1GF reviews the new age Marvel films.

[1godzillafan]

Hello all, 1godzillafan here. Seeing how Blade: Trinity is coming out tomarrow, and I'm sure as hell seeing it, I took it upon myself to watch ever single 1998 and above Marvel films released on another board. I thought the reviews turned out rather well (and in some cases, freakin' huge), and thought I'd share them here with all of you.

Sit tight all.

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0780624890.01.LZZZZZZZ.gif

Can a film ride on additude alone? Probably not. But Blade certainly does try. It does have a decent story that probably could have made an excelent action film, but several thing slow it down from getting that high.

First of all, while I do admit the story is decent, there is a very big plot hole that just can't be ignored in it. Frost's plan to turn the entire human race into vampires is extremly poorly thought out. If everyone on Earth was a vampire, who the hell would they feed on? I almost wish his plan succeeded so we could watch the movie go on and watch this dumbass see his entire race die out.

Second, the film is very melodramatic. There are many many moments of silence that could have easily been cut. Instead we have to watch the characters just sit there and stare at each other with an annoying score thumping in your ears. Interestingly enough, I saw a version on Fox once that was cut down to fit into a two hour running time including commercials. Did it lose anything important? Not really. The only things dropped that I really liked was Blade's shoulder getting dislocated because of grabbing onto the train, a few gore shots of vampires exploding, and the very end where Blade's in Moscow. We can blame one of either two people for this. The first one would be director Stephen Norrington. I've seen two of his movies (the other being the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, which was also based on a comic book), and while he has a great eye for visuals, he seems to lack in the human drama department. In Blade, he tries to hard, and in LXG, he doesn't try hard enough. The other would be screenwriter David Goyer, who I'm praying is not at fault here since he did write the upcoming Batman Begins (a movie I'm definatly looking forward too), and I'd hate to see that fall into what Blade is. But Goyer did have a fairly good pace in Blade II, and he did cut off a half hour off of the Freddy vs. Jason script (uncredited), so I'll just see how Blade: Trinity turns out, which he also directed, before I judge his pacing skills.

There is one other nitpick I have about this film, but it has nothing to do with the story. It's just a stupid action for an otherwise good scene: Frost being able to walk in the daylight because he's wearing sunblock. Granted, I've never met a vampire and can't test this out, but that just comes off as bloody rediculous to me.

If you're willing to forgive all that, Blade can be a very entertaining movie. I love the character of Blade, a half vampire who hunts vampires. In fact Blade's probably the reason I never watched Buffy the Vampire Slayer despite it's good word of mouth. I already have my vampire slayer, thank you very much. Wesley Snipes is perfectly casted in the role as well. He's pumped up enough to make you believe he's been doing this his whole life, and his voice holds enough anger so that you feel his hatred toward the race. Kris Kristofferson also has a good role as his smartass mentor, Whistler. The movie also features Alien vs. Predator star Sanaa Lathan in the small role of Blade's mother and porn star turned Sci-Fi Channel TV movie queen Tracy Lords in an even smaller one. Stephen Dorff finishes off the cast as Frost, and really shines in the role. You can feel his determination to get what he wants done (no matter how misguided it may be, as I mentioned above).

Where Blade's real appeal, however, is the fight sequences, which are nothing but good old fashioned sword fights and brawling. The final fight with the guards and Frost is easily one of my favorite fights in film. And the opening sequence with the blood shower was a visual feast. It's too bad Blade II didn't follow, I felt that it's fights were way too CGI reliant (even though it did have a better story). Oh well.

Blade is pretty much just a movie about kicking ass and getting your assed kicked. If that's your bag, go for it. The fights are definatly worthwhile, which is more than I can say for similar action film wannabes like Equilibrium.

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000078UJV.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

While some give the credit to Blade for being a respectable comic book film back in an era when the genre became a joke (thank you very much Tim Burton and Joel Schumacher. That's right, I'm blaming both), the real credit for resurrecting it should go to X-Men. Not only was it a beautiful film to look at, but it had the depth and story that Blade lacked and did everything with class.

First of all, I'd like to say bravo to director Brian Singer, who just recently, sadly, dropped out of X-Men 3 so he can direct Superman (which I assume he'll drop out of as well, just like the last two directors that Warner Brothers pissed off did. Don't get me wrong, I'm extremly glad that hack McG isn't directing, but a Brett Ratner Superman might have been cool. Especially after the great job he did with Red Dragon. Singer already casted a Superman though, so that's a good sign. But I don't have my hopes up). Singer brings the world of the X-Men to life flawlessly. First, I've gotta rave about the X-Men outfits, which I thought were an excelent idea. I love both Wolverine and his comic book look, but I'd be the first to admit that he'd look rediculous like that in live action (I love Cyclops' response to him "What would you prefer? Yellow spandex?"). Then there's Magneto's helmet, while it does look a little silly, they give an ingenious reason for why he has to wear it so I can easily look it over. Mystique is a little off from what she looks like in the comics, I see why they gave her scales (it was probably just to show off Rebecca Romijn-Stamos' body, but it makes sense from a logical point of view as well, especially when she mimics Wolverine's claws later in the film). While Wolverine and Mystique are the most radical changes, the others aren't too far off from what their comic book counterparts look like. The sets are beautifully constructed as well. What lies beneath of Xavier's school is truly a wonder to behold.

Probably point where the film really shines is the casting. Hugh Jackman is Wolverine. Too tall? Maybe, but I'd like to see someone else give him the same additude. Patrick Stewart (who is a brilliant actor, I must say) is Professor Xavier. Bald typecast? Meh, if you fit the role you fit the role. Ian McKellen is Magneto. Too old? Anyone who suggests this needs to be slapped. He was easily the best performance of the movie. The rest of the cast is pretty good as well, including Darth Maul (from Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace) himself, Ray Park, who kicks ass in this movie as Toad. James Marsden plays Cyclops to perfection. His diologue with Wolverine is wonderfully witty...

Wolverine: Hey! It's me!

Cyclops: Prove it!

Wolverine: You're a dick.

Cyclops: OK.

Add in a delightfully eerie yet heroic score by the late Michael Kamen, and you got one wonderful film.

If I were to complain about one thing, it's that Magneto's plan really seemed like something that a 60's Batman villian would do. But then again, it's no worse than what the Riddler did in Batman Forever (which to this day is the best live-action Batfilm. Of course that's not hard when the others include the likes of Batman Returns).

X-Men is truly top notch throughout. If you haven't seen it, I must ask what the hell are you waiting for?

Final ranking (as of yet):

1. X-Men
2. Blade

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005JKWJ.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Guillermo Del Toro obviously loves comic books. In the past three years he directed two movies that were based on comic books, Blade II and Hellboy (and his next film, Hellboy 2, is yet another one). So he must be the perfect director for a comic book movie, right? In some areas, yes. In others, he faults.

I'm not going to go into Hellboy's problems right now, because this is a review of Blade II. Let me start by saying that Blade II is undeniably better than the original. It's story is better and it's pace is faster. Del Toro and writer David Goyer give the film a very Predator-esque plot about hunters becoming the hunted. (SPOILER FOR BLADE AND BLADE II) One of the more interesting story elements in Blade II is the return of Whistler, who appearantly died in the first one. While this seems very WTF at first, it makes more sense as the story goes along. After all, we never saw a body. Hell, we never even saw Whistler shoot himself. Just heard a gunshot and saw a hand drop the gun. Anything could have happened after Blade left. This is very cleverly pulled off, and I applaud them in doing it.

The cast is once again wonderful. Wesley Snipes and Kris Kristofferson are back and it's like they never left. Backing them up this time is the always badass Ron Perlman who also got the title roll in Del Toro's Hellboy. The beautiful Leonor Varela plays her part well and holds her own in the fight scenes. Norman Reedus is a blast as Scud, he steals most of his scenes with his hillarious punk-like dialogue and interaction with Whistler (SPOILER: It's too bad he had to eat it. I think it would have been awsome to see him again in Trinity). Even martial arts master Donnie Yen has a bit part in this flick, but don't expect him to do much fighting (just one scene of kicking and swordplay). Rounding out the cast is Luke Goss as Nomak, the main Reaper, and he is great in the part. He really feels like Blade's match, unlike Frost in the first film (although I admit I prefer Frost himself as a villian).

The atmosphere in Blade II is astounding. Something like this can be an eyesoar if not pulled off right, and here it's pulled off flawlessly. The crystal like blues and amber yellows are very pleasing to the eye. This is one part that Del Toro definatly didn't screw up on.

One part he did, however, was the fight sequences which are way too CGI reliant. There are unneeded and embarassing CG shots in an otherwise cool sword fight sequence near the begining. A major let down in the film would have to be the final fight. Here we see Blade and Nomak jumping around or being thrown all over the place, doing impossible twists and turns and it really becomes irritating (my "favorite" of the bunch is when Nomak throws Blade right before he tries to push the metal statue on him. Blade hangs in the air in the same place for about three seconds and does about two whole spins). The best fight of the film is without a doubt the fight with the guards near the end, because it's old school, just like the original Blade.

Other than the fights, the CG is pretty impressive. The Reaper mouths couldn't look more threatening if they tried and vampire deaths look pretty cool with all the sparks and ashes flying every where (even though I prefer the simplistic ashing away we saw the the original Blade).

If you are looking for a good interesting action movie that never lets up, I'd personally suggest that you skip the original and head for the sequel. But then again, this movie would probably be better with a knowledge of Blade that you can get from the original. Do what you will.

Final Score (so far):

1. X-Men
2. Blade II
3. Blade

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005JKCH.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Who am I? You really want to know? The story of my life is not for the faint of heart. If somebody told you it was a happy little tale, that I was an average, ordinary guy, not a care in the world, somebody lied. Holy sh*t did somebody lie. I have plenty of cares. I have no job because the bastard business people of this world don't want to hire me. I'll probably spend the rest of my life being turned down by the likes of Taco Bell (that's just sad). I can't afford anything, and have to make a living scavanging cash from relatives for doing odd chores for them. I'd take what Peter Parker's dealt over this life anyday.

Spider-Man has always been my favorite hero. I thought his powers were awsome, and I could really relate to him while I was growing up. When I heard that he was finally going to make his way to the big screen, I couldn't have been happier. And when that day finally came in 2002, I was there opening day, sitting in the theater seat. I was in complete aw the entire time. Here he was, my childhood hero doing all the things I only dreamed about doing right in front of my eyes. But that's not what I was most impressed with, I was impressed with how well the legendary tale was being told. Sure it used every superhero cliche in the book, but it used them well. How many times have we seen the villian have the hero right where he wants him and not even attempt to unmask him? More than I can count, but it works. And even in the most emotional scenes, the film never got boring. When I walked out of the theater, I knew it was the best superhero movie ever made up to that point. How did I know that? I looked back on the other movies I saw. The Batman series suddenly seemed very eratic and out of focus (this would become even more appearant when I watched Daredevil the following February). So when I needed to get my superhero fix again, I wound up watching Spider-Man again on the big screen two days later. And it was still just as good as I remembered it.

The casting of Spider-Man was positively brilliant. Tobey Maguire, Willem Dafoe, James Franco, Cliff Robertson, Rosewmary Harris, and JK Simmons all own their parts. Especially Dafoe and Franco. They look so much alike and have so much chemestry that you actually believe that they are father and son. The most questionable casting would be Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane. She's not bad in the role, but not who I pictured. I might have went with a natural redhead instead of a dye job, but that's just me.

The direction is wonderful. However we have Sam Raimi, the demented genius behind the outstanding Evil Dead trilogy, behind the camera, and he usually doesn't give us something traditional. While it would have been easy for him to cut loose and give us something more similar to his other superhero attempt, Darkman, he holds back his insanity and gladly gives us Spider-Man. He does sneak in tiny bits of his unique humor in however (That flash of the night before when Norman is trying to remember what happened was pure Raimi trying to make the audience jump. Don't forget to look for Evil Dead star Bruce Campbell in a cameo as a ring announcer and Xena star Lucy Lawless as a citizen who says "Guy with eight hands? Sounds hot." as well). If you truly want to get a feel of what goes on in Raimi's head, stick around during the end credits to the very end. That catchy 60s Spider-Man cartoon theme begins playing. Only someone as off-beat and as brilliant as Raimi would have done that. Bravo.

The special effects range from good to bad depending on what shot you're looking at. The scenes where he's in his wrestling outfit chasing down a criminal look terrible, but they look very good when he's in his Spidey outfit. I can assume since the costume is skintight, it lookes much better than clothes that hang loose.

The only truly bad point of Spider-Man is Danny Elfman's half-assed score, which seems like he cut and pasted from other movies he done. Honesty, Danny, you hit gold with your score for Batman, what happened to you?

Spider-Man is on my top 5 favorite films of all time for a reason, and I highly doubt it will go down very far on the list. I'll deffinatly watch this outstanding film again and again. This is my gift. My curse. Who am I? I'm a Spider-Fan.

Final score (as of yet):

1. Spider-Man
2. X-Men
3. Blade II
4. Blade

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005JLXE.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Quite possibly the most underrated movie of all time. Daredevil is a movie that does almost everything right, but when it does get something wrong, people were all over it.

Daredevil is a character that I admit that I'm not familliar with. The first time I was ever exposed to him was during that 90s Spider-Man cartoon where he and Spider-Man fought the Kingpin. I thought the concept of a blind superhero was interesting (you know, the whole "Justice is blind" irony thing), but I didn't really give it a second thought because they didn't really explain what he was enough in the episode (they actually hardly ever explained the hero cameos in that show. The most informitave I think were Blade and the Punisher). Next time I even heard about this hero was in a TV movie called Trial of the Incredible Hulk where he and the Hulk fought the Kingpin (it's always the Kingpin. This time played by John Rhys-Davies though!). I thought is was a rather lame portrayal. The costume sucked and his red vision was really WTF? Not a bad TV movie though. It was probably the best of the Hulk TV movies.

Then I got access to the net. I found out more and more about DD over the years, not much, but it's more than I used to know. I found out that they were making a movie and I thought it sounded cool. I'd check it out. Then came the trailers which I thought were amung the best I've ever seen. The told the story without giving to much away. I was definatly hyped.

The film itself is a labor of love. Writer/Director Mark Steven Johnson's passion for the character of Matt Murdock/Daredevil comes in loud and clear from the history of this movie alone. He stuck with this movie during studio moves and worse. He even reluctantly cut out a half hour so the film could get the PG-13 that Fox was pressing on him after the success of Spider-Man. The result was editing problems which dragged down what is otherwise a fantastic superhero movie.

MSJ's script is wonderful. It's captivating from the very first line:

"They say your whole life flashes before your eyes when you die. It's true. Even for a blind man."

To the last:

"Hell's Kitchen is my neighborhood. I prowl the rooftops and allyways at night watching through the darkness. Forever in darkness. A guardian devil."

Well, actually if you want to get technical, the first line is actually "Oh my god. Matthew. Matthew. Matthew." and the last line is actually "Bullseye." But those are pretty minor, I went for the biggies. But what really caught my eye about the script is how dark it is. It's not as shallow as Batman's poor lighting darkness, or is it as misused as Batman Returns' over-the-top darkness, this is the type of darkness that needs to be portrayed in superhero movies more often. I hope Chris Nolan and David Goyer took notes during this movie, because this is what I'm hoping next year's Batman Begins is going to be like. Probably my favorite aspect of the script is the small subplot of Matt trying to convince himself that he's not the bad guy. Those were some truly powerful scenes.

