Comic Book Movies: Where are they heading?

Hey all. I looked around and couldn't find a topic on this, so I figured I would start one. Comic Book Movies are all the rage right now, and I was thinking to myself how I felt about comic book movies as a whole, and where I see them going in the future. By Comic Book Movies, I only want to refer to the newer ones, I figure starting with Blade in 1998 (as much as I don't want to use Blade as an example for this discussion, as really, it has about as much basis in comic books as the more recent Catwoman does).

I guess I should start by listing the comic book movies that have come out since then (this is going off of the top of my head, so if I miss any, I blame my pretty terrible memory).

Blade
Ghost World
From Hell
Road to Perdition
X-Men
Spiderman
Blade 2
Daredevil
X-Men 2
Hulk
The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
Hellboy
Punisher
Blade Trinity
Catwoman
Spiderman 2
Elektra
Constantine
Fantastic 4
A History of Violence
Sin City
Batman Begins

I'm sure there are more that I'm forgetting, but it'll do for now. So what separates the Spidermans from the Catwomans? I figure I'll discuss some of the various movies as to their merits or lack thereof, as I see them, to get some discussion going.

The reason I don't consider the Blade movies as comic book movies, as although they are based loosely on comic books, they really don't include anything about the character's history and background other than his name. Barring the third movie, which at least had Hannibal King (although not the King from the comics again), there were no characters or stories from the comics used. However, it should be said that Blade at least help to start awareness that comic book movies could be done in the modern day as a well done movie, rather than a campy fan-fest.

X-Men of course started the comic-fest full force. It was the first major picture that really held true(ish) to it's roots. Barring a few changes to make the movie more doable on the big screen, it had characters that weren't all too different from their comic counterparts. As well, it did something different from most comic movies: it didn't really establish an "Origin" story for the team. It started them more in the middle, with an established group. It made for a faster pace, since the characters weren't "learning their powers". It did have some problems, of course. Halle's wooden acting. Rogue as a kid, but it did do many things right; even though everyone's favorite gruff canuck was a little taller and less stocky...he still felt like Wolverine through and through. It did pay homage to the fans (the X-Men suits design comments), without being "cheesy".

Spiderman was another huge success. It dealt with the web-slinger directly as the comics did, with an origin that was very true to the comics, barring a few changes that really did not have any effect on the overall story (Peter was still the same picked-on type of character that was bitten by a radioactive spider, his uncle's death in a great representation). Sure, it had Mary Jane insead of Gwen Stacy, but really, how much comic story can you cram into a movie or even 3 movies, without the movie seeming cluttered? Gwen Stacy is more of a fan-thing wheras Mary Jane is the more well known love of Peter's life (sort of like Superman's Lois Lane as opposed to Lana Lang). The only thing I'm not sure I'm sold on is the "dumber" Peter Parker, who was a genius in the comics, a young Reed Richards who had tons of inventions (including the web-shooters), but it was probably easier to explain the webbing as organic than to bore watchers with an explanation of how he created it...

Daredevil was not as well received by movie-goers. What did it not have that the other two did? Well, first off Elektra...nothing more than T & A. She had no real purpose in the story at all. Her entire story could have been written out of Daredevil, and the movie would not have changed in effect. As well, the villains had no real character (barring Colin Farrel's huge overacting). With Magneto and Hobgoblin, you have a feel for the villains. They have their own origin, which you, the viewer, are privilaged to see. You get where their actions are coming from. Bullseye? Shows up, throws something at Daredevil, misses, and is now his lifelong enemy. Yeah. The fight scenes were apparrently filmed by someone who loved filming so close you could see the knuckles on a fist, but you couldn't tell whose fist it was. It seemed a case of "we don't know how to properly choreograph a good fight, so we'll just film everything really close and shakey-like, so it looks...real" Daredevil's toys apparently came from nowhere, or at least there was no explanation beyond "I'm rich, I can afford anything"...except that he was a down-on his luck lawyer. The Kingpin "fight" should never have happened in the first place. That was a joke, and poorly conceived from the start. All in all, Daredevil was a failure for a well-done modern comic book movie (or even a moderately done comic movie for that matter).

Hulk was another poorly received movie. The director at least tried something new for his film style, trying to make a movie more like a comic. However, the constant cuts and slides and multiple windows on the screen really got old quickly, and really slowed the movie down. As well, the writer of the story, although at least having the Hulk created in the same way, apparently decides instead of using established Hulk villains (like, say Abomination), he will go with giant mutated dogs and an Absorbing Man copy. What?! This was a case of too much creative freedom and not enough sticking with established stories.

