There’s no reason why escapism should only be for kids. There’s plenty of ‘deep’ art in this world, and fantasy escapism isn’t preventing that from existing.
Now the common response to that studios are just giving the people what they want. But A. people will tend to like what you put in front of them and B. that doesn't mean studios should starve creative, new ideas. It's a sign of the times that someone like Martin Scorsese has trouble getting money, that a film with Robert De Niro, Al Pacino and Joe Pesci has to be made with Netflix.
Also, studios seem to forget that these franchises started as risks themselves. Iron Man was a huge risk. Star Wars was massively precarious. If executives hadn't taken the original risk, these franchises wouldn't be the cash cows they are.
Escapism isn't necessarily bad but it's a little noticeable how much escapism is being sold to us at the detriment to real, innovative, intelligent art.
All genres go through cycles in film in terms of popularity. Marvel will have a down cycle at some point. Disney movies lost their way when Disney himself died. It takes leadership, a great script,great acting and creativity, to build successful movies that can grow into franchises. or be even something people enjoy watching more that once on it's own.
From the Scorsese Op-Ed. I did explain in my previous comment that "voting with their attendance" is a faulty excuse, because it's a self perpetuating cycle.
Also, if studio execs just blindly gave people more of the same franchises without trying new ideas, we wouldn't have Marvel or Star Wars. Executives need to take creative risk if they want to receive financial gain.
The idea that Marvel is just having a genre moment doesn't really follow. We've never seen a genre that subsumes all genres, that dominates the box office in such a relentless manner. Has there ever been a time where horror movies were playing at every movie theater, where everybody talked about horror movies, where practically every actor under the sun had starred in a horror movie?
And apparently, people like them. Some don't.
Iron Man was the risk. Marvel's approach of a 15 year cycle of building and interlinking was what worked.
For Warner/DC, they tried the same thing for DC characters and could not pull it off.
Nor could Universal with the attempt to force a Monster Cinematic Universe. Their Tom Cruise Mummy movie failed.
Marvel is getting beat up here, because they are so successful. DC gets beat up, because they have not figured out how to tonally present their movies in a way that can build a franchise.
As to the size of the budgets, they are large because of the CGI that makes the characteristics of the superheros seem more real.
The first modern Superman movie's tag line was: You will believe a man can fly".
The Hope and Crosby Road Trip movies, the Abbot and Costello franchises or the Jerry Lewis Dean Martin movies were all franchises as well. Hell, Rin Tin Tin was a franchise.
We've been here before and will be there again. Studios will milk what works for them until it no longer does, and the other studios will copy the genre and try to get in on the money there.
Or they just reboot something that doesn't have a new story to tell, or has a weak cast or uninteresting story line. That is the business.
You weren't forced to go and neither was anyone else.
As for Scorcesse, he is reviled within the Academy community for some of his films.
But even you quote 'deep' as if it isn't deep at all. By this rhetoric there isnt any deep art, whatsoever, in existence. And I think that bolsters the point that we need less escapism and that actual real critical thought needs to be applied.