MSJ's direction however, leaves something to be desired, but considering the pressure he was under, I say it's passable. He obviously wanted to make the film feel as realistic as possible, but all the wire work and CGI really take from that. It's hard to take somthing seriously when someone is jumping thirty feet in a single bound. The CGI feels very, for the lack of a better word, plastic. Whenever it is onscreen, the characters feel way too stiff and unreal. However I must praise the effects used for Daredevil's vision which is astounding and truely something we've never seen before. In the cartoon and TV movie they basicly just used a red filter (or as they say on MST3K, Kool-Aid Vision!). One thing about his direction that I can praise is how comic bookish it feels. He has a couple of shots that has the dynamic angles of a comic book. Something similar was done three years prior in a little known film called Battlefield Earth which was done to a degree where it came off annoying. The difference between the two is that MSJ doesn't overdo it. He knows where to use these shots and when, instead of all the time.

One thing about the final product that I really liked was the costumes. Daredevil's costume is a brilliant design. Faithful to the original source yet feels real at the same time. Sure the leather thing has been done before with X-Men, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't work here just as well. The one complaint I have with it is that it was obviously enhanced in the muscle area, but that was probably done to make him look more intimidating. Bullseye's costume is a radical change from the comics, but it's a welcome change because his comic costume wouldn't have worked on film at all. His look does obviously take inspiration form the comics, though. Especially in the face. His bullseye brand, beard, and shaved head was a genius homage to what his mask looked like. Elektra's costume is a little more simplistic than the comic design, but I feel that this was done on purpose to make it feel more "thrown together at the last minute" (like Peter's wrestling costume in Spider-Man), and it works. We should expect to see something more faithful in the Elektra movie that's being released this January.

The cast is awsome. There probably were people better for the roles, but they get the job done. Ben Affleck once again proves how underrated he truly is with a fantastic performance as Matt. Jennifer Garner is well chosen as the "victim who fights back" Elektra. Colin Farrell positivly steals the show with his hillarious and threatening performance as Bullseye. And finally we get to the most perfectly chosen of the bunch, the great Michael Clarke Duncan as Richard Fisk AKA the Kingpin (see? I told you it's always the Kingpin). I've been defending this casting choice from day one and continue to until my grave. Sure the Kingpin was white in the comics, but I think Mark Steven Johnson said it best when he said that they couldn't find anyone who could play the part like he could. It's more important to stay true to the character than to his skin.

Geraeme Revell's score is well done. Definatly better than Danny Elfman's Spider-Man score, but not quite as memorable as Michael Kamen's X-Men score. He is backed up with a wonderful soundtrack featuring catchy songs like Feul's "Won't Back Down" or Evanescence's "Bring Me To Life."

Daredevil is a film I shall defend as long as I live. Sure, I admit I'm not as familliar with the character as most people are, but I know what I like. And Daredevil's what I like. I can't wait for the Director's Cut to be released so we can finally see MSJ's true vision of this blind man's story (vision/blind pun intended. I know, it's not funny but it sounded good at the time).

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0002XVQNU.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

TRIVIA: Watch for cameos from several Daredevil writers, including the legendary Frank Millar as some guy Bullseye killed with a pen to steal a motorcycle and Kevin Smith as Jack Kirby (Smith also directed five other movies that starred Ben Affleck. He was also the one who hooked Mark Steven Johnson up with Affleck to play Matt Murdock).

TRIVIA PART DUEX: Colin Farrell's Irish accent for Bullseye is real. He is actually Irish and this is the first time he ever used it in a movie.

TRIVIA PART TRIX: SPOILER! Something that makes this film a little more personal to me is the fact that the song that plays during Elektra's father's funeral, "My Immortal," was also played at my cousin's funeral earlier this year.

Final score (as of yet):

1. Spider-Man
2. Daredevil
3. X-Men
4. Blade II
5. Blade

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0000BWVCM.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

I believe it was professional hypocrite...............I mean movie critic Roger Ebert (wait, I was right the first time) who once said "a superhero movie is only as good as it's villian." This is one of the few things I've ever agreed with him on (Of course, this rule doesn't apply all the time. I liked Blade II better than the original but thought the original's villian was better than the one in II. But since I enjoyed both villians to an infinate degree, the statement still holds up). This is the reason why I don't regard the original Superman (RIP Christopher Reeve) as one of the best superhero movies of all time. Lex Luthor seemed more like a stooge than an evil genius. I kept getting this feeling that he should be taking orders instead of giving them out (which is exactly what happened in the infinatly better Superman II). X2, another movie that has taken the name of best superhero movie of all time and I also happen to disagree with, has the same problem. The only difference is that X2 had a villian we could take seriously, only nothing was really done with him.

Brian Singer, the director of X-Men and X2, was the one who said that "the best villians are always the ones who think they're doing the right thing" or something to that effect. This is true. Magneto was an excelent villian in the first movie, and he thought he was benifiting all of the man and mutantkind. Now Magneto's plan has failed he's turned into someone just like William Stryker, the human villian of X2, both willing to be reduced to complete genocide of the other race in order to win a war that hasn't even started yet. While this is great making for great villians and Magneto is still as awsome as he was in the original, Stryker just falls flat. Why? I don't know, everything that we need for an excelent villian is there, he just never catches my interest whenever I watch this movie. Maybe it's not Stryker himself, but his son, whom he leaves in charge at the end of the movie. His son is a mutant. Interesting plot twist, but flat execution. His son goes into Xavier's mind and turns himself into an annoying 8 year old girl that you just want to slap. While I see they they were trying to do a "things are not what they seem" turn, I find it hard to fear something that irritating.

In fact, I found myself ignoring both Magneto and Stryker in this movie. My attention was caught by a lesser villian who's hardly in the movie at all. I'm of course talking about John, or his "real name" as Magnito puts it, Pyro. The more this kid was onscreen, the more I wanted to hear his story. Why he hates humans and how he got so hot-headed (no pun intended). He was an interesting character hopelessly lost in a movie that has too many characters.

This brings me to my next point of there being too many characters. Once again, the primary character of the story is Wolverine. Now, I love Wolverine, he was always my favorite X-Man, and I fully realize that his story is complicated and mysterious, but he isn't the only X-Men. I would have liked to hear more about the other characters. And while we hear bits and peices of the other characters are known in this movie, it's just not enough. We will probably never hear anything else about Storm now that Halle Berry's on her "I'm too good for X-Men but Catwoman is just right" high horse (that is unless she does a complete 180 and shocks us all by signing on for X3, or even more likely a recast of the character ala Batman). And then there's poor Cyclops, who's hardly in the movie at all. And last but not least is the newbie lacky Lady Deathstrike. It would have been awsome to hear more about her, but she's less characterized than Toad or Sabertooth in the original. At least Toad and Sabertooth showed personalities, which I guess is why I found their fight scenes in the original more entertaining than Deathstrike's fight in this movie.

But does that make this a bad movie? No, not really. These are all minor gripes (but major to write out, holy crap that was long winded) on what is a pretty entertaining movie. Brian Singer's direction is once again superb. He gives the film a dark setting, even more based in reality than the original. It's very cool.

The cast is just as good as it was the last time around. Hugh Jackman, Ian McKellen, and Patrick Stewart all stick around to give performances just as good, if not better, than what they gave in the first movie. The are backed up by a great supporting cast as well. Shawn Ashmore is given more time to shine as Iceman, Alan Cumming is having a blast as Nightcrawler, Aaron Stanford draws some interest as Pyro, and some of the small cameo mutants I just wanted to see more of (a certain badass metal mutant named Colossus comes to mind).

The script, despite character problems, is pretty first rate. It has a solid story that also sets up for what could be a solid X-Men 3 involving the Pheonix storyline. The script also has a lot more humor than the original, and it's successful 99% of the time. I don't need to say anymore than "Professor Logan; Teacher of Art" to prove my point. However, the script does fault in several places. In one scene, Xavier is talking to Magneto they're talking about Wolverine, then all of a sudden Xavier says "Erik, what have you done?" This line could not have been placed more poorly. Not only does it have nothing to do with the conversation, we are forced to believe that Xavier was sneaking around Magneto's mind which wasn't even implied until that moment. Another is a scene where Mystique is trying to get it on with Wolverine and starts changing forms into Jean, Storm, and Rogue. When he rejects her, she changes to Stryker and says "What do you really want?" What is that supposed to mean? Is she trying to get under Wolverine's skin or is she so deperate for sex that she's willing to do intimate homosexual relations? I'm leaning toward the former but the line she says in that case doesn't make any sense at all. That scene is just creepy. I'm not trying to sound homophobic, but sex with Stryker? Matt Damon, maybe, but not Brian Cox. But that's just me.

Then we come to yet another gripe I have about this movie, John Ottman's score, which is nothing on the score to the original movie. Ottman's score is so generic and uninteresting that it just seems to get in the way. I hope they get someone else for X3.

All it comes down to for me, is that X2 just didn't grip me like X-Men did. I'm not entirely clear on why people call it the best superhero movie ever made. I'll still stick with the franchise, I just hope that they get more focused than this in the future.

Final Score (as of yet):

1. Spider-Man
2. Daredevil
3. X-Men
4. X2
5. Blade II
6. Blade

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005JKC3.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Hulk was always one of my favorite comic book characters. The isolation, the anger, I could relate to him a lot. So it really pained me to see this movie handled with the best intentions but fail like it did. There are only so many things you can do in a superhero movie without taking it too far. Hulk tries to push the limit and ends up wandering around as confused and aimlessly as it's title character.

While I haven't seen his other films, judging from Hulk alone I can tell that Ang Lee is actually a very good director, but a terrible choice for this type of movie. It's obvious that his motto was "It's too easy to do 'HULK SMASH,' let's do something different," which isn't a bad thing, but what he does in it's place is try to blend the line between art film and comic book movie, which is just not possible. The biggest problem with this is the piss poor way it was advertised, trying to make it come off as an action blockbuster, which it is not. Those bastards at Universal promised "HULK SMASH," and there just isn't enough of it to pull the film out of the hole that it dug itself into.

One of the most annoying things that Lee did with the moive was contradicting the mythic feel he was going for with a silly comic book feel. SPOILER WARNING! This movie might have turned out fine had three things been dropped: 1. The constant multipal screens. 2. The Hulk Dogs. 3. Absorbing Dad.

I can see what Lee was trying to do with his splitscreens, but the problem is that he overuses it to an extreme. If he wanted to make his movie feel like a comic book, he should have done the dynamic angles that Daredevil pulled off so beautifully. And if he wanted to do his comic book panel thing, do it once or twice, but what he did is absolutly rediculous. It's impossible to keep an eye on any of the action because you don't know where to look.

The Hulk Dogs are without a doubt the dumbest idea this movie presented. The fight is just so unneeded. Not to mention poorly light. You can't tell when the fight begins or ends. It's the biggest mess in the film and Lee was too lazy to clean it up (made even more obvious by the green explosions every time one of the dogs die, god that was hillarious).

ONCE AGAIN, I MUST WARN ABOUT SPOILERS! As bad as the split screens were, they were a minor annoyance compared to what ended up being the ultimate villian of the film, David Banner (which I admit still isn't as bad as the Hulk Dogs). The movie was doing OK until David smashed the security guard with whatever the hell that thing was. When that happened, I just leaned forward and shook my head. It's about an hour and twenty minutes into the movie and you're introducing the villian now? What moron screenwriter thought that up? I was just begging the screen "Please movie, don't ruin what little you have with this foolishness. Count your dead and move on." And then we don't hear from this supposed plot point again in the movie for another forty, so it just seems like it was added in to provide an ending when they couldn't think of one.

This movie would have been so much better if the army alone was the villian.

So, if we ignore the foolishness, does the art aspect of the film work? No. Absolutly not. Lee tries a lot of things in the film, giving us shots that are supposed to signify something but say absolutly nothing (most notably is the shot of Bruce's dying mother running out of the house and reacing for the sky as a nuclear explosion goes off and the "Puny human" dream sequence).

So are there any good points to this movie? You bet. The CGI is spectacular. OK, not all the time. The transformation scenes look pretty damn cartoony, but the Hulk himself is wonderous to behold. The desert scene is also wonderful, showing us what this Hulk movie could have been like had it not tried too hard.

The cast is pretty good too. While Eric Bana probably could have tried a little harder as Bruce, the rest are just fine. Jennifer Connelly, while a bit useless, does great with what she has. Sam Elliott is even better as her father. Josh Lucas pulls a Colin Farrell and steals the show with his wonderful performance. Everytime he was onscreen was easily the best moments of the movie. Nick Nolte has some great lines as David Banner, but by the end, the character's a waste. But it's not his fault.

Now we get to a part of the movie that I truly hated, Danny Elfman's score. I critisized his score for Spider-Man because it was half assed and unoriginal, this time he tries to be original but drops dead instantly. He plays the same damn tune throughout pretty much the entire movie, and it wasn't that good to begin with. Music usually adds to the excitment of the story (like Alan Silvestri's Back to the Future score), but Elfman's is so boring and lifeless, and then he just uses it over and over again makes the movie seem more boring than it has any right to be. While it's great for something as exciting and intense as his score for Batman, it's terrible for a bunch of flutes that just goes "BUM BUM bum bum bum bum" I think as Elfman gets older, his judgement gets poorer and poorer. He should have known better than this. Either that or his score is reflecting what he's turned into lately. Yes Elfman, you're a bum. You need to listen to some Silvestri, John Williams, or Don Davis to try to put the spark back into your work. Here's a thought, if Hulk 2 happens to be made and by some act of god you're hired again, listen to Graeme Revell's fantastic and overlooked scores to Pitch Black and the Chronicles of Riddick in order to get a feel for what a Hulk score should sound like.

Hulk tries to concentrate on the human drama, but the 70s show pulled it off far better than this. I'll take Lou Ferrigno anyday. While it has it's moments of interest, I can't help but feel that as simple as "HULK SMASH" is, that alone would have resulted in a movie far more interesting than this. I think some guy on IMDB said it best, "Hulk was overcooked."

Final score (as of yet):

1. Spider-Man
2. Daredevil
3. X-Men
4. X2
5. Blade II
6. Blade
7. Hulk

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0002IQMAM.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

In April 2004, two revenge movies ironicly opened the same day: Kill Bill Volume 2 and the Punisher. Both didn't have just that in common, they both had incredibly lame originals to overcome: Kill Bill Volume 1 and the Punisher (from 1989 staring Dolph Lungren). So what was the difference between these two movies? Well, Kill Bill had campy over the top action, uninteresting characters, and a tired, overlong story that wore out it's welcome in Volume 1 alone. The Punisher had old school action (which we've been lacking lately, the closest we ever got this year was this and Walking Tall), cornball diologue, and gritty reality. So I guess the major difference is that Kill Bill sucked, the Punisher didn't (although Kill Bill obviously won out the box office since it was Tarantino and that man can do no wrong. *yawn* Even though he did plenty of wrong, thy name was Jackie Brown).

Writer Jonathan Hensleigh makes his directorial debut and does a pretty good job (remind me to compliment him when I'm done killing him for co-writing Armageddon). He gives the film a dark depressing tone throughout that just has "the Punisher" written all over it. He also uses practical effects in favor of CGI which is great to see. I don't recall a single CG shot in this film. And if there was, they looked damn real to me.

His script, which he co-wrote with Michael France, is actually pretty good with moments of power spread throughout. One of my favorite things about the script is the way Frank screws with the heads of the bad guys, and by the end force them to turn on each other. Despite all the evil things they've done, you almost feel sorry for them. The most powerful moment in the movie is without a doubt the Family Reunion Massacre, which is filled with so much emotion that it can get hard to watch. Can you imagin if it was your family getting gunned down in front of you and you can't do a damn thing about it? Mother, father, aunts, uncles, cousins, men, women, children, ect...the good script, great acting, and nice direction really give off the terror these people must have been going through. It reminded me of Uncle Ben's death in Spider-Man, I knew it was coming but the way it was executed was so perfect that it really gets to you. Well done.

