PDA

View Full Version : DC Comics Movies


ganon578
2009-03-24, 04:41 PM
OK, maybe this has been posted in some shape or form in another thread, but I had to voice my opinion and didn't feel like rifling through the forum:

When is DC/Warner Bros. going to do something about Marvel Studios completely handing them their ass when it comes to new comic movies? It seems like Marvel Studios doesn't hesitate when it comes to developing and pushing out their products via the big screen (X-Men, Iron Man, Daredevil, The Incredible Hulk, Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, Punisher, Ghost Rider - and they're at least decent movies at that), while DC/Warner continually drags their feet? (Batman excluded)

I understand that Warner already has a lot of projects that make them money (Harry Potter, etc.), so there's no real big rush to put out tons of comic movies, but there's a lot of potential money to be made from these films if they ever see the light of day!

I recently came across this article concerning the Superman franchise (which IMO, could use a serious update to drag it away from the Richard Donner era):

Superman in Stasis (http://movies.ign.com/articles/965/965626p1.html)

It bugs me to no end seeing Marvel put out movie after movie of their great characters while Warner Bros. can never seem to even settle on a damn script (Wonder Woman (http://movies.ign.com/articles/962/962399p1.html) I'm looking at you...). Sure there's a Green Arrow movie in development, and Green Lantern is supposed to film in September (http://movies.ign.com/articles/964/964235p1.html), and I hear there's a Flash film in the works (http://movies.ign.com/articles/952/952910p1.html), but c'mon all ready! Get those babies out!!!

Granted, there are a few DC properties that have been released, but most people don't know they're owned by DC (Watchmen, V for Vendetta, etc.), I would just like DC to move along and develop their heavy hitters...

Halfshell
2009-03-24, 04:50 PM
X-Men, Iron Man, Daredevil, The Incredible Hulk, Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, Punisher, Ghost Rider - and they're at least decent movies at that

That's massively debatable.

ganon578
2009-03-24, 05:02 PM
That's massively debatable.

It definitely is. I said decent, I wouldn't go so far as to say they're all good.

I didn't particularly care for the second Fantastic Four, the first Hulk movie was an atrocity - I much prefer the new Edward Norton version, and Daredevil was marginal at best (still can't get over Ben Affleck in that role), though I hear Marvel might already reboot that one much as treatment the Hulk got.

But the others are decent at least, and entertaining. Even if X3 & Spidey-3 were jammed with too much stuff going on.

Zeeks
2009-03-24, 05:26 PM
:swirly:i wrote something, but I totally didn't read the first post thoroughly. My bad.:swirly:

<thinking of something relevant to write...........>

I think there is a JLA movie being talked about as well.

Cliffjumper
2009-03-24, 05:56 PM
It definitely is. I said decent, I wouldn't go so far as to say they're all good.

I'd say several of them are outright bad... It's been a while since I've seen most of them, but Daredevil sticks out for being all-round awful - badly acted, poorly cast (Colin Farrell? JENNIFER TUKANKAMN GARNER?), poorly designed (he looks like the cocking Gimp) and very badly scripted.

The first X-Men film was very, very dull too, very little plot and very few characters... Plus, of course, one of the most awful lines in history. Which is the only reason anyone can remember that there was more than 1 member in the film roster of X-Men.

Ghost Rider had Nicolas Cage in it if I remember correctly, the man with the range of an American G1 missile. Fantastic if you need that patented Psycho Elvis routine, not so much if you need, well, someone other than a Psycho Elvis.

The second Spider-Man was a big pile of emo shite as well.

Denyer
2009-03-24, 06:44 PM
Apparently the director's cut of Daredevil is watchable. Can't say I fancy testing that.

I loved Iron Man -- Fantastic Four was passable, X-Men 2 was entertaining fluff. Thought most of the other Marvel films I've been forced to sit through by friends were bollocks.

DC tends to do archetypes better than concepts that translate to a big screen, IMO. Batman works as a somewhat more realistic delivery.

Really liked the first Hellboy film too. Excellent family movie.

ganon578
2009-03-24, 06:56 PM
:swirly:i wrote something, but I totally didn't read the first post thoroughly. My bad.:swirly:

<thinking of something relevant to write...........>

I think there is a JLA movie being talked about as well.

