thenolan
Sophomore
@thenolan
Posts: 778
Likes: 162
|
Post by thenolan on Jul 19, 2020 8:36:48 GMT
I don't think he forgot about superman , I think with xmen it was more noticeable because the movie was very grounded and had a more realistic story about people with powers. the second film just had better action sequence, practical effects? the drama was more with more stakes. speaking of action, it is almost funny now watching a comic film like xmen 1 or 2 where nothing really explodes. comic films were different back then but better. they were less easy to hate on. The dramatic parts in Superman like the Krypton council and Smallville scenes were as grounded as any in X-men films. They weren't intended as comedy.
The relationship between Rogue and Logan was stronger and more personal drama in the first, and while Brian Cox was a great villain and Magneto was also more threatening, the Jean Grey sacrifice and reaction from Logan and Cyclops was kind of emo weak, sort of like an attempt to copy Star Trek 2 (even by having her give the ending narration as Spock did). Superman got weepy when Lois died but he then did something about it so it isn't the same kind of helplessness.
Superman was the first mainstream comic film and most important comic film but some aspect about superman, would place superman more in a the fantasy hero section. if you want to compare a superman film to xmen 1, i think man of steel is closer. not saying superman was more grounded as any of the xmen films but man of steel and batman are the most grounded to the xmen films. superman 1 and 2 are more comparable to spiderman 1 and 2. they juggle Grounded and big fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jul 19, 2020 13:30:32 GMT
that is what you get when you make your movies more grounded. Is that what got you into the legal business?
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jul 20, 2020 0:49:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Jul 20, 2020 1:23:06 GMT
They didn't use the costumes which one could say was a cop out--Superman didn't shy away from it.
They were afraid to give them such costumes because they couldn't or didn't think they could maintain the seriousness (although the costumes they had were too flashy to be effective battle fatigues either). I think Cyclops also came across as a twink thanks to Singer-they should have had someone older and more assertive. That quality was given to Wolverine since they opted not to use a Bob Hoskins-type actor.
Another thing Ebert or Roeper mentioned was that Mystique saying to Senator Kelly "it's people like you that made me afraid in school" they were thinking with powers like hers she wouldn't have much to fear. I think it's a bad line. Could have just had her say "I hate people like you."
|
|
Jan El Señor
Junior Member
I love everyone.
@janelsenor
Posts: 1,659
Likes: 1,247
|
Post by Jan El Señor on Jul 21, 2020 14:39:53 GMT
The entire X-Men movie franchise has been spectaculary mediocre. Logan was the only entry that rose above that.
|
|
|
Post by bud47 on Jul 21, 2020 22:17:49 GMT
The entire X-Men movie franchise has been spectaculary mediocre. Logan was the only entry that rose above that. Logan and Deadpool for me. Everything else is mediocre and full of missed opportunities, especially when looking back in hindsight. Most of the films are just painfully small in scope and lack imagination. Makes you wonder why they even bothered if that was all they were going to do with it? Can't help but think what they COULD have done with these films if they had just a little bit more faith in the source material and worried less about grounding everything.
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Jul 22, 2020 7:46:51 GMT
A solid beginning to the Marvel movie franchise (if one chooses to exclude Blade). Great cast and world-building. The story is a tad pedestrian, but it lays a strong foundation for the series to come.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Jul 22, 2020 16:58:08 GMT
A solid beginning to the Marvel movie franchise (if one chooses to exclude Blade). Great cast and world-building. The story is a tad pedestrian, but it lays a strong foundation for the series to come. And Captain America, The Punisher, the unreleased Fantastic Four and most importantly HOWARD THE FUCKING DUCK, or the old Spiderman and Hulk TV movies.