The cast is a very well played card here. Thomas Jane is perfect as Frank Castle, and when he snaps and turns into the Punisher, you believe it (unlike Lungren from the original Punisher who just seemed to sleep thorugh the whole thing). John Travolta even tones down his usual over-the-top villian in order to put in a believable performance. He can get a bit dry at times, but that's what the character asks for. The great Roy Scheider isn't given much time, but he does well with what he has as Frank's father. The same with Samantha Mathis (If you don't know who she is, you may remember played the unlikely Princess Daisy in Super Mario Bros. If you still don't know, I can't help you) who plays Frank's wife. Rebecca Romijn-Stamos makes her third Marval Movie appearance (the first two as the body painted and very nude Mystique in X-Men and X2) as Joan, and this supermodel actually does a good job playing a mousy character (whodathunkit?). TRIVIA: One of Thomas Jane's more popular roles was the male lead in Deep Blue Sea, a killer shark movie. His father in this movie is played by Roy Schieder who played Cheif Martin Brody in Jaws, the mother of all killer shark movies (and one of my personal favorites).

Now I take some time out to praise something that I truly believe deserves praising, the Punisher outfit. It's just a t-shirt and a trenchcoat, but it looks great. Proof that not everything has to be flashy and Hollywoodesque like Spider-Man's supposedly "selfmade" costume (like Peter really made that) or Batman's head to toe in rubber costume (if Bruce isn't getting claustrophobic in there, he should be sweating his glands out) . Simplicity at it's finest.

Carlos Siliotto's score gets the job done. He doesn't provide a very memorable one, but he doesn't need too. The Punisher is a character, like Blade, is isn't heroic enough to get something dynamic and exciting. What kind of theme can you give someone who basicly just shoots people, what kind of theme can you give him? He tries, but it's never burns into your memory like Danny Elfman's Batman or John William's Superman.

The Punisher is pretty much a modern day western. You know, "You shot my dog, now I shoot you." (only there wasn't a dog there, but I think I got my point across). It's fun old school action in a time that we're deprived of them and filled with CGI and wirework kung fu (as much as I love the Matrix trilogy, I'm sick of this). I look upon this film fondly as it makes me recall what is so great about "Big gun, hard fist" action.

Final score (as of yet):

1. Spider-Man
2. Daredevil
3. X-Men
4. The Punisher
5. X2
6. Blade II
7. Blade
8. Hulk

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005JMQW.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

How do you mak a supereor sequel to what is unquestionably the greatest superhero movie ever made? Simple, bring back Sam Raimi. If he knows one thing, it's how to make a sequel that's better than the original. Look at the Evil Dead trilogy. Both Evil Dead II and Army of Darkness were better than the original Evil Dead.

For Spider-Man 2 he dumps David Koepp, who wrote the first one (and one of my favorite screenwriters, not just because he wrote Spider-Man, but great movies like Mission: Impossible, Jurrasic Park, and the Lost World as well) and hires Alvin Sargent. Is this the smart thing to do? I don't know. I'm not working behind the scenes. But I can't argue the quality of the final product. The story of "Spider-Man No More" was always such a powerful story, that it was brilliant to choose it for part two. And you gotta love the outcome of the movie, in the end it's not Harry or Doctor Octopus that is the villian, but Peter himself.

But the movie wouldn't work without a great cast to back it up, and Spider-Man 2 has that in the bag. Maguire, Franco, Dunst, Harris, Simmons, and even Dafoe and Robertson (in small cameos) all return they played so brilliantly two years ago. I'm more open to Dunst as Mary Jane now because she proved that she worked in the role in the first one and goes all the way in the second (even though I feel she might have made a better Gwen Stacy or even Felicia Hardy). And Franco's new turn as a more mature Harry Osborn is well done on his part. The newbie this time around is Alfred Molina as Doctor Otto Octavius AKA Doctor Octopus. He's not quite as thrilling as the Green Goblin, but I never thought Doc Ock was in the past and I'm not about to start now. Doc Ock always seemed generic to me in the comics and cartoons, I never found him particularly interesting because he's basicly your average evil mastermind. I find the insanity of the Green Goblin much more interesting. However, and this is a major however, the role of Doc Ock was made much more interesting in the film by making Ock a much more sympathetic man who lost everything and is just trying to finish his work blinded by what may happen. And Molina's performance helps make Doc Ock more interesting than he ever was before.

Raimi's direction is, once again, superb. This time he's alot more at ease and does a lot more of his cheap tricks which he held back on in the first movie. Most notably is the scene in the operating room where the tenticles are attacking the doctors. That was Sam Raimi doing was Sam Raimi does best, screwing around and torturing fellow humans in humorous, over-the-top ways.

The CGI this time around is much more solid. The train sequence is unbelievable and easily one of the best fights in the history of film, and without the CGI they couldn't have done much with it at all. Equally impressive are the clock tower and the final fight. There are a few moments where it blatantly sticks out however. The one that sticks out the most is near the end where Doc Ock kidnaps Mary Jane, the look of his face is a little weird. Weird in a kinda blank way. You know the constant shots of an all CGI Neo during the Burly Brawl in the Matrix Reloaded? That's what it looks like.

Danny Elfman is back for the score, and while I still don't care for his main theme, it runs a lot smoother this time around. I don't know if it's because I'm used to this lazy score from the first movie or not, but I got less to bitch about because they're pretty much the same. You can read what I feel about it in my review of the first movie.

One of the things I need to comment on are the opening credits, which are fantastic. The credits of the first movie are OK, but pretty cheesy. I couldn't help but wonder if this was the best they could come up with. I'm glad they changed it up with a comic recaping the first movie, it looks amazing. I hope they continue this with all the sequels.

So after all of this, what's next? Why Spider-Man 3 of course! But who will be the villian the next time around is the question to ask. It's obvious that Harry will become a villian some time in the future. Whether or not he becomes the new Green Goblin like in the comics will be up to Sam Raimi to decide. But doing another solo Goblin movie may be a little boring to the audience. Might I suggest adding the Hobgoblin to the mix and spice things up with a Goblin War? I'd personally would love to see Venom, even if his backstory is complicated. Or Eddie Brock at least. C'mon Sam, if not Venom, just give us Eddie! You could even cast Bruce Campbell in the roll, if you'd like (that would rule, come to think of it. I can see it now! Eddie getting the symbiote and when he first sees his new look, we hear Venom in his mosterous voice say "Groovy..."). Or maybe Black Cat. Sure she's a Catwoman knock off, but considering Catwoman's last two adventures on the big screen (Batman Returns and Catwoman) both sucked, you can't do much worse. And since you already introduced Kurt Connors, the Lizard would be awsome to see.

Spider-Man 2 is a sequel that surprisingly surpassed the original in almost every way. I was expecting a good movie, but damn. This was damn near perfect. Let's hope the tradition continues.

Final score:

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man
3. Daredevil
4. X-Men
5. The Punisher
6. X2
7. Blade II
8. Blade
9. Hulk

[Captain Bryan]

Well, first of all, I'd like to say I stayed home sick today, and when I finally got up to see if the world had ended I saw this.
I read it all, and it seems that I'm feeling a whole lot better, so thanks;)
Also I beleive I agree with you on almost everything here.
Something stuck out in your punisher review(It's just a nit pick, don't worry:D)
When you said "Hollywoodesque like Spider-Man's supposedly "selfmade" costume (like Peter really made that)" If you read the book(Which I like a lot.. I wish more of it would have made it into the movie:\) it's explained that he didn't make the costume, but somebody who makes costumes for wrestlers made it for him because he suggested he was interested in doing wrestling or something.

I would love to see what you thought about Hellboy:)

I think our scores are almost the same, I would have put Daredevil down a slot and X-men up one, but other than that I'd rank them the same way.
Anyways, good post! I can't wait to see your review of Blade Thrise.:)

[1godzillafan]

Originally posted by Captain Bryan

When you said "Hollywoodesque like Spider-Man's supposedly "selfmade" costume (like Peter really made that)" If you read the book(Which I like a lot.. I wish more of it would have made it into the movie:\) it's explained that he didn't make the costume, but somebody who makes costumes for wrestlers made it for him because he suggested he was interested in doing wrestling or something.

I did read the book. But that was a long time ago. But Spidey himself says that he made it in Spider-Man 2. Sure it was an akward situation he was in at the time, but I didn't see any reason for him to lie to that guy. So I'll take movie continuity over what was written in a novelization.

[1godzillafan]

As for what I thought of Hellboy, I haven't seen it since it came out on DVD, so I dug up this old quickie review I wrote a while back...

Hellboy

Warning: If you're the type of person who rolls their eyes at movies like X-Men or Men in Black, this is not the movie for you.

Hellboy is pretty much a cross between the two, although the trailers made it look like this years League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. While Hellboy is no X-Men or MIB, it's definatly better than LXG.

The lantern-jawed Ron Perlman is pefectly casted as the title character. He gives Hellboy a neat little sense of humor in an "all in a day's work" additude. But while he seems to enjoy the role, he does look uncomfortable in it. This was probably due to all that make-up (which is also fantastic, reminds me of Nightcrawler in X2).

But while the first half of the film is fairly solid, it's pretty uneven in the second. Probably the most noticable problem with it is that David Hyde Pierce's Abe Sapien character pulls a Johnny Knoxville in Men in Black II, completely disappears after the halfway point. I found myself asking "where did the fishguy go?" more than once.

The final fight is pretty lackluster. I was expecting something a little more impressive, although it still has it's high points.

Probably the my biggest problem with the movie was one that I have with several movies, it was lacking an ending. You know what I'm talking about. Those movies that just end abruptly without any sense of the movie being over. The best example of this I can think of is the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre. While this ending isn't as abrupt as that (hey, at least Hellboy had some ending nararation), it still wasn't satasfying.

Out of all the comic book movies that came out this year so far, I'd rank it third behind the absolutly incredible Spider-Man 2 and the campy but powerful Punisher. Haven't seen Catwoman yet, though, but from what I've heard, Hellboy isn't even close to being the worst comic book movie of the year.

[DragnFire22]

How do you know he didn't make it?

MY Final Scores

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man
3. X2
4. X-Men
5. Blade II
6. Hulk
7. Daredevil
8. Blade
9. The Punisher

[Atrax robustus]

Originally posted by DragnFire22
How do you know he didn't make it?

MY Final Scores

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man
3. X2
4. X-Men
5. Blade II
6. Hulk
7. Daredevil
8. Blade
9. The Punisher
MY Final Scores

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man
3. X2
4. X-Men
5. Hulk
6. Blade II
7. Daredevil
8. Blade

( I havent seen punisher yet)

Your choice was pretty close to mine, Spidety 2 ROOLED! :up: :D

[1godzillafan]

So, who else is going to see Blade: Trinity tomarrow? Or will I have the leg up on everybody here?

[Captain Bryan]

I don't think I'll be feelng well enough to go:(

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005JN39.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Walking out of the theater, I could use six simple words to describe my feelings toward this film: "Now that's what I'm talking about."

Did I ever mention how I'm a sucker for an action film with horror elements? I have no clue why. I guess it's when I go to a horror movie and see all these horror "icons" and I keep rolling my eyes. Especially vampires. I've never been impressed with those prissy little wimps that suck in more ways than one in my entire life. In fact, the only real vampire movies I ever thought anything highly of are the Blade films and Underworld, all of which are action movies with horror elements. I guess I just love seeing these creations that are supposed to be scary getting their asses kicked. Does my love for this type of movie go beyond vampires getting the living snot beaten out of them? Sure. I'll take Aliens as well. And then there were the incredibly stupid Resident Evil movies, which I admit I can't stop watching. That's brain killing at its finest. As fanatical as I sound about movies like this, even I can have problems with them. I'll be the first to say that Van Helsing wasn't that good at all. But now here we are in December, facing the supposed final chapter in the Blade franchise, and I can honestly say that this is the way Blade should have been portrayed since day one.

To put it simply, Blade: Trinity is the best of this genre since the original Predator.

David Goyer's direction completly knocked my socks off. It was fast, furious, and edgy. Not to mention nearly every problem I had with the first two Blades is corrected here. The script itself forms rather well as the movie goes on. Not only is this the best plot of the entire trilogy, it fills in some of the gaps I had with the first two as well. Only problem I had was Blade didn't get to play with his toys enough. Hell, After this offering from Goyer, all I can say is bring on Batman Begins. I can't wait to see his take on the Dark Knight.

The cast has its ups and downs, but for the most part, it's splendid. Wesley Snipes and Kris Kristofferson are both back, of course, but they seem to be doing something different. Blade seems a lot grimmer and angrier than before and Whistler is a little stricter. Jennifer "Couldn't Be Any Hotter" Beil is backing them up this time as Whistler's daughter, Abigail. Along for the ride is also Ryan Reynolds as Hannibal King, providing some comic relief as well.. His character kind of gets in the way at times, but his humor works quite often. Dominic Purcell is the villian this go-around as Drake/Dracula, and he puts both Frost and Nomak to shame. His fight at the end with Blade is easily one of the best of all three movies. On the downer side of the cast, we have Parker Posey's overacting (or underacting, I can't tell. It's one or the other) and Paul Michael Levesque AKA Triple H egging her on. H, please, don't encourage her.

The fight sequences are thrilling and, along with the Chronicles of Riddick, easily take the cake for best action scenes of the year. Blade gets to showcase a lot of cool moves in the opening credit sequence.

You know sometimes you just have to find your flow and ride it. Blade: Trinity is my flow. Sure, my praising this movie could be considered a slap in the face to good movies everywhere, but if it clicks with you it clicks with you. To this I say "Meh, what're ya gonna do?"

Final score:

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man
3. Daredevil
4. X-Men
5. Blade: Trinity
6. The Punisher
7. X2
8. Blade II
9. Blade
10. Hulk

[Captain Bryan]

I'm glad to hear you liked it.:)
I'm definitely looking forward to seeing it this weekend. I have high hopes for it:D

[eSJayBee]

very nice reviews, 1GF. I read them all in one shot which is rare of me. ;)

I felt Blade was a better movie than Blade 2, story-wise, myself. But I don't recall Frost wanting to turn everyone into vampires.

Blade 2 had nicer visuals and I actually liked the fighting in that one, more. Especially the non-martial arts fight at the end between Nomak and Blade.

Daredevil felt a little lacking, imo. But it's possibly due to the fact that the director had to cut a lot of stuff out to please the studio. I'll check out the Director's Cut.

Spidey movies: you nailed 'em.

X-Men movies: you nailed 'em.

The Punisher was okay but the way they made it, I felt it would have been a better 2-part premiere to a weekly show rather than a movie. Read Garth Ennis' work on the Punisher to see some of the most creative ways to kill. It would have been great if they put those in the movie. It would definitely have stuck Punisher out as not just another shoot-em'up.

Hulk is underrated, imo. The action and drama are incredibly separated in that movie. I'm not sure but I think this was the director's first movie for America? Possibly, he didn't realise that (to paraphrase Drak), we're all struck with ADD. If we don't have a 10-min break from talking and just put in mindless action, we start to fall asleep. Though, myself, I liked it aside from the three things you named. Hated the dogs. Didn't entirely care for the absorbing dad end fight (wtf was that??) but I did like how they updated Hulk's origin. It seems better than being hit by gamma radiation. And the paneling effect that Ang Lee did in the movie was good. Brilliant, even, since it's a comic movie. BUT he overdid it, alright. If used in moderation, it would have been a cool thing.

Blade Trinity: hmm....I was pretty disappointed with it. Would you care to read my not-so-great review?

[Amirius]

I liked Blade: Trinity.

Although, at least for me, King was the real reason why I enjoyed it. I don't know, maybe i'm simply too easily amused and get too distracted away from the action but King was my favorite character out of that movie. Not only was King witty but he could actually back up all the shit he talked, which is what I really liked about him.

I do have to give props to Snipes and Goyer though. This angry, gritty, self-rightous, serious-to-a-fault, bad-ass Blade is, as Zilla put it, the way Blade was supposed to be and the way he should have been portrayed from the start.