I heard that. From what I understand though, it's now on hold until they can establish the other franchises. Which means it'll be a LONG time before we see it... :(

Cliffjumper
2009-03-24, 07:04 PM
Apparently the director's cut of Daredevil

The Evanescence video?

Hound
2009-03-24, 07:55 PM
Apparently the director's cut of Daredevil is watchable. Can't say I fancy testing that.Yeah, I've seen it. It's much better, not that it could've been any worse.

I'm actually very anxious to see a Flash movie.

Cliffjumper
2009-03-24, 08:46 PM
http://www.angryalien.com/0204/exorcistbunnies.html

Zeeks
2009-03-24, 08:56 PM
http://www.angryalien.com/0204/exorcistbunnies.html


THAT IS TEH AWESUM!!!!!!!!!!!11111ONE

Zeeks
2009-03-24, 11:32 PM
IMO, I think the best of the Marvel Movies so far is Iron Man- with X2 as a runner up. Didn't like the first FF movie, Only liked the second for Doom's costume upgrade, Daredevil/Electra/Ang Lee Hulk..........um, yeah, I passed. Norton's Hulk= damn good.


For DC, though, I think the best film they have done so far is Catwoman with Halle Berry.





































Got ya, didn't I? LOL Naw, definitely DK, with Begins as second.

inflatable dalek
2009-03-25, 10:03 AM
When is DC/Warner Bros. going to do something about Marvel Studios completely handing them their ass when it comes to new comic movies?


Well, Marvel studios are certainly aiming to be more prolific but I can't see Warners crying to sleep when The Dark Knight pretty much made more money than every movie ever combined and got big critical props. True, it'll be hard to replicate that without killing off one major cast member in every subsequent film (though if there were ever a good reason to let Nick Cage play Superman...) but I can't see the DC bods looking at Punisher: Warzone and wondering where they went wrong.

I loved Iron Man, but the Norton Hulk was decidedly OK in comparison. I picked it up on DVD for a fiver today, mostly because Tim Roth is supposed to be good insane value on the commentary. Otherwise I'll probably be fast forwarding a lot between Super Stan Lee and Stark showing up to piss over everyone else in the film.

EDIT: Most of the films mentioned in the first post weren't actually made by Marvel Studios were they? I thought up until they got their act together with Iron Man it was pretty much a case of letting the highest bidding studio play with their toys?

Halfshell
2009-03-25, 10:21 AM
Mmm. Iron Man was great, I thought the Norton Hulk was good and like the first Blade flick. X2 aside, every other Marvel film ranges from passable to flat-out dreadful.

Okay, DC haven't drowned us in movies based on their characters, but at the same time they've avoided insulting the medium on quite the level that Marvel have. Stan Lee Inc has had far more misses than hits, artistically speaking. And, as Dalek said, with the success of Batman VII, I doubt DC are too bothered about redressing the balance.

[EDIT] Yeah, Iron Man and The Incredible Norton were the first films actually put out by Marvel Studios.

ganon578
2009-03-25, 03:25 PM
Okay, DC haven't drowned us in movies based on their characters, but at the same time they've avoided insulting the medium on quite the level that Marvel have. Stan Lee Inc has had far more misses than hits, artistically speaking. And, as Dalek said, with the success of Batman VII, I doubt DC are too bothered about redressing the balance.

[EDIT] Yeah, Iron Man and The Incredible Norton were the first films actually put out by Marvel Studios.

I guess I'd have to agree with that. I suppose you can appreciate DC for not wanting to churn out a bunch of half-assed efforts, I just want to see some more DC properties out there. I'm really interested to see how Green Lantern and The Flash will turn out, and hope they don't get too campy or silly. No need to throw in comedic relief just to make it more 'appealing' to the general audience.

I also didn't realize that only recently Marvel Studios was doing things more on their own instead of whoring out their works. That might explain the better Marvel movies as of late.

inflatable dalek
2009-03-25, 08:03 PM
Marvel's current Avengers plan is certainly a very bold one that, if it works, could be a amazing achievement. The problem is we've only had the two films so far and there's already a potential large stumbling block in Edward Norton looking unlikely to return as Banner (they could recast again but that would work against the shared Universe idea. The only other option is, what, leave him as the Hulk for the whole film?). If Thor or the Cap Movie turn out to be utter, utter shit that bomb badly the whole idea is undone.

