PDA

View Full Version : COMIXFAN PRESENTS...THE TOP TEN COMIC BOOK MOVIES


Jordan T. Maxwell
May 5, 2008, 07:04 pm
<img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/comixfanpresents.gif" align=left border=0 hspace=10 alt="Comixfan Presents logo">The Top Ten Comic Book Movies

By: Jesse Baer, Will Carper, Nick Costanzo, Phil Hunn, Anand Khatri, Alan Lynch, T. Martin, Jordan T. Maxwell
Editor: Jordan T. Maxwell

The weather's getting warmer, the days are getting longer and most importantly the geeks have begun to line up at the multiplex. Yep, summer's upon us again and with it comes a sampling of brand new comic book movies to delight us...until we get home and sign on to the internet to talk about how much we hated them. It's a strong list of contenders with Iron Man opening this past weekend (and already seemingly destined to take its rightful spot near the top of this list someday), followed in the coming months by The Incredible Hulk, Hellboy II: The Golden Army and The Dark Knight. To celebrate the ever increasing quantity...and, on occasion, quality...of film adaptations of the comics we love so dearly, we here at Comixfan have poured over the library of movies adapted from comic books and after much pain staking toil and deliberation, come up with our list of the top ten (or so) comic book movies of all time! So grab your popcorn, tell the obnoxious guy behind you to shut the hell up already and enjoy as Comixfan Presents...The Top Ten Comic Book Movies!

(And a quick aside...while limiting ourselves to only ten slots meant depriving some incredible films of recognition, one film in particular suffered due to our production timeline as when we first started working on this column, Persepolis had not yet been released in the United States, thus robbing several of our staffers of the opportunity to consider this heart breaking and absolutely artful adaptation for inclusion. But then again, I suppose the Golden Globe win and Academy Award nomination will provide the film and graphic novel's creator Marjane Satrapi with some small solace. ;) )

<center><hr width=75%></center>

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/supermanreturns.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/supermanreturns.jpg" align=left border=0 hspace=10 height=150 alt="Superman Returns"></a>#10 Superman Returns

Director/Writer: Bryan Singer/Mike Dougherty, Dan Harris, Bryan Singer
Adapted From: Superman line of comics (DC Comics)
Creators: Jerry Siegel/Joe Shuster

The writing/directing team that lifted X2: X-Men United to such great heights reunited not to tell the next installment of Marvel's Merry Mutants, but instead to resurrect DC's Man of Steel in the realm of celluloid. After years of failed pitches and scripts (including such talents as Kevin Smith and JJ Abrams), Bryan Singer took an incredibly back to basics approach by quite literally taking over where Richard Donner left off after the first two films (the third and fourth movies are, mercifully, ignored). Structurally, it mirrors the first movie so closely that many accused it of merely being a rehash of that iconic film...but upon closer inspection, each element reveals itself as a darkly subverted version of its predecessor. Superman and Lois' rooftop interview and flight together are no longer a fanciful flirtation of wonder and magic, but a longing and bittersweet moment of "what might have been." Luthor's latest real estate plot is both grander and more destructive, while his use of Kryptonite to incapacitate Superman is a study in cruel brutality compared to the camp silliness of draping it upon him as a necklace. The visual spectacle of it all introduces us to a whole new world of "wow"! The plane sequence in particular combines action packed special effects with visual poetry so neatly that you can't help but feel like a kid again, seeing movies for the first time. Newcomer Brandon Routh calls upon the spirit of Christopher Reeve while also making the role(s) subtly his own, while Kevin Spacey out-Luthor's the great Gene Hackman with a slyly sinister but still very fun take on the villain. And Kate Bosworth's Lois Lane represents the viewpoint of an increasingly cynical audience...questioning whether we need a Superman in our world while desperately needing one to emerge. And we are blessed to know that he can...and will...return, always.

<center><hr width=75%></center>

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/blade.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/blade.jpg" align=left border=0 hspace=10 height=150 alt="Blade"></a>#9 Blade

Director/Writer: Steven Norrington/David S. Goyer
Adapted From: Blade (Marvel)
Creators: Marv Wolfman/Gene Colan

Let’s be honest: prior to 1999, most comic book fans’ lists of Marvel heroes who would be eligible for their own movie would not have included Blade, the half-human/half-vampire slayer of the undead. In fact, in terms of his popularity as a character, he probably ranked somewhere below Howard the Duck...and then Goyer, Norrington and Wesley Snipes collaborated to bring an absurdly kinetic, high-octane version of Blade to the silver screen. The film falters a little when it has to provide more than a brutal punch-up, but clearly Goyer, Norrington & Snipes did not want to make the film too complicated. Indeed, to have Blade emote too much would sap a great deal of the unquenchable fury of the character, so the film doesn't suffer much from the apparently truncated approach to introductions. When compared to some of its contemporaries, Blade is not a great movie. But taken on its own terms, it’s bloody brilliant (pun fully intended), and a great deal of fun (perfect for a Friday night in sharing a pizza and a six-pack with your buddies, in fact). You’ll likely forget ninety percent of it when it’s finished, of course, but there are enough “wow, that was cool, dude” moments during the course of the movie which more than make up for that.

<center><hr width=75%></center>

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/300.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/300.jpg" align=left border=0 hspace=10 height=150 alt="300"></a>#8 300

Director/Writer: Zack Snyder/Kurt Johnstad, Zack Snyder
Adapted From: 300 (Dark Horse)
Creators: Frank Miller/Lynn Varley

Whoever thought a decapitated head flying through the air would look so beautiful? Based upon Frank Miller's graphic novel by the same name, 300 recounts the historic Battle of Thermopylae, with a healthy dose of stylistic flair. On one side, a mere 300 of the finest Spartan warriors led by the mighty King Leonidas (Gerard Butler). On the other, the brooding and innumerable hordes of the Persian Empire, led by the strangely androgynous King Xerxes (Rodrigo Santoro). Funneled into a tight valley where numbers count for naught, the resulting battle is a gorgeous display of, well, gore. The film, like the graphic novel itself, is unapologetic in its show of violence. Man and beast alike are ripped apart with savage fury, as the dark legions of the Persian army fall again and again to the glorious Spartans in their efforts to preserve democracy and freedom. Historically, it's hardly the most accurate portrayal of the battle, but what certainly does come through is the heroism of the doomed Spartan soldiers and the passion that ultimately led Greece to become the cornerstone of Western Civilization. The cinematic portrayal of 300 is visually stunning. The human body, as well as its grisly destruction, is as much a work of art as the stylized environment within which the story is set. Made all the more haunting and effective by David Wenham's narration (from the perspective of Delios, the lone Spartan survivor of the battle), 300 retains its impact long after the initial adrenaline rush wears off.

<center><hr width=75%></center>

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/ahistoryofviolence.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/ahistoryofviolence.jpg" align=left border=0 hspace=10 height=150 alt="A History of Violence"></a>#7 A History of Violence

Director/Writer: David Cronenberg/John Olson
Adapted From: A History of Violence (Paradox Press/Vertigo)
Creators: John Wagner/Vince Locke

A History of Violence is one of the rare instances in which the film may, in fact, be superior to the original source material. While John Wagner and Vince Locke’s graphic novel is certainly a beautiful and touching examination of violence and redemption, David Cronenberg’s film adaptation is a much more complex and thoughtful work. With amazing performances by Viggo Mortensen, Maria Bello and Ed Harris, the film delves deep into the core of one man’s desperate attempts to leave behind his violent, amoral past and never lets up. Is such a goal even possible, the film asks and, to the gall of some viewers, never fully answers. From its brutal beginning to its ponderous, understated conclusion, A History of Violence dares its audience to consider this question: Can we ever truly break free of our pasts? And: What happens if we can’t?

