Thor and Cap - Marvel movies incoming this year

[Target]

OH well, I just hope the vision they have the the Superman films improve.
What is the best super hero franchise out there in movie format at the mo? I think it's between Ironman and Batman.

[SpiritWarrior]

Batman IMO. While Ironman is certainly doing very well, for me, there was just something more in the Nolan versions of Batman. Interestingly, I preferred Batman Begins to the more recent Dark Knight that everyone was raving about.

Spiderman was great, until the third movie made it very camp and over-the-top. Of course, a Spiderman reboot is in the works currently.

[Larry_OHF]

Originally Posted by SpiritWarrior Of course, a Spiderman reboot is in the works currently.

And I am pissed about that. I understand having to redo Batman and Superman to get them right (finally) but why do we need another Spiderman?
Hell, I guess in ten years we'll see another LotR when somebody comes along to say they can do it better.

When will it end!

[Cerek]

Originally Posted by Target OH well, I just hope the vision they have the the Superman films improve. What is the best super hero franchise out there in movie format at the mo? I think it's between Ironman and Batman.

I would say Spiderman, X-Men and Fantastic Four rank with Iron Man and the new Batman series. Iron Man has a much better look, but that is more the benefit of improved technology as well as learning from previous errors. Just look at the 2nd Hulk movie compared to the first - well, there really is NO comparison between the two.

Spiderman began the trend and the first two were excellent. The third had the potential to be the best of the bunch with Venom, but I agree it was too campy.

Fantastic Four was good with excellent casting. Michael Chiklis was an obvious choice for Ben Grimm, but Chris Evans stole the show and really nailed the personality of Johnny Storm, IMO. Rise of the Silver Surfer was even better than the original.

Even though it is a bit campy at times, the X-Men series is still one of my favorites. I just finished watching the first two again this weekend. This is one of the few series where each movie was better than the previous one (again, IMO). The first one gave us a good introduction to the characters, but the story was too "comic book". The opening scene with Nightcrawler in the 2nd movie is still one of my absolute favorites in ANY movie. Absolute perfection on capturing his acrobatic skill as well as his teleporting and use of his tail as both an extra hand and a weapon. Once again, the story could have been a little better, but overall, it was very good.

Third movie - Dark Pheonix! Epic power unleashed to cause utter devastation! Magneto moving the Golden Gate bridge was epic as well (and a major event from the comics). I did NOT like how it suddenly became "night" within just a couple of minutes after Magneto dropped the bridge, but the resulting fight was great. The highlight - of course - was Bobby Drake transforming into his "ice form" during the fight with Pyro. THAT almost made me jump out of my seat in the theater - literally!

The Iron Man series are equally great, not just for the hi-tech CGI, but because Robert Downey Jr. is the PERFECT actor for Tony Stark (in more ways than one). To me, great casting is just as important as a good story. That's one reason I like the FF movies so much. The X-Men series did a good job as well with Halle Berry, Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellan, Famke Janssen, James Marsden and a previously unknown Hugh Jackman ALL being perfect for their chosen roles.

Heath Ledger won great acclaim for his portrayal of the Joker, but I felt Jack Nicholson did a good job as well. He portrayed the Joker's crazy, unpredictable style that was portrayed in the comics for many years while Heath captured the essence of what Joker would be like in real life.

So, as you can tell, I basically like them all.

[SpiritWarrior]

Ugh Cerek you'd really rank FF, up there? : -/

They were okay movies, but I felt they were kids films, if anything. I'm a big Marvel fan, so am super-critical about their interpretation especially when it doesn't pan out. You got me going now.

There are logical holes in the plot and characters that are never explained away, leaving us with the impression that we're either supposed to leave our brain at the door, or not have one to begin with. They were (to me) a kinda quirky, comical, teenage take on the FF franchise. I think they did the only thing they could do. The FF is a little too "out there" to explain in a serious movie without making some major changes to the story.

