Ragnarok: Reborn or Recycled?

Thor: Ragnarok hit cinemas last month and marked a significant change in tone for the franchise. Whereas the previous entries in the series - Thor (2011) and Thor: The Dark World (2013) - took themselves rather seriously (despite moments of comic relief), Ragnarok throws this to the wind, opting instead to put silliness and humour on the front line. The result is a film Rolling Stone went so far as to describe as a "hilarious buddy comedy". The lacklustre response Thor: The Dark World received from critics (it currently holds 66% on rotten tomatoes: the worst rating of a Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) entry to date) as well as fact it earned the lowest box office results of an MCU sequel, explain why Marvel felt the need for such drastic change in direction for the franchise. However, this doesn't clarify why they chose such a comedic route.

In an interview with IndieWire, Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige claimed that, when faced with the prospect of making the third entry into a series, his thinking is that "the audience is willing to go with us, [so] let's take them to a unique place". The implication here is that Ragnarok is new ground. However, this "unique place" looks very much like the one seen in 2014's surprise superhero hit Guardians of the Galaxy - showcasing similar comic emphasis and '80s sci-fi fantasy elements (and from Marvel also). Upon it's release, Guardians earned critical acclaim as well as a huge $771 million at the worldwide box office. It's very conceivable therefore, that Feige in fact took cue from this film (as well as it's sequel) to revive a franchise previously criticised for "dullness" and "thunderous boredom".

Justice League (2017) has tried to adopt a lighter tone than it's predecessors,
with decidedly mixed results.

Such a tactic is not exclusive to Marvel, however. It appears Warner Bros. did something similar with the DC Extended Universe, bringing director Joss Whedon in to complete this year's Justice League, following Zach Snyder's departure (due to a family emergency). Whedon's decidedly lighter tone previously helped Marvel's Avengers Assemble (2012) garner critical praise and over $1.5 billion at the worldwide box office; it appears Warner Bros. were looking for that same magic here (albeit with decidedly mixed results). Given the potential for such commercial gain, it's no surprise studios attempt to follow in the footsteps of what has worked in the past.

In the case of Thor: Ragnarok, this seems to have worked - critics dolling out overwhelmingly positive reviews and reports suggesting it will surpass $800 million at the global box office. Yet there is a risk that this tactic will end up stunting the growth of the genre. If every film just recycles the successful elements of those that came before it, none will progress. In order to do so, risks must be taken - new ideas and approaches tested. This is why Guardians of the Galaxy was such a hit - it's tone and style unseen in previous superhero outings. The same is true of other acclaimed endeavours like Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy and Brad Bird's The Incredibles. Each tried something new and won big because of it. Currently both Marvel and Warner Bros. have several films in the pipeline. I only hope they draw from these examples (and other successes before them) - not the specific elements that made them as good as they are - but the inspiration to take risks themselves.