to be making more and more money. Take Iron Man, for instance. The first Iron Man film launched in 2008 grossed $318,412,101, a respectable amount of money for a burgeoning, narcissistic hero in what seems to be a colorful, iron Apple product. By the time the series got to Iron Man 3, however, it grossed $409,013,994. So where’s the incentive to stop?

These aren’t like the sequels of the past, where something like the specter of Jaws is resurrected to torment a new generation in a cheap movie trick that brought back to life the monster that made us fear all kinds bodies of water. Jaws was clearly killed in the first movie, restoring order to this human world we live in; I’m not sure if producers were trying to convince us of the existence of multiple giant sharks, or if they were resurrecting the old terror time and time again. Either way, they should have let the Jaws franchise alone. How could anything ever come close to outdoing the scene where Brody shoots the oxygen tank, blowing apart the horrifying creature of the deep? It was just short of insult to create each sequential Jaws movie, and it seemed like an obvious ploy to make more money.

Another clear money grabbing scheme is the idea of making a movie just to make a sequel. This is seen in everything from the Pirates of the Caribbean to the latest Bourne Legacy starring not Matt Damon. Aside from Pirates 1, these movies were made merely to set up a second or a third movie, giving you just enough detail that you’re somewhat confused and you feel that the only way to unmuddle your brain is to wait for the next movie to come out. When the sequel’s subplot is too much the part of the first sequel’s, you wonder what you paid your money for. You came to see a conflict resolved, and all you got was violence or action or more conflict. Is that worth the price of a ticket?

Great franchises, however, don’t play these money-making games – at least not overtly. Of course their main goal is to make money, but the entertainment value is not compromised. When it is, when the overarching plot is too forced and the subtlety disappears, the movie as a whole suffers. Take Iron Man 2, for example. The whole movie is peppered with the “Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.” plot that doesn’t just flirt with the main plotline; it stomps all over it. While novel at first, the heavy-handed hints at the Avengers gets old as the moviegoer is unable to decide which plot to settle on; Venko, or S.H.I.E.L.D.?

For a while, X-Men to me seemed like it was merely in the business of making money, producing movie after movie. However, upon seeing both X-Men Origins and The Wolverine, I have come to realize that there is still great entertainment value in each one. Feeling the thrill that accompanies seeing Hugh Jackman kick some ass again and again makes me wonder if maybe I’m missing the point with these sequels. Maybe it’s not the complexity and subtlety of the plot, the nuances and the ways in which the audience interacts with a cohesive, self-contained storyline, that make it what it is. Maybe all I need to do is sit back, shut off, and watch.