<center><hr width=75%></center>

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/superman.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/superman.jpg" align=left border=0 hspace=10 height=150 alt="Superman"></a> #6 Superman: The Movie

Director/Writer: Richard Donner/Mario Puzo, David Newman, Leslie Newman, Robert Benton
Adapted From: Superman line of comics (DC Comics)
Creators: Jerry Siegel/Joe Shuster

There are some movies that transfer their source material directly to the screen and there are other movies that adapt it for the language of a different medium. And then there are movies that truly transcend their source material, transforming it in turn. Richard Donner’s Superman is one of those rare films. Donner juxtaposes Superman’s idealism against some of the darker elements of 70s cinema: there are echoes of disaster movies like The Poseidon Adventure and Towering Inferno, John Williams’ score sounds like a joyous retort to the threat of his music in Jaws and Margot Kidder's Lois Lane betrays a post-Watergate cynicism about elected politicians and the "American Way." But the darkness is never in the foreground for long, thanks to a script full of wit and heart. Lois isn’t a crusading journalist but stands in the tradition of wisecracking reporter-broads that dates back to movies like His Girl Friday. Nor is she the only character to be given some great lines. Even "boy-scout" Superman and "mild-mannered" Clark are given one-liners to add playfulness and edge to the powerful protagonist as portrayed by Christopher Reeve, who is a revelation in not one, but both roles. As Superman he stands up straight and his voice is resonant. As Clark, he slouches and speaks with a nasal whine. But Reeve never pulls the two performances too far apart. There are always signs of one identity in the other, most noticeably a sly smile that both share. Reeve could play confidence and vulnerability with equal skill and had great comic timing to boot. Superman: The Movie is practically a textbook for how to make a great comic book film: draw your inspiration from both media, write a clever, killer script and, of course, put a fantastic actor in the central role.

<center><hr width=75%></center>

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/akira.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/akira.jpg" align=left border=0 hspace=10 height=150 alt="Akira"></a>#5 Akira
Director/Writer: Katsuhiro Otomo/Izo Hashimoto, Katsuhiro Otomo
Adapted From: Akira (Kodansha/Dark Horse)
Creator: Katsuhiro Otomo

Akira is an unflimable book, and if anyone other than the original creator had even tried then the project would likely have never gotten off the ground, even in Japan. Yet somehow Otomo managed it, by basically excising most of the plot. Now we have a story which takes place over a few days and involves far fewer characters, but retains enough to remain a proper adaptation. So while the scale of the original (which included musings on the creation of life, of all things) is lost, what remains is surprisingly faithful. By keeping the focus on the rivalry between Kaneda and Tetsuo, the movie is able to deal with themes like the potential of youth and their isolation from authority, and the dangers of unchecked government power, while also keeping the narrative simple. The animation helps keep things consistent as well; very few of the designs for the movie are different from Otomo’s own drawings, and since the manga used a lot of cinematic-style storyboarding, Otomo is able to make the movie look almost identical to the source material in places, linking both works. Akira is a comic which could never be adapted with absolute faithfulness, but Otomo's insight results in a movie where the new material fits alongside the adapted with ease.

<center><hr width=75%></center>

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/hellboy.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/hellboy.jpg" align=left border=0 hspace=10 height=150 alt="Hellboy"></a>#4 Hellboy

Director/Writer: Guillermo del Toro/Guillermo del Toro, Peter Briggs
Adapted From: Hellboy line of comics (Dark Horse)
Creators: Mike Mignola

The pulpy thrills and creature filled adventures of Mike Mignola's Hellboy and BPRD world of comics are brought to glorious life by master storyteller Guillermo del Toro in this fun, if not entirely faithful, adaptation. del Toro is an unabashed fan of the character and knows his way around monsters and in many ways improves upon Mignola's original stories. Loosely based around the first storyline, Seed of Destruction, the film elaborates and explores relationships and characters that the book had neglected. Professor Broom's heightened role (performed with weathered brilliance by the always great John Hurt) punches home the paternal relationship with the film's eponymous hero...and renders his death all the more tragic. Liz Sherman, little more than a plot device and cool set of powers in the books initially, is transformed through the unconventional beauty and wry wit of Selma Blair and through the strange but beautiful love story with Hellboy. Abe Sapien's role in the action is downplayed, but his friendship and role as the odd heart of this muddled together family are brought charismatically to the screen by Doug Jones (and voiced in an uncredited role by David Hyde Pierce, who modeled his performance so closely on Jones' on-set vocal performance that he refused credit so that Jones would receive the proper amount of recognition). And the villains...more than merely cool looking place holders, Rasputin, Ilsa and especially Kronen become genuinely sinister threats. Spearheading it all, of course, is Ron Perlman, whose immense frame and resonant voice bring Hellboy to large screen life as a crimson cross between Tom Waits on steroid and a pit bull you can't help but love. Combined with incredible action, creature effects and comedy (much provided by the comedic genius of Jeffrey Tambor), Hellboy is a rare film...a movie about a giant red guy with a giant stone hand who shoots monsters for a living that's also a love story, a coming of age story, and the origin of one of the greatest and coolest heroes of our time.

<center><hr width=75%></center>

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/x2.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/x2.jpg" align=left border=0 hspace=10 height=150 alt="X2: X-Men United"></a>#3 X2: X-Men United

Director/Writer: Bryan Singer/Michael Dougherty, Dan Harris, David Hayter, Zak Penn, Bryan Singer
Adapted From: X-Men line of comics (Marvel)
Creators: Stan Lee/Jack Kirby

The original X-Men film was certainly a fun movie. It provided competent (and at times wonderful) acting, some great visuals, and quite a few good fight scenes. It expanded on the idea of Xavier's "school" in a way that wouldn't be seen in the comics for well over another year, and thankfully dropped the spandex in favor of more fashionable leather. Still, it felt like a lot of setup, as if something much bigger and better was on the horizon. X2 is the kind of beautiful sequel that takes the characters and themes from the original and expands upon them. Characters like Xavier and Magneto gained a level of cunning and depth that was only hinted at in the first installment. Others, such as Iceman and Pyro, went from cameo status to major players whose impressive displays of power made for some of the most memorable scenes. Best of all, the human/mutant tensions go from an implied conflict to being the very forefront of what the X-Men are all about. We see why the X-Men are needed, and we gain some sympathy for why Magneto pursues his own more violent methods. And though the immediate threat is ultimately resolved, it is not without casualties on both sides. X2 elevates the X-Men beyond simple superhero theatrics, blurring the line between good and evil and showing that the tensions driving Xavier, Magneto and even the mutant-hating Stryker aren't going to be solved by a flashy fight scene. The film hints at the level of tragedy and destruction that would follow any all-out race war, and by the end of the film, the need for a peaceful resolution is felt more greatly than ever before.

<center><hr width=75%></center>

Before we introduce our number 2 spot, it's important to note the historical relevance here as we encountered something never before seen in our long and storied history of Top Ten lists...a tie! That's right, two films were of such high quality and appeal that when the final votes came down, they both shared the same ranking for second place. Rather than go through the arduous process of a tie breaker, we've decided instead to preserve the will of the people and present to you BOTH of our second place films!

