COMIC BOOK MOVIES

Tools    





You can't make a rainbow without a little rain.
I still haven't seen Age of Ultron (I don't go to the theater, so I have to wait).

Without spoilers, do you think it ranks higher than Avengers 1?

As a comic guy I have issues with almost all comic-based movies since I feel loyalty to the source material, but for what it was, I liked the Avengers movie. (I would've liked to see Cap in a less-dorky looking costume and Hawkeye in SOME sort of costume.)

I haven't seen Avengers: Age of Ultron yet, but several people here have reviewed it.

http://www.movieforums.com/reviews/s...gher/99861/any



I'm not old, you're just 12.
I still haven't seen Age of Ultron (I don't go to the theater, so I have to wait).

Without spoilers, do you think it ranks higher than Avengers 1?

As a comic guy I have issues with almost all comic-based movies since I feel loyalty to the source material, but for what it was, I liked the Avengers movie. (I would've liked to see Cap in a less-dorky looking costume and Hawkeye in SOME sort of costume.)
I liked Age of Ultron, in some ways the action scenes are more memorable, even if the first movie had more of a plot. Totally worth seeing.
__________________
"You, me, everyone...we are all made of star stuff." - Neil Degrasse Tyson

https://shawnsmovienight.blogspot.com/



If I may indulge in one spoiler question...
Based on previews I've seen, it seems like, in the movie, Ultron is the creation of Tony Stark and NOT of Henry Pym? Is this correct?

I understand they're making an Ant Man movie in which Pym will play a part, but in Avengers lore Ultron is so tied to Hank Pym that it's not even funny. (Ultron, either directly or indirectly, led to all of Pym's mental & emotional problems, his schizophrenia, his multiple personalities, etc. Ultron is essentially Pym's offspring & is thus the source of almost every major event that shaped the troubled character of Pym.)

So if they say Ultron was created by anyone other than Hank Pym and was not created by Pym, it's like saying "the creature" was not created by Dr. Victor Frankenstein, but instead was created by Professor Abraham Van Helsing.



I just watched Howard the Duck for the first time.
I'm baffled as to why this was made.
But worse, I remember working with a guy back in the 90's who said that this was one of his favorite movies ever. I understand that some things become cult films, but this seemed lacking in every area that might give it even a cult following.



I just watched Howard the Duck for the first time.
I'm baffled as to why this was made.
But worse, I remember working with a guy back in the 90's who said that this was one of his favorite movies ever. I understand that some things become cult films, but this seemed lacking in every area that might give it even a cult following.
Do you think it came out in the wrong time and should had waited 2 decades to be made and be accepted? i mean some comic book movies in the 80s and 90s should had just waited for the new millenium where our technology and stuff have improved and execute. I mean Judge Dredd, Captain America 1990 and all that should had waited.

Im sure it has a cult following among the furry fandom if you know what they are? i am one myself. And now with Guardians of the Galaxy with Howard's cameo, i'm sure nowadays with the MCU and Ted movies, Howard can be accepted.



Do you think it came out in the wrong time and should had waited 2 decades to be made and be accepted? i mean some comic book movies in the 80s and 90s should had just waited for the new millenium where our technology and stuff have improved and execute. I mean Judge Dredd, Captain America 1990 and all that should had waited.

Im sure it has a cult following among the furry fandom if you know what they are? i am one myself. And now with Guardians of the Galaxy with Howard's cameo, i'm sure nowadays with the MCU and Ted movies, Howard can be accepted.
I know what you're saying, Korben. With movies, especially comic movies, timing is everything.

But with Howard I was trying to watch it both from a 1986 perspective and a modern one (and a "cult" perspective as well). It just didn't seem to resonate for me on any level. It seemed like it tried to be funny (but wasn't), it tried to be quirky, it tried to appeal to kids while it tried to inject adult humor, but just didn't seem to succeed on any levels - not even the "so bad, it's good" level. Every joke was just so forced, predictable and cliched - now some movies can get away with that if they're self-deprecating and making fun of their own cliched humor - that usually lends toward cult status. But this movie didn't seem like it was making fun of itself or the genre, but legitimately trying to be funny. Granted, I never read the comic book (don't know if that would help or hurt or in this case).