Like, why are they revered as heroes when their friends, the X-Men, who live just around the corner, are looked upon as the dirt and reviled because they are mutants? People don't know enough to tell if they're mutants or not. They have special powers that's all that matters and that's what makes them freaks. But the people don't they care, it seems. A far cry from X-Men, where they were suspicious of everyone being "a freak" and hunt mutants into the underground like vermin. Like, Thing, is a classic mutant. He could easily be born that way. He is similiar to Colossus. In fact, the FF are mutants technically, because their genetic makeup was mutated by cosmic rays.

According to the X-Men movies, people should be so terrified of them that they raid their houses, hunt them and force them into hiding. Just the opposite here it seems. They are touted as icons and heroes from the get-go. Indeed, Johnny Storm has no problem showing off in front of crowds. Why then, if Ice-man did this in X-Men, would he be scolded by Xavier, chased by the police and most likely rescued by the Blackbird and brought to a safe-house because "we're not accepted" ? Same with Spiderman, is he a villain or a hero? He gets all this bad press. These characters are supposed to be from the same world as the FF, yet appear galaxies apart in many respects. This woman who can turn invisible is revered and trusted immediately by everyone, yet elsewhere in the same country (X-Men), a girl who can walk through walls is being talked about by the government as a threat to society. I don't get it.

Then there's the notion that they fly around on a hover-buggy. It was always kinda tongue-in-cheek in the comics, because Reed was a genuis and we half bought it and half let it slide, but in the movies, it was just thrown in there the same way a car would be. This technology isn't around yet so give us some kind of believable grounds for you perfecting and using it so much. Flight for Iron Man is dealt with carefully, demonstrating the hazards, the technical problems, the money and research behind it, and the ingenuity of Tony Stark. The way they paint Reed Richards in the movies he could create Iron Man during his lunch break, nevermind stretch his body.

There were more problems that I had with the FF movies, but I confess I watched them once and barely got through the second one so can't remember. I just know it wasn't nearly as belieavable as other Marvel stuff, thus why I refer to it as mostly for kids. I am glad you liked it, and welcome the chance to tap my inner-geek and discuss superhero films regardless. For me, I think the best superhero movies in the last 10 years would be Spiderman 2 and Batman Begins. Iron Man was great, and a huge success but I wasn't absolutely amazed by it.

[Cerek]

I agree there is an extreme double standard in the Marvel Universe regarding different heroes or groups of heroes. The FF and Avengers are almost universally revered, but the X-Men are considered a national threat with Senators seeking litigation to register and "brand" them. You are right that there really is NO difference between Colossus and Thing, or Iceman and the Human Torch, except those born with mutant powers are inexplicably considered inherently more "dangerous" than those who get saturated by cosmic rays or splashed with toxic waste.

The only logical explanation is that Stan Lee, Jack Kirby, et al used the X-Men as a way of addressing bigotry and prejudice, trying to teach future generations (if you will) that others are not "bad" just because they are different from us.

I also agree about Spiderman always being cast as a villain. It's bad enough he had to deal with all the normal teenage angst, which is only complicated by gaining superpowers, but he also has to have the editor of the largest paper in the city embark on a decades-long personal vendetta against him? Jeeeeez, give the kid a break, willya?

Again, though, the underlying theme (admittedly aimed at pre-teens) is that you CAN persevere and remain true to yourself, even when it the whole world is against you.

Do I really rank the FF up there with X-Men, Spiderman, Iron Man and Batman Begins? Yes, I do. Why? Because it IS based on a comic-book after all (and I have a decent personal collection). Yes, the FF were a bit campy. I don't think it is ever explained HOW Reed Richards became a millionaire (unless it was from selling his inventions). I don't think the FantastiCar is any more "campy" than the Batmobile myself. While the special armor, weapons and advanced technology were explained easily enough in the new series, the ability for the humvee to spontaneously "jump" over chasms or rivers also required stretching the imagination just a bit, IMO.

Oh...and Reed Richards probably COULD create the Iron Man armor on his lunch break because his IQ IS that much higher than Tony Stark's. That is one reason a lot of the things associated with the FF are explained by saying "Reed Richards is a genius".