<center><hr width=75%></center>

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/spiderman2.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/spiderman2.jpg" align=left border=0 hspace=10 height=150 alt="Spider-Man 2"></a>#2 (TIE!) Spider-Man 2

Director/Writer: Sam Raimi/Alvin Sargent, Alfred Gough & Miles Millar and Michael Chabon
Adapted From: Spider-Man line of comics (Marvel)
Creators: Stan Lee/Steve Ditko

What makes Spider-Man 2 special is that it is not only a great comic book movie, but a great film in its own right as well. As a comic book adaptation, it stays pretty close to the “Spider-Man No More” story of Amazing Spider-Man #50, blended into several other storylines lifted straight from the 40-plus years of Spider-Man comics. All of it is mixed with a modernized Doctor Octopus origin story, one that makes him more of a tragic figure brought low by his own hubris and loss than the arrogant mad scientist of the comics. But the true quality of this film springs from the fact that Raimi and the writers understand exactly what makes Spider-Man a great character: Peter Parker. The film spends more time with Peter and the problems Spider-Man brings into his life than it does on action, and the story is just as satisfying as the Academy Award winning special effects are spectacular. The original cast is still fantastic, as is newcomer Alfred Molina, simply one of the best casting choices ever made in a comic book movie, playing one of the best versions of the Doc Ock character ever written, with the special effects that film allows providing the best Spider-Man vs. Doctor Octopus battle that we are likely to ever see. With Raimi's apparent love of the characters and faithfulness to the comics, it's a comic book movie that Spider-Man fans can love. With a perfect melding of a great script, a highly talented director, outstanding special effects and great performances, it's a film that anyone can love.

<center><hr width=75%></center>

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/sincity.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/sincity.jpg" align=left border=0 hspace=10 height=150 alt="Sin City"></a>#2 (TIE!) Sin City

Director/Writer: Frank Miller, Robert Rodriguez, Quentin Tarantino/Frank Miller
Adapted From: Sin City: The Hard Goodbye, Sin City: The Big Fat Kill, Sin City: That Yellow Bastard and Sin City: The Customer is Always Right (Dark Horse)
Creators: Frank Miller

This is how it’s done. At least this is how it should be done. Sin City creator Frank Miller and seasoned director Robert Rodriguez did an excellent job of adapting one of the most popular comics ever published. Watching this film, it’s very hard to find something to complain about. Every scene and bit of dialogue is taken directly from the books, which works very well and keeps the movie true to its source material. Miller’s stories already have a strong cinematic quality to them, making it very easy to transfer from staple-bound comic books to a multimillion dollar big screen production. The soundtrack is amazing, the CGI is great, and the casting...oh, the lovely casting! To name just a few from the star studded cast: Bruce Willis takes on the role of betrayed cop Hartigan; Clive Owen is the desperate but clever hero Dwight; and Mickey Rourke was born to play the brutal street warrior Marv. Just remember, this one isn’t for the kids. It’s brutal, it’s vulgar, there’s nudity, and a **** load of violence. But what else would you expect from a town called Sin City?

<center><hr width=75%></center>

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/batmanbegins.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/top10comicmovies/batmanbegins.jpg" align=left border=0 hspace=10 height=150 alt="Batman Begins"></a> #1 Batman Begins
Director/Writer: Christopher Nolan/David S Goyer, Christopher Nolan
Adapted From: Batman line of comics (DC Comics)
Creators: Bob Kane

Nolan and Goyer just lifted him off the pages. They could’ve put this Batman into almost any plot and he’d still feel like the real article. He’s terrifying, psychotic, dangerously single-minded...and the movie doesn’t shy away from that, nor does it try and justify setting this guy up as the hero. He’s not pleasant, but neither is Gotham City. This is very much a necessary evil. Building a Batman as believable as this, as easily recognizable to fans of the books, is key to what makes Batman Begins a successful adaptation. And by taking inspiration from a select few Batman stories, the whole setting feels as “right” as the main character himself. Gotham is unmistakable, equal parts bustling metropolis and gothic nightmare. Jim Gordon is the perfect anchor for viewers not already familiar with the world they’re thrown into, and in Ra’s Al Ghul the film offers a genuinely credible alternative to Batman’s own efforts to clean up Gotham. Ra’s has always been at odds with the majority of Batman’s rogues gallery: a calculating, methodical and, most interestingly, rational villain, he presents the kind of threat that the likes of the Joker could never dream of. He forces us to think about Batman’s methods in a way none of the other movies have, which is quite brave considering how flawed the “wear a mask and punch people” approach actually is. Batman Begins is not a straight adaptation. It’s a wholly original story, with elements pulled from select comics over the years. But what brings it all together, what makes it a truly great comic book movie, is the way everyone involved managed to link these disparate plots and characters into a cohesive and ultimately brilliant whole.

<center><hr width=75%></center>

And there you have it! Sequels and Supermen, monsters and mutants, high flying heroics and moral ambiguity. A reflection of the diversity available in both media. So whether you're a fan of bombastic blockbusters or indie arthouse flicks, we hope you've found something on this list you agreed with, something on this list that made you think...and more than anything, something on this list you might like to sample from your local video store or comic book shop. Until next time, we'll see you...at the movies!

(And yes, I do have a giant book of cliches right next to me to draw from...:D)

<center><hr width=75%></center>

300, X2: X-Men United: Nick Costanzo
Akira, Batman Begins: Alan Lynch
Hellboy, Superman Returns: Jordan T. Maxwell
Spider-Man 2: Jesse Baer
A History of Violence: Will Carper
Blade: Phil Hunn
Sin City: Anand Khatri
Superman: T. Martin

Contributors: Anthony Devlin, Alex Groff, James Groves, Stephanie Kay, Marty P, Janne Pietikainen, Erwin Rafael, Michael Regan, Greg Reeves, Omar A. Safi
Image Assistance: Michael Regan

<center><hr width=75%></center>

The opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the writers involved, and are not reflective of Comixfan or its other staff in general.

citizenx
May 5, 2008, 07:18 pm
An interesting list. I'm one of the weird folk who not only enjoyed Superman Returns, but thought Sin City and Hellboy were incredibly dull and that Spider-Man 2 is overrated. I'd probably put Ghost World up there. Maybe Oldboy. I have a soft spot for Tales from the Crypt: Demon Knight. And I know Iron Man would already be on my list. Still, I always enjoy lists.

Michael Regan
May 5, 2008, 07:23 pm
An interesting list. I'm one of the weird folk who not only enjoyed Superman Returns, but thought Sin City and Hellboy were incredibly dull and that Spider-Man 2 is overrated. I'd probably put Ghost World up there. Maybe Oldboy. I have a soft spot for Tales from the Crypt: Demon Knight. And I know Iron Man would already be on my list. Still, I always enjoy lists.
Ah, a man who know his comic related movies.

... interested in writing up summaries for any of your favourites ;)

Bernard Murnane
May 5, 2008, 10:39 pm
Where the heck is American Splendor?!? Its not only a fantastic comic book movie, but a fantastic movie.

Spider-Man 2 is plodding, dull, boring, cheesy, and utterly worthless. (the only time I sound like a message board troll is when talking about Spider-Man movies)

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 6, 2008, 03:17 am
Where the heck is American Splendor?!? Its not only a fantastic comic book movie, but a fantastic movie.

but, sadly, not one that was widely seen...


Spider-Man 2 is plodding, dull, boring, cheesy, and utterly worthless. (the only time I sound like a message board troll is when talking about Spider-Man movies)

well, you know, there's an easy enough way to avoid that...don't talk about Spider-Man movies. ;) it has the added benefit of making you not be so wrong about the awesomeness of Spider-Man 2, if only in public. :LOL:

blackcat
May 6, 2008, 07:44 am
I would never put any Spiderman movie above the 3 X-Men movies.

n25philly
May 6, 2008, 11:28 am
Is this a list of the best superhero movies or the worst. A lot of them either sucked, or are no where near as good as people want to make them to be.

Radiate
May 6, 2008, 11:28 am
I generally agree with the list, especially Batman Begins and Spider-Man 2 in the top spots. They are my two favourite comic book films ever! But Hellboy in the llist? Really?

RADIATE!

