Lycaon Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 if i had to put it on a scale of modern comic flicks, its above Wolvy Origins (STILL FLAWLESS THOUGH) and below Ang Lee's Hulk which was crappy but at least gave me like 10 minutes of him fighting tanks in the desert (what i came to see) which is longer than i got of Hal doing things that were cool. what the movie did accomplish, however, was make me kinda wanna play the game and get an easy achievement for punching Parallax into the sun. Madness! You trollin'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorelei Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 why can't comic books remain on paper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Hakujin Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Jax has been preaching the awesomeness of the WW animated film for a while now. I DL'd it a while back on his say-so, but haven't had the chance to watch it. I need to make it a priority, especially w/ how much I'm digging her comic book reboot in the DCnU. You should definitely be reading that, Jax. Deadpool wasn't a great Hal. a lot of Hammond's delivery was not good. I wasn't made to care about most people on screen, and events seemed to happen and just rush along as if i wasn't supposed to. literally the best moments for me were during Kilwog's training, and that was way too brief - he and Sinestro were absolute highlights. i too dont think shit has to be super-faithful, but emo "im taking my ball & going home" Hal was really off for me, though newt had a harder time with the constant "you must be a man without FEAR" thing rather than just pushing past it like he did. Agreed on all accounts and especially the emboldened portion. if i had to put it on a scale of modern comic flicks, its above Wolvy Origins (STILL FLAWLESS THOUGH) and below Ang Lee's Hulk . . . . . .like Daredevil, my boy GL deserved way better. I honestly think if done right, this couldve been DC's # 2 property, currently i dont even know how it stacks up to Superman. I'd have to put some more thought into it on where I'd rank it in the current pantheon of superhero films, but off the top of my head I'd say I'd agree w/ GL's placement below Ang Lee's HULK and above Wolverine:Origins. Not sure where I'd put Singer's Superman Returns though. That film had some great moments, but it also was lacking in many ways. I think I'd rank it just ever so slightly above GL--by like a decimal point or two. But DD got what he deserved, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 See, the thing about Superman Returns in regards to the other films being mentioned here is that it wasn't a bad movie, it was just a really fucking boring movie. He wasn't fighting mutated chihuahas or delivering groan inducing campy one liners. I think it ranks hogher than all of the above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Hakujin Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 See, the thing about Superman Returns in regards to the other films being mentioned here is that it wasn't a bad movie, it was just a really fucking boring movie. He wasn't fighting mutated chihuahas or delivering groan inducing campy one liners. I think it ranks hogher than all of the above. How does it being boring not make it "bad"--or at least contribute to making it "bad"? Also bad, which I'll tag as spoilers since this isn't a Superman Returns thread . . . Kate Bosworth as Lois? Bad. Supes on a gurney and in a hospital? Bad. Making Supes an absentee father? Bad. Baby Supes' not destroying Lois womb? So bad Brodie's brain matter is likely still staining a wall in a Redbank, NJ theater somewhere from when his head exploded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Yeah...okay. I have absolutely no logical argument to any of that, and being boring does certainly contribute to badness. I'm sorry, but as much as it pains me I have to take fanboy rage issues out of the equation when rating it as a film. Mashing a fist against a keyboard while screaming about how something is terrible because of the logical effects of yellow solar rays on Kryptonian physiology just sounds crazy to normal people. Memory erasing bullets did not make Wolverine bad. Every square inch of that piece of shit made it bad. Superman is just on a different level of bad than the rest of these. It had some excellent acting, it had some well written parts, some really well directed and cool sequences (for like 90 seconds). It's not terribly made and insultingly stupid like the others. It's not like I'm in love with the film or somethin'. I doubt I'll watch it a second time, I just don't think it deserves to be in the same league as man-Thing or Hasselhoff's Nick Fury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 But DD got what he deserved, i ain't even mad. Lucas fans fashion themselves a worse hell than i can ever create. