[BobC]

Wolverine Origin?  My fav comic for sure.  Movie was weak and disappointing, but tolerable.  IMO

Wish X-Men would have stuck more to the plots in the comics, e.g. emergence of the Phoenix, etc.

I guess I'm ok with heros like Spiderman or FF being a little cheezy and kid friendly.

I read Watchmen, before watching the movie.  Book was better, but I appreciate more of the movie after rewatching it.  Definately not one for the kiddies....or my wife for that matter    

[Construct]

Wolverine Origin?  My fav comic for sure.  Movie was weak and disappointing, but tolerable.  IMO

Wish X-Men would have stuck more to the plots in the comics, e.g. emergence of the Phoenix, etc.

I guess I'm ok with heros like Spiderman or FF being a little cheezy and kid friendly.

I read Watchmen, before watching the movie.  Book was better, but I appreciate more of the movie after rewatching it.  Definately not one for the kiddies....or my wife for that matter   

That's why I liked X2 the best of the lot.  X1 was a little weak in dialog, scope and effects...but not bad.  X3...what happened there?  I am not a comic purist but It dropped the ball.  Since when was juggernaut a mutant?   
Wolverine was more enjoyable to me than it was to the hardcore comic base.  But then again, the hardcore base never accepted 6'+  Jackman as a 5'  hero--no matter how well he did.

[PhilNYC]

X-Men 1 didn't have the budget that all of the subsequent comicbook movies have had.  It was Hollywood's "test run" for making a movie based on comics (Superman and Batman notwithstanding)...and basically, I think they ran out of money towards the end of production (it explains why the big climax of the film was essentially Storm and Cyclops yelling "Take the shot!", "I can't take the shot!", "Take the shot!" and a cheesy light-show over Manhattan rather than any kind of epic battle....

X3 was directed by Bruce Ratner, which explains it's lameness...Bryan Singer (X1-2 director) was tapped for Superman Returns and couldn't fit X3 into his schedule.  Unfortunately, Superman Returns wasn't all that great....

[Construct]

Unfortunately, Superman Returns wasn't all that great....

I was anticipating the movie on pins and needles.  While there were some cool parts...the movie was overlong, made Superman into a voyeur and an illegitimate dad.  That, and having no real physical menace from Lex Luthor.  Singer tended to fawn over the material, rather than making a tightly wound Dark Knight or Iron Man tale.  I have every confidence that Chris Nolan (and others) have learned the lesson, and will produce a high quality reboot.  "man of steel"  or "Superman begins"  though we don't need a protracted origin movie. It should be a doomsday or darkseid tale, not some thugs with kryptonite.

[BobC]

I think the problem is that a film writer knows he will likely have one 2 hour film to tell a long a complex story...and knows that the average viewer knows nothing, but the strongest critics know eveything.

[BobC]

...so some of the better known heros are easier, because the writer doesnt need to set them up as much.

But lesser known heros, like Wolverine, and maybe Thor need to spend a lot of movie time in character background and set up which takes time from the central plot.

[PhilNYC]

...so some of the better known heros are easier, because the writer doesnt need to set them up as much.

But lesser known heros, like Wolverine, and maybe Thor need to spend a lot of movie time in character background and set up which takes time from the central plot.

I think I disagree...I think that the films that fall short do so a lot of times because they try to jam too much stuff into them from the years and years of comicbook history and not enough time setting the characters up....

[BobC]

I think we're saying the same thing.

To me jamming in years and years of history and back story is part of character set up.  If people don't know them, then you spend half the movie getting them up to speed.

[wushuliu]

A lot has to do with studio/director approach. These tend to be tentpole films so there's a lot of meddling. Fox is the worst. They have zero interest in integrity of material. The only reason X1 and 2 are decent is Singer. The fact that someone thought it made sense to bring RATNER on for X3 says plenty. This is a guy whose last picture I saw was two weeks ago promoting a coffee-table book on chicks w/ big @sses. I am not kidding. Not that I disapprove. But everyone knows he's not exactly 'focused' on his craft (there was a British GQ piece on him a few years ago which had to be one of the more hilarious and hollywood-people-are-insane articles I've read. And yes I believe it also involved @sses).