Back in the 80's, there was a DnD-style game for the Marvel Universe. It included a fairly comprehensive list of Marvel characters and their various attributes. Peter Parker is considered the equivalent of a highly-gifted college student in terms of intelligence with an IQ that approaches (but doesn't necessarily reach) genius-level. Bruce Banner is considered a gifted scientist and Tony Stark is a technical genius with an IQ in the low-to-mid genius range. Reed Richards and Dr. Doom, on the other hand, are considered off-the-charts in IQ. Like real-life geniuses, much of their thought process is just too advanced for us regular folk to comprehend, much less understand. Campy? Yes, but it allows Stan Lee to say "Reed Richards invented the FantistiCar because...well, because he just DID, OK?"

As for Johnny Storm showing off, remember that Reed Richards AND Sue both admonished him for his actions, just as Professor Xavier would have done to Iceman.

Getting back to Iron Man for a moment, one thing I will admit I DO like about the movies is that - even though the Iron Man armor is extremely advanced and impervious to most damage - it is NOT indestructable. By the time Obadiah (in the first movie) and Whiplash (in the second) had finished their attacks, BOTH suits were pretty-much ready for the scrap-heap.

Another important factor to keep in mind...Stan Lee does not actually "own" the Spiderman and X-Men series. Those franchises actually belong to Sony and Fox Entertainment. Stan also did not have production rights to those movies. He did have come collaborative input and the producers and directors did try to remain "true" to different elements of the comics, but the Stan was an advisor only on the first generation of Marvel movies that were produced. Now he OWNS the rights to Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk (the newer one) and all FUTURE Marvel films, including Thor, Captain America and (next year) The Avengers. You seem to agree the newer movies are better overall. Maybe that is because Stan Lee and his team have a more direct hand in creating those movies and their storylines. Then again, maybe not.

All I know is that I will be going to see all three of those movies as well as The Green Lantern. If you really want to talk about campy storylines and stretching the limits of belief, DC is the Universe you need to discuss.

[Hindsight]

Overall, I really appreciate the quality of superhero sci-fi films we have seen in the last 10 years. There have been lots which have be anywhere from good to excellent. And I have no doubt will be more great ones in the future.

...but please, let that 3D crap die off...

[Cerek]

Originally Posted by Hindsight Overall, I really appreciate the quality of superhero sci-fi films we have seen in the last 10 years. There have been lots which have be anywhere from good to excellent. And I have no doubt will be more great ones in the future. ...but please, let that 3D crap die off...

Amen. I agree completely.

[Kakero]

Originally Posted by SpiritWarrior While I was looking forward to Captain America most of all, I am pleasantly surprised by the Thor trailer. Call me crazy but it actually looks better than Cap right now (although I note the Thor trailer is much longer since release is closer, so we don't get to see much of Cappy). But yeah, optimistic about both now. So glad they based Cap in his respectful timeframe rather than updating him for the present-day. Woulda been a mess. What say ye?

I'm going to be a spoilsport and spoil the movie for everybody. In the end of the movie, the good guys win.

There, no need to watch the movie already. I already tell you all the ending.

I'm also going to tell you all the ending of every superhero movies in the future. The good guys always win.

Happy? No? Don't like the spoiler? Well blow me down then. If there are any superhero movie where the superhero is defeated and the bad guys won at the end. Call me.

[SpiritWarrior]

Originally Posted by Kakero I'm going to be a spoilsport and spoil the movie for everybody. In the end of the movie, the good guys win. There, no need to watch the movie already. I already tell you all the ending. I'm also going to tell you all the ending of every superhero movies in the future. The good guys always win. Happy? No? Don't like the spoiler? Well blow me down then. If there are any superhero movie where the superhero is defeated and the bad guys won at the end. Call me.

Same with most movies. It's not if they win but how. For that matter, most computer games end with the good guy (i.e. you) winning. If they don't, it's because you have yet to reach the ending.