Fantastic 4 was an iffy one. You have Marvel's premier family on the big screen, and to me, it was both a success and a failure. On one had, Jonny Storm and Ben Grimm were amazing in the movie. They captured the characters to a very close degree, and made me feel they really were Human Torch and Thing. On the other hand you have Sue Storm, who was very lackluster in her performance, very simplistic and T & A. In the comics, she's the glue that holds the team together, but in the movie, beyond gluing your eyes to Jessica Alba in a tight suit, did nothing for the character. Reed Richards...did not feel like the smartest man in the Marvel Universe to me. Hell, I thought Punisher could have outsmarted him. Poor performance there. And Victor Von Doom. What's the one thing you don't do in a movie based on something else? Take established history for a character and throw it out the window, making up something completely new. Doctor Doom is probably one of the, if not the best known and well liked villain in the Marvel universe, and to change his origin is to take away from the character that is well liked. He felt very silly on screen, and definately nothing more than B-grade villain material. Very clunky, and far too simplistic in his character. He definately did not make you feel like it was the Doctor Doom we all know and love. It was like taking Batman and making him bit by a radioactive Bat giving him the powers of a Superhuman Bat...ie. it was not well done. Fantastic 4 felt very campy, alright for a family viewing it, but not a well done comic movie for the fans.

The Punisher was another poorly received movie (but it was light years better than the original one). Truthfully, the only thing I find fault with in the Punisher was the fact that it didn't have a main villain to direct him. All he had was generic mob boss #42, where instead it should have had someone like Jigsaw or some such villain. Otherwise, the movie was well laid out, told a decent origin story and was decently acted. I definately liked it better than Daredevil...

Batman Begins was a very excellent movie. It made you feel for both the villain and the hero. As well, using the B-villains, it did not try to make them the star of the movie, nor give them more screen time then they were due (Scarecrow). Batman felt smart, competant and like the myth/legend he was supposed to be in Gotham. I wasn't completely sold on the Batmobile, but it wasn't overdone, and it felt less campy than an original Batmobile would have within this movie.

Overall, I find that as long as the movies take the source material seriously, and only making modern changes to fit the time and space requirements, it should turn out to be a decent movies. I mean, it's not like there's not a wealth of material to draw storylines from. You don't have to make up something completely new to do a comic book movie (re: Catwoman). As well, the more popular the character, the truer one must stay to the original. Most importantly, a hero is defined by his villains. You must be able to empathise with the villains, and they must be well done enough that the heroes look competant defeating them within their expertise. Having a villain there just for the sake of it does the hero no justice, and makes the viewer dumber for having watched it.

That said, I have high hopes for Spidey 3 and X-Men 3 as they are already established as being well done. As long as they follow the same formula as the first ones, they will succeed. Superman...well, I have my hopes, but I'm not holding my breath. Judging by Constantine and Hellboy, I'm hoping that 300 and The Red Star turn out as well, as they are smaller stories, and deserve the success. However, since Hollywood likes to milk something until everyone is sick of it and never wants to see another movie like it, I'm sure that having Spidey 5 or X-Men 7, countless spinoffs, and tons of others that could be made (which doesn't necessarily mean they should), will kill the comic movie industry for a while (kind of like the Batman franchise eventually did...). Hopefully it doesn't come to that.

So what do you all think? Where do you see comic book movies going? What are your reviews for comic movies that have come out? I'm always happy for discussion.

EDIT: Added some movies that I forgot.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Man, you forgot The Phantom.

What is wrong with people? The Phantom was an awesome movie. It's this camp-shitck Republic serial stuff like Indiana Jones. Live stunts, cheesy dialouge, heroic feats. The movie is easily one of the best superhero movies ever made.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Heh, I did forget about The Phanton (and Darkman, for that matter), but it was made before the big growth in comic movies. Billy Zane was mighty in that movie.

Most amazing jew boots

I *think* Darkman was a movie before he was a comic. I'm not sure, it's been a while. You also forgot Ghost World and From Hell

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Good call. I know that I had the Darkman 1st issue, but I honestly can't remember which came first either. I never actually saw Ghost World or From Hell though, so I can't comment on how well they were made/compare with the comics.

How ya doing, buddy?

Missed a big one: Sin City.

- WraithTwo -

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

The fringe comic movies will never be as big as the mainstream books sadly. Some of the fringe books are better written than their mainstream counterparts. With that being said I am eagerly anticipating Ghost Rider.