Ozz
2009-03-26, 08:21 AM
they could recast again but that would work against the shared Universe idea

Jim Rhodes has already been recasted for Iron Man 2.

inflatable dalek
2009-03-26, 08:23 AM
Jim Rhodes has already been recasted for Iron Man 2.


If he's in The Avengers I'll be surprised though.

Ozz
2009-03-26, 10:11 AM
Surprise! (http://www.superherohype.com/news/ironmannews.php?id=7763)

I don't think anything was changed since then and he's not supposed to be in it.

inflatable dalek
2009-03-26, 10:17 AM
Consider me surprised. Considering they're heading toward their third Hulk in as many Movies I'd have thought they'd have at least made sure the new guy was going to work out before having him sign a contract (though of course, signing and actually winding up in the film are two different things. I may still be right! Possibly).

ganon578
2009-03-27, 01:44 PM
I heard (or read) that the scenes in Iron Man with Terrence Howard took numerous takes to get them right. I guess he just wasn't doing a great job with the part, so I think the Don Cheadle recast is a good idea. He's a secondary character, so it's not a big deal to get someone new in there.

If they make it to an Avengers movie, I hope Norton sticks with the Hulk role. It would be nice for continuity's sake, and I also think Norton is a great actor.

I'm curious to see how Thor, etc. will turn out. I hope they don't fall flat.

inflatable dalek
2009-03-28, 09:27 AM
The problem is I think the only way they'll get Norton back is if they release the 12 hour cut of the film on DVD with extra added brooding and being miserable. Does anyone actually want to see that?

CounterPunch
2009-03-28, 10:21 AM
They majority of Marvels output has downright sucked, imo the only stuff thats been decent is Blade, Spidey 1&2, X2 and Iron Man (hoping I havent missed any out)

- Blade 2 I do like, but thats cos I'm a Del Toro whore.
- Fantastic Four (and its sequel) were dreadful.
- Daredevil I found passable, but not exactly bad.
- X3 was just a big ole pile of mishmashed ideas and ALOT of cgi
- Elektra.... Well, I'm not gonna say any more
- Hulk tried to hard at some things and not enough at others
- Incredible Hulk is ok, but man, I dont like Liv Tyler

Then of course you have the two (or 3 depending how far you wanna look back) Punisher films, Nick Fury, Ghost Rider, Howard the Duck..... Etc

So really 5 or 6 decent films out a list of... 16 maybe films isnt something to shout about

Cliffjumper
2009-03-28, 01:31 PM
I do have a soft-spot for the 1980s Captain America, simply because for some reason I ended up seeing it a lot as a kid, well before I'd even heard of the comic character. The Rocketeer was much better even then, though. But then the Rocketeer is probably still the greatest film-of-the-comic ever made (not least because it shows up the comic as pretty dull - the film has a plot and stuff happens, which kinda beats out Doc Savage cameos). It's also a proven fact that you can't go wrong with Tim Dalton playing a bad guy (cf. Hot Fuzz, The Living Daylights etc.)

inflatable dalek
2009-03-28, 01:54 PM
I do have a soft-spot for the 1980s Captain America, simply because for some reason I ended up seeing it a lot as a kid, well before I'd even heard of the comic character.

It was one of those films that was on Saturday afternoons a lot wasn't it? Not as much as Flight of the Navigator or Short Circuit, but still about once every year or so. The completely insane way they did the Red Skull ("I used to have a Red Skull but have now had plastic surgery to look like a cheap Dick Tracey baddy") sticks in the mind. The Dolph Punisher is actually surprisingly good, though I've only seen that once.

CounterPunch
2009-03-28, 02:00 PM
I do have a soft-spot for the 1980s Captain America, simply because for some reason I ended up seeing it a lot as a kid, well before I'd even heard of the comic character. The Rocketeer was much better even then, though. But then the Rocketeer is probably still the greatest film-of-the-comic ever made (not least because it shows up the comic as pretty dull - the film has a plot and stuff happens, which kinda beats out Doc Savage cameos). It's also a proven fact that you can't go wrong with Tim Dalton playing a bad guy (cf. Hot Fuzz, The Living Daylights etc.)