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Hakujin Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 It's not like I'm in love with the film or somethin'. I doubt I'll watch it a second time, I just don't think it deserves to be in the same league as man-Thing or Hasselhoff's Nick Fury. Yeah, true, but you were ranking it above films like GL, DD, & HULK. Despite the character's A-List status, Superman Returns the film was not breathin' that rarefied air reserved for the character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 I haven't seen DD or GL, but I rank it above Wolverine and Ang Lee Hulk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keth Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 Memory erasing bullets did not make Wolverine bad. Every square inch of that piece of shit made it bad. Except Sabretooth. Anytime I see this movie get shit on I'll accept all of it, except Sabretooth. continue with relevant discussion :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 strong +1 for axels there; especailly following Tyler Mane, Sabretooth (and for me, the few minutes of Deadpool in character earlier on) were the diamonds in the rough. kinda with Haku on Supes returns, but i see the distinction - with GL, it wasnt an abomination where seemingly everything went wrong like Origins, it was closer to something kinda hollow/done by numbers that could've been great with a different director/cast. in my mind, it's like a weird parallel to Iron Man - think about what went down in part 1, and imagine that with say Ratner directing and someone-not-Downey jr as Stark, that's how GL made me feel. yeah, the script/plot certainly had problems, but a more charming Hal would've gone a long way for me. again, Thor easily could've been that movie. Supes Returns, however, had a lot of things right - i dont really disagree with any of the casting (i guess haku's right about Louis, but i forgot she was there, haha!), but the plot points he focused on were the big dumps of the film. that, and how do you have such a great villain and kinda waste it like that? i dont think it's bottom-tier, but yeah, boring is a great word for it. it's not the same as Daredevil where so many pieces were off i woudlnt even know how to salvage it - that said, Logans, do check out the director's cut if inclined sometime, it's...there's worse comic films, you know? yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newtype Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 It felt like I was watching a bad made for TV movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Nzebra - I'll do that at some point. Director's cut helps a lot then? Newt - You're talking about GL? Damn, that's some shit. As it is something I get a kick out of doing sometimes, i looked it up on Metacritic. 39 Wowey zowey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newtype Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Pacing issues The CG was rough looking from start to finish Poor editing Everybody was out of character The Green Lanterns had maybe a total of 5-7 minutes of screen time Other shit that made you say WTF was the point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 The Green Lanterns had maybe a total of 5-7 minutes of screen time wut. They were like half the damn trailer! I figured at the very least it would have a lot of Corp action. Thats just fucked. I'll put this on the list of movies I have no intention of seeing, unless the kid really wants to or something (he's expressed no interest, but he's getting into the relaunch Justice League, so someday soon he may need to be taught that the world isn't fair). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Hakujin Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Damn, Newt. GL wasn't a great film, but I don't think it was as bad as a TV movie. You're spot on in that the Corps got way too little screen time. I daresay it was more than 7 minutes though. Not much, like 15-25 min tops. But still too much Hector Hammond/Blake Lively BS and not enough GL action. strong +1 for axels there; especailly following Tyler Mane, Sabretooth (and for me, the few minutes of Deadpool in character earlier on) were the diamonds in the rough. kinda with Haku on Supes returns, but i see the distinction - with GL, it wasnt an abomination where seemingly everything went wrong like Origins, it was closer to something kinda hollow/done by numbers that could've been great with a different director/cast. in my mind, it's like a weird parallel to Iron Man - think about what went down in part 1, and imagine that with say Ratner directing and someone-not-Downey jr as Stark, that's how GL made me feel. yeah, the script/plot certainly had problems, but a more charming Hal would've gone a long way for me. again, Thor easily could've been that movie. Supes Returns, however, had a lot of things right - i dont really disagree with any of the casting (i guess haku's right about Louis, but i forgot she was there, haha!), but the plot points he focused on were