Kevin Jones
May 6, 2008, 11:51 am
I would never put any Spiderman movie above the 3 X-Men movies.Really??? You think X3 was better then Spider-Man 2??? I find that shocking.

ustad
May 6, 2008, 11:52 am
i totally,absolutely disagree with Superman Returns on that list -even in top 20- it was one of the few dumbest superhero movies i have seen in recent years (along with Transformers and Spider-Man 3),but i agree with Batman Begins as #1,it was totally fresh air after how Joel Schumacher killed Tim Burtons masterpiece(s)

and i wish Blade would have a higher grade

Michael Regan
May 6, 2008, 12:08 pm
I personally thought that Superman Returns revitalized the franchise without ignoring the great work done in with Superman I and Superman II (ignoring the horrible Superman II and Superman IV)

ustad
May 6, 2008, 12:28 pm
if Bryan Singer hadnt made Superman an illegitimate father,or composed Clark Kent as a Superman with glasses it could be something ok;but what Singer did really,really hurt the franchise i think, and instead of moving on the story of first 2 films he could have written his own story independent from previous movies (i thank Chris Nolan for doing that to Batman franchise)

and after years of absence of Superman (in movies) it just sounds stupid to build a story which he wasnt around like 5 years or so

BlackSamurai
May 6, 2008, 12:51 pm
I had to erase an overly long reaction to this list applying better judgement before hitting the 'Submit Reply' button, it had to do with Superman Returns even deserving to get on this list at the 10th (technically 11th) spot it's at. While the supporting arguments were up to the specific contributor(s), I don't find that they made that in any way the good movie that it would need to be to deserve top 10 status. I was struggling a bit to find a better comic book movie to replace it, almost thinking it would be better to have just argued that the tie of two movies at the no. 2 spot accounts for 2 and 3 making the list need to stop at Blade; however, if it was just to find a better movie than Superman, to me Fantastic Four TROTSS suffices, as do the first installments of FF, X-Men and Spiderman (even Transformers, having seen several iterations of comics before the film is, but may not qualify I guess, because it builds from another source, cartoons as well, else we'd be having to consider any and everything that became a comic before a new wave of movies came out e.g. Star Wars, Star Trek, AVP, etc.)... but besides better than Superman Returns I can agree that they aren still not top ten material, but what IS stared me right in the face when I reread the fact that Superman: The Movie is here too apart from Superman Returns; Batman.

If you guys dug back to the likes of the original treatments of Superman, how did you miss those of Batman, which were all considerably good before Shumacher got ahold of the sequels? The first Batman beats back Superman Returns by far and I see Superman Returns as a boring entry that at least served to modernize the concepts of Superman, from which we can hope the sequels (which I believe the studios were/are nervous to even do because of the perceptions of 'Returns) will be what deliver the meat. The greatness of the portrayals you report as support to your arguments seem a bit more like fishing for something and stretching just to say something good about the movie, and the plane thing, while a thrill and a sweet piece of special effects does not a movie make.

A Kryptonite island being lifted out by Superman, the crappy illegitamate baby Supes, the overly cheesy Luthor, the lack of a physically matching/threatening enemy all are only a few of the things that made many wonder how such a take on Superman ever saw the light of day. Something the likes of Superman HAS to be full of excitement, even when trying to tell those underlying stories of his relevance in today's age, and it was not. Just like I don't think Hulk was a bad movie, I can still see that it had too little of what Hulk should give to us to ever be fully loved; hence, I support the retake of it. So likewise I can't discredit anyone for thinking SR isn't actually bad, but I would be lying if I actually called it good.

To be even more definative, I wonder why this list was released around the same time as Iron Man, because the only way I can't see it being not only on this list but also very high in it, possibly no.2 (dropping that tie to two #3s) is if it wasn't considered at all. As for the rest of the list, I can't too much fault the ordering except for a little brow raising at Akira and History of Violence (Akira because I barely remember it, and classify it differently as an animated movie in my head, and HoV because it left me dry despite no major qualms about the acting, I'll leave that one as just other people's type of thing)

Xavier Disciple
May 6, 2008, 01:17 pm
Batman Begins made the list and top spot too boot, but Tim Burton's first Batman installment doesn't even rank? Might as well put Daredevil in the top 10 then because this list holds no weight.

citizenx
May 6, 2008, 03:05 pm
As far as the earlier Batman movies being on the list, if anyone of them were to make it it should have been Batman Returns. They are fun movies still, but they don't hold up all that well.

Congo Jack
May 6, 2008, 04:09 pm
My list:

10) Batman Returns
9) Batman
8) 300
7) Blade
6) Spider-Man
5) Sin City
4) Iron Man
3) X2
2) Spider-Man 2
1) Batman Begins

Nick Costanzo
May 6, 2008, 04:41 pm
Batman Begins made the list and top spot too boot, but Tim Burton's first Batman installment doesn't even rank? Might as well put Daredevil in the top 10 then because this list holds no weight.The first Burton Batman fails because it made the Joker more interesting than the title character. Batman Begins is the only Batman movie where Bats himself steals the show.

Malachi
May 6, 2008, 05:06 pm
The two first batman movies are really good. And I like Michael Keaton as Batman.

Superman returns was not a good movie in my eyes. I agree with the argument that it would have needed some physical challenge for Superman. My friend who loved the earlier superman movies loved it though. But his taste is not allways to be trusted =)

phoenixfyre2k4
May 6, 2008, 05:28 pm
I have YET to understand why people liked Batman Begins so much ... it shouldn't be number one on ANY list, lol. In its attempts to be "scary" and serious it was quite comical ... all I can recall is a bunch of blurs which were supposed to be "fight scenes." :?

I also thought the first Spider-Man was the best of all three ... they never surpassed its emotional appeal or story.

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 6, 2008, 06:12 pm
I would never put any Spiderman movie above the 3 X-Men movies.

really? X-Men 3 over...well...ANYTHING short of Batman and Robin would be a crime of taste that i don't think any of us would ever recover from.

Is this a list of the best superhero movies or the worst. A lot of them either sucked, or are no where near as good as people want to make them to be.

neither. it's a list of our top ten COMIC BOOK movies. read the title. there are some superhero movies on here and they're among the best ever made, at least according to the consensus opinion of our staff. but Sin City, 300, Akira and A History of Violence having nothing to do with superheroes, so either way you go, you're operating from a false assumption to begin with.

I generally agree with the list, especially Batman Begins and Spider-Man 2 in the top spots. They are my two favourite comic book films ever! But Hellboy in the llist? Really?

RADIATE!

yes. really. Hellboy is amazing, and the second one looks to be even moreso.

i totally,absolutely disagree with Superman Returns on that list -even in top 20- it was one of the few dumbest superhero movies i have seen in recent years (along with Transformers and Spider-Man 3),but i agree with Batman Begins as #1,it was totally fresh air after how Joel Schumacher killed Tim Burtons masterpiece(s)

and that's your right to disagree, but plenty of us agreed enough for it to make the list. personally, i would've liked to have seen it higher as i think it's incredibly intelligent and well crafted. but ah well...democracy comes with compromises. ;)

and i wish Blade would have a higher grade

honestly, i was surprised it even made the list. pleasantly so because i think it's good cheap fun, but there's not a lot to it that sets it apart for me.

still, better it than Constantine. Or League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. i'd gladly give it up to have V for Vendetta on the list, though. but, again, i yield to the consensus. ;)

I have YET to understand why people liked Batman Begins so much ... it shouldn't be number one on ANY list, lol. In its attempts to be "scary" and serious it was quite comical ... all I can recall is a bunch of blurs which were supposed to be "fight scenes." :?

because it was smartly written, shot gorgeously and performed with incredible range and talent by an all star cast that redefined Batman and gave him back some of his depth and dimensionality after suffering years of campiness on the big screen.

for one. :P

I also thought the first Spider-Man was the best of all three ... they never surpassed its emotional appeal or story.

i thought the second one did a much better job at emotionality and narrative, much more nuanced than the broadly arch strokes of the first one (while still excellent). and the dialogue was a thousand times improved in the second.

i dug the third, for all its flaws, but it's definitely the weakest of the trilogy.

