good: batman (1989), batman returns, batman: mask of the phantasm, hulk, the incredibles

okay: spider-man, spider-man 2, x-men, x2: x-men united, x-men: the last stand, batman (1966), dick tracy, darkman, superman ii

mediocre: daredevil (theatrical and director's cut), batman begins, unbreakable (aka unbearable), blade, blade ii, v for vendetta, constantine, the crow, swamp thing, the mask, hellboy, superman, superman returns

bad: captain america, the punisher (1989), the punisher (2004), fantastic four (1994), fantastic four (2005), catwoman, elektra, superman iii, superman iv, blade: trinity, the league of extraordinary gentlemen, batman forever, batman & robin, teenage mutant ninja turtles series, the rest of the crow series, the rest of the darkman series, steel (shaquille o'neal as superman!), son of the mask



other comic-book adaptations:
good: road to perdition

okay: ghost world

mediocre: from hell

bad: sin city

Good - Superman, Superman 2, Spider-Man 2, X-Men 2, Batman (Burton), Batman (1966), the Dr. Strange TV movie, The Trial of the Incredible Hulk

Bad- Batman Begins, Batman and Robin, Punisher (the 1st one), Sin City

Ugly- X-Men 3, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Steel, Captain America, Batman Forever, Superman 4

Ugliest - Daredevil (a low water mark not just for super-hero films, but for modern culture)



I didn't count animated movies, of which there are several good ones, esp. some of the Batman ones.

I forgot to include the Bat-films. I'm surprised people are saying Begins was bad - I thought it was universally loved. Begins (Very good), Batman (very good), Batman Returns (Good), Batman Forever (bad), Batman & Robin (among the worst movies ever made). Oh, and Sin City was fantastic, but I know from another thread the objection by some to anything violent, so I won't get into that here. (see the Saw III thread) As for Daredevil, and I think Constantine as well, I think people's enjoyment seems to have a lot to do with their familiarity with the character, and I knew nothing about either one, so I enjoyed the movies. Many people who love the comics those movies are based on, hated the movies, I think primarily because of the casting of Affleck and Reeves.

"batman begins" is an overly-literal movie that leaves nothing to the imagination. therefore, it is not a particularly inspiring creation--that is, it doesn't help the viewer envision possibilities since it tells the viewer every mundane detail about batman's life. the final third was overblown and clumsily staged (especially the lame fighting on the elevated subway). i also hated the lousy editing, which reduced the impact of the cinematography.

"sin city" is bad not because it's very violent but because it's a hodge-podge smush of inaneness. the one good thing in it was mickey rourke. everyone else either slept-walked through it or didn't know how to act in the first place (see jessica alba, devon aoki, rosario dawson, nick stahl, etc.).

I certainly wouldn't say the fighting was poorly staged in the least in Begins. Plus, I expect different things from the first movie in a comic series (and this is the 1st movie), compared to the sequels. The first ones always need to give you the backstory, which generally slows down the pacing, but I think Nolan did it better than even Burton. Batman is the one superhero that I am very familiar with from the comics, and I think this was the first time the character's origin was handled well, and really, it was handled in some form in nearly every movie.

interplanetaryspy:

i did read your post, and on the basis of one movie using jack napier as the waynes' killer and the other movie using joe chill+the league of shadows as the waynes' killers alone, "batman begins" CAN NOT be a prequel in any way, shape, or form to tim burton's "batman". moreover, nolan, goyer, and warner bros. executives have said that "batman begins" is not related to burton's "batman". this is not like "superman returns", which has been explicitly stated as a sequel to "superman ii".

eddie

Eddie,

Did you actually read my post? I said that Begins was not meant to tread too much on the original franchise, and COULD, apart from some minor continuity problems, work as a prequel. I also said that the sequel WILL "re-make the Batman universe", with its own continuity. I'm not really insisting that Begins was a prequel at all, but that one could, if they forgive some continuity problems, consider it a prequel. I don't think John was really insisting anything, either.

onijay:

just out of curiosity, have you seen all of ang lee's movies? try watching these in the following order:

1) pushing hands
2) the wedding banquet
3) eat drink man woman
4) the ice storm
5) ride with the devil
6) crouching tiger, hidden dragon
7) hulk

(i'm leaving out "sense and sensibility" because that was a hired-gun project and not a self-initiated project. the same can be said about "brokeback mountain", actually.)

ang lee had a troubled relationship with his father due to various cultural factors. his dad did not want him to make movies as moviemakers were viewed as second-class citizens in chinese society up until at least the mid-1980s. lee's movies are mostly about responses to patriarchal authority (usually, the patriarchs have heavily negative or undesirable influences on their children). this culminated in "hulk", with ang lee literally playing the hulk himself (during post-production, ang lee acted out the hulk's movements with computer motion-capture photography). "hulk" was ang lee's way of duking it out with his own dad without actually beating up his dad in real life (yes, making movies as psychotherapy). the movie also features two pairs of bad fathers and troubled kids (the banners and the rosses). this is the best way to approach understanding why ang lee made the movie that he did.

eddie

john and interplanetaryspy:

let me put it this way--when nolan's sequel to "batman begins" arrives in theatres, you'll see that nolan's "batman" narrative continuum has nothing to do with burton's "batman" continuum. if you still insist that "batman begins" is a prequel to burton and schumacher's movies, then i'll have no choice but to write you off as hardheads.

eddie

I was fairly confident I was going to enjoy the Hulk, and seeing as how I bought it as a blind buy for 49 cents (a malfunction of the cash register I didn't notice till after I got home, although I was curious as to how I could get three new movies for $18, anyway) I figured there was no way I would be disppointed. I popped the movie in and watched, enjoying the neat comic book panels slidding by every now and then. And then I waited, and waited, and waited, and nothing happened. To say nothing happened is overexagerrated hyperbole (that phrase in and of itself was hyperbole, apologies), but in essence I waited to be entertained. Instead it was a bunch of stuff I didn't care about pertaining to some guy I had no clue about. Needless to say that after a whopping one hour of this nothingness I shut it off, and didn't return to it for seven whole months. This time I sat through the whole thing, and needless to say I wanted my 49 cents back. The action scenes were decent enough, but it was far too little way too late. Nick Nolte was just annoying and out of place, and I found nothing enjoyable. The comic panel technique felt underemployed so that it came out as feeling more like a gimmique than an actual technique. Not to say I would want an entire movie in that format, but there wasn't enough of it, and when there was, it felt kinda silly (that man who shot the rocket launcher at the Hulk only to have it rebound back at him and blow him out of the panel in the strange white warp thing was stranger than anything on Austin Powers when they used those time machines).

As for Begins, the script is atrocious, I couldn't help but feel what a hack job it was. The third time I watched the movie it was actually grating on my nerves to listen to the dialogue and think about the mechanics of the plot as written, the editing and cinematography for most fights was too fast paced and too tight, just move out three feet and I probably would have enjoyed it. But I still had tonnes of fun and enjoyed revisiting the Batman world that I hadn't truly experienced since I saw Batman as a young child (warped stuff to see I realise, but I loved every moment of the crazy stuff).

Best superhero movie for me is a tough one though becuase there's so many good ones. In terms of sheer novelty it would have to be Batman, but most well-rounded and innovative would be Spiderman 2 or Superman (even though I have no real interest in the man of steel, never really enjoying the DC characters, with the exception of Batman).