[DragnFire22]

I liked B:T just because it was not exactly like Blade and B2

[eSJayBee]

I was actually thinking of 1GF last night as I was watching part of the Blade DVD last night (just bought it). They had a deleted scene that explained what Frost planned on doing once everyone turned and they'd have no one to feed off of. Basically something like in Blade Trinity with the blood banks of brain-dead human bodies

[1godzillafan]

Originally posted by eSJayBee
I was actually thinking of 1GF last night as I was watching part of the Blade DVD last night (just bought it). They had a deleted scene that explained what Frost planned on doing once everyone turned and they'd have no one to feed off of. Basically something like in Blade Trinity with the blood banks of brain-dead human bodies

I've seen the scene, but it's not in the movie so I can look over it and not feel bad about it.:)

Thanks for the bump, since Electra comes out tomarrow. I'll be seeing it in the afternoon, looks interesting, and I've definatly been anticipating it, but so far it does seem less than spectacular. I'll judge it when I see it.

[DragnFire22]

Screw Elektra! I'm going to go see Coach Carter!

[Captain Bryan]

Screw Coach Carter!
Go see Racing Stripes! (http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&cf=info&id=1808599272)
:p

[eSJayBee]

Originally posted by DragnFire22
Screw Elektra!
mmmm


I'm going to go see Coach Carter!
The moment I heard it was a Sam Jackson movie, I wanted to see it. Heck, I didn't even know what kind of movie it was...

[1godzillafan]

Originally posted by eSJayBee
The moment I heard it was a Sam Jackson movie, I wanted to see it. Heck, I didn't even know what kind of movie it was...

If I went to see every single Sam Jackson movie, I would have sat through XXX. The trailer for that was bad enough, I can't imagin what the entire movie's like. As for Coach Carter, I got these Marvel reviews to write so I'm skipping it.

As for screwing Elektra, thank you for the offer. If you can provide a Jennifer Garner for me, you'd have yourself a deal.

[eSJayBee]

I await your Elektra review, good sir. :)

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005JNPB.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Swing and a miss.

Daredevil is easily one of the best superhero movies ever made, despite it's reputation. The Director's Cut was even better. Because I loved DD so much, I couldn't help but look forward to Elektra. It was obvious from the trailers that it would be a different kind of film, but I was at least hoping it would maintain some of the things that made Daredevil so excelent. However now that I've seen the finished film, I can honestly say that Elektra is best enjoyed if you completly forget that it's a spin-off from Daredevil.

Elektra has some wonderful talent behind it. They've got a good director, Rob Bowman. I'm a fan of his other two films, the solid sci-fi thriller the X-Files and the original and wildly entertaining Reign of Fire. His direction in Elektra is very stylish and reminds me of Mark Steven Johnson's direction of Daredevil. The only major problem I have with it would actually revolve around the script, which is penned by Raven Metzner and Stu Zicherman.

Elektra feels kind of like a skipping record. They don't answer how Elektra is still alive until around halfway through the movie, which is a little tedious. What's even more tedious is that it's never explained why Elektra's an assassin in the first place. The closest explaination we get for this is the line "It's what I'm good at" which doesn't answer a damn thing. Another problem with the script is the mystic feel to it, which is a major contrast to the gritty reality of Daredevil (granted, a reality where blind men can gain radar senses and jump thirty feet from one building to another). I'm guessing they were trying to pull a Chronicles of Riddick and not be similar to the previous film and expand the universe. However, what made the Chronicles of Riddick work so well was that Pitch Black was an isolated film, we had no clue what was beyond that planet. Daredevil never felt isolated to me and the jump from dark action film to asian-esque fantasy doesn't really work that well.

The acting is pretty solid, however since the film is Elektra centered, the only one worth noting is Jennifer Garner who is just as good in the role as last time. The others do well with what they have, but are never developed enough for us to give a damn about them.

Christophe Beck's score is neat and mysterious and works well with the material given. And just like the material given, contrasts Daredevil also. But this peice I can live with.

Elektra is decent dollar cinema fare and completly harmless. But I would rather have a Daredevil 2.

Final Score:

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man
3. Daredevil
4. X-Men
5. Blade: Trinity
6. The Punisher
7. X2
8. Blade II
9. Blade
10. Elektra
11. Hulk

[Captain Bryan]

Darn, that sucks.
I was hoping that it would be good:(

[eSJayBee]

NO NO NO! Stop posting your opinions! Post reviews!

[eSJayBee]

;) ^



Nice review, 1GF. I was really hoping this movie would do well. :(

I guess I'll still go see it.

[1godzillafan]

Originally posted by eSJayBee
NO NO NO! Stop posting your opinions! Post reviews!

LOL!


Originally posted by eSJayBee
;) ^



Nice review, 1GF. I was really hoping this movie would do well. :(

I guess I'll still go see it.

It still maybe worth seeing it in a theater. It had the teaser for the Fantastic Four with it. It's too early to see if it will be an actually good movie, but it shows us that it'll at least be a visual feast.

I also finally got to see the Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith trailer. Pretty rockin'. Good to see Vader back on the screen.

[1godzillafan]

Man-Thing's going straight to TV. (http://www.superherohype.com/news.php?id=2502) So I'll leave it up to you to decide. Do I review it when it airs on television, wait for the unedited DVD, or review it at all since it's not going to theaters? What do you say?

[Captain Bryan]

Hahaha, That pleases me:D
Man-Thing was going to come out on my birthday and that made me mad.:smad:
I'll probably end up watching it anyway though...:rolleyes:

[1godzillafan]

You didn't answer my question! :smad:

[Captain Bryan]

I say go for it:p
I'll actually watch it before I read your review for once;)

[Captain Bryan]

Saturday April 30th 9/8c
Be warned...;)
http://www.scifi.com/manthing/

[eSJayBee]

Originally posted by 1godzillafan
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005JNPB.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Swing and a miss.

Daredevil is easily one of the best superhero movies ever made, despite it's reputation. The Director's Cut was even better. Because I loved DD so much, I couldn't help but look forward to Elektra. It was obvious from the trailers that it would be a different kind of film, but I was at least hoping it would maintain some of the things that made Daredevil so excelent. However now that I've seen the finished film, I can honestly say that Elektra is best enjoyed if you completly forget that it's a spin-off from Daredevil.

Elektra has some wonderful talent behind it. They've got a good director, Rob Bowman. I'm a fan of his other two films, the solid sci-fi thriller the X-Files and the original and wildly entertaining Reign of Fire. His direction in Elektra is very stylish and reminds me of Mark Steven Johnson's direction of Daredevil. The only major problem I have with it would actually revolve around the script, which is penned by Raven Metzner and Stu Zicherman.

Elektra feels kind of like a skipping record. They don't answer how Elektra is still alive until around halfway through the movie, which is a little tedious. What's even more tedious is that it's never explained why Elektra's an assassin in the first place. The closest explaination we get for this is the line "It's what I'm good at" which doesn't answer a damn thing. Another problem with the script is the mystic feel to it, which is a major contrast to the gritty reality of Daredevil (granted, a reality where blind men can gain radar senses and jump thirty feet from one building to another). I'm guessing they were trying to pull a Chronicles of Riddick and not be similar to the previous film and expand the universe. However, what made the Chronicles of Riddick work so well was that Pitch Black was an isolated film, we had no clue what was beyond that planet. Daredevil never felt isolated to me and the jump from dark action film to asian-esque fantasy doesn't really work that well.

The acting is pretty solid, however since the film is Elektra centered, the only one worth noting is Jennifer Garner who is just as good in the role as last time. The others do well with what they have, but are never developed enough for us to give a damn about them.

Christophe Beck's score is neat and mysterious and works well with the material given. And just like the material given, contrasts Daredevil also. But this peice I can live with.

Elektra is decent dollar cinema fare and completly harmless. But I would rather have a Daredevil 2.

I saw this movie a few days ago and I gotta agree with 1GF when he said "the jump from dark action film to asian-esque fantasy doesn't really work that well". I for one liked the fantasy feel that Elektra was going for but it didn't work out when you think about the reality she came from in Daredevil.

I was liking that Ninja Scroll feel with Elektra against a team of supernatural baddies (Tattoo was cool from a fantasy POV). I didn't care for Garner's acting in this, however. I never read any Elektra books but did she suffer from obsessive-compulsive disorder? They focused on it a bunch of times in the movie and I was thinking it would lead to something in the end but it didn't...

[Captain Bryan]

I think I'm going to see this tonight or this week at least. I'll be sure to post my thoughts on it right after, or even during the time I spend watching the movie.:)

[1godzillafan]

It's funny the Elektra talk sparked up again, I just finished watching it 5 minutes ago.

The DVD is extra light, so my DVD review should be up tonight (be sure to stay til the very end, I've attached and extra something to my reviews now).

[1godzillafan]

Man-Thing this weekend. I have a tendancy to forget things like this, hopefully I'll remember.

[Captain Bryan]

Oh yeah, that is this weekend, wow. heh.

[eSJayBee]

My friend said it 'looked' cheap. I await your review, sir.

[1godzillafan]

Originally posted by eSJayBee
My friend said it 'looked' cheap. I await your review, sir.

I saw a commercial for it and I didn't think it looked cheap at all. In fact, effects wise it looked damn good for a movie that's premiering on the Sci-Fi channel (now that's cheap. Need I remind you all of Boa vs. Python? *shudder*)

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0009A409S.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Back in the day, both DC and Marvel released two seperate characters at the same time that were so similar that even today it's a subject amung comic book geeks of who ripped off who. One of them was DC's Swamp Thing (which is the more popular of the two), the other was Marvel's Man-Thing.

Swamp Thing already had his movie. It came out in the early eighties. Needless to say, it sucked. OK, I guess it wasn't godawful, but it took itself way too seriously. It also spawned a sequel, which also sucked ironicly because it didn't take itself seriously enough (if you want my opinion of what Swamp Thing you should check out, be on the lookout for an old animated series that only lasted five episodes. That kicked ass).

Now it's 2005, and Man-Thing finally gets his own movie. Does it suck? Yes and no. It sucks in a way one of those shockingly entertaining movies on Mystery Science Theater 3000 sucks. You know what I'm talking about. They're awful but they're fun to watch. I'm talking Prince of Space, the Brute Man, Fugitive Alien, Future War...OK, I take that back. This movie's not nearly as bad as Future War (not by a long shot). But I think you get my point.

Man-Thing is filmed in Hick-Vision. But I kid Brent Leonard. It's competantly directed, I guess. In the normal scenes between the human's, the camera work is often generic, but not over the top, so that's kind of a good thing. The scenes in the swamp are terrific, though. There's this eerie green glow in those scenes that is very cool. And Man-Thing himself looks great. The suit is cool and believable, and the sparse CG work is outstanding. The problem is we don't see enough of it. Man-Thing seems to be tossed into the background, in his own movie even. Most of the time we're watching characters that seem to have come straight from a "Do It Yourself Horror Movie" kit, and Man-Thing is brushed aside as a subplot. As a result, we never truly find out what he is. The closest we get to an explaination is that he's "the guardian of the swamp," which is pretty vague.

As far as movies that premier on the Sci-Fi Channel go, Man-Thing's probably one of the best. Sure that's not saying much, and it's probably a good thing that this never made it to theaters, but it's entertaining enough.

Pure, trashy, monster movie fun. It's a horrible adaptation, and I'd hope something better surfaces someday for the character, but hey, at least it's better than Swamp Thing.

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man
3. Daredevil
4. X-Men
5. Blade: Trinity
6. The Punisher
7. X2
8. Blade II
9. Man-Thing
10. Blade
11. Elektra
12. Hulk

[eSJayBee]

I was sort of hoping this movie would do better. Oh well. I'll still try to catch it somewhere. Though I loved Blade and Hulk, 1GF. :( And you put Man-Thing above those two? Hmm

[1godzillafan]

Originally posted by eSJayBee
I was sort of hoping this movie would do better. Oh well. I'll still try to catch it somewhere. Though I loved Blade and Hulk, 1GF. :( And you put Man-Thing above those two? Hmm

I was kind of on the edge with Blade. But it all came down to that, while the movie still sucked, it didn't slow up the way the ones that dominate the lower area of my list do.

I toyed with switching places with Blade for a while, even Elektra. Poor Hulk, however, always stayed in last.

[eSJayBee]

I downloaded Man-Thing earlier today. I gotta find time to watch it later. AFTER school's done with.

[Captain Bryan]

Watch Godzilla vs. Megalon first!:smad:

[eSJayBee]

Don't tell me what to do.

[Captain Bryan]

Don't tell me what to do then either.:(

[eSJayBee]

That's different.

Anyway, Man-Thing's first. That MST3K ep might be after.

[1godzillafan]

As a warning for Godzilla vs. Megalon, the first half is very slow. But once they get to the big fight, hillarity abound.

[1godzillafan]

Bump! Fantastic Four comes out friday!

[Captain Bryan]

Oh yeah.. That's right. I forgot.:o
I wonder what I should do.. I'm babysitting. Oh well no more thinking outloud.

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005JNTS.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Warner Brothers and DC are brilliant. Look at their battle stratagy, just when things look hopeless with Batman & Robin, Steel, and Catwoman, Marvel picks this time to strike. However when Marvel faulters with Elektra and Man-Thing, DC and WB move in for the kill with Constantine and Batman Begins.

Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. More than likely they were just taking notes. This is proven after they mistakenly thought that the reason the X-Men franchise was so successful was Halle Berry in tight leather, and thus Catwoman was born. "But if T&A isn't the answer, what is?" says one exacutive to his fellow coworkers. Then it happens. That shy little new guy who hasn't said a thing for 10 years speaks up, "Um, it may be that they have good scripts." The room bursts with laughter. "The people don't want that," says the first executive, "They want Will Smith on a giant robot tarantula or Keanu Reeves doing kung fu." The brave little executive shoots back "Then how come Catwoman bit the big one and Spider-Man 2 hit it big?" The room falls silent. They spend the rest of the night following up on this crazy idea of making good movies. They come up with two, however someone demanded that they both have Keanu Reeves doing kung fu in them. They comprimised by casting Keanu Reeves in one, but no kung fu.

Let's just face it, DC plain kicked Marvel's ass in 2005. Fantastic Four was Marvel's last chance to save face.

I won't pretend to be a Fantastic Four expert (usually I just stick with Spider-Man and Batman), but I did know a great deal about them before going into this movie. As far as I can tell, Fantastic Four is very faithful to it's source material, but far from fantastic itself.

One of the great things about all the previous Marvel films is how the filmmaking just swept you into the world. Spider-Man and X-Men succeeded in doing this brilliantly, and Blade, Daredevil, Hulk, and Punisher did respectivly as well. Hell, even Man-Thing had something like this going for it. Tim Story's direction for Fantastic Four is plain. I feel like I'm watching from a movie screen, and not from the sidelines. While I think he was a decent director for the film in the fact that it's probably the most upbeat comic that Marvel has (due to the lack of secret identities and publicity problems), but as a visual filmmaker, he sets the camera anywere and tells the actors to do their thing.

However, on the acting side, everything is fine. There's a few moments of poor acting, but most of it is solid. Michael Chicklis shines the brightest as Ben "The Thing" Grimm. He's intimidating and at the same time sympathetic. And damn does that Thing costume rule. Chris Evans does Johnny "Human Torch" Storm justice with his hot-headed and fun performance. Ioan Gruffudd is decent as Reed "Mr. Fantastic" Richards. He doesn't stick out in your head mostly because you're too busy watching Chicklis and Evans. Julian McMahon is a big surprise as Victor Von Doom. I don't know why, but I was expecting him to give us something more like Rupert Everett as Dr. Claw in the Inspector Gadget movie a few years back, but even though akward as the villian at first, he hits a home run by the film's end. All these bright spots aside, Jessica Alba is horribly miscast as Sue "Invisible Woman" Storm. At ever turn she tries to pronounce words that she seems to have never heard of before, and as a result often looks utterly lost. However the reason she was picked for the role comes in loud and clear during the bridge scene where she strips nude in public (invisible of course. This is PG-13).