Mightiest_mortal
May 6, 2008, 07:20 pm
Pfft.. Original Super-Man movie is very ovverated. He flew round the earh backwards and reversed time! I mean seriously. I was 5 when i first saw the film and even then i knew it was ridiculous. How so many fans are so willing to overlook such an obvious Deus Ex Machina is beyond me. He might as well just do that every time he does something wrong (oh wait he did in the Donner Superman2 as well)


Its a shame that the theatrical version of Daredevil was released at cinemas and not the Directors cut. The directors cut is actually bloody good and tends to be seriously overlooked. Go see it if you havnt.
Punisher was a very entertaining film too (apart from his Big Art Attack moment at the end)

X2 would be top of my list. It was and always will be awesome :)
(though i agree fully that x3 should only be allowed to be placed on lists with "worst" in the title)

Michael Regan
May 6, 2008, 07:30 pm
He did not reverse time, he travelled backwards in time.

Nick Costanzo
May 6, 2008, 07:35 pm
Its still completely impossible and silly.

citizenx
May 6, 2008, 07:37 pm
Pfft.. Original Super-Man movie is very ovverated. He flew round the earh backwards and reversed time! I mean seriously. I was 5 when i first saw the film and even then i knew it was ridiculous. How so many fans are so willing to overlook such an obvious Deus Ex Machina is beyond me. He might as well just do that every time he does something wrong (oh wait he did in the Donner Superman2 as well)


To me, Superman: The Movie has more charm than any superhero movie since. Christopher Reeve is the embodiment of Superman and Clark Kent. Is it campy? Sure, but it's a product of it's time. It's charming and uplifting and fun and dare I say it makes me believe a man can fly. As for the end, yeah it's illogical and completely crazy but it's a fantasy movie. Superman was so devastated that he was able to, in his rage, turn back time. I don't think it was a great way to do things, but I can't help but love the movie. As silly as it is it never bothers me.

And technically the reason the Donner cut of #2 has the turn back time thing in it is because Donner intended to not use that ending in the first movie.

I do really need to see the Daredevil Director's Cut though.

Michael Regan
May 6, 2008, 07:42 pm
Its still completely impossible and silly.
But consistant with the comic books.

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 6, 2008, 07:42 pm
Pfft.. Original Super-Man movie is very ovverated. He flew round the earh backwards and reversed time! I mean seriously. I was 5 when i first saw the film and even then i knew it was ridiculous. How so many fans are so willing to overlook such an obvious Deus Ex Machina is beyond me. He might as well just do that every time he does something wrong (oh wait he did in the Donner Superman2 as well)

well, it's not exactly a vast departure from a lot of the Superman comics of the time. while the science of it makes me roll my eyes, i love the emotional content of that sequence, when he finds Lois dead. he's saved the entire west coast, but couldn't save this one person that he cared about in his own life. that moment of just screaming to the heavens, and his voice echoing through the canyons before he takes off still makes me cry. i mean, seriously...he's rocketed to Earth from a dying planet, where he gains superstrength, superspeed, flight and a bevy of other superhuman powers, disguises his identity with a pair of spectacles, builds his entire fortress by throwing a crystal into a block of ice and the only thing that can bring him low is a chunk of rock...but THIS is the thing you have trouble believing? ;)

the amnesia kiss in Superman 2 is much more insulting to the audience's intelligence. :LOL:


Punisher was a very entertaining film too (apart from his Big Art Attack moment at the end)


:LOL:

oh...you were serious?

:rofl:

He did not reverse time, he travelled backwards in time.

isn't that really just splitting hairs? i mean, that's kind of relative to your perspective...for him to travel backwards in time, he has to reverse time. and if he reverses time, he travels backwards in time. it's not as if the film makes this entirely clear, by having him fly superfast circles around the Earth, causing it to rotate backwards on its axis as we see everything happen in reverse. so by all appearances, he's merely making time flow backwards by making the Earth turn in the opposite direction. which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. and either way creates the paradox that there would now be TWO Supermen present at that moment. so what happens to the second one?

i know, it's cheesy fun and best not to dwell on it too long, but while it doesn't ruin the movie for me (as the above poster claims it should) it could've used a little clarification as to just what the heck he did there.

and either way, it still makes a thousand times more sense than the amnesia kiss. oy. :P

Michael Regan
May 6, 2008, 07:49 pm
the amnesia kiss in Superman 2 is much more insulting to the audience's intelligence. :LOL:
But was also something that existed in the original comic books, although rarely.

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 6, 2008, 08:00 pm
But was also something that existed in the original comic books, although rarely.

i've never encountered it in my own reading...and that's probably for the best. it's just a dumb, dumb idea. "my super saliva will travel to Lois' short term memory centers and erase any memories of my true identity while leaving her with no lasting neurological damage!" :P

Mightiest_mortal
May 6, 2008, 08:04 pm
so did they just make up brand new powers for super-man whenever they needed them back in the old days then? lol

Michael Regan
May 6, 2008, 08:04 pm
i've never encountered it in my own reading...and that's probably for the best. it's just a dumb, dumb idea. "my super saliva will travel to Lois' short term memory centers and erase any memories of my true identity while leaving her with no lasting neurological damage!" :P
If I remember correctly it was in Action Comics #306 (1963). Lois was suspicious as usual of Clark. Clark kisses her under the mistletoe in a non-mild mannered fashion causing her to swoon and forget her suspicions.

There was another option though: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Al7FeEZrH1E

James Groves
May 6, 2008, 08:04 pm
bit of a cheat to have a tied spot for 2nd place. its basically allowing 11 in rather than 10. :P

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 6, 2008, 08:23 pm
so did they just make up brand new powers for super-man whenever they needed them back in the old days then? lol

in the wackiest days of the Silver Age...yeah, pretty much. :LOL:

bit of a cheat to have a tied spot for 2nd place. its basically allowing 11 in rather than 10. :P

not really. after everyone voted, there were 11 contenders for the top ten list and we did our round of ranking. mathematically, those two films were tied for number 2. hell, it would've been a cheat NOT to have them tied since it would've involved us manipulating the numbers or process in some way that one film came out ahead of the other.

10 spots. 11 films. sorry if that's too complex to wrap your head around, but that's why ties exist in the first place. :P

Michael Regan
May 6, 2008, 08:26 pm
so did they just make up brand new powers for super-man whenever they needed them back in the old days then? lol
At one point it was decided that Superman had super-control over his muscles and could alter his facial appearance and even his size.

Nick Costanzo
May 6, 2008, 08:39 pm
Oddly, Jimmy Olsen seemed to sprout an even more varied array of random superpowers back in the day.

Michael Regan
May 6, 2008, 08:40 pm
Oddly, Jimmy Olsen seemed to sprout an even more varied array of random superpowers back in the day.
Very funny stuff as well, cleverly taken on in post-crisis continuity from time-to-time and in the recent countdown.

Nick Costanzo
May 6, 2008, 08:50 pm
Also: Superman is sorry he ever adopted Jimmy Olsen. That stupid jacket was just that bad.

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 6, 2008, 10:18 pm
i'll thank you two to kindly get back on topic. :LOL:

Nick Costanzo
May 6, 2008, 10:32 pm
Alright.

So "Superman's Pal: Jimmy Olsen: The Movie: Yes, Really". Where might that place on this list? Surely at the top.