So The Rocketeer is actually good? I've heard it did horribly at the box office but that it was actually quite a good movie... I ask because of the fact the director is directing the new Cap movie.

Cliffjumper
2009-03-28, 09:31 PM
The Rocketeer's a good slice of Boys' Own adventure, with some big silly stunts and no retarded 'ironic' touches or stupid in-jokes.

ganon578
2009-03-29, 12:55 AM
I keep forgetting about Blade. That was a good film, though I didn't see 2 or 3. I enjoy Blade always cutting off Quinn's hands in the movie.

Dead Man Wade
2009-03-29, 04:21 PM
- Fantastic Four (and its sequel) were dreadful.

How is it that I'm the only one who didn't hate Fantastic Four?

Ozz
2009-03-29, 08:46 PM
I love Fantastic Four. The sequel not as much, but the first one - hell yes.

Halfshell
2009-03-30, 08:43 AM
F4's one of those movies that, whilst I'll never proclaim it a masterpiece, was still good unpretentious fun.

And I do respect the approach of trying to make an actual family film that can appeal to the youngsters, rather than a self-involved navel-gazing piece of fanboy appeasement that just happens to have a thousand different kid-friendly licenses spun-off from it.

I'm still slightly unsettled from seeing a friend's three-year-old with a Venom-centric Spider-Man 3 colouring book.

Basic point: Not every comic movie needs to try to be a complex psychodrama with gory violence and an 18 certificate. And reinforces my feeling that the existence of The Incredibles made a movie version of Watchmen even more unnecessary.

ganon578
2009-03-30, 02:26 PM
F4's one of those movies that, whilst I'll never proclaim it a masterpiece, was still good unpretentious fun.

And I do respect the approach of trying to make an actual family film that can appeal to the youngsters, rather than a self-involved navel-gazing piece of fanboy appeasement that just happens to have a thousand different kid-friendly licenses spun-off from it.

I'm still slightly unsettled from seeing a friend's three-year-old with a Venom-centric Spider-Man 3 colouring book.

Basic point: Not every comic movie needs to try to be a complex psychodrama with gory violence and an 18 certificate. And reinforces my feeling that the existence of The Incredibles made a movie version of Watchmen even more unnecessary.

Agreed. Fantastic Four and it's sequel, while not great, are pretty good for a short period of entertainment. Most of the time I will put them on for background noise while cleaning or fixing something.

And a Venom-centric kid's coloring book is somewhat unsettling.

RID Scourge
2009-04-01, 08:56 PM
I've only seen the Director's Cut of Daredevil (my brother got it for me for Christmas one year) so I can't comment on how they compare, but it was watchable enough.

I also enjoyed the Fantastic Four movies. The first one also provided me with the only instance in which I've found Jessica Alba to be atttractive (yeah she's pretty, but she just doesn't do it for me. I think it's because her lips remind me of a duck's bill)--when she was wearing the glasses. There was a geeky-cuteness to her.

Iron Man was highly entertaining.

I don't really care too much about the X-Films so I didn't bother seeing the third one, but the upcoming Wolverine movie looks like it'll be action-packed.

I liked the Spider Man films, but as I get further away from college I just don't relate all that well to Spidey.

The camerawork with the first Hulk movie annoyed me, and the story was silly. The second was good fun just watching Hulk tear **** up.

I liked the three punisher movies more or less because they were excessively violent. I don't need characterization when there's a guy killing everyone in sight. That easily keeps me entertained.

The Blade movies were a mixed bag. I liked the first one, and the second one was all right. The third one was pretty bad, and there were a few too many crude sexual references. It was like a middleschooler wrote it or something.

All in all I'm a much bigger DC comics fan. So I'd definitely like to see more of their movies, but I definitely like the quality over quantity approach (I'd probably be more impatient if it weren't my favorite character who was getting the big movies though).

A GL movie you say? That's good news to me since GL/GLC is my second-favorite set of books. I really enjoy all the aliens and the characters. My favorite GL is def Kilwog. I'm quite excited to see GL: First Flight when that comes out on DVD.