But all bad things aside, the movie pulls itself off rathar well. It's closer to being what it wants to be than Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy was last April, or even War of the Worlds was last week. It's a fun, lighthearted popcorn flick with some cool effects (especially ol' Torchy in "Flame On!" mode. How cool was that?)

"Okay, keep me out of your group! Who needs you? I'll make you guys look like pikers!" - Spider-Man to the Fantastic Four, Amazing Spider-Man #1

Your movies already have, Spidey. Twice in a row. Fantastic Four is less fantastic than it could have been, however it is a decent and likable entry into Marvel's lineup. It may be found very silly to some movie goers (especially since it's hot on the tail of last year's the Incredibles, which while being a blatant copy of the concept was much superior), but if you are able to believe Jessica Alba is a scientist for five minutes, you'll most likely be ready for anything else this movie has in store. It's worth the price of admission for Michael Chicklis' performance alone, but when you walk out you might wish you watched Batman Begins again instead.

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man
3. Daredevil
4. X-Men
5. Blade: Trinity
6. The Punisher
7. X2
8. Fantastic Four
9. Blade II
10. Man-Thing
11. Blade
12. Elektra
13. Hulk

[1godzillafan]

Been nearly a year since I bumped this motherfucker, but with X-Men: The Last Stand coming out friday, it's time to dust it off.

Wolverine is da bomb.

[eSJayBee]

Have fun. I've been waiting a while for this one, myself. :up:

[Atrax robustus]

Im still bummed that Nightcrawler aint in it......... :(

[1godzillafan]

I'm still bummed that Sabertooth and Toad weren't in the last one, but whatyagonnado?

[1godzillafan]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005JOVH.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_V55821548_.jpg

The X-Men is an excellent saga in many ways, showcasing it's many awsome superheroes while backing it up with moral as well. In this lies what is also wrong with it as well. I recall being a young lad in 1992, watching and enjoying the cartoon series on Fox Kids. In time, I grew away from it. About a year ago, I watched an episode of it again and found my views on the show had changed. I still enjoyed the characters themselves, but the show was so goddamn preachy. At every corner they were shoving their moral down my throat until it just felt like a weekly afternoon special.

The X-Men films, on the other hand, suffer from something different. The moral is still there, and it's still baby fed to us, but it's just not force down our throats. What the X-Men film franchise has is an inability to find a happy-medium. They try to find so many things to fit within the story their trying to tell, that they seem to forget something only to run back and pick it up. This is appearant in both the sleek and cool original, the overpraised but fun X2, and, yes, even the new sequel, X-Men: The Last Stand.

What was wrong with the original X-Men was that it had all the elements to make the best superhero movie out there; a great cast, good source material, and faithfullness to that source material, even with a few liberties to adapt it; but it never stepped above a slight look at this universe. Many characters weren't developed to satisfaction and the film feels more shallow than it really is because of it. X2 (I refuse to use the lame ass "X-Men United" subtitle for various reasons) promised itself as a correction, it had a much longer runtime and more characters. However, the runtime stretched the story thinner than it needed to be and the characters still recieved less development than they should have.

Now we get to X-Men: The Last Stand, the supposed "final" chapter in the X-Men trilogy, and ironicly it's a reverse of what went wrong with X2. The Last Stand offers to develope these characters beyond the last two entries combined, and ups the ante with an story worthy of an epic finish. The problem is that the mere 104 minute run time feels to short for these ambitious desires. For the ambition alone, I must hold the Last Stand to higher regard than X2, but I still remain firm in my belief that the original is the best film of the series, mostly since it's more satisfying as a single film than all three put together as a saga.

One problem I have with the film lies within the deaths of three major characters. I'm not going to spoil who they are, but I will say the first two left me unsatisfied. The second one, especially, since it's supposed to be an important scene in the film, yet it's treated in such a campy manor that it doesn't result in any emotion from the viewer. This is the one aspect of the film that I place entirely upon the new director, Brett Ratner, who otherwise did a worthy job of finishing what Bryan Singer started, especially with the hectic schedual he had. I would have liked to see what this sequence would have been like under Singer's direction.

However, like X2 before it, the Last Stand is not a bad film by any means. It's fun, flashy, and entertaining, just like the first two. Also like the first two, my personal favorite, Wolverine, takes center stage, but not entirely. Storm also shares the spotlight and it's great to see the character used to her full potential. Jean Grey's transformation into Pheonix is also a fun direction for the series. But, unfortunatly, Cyclops' almost tradition of reduced screentime in these films continues, as he (somehow) contributes even less here than he did in X2. However, we have four new additions to the X-Men team, all four expanding on small roles from previous films. Beast, Iceman, Colossus, and Shadowcat all kick ass and take names in this movie. In the previous films, the latter three all used their powers basicly for "wow" factor than actual battle, but finally we see what they're really capable of. As for Beast, he never really got to showcase anything in his very small X2 cameo (in fact, his change from human to big furry blue thing isn't even addressed either), but he shows himself to be a force to be reckoned with either.

Probably what the Last Stand is most satisfying as is a conclusion. I liked many of the slight wrap-ups spread throughout the film, many of which are small but it's fun to see them aknowledged. My personal favorite being the last scene involving a main character right before the end credits roll, in a short sequence that's both sad and amusing at the same time. In a way, it's the perfect sign off for the series (can't comment on the post-credit tag since I didn't stick around for it).

I respect Brett Ratner for coming into the series and squeezing out this film under so much pressure, but it doesn't change that it still demonstrates the flaws of the previous film. Those who call X2 the "greatest superhero movie of all time" will undoubtably look down upon the Last Stand, but I see the flaws of all three movies and I accept them. Too me, the Last Stand is just as good as those that came before it.

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man
3. Daredevil
4. X-Men
5. Blade: Trinity
6. X-Men: The Last Stand
7. The Punisher
8. X2
9. Fantastic Four
10. Blade II
11. Man-Thing
12. Blade
13. Elektra
14. Hulk

[1godzillafan]

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B00005JPFO.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V44208463_.jpg

Simon Birch...Daredevil...how does one go from those fantastic films to this mess? Mark Steven Johnson, you had so much promise.

Is Ghost Rider totally without merit? Not quite. Nicholas Cage is making the most of playing the character he has tatooed on his body, and seems to be loving every minute of it. It's hard for some of that fun to not rub off on you as you watch a film like this. The Ghost Rider scenes are fairly badass, and really highlight this movie in action. The CGI work on the Rider's head is beautiful. I also enjoyed the small not to Marvel's forgotten original Ghost Rider, Carter Slade, even though the character in the comics has nothing to do with Johnny Blaze's Ghost Rider.

Unfortunatly, none of the above can change what is an ultimatly unsatisfying movie. The movie switches back and forth between odd campiness and over-the-top melodrama. Like the title character, Ghost Rider tries to walk in both worlds, and the end result is perplexing, to say the least.

With the comic book film overload we've had since the release of Spider-Man, comparisons to those in the past are inevitable. The ones that come immediatly to mind are Constantine, for it dark religious themes, and Hellboy, for it's campy, out-there style. What made these movies work is that they chose a side and stuck with it. Ghost Rider becomes more akin to the overrated Pirates of the Carribean film series, in which it tries too hard to please everyone in the theater, that it just becomes a headache to watch. It's admirable to try beyond your limit, but sometimes you need to quit while you're ahead. I'm certain the script for Ghost Rider could have worked, mostly if the film had been far less of a crowdpleasing attempt.

While I critisize it's use in the film greatly, the truth is the humor in the film does work, and it's often very, very funny. I just didn't appreciate it within the context of everything else. I did walk out of the theater charmed by the performances of Nicholas Cage and Eva Mendes, yet thinking that thew goofiness of some of their material hurt the integrety of the film.

As for Mark Steven Johnson, I loved the comic book look he gave to Daredevil. In Ghost Rider, he's once again trying to create moving comic panels, but everyone looks like they're posing for an artist. In the opening act, the kid that plays a younger Johnny Blaze meets the devil after he's sold his soul. The actor poses, points his finger at him, scowls, and says "You did this!" It wouldn't look so out of place on the comic page, but in the film, it looks positivly rediculous. And it doesn't stop either. Every time Cage sees the devil in the film, he does the same thing. Pose, point, scowl, "You!"

And the film feels very unoriginal as well. I found there to be several plot similarities to Constantine and the end battle directly rips off Blade (right down the eyes turning red on the villian).

Before the film opened, there was already a buzz about Ghost Rider 2. Given how packed my theater was, there's probably something to it, unless bad word of mouth spreads and the film ends up bombing. Johnson, do me a favor, give us Daredevil 2 instead. I'll be much happier.

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man
3. Daredevil
4. X-Men
5. Blade: Trinity
6. X-Men: The Last Stand
7. The Punisher
8. X2
9. Fantastic Four
10. Blade II
11. Man-Thing
12. Blade
13. Elektra
14. Hulk
15. Ghost Rider

[eSJayBee]

I plan to see this movie soon, hopefully today. The trailers and clips I saw of it didn't seem very promising and it kind of gave the impression it was a boring film. Now I see the bad reviews coming in which isn't helping though many movies I liked got a lot more bad-than-good reviews so we'll see... I like Mark Steven Johnson too and I had hoped that after the ill-received reaction to Daredevil, this big comic fan might have gotten better at this comic movie thing. :(

Anyway, I read that Affleck said Daredevil is in his past so he probably wouldn't return for a sequel which possibly isn't even being considered since (I believe) Daredevil was considered a bomb.

[Amirius]

The second half of the movie just confused me. I really enjoyed the movie up until the point where Roxanne found out the Ghost Rider is Johnny, but it's like the movie hit a wall and gave itself a concussion after that. The far away to right in their face abrupt camera pans towards the end gave me a headache. Thought Blackheart went down way too easily too, you'd think a demon with all that power wouldnt just stand there and let Ghost Rider burn him.

[1godzillafan]

Anyway, I read that Affleck said Daredevil is in his past so he probably wouldn't return for a sequel which possibly isn't even being considered since (I believe) Daredevil was considered a bomb.


Affleck also said he'd love to do another movie with his wife, Jennifer Garner, and Daredevil 2 was probably the most likely candidate since they already costared int the original.

I really don't see Daredevil as a bomb. $100 million with a $70 million budget is still a decent chunk of change. Elektra was the bomb, and the fact that audiences didn't much care to watch a supporting character who was supposed to be dead get her own movie, 20th Century Fox pretty much scrapped Daredevil 2 entirly. However now that Marvel is funding their own movies, should they work a deal with Fox, it may be back in the cards (ala the anti-sequel Incredible Hulk).

[eSJayBee]

I think any movie that doesn't get back at least twice its budget cost is considered a "bomb" to the studio and/or people who made the movie.

So Affleck got to be one of his favourite superheroes in a Mark Steven Johnson movie that didn't do so well and now Cage got to be one of his favourite superheroes in a Mark Steven Johnson movie that probably won't do so well. :( I really do like the guy but that's sad. Perhaps it's best if you aren't a big fan of what you're adapting into a movie.

[1godzillafan]

Look at Superman Returns, $250 million budget, merly $200 domesticly and $400 worldwide. Not quite double, but enough to warrent a sequel. I think Fox found Daredevil a modest success, or they wouldn't have greenlighted Elektra.

Ghost Rider's not a bomb yet. It made nearly $16 million yesterday, and it's being said it may take over National Treasure as Cage's biggest opening ever (although I doubt it will have the same legs as NT). I'm not entirly sure how the general public will react to the film. There were a great deal of people in the audience that seemed to be enjoying it (there was even a group in the front row that started clapping during a scene where Rider flipped the bird to a group of cops). I really couldn't get into what was being attempted in this movie, though, and Ghost Rider is one hella cool character in my book. I kept trying to tell myself that maybe MSJ will pull a superior director's cut out of his hat ala Daredevil, but judging from what's onscreen, I can't be that optimistic.

[eSJayBee]

I finally saw Ghost Rider yesterday. My opinion: it was good. I don't see every movie that isn't a masterpiece as a bad movie. Ghost Rider was a 'fun' movie and it had potential but I think the director/writer, Mark Steven Johnson, is trying harder than he is currently capable of handling. According to IMDB, Ghost Rider is only the third movie he's directed (the others being John Birch and Daredevil) and the eight that he's helped write. He's letting his fanboyism get the better of him.

As 1GF pointed out about the pointing scenes with Nicolas Cage in this movie being something that only works in comics, I'm reminded of all the physically impossible stunts Daredevil would do in the movie despite not having any superstrength-type powers. He would do such stunts in the comics and they work fine. No one questions it. But things like that can't be translated realistically onto film and not make people go "What the...??" The critics are tearing this movie apart but I'm told the sequel is already in pre-production. It looks like we'll have another Fantastic Four on our hands (mediocre reception but stil box office success to warrant a sequel). I couldn't be happier.

And now for the cheesiest and lamest line in the movie: "We are...Legion...because...we are...MANY." I don't see how Mark Steven Johnson thought that'd fit in any movie that's not trying to be a joke.

[1godzillafan]

I pride myself in enjoying entertainment as well as art, as well. I still think Ghost Rider was trying a bit to hard to be a crowd pleaser, though.

Yeah, that Legion line was horrible. I definatly surpressed a giggle at that.

[eSJayBee]

I agree with you. It was trying too hard. It should have been a rated R movie. Could it be that that skull was so clean because if it looked dirty, they'd have to up the rating from PG13? My friend says "That's how it looked in the comic". That's another nice example of how things that work in the books may not seem as good on flim.

I also hated the Blackheart character in this movie. The actor acted like he was high when he delivered all his lines. :down: Mark Steven Johnson needs to work on his directing. Some directors can quickly fit into making complex pictures but I don't think he's one of them. He really needs to do more small pictures before tackling works like Daredevil and Ghost Rider again.

Also, who brings a Magic 8-Ball to a date?? :lol: That was so random, I loved it even if it was weird. Eva Mendes' dress in that scene helped, too...=ahem=










http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=5234

ComingSoon.net has posted the four-day weekend box office results for Ghost Rider, which set a new record for the Presidents' Day weekend:

Despite less than stellar reviews, Sony's Ghost Rider, with Nicolas Cage playing the Marvel Comics character, found a huge audience of fans this weekend, as it grossed an estimated $51.5 million over the four-day weekend in 3,619 theatres. With an astounding average of over $14 thousand per theatre, Ghost Rider easily beat previous holiday weekend records set by Adam Sandler's 50 First Dates and Ghost Rider director Mark Steven Johnson's Daredevil. Having made $44.5 million over the three-day weekend, the action-thriller also set a new opening record for its star Nicolas Cage, whose previous high was $35 million with 2004's National Treasure.

[1godzillafan]

Also, who brings a Magic 8-Ball to a date?? :lol: That was so random, I loved it even if it was weird. Eva Mendes' dress in that scene helped, too...=ahem=


You mean you're not supposed too? I've been lugging this thing around for years.

[DragnFire22]

I cant believe you rank X:Last Stand over X2....

[1godzillafan]

I've made it no secret that I find X2 to be inferior and overrated. Even with it's opposite problems, I found the Last Stand to be a much more solid and watchable film.

I'm more in shock that I rank Man-Thing so highly.

[eSJayBee]

I've made it no secret that I find X2 to be inferior and overrated. Even with it's opposite problems, I found the Last Stand to be a much more solid and watchable film.

I'm more in shock that I rank Man-Thing so highly.
I'm more surprised you put Man-Thing above Blade I and Hulk. :(

I appear to be the only human being on the face of the Earth who really liked Hulk. I'd have put Man-Thing at the bottom of my Marvel list. Even Elektra was more entertaining.

