Yea but I'd argue, marvel's escapism is more grounded in reality and less fun than like the camp of the 80s so it's this odd hyper realistic middle gound

Honestly even as a kid I never found Halo to be all that violent enough to warrant it being rated M. It was your standard science fiction shooter type action/violence. Compared to a Quake, DOOM, etc it was pretty tame.

This is just another result of studios being risk averse

I mean action movies of the 80s involved big muscley motherfuckers mowing dudes down with Gatling guns and s***.

Also, isn’t what you’re saying contradictory to the premise of this thread?

Also, how in the f*** are movies like Endgame and No Way Home grounded?

Both of those movies are f***ing bizarre when you a***yze them from an outside perspective, it’s just that people have grown accustomed to their kind of bizarreness.

Endgame is a time travel alien invasion movie starring a bunch of people with super powers that they got either through freak accidents, or sci-fi experimentation. The movie also includes Thor, who is a literal space alien instead of a Norse God.

There’s also f***ing magic in it.

There's both a campiness but a maturity, so notice how when the driver is shot there's blood and a bullet hole in the window and there's like this over the top ness in spectacle.

Even comparing the costume designs of older superhero movies, the newer ones are more materialistic and grounded in realism

Compare Robocop vs Robocop, the new one has no blood or impact to the shots, the guns have no consequence, it's very "gounded" in terms of how it's presented while also cutting away during violence thus creating a more kid friendly product that is more comic in it's portrayal of violence

Compare this to the OG, there is pain for getting shot, but the overall fantasy and spectacle is more theatrical and less grounded in realism. There's a playfulness to it.

It's not so much the content of the story or where it's fantasy goes but it's the way in which it's presented to us

Those are stylistic choices though, and they vary director to director. They’re also of their time.

Same as how gross out/sex comedies dominated the last 90s up until the mid 2000s until Apatow came onto the scene.

Tastes change. Extreme, realistic violence didn’t even really show up in films until the early 70s.

You're missing the entire point of what I'm saying tho is that there was no reason to dilute the concept of robocop to a toyetic pg-13 film in the remake, by removing the consequences of violence I'd argue that you don't show kids that "hey guns hurt"

Like they're kid-fifying an R film to get more butts in seats which is what I was saying why are we diluting more and more media to appeal to a demographic without any real buying power to begin with

@op as a Christian, Disney doesn't hold Judeo Christian values. That being said, I do agree, at least from a violence standpoint. Disney and films won't show blood but they'll put witchcraft right in your face like
Damn.

Why do you keep sticking to the Robocop remake, a film that bombed and was critically panned?

People didn’t even like it, so it’s a very weird example to keep bringing up.

productions still take risks

see Suicide Squad (2021)

Because it's a great example, and the only one I can use 1:1 off rip, more so because it's more a greater tonal shift that's reflected in small changes in many films and mediums.

It's harder to example how the neo-classical suit designs of the the Batman and Robin films are both more and less mature than the militaristic police state design of the dark knight, because the taste and concept overall is much higher (in batman and robin) and made for a maturer audience as compared to the hyper grounded Dark Knight. iI's harder to explain that the sexual and sensual catwoman suit, (that's based off a f***ing latex BDSM suit) designed for an adult audience in mind is something that you'd never see in our kid-friendly media landscape

…because that was the stylistic choices based on the directors, and it was the style of the time.

Both Burton and Schumacher both have very cartoonish, often campy, visual styles. Those are very much based in, and a reflection of, the era of the 90s, when things tended to be very over the top, edgy and often times garish.

Christopher Nolan’s style isn’t like that, neither is Matt Reeves.

It’s trends, which have always been a thing in media.

Also, as an aside, pretty much every movie no matter if it was R Rated or not would be merchandised to hell and back and primarily aimed at children, often times beyond even what we see today.

Toy commercials were RAMPANT in the 90s, to an absurd degree which is why they’re so often times parodied.

You keep looking at these films as if they exist in a vacuum or something.