or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › Re-assessing the Comic Book Movies
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Re-assessing the Comic Book Movies - Page 4

post #46 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDroog View Post

Here's a question ... what's the worst superhero movie of all time?

One that few if any people have ever seen: The Fantastic Four

No, not the one with Jessica Alba tramping around.

Marvel made a total B-movie in 1994. No name actors, laughable special effects (I think Mr. Fantastic's stand in is a pile of Play-Doh). It's gets the complete Ed Wood treatment.

Very difficult to find - there are only bootleg copes available. But one of the best worst movies you will ever see.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109770/
post #47 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDroog View Post

Here's a question ... what's the worst superhero movie of all time? Here are a few contenders ...

Spiderman 3
Superman Returns
Xmen 3
Spawn
The Punisher (Dolph Lundren)
The Punisher (Tom Jane)
Batman & Robin
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johdus Fanfoozal View Post


One that few if any people have ever seen: The Fantastic Four

No, not the one with Jessica Alba tramping around.

Marvel made a total B-movie in 1994. No name actors, laughable special effects (I think Mr. Fantastic's stand in is a pile of Play-Doh). It's gets the complete Ed Wood treatment.

Very difficult to find - there are only bootleg copes available. But one of the best worst movies you will ever see.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109770/

I never knew that existed up till now, but surely this must be in the running...

500
post #48 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by epb View Post


That's one perspective. Mine is that Moore has/had interesting ideas, but they're typically based on someone else's work/works: League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Miracleman, The Watchmen, even V for Vendetta was Zorro moved to Thatcher's England (the graphic novel, I mean). And his work is rendered formulaic by his neuroses (name something Moore's written that doesn't include a rape scene - you may succeed, but it's more difficult than it ought to be).

And Zorro is Robin Hood in 19th century Mexico.

You can go on and on. I think you're unfairly setting the bar a little too high here. Most stories we read and watch have thematic elements taken from other stories so I don't think that's a fair critique. It's been this way since man first started telling stories. It's what storytellers do with the characters within the world they create that matters. When you look at what the characters actually do, the only real thing V and Zorro have in common is that they're both vigilantes and they both wear hats; that's about it. In fact you could argue that Zorro has more in common with Batman than V.

You're also painting in some pretty broad, sweeping strokes by saying that an author's entire body of work is rendered formulaic by personal neuroses. How does a neurosis even affect things like theme and plot structure, two elements that Moore proved he has an exceptional command of? Not once when I've gone back to read stories like Watchmen over the years have I thought that, "Ya know, the plot structure, character development, symbolism, and themes employed here really seem to stem from Moore's fascination with rape."

I'm sorry but that's ridiculous. Maybe you need to clarify a little bit more.
post #49 of 67

Italian Spiderman.

 

 

 

lefty

post #50 of 67
I will often turn a blind eye to B-movie adaptations of comic book movies -- the cheap effects and so-bad-it's-good factor make them good for something. It's the A-budget movies that completely don't "get it" that really irk me. That's why Spiderman 3 is so awful. Why is Peter Parker dancing in a bar? Why is one of the coolest villains in comicdom (Venom) given 20 minutes of screen time? Why does he looks so fake? Superman Returns was about an effeminate pretty boy deadbeat dad. Watchmen had great visuals, but they got the entire theme of the movie wrong -- the comic is about normal people trying to be heroes, not superheroes who can actually punch through walls. These are the real stinkers.
post #51 of 67
what was wrong with the villain in Ang Lee's hulk? I'm not arguing, I just don't remember.
post #52 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanathonHuff View Post

what was wrong with the villain in Ang Lee's hulk? I'm not arguing, I just don't remember.

500
post #53 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDroog View Post

I will often turn a blind eye to B-movie adaptations of comic book movies -- the cheap effects and so-bad-it's-good factor make them good for something. It's the A-budget movies that completely don't "get it" that really irk me. That's why Spiderman 3 is so awful. Why is Peter Parker dancing in a bar? Why is one of the coolest villains in comicdom (Venom) given 20 minutes of screen time? Why does he looks so fake? Superman Returns was about an effeminate pretty boy deadbeat dad. Watchmen had great visuals, but they got the entire theme of the movie wrong -- the comic is about normal people trying to be heroes, not superheroes who can actually punch through walls. These are the real stinkers.

Once the budget is over a couple of million dollars, it's effectively movie-making by committee, and the committee is mostly accountants, merchandisers and lawyers. This is true of everything coming out of Hollywood these days, but it's especially true of comic book movies.
post #54 of 67
oh, right. I actually really liked Ang Lee's direction during the entire movie... I thought the action sequences had a certain mystifying nature of them that reminded me of action sequences of old.

Michael Bay, take notes. You piece of shit.
post #55 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by acidboy View Post

I never knew that existed up till now...

500

500

500
post #56 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by burningbright View Post


Marvel made a total B-movie in 1994. No name actors, laughable special effects (I think Mr. Fantastic's stand in is a pile of Play-Doh). It's gets the complete Ed Wood treatment.

Very difficult to find - there are only bootleg copes available. But one of the best worst movies you will ever see.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109770/

I never saw this but remember that it happened. Scuttlebutt at the time is that Marvel had to make it to preserve the film rights until a decent project could be done.
post #57 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by epb View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by burningbright View Post


Marvel made a total B-movie in 1994. No name actors, laughable special effects (I think Mr. Fantastic's stand in is a pile of Play-Doh). It's gets the complete Ed Wood treatment.

Very difficult to find - there are only bootleg copes available. But one of the best worst movies you will ever see.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109770/

I never saw this but remember that it happened. Scuttlebutt at the time is that Marvel had to make it to preserve the film rights until a decent project could be done.

The Wiki page lays this out pretty clearly - it was done solely to preserve the rights to the property, and the production company eventually produced the FF we all know and love. They didn't even tell the actors that it was a bullshit project that was never going to be released!
post #58 of 67
^There are some great Youtube clips of this.
post #59 of 67
That Human Torch gives new meaning to the term "flaming"

I remember the old Flash tv show (I know, not a movie). Even as a kid, I was totally confused.gifuhoh.gif at it.
post #60 of 67
^ Often, I like to imagine that I hallucinated that FF film, but I understand that it was more or less in the spirit of the books
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Entertainment and Culture
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › Re-assessing the Comic Book Movies