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 6, 2008, 10:43 pm
somewhere below that awful, awful Supergirl movie. no matter how hot Helen Slater was in that costume. sigh...

and man...between this and King Ralph, i'm pretty sure you can get Peter O'Toole to act in a movie for little more than a warm sandwich. :P

BlackSamurai
May 7, 2008, 11:45 am
You know, if I didn't know better, I would almost think you guys put Superman Returns on there to send us loyal perusers of the great Comixfan into this frenzy and sit back around an office boardroom (yes I know it doesn't exist) somewhere, cracking up maniacally as you watch real time automatic updates of comments suggesting some of us are having conniptions on a projected screen.

And sorry to point out, but regardless of ties, 11 items do not qualify as 10, even though I have no real problem with wanting to place things to 10 slots and two fit in one of them.

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 7, 2008, 03:36 pm
You know, if I didn't know better, I would almost think you guys put Superman Returns on there to send us loyal perusers of the great Comixfan into this frenzy and sit back around an office boardroom (yes I know it doesn't exist) somewhere, cracking up maniacally as you watch real time automatic updates of comments suggesting some of us are having conniptions on a projected screen.

And sorry to point out, but regardless of ties, 11 items do not qualify as 10, even though I have no real problem with wanting to place things to 10 slots and two fit in one of them.

no, but 11 items can fit in ten slots. you just have two of them share one of the slots. and if you have no problem with it, then why are you pointing it out to begin with? :LOL:

and we also put Superman Returns on this list because enough of us thought it was a great film. no ulterior motive there. we did, however, put A History of Violence to subliminally make everyone Viggo Mortensen's love slaves. he paid us top dollar for that one! :P

Anthony Devlin
May 7, 2008, 03:48 pm
Cant say there is a film in the list I wouldn’t happily watch. i remember as a child being scared stiff of Superman when at the beginning Zod was placed in the phantom zone - i was only young. my all-time personal favourite adaptation at the moment has to be Stardust - I absolutely adore that film.

citizenx
May 7, 2008, 04:23 pm
Cant say there is a film in the list I wouldn’t happily watch. i remember as a child being scared stiff of Superman when at the beginning Zod was placed in the phantom zone - i was only young. my all-time personal favourite adaptation at the moment has to be Stardust - I absolutely adore that film.


Stardust is cool, but not really a comic adaptation, as it started out as a novel and then just became a novel with really pretty illustrations.

Anthony Devlin
May 7, 2008, 04:48 pm
theres always gotta be one person who has to get technical. ;)

technically you are correct.. still a bloody good film though.

Nick Costanzo
May 7, 2008, 05:33 pm
Stardust is the greatest date movie ever.

citizenx
May 7, 2008, 06:59 pm
No doubt, Stardust is good stuff.

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 7, 2008, 09:52 pm
actually, the illustrated edition of Stardust by Neil Gaiman and Charles Vess came out first (released serially by Vertigo), then was adapted to a prose only version later. but since it was illustrated prose even in its initial incarnation, rather than a comic book, we decided not to include it in consideration for this list. despite how utterly amazing and fantastic it is. :D

citizenx
May 8, 2008, 12:13 am
actually, the illustrated edition of Stardust by Neil Gaiman and Charles Vess came out first (released serially by Vertigo), then was adapted to a prose only version later. but since it was illustrated prose even in its initial incarnation, rather than a comic book, we decided not to include it in consideration for this list. despite how utterly amazing and fantastic it is. :D


My mistake then. Of course saying it was adapted to a prose only version is kind of funny as all that required was taking out the pictures that framed the text. And why would anyone want to do that?

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 8, 2008, 04:13 pm
My mistake then. Of course saying it was adapted to a prose only version is kind of funny as all that required was taking out the pictures that framed the text. And why would anyone want to do that?

i don't know, but they did. :P

Michael Regan
May 8, 2008, 09:27 pm
i've never encountered it in my own reading...and that's probably for the best. it's just a dumb, dumb idea. "my super saliva will travel to Lois' short term memory centers and erase any memories of my true identity while leaving her with no lasting neurological damage!" :P
I found it! Here it is, the Super-Kiss (http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d28/Red00Knight/Super-Kiss.jpg)!

Jon Hancock
May 10, 2008, 11:06 am
There's no way Returns is better than Superman II. Or than the Burton Bat films...

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 10, 2008, 04:16 pm
There's no way Returns is better than Superman II. Or than the Burton Bat films...

there might be at least one way...

::looks at list::

hey, what do you know? there is! :P

(and i mean, seriously...ripping off his S-shield and throwing it at Non as it becomes this giant piece of cellophane that immediately disappears? i think that and the super amnesia kiss will keep it off of most top ten lists for a long time to come. :LOL: )

Jon Hancock
May 10, 2008, 05:27 pm
Rubbish. You have genuine character acting and development. It's not like Returns can be held up on the strength of its stunts. II has Lois, Clark and Superman all being acted superbly and Superman facing genuine struggle over his role and his responsibility to the planet. Returns is meant to be set after it and yet he regresses to this child who can't come to terms with his own wobbly emotions. Returns is a fun enough film but it's not nearly as good a portrayal of the actual characters and mythos plus the storyline is dull and pretty obvious. Plus Spacey's Luthor sucked hard :P

In fact I'd be interested how you'd argue Superman the Movie being a better film than Superman II. II has better action scenes, better plot, better villains etc etc

And regardless of all that, Batman's better than Returns for plenty of reasons. Creative, imaginative, bold, groundbreaking. All terms that just don't sit with Returns but apply to Batman

Michael Regan
May 10, 2008, 05:39 pm
Spacy was brilliant as a far more evil Luthor.

Superman Returns was a fantastic film which, as I've said, did not ignore the great work done in Superman and Superman II, but instead extended it.

Batman Begins effectively erased the bad Batman sequals from our minds, placing the villains into the psychotic level they deserve rather than the clowns they had been in the original quadralogy.

Jon Hancock
May 10, 2008, 07:18 pm
Oh I'm not having a go at begins. That deserves to be up there.

Returns just doesn't though. Not when you look at what is missing. And I don't think cinematic Luthor needs to be that evil. It's Superman, not Batman. I think that's the best I can phrase it. Making superman darker and more realistic isn't a good move. It isn't the character and isn't the franchise and it's one of the reasons the film got such mixed acceptance. People don't go to a Superman film wanting to see navel gazing. The film shouldn't need a psychotic evil villain. Hell Luthor isn't. He's a very talented (and thus crooked) businessman. The whole world domination thing doesn't really fit his character profile. Like there were shouts to the old films with the stupid old lady bit and the comedy sidekicks but they felt like concessions, rather than contributions, to a legacy.

Plus Brandon Routh really could have done better with Clark. Clark's a way more interesting character than Superman and yet the film barely shows his uniqueness. Kate Bosworth was embarassingly dull as Lois. Lois should be so charismatic and centre stage but she just brooded and brooded.

Michael Regan
May 10, 2008, 07:22 pm
Are you up to date on Luthor of recent years in the comic books?

Jon Hancock
May 10, 2008, 07:34 pm
oh yeah. But then the movies are something seperate and if it's meant to be the same character from the first two it's a pretty drastic removal. The film isn't set in current continuity. No President Luthor or Crisis or anything. It's meant to be a wily crook who sees Supes as little more than a problem he needs to avoid while making some cash

Michael Regan
May 10, 2008, 07:40 pm
Except that in the first two movies he was for destroying the western seaboard to gain control of the most valuable portion of the United States, then led the renegade Kryptonian villains to kill Superman. He was still for monetary gain at the beginning of Returns, until Superman came back from a long absence. What other leap to take than to get rid of a thorn in your side once-and-for-all.

