The Marvel/DC/Fox Pre-Expande Universe

That and the wire work. It was that period after The Matrix and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon came out where every Hollywood movie needed an insane amount of wire fighting for no reason.

The playground fight scene has to be the worst example.

edited 28th Dec '16 1:27:13 PM by comicwriter

having evansece is pretty much a case of "I though it was a good idea at time" and slow motion is not that bad consider is daredevil.

"They got shit on by parents a lot back then because a lot of people thought his movies were too dark for kiddy characters like Batman"

they were kinda right, the pinguin IS Dark as shit in returns, he bite a man nose and them babbbling about having a woman in the most unconfortable way posible, hell is plan was to take all the children and drown them in Gotham waters, or when Shreck see Selina alive he said "if she try to talk, I will push her in heigher window" and in short a tone of thing that would get flack today.

edited 28th Dec '16 1:32:17 PM by unknowing

Took the Matrix mention right out of my mouth. So far, it seems only Blade could actually be enhanced by the Marilyn Manson aesthetic.

Blade 2 have by far the best action scene with Blade vs Nomak, sure is a little bit dated but is a blast to see

I've never actually seen either of the Blade movies. Are they worth checking out still? I know Del Toro directed the second one so I've been mildly curious about it for a while now.

Yes. One's better though

the second is better and I will fight everyone who said otherwise.

Also, Blade si curious case since it dosent feel AT ALL like a superhero movie, also Nomak is a good villian and very sympathy actually.

That's because Blade doesn't really have any of the trappings of a superhero . He's just a monster hunter.

Yeah, Blade ain't your normal superhero mythos to begin with. It's basically an urban fantasy premise, similar to Doctor Strange. Blade is also more goal-oriented, similar to how the Punisher operates. However, that's what gives him an everyman appeal as well as a supernatural escapist quality - he's stronger than most people, but his opponents are stronger still, so there's a sense of immense challenge that he faces night after night. It's like having the best of Superman and Batman... and mothafuckin' Shaft! Ya damn right!

Blade is a good example of a film with a similar aesthetic to Daredevil that didn't age like milk. There's some things that do sound amusing, like some very wonky CGI or how absolutely everyone looks like they walked out of a Marilyn Manson music video, but the bizarre aesthetic kinda enhances the movie's feel of this weird vampire world that is removed of (yet interwoven with) our own. Daredevil is clearly trying to be a more gritty and realistic superhero film, so the schizophrenic CGI and Evanescence blasting just clash violently with what the movie is trying to get across.

edited 28th Dec '16 1:58:12 PM by Gaon

The punisher is worst in that regard, if you saw is movie them it just feel a revenge movie with a guy who call the punisher at the very,VERY end, but that movie also does somethings right like subverting the cliche "super hero love story" and his fight with russian is one of the funniest around, in part because it consist of him getting smack around like rag doll.

I mean, that is the kinda of thing I cant see in a super hero movie right now.

Daredevil feel like is trying to be a DCCU movie but instead being a edgy version of a Marvel one...and no in the good way.

edited 28th Dec '16 1:59:33 PM by unknowing

I know there's a Punisher movie but nobody ever talks about it. It's like it doesn't even exist and I'm just wondering if it was THAT mediocre or forgettable.

The 2004 Punisher film likewise has several misteps but it isn't a bad film. It's actually quite cool. It's impressive because if you see the director's commentary you can see the movie was made on a shoestring budget but creative filmmaking and clever stuntwork hide how cheap the film really is.

It has a few interesting elements, like how the movie's revenge plot is about Frank unmaking Howard Saint's world rather than just shoot him dead, so you get to see the (fairly function, if criminal) Howard Saint family collapse under its own weight in a nearly Shakespearean fashion. It's a interesting plot.

It also has a few curious cinematic references, like the oddly New Old West moments the film has. Castle keeps getting into Quick Draw duels with people and faces off against a murderous guitar player at one point, which is quite curious for a Death Wish-style urban vigilante film. This scene, for example, is awesome in its tension:

It's primary creative decision that divides fans is that it harkens back to Castle's earlier portrayals as a pulpier, Charles Bronson-type of action hero rather than Garth Ennis's endless non-stop assault of cynism and sociopathy. Mind you, the Netflix show also took quite a bit from that approach, opting for a more heroic and less sociopathic Frank Castle.

they are two actually, the first one is good but barely count as superhero movie since it just used the back story(murder family) but for the rest is a action hero movie with superhero name atack to it

That dosent mean is bad, mind you it is pretty damn good but is...well, not super

to be fair, is hard to take Garth gannis punisher seriously without wanting dead after a while.

edited 28th Dec '16 2:11:26 PM by unknowing

There are actually three Punisher films, and they are all pretty good about what they're trying to do. The Dolph Lundgren one is a fairly standard 80's crime action film with a Mafia vs. Yakuza gimmick, but it also has a very human element between Castle and Louis Gossett Jr.'s character - the good cop trying to bring the fallen cop back into the light. It's definitely worth watching.

The Thomas Jane film is... okay, I guess. There are things I found too exaggerated, like having Castle's entire bloodline killed as a deliberate revenge move, rather than just his family in an unrelated crossfire. It took some elements from Garth Ennis's Welcome Back, Frank, but otherwise, it's clearly an independent script with the skull slapped onto it.