I have an idea what "furry fandom" is, but would love to hear an elaboration (I take it, it's not the same as those people who dress up in animal costumes?)

And, was Howard in Guardians? I saw the movie but don't remember a cameo (unless it was in a deleted scene or hidden "Easter Egg" or something).





No Debate.
__________________
''Haters are my favourite. I've built an empire with the bricks they've thrown at me... Keep On Hating''
- CM Punk
http://threemanbooth.files.wordpress...unkshrug02.gif



He was in the end credits scene.

Thanks!

Heh! I thought I watched past the end credits (since Marvel movies always seem to stick a scene at the end these days), but don't remember seeing this.

This short bit seems a little more along the lines of what I always imagined Howard to be like. And that was the problem with his own movie - he was just too average. There was nothing about his character or personality to make him stand out. Now if they'd made him a real trash-talker, or super pessimistic, or given him a political angle, or something, it would've made for a more interesting film.

But his very average personality in the film made him seem like just another character who might show up on an episode of the Love Boat and his jokes were on par with those of "Jeff" (the guy who teamed up with Pink Lady in a late 70's, Sid & Marty Kroft variety show venture)!



Like Sam Raimi`s Spider Man and Iron Man. The former is truly dynamic, Toby Maquire is great even not as Spidey himself but as a loser schoolboy, which then turns into a superhero. I mean it`s important to carefully preserve the character of not only a superhero but also of the man whom people see most of the time when they do not know who`s hiding under the mask.



As for Iron Man, I just love cool soundtrack, steel, fire and Downy Jr`s beard



Hey, it`s strange but I can watch Raimi`s Spider Man over and over again! Damn the film series is cool. Oh, how could I forget about Alfred Molina! Isn`t he a great villain?



Hey, it`s strange but I can watch Raimi`s Spider Man over and over again! Damn the film series is cool. Oh, how could I forget about Alfred Molina! Isn`t he a great villain?
True enough (except for Spider-Man III, of course). I rate the first two original Spidey films in the top 10 of all superhero comic book film adaptations.

I didn't care for either of the reboot films when compared to the Raimi films. I can hardly remember them even though I saw them not too long ago, yet I remember Raimi's Spidey I & II vividly.

But I still have to chuckle at Sally Field as Aunt May (to me, Sally Field is still Gidget!)




Just viewed Big Hero 6.
I wouldn't mention it here, but then I'd forgotten it was originally a Marvel Comic (and I was driven to my Marvel Encyclopedia to confirm).

Enjoyed catching some obscure Marvel Villains in the background (of Fred's room)... Orca & Black Talon, and of course Stan Lee's (animated) appearance in the film.
Supposedly, this was the first joint Disney / Marvel / Pixar film.

(When are they gonna cut to the chase and just have Warner Brothers & Disney team up to give us the Justice League vs the Avengers? I'm sure that will take far longer than it took DC and Marvel to give us the comic.)



Interesting article:

http://grantland.com/hollywood-prosp...ok-franchises/

When, in the space of three months, all three movies in a genre arrive with very public news that they are not the movies they could have been, something has gone wrong. There is, I think, an increasing sense that every mark the comic-book genre is forced to hit — origin stories, Easter eggs, big-picture continuity, action beats, fan service, world-stakes battles, potential sequels, post-credit sequences — is obstructing them from being movies. It certainly seems to be keeping their makers (“architects” feels like a more accurate term than “creators”) from any sense of joy — directorial joy, cinematic joy, authorial joy, or even the obsessional joy that allowed Peter Jackson to commit himself to living in Middle-earth for 15 years or that has sent James Cameron off to whatever solar system in which he is currently purporting to make Avatar sequels. These comic-book movies are, first and foremost, assignments. Directors and writers try to get through them with their souls and spirits intact. They pat themselves down afterward, the way you do when you get off a roller coaster, to see if they’re still all there. Some end up less all there than others.
Sometime between the openings of Ant-Man and Fantastic Four, 20th Century Fox released the red-band trailer for Deadpool to great mirth from what is known — whether in comic-book or political circles — as “the base,” the element that must always be appeased, sometimes at the self-defeating expense of broader appeal. As of this writing, the
2 — and what viewers have seen is a successfully sour in-joke that takes a rather vigorous dump on this whole enterprise. It stars Ryan Reynolds, who, if things had gone according to plan, would now be in negotiations for $20 million plus a piece of the back end on Green Lantern 4 but instead has gotten a second shot at the genre, this time as an air-quotes superhero who kills people and says, “Please don’t make the supersuit green! Or animated!” That’s funny, but it’s what is known in theater as an expensive laugh. Jokes that say “This is all ********” tend to make an audience feel slightly skeptical the next time you try to convince them that no, it isn’t.
The Deadpool trailer is fun, and if you’re a glass-half-full person, you might say that it’s proof that the genre is sturdy and entrenched enough to withstand a poke in the ribs. If, however, you are glass-half-empty, you might cite the trailer as evidence that impatience with the comic-book genre and its tropes has now become a real enough part of the discourse to make it out of Comic-Con conversations and chat-board rants and into the content of the actual movies. When a genre starts saying enough already about itself — and when it says that on the eve of five more years ofmovies — I wouldn’t say it’s time to worry, but perhaps it’s time to wonder.



Genre fatigue doesn't exist, at least not yet. 3 superhero movies released in 4 months, which is a lot, but over a full year there are no more superhero movies than there are disaster movies or musicals or YA book adaptations. Fantastic Four bombed because it was bad, Avengers 2 didn't catch the original in the box office because people didn't like it as much as the original. When 8 of them come out next year, we can talk about fatigue, but there's no such thing right now. I do think there's an argument to be had about Marvel's house style sacrificing creativity, though. No Phase 1 director returned to Phase 2 other than Whedon, who was poorly treated and is done with Marvel. Basically everybody who works with them and doesn't have to play nice to keep pay checks coming in has said something bad about the experience. All of the directors are telling the same story, so it pretty much has to be true. "I had a really cool movie, but the executives made me drop character development and add a Thor scene, even though Im not making a Thor movie." I think it's absolutely hurting their movies. My favorite Marvel movies are Captain America 2, where every character directly effects the plot, and Guardians of the Galaxy, where after the Thanos scene the movie is pretty self contained.



It's hard to predict when people will start getting sick of Superhero Movies. Everyone loves the MCU, The DCEU is looking pretty great, and even Fox looks to have some good stuff on the way. If the movies are still good, then people will keep seeing them.



It's hard to predict when people will start getting sick of Superhero Movies. Everyone loves the MCU, The DCEU is looking pretty great, and even Fox looks to have some good stuff on the way. If the movies are still good, then people will keep seeing them.
All those 60s historical dramas were fairly good but people still got tired of them.



I was curious what was the first American superhero comic book to be made into a live-action movie (key note: comic book as opposed to comic strip. There were a lot of movies based on newspaper comic strips from the silent era on).

The answer was the movie serials with the first being Adventures of Captain Marvel (1941), followed by Batman (1943), Captain America (1944), and Superman (1948).

The next was Superman and the Molemen which was a movie created to kick off The Adventures of Superman TV series (and the movie itself was broken into two parts and showed as two episodes of the show).
The Batman movie (1966) came out after the TV show was already airing.

So, it's debatable if these could really be considered "movies." The first "big budget" film based on a comic book was 1978's Superman: the Movie.



I had 5 Swatches on my arm…
I may not see all of them, but I'm on board for more ...

...unless this Tyrese and Rhonda Rousey hootwah takes off.