In any case, these comments are all opinion based. I enjoyed the revival.

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 10, 2008, 08:07 pm
Rubbish. You have genuine character acting and development. It's not like Returns can be held up on the strength of its stunts. II has Lois, Clark and Superman all being acted superbly and Superman facing genuine struggle over his role and his responsibility to the planet. Returns is meant to be set after it and yet he regresses to this child who can't come to terms with his own wobbly emotions. Returns is a fun enough film but it's not nearly as good a portrayal of the actual characters and mythos plus the storyline is dull and pretty obvious. Plus Spacey's Luthor sucked hard :P

Spacey's Luthor was amazing. Superman II, as much as i enjoy it, has utterly contrived plot devices, odd characterizations, slap shod structure and stilted dialogue in a lot of scenes. now, a lot of this has to do with Donner being taken off of the film halfway through by the Suskinds so it's naturally rather uneven. but the cellophane S-shield? the amnesia kiss? Clark going back to the bar to take some petty little revenge on the redneck who'd kicked his ass when he didn't have powers (and...um...dude, you just lost your powers. WILLINGLY. why are you suddenly surprised when you're in a fight and no longer have super strength or invulnerability?)? and Hackman's Luthor is mostly wasted as weasely second fiddle to Terrence Stamp's incredible and iconic Zod. there's a lot to be admired in Superman II, don't get me wrong. but Returns hold together with a much more even and coherent structure and narrative, more thoughtful and dimensional performances, better action set pieces and way better dialogue.

and while i encourage disagreement and argument, let's can it on the calling other people's points of view "rubbish" and the like. disagree all you want, but let's try and maintain a certain level of decorum in here, okay?


In fact I'd be interested how you'd argue Superman the Movie being a better film than Superman II. II has better action scenes, better plot, better villains etc etc

Zod's a great villain, no doubt. but like i said, Luthor's wasted in II where he shines with clever villainy in the first. and Ursa and Non are just kind of non-entities. stoic major domo and brainless childish thug. the first movie holds together a lot more elegantly, there's a lot more emotional richness to it, and even though Superman's not getting into fist fights in the first one, i think the action scenes work just as well. in the end, the second one is just too easy. Superman gives up powers to be with Lois, Superman goes and gets powers back to fight super powered villains, Superman easily tricks super powered villains into getting rid of their powers. it's fun and all, but it really doesn't hold up to close scrutiny.


And regardless of all that, Batman's better than Returns for plenty of reasons. Creative, imaginative, bold, groundbreaking. All terms that just don't sit with Returns but apply to Batman

i think they apply as much to Returns as they do to Batman, which was basically just Burton layering a Frank Miller Batman aesthetic on to his own usual cinematic tropes. likewise, Superman Returns pays homage while also cleverly subverting the same structure and characters it's emulating. in other words, i think there's just as much that imaginative and groundbreaking in both films as there are things they've taken from other films and the comics themselves. so to say one is fully "creative" while the other isn't just comes across as hyperbolic rhetoric.

they're both excellent films and i love them both. and you're free to think Batman is better than Superman Returns. but apparently the majority consensus of staffers who worked on this disagree with you. and this is, after all, Comixfan's Top Ten list, not Jon Hancock's top ten list. :P

Returns just doesn't though.

well, yes, it does since so many people voted for it to be. it is possible for you to state an opinion without having to devalue the opinions of others, you know. it's difficult, i know, and very rare on the internet. but i have seen it done before so i know it's possible.


And I don't think cinematic Luthor needs to be that evil. It's Superman, not Batman. I think that's the best I can phrase it. Making superman darker and more realistic isn't a good move. It isn't the character and isn't the franchise and it's one of the reasons the film got such mixed acceptance. People don't go to a Superman film wanting to see navel gazing. The film shouldn't need a psychotic evil villain. Hell Luthor isn't. He's a very talented (and thus crooked) businessman. The whole world domination thing doesn't really fit his character profile. Like there were shouts to the old films with the stupid old lady bit and the comedy sidekicks but they felt like concessions, rather than contributions, to a legacy.

um...you DO know there are more versions of Luthor than just what John Byrne and the animated series did, right? he's just as often been portrayed as a mad scientist who thinks he should be in charge of things. and in the movies that Singer was emulating, he'd been portrayed as a proud criminal, obsessed with his own genius and a penchant for real estate. all elements Singer and Spacey brought to the character, while combining his more modern character elements of more brutal cunning and belief that humanity doesn't need a super powered savior (springing at least in part from his envy that he's NOT the most powerful man in the room if Superman is around). so, yes, i think a darker and more realistic take is an entirely valid direction to go in. you can still have fun and big action set pieces, but also ruminate on the characters and the philosophical implications of who they are and why they do what they do. the very notion of a superman is derived from philosophy, as mentioned by Nietzsche and Shaw. there've been plenty of versions of Superman that have just been him punching giant robots around and winking at the camera after Lois just can't figure out he's really Clark Kent. aw, gee, shucks those are fun...but there's so much more to do with the character and his relationships, especially in the world we're in now. Morrison's had that element in his All Star Superman. we've seen it pop up in both Johns and Busiek's recent runs on the books. and back to recent runs by Rucka and Azzarello, all the way to Birthright.

i mean, come on...he's the most powerful being on the planet, the best of all of us, but he's an orphan and an immigrant, utterly alone and the only time things show up from his past and his home, they tend to try and kill him. he has to hide behind not one identity but two to the point where you have to wonder who the real person behind it all truly is. there's so much philosophical and dramatic depth that can be explored through the character and his relationships with others, i think it's a disservice NOT to do so. especially if i'm coming to see a full length film. you want to throw up a few minutes of animation or a half hour on TV of Superman punching stuff, awesome. i'll get on the visual spectacle. but if you want to make it really special, add that emotional depth (as the Bruce Timm Superman animated series so often did, even if just to add a little texture to the world). and if i'm going to see a film on the big screen, i want more than just visual spectacle, giant robots and winking. i want a compelling story with complex and flawed characters. i want some human drama mixed in with the flying and fighting. i think the ability to have that blend is what separates great films from merely good ones.


Plus Brandon Routh really could have done better with Clark. Clark's a way more interesting character than Superman and yet the film barely shows his uniqueness. Kate Bosworth was embarassingly dull as Lois. Lois should be so charismatic and centre stage but she just brooded and brooded.

Bosworth wasn't as stellar a Lois as i would've liked, but i thought she did a pretty good job. and Routh was phenomenal for me. he brought a lot of warmth and humanity to both sides of the character that occasionally got lost in Reeve's more screwball Clark moments or overly aloof Superman scenes (which were great for the movie Donner was making because it matched that more arch tone they were going for, so don't take that as a dis on Reeve's performance). i actually hope he can avoid the Superman curse because i'd love to see him in some different roles in the near future.

Michael Regan
May 10, 2008, 08:16 pm
Damn you Jordan ... too much ... to read ...

Alrighty, then, who has seen the Donner cut of Superman II? I have yet to see it myself but I'm definitely pumped up for it. (I keep forgetting to grab it when I'm out.

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 10, 2008, 08:36 pm
Damn you Jordan ... too much ... to read ...

yes, but it all MEANS something, man! :LOL:


Alrighty, then, who has seen the Donner cut of Superman II? I have yet to see it myself but I'm definitely pumped up for it. (I keep forgetting to grab it when I'm out.

i haven't gotten to, but i very much want to. i hope it cleans up some of the problems i mentioned above.