[1godzillafan]

In all honesty, I haven't seen it since it aired on Sci-Fi. I picked up a used copy real cheap, but I never watched it.

I'm probably saving it for when I'm in an MST mood. If I ever feel the urge to do a fan MSTing, it's probably one of the movies in my collection I'll turn to (along with Friday the 13th and both Resident Evil flicks).

Still, I have memories of that Man-Thing costume. Awsomeness unleashed.

[DragnFire22]

I've made it no secret that I find X2 to be inferior and overrated. Even with it's opposite problems, I found the Last Stand to be a much more solid and watchable film.

I'm more in shock that I rank Man-Thing so highly.

But it just doesn't make sense. What does Last Stand do better than X2?

[1godzillafan]

In honesty, it doesn't really do anything better, and I gave them both the same rating. They were both opposite ends of the same problem, X2 was an inferior story that took too long to tell and the Last Stand was an excelent story that was short changed. The reason I rank the Last Stand higher is that even with it's brisk run time, I left the theater more satisfied than I did with X2. Brett Ratner provided a more entertaining movie in his short deadline than Bryan Singer did with 3 years planning, and I gave it the edge solely on that.

But in any case, most of the problems with both films were consistant, way too many characters and promises overlooked at the expense of consentrating on just one, namely Wolverine. I love Wolverine as much as the next guy, but X-Men is not a one-man show. I would have loved more Cyclops in both films, and save Wolverine's arc for his own movie.

I always tend to avoid the X2 vs. the Last Stand argument, though, since I know I'm in a very, very small minority. I prefer to just merely say that the original was superior to both. I said it before and I'll say it again, it was a better singular movie than all three put together were a trilogy.

[DragnFire22]

I guess I just don't understand why you think the story in X3 was so much better. I know both films have their flaws, but X3 seemed to be aimed at first graders.

[1godzillafan]

I was more into the idea of a mutant cure and Magneto's rage to put an end to it that I was at the petty prejudice of Striker and his rather boring plot of building another Cerebro. Granted, Striker's story was an attempt to show the other side of the war and showing that Magneto and his chronies aren't the only bad guys around, but it could have been done in a much more interesting way.

The Last Stand seemed to be a mirror story of what happened in the original film, in which Magneto tried to turn a certian group of humans into mutants against their will. Now the tables have turned, and Magneto can't take it. I was actually disappointed that the Last Stand never really confronted this, though, even though it's dead obvious.

I was disappointed that Ratner's direction resulted in a less serious film than the first two, even when he proved he can do drama exceptionally well with Red Dragon. That was the Last Stand's biggest weakness, as far as I'm concerned, although I still stand as a defender of Ratner, his film, and it's place in the series.

[Shivure]

What is your review of Ghost Rider. I think that would be funny to read.

[1godzillafan]

It's on the previous page.

[eSJayBee]

Lazy Shiv. :smad:

[1godzillafan]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7a/Spider-Man_3%2C_International_Poster.jpg

What makes a movie good? Is it originality? If that were true, Dark City wouldn't have sucked as hard as it did. Is it good storytelling? It helps, but the story being told needs to do it's share as well.

There is no definition of a good movie. You either like it or you don't. Film reviewers like myself often stretch "I liked it" into neumorous paragraphs, simply because we can't shut our traps.

Sitting in front of my computer, I'm trying to explain why I liked Spider-Man 3. I reread my original write-ups of Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2, hoping for inspiration. I didn't find any. Here I am, years later, and I'm amazed at how amaturish my writing was, even though it gave me great pride back in the day. After these last few years, my tastes have matured and expanded and I found myself loving other films. The me of then can't tell the me of now what to say. Hell, the me of then probably would have hailed Ghost Rider as a phenominal achievement in filmmaking.

So I'll just say what's true...I liked it.

But as a writer, just leaving it at that wouldn't be much fun now would it? Are there things about it I didn't like? Sure. Spider-Man 3 is no Spider-Man 2, which is a superhero flick near perfect in every aspect. It actually on par with the original Spider-Man, in retrospect. It's a bit rushed and disjointed, but everything works out quite well by the time it ends. I'll have to hold 3 to higher regard, actually, simply because I have a gut feeling it will probably hold up better in time.

The thing that everyone will be griping about is the character overload and how they don't all fit into the movie. I've heard a lot of people place blame on Venom, but in all actuality, of the villians in the movie, Venom works the most. I'm not a big Sandman fan, since there is nothing about him that facinates me. He's a pety thug in the comics and he's a pety thug in this movie. All of the efforts at juicing up his character and justifying his inclusion in the film franchise are flimsy. There are other better ways Harry's Goblin could have been used as well. The amnesia storyline is brief and really not that enthralling. I liked his final fate, however, and thought it was a fitting conclusion to his arc.

As for Venom, we can't use him until the final act. Until then, Spidey needs somebody to beat on. Sandman and Harry just drew the short straws. Looking at it from that point of view, they fulfill their purpose.

The main crew return as if they never left. This is quite simply Tobey Maguire's best performance in the entire series. Kirsten Dunst once again fails to impress as his girl, but you could still do worse. James Franco, Rosemary Harris, and JK Simmons are all in top form as well. Given how much hype there was around Thomas Haden Church's Sandman tying into Peter's backstory, I'm surprised he wasn't used more. Church does magnificantly with what he has, though. Topher Grace plays both Eddie Brock and Venom, and while I was hoping he'd deliver the goods, he surpassed my expectations and thensome. Even with his illfitting voice coming out of Venom's jaw, something about it was creepy enough for me to say "bravo."

Danny Elfman steps down from the score duty, to witch I say thank god. Christopher Young steps up to the plate with an equally unremarkable score. Who was better? As much as I though he missed a grand opportunity, I'm going with Elfman, if only because Young's Black Suit theme is the most annoying tune in the entire series (and he beats it into the ground too).

Minor details to note, I was disappointed that Sam Raimi and co didn't ride with the comic book illistration opening credit sequence they started with 2. In it's place, scenes from the original movies are played pieced together between spider webs (as the symbiote crawls over them). It's underwhelming, but it is better than the cheesy 3D graphics of the original. Also, I missed that end shot that defined the series in the first two films, which both ended with one long shot of Spidey swinging through the city. I was disappointed that 3 didn't follow suit, and instead ended on Peter and MJ dancing gloomily together.

Is this the end of Spider-Man? Honestly, I hope not. This one is a bit of a downer to end the series on. But I'll only take another with Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire delivering the goods. After three movies, what sense would it make to change now? Keep doing what you guys are doing and these movies will continue to tower above all other blockbusters. If not, even if it turns out alright, it just won't feel the same.

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man 3
3. Spider-Man
4. Daredevil
5. X-Men
6. Blade: Trinity
7. X-Men: The Last Stand
8. The Punisher
9. X2
10. Fantastic Four
11. Blade II
12. Man-Thing
13. Blade
14. Elektra
15. Hulk
16. Ghost Rider

[1godzillafan]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fa/FanFour2_newposter.JPG

One would think that great care would be taken into adapting the self proclaimed "World's Greatest Comic Magazine" onto the big screen. It's too bad that hasn't happened twice in a row (three times, including the Roger Corman one).

Is Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer better than the original? No. It's very very equal in pretty much every shape and form. The only difference is I didn't leave the original with the general impression that the movie just stopped and said "We're out of money, so we're going to wrap this up as quickly as possible. Sorry."

I do imagine there are going to be a lot of people with the opinion of Silver Surfer as a sequel superior to the original, but there was a lot of talk about X2 being one as well, and I didn't see it there either. Both tried to be bigger and better, but ended up flat on their faces in execution and made me long the original's Point A to Point B nature.

However, one thing I can give X2 and not Surfer is that at least X2 didn't feel like a tacked on byproduct. The producers always say "Now the origin is out of the way, let's get to the good stuff," and I'm still waiting for the good stuff. There's so many things about this movie that just seem thrown in for the hell of it. This list disappointingly includes Dr. Doom, who seems to be added in as an afterthought.

In the end, Surfer feels less of being the payoff from sitting through the original than it does being a shameless cash grab ala Speed 2: Cruise Control. While Surfer's existance in the world isn't as utterly perplexing as Speed 2's, I still wish they could make it feel like an add on to the original movie and not just "Hey! It's another one!"

In all fairness, the movie actually does surpass the first film somewhat. Then the main story starts to kick in, and it all becomes quite predictable, and even rather foolish. Johnny has a subplot in this one, where we are supposed to believe he is falling for a girl, yet she never comes off as anything other than another Johnny fling. By the end of the movie, we're forced to think they're in a serious relationship, given how things developed, how they got to this point is really quite confusing. I also have quite a bit of problems with the climax, which is more unsatisfying than I could ever imagined. The downfall of Galactus is unexplained and the movie just kind of ends in heartbeat wondering "What the hell was that?"

And there are many minor nitpicks in the film as well. The film constantly defies the rules it sets up in the original film, what with Mr. Fantastic's civilian clothes stretching along with his body in every scene, when we've already concluded that it should not be. While Johnny still has his burning clothes problem, he wears a new suit at the beginning of the film full of product placement stitched on. How this doesn't burn off after his "Flame On!" is never explained (not that I really wanted it to be, I just wanted the movie to move on already). I also didn't really care for the giant 4 being written in the sky at the end. It's a cute callback to the original film, it the context of the situation at the time, it's really just stupid. The first film was Johnny showing off, yet in this film, they're on their way to a crisis. "Oh, sure a disaster is on hand, but let's take five and write our logo in the sky."

But I will say one thing in favor of the film, Stan Lee's cameo is the best one yet. I loved it.

I liked the story better this time around, it just didn't feel like it was the proper execution. Yeah the world is about to end, can you do something bigger with it? Too bad Fantastic Four couldn't be the next great superhero franchise. How can it be fantastic when all of it's attempts at "Flame On!" keep burning out?

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man 3
3. Spider-Man
4. Daredevil
5. X-Men
6. Blade: Trinity
7. X-Men: The Last Stand
8. The Punisher
9. X2
10. Fantastic Four
11. Blade II
12. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
13. Man-Thing
14. Blade
15. Elektra
16. Hulk
17. Ghost Rider

[Drakon]

And there are many minor nitpicks in the film as well. The film constantly defies the rules it sets up in the original film, what with Mr. Fantastic's civilian clothes stretching along with his body in every scene, when we've already concluded that it should not be. While Johnny still has his burning clothes problem, he wears a new suit at the beginning of the film full of product placement stitched on. How this doesn't burn off after his "Flame On!" is never explained (not that I really wanted it to be, I just wanted the movie to move on already). I also didn't really care for the giant 4 being written in the sky at the end. It's a cute callback to the original film, it the context of the situation at the time, it's really just stupid. The first film was Johnny showing off, yet in this film, they're on their way to a crisis. "Oh, sure a disaster is on hand, but let's take five and write our logo in the sky."

To explain the civilian clothes thing, I think that it could be explained if you've seen the first movie, have a general knowedge of the comics, and a bit of imagination [or othewise it'd be lost on you. Not -you-, specifically, but the collective you.]

The reason that their supersuits stretch is because of the unstable molecules within them that were also bombarded with the cosmic gas or whatever it was in the first film. Reed created that chamber to try to reverse Ben's stone problem, and it worked, for the most part. My guess would be that since it wouldn't work on reversing powers or anything [which would explain why they didn't try it in this movie], but they still have it, Reed calibrated it in such a manner to have his clothes work with him. Johnny's tux catching fire would be because he "just bought it", and it probably hadn't had time to be treated yet. Sue and Ben's clothes are calibrated to their own power [well, rather, Ben's isn't calibrated to anyone else's power--he just wears big clothes], so while they can go invisible, they can't stretch or catch fire.

[1godzillafan]

It seems a very big stretch to me (and it's not just a pun on Mr. F), and I do have an active imagination. I watch Godzilla films afterall. I was under the impression that their uniforms gained their power because of the unstable molecules they were made of. If anything they wore could would have done equally so, then what about the regular uniforms they wore over them?

I just don't buy it. Sorry. It just seemed so very lazy to just ignore the details they placed in the original film the way they did.

[Drakon]

Well, once they realized that the suit, being made of unstable molecules, was able to have that extra ability, then I'm sure they would have treated any other clothes they had, too.

[1godzillafan]

It's possible. Though in the first film Reed claimed he was merely working on a formula for it, but Doom was the one who actually succeeded in creating it. What I don't seriously buy is that the same process could apply to street clothes. I think the whole point of the costumes in the first place was that they were form fitting, suiting the body's every need, as Sue put it. Or it "keeps the hot stuff hot, and the cool stuff cool." I don't neccessarily understand why they would even want to apply the same process to regular clothing, when they're much looser.

Plus, Reed stretching his slacks out just looks stupid. Maybe that's what I can't get past, now that I think about it.

[Drakon]

It's possible. Though in the first film Reed claimed he was merely working on a formula for it, but Doom was the one who actually succeeded in creating it. What I don't seriously buy is that the same process could apply to street clothes. I think the whole point of the costumes in the first place was that they were form fitting, suiting the body's every need, as Sue put it. Or it "keeps the hot stuff hot, and the cool stuff cool." I don't necessarily understand why they would even want to apply the same process to regular clothing, when they're much looser.

Plus, Reed stretching his slacks out just looks stupid. Maybe that's what I can't get past, now that I think about it.

Well, my guess, from there, would be that since he was able to see the final product, he could compare it to his notes and formulas and adjust as necessary. How it would apply to the street clothes, I'm not sure, since I admittedly came up with the idea basically on the spot, but if I had to guess, I'd say they had the form fitting suits for insulation and maneuverability, which were then treated with the unstable molecules treatment.

But I do agree the stretching slacks does look ridiculous.

[1godzillafan]

So it all boils down to is "Reed is smart. He found a way." I can live with that.

[Drakon]

I make three somewhat lengthy posts on the subject, and you break it down to six words.

You've got an annoying talent, you know that? :smad:

[DragnFire22]

Seven Words

[Drakon]

Articles don't count towards a word count.

[Dew k. Mosi]

Articles don't count towards a word count.
and why wouldn't they? if it is a word, it is a word.

type "Reed is smart. He found a way" into Word and go to word count.

7 words.

[1godzillafan]

I can shorten it to 5 words.

"Reed smart. He found way."

All I had to do was sound like a complete dumbass.

[Dew k. Mosi]

Reed smart, found way

4 words, name that tune

[1godzillafan]

Smart Reed finds.

[DragnFire22]

Articles don't count towards a word count.

LIES! :smad:

[Drakon]

I hate you all. Especially you.

[1godzillafan]

Now that is six words.

[eSJayBee]

I'm too tired to comment on this movie that I saw yesterday but let me just paste this chat I had with a friend. I'll comment on the movie later:

eSJayBee: The movie had a bunch of clichés which I didn`t mind but meh
eSJayBee: Like the moment Johnny got Reed to have a bachelor's party, I 'knew' they'd pull that thing where Sue comes in at the worst time and misunderstands.
eSJayBee: But if I saw my man dancing that way, I'd be jealous too.
eSJayBee: I wanna swing my arms and legs around like mad too
eSJayBee: In reality, he still sucks at dancing. It's just that no one could do what he does so they are blinded by that.
eSJayBee: In reality, he's the Elaine or Carlton of the superhero community.

[1godzillafan]

Time for the annual bump. Why, you may ask? Well...

gfp9PRIxt-g

With reboots Incredible Hulk and Punisher: War Zone on backup.

[Captain Bryan]

Jesus Christ, that video was scary!