Now, War Zone is just about the best of the lot, even as it's the most episodic. It's precisely the kind of film I was talking about. Ray Stevenson presents a stellar performance as the war-weary Punisher that has substituted all emotion for iron determination. The focus is on a very small scale, but it works exactly because it doesn't try and inflate matters. The atmosphere is very noir, to the point of almost being claustrophobic. Essentially, it's one day in the life of the Punisher... and the last day for a whole bunch of other people. The whole thing is distilled to the point of being 200% proof, pure action alcohol. Also, a parkour dude gets shot with a bazooka, because why the hell not?

I actually like the second one more, having IS ENTIRE family, kill is like bruce wayne drama on crack, but I like more is that instead of going rampage with bullet flying all over the place, he just decide to go for a more quiet aproach.

It also have the second best fighting scene between castle vs the russian, with those two pretty much formed how I write fight in fiction

The 90's one is pretty weak but it's been a long time since I've seen it. War Zone though is So Okay, It's Average. It manages to get the ultra-gory-violence the comic's known for pretty well and Ray Stevenson is a good Ennis-Castle compared to Thomas Jane's (equally good) Marvel Knights-Castle. But otherwise it really fizzles out on the dramatic beats and the actual plot of the film. Jigsaw (who, I'll grant you, isn't a really compelling villain in the comics either) is kind of insufferable in the movie because they decided to make him Joker-lite.

Also, what do you think Blade need, is on movie or to be in netflix marvel?

Blade was born for Netflix. He's ultra-gory, ultra-stylish, and his plots are really more suited for televized formats than anything. One of the primary complaints about the first Blade is that Deacon Frost's plan to summon a elder god doesn't mesh with the movie's more mundane aesthetic, and it's true. It's an attempt to give Blade a more "cinematic" (i.e world-threatening) conflict. In tv they can positively scale him down to a place he's more at home and retain his stylish ultraviolence.

I actually recall enjoying Batman Forever quite a bit at the time. I thought Robin was miscast (I would've gone with an actual 15 year old, or someone who could pass for 15 anyway) and I thought they tries to cram too many villains into it (I kinda thought it needed to be the Riddler's film, and they should've saved Two Face for some other time) but over all I enjoyed it. Batman and Robin I felt suffered from a lot of the same problems, just moreso (Clooney, I felt, was miscast, as was Batgirl, who's character was poorly thought out too, and just too many villains). I didn't mind their tone at all (which kinda reminded me of the old Filmation Batman cartoons); my issues were about poor construction. They are flawed, but they don't deserve the hate they get, I think.

Batman return pretty much star the trend of DC movies to have two villians, one subservant the other, so far only green lantern(a movie nobody want to remenber) and Men of Steel subvert that, if a movie have batman, change is two villian will apear in it

I think the main issue is that outside of being poorly constructed in a number of areas and having some pretty terrible miscasting, the main reason people hate on B&R is because its aesthetic is super toyetic and garish. All of the costumes look like they belong on super tacky action figures.

Is a thing of going to far, B&R feel too childish, too toyish, is just....to silly

The Issue with Daredevil is for me that the movie makes him too brutal and ready to murder. I mean, I am not a comic book expert, but he seems to be more like a blind punisher....

Otherwise, I think both the universe approach and the stand-alone approach has merits. But so far, only Marvel actually managed to pull off the shared universe concept and to be honest, it fits their characters the best. I would like something similar for the X-men (but not within the MCU) but I am actually kind of the fence when it comes to the DC characters....otherwise, I really can do without shared universes (well, outside of Harry Potter, but that is entirely different construct anyway). It is too bad that so many studios are now trying to force one into existence, though the good thing about this is that they have finally learned that they can make way more money if they actually put some effort into sequels.

I just want a nice little mix overall...if it makes sense to fold a property into the MCU, do it. If not, well, perhaps put it on the backburner for now and do it once the MCU has run its course.

I have to explain something here: For me early comic book movies were a giant let down. I mean, I liked Superman I and II well enough, but I wasn't all over those. The original Spider-man trilogy wasn't really what I wanted (too much melodrama, not enough character development) and the X-men movies, well, I always wanted a collection of movies which were all set in the X-men world, but with a changing set of characters in every movie. Instead I got the Wolverine show. I would love it for Fox to do a proper reboot and then do exactly that, explore the X-men in a proper continuity with a changing cast.

Otherwise...I actually don't feel that there are that many proper comic book movies overall...either they are really, really badly made, or they are more a Burton movie or a Nolan movie or an Ang Lee movie than an actual representation of the character in question. There is certainly merit in this, but I would actually prefer to get a take on the characters in which they are the focus, and not the sensibilities of the director in question.

What defines a "proper representation of the character" is an open question. Besides certain obvious, big things, these characters by definition can and have been interpreted in a multitude of different ways.

I would much prefer seeing a unique take on the character that adds something interesting to the table, from a creator with a strong vision, than something that was essentially created by studio-mandate and whose identity isn't particularly interesting.

Of course, others have pointed out that to a certain extent the two don't have to be in opposition. For better or worse, Mo S has both Nolan and Snyder's thumbprints, and Bv S is very much a Zack Snyder movie.

edited 28th Dec '16 3:26:57 PM by Draghinazzo