Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by Audiophilander (A) on June 30, 2003 at 09:54:40

In Reply to: This is great, group of advanced culture brainiacs Reviewing a Marvel Comic. posted by Edp on June 27, 2003 at 10:49:59:

When I see a movie based on a pop-culture comic book character, there are two things expected:

1) That long established comic characters (i.e., cultural icons), translated to the big screen, are "reasonably" true to my recollections of the original comics, and...

2) that the vision of the director doesn't intrude upon my preconceived notions and insult my intelligence in order to reach a theoretically hipper, more youthful, target audience.

Using those two paradigms as my criteria, here is how I would grade some of the feature films based on comic characters (both Marvel & DC):

Superman (C. Reeves): C- [on avg.]
Batman (Keaton & Clooney): C [on avg.]
X-Men: B [averaging I & II]
Spiderman: A-
Daredevil: D
Hulk: C

In regard to "Angst" Lee's take on the Hulk, he is the one touting his film's depth and endeavoring to place so much emphasis on exploring the subconscious duality of the Hulk/Banner character. I had no problem with this added dimension to the character as long as Lee's dissection of the psychological aspects of Banner's traumatized personality didn't dillute the primal energy of the Hulk character and inevitably, the film. Unfortunately, that's exactly what did occur and the pacing suffered tremendously for it, IMHO. That's about as close to a "grey poupon" Cannes (canny?) analysis as I care to get. :o)

BTW, are you suggesting that us advanced culture "Braniacs" should only be qualified to review flicks based upon DC Comic characters (Superman)? ;^)

Cheers,
AuPh