FELIPE NO

Akh! You're right. Heh, told you my memory was a little off...I'll have to edit the thread with all the ones I've missed. Ah well.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by stormshadow

With that being said I am eagerly anticipating Ghost Rider.

I want a Ghost Rider movie like you wouldn't believe. But this one is going to suck eggs HARD. It's the same director as Daredevil, for God's sake.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Good lord. That combined with Nic Cage's acting skills...could be bad for the movie. I can still hope though.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

I for one happened to like Daredevil. Didn't like Ben Afleck, but liked the movie in any case. As for GhostRider, I am not expecting anything on the level of Batman Begins or X2, but I am expecting a decent fun couple of hours.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Well, I was hoping to get some discussion out of this...Why did you like the movie? I would honestly like to know, because I can't see very many redeeming values in it.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

To answer the question posed by the thread title, I'll say that comic book movies are headed towards making movies for less and less well known characters until the fad peters out. Then, some genius will decide that some of the characters need to be redone (like Batman and Superman are now) and the trend will begin again, though probably for not as long.

You should probably put V for Vendetta on there. I'm not sure if it was actually a comic book or more of a graphic novel, but I still think it applies (even though it hasn't come out yet).

I was speaking idiomatically.

I told you 2000-2010 would be the decade of (shitty?) comic book movies.
Nobody believed me.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Thats because your wrong. =]

FELIPE NO

Road to Perdition was based off of a comic book? Wow. I had no idea, to be honest... Didn't seem comic book-esque at all to me.

WTF. Where's Dick Tracy? =P

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Comic book movies just need to faithfully reproduce the good story arcs from comic books in order to be successful. It's really not that hard a thing to do, yet very few films will actually do this.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

For some reason movie producers, directors, and writers feel the need to screw up comics in their translation to the silver screen. Only when the movie makers have respect for the source material will you actually get a decent flick. As soon as they start taking liberties and changing stuff around do you get disasters like Joel Schumacher's Batman flicks.

Don't forget to add the TMNT movies as well as Spawn to the list.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Gechmir

Road to Perdition was based off of a comic book? Wow. I had no idea, to be honest... Didn't seem comic book-esque at all to me.

WTF. Where's Dick Tracy? =P

Yeah, a graphic novel actually. I've never read it, but the movie was darned good. Apperently it diverges from the book in the last half, but I couldn't tell you how.

As far as Dick Tracy, I was going more for the more modern movies. That's why the original Supermans/Batmans aren't up there, nor the original Punisher and Captain America Movies, etc.

Originally Posted by Acro-nym

To answer the question posed by the thread title, I'll say that comic book movies are headed towards making movies for less and less well known characters until the fad peters out. Then, some genius will decide that some of the characters need to be redone (like Batman and Superman are now) and the trend will begin again, though probably for not as long.

You should probably put V for Vendetta on there. I'm not sure if it was actually a comic book or more of a graphic novel, but I still think it applies (even though it hasn't come out yet).

I didn't want to put "upcoming" movies on the list as it would start to become way too long (there are a ton of movies in production right now). But maybe since the thread is about upcoming movies and such, maybe I should work out a list.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

I doubt they would ever come about, but I'd love to see a live action The Maxx or a cartoon film version of Sam & Max. Mind you, at the same time they won't be ruined any time soon either.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

I thought Road to Perdition was based off of a novel. Maybe not.

I find most of these movies to be so-so at best, minus Spiderman and Batman Begins.

X-Men and the sequel were fine enough but by no means classic. I mostly attribute this to pseudo-mutli-protagonist storytelling. They want to throw a lot of focus on Wolverine but not actually make him the main character. It's obviously because men and women alike consider Wolverine to be one of the cooler X-Men characters.

After seeing The Hulk and Daredevil and simply seeing the trailer for The Punisher, I figured I would just stop seeing Marvel movies altogether minus Spiderman and X-Men. Just because everything else keeps coming out abysmal.

I was speaking idiomatically.

For purposes of argument, Richie Rich was based off a comic book too.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Live action Maxx would either be incredibly awesome or incredibly terrible. That was such a cerebral comic (and associated animated series) that I doubt they'd be able to do it justice in a couple of hours, though.

Most amazing jew boots

I thought The Punisher was great, although i didn't read the comics is till liked the movie a lot.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Spider-Man 2 is the best comic book movie ever made. Everyone agrees.

I mean, the man is saving little kids crossing the street while delivering pizza. How do you even beat that. Please don't even try.

Also, contrary to popular opinion, Fantastic Four was an excellent film. The pacing was about perfect, and the way that their powers were unraveled bit by bit was genius.

Most amazing jew boots