Jon Hancock
May 10, 2008, 09:16 pm
I see your point Jordan and sorry for the rubbish remark. It was meant in jest and I forgot the smilie. I may be mildly embarrassed by the cellophane s :P

I think that the character driven plot you describe though is just as applicable to ii though when you consider how groundbreaking it was to have Lois work out Clark's identity and then for Superman to abandon it all for love. I mean that's a real character flaw explored there. Get your end away or serve the planet and humanity. I just think that within the context of the three movies, the stuff he deals with in III about being rejected by Lois and the world shouldn't be as big a deal compared to the previous turmoil he's been through.

And I know Lex has many different interpretations. But I was more coming from the view that a character in a series should be consistent and to me the jump from Hackman in I and II to Spacey in Returns is too big a move.

I mean I enjoyed Returns and bought it on DVD (albeit for £1 in the clearance bin) but I don't think, personally, that it's as enjoyable or as well made a film.

But I'll agree to differ :)

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 11, 2008, 03:07 pm
I see your point Jordan and sorry for the rubbish remark. It was meant in jest and I forgot the smilie. I may be mildly embarrassed by the cellophane s :P

ah, there you go...a smilie can forgive a world of sins. ;)


I think that the character driven plot you describe though is just as applicable to ii though when you consider how groundbreaking it was to have Lois work out Clark's identity and then for Superman to abandon it all for love. I mean that's a real character flaw explored there. Get your end away or serve the planet and humanity. I just think that within the context of the three movies, the stuff he deals with in III about being rejected by Lois and the world shouldn't be as big a deal compared to the previous turmoil he's been through.

i agree that Superman II had some great character moments, but a lot of them i think work better in premise than they managed to work out in execution (again, somewhat hampered by the behind the scenes turmoil). i just like the more mature themes of "i still love you, but where do we go from here?" in Returns. it feels more human and relatable than "i love you and will sacrifice my superpowers and alien legacy to be with you." those themes seemed to focus more on the Super and why he can't walk away from it, while Returns focused more on embracing the "man" side of the equation. but that's my personal preference. i think both have strong themes at work, but, again, i think Returns also manages to execute its themes more consistently throughout.


And I know Lex has many different interpretations. But I was more coming from the view that a character in a series should be consistent and to me the jump from Hackman in I and II to Spacey in Returns is too big a move.

right, and i'm saying i think it makes a lot of sense. because you still see that seed of Hackman's campier Luthor under the surface, but he's gotten much harder and darker in the years since Superman left. it plays into that theme in the film of growing up in a lot of ways. even evil has to mature. ;)


I mean I enjoyed Returns and bought it on DVD (albeit for £1 in the clearance bin) but I don't think, personally, that it's as enjoyable or as well made a film.

and that's fine. i'm not saying you have to love it, just as i don't have to love Superman II as much as you do (or even as much as i used to). though i do want to get the Donner cut at some point to compare and get a glimpse of "what might have been." sigh...:LOL:


But I'll agree to differ :)

i know it's hard to imagine you and i disagreeing on something, but i'm sure we'll get by. :D

Alan Lynch
May 11, 2008, 06:07 pm
I thought Superman Returns was guff. I wouldn't watch it again on a dare; but that's the joy of opinion, I guess. So rather than cuss the folks who voted it in, I'll just lavish praise on most of the rest of it. I think we did alright there; Jordan's intro is right though. Iron Man would go straight into the top 5 had we done this list after it came out.

BlackSamurai
May 14, 2008, 01:34 pm
I'll play Devil's Advocate and ask "Would Iron Man going into the top five, tie with something else, making it a list of 12 in 10 slots, or would it bump Superman Returns down, and off?" :giggle: No but seriously, I loved Iron Man and am well finished with complaints about why S Returns is on here, since at the end of the day it was voted in by the Comixfan Staffers and it is their list reflective of their standards. I do wonder if all the comic movies I can think of where up for comparison in whatever criteria they used to judge though, and it would've been more a "COMIXFAN..." list to us, reflective of us, if it was somehow polled by all the users of the site, but it was not, and even that is subjective to popularity vs. serious ability to critique.

I await a time to see how Iron Man stacks up in the opinions of you staffers and even the public/Comixfan users, but since this particular list is still so recent, I would rather see a few more come out e.g. the next Batman, the new Hulk, the next Hellboy, the Punisher, not that all will be worthy of top ten, but I'd be interested in the pool encompassing more '08 movies before the next tally comes about.

In the meantime, it'd be cool to build a rating calculator public poll that would return comparative results. Either with people assigning 1 - 10 beside 10 they pick from 50+ comic movies, or something even more in depth with each person entering grades for how well their 10 picks do with story, theme, acting, pacing, or whatever 5 or more categories seem best to decide what criteria makes a good movie.

Jordan T. Maxwell
May 14, 2008, 04:03 pm
I'll play Devil's Advocate and ask "Would Iron Man going into the top five, tie with something else, making it a list of 12 in 10 slots, or would it bump Superman Returns down, and off?" :giggle:

well, in order for Iron Man to be included, it would be a bit more complicated than simply slotting it in. we'd basically have to restart the process, have it considered equally alongside all other eligible films, voted on and then ranked. which would basically lead to a whole new list...since the films to consider is ever changing and the participating staff is shifting as well. this is more a brief snapshot of what we think right now. but in another year's time, we could see any of these entries replaced or reordered by Iron Man, Dark Knight, Hellboy II or The Incredible Hulk...or the staff could suddenly spike in indie sensibilities and suddenly the top spots are claimed by Persepolis, 30 Days of Night, V for Vendetta, Road to Perdition, American Splendor and Ghost World. who knows? :D

I await a time to see how Iron Man stacks up in the opinions of you staffers and even the public/Comixfan users, but since this particular list is still so recent, I would rather see a few more come out e.g. the next Batman, the new Hulk, the next Hellboy, the Punisher, not that all will be worthy of top ten, but I'd be interested in the pool encompassing more '08 movies before the next tally comes about.


i'm a bit of a film buff myself, so i could absolutely see us revisiting this topic at some point in some capacity in a year or two. maybe switch it up a bit, make sure it's not just a rehash of this list. we'll see. :)

living not existing
Aug 2, 2008, 08:34 pm
Now with The Dark Knight out, what does said advocate think else? It's definitely in the top 5 for sure. I haven't gotten to see Iron Man yet.

Sad to see that Tim Burton's 'Batman' '89 wasn't on the list (although I do love 'Batman Begins'). Overall, some of the films I feel were good ('Blade', '300', 'Hellboy') but not among the 'greatest'. That and, Superman: The Movie should of been a lot higher. :dunce:

Wanted is based on a comic book, isn't it? I'd add that too, having just seen it. It took me by surprise.

Michael Regan
Aug 2, 2008, 08:44 pm
Top Ten Comic Book Movies is defintely a topic which should be revisited, as long as it is not anytime too soon for risk of creating a list very much the same as this one.

Jordan T. Maxwell
Aug 3, 2008, 12:19 am
Now with The Dark Knight out, what does said advocate think else? It's definitely in the top 5 for sure. I haven't gotten to see Iron Man yet.

as a personal movie goer, i would add Iron Man and Dark Knight to this list in a heart beat. probably Hellboy II as well. but as the editor, i stand by the list as a snapshot of the top ten comic book movies before this recent batch came along and changed everything. :P


Overall, some of the films I feel were good ('Blade', '300', 'Hellboy') but not among the 'greatest'.

other than Blade, i can't agree with you. ;)


Wanted is based on a comic book, isn't it? I'd add that too, having just seen it. It took me by surprise.

very loosely based, yes. except one being the story of a group of supervillains who take over the world and the other being the story of a secret group of assassins who maintain the status quo via a knitting instrument. :LOL:

Ovid
Aug 3, 2008, 06:13 am
Of the recent batch, I'd add Iron Man and Dark Knight, but also Persepolis.