the big dumps of the film. that, and how do you have such a great villain and kinda waste it like that? i dont think it's bottom-tier, but yeah, boring is a great word for it. it's not the same as Daredevil where so many pieces were off i woudlnt even know how to salvage it - that said, Logans, do check out the director's cut if inclined sometime, it's...there's worse comic films, you know? yeah. Yeah, Hal was just mis-cast. I don't drink your haterade for DD. Then again, I don't have the affinity for the characters you do. Garner was good as Elektra (we won't mention her solo effort though) and I dug Farrell's Bullseye. M.C. Duncan as kingpin was a letdown though. And so right about wasting Kevin Spacey. He deserved a better script. So did Supes. Let's hope Zack Snyder can deliver. nd maybe Spacey will show up as Luthor again. It could happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keth Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 It should happen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 I don't drink your haterade for DD. Then again, I don't have the affinity for the characters you do. Garner was good as Elektra (we won't mention her solo effort though) and I dug Farrell's Bullseye. M.C. Duncan as kingpin was a letdown though. i cant argue with much here; garner was just sorta there, nothing memorable but not a problem. i thought Farrell took the irish thing up a notch but he was a highlight, it was mostly Duncan that felt off. Even Affleck wasn't the worst, but he was a much better Murdoch than DD - the scenes with him & Foggy's exchanges were some of the best the film had to offer. and yeah, director's cut - it doesnt take away from some of the awful scenes the film brings (likely moreso to me as a fan) but it adds more stuff than Urich and others that flesh things out, better movie overall. its just, i keep saying it: cult figures like he, Punisher etc could have really good films done for a whole lot less if they'd stop pushing them like they're spidey/x-men/big mainstream releases that you're gonna merchandise off of. either character done like Blade 1 or the Crow, for instance, would be ten times a better film than we've seen. GL...it's funny, i guess besides just being cosmic, you have this whole cast of otherwordly stuff that you shouldn't give a shit about (and in GL, largely dont), but Thor got around all of that. i think it couldve learned a lot from that flick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 nd maybe Spacey will show up as Luthor again. It could happen. Can we have one goddamned Superman movie without Lex Luthor in it? It would be like if Joker was in every Batman movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jables Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Superman's second biggest enemy is Andrew Dice-Clay though. The guy's rogues gallery is lamer than Stephen Hawking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 heh. i recall jumbie saying kevin smith's script had Braniac? all the other guys i can think of - Bizzarro, Doomsday etc - they're fun but i dont know if they can carry an entire flick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Man: Metallo, Darkseid (he may not have started out as one, but he's a superman villain now), even Mongul would make great antagonists. And I'm glad to see Zod getting a shot. There's more than just Lex, all I'm saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jables Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 I forgot about Mongul, but a 'What to get the man who has everything' story would have to wait for a sequel or more ideal a 3rd along. Hell, the last Superman movie was so stupidly meta they could even get away with doing the exile story(because it was amazing. I gotta reread it) that introduced Mongul(again, it requires viewers to act on prior knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Oh how quickly they forget about Mister Mxyzptlk. Now there's a movie (played by Gilbert Gottfried, natch). My only exposure to Mongul is in that Moore story JZA mentioned. Is he a regular player? I can see Darkseid working to pretty epic effect. Brainiac too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Mongul was a major player until an inter-company crossover in 90s where Nekron (essentially DC's Satan) offered every major DC villain whatever they wanted for their soul. Mongul's reply was "essentially" fuck you, so Nekron killed his ass. His son is currently fucking around space with 7 or 8 yellow lantern rings. He's pretty much the Hong Kong knockoff of Thanos who himself is a ripoff of Darkseid. I could even see Mxyptlk working if they used him like they did just after the Crisis on Infinite Earths where he was legitimately terrifying despite looking ridiculous. They'd just have to make him a bit less ridiculous looking and less jokey. Brainiac, Darkseid, Metallo, and Zod are all no-brainers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.