[1godzillafan]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/Ironmanposter.jpg

I've been a huge supporter of an Iron Man movie for the longest time. I was thrilled when they announced it would finally be made, however, I will admit that my attention drifted off when Jon Favreau was announced as the director. Nothing against Mr. Favreau, I enjoyed Elf and Zathura, even though neither will ever be forever favorites in my book. The announcement of Favreau flashed my mind toward a little disaster in the Marvel film-verse known as Tim Story, who, like Favreau, has only cut his teeth on comedies in the past, and the one big effects film they've offered in that catagory (Taxi for Story, Zathura for Favreau) hardly convinced me they were qualified for the job.

To an extent, this sort of bliss throughout the production probably proved to be a saving grace. I expected watchable mediocrety akin to Story's outings on the rumored to be abandoned Fantastic Four franchise. Not only did Iron Man surpass these expectations, it lapped them several times.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_02.jpg
Following in the footsteps of Shaq as Steel...big shoes to fill, indeed...
Of course I mean in a literal sense.

Like Story, Favreau has no particular direction style other than point and shoot. Unlike Story, Favreau can stitch together a film that doesn't leave you hungry in the end, even though it does give one hope for seconds. This alone makes Favreau a superior director in my eyes, because he doesn't accomplish the bare minimum and expect the audience to eat it up.

Favreau does let the success of the film lie on the shoulders of Robert Downey Jr., who has bravely taken on the title role. I'm not sure how this film would have fared had it not had an actor as keenly quick-witted as Downey in the role, and I don't want to find out. Reviews are popping all over the net praising Downey for his roll in this film, and I'll be the first to say it's rightly so. He wasn't exactly the first actor my mind went to when the idea of casting Tony Stark came about (for some reason my mind drifted to Tom Cruise, call me crazy), but in the end, he proved to be the right one.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_03.jpg
This new technology takes "Talk to the hand" to a whole new level!

While Downey is probably the biggest reason Iron Man works as well as it does, he isn't the only. I enjoyed seeing the little touches of the Iron Man universe caught on film. Stark is portrayed as pretty much the anti-Bruce Wayne. Like Batman, he is a superhero made by his own hand, his own skills, and his own money (and lots of it). Unlike Wayne's alter-ego, he's a little less broading about it (pre-alcoholism, as this film is portraying). He beds a hottie nightly, not all of them he gives a damn about, and vice versa. He pretty much enjoys the sweet life when he's not fighting wrongs. His origins lie in redemption, as opposed to Batman's anger and vengence, as he realizes that he has helped make the world a savage place and tries to right that wrong. He has a personal assistant, Ms. Pepper Potts, who is basicly what Alfred would be if he looked good in a thong and Bruce Wayne had the hots for him. And unlike Wayne, Stark likes the public eye. This is proven in my favorite moment in the film, at the very end where Stark is about to read his proposed alibi to the press as to what he was doing while Iron Man was playing around. Stark begins the lie, and ultimately figures "screw it" and shouts out "I am Iron Man." Cue the chaos.

The small winks at War Machine and SHIELD were a lot of fun, too. And yes, the rumors are true. Samuel L. Jackson has a cameo as Nick Fury, but you have to wait until the end of the credits to see him (as he plugs a potential Avengers film. Hopefully Ralph Fiennes and Uma Thurman have nothing to do with it).

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_39.jpg
"Look, up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane! No it's...Robert Downey Jr.? HEY ROB! GET OUT OF THAT DAMN TREE!"

What doesn't work? Besides the nitpicks, pretty much everything does. Honestly, Jeff Bridges annoys the hell out of me, no matter what role he's in. I tolorated him here, mostly because his new look hardly makes him recognizable (if it weren't for that grating voice of his). His role as the villian is too well written for me to care who played him though. The choice of Iron Monger as the main baddie allowed the origin of the villian to merge into the origin of hero, allowing for the story to be told satisfactorily without any major logic hiccups (such as, oh say, both the hero and the villian being created in two seperate events on the same day in Spider-Man). And how he starts out as a likable enough guy, only to slowly emerge his true colors is just beautifully well played.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_11.jpg
"I demand my own theme tune. Something like...'I...AM...IRON MONGER! Do-do-do-do-do-do...'...what? No good?"

If there's one thing I'll admit to not exactly surpassing what I was expecting, it was the action. While the battles are spectacular in their own right, there is definatly a feeling of holding back present. This is especially so in the final conflict between Iron Man and Iron Monger, which is a bit of a let down after a rather spectacular second act action sequence as Iron Man squares off against a group of terrorists and even the Air Force. But I enjoyed the story too much to care, and anywho, that's what sequels are for, right? To kick it up a notch?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_35.jpg
You just know he's making little race car engine noises inside that thing, and going "pe-CHEW! pe-CHEW!" everytime he shots off his weapons.

Iron Man may not be the most genre-turning superhero flick of all time, but I have a hard time denying that it rocks. No, I take that back...it rocks hard. I hope Favreau gets to finish the trilogy he started, because I definatly want to see it.

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man 3
3. Spider-Man
4. Daredevil
5. X-Men
6. Blade: Trinity
7. Iron Man
8. X-Men: The Last Stand
9. The Punisher
10. X2
11. Fantastic Four
12. Blade II
13. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
14. Man-Thing
15. Blade
16. Elektra
17. Hulk
18. Ghost Rider

[1godzillafan]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/Hulk_poster.jpg

It used to be hard to pump out a superhero movie. Remember the days when all we would get is a uncertain quality Superman or Batman movie that we ate up anyway because there was nothing else? There was also the random Supergirl, Steel, or Swamp Thing, but that was water we dared not tread. Then X-Men hit it big, and superheros started blooming out of it. Spider-Man then swung above all expectations, and pretty much every superhero license in existance was put into developement at the same time. When X-Men and Spider-Man came out, superhero movies were fairly sparse, like one every few years, two if you're lucky. Then the year after Spidey-Mania, we were hit with three Marvel superhero flicks: the tragicly misunderstood Daredevil, the satisfying sequel X2, and, the one we were all dying for, Hulk.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_04_hires.jpg
Uh oh...he watched Ang Lee's movie!

Ah, yes. I remember Hulk well. A bit too well, in fact. People fastened their seatbelts for the next big thing, and they fell asleep during ride. But Hulk is a complicated movie to address. Some people love it for the exact same reason some people hated it: it was unique. There's no doubt about it, it was a different movie, however I'm one of the opinion that no movie with giant mutant dogs should be that full of itself.

But it's not all because the film was pretentious and boring, because even as an art film, Hulk was just sloppy. It was so muddled up with many images and ideas, that it was never clear as to just what it wanted to be, what story it wanted to tell, and just why the hell it was worth making the way it was.

I'm hardly the only one with that opinion. Some people put it out with a lot more simplistic phrases such as "it was boring," "where's 'Hulk Smash?,'" and, an oldie but a goodie, "it sucked." There was a lesson to be learned from Hulk. You know what it was?

Don't make fanboys angry. You wouldn't like us when we're angry.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_20_hires.jpg
Wow...Lou Ferrigno's body building has gotten out of hand!

That's right, we bitched and moaned until Universal decided to drop the Hulk franchise altogether. Marvel bought back the rights and decided to try this dance again. Do we have anything to bitch and moan about this time? Possibly. But I can tell you one thing about the Incredible Hulk, this movie struck the biggest nerdgasm nerve in my body for a (non-Spider-Man) Marvel film since Daredevil.

The pacing of the story is solid, and it hooked me from the very first frame. Each scene, each lead up to the next "Hulk Out" becomes more and more engrossing, as the tension builds and each Hulk scene grows more and more massive. This isn't just a good superhero flick, it's a good thriller with a giant green man running around pounding things.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_23_hires.jpg
"C'mon...just a little closer...step into the crosshairs, Ang Lee..."

The acting is far and away much more impressive than Ang Lee's film, which seemed to be under the impression that constant whispering equaled an outstanding performance (the M. Night Shyamalon method of acting, if you will). There's less underacting featured (and less overacting, thanks to a certain absence of a psychotic Nick Nolte turning into a giant bubble. "I''ll go! YOU JUST WATCH ME GO!"), and Edward Norton puts out a quite outstanding performance as Bruce Banner. Channelling less of a surpressed kid that sits in the corner of a classroom that Eric Bana was going for, Norton takes a page from Bill Bixby's book and plays a man who is fighting his emotions. This is the Bruce Banner I want to see, conflicted and mentally fighting off the beast inside him. Liv Tyler, Tim Roth, and William Hurt are all quite exceptional as well, providing pretty good marks across the cast. The only acting that is a bit off would have to be Tim Blake Nelson as Samuel Sterns. I understand that energetic and fidgety is most likely what he wanted to do with the role, it just gets to be quite an annoyance at times.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_17_hires.jpg
Liv Tyler studied under Jodie Foster. The golden lesson was stare blankly and gape your jaw like a moron and they'll hand you an Oscar.

One thing that made me weary of the Incredible Hulk before it's released was director Louis Leterrier, who has a career of hit and miss so far. While Unleashed was quite good, Transporter 2 was...pretty much an abomination, I'd say (saved minorly by the charisma of Jason Statham). He's probably the one reason this project never peaked my interest, because he hasn't really proven himself to me. After viewing his latest project, I must say he's come a long way from insulting the audience's intelegence with Transporter 2. His direction probably could be refined a bit more (the CGI blood drop was a bit much), but Incredible Hulk is a very slick looking movie. The action sequences are well constructed, albeit without generally impressive CGI.

But, then again, I seem to be the only person in the world who thought the original Hulk had amazing CGI. The skin texture was gorgeous, although the cloth texture of "Hulk Pants" and the tranformation scenes left much to be desired. With Incredible Hulk, it's the opposite, the cloth and transformation aspects are quite fine, but the skin is very weak. I appreciate the edgier look to the Hulk, since the 2003 version looked a little too soft and hugable, and the veins are a nice touch for a further organic look, however the whole thing looks a bit too plastic, to be honest. The Tim Roth originated foe Abomination doesn't fare any better, either.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_18_hires.jpg
As bizarre as this may sound, I still find this thing SLIGHTLY sexier than Liv Tyler.

But, it's a glorious time to be a geek. What with Iron Man and Incredible Hulk leading up to probably the biggest event in superhero films since Superman was brought to the screen in '78...the big crossover team up movie. I had reservations about an Avengers film (still do, to an extent), but if Marvel Studios can keep up the consistant quality of Iron Man and Hulk (the Hulk I'm going to rate higher, for the record), I say bring it. The last two setup films are Captain America and Thor, both of which I'm not quite as fond of as Iron Man and Hulk. Cap is alright, but Thor is one that I've never been into. I guess a greek god turned superhero...something bizarre about that (well, more bizarre than usual).

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_07_hires.jpg
"Sorry Ed, we're keeping you in storage so you don't drop out of your contract. Don't worry, we'll let you out for Incredible Hulk 2 and the Avengers, so just sit tight and enjoy the sedation."

I still can't get off my high. Iron Man rocked the house and Incredible Hulk smashed my expectations, and the Dark Knight will hopefully match it's predecessor next month. It's times like this that make the horrors of Ghost Rider and the 90 minutes of blank space known as Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer seem ages ago. This fanboy isn't angry anymore.

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man 3
3. Spider-Man
4. Daredevil
5. The Incredible Hulk
6. X-Men
7. Blade: Trinity
8. Iron Man
9. X-Men: The Last Stand
10. The Punisher
11. X2
12. Fantastic Four
13. Blade II
14. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
15. Man-Thing
16. Blade
17. Elektra
18. Hulk
19. Ghost Rider

[Captain Bryan]

I'm pretty surprised you like Hulk more than Iron Man.

[1godzillafan]

Personally, as much fun as Iron Man was, if Robert Downey Jr. wasn't in it, it wouldn't have been that memorable of a movie for me. The story was quite pedestrian and the style was very tame.

Every aspect of the Incredible Hulk just clicked, and is sticking with me. I loved this movie.

[1godzillafan]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/Punisherwarzoneteaser.jpg

About a week ago, my sister said to me "Did you know they're making a new Punisher without Thomas Jane? How fucking lame is that! The Thomas Jane one was the shit!" I just nodded in agreement. Of course, I knew this movie was coming out long before she did, and I have no doubt I knew more about why Jane decided not to do a second one than she did as well. Yet, my feelings were exactly the same as her's.

The term "reboot" is being thrown around all too often lately. First Batman and Hulk, now Punisher, next up is Superman (the latter two characters' previous films were already a reboot, so in essence they're rebooting a reboot). Even though, having been a fan of Godzilla and Halloween for a while, I was used to the idea of restarting on a whim. However, I'm really starting to get annoyed. Batman needed to be rebooted because it's previous series had lost far too much respect from it's audience. Hulk (arguably) needed to be rebooted because those most likely to actually like the original film would have been those who wouldn't want a sequel (and, of course, I have notice pretty much everybody who reacted negativly to the Incredible Hulk were people who adored Ang Lee's Hulk). So...remind me why the Punisher and Superman need to be rebooted? The previous films of either series both had a respectable above 6.0 on the Intenet Movie Database (in Superman Return's case, it's closer to a 7.0 as well), which means they both have fans, though (like a lot of movies on that site) their page is overloaded with trolls who seemingly have nothing better to do with their time than to tear that movie a new one and call it the worst movie ever made over and over again.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_12_hires.jpg
Despite his busy schedule, the Puisher gladly siezed the opportunity to carry the Olympic Torch. He just had to make one little detour...

Prior to watching Punisher: War Zone, I rewatched both the Dolph Lundgren Punisher and the Thomas Jane Punisher. I hadn't watched either in years, but my general memory was that the Lundgren one sucked and the Jane one rocked. My memory was fairly accurate. While I enjoyed the cheesy goodness of Lundgren in the role of Frank Castle and it did indeed have it's moments, the film was so poorly made that it can't even hold it's own against other cheesy actioners of the 80s. After all these years of listening to detracters, I still find that I really love the 2004 film, with it's old school action and solid story. I loved the way they upped the ante on Castle's tragedy, and instead of killing off just his wife and kids, the gang takes out his entire family at a family reunion. Having the family that he himself created die in front of him is a tragedy but one really not different enough from other comic book heroes. What happened to Castle in the previous film was definatly more than enough for him to snap. I thought the tale told of people who try to understand him holding out their hands in friendship, and while he doesn't reject them, he doesn't accept either was well told. And John Travolta's surprisingly subtle performance added the right flavor for the villian. The 2004 Punisher was simple, but effective. It's no wonder I hold it to such high reguard.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_20_hires-1.jpg
"When I said 'Bite Me!' I didn't mean this!"

Thomas Jane supposedly bowed out of the production of Punisher: War Zone because of creative differences. Reportedly his vision of the character didn't meet where Marvel and Lionsgate thought the series would go (the term "Make it more like Taxi Driver" has popped up more than once when people have discussed what Jane wanted to do). Rather than pull a Val Kilmer/George Clooney/Joel Schumacher and recast the role and make a sequel stylisticly different from the original, they decided "Fuck it, let's start from scratch."

After viewing the final film, I can't help but feel maybe Thomas Jane was right.

Despite what internet message board posters say, the previous Punisher film was not Batman & Robin. Hell, it's not even the shallow promises of the 2003 Hulk movie. As a filmgoer, I do everything in my power to erase preconception from my mind when watching a movie. I don't walk in expecting to like it, I don't walk in expecting to hate it. I sit in that theater seat and let the film sweep me away, and let taste decide whether I enjoyed it or not. This is the first time in a while in which I found it difficult to do so, because the film had already annoyed me significantly.

Is this how fans of Tim Burton's Batman felt when they watched Batman Begins? Is this how fans of Ang Lee's Hulk felt when they watched the Incredible Hulk? And most importantly, is this how fans of Dolph Lundgren's Punisher felt when they watched Thomas Jane's Punisher?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_22_hires.jpg
"Smell my hand! Smell it! SMELL IT!"