The Wild One
2009-04-10, 03:12 AM
The difference between the director's cut of Daredevil, and the Theatrical release are night and day. I'm mean they're almost completely different movies. Now the X-men movies were considered good when the came out. Except X3. Now that was because they were decent. But when some exceptional movies came out, people really began to see them for the mediocrity they really were. One thing people have to realize, is that DC wants to put more movies out. It's the WB that's blocking everything. Warner is overly protective of there licsences. I'm mean they don't want another Spider-Man 3 fiasco. Most of Marvel's movies seem to be a bit lack luster. My favorite movies from Marvel are the last two Hulk movies, and Iron Man. Because of Kirsten Dunst, I really can't tolerate watching the Spider-Man movies. And with the fourth one being written by a teenage, primetime soap writer, I won't even make an effort to see it. DC seems to be having the winning running, with Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, and Superman Returns. I would rather WB take there time releasing movies based on DC properties.

Dead Man Wade
2009-04-10, 03:31 AM
Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, and Superman Returns

I don't think I'd put Superman Returns in with BB and DK.

Ozz
2009-04-10, 07:12 AM
Superman Returns... Superman Returns... is it the one that was a remake of 1978 film but claimed to be a sequel to Superman 2?

ganon578
2009-04-10, 12:36 PM
A GL movie you say? That's good news to me since GL/GLC is my second-favorite set of books. I really enjoy all the aliens and the characters. My favorite GL is def Kilwog. I'm quite excited to see GL: First Flight when that comes out on DVD.

Yeah, live action. Can't wait. The animated one will be interesting to see, I didn't catch the Superman/Doomsday one, but a buddy of mine claims it's pretty good. So there's some promise with the animated movies.

I don't think I'd put Superman Returns in with BB and DK.

Agreed. As much of a Superman fan as I am, that movie can't touch BB & DK.

Superman Returns... Superman Returns... is it the one that was a remake of 1978 film but claimed to be a sequel to Superman 2?

Yes. That's a franchise that needs a serious reboot.

Zeeks
2009-04-11, 12:45 AM
For anyone interested in GL: First Flight, here's the trailer:

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810077708/video/12839105

Dead Man Wade
2009-04-12, 06:07 AM
Agreed. As much of a Superman fan as I am, that movie can't touch BB & DK.

"Oh, look. He's lifting something again. Well, that totally justified the cost of the ticket."

I honestly have to question the wisdom of doing a sequel to a twenty-someodd-year-old movie. It didn't bring anything to the table for anyone. For older fans, there wasn't enough to differentiate it from the previous movies to have justified its existence, and younger fans may not have been aware enough of the continuity to give a rat's ass. Add that to the crappy casting...

They'd have been better off doing something along the lines of Superman: Birthright. It was an out and out origin story, but with enough new bits to set it apart from everything else.

ganon578
2009-04-14, 04:30 PM
"Oh, look. He's lifting something again. Well, that totally justified the cost of the ticket."

I honestly have to question the wisdom of doing a sequel to a twenty-someodd-year-old movie. It didn't bring anything to the table for anyone. For older fans, there wasn't enough to differentiate it from the previous movies to have justified its existence, and younger fans may not have been aware enough of the continuity to give a rat's ass. Add that to the crappy casting...

They'd have been better off doing something along the lines of Superman: Birthright. It was an out and out origin story, but with enough new bits to set it apart from everything else.

I would have much preferred to see someone cast that wasn't a spitting image of Christopher Reeve. And the "sequel" feel of it was crap. They should have started fresh. I also can't get over the whiny, emotional Lois. I much prefer a stronger, sharp-tongued Lois a la Erica Durance on Smallville. And we're not even going to get into Super-baby.

What I would like to see, that I doubt would happen due to the current lack of fan base for Supes in movies, is the Doomsday storyline. It would be great to see him finally fight something other than a huge rock. However, I don't think it would see the light of day as it would entail multiple movies (2-3?) to cover, and with the latest lackluster box office performance, I don't see WB diving into that one. Especially with the special effects that would be needed. Ah, a Supes fan can dream, eh?