Comic Book Movies

Holly you know im not big on comic book films so I think Hellboy was kind of lame. I do agree Selma Blair is a sexy girl. If I had to pick one comic book film I would go with Burtons Batman (1989). Jack was just to classical as the Joker.

Everything this guy plays is pure gold. So as for Dex this IMO is the best casting for a comic book character. Everyone I know loves the Ledger Joker so I may be alone on this but this is just my opinion.

I do agree with you Plainview but batman was not one of the choices silly, I chose hellboy out of the poll! But you are right Burton's batman is great

If it was about Superhero films, I would have gone with Unbreakable as well..
I think it's the best superhero film that isn't from a comicbook, second best would be Darkman.

But I think Ludi wants this thread to be about comic adaptations, but seriously Lud, why did you pick these movies?

Holly you know im not big on comic book films so I think Hellboy was kind of lame. I do agree Selma Blair is a sexy girl. If I had to pick one comic book film I would go with Burtons Batman (1989). Jack was just to classical as the Joker.

Everything this guy plays is pure gold. So as for Dex this IMO is the best casting for a comic book character. Everyone I know loves the Ledger Joker so I may be alone on this but this is just my opinion.

So as for Dex this IMO is the best casting for a comic book character. Everyone I know loves the Ledger Joker so I may be alone on this but this is just my opinion.

But this is so NOT a great comic film in so many ways. Nolan put these pieces of junk to shame. Burton is NOT a great director. His art direction is pretty damn good tho, he should stick to that. Jack's Joker was pretty terrible, too.

I think the Dark Knight sucked a@# so its all a matter of opinion. I didn't mind Batman Begins but then again I have never really read or been into comic books ever, so who am I to compare any of the films to the books. All that I am saying is that Burtons Batman was my favorite.

I saw this when it came out and liked it, but didn't really remember why. I basically agree with those who think this is fair to middling as an Ang Lee Melodrama, though I'm leaning towards fair. This might be his most purely visual film however, with a constant barrage of exciting and novel transitions and uses of split-screen and collage. It borrows heavily from some of DePalma's thrillers such as Dressed to Kill but goes even further with a seemingly endless series of ways to combine images. Many of these -- such as the bit where an exploding oxygen canister pingpongs between several "panels" -- are pretty sophisticated, while others (Jellyfish in the desert?) are quite lyrical and mysterious; it requires a bit of effort but I never found it tiresome. Compare it to the split-screen of Doctor Octopus's tentacles in SpiderMan 2.

It also tends to go for unusual camera placement with interesting uses of space to really bring home the unusualness of Hulk as he interacts with his environment. Like a far-away shot of him running along the side of a giant sand-dune while sliding down it.

If I have a complaint I think there are a couple of awkward set-ups (like the final confrontation between father and son) and the female love interest was a bit of a miss, in spite of the parallel father-daughter relationship to add a counterweight to the Banner family drama. Connely also just seemed not to bring much other than a pretty face to her character leaving Nick Nolte to pretty much steal the show much of the time, as he's clearly an actor able to deploy his entire body and soul, even in a somewhat camp role like this. The other big "full-body actor" in this is Ang Lee who donned the motion-capture suit to act out the big green monster of the movie. Maybe that is also why he was able to get the Hulk's interactions with the environment to be so physically seamless.

I've heard a couple people complain that they found the Freudian "subconscious mumbo-jumbo" of the film to be pretentious and overblown, and extra hard to take with the straight-face that the movie seems to demand. I guess I'm neutral on this, I didn't find it to be a particular strength or weakness, not enough to strongly influence my rating in either direction. To me the story almost seemed like a half-apology/half-celebration for the oddness of the form. Nick Nolte's mad scientist character practically says as much in his confession about what motivated him to experiment on his own flesh and blood.

I'd probably rate it just above average for the story, but I truly feel this is a must-see for anyone who is interested in the cinematic form. That it's a big pile of brightly-colored pop-fun didn't hurt it any. With me, at least.