theres guys you can hit and theres guys you cant hit
I can just hear his voice saying that...I've watched The Departed at least 50 times.
Seven Psychopaths 8/10 
Here Comes the Boom 6.5/10
: A pretty good adaptation as far as I know.: Revived Marvel after it was dying. Why? Because it didn't have shallow characterization YET was still cartoonish at times.: Not a bad film at all, it's just a shame that Hulk was cast by so many people and couldn't stick with someone.: Again, another great continuation of an excellent adaptation that Guillermo did with the first film.: The first superhero film to really get the attention of awards ceremonies, because of excellent acting that had not been seen before.
Back in October
If that didn't convince you, nothing will.
.
and after that it was like he was a black hole of funniness cuz he sucked in the rest of the characters and made the whole show better.
Whether I agree or not with your assessments, love the passion about movies though...
I don't really know where all that came from...
I think he just meant Batman+Returns set the bar, Begins+TDK raised that, and Avengers wasn't in the class of any of those.
I think a part of what helped Avengers get over was that it started off the summer and had that silhouette of TDKR off in the distance, so there were no stakes. This can be the fun appetizer, then the real comes through. So when it was a real crowd pleaser, with great punchlines, gags and good, clear, not-Transformers-like action....and then it killed with every audience...chicks, kids, old people, foreigners... That was a great pop culture moment. Schwarma went viral. I'm always angry went viral. Rag doll Loki went viral. Joss went viral. It was all good.
But hyping up Avengers now, is like hyping up a bunch of YouTube videos you used to love last year. Ok, but that's YouTube. See it to see it, enjoy it when it's hype and just to say you saw it, but it's not that real.
It was great when it was hype, but it kinda aged like an internet fad and, in a vacuum, it's good for what it is, but it's not an all time classic or anything. It's a pop crowd-pleaser with some really good moments.
So, I was watching Bill Maher the other night, dude had this amazingly hot girl on there.
Mad intelligent. Mad beautiful.
I don't know, for me? Keaton Batman did that to superhero films. Before that, superhero films were putrid. Absolutely putrid. There's charm in some of the early Superman films, and definitely in the old Adam West Batman, but what Burton brought to the superhero film genre was more groundbreaking than Nolan IMO. Whether Nolan made the better films? That's up for debate, but without Burton Batman, there is no Nolan Batman IMO. He brought them mainstream, and made them into blockbusters, and paved the way for films like X-Men, and Spider-Man.
I completely understand peoples favoring for the more realistic take that Nolan provides, and gives some more effort in character development, but if you look at most superhero films, how many of them are REALLY bad?
Not counting TMNT, Toxic Avenger, Swamp Thing, etc., lets look at the history of comic book films since Batman
Captain America (1990): Made for TV crap, mislead.
Batman Returns (1992): Another Burton classic.
The Fantastic Four (1994): As with Captain America, mislead.
The Crow (1994): Criminally underrated adaptation. Did what Nolan did, only 12-15 years earlier.
Batman Forever (1995): Schumacher trash, but still incredibly successful.
Judge Dredd (1995): Cult-classic Stallone action-packed adaptation.
Batman & Robin (1997): Last of the Schumacher crap, yet still very successful.
Spawn (1997): Groundbreaking use of CGI. Doesn't stand up as well as it did, but for 1997 it was very good.
Blade (199
X-Men (2000): The birth of the modern-day super-hero film. Excellent, well casted, and a huge hit.
Blade II (2002): Hit-sequel to the first, more of the same, nothing too special.
Spider-Man (2002): Another film that made waves for the world of CGI. Let you fly across the world with Spidey.
Daredevil (2003): Ben Affleck's poorest career choice possibly, but the Director's Cut isn't nearly as bad as the theatrical cut.
X2 (2003): One of the best in the series, if not the best. Again, made tons of money.
Hulk (2003): Ang Lee trash. It was okay when it first came out, but holds up TERRIBLY.
Hellboy (2004): Guillermo did a phenomenal job with the adaptation, even though it wasn't a big hit.
The Punisher (2004): Not a very well marketed film, and it shows why. It wasn't very good.
Spider-Man 2 (2004): Has been mentioned several times as one of the best Marvel films.
Catwoman (2004): Probably the biggest misstep that WB ever made in the superhero film biz.
Blade: Trinity (2004): Not as successful as the earlier films, and for the most part a disappointment.
Constantine (2005): Another really good attempt at an adaptation for a graphic novel.
Elektra (2005): The Catwoman equivalent for Marvel. Just not a great film
Batman Begins (2005): Nolan picks up where The Crow and Burton's Batman first started to delve into.
Fantastic Four (2005): It did incredibly well, but not a very good film.
V for Vendetta (2005): Beautiful adaptation, paved the way for the likes of Watchmen.
X-Men: The Last Stand (2006): Does Brett Ratner ever do anything good? This is what happens when you give him something good. He messes it up.
Superman Returns (2006): It's not as bad as everyone seems to make it out to be, but it just didn't fall-in-line with what DC JUST did Batman.
Ghost Rider (2007): Shallow attempt at bringing the Rider to the big screen.
Spider-Man 3 (2007): We all know what went wrong here.
Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007): Longest movie title ever? It wasn't very good, but was made because the first did so well.
Iron Man (200
The Incredible Hulk (200
Hellboy 2: The Golden Army (200
The Dark Knight (200
Watchmen (2009): One of the first attempts at a Rated R comic book film, and it worked really well, even if it wasn't for everyone.
X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009): It was better than X-Men 3?
Kick-*** (2010): Again, graphic novel adaptation that was executed to perfection, just not as huge of a critical hit. Did well on home video.
Iron Man 2 (2010): Another great success for Marvel, but not as good as the first. Continued the first phase of the Avengers.
Jonah Hex (2010): A commercial and critical flop. Poor Brolin.
Thor (2011): As shallow as it is, it's still a pretty good ride that does well to replicate Asgard. Seeing it in theaters was a blast.
X-Men First-Class (2011): Brought new life to the X-Men franchise, mostly because of great performances from Fassbender and McAvoy.
Green Lantern (2011): Commercially wasn't bad, but they tried to go the Marvel route with it, and it just didn't work. I can see this being remade down the line similar to how Hulk was.
Captain America: The First Avenger (2011): A decent attempt at bringing Cap to the modern-day.
The Avengers (2012): The first ensemble comic book film, and this one actually felt like you were watching a comic book in the last act.
The Amazing Spider-Man (2012): Not bad considering they re-cast everyone, and went back to the origin story.
The Dark Knight Rises (2012): Didn't live up to the expectations of many, but still a fitting close to the Nolan trilogy.
Dredd (2012): A commercial flop, but in general it was welcomed by most viewers.
Pretty clearly, we have two different categories of films. Generally what you can call the Marvel approach (X-Men, Iron Man, The Avengers, Spidey, etc). Then you have those that try to incorporate superheroes into real life (The Crow, Batman, Blade Nolan Batman, V for Vendetta, Watchmen, etc). Superhero films have almost always been pretty cartoony. It's not something new. It's been like that for a while.
And if you go down that list, most of those films are pretty good. Very very very very few are worth mentioning during awards season, but still, even if a lot of them are shallow, they are at least faithful enough to feel as if you're watching that superhero kickass around the world.