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Jul 23, 2020 6:14:05 GMT
A solid beginning to the Marvel movie franchise (if one chooses to exclude Blade). Great cast and world-building. The story is a tad pedestrian, but it lays a strong foundation for the series to come. And Captain America, The Punisher, the unreleased Fantastic Four and most importantly HOWARD THE FUCKING DUCK, or the old Spiderman and Hulk TV movies. I definitely wouldn't include those much older movies as part of the 'modern' Marvel movie era. They're of a different vintage, much lower in budget and never generating anything like the sort of cultural impact, popular appeal or financial success that the Marvel movies that began with X-Men (2000) and Spider-Man (2002) managed to.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Jul 23, 2020 7:28:34 GMT
And Captain America, The Punisher, the unreleased Fantastic Four and most importantly HOWARD THE FUCKING DUCK, or the old Spiderman and Hulk TV movies. I definitely wouldn't include those much older movies as part of the 'modern' Marvel movie era. They're of a different vintage, much lower in budget and never generating anything like the sort of cultural impact, popular appeal or financial success that the Marvel movies that began with X-Men (2000) and Spider-Man (2002) managed to. Howard The Duck in 2019 dollars made $89m, and if you add in the cost of marketing probably was more profitable well less of a financial disaster than Dark Phoenix was, also forgot to add Men In Black, technically a Marvel movie, and it fits the other criteria and was a bigger money maker than 90 of the X-Men films, hell in terms of budget to box office it's a bigger financial success than any Spidey movie outside of Far From Home
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Jul 23, 2020 7:59:03 GMT
I definitely wouldn't include those much older movies as part of the 'modern' Marvel movie era. They're of a different vintage, much lower in budget and never generating anything like the sort of cultural impact, popular appeal or financial success that the Marvel movies that began with X-Men (2000) and Spider-Man (2002) managed to. Howard The Duck in 2019 dollars made $89m, and if you add in the cost of marketing probably was more profitable well less of a financial disaster than Dark Phoenix was, also forgot to add Men In Black, technically a Marvel movie, and it fits the other criteria and was a bigger money maker than 90 of the X-Men films, hell in terms of budget to box office it's a bigger financial success than any Spidey movie outside of Far From Home I did not know Howard the Duck did so well back in '86. It's an awful film IMO. Regardless, superhero movie it ain't.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Jul 23, 2020 17:42:20 GMT
20 years later I'd say most of the movie still works but man the effects have definitely not aged well at all and the action isn't none too exciting either. Still really wish they had used Jubilee instead of Rogue - Rogue never ever got to shine like she should have in these movies.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Jul 23, 2020 20:36:34 GMT
Howard The Duck in 2019 dollars made $89m, and if you add in the cost of marketing probably was more profitable well less of a financial disaster than Dark Phoenix was, also forgot to add Men In Black, technically a Marvel movie, and it fits the other criteria and was a bigger money maker than 90 of the X-Men films, hell in terms of budget to box office it's a bigger financial success than any Spidey movie outside of Far From Home I did not know Howard the Duck did so well back in '86. It's an awful film IMO. Regardless, superhero movie it ain't. Back then it made $36m but it cost $35m so it was a massive flop, but back then marketing budgets were a fraction of what they are now, so Howard The Duck probably cost $40m all in in, where as Dark Phoenix cost $200m to make and then another $50-100m to market, also Howard The Duck would have been mostly domestic box office if not entirely domestic, Dark Phoenix is mostly international so the money back from their box office would be smaller, just all in all kind of a funny thing to think about.
Yeah it's a bad movie but it's a bad movie I enjoy for that very reason.
|
|
|
Post by Power Ranger on Jul 24, 2020 6:39:37 GMT
One problem with its legacy is that it was treated as a franchise template by studios who tried many of what has now become tropes, but includes many fails.
The worst example is GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra. Think about how many beats it has in common with X-Men. Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow is basically Wolverine and Sabretooth. That one is consistent with GI Joe’s canon I guess. But then think about Zartan taking the Mystique role, the shapeshifter who remains on the loose at the film’s conclusion. But the ultimate fail was Hawk taking the Xavier role, being injured and missing the final battle. I think he even ended up in a wheelchair. Then there’s Cobra Commander’s history with Duke (like Xavier and Magneto) which was not canon. It was just failed world building.
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Jul 28, 2020 15:29:09 GMT
The entire X-Men movie franchise has been spectaculary mediocre. Logan was the only entry that rose above that. Thank you. Logan is good. Deadpool is good but it really isn't an in-universe X-Men movie so it doesn't really count. The rest are totally mediocre.
|
|