I'm willing to admit that Punisher: War Zone isn't Ghost Rider bad. It's not Catwoman, Batman Returns, or Son of the Mask bad either. At the very least, it's Batman & Robin bad, though. Full of overdone style and guided by a less than worthy screenplay, Punisher: War Zone is the closest recreation of the most notorious superhero movie ever made that I've ever seen. Good thing I don't consider Batman & Robin one of the worst movies ever made, or I'd probably be pissed.

At it's best, Punisher: War Zone is Dick Tracy meets Robocop. It's an overdone, stylish, and moody gangster film with lots of exploding body parts. As a whole, it rids itself of the things I liked about the 2004 film and brings back the elements of the 1989 film that I felt just didn't work. Instead of being a character that you feel pity for, Castle is a living statue. You can talk to him, but you'll get nothing. I wish I could feel affection for him when he flashes back to the death of his family, but if I felt anything, it's nothing compared to the feeling I got when I watched him huddle with his wife and son's lifeless corpses in the previous film. Why? Most likely it's because we never got to know the Frank Castle from before. We see pictures of him actually happy, but it's a hollow effect.

For the record though, Ray Stevenson is an excelent Punisher. He's probably the most intimidating of the three actors that got to play the role, and his coldness is quite striking. On the whole, I may prefer Jane because he actually got to play both Frank Castle and the Punisher. However, I would willingly see another film starring Stevenson in the role. I also thought Wayne Knight was excelent as Microchip (though, I admit I thought to myself "brilliant" the minute he was announced for the role). The acting is all over the map for their many co-stars. The actresses playing the role of the family whose husband/father was accidentally killed by the Punisher earlier in the film are terrible, especially the mother, who can't say her lines without staring blankly and stuttering. Dash Mihok does his best, unfunny Will Ferrell impersonation (not to say Farrell is funny in the first place) as Martin Soap. Dominic West and Doug Hutchison are both painfully over the top as Jigsaw and his brother Looney Bin Jim, though put them both together and they're as much fun to watch as Tommy Lee Jones and Jim Carrey in Batman Forever (good thing or bad thing? You decide).

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_11_hires.jpg
"Hellooooooooo Punisher!"
"Hello Neeeeeeeeeewman..."

The plot stretches to find a good story for a Punisher film, and comes up with a decent one at the least. The Punisher accidentally kills an FBI agent and feels remorse about it, meanwhile a disfigured gangster vows revenge against Castle for what he did to him. Unfortunatly neither plot nor subplot pay off the way you feel they should, and everything takes a backseat to heads getting sliced off. Of course, this is an action film, and you can't deny the film delivers on what people want to see.

Surprisingly enough, the film is directed by a woman named Lexi Alexander. I say surprising because most female directors that I know of stick with art films, chick flicks, and comedies. Did someone lose their Barbie doll when they were 3 and pick up a GI Joe, or what? I don't really want to sound sexist, it's just that the graphic visuals here are more associated with what tradition calls "a man's world," and to know they've come from the head of a female is kind of alarming. But I don't mean to disrespect Miss Alexander, who I can tell is a very gifted director and I can honestly say I look forward to seeing more action films from her. I just hope she can offer a better film than this.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_16_hires-1.jpg
Personally, I'd ask for another doctor. His bedside manor leaves much to be desired.

As it stands now, the Punisher is a trilogy of reboots which sadly never spawned into the franchise the Punisher deserves. That is, of course, assuming War Zone is a colossal failure (which it could very well be since it's a gorefest opening during the Christmas season. Haven't we learned anything from AVPR: Aliens vs. Predator - Requiem?). This is starting to look like the Millennium series of Godzilla films, each film making up a new continuity just for the hell of it. I won't be surprised if Marvel just gives up this one and tries to reboot it in another 15 years when they get their shit together.

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man 3
3. Spider-Man
4. Daredevil
5. The Incredible Hulk
6. X-Men
7. Blade: Trinity
8. Iron Man
9. X-Men: The Last Stand
10. The Punisher
11. X2
12. Fantastic Four
13. Blade II
14. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
15. Man-Thing
16. Blade
17. Elektra
18. Hulk
19. Punisher: War Zone
20. Ghost Rider

[eSJayBee]

I completely forgot this movie was coming out. Honestly, it didn't really grab my interest anyway. The trailers made it look like an action movie from the 80s and I don't really jump at the chance to watch those anyway unless it's with Arnold Schwarzenegger. I'll probably check it out just because it's a Marvel movie but this movie has to get in line behind Transporter 3 and JCVD (even if that isn't really an action movie).

Nice review. I enjoyed it.



Oh, and I think you forgot a word, 1GF:
The actresses playing the role of the family whose husband/father was accidentally by the Punisher earlier in the film are terrible,

[1godzillafan]

Oh, and I think you forgot a word, 1GF:

I rewrote that sentence many times, and that's still the best I came up with. I don't believe I left out a word, but what I ment was the actresses who play the mother and daughter are terrible, and I just threw in the fact that the father was killed in the middle. Kind of muddled it up, but that's what I meant when I wrote it.

[Captain Bryan]

Wow, at least it isn't as bad a Ghost Rider. I kinda figured Punisher War Zone wasn't going to be worth much though.

[eSJayBee]

I rewrote that sentence many times, and that's still the best I came up with. I don't believe I left out a word, but what I ment was the actresses who play the mother and daughter are terrible, and I just threw in the fact that the father was killed in the middle. Kind of muddled it up, but that's what I meant when I wrote it.
Look between "accidentally" and "by". I think you meant to put the word "killed" there or something. Anyway, no biggie.

I like how you view movies with no preconception beforehand. I respect that. I hate how some people go into a movie with their mind already made up about it. Or worse: their mind is already made up WITHOUT HAVING SEEN THE DAMN MOVIE.

[1godzillafan]

Well, damnit. That's what getting by with minimal sleep will get you. I was one of the geeks who waited until midnight for the Dark Knight on DVD, you know.

I find preconception gets in the way of enjoyablity. The last thing I want to be is one of those people who hates on everything because it's the internet and they can say whatever they want. I had preconception of both Harry Potter and Chronicles of Narnia because of my indifference to Lord of the Rings and the fantasy genre as a whole. As we all know, I'm a Potter freak now, and while Narnia wasn't memorable, it was light entertainment. And something like Get Smart, I sat in the theater seat with my fingers crossed muttering "please don't suck, please don't suck, please don't suck" and it didn't.

But it also goes the other way around. There's Cloverfield, which I was amped up about a big budget American kaiju movie and got a smelly pile instead.

[1godzillafan]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/Wolverineteaserposter_a.jpg

So many people are complaining about trilogies lately, especially in the superhero genre. Appearantly the third can never live up to the originals. I can't tell you how many times I met people who's opinions of such films are a continuous "1 was good, 2 rocked, 3 sucked." It almost seems like an autopilot response, to me.

Well, good thing the Fantastic Four franchise is dead. If Rise of the Silver Surfer was the best they got, then I don't even want to hear the fan reaction to the third one. And after the fan backlash Sam Raimi got for Spider-Man 3, I feel a great deal of pity for Christopher Nolan, should he choose to continue the Batman franchise. After something as good as the Dark Knight, negative fan reaction for the third one should be extreme.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_02_hires.jpg
This is the pose I imagine Wolverine makes whenever he's on the can and can't squeeze one out.

I remember a time where fan reaction was a similar "1 was amazing, 2 was worthy, 3 was a disappointment, 4 is the WORST MOVIE EVER MADE" in the comic book film medium, due to Superman IV: The Quest for Peace and Batman & Robin. X-Men is the first franchise that dares to cross into the dreaded part IV territory since "Never leave the cave without it" in 1997. The question lingers, is it the worst movie ever made? You know, aside from the other worst movies ever made?

X-Men Origins: Wolverine is a triumphant action film and a blast to watch. However it plays down the social tolorance messages that cluttered up the first three, making Wolverine the most shallow of the series but also the least preachy. Let's face it, you go see a movie about Wolverine, you're here for the ass kicking, right? If not, then you should probably stay home.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_22_hires-1.jpg
"Oh, I don't know which one I should get. My daughter would love both of them.
Who's a good little mutant! You's a good little mutant! Yes you are!"

A prequel to the X-Trilogy, X-Men Origins: Wolverine is about Logan's life before the memory wipe, and how he achieved he metal skeleton and nifty claws. He's hired into a group of mutant agents by William Striker, along with his brother Sabretooth, and very young versions of the Blob and Deadpool, amung others. Fed up with killing people for no decent reason, Logan quits the team and ventures to Canada, where he gets a job and a girlfriend and lives happily ever after.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_07_hires-1.jpg
Heh. You know the funny thing is both these guys spend half the movie screaming with veins popping out of their necks.

That is, until big brother Sabretooth comes back, kills his girlfriend, and kicks baby brother Logan's ass real good. Seeking revenge, Logan returns to Striker who offers him an upgrade of sorts, by lining his skeleton with adamantium and giving him meaner, sharper claws than the bone one's he's been sporting as a kid. Adopting the name "Wolverine," he escapes upon learning that they intend to wipe his memory and keep him in the organization.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_17_hires-2.jpg
"So long and thanks for all the fish...
So sad it had to come to this..."

This amounts to half the movie right here, leasurly paced and full of drama, much like Bryan Singer's first two X-Men films. However, as soon as the chase begins, the film turns to video game mode. Wolverine goes from place to place, getting some action, and meets up with a boss mutant before he can advance to the next level, respectivly Agent Zero, Blob, Gambit, Sabretooth, and Deadpool (or at least a representation of).

Since we've already seen Wolverine brought to the screen thrice before, the new mutants that haven't been seen before, notably Gambit and Deadpool. Gambit is basicly a very stretched cameo role that overstays it's welcome. I like Gambit (not as much as other people though), but he shouldn't have been in this movie as much as he was. It's obvious the filmmakers were milking his presence to apease the fans who were outraged at his lack of inclusion from previous films, whether they had a good role for him or not. Deadpool is already a controversial inclusion in the movie, and his final form in the film is different that what we've seen of him in the comics, though not as different as whining fanboys would lead you to believe. He showcases a lot of his powers from the comics, and a few gratitous ones that he never had. However the seed is there, should Deadpool return to the screen, and that's what matters to me (and if there's a person more perfect for the role than Ryan Reynolds, I'd like to hear that name).

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_13_hires.jpg
"Anything Blade can do, I can do better!"

The film kind of suffers at the end when the explaination for Wolverine's memory loss is finally given, and it feels tacked on and doesn't really fit in with the flow of the movie. We all know it was coming, but it's a somewhat bitter note to leave it on.

Ultimatly, though, the film gave the same pleasurable satisfaction that the Incredible Hulk showcased last year, however, unlike Incredible Hulk, none of it made me giddy with nerdish excitment. Perhaps it's because I've already seen Wolverine adapted to the screen before, and very well. X-Men Origins: Wolverine is a good movie, and I'd rate it higher than either sequel to the original (especially the overrated X2). But none of it packs the spunky punch of Bryan Singer's original.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/1godzillafan/photo_19_hires-1.jpg
Having an ace up your sleeve is one thing, but this guy takes it to a whole new level.

Of course, that could change, because Fox wants to franchise the hell out of this series, with X-Men Origins: Magneto potentially up next, followed by X-Men: First Class, spin-off's staring Gambit and Deadpool, and potential sequels to Wolverine or any of the others to follow. I can't wait for X-Men Origins: Toad, myself.

1. Spider-Man 2
2. Spider-Man 3
3. Spider-Man
4. Daredevil
5. The Incredible Hulk
6. X-Men
7. Blade: Trinity
8. Iron Man
9. X-Men Origins: Wolverine
10. X-Men: The Last Stand
11. The Punisher
12. X2
13. Fantastic Four
14. Blade II
15. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
16. Man-Thing
17. Blade
18. Elektra
19. Hulk
20. Punisher: War Zone
21. Ghost Rider

[Captain Bryan]

I wouldn't mind seeing a Deadpool movie. As long as Ryan Reynolds and he wasn't the goofy looking Mortal Kombat character from the end of the movie.;)

[eSJayBee]

Does this Wolverine review have spoilers?

Anyway, I read the first paragraph and I don't entirely agree with why Raimi's getting so much crap from the fans over Spider-Man 3. Honestly, while I enjoyed that movie, it was easily worse than Catwoman. At least Catwoman had a coherent story whereas Spider-Man 3 was all over the place. It was a mess. That installment shames the previous ones worse than Blade III and X-Men III did, in my books.

[1godzillafan]

Not really spoilers per sey, I kinda explain the plot and give away a few fights, other than that I kept it spoiler free.

As for Spidey 3, personally I had no trouble understanding it. The story telling itself was a little choppy, but no worse than what was displayed in the original. Definatly wasn't as smooth as 2, though.

[eSJayBee]

Exactly. It wasn't as "smooth as 2". I don't believe in that philosophy that each sequel has to be BIGGER than the last one but some manner of consistency would be nice. I'm not as excited about the two next Spidey movies because of Spidey 3.

A week or two ago, Christian Bale made a nice comment about doing a third Batman movie: "Will we do a third movie? It's got to be the right story. You can't make something like 'The Dark Knight' and then come out with something disappointing.

[1godzillafan]

I read that interview too. I hope they get Batman 3 done with as much bang as the first two films as well, though I get a sinking feeling of "Godfather Part III" from it. Bale also admited in the same interview he has to do Batman 3 reguardless, because he's contracted to do it even without Nolan and a script he likes.

In my opinion what makes a sequel work is not to top what a previous film does, but to honor it. I always felt Spider-Man 3 honored it's originals, even after watching it ten times after the past two years. People have tried to convince me it was crap, yet I'd come home, pop it in, and still find it's a great movie.

I attribute most of what made Spider-Man 2 work to Alvin Sargent and his excelent screenplay. He had a hand in 3, but not as much he probably should have. I believe most of the script of 3 was written by Raimi and his brother Ivan, and Sargent mostly wrote the symbiote and Venom sequences because Raimi wasn't very familiar with either and Avi Arad was insistant about including them in the story.

If I recall correctly, the Raimi brothers original idea was the exact same movie, only no symbiote/Eddie Brock/Jazz sequence/"Now dig on this"/PELVIC THRUST/Venom storyline. Venom's role was intended to be the Vulture, and what was intended to be his subplot was replaced by Venom in pre-production.

I'm not sure what Raimi's intention was with the Vulture, and I freely admit it's probably possible that the movie might have worked better had Raimi's original intent been kept. I doubt I would have been very interested in the final product, though. I yawned when Sandman was announced, and if the Vulture was on backup, I probaby would have lost track of the film completly until release (much akin to the new Star Trek movie). Sandman was always a pety thug in my eyes and the Vulture just has no business being in any movie (except maybe Sinister Six).

I feel Spider-Man 3 managed to become a more intriguing entity with Venom in the mix. The black suit sybolic of Peter's blind rage at Flint Marco, driving Mary Jane away, and his relationship with Harry finally reaching the boiling point. Could it have been done without the symbiote? Sure, but the intensity would be lacking as Peter finally snaps back to attention and realizes what he is doing.

Plus there would be no jazz sequence. It gets a lot of hate, but I love it. It's the most Raimi-esque thing of the entire trilogy, bringing back fond memories of his early works.

Venom, however, should have went solo. The Sandman team up is one aspect that probably would have worked better had it featured Vulture instead, since neither villian would have been really worthy of carrying the film by themselves. If Peter's issues with Marco had been delt with during the climax of the black suit sequences, only to have the symbiote haunt him in the finale, that would have made a much more interesting confrontation.

That's my opinion anyway. Keep in mind, I was raised upon Godzilla movies, so I've been quite trained at making sense of nonsense, even when my logic doesn't make sense either.

On the subject of Spider-Man 4, Raimi has put the story entirly in the hands of his writers and not himself this time, like the first two movies. Plus Avi Arad is out of the picture at Marvel. It holds promise, though that is subject to change.