The FF movies are another case in point. The first ranks as one of the worst films I have ever seen. Period. Not even so bad it's good. The direction, dialogue, cinematography, the whole thing. The studio clearly did not care. Wolverine same thing, it nowhere near as good as X1/2 and only holds up because of Jackman and Schriever (Gambit was sweet tho). They just want the thing brought in under budget, who cares about the rest.

WB is trying for the auteur approach w/ DC. Nolan nailed it (though I personally don't care for Batman Begins at all). Singer didn't, but at least he tried. Nolan was not afraid to own the material. Singer did the opposite and basically made an extended homage to the Donner films. In his defense, however, it's hard to step out from that shadow (yes I think Superman is the best superhero film and also one of the best films ever made).

Sony had the stars align w/ Raimi and SM. Now that's he's gone and they're already rebooting JUST so they can capitalize on 3-D, not have to worry about Raimi/McGuire salaries, and are already starting production...

The new Marvel factory, I gotta say I'm pretty skeptical. All they got is Iron Man 1. IM 2 ran on the first one's steam and shows just how cheap Marvel is and how ready they are to jettison an expensive actor for a cheaper one. Dropping Howard was a mistake. Now they lost Norton. Rourke had to beg to get cast and take a pay hit. Same salary deal w/ Sam jackson (!). I think the Mjolnir will have more screen presence (literally!) than Thor (couldn't Branagh have played Odin at least?!). And I think they went w/ Whedon for Avengers not only because he's great at ensemble projects and a comic fan - but because he's used to having very little budget.

This is all IMO of course, and I admit I never grew up on comic books. Just movies! 

[tonyptony]

Wish X-Men would have stuck more to the plots in the comics, e.g. emergence of the Phoenix, etc.

I was hoping for either that or the full storyline of the Sentinels, including the alternate future arc where... well, in case some have not read it I won't say.

Would have been a great 3 or 4 movie arc after introducing the themes in X-1.

[Construct]

I was hoping for either that or the full storyline of the Sentinels, including the alternate future arc where... well, in case some have not read it I won't say.

Would have been a great 3 or 4 movie arc after introducing the themes in X-1.

The lack of sentinels in full view was a disappointment.  And Juggernaut was modified to be a mutant, not magic.  Of course it would have been cool to see the phoenix saga and have gladiator fling jugg across the English channel, or punch colossus so hard he has to drag himself to a stop in the next time zone.

[Construct]

Something I forgot...
Back in the day, Hulk and Thor  were 1:1 without Thor's hammer, with hammer: hulk would get waxed. In recent years, it seems that hulk has been able to beat Thor with, or without the hammer. 
I would hope the Thor movie would fix his situation, but it seems some folks want to cast Hulk as the "villain"  in "The avengers.".  This implies his ability to take them all on at once... 

[navi]

My top comic-based movies are:

Batman Begins
Spiderman 2
Spiderman 1 (I didn't care that the effects weren't perfect...it was the original comic book come to life)
The Watchmen (I never read the comic, but I loved the movie)
Superman 1
Iron Man 1
X-Men 2


The worst:
Ghost Rider
Daredevil
Fantastic Four 1
The Hulk (Ang Lee version)
Spiderman 3

Everything else was in the middle for me...enjoyable, but nothing all that memorable...

My top comic movies are:

Batman Begins
Dark Night
Spiderman 2
The Watchmen
Iron Man 1
Spiderman 1
X-Men 2
Blade 2

Blade 2 too me was a GREAT comic movie- I know most people didn't like it.

[Construct]

My top comic movies are:

Blade 2

Blade 2 too me was a GREAT comic movie- I know most people didn't like it.

I liked blade 2 better than 1.  Much like spider man 2 overall vs 1.  I even enjoyed ghost rider on it's own level and saw potential there for much better.

[cujobob]

I'm surprised some of you guys speak positively of the Xmen films...I thought they were terrible for the most part.  They screwed up Rogue, no Gambit, cyclops was awful, Storm was awful, etc.  Wolverine and Professor X were two of the only parts casted well.  Magneto could have been cool but was made very weak.  I thought Wolverine Origins was far better than any of the X films.  Not amazing, but far better.

I loved Iron Man 1, 2 was solid, the first two Spiderman movies were good, and I liked batman begins (plus the Batman movies with Michael Keaton)