Which is silly because comic book movies(or well superhero movies to be exact), by the nature of the source material, are going to be much more : D than :[ 9 times out of 10.
Hell even Batman Begins had Batman beating up ninjas and being a playboy every once in a while
BlankZoe on
0
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
edited May 2011
I think another golden point regarding Marvel is the fact that their films are at least building an internal consistency.
I dunno. This seems like a fairly futile discussion (unless we wanna use RottenTomatoes scores, or something). I stick by what I said in another somewhat related thread in D&D: I prefer DC's pseudo-strategy of having people who can do the franchise justice come along and knock it out of the ballpark every couple of years, as compared to Marvel Studios's strategy of just churning out 2-3 vapid flicks every summer and cashing in on the commercial tie-ins. DC's also put out some really terrible films of its franchises (the old, campy Batmans; Catwoman; etc.), but I feel like the quality of the films I mentioned above, collectively, outweighs what Marvel has put on the silver screen thus far.
ymmv, of course.
"knock it out of the ballpark"?
You are basing DC's strategy entirely on Nolan's Bat-Films
the only other superhero flick they have had was Superman Returns which wasn't bad but was hardly a hit
everything else was Vertigo which is essentially a separate brand and has no franchises to speak of film-wise.
plus you think the 60s batman was terrible so you are fucking broken
I was referring to the more recent Val Kilmer / George Clooney Batman films.
Again, though, this is pretty futile discussion. I threw my opinion out there (and never called it anything but my opinion), people shat on it, and I don't really see where this can go from there.
well, we could have a measured and reasonable discussion about the various merits of the films in question, you could perhaps suggest that while while marvel has made more reasonable films dc has made strictly better ones, or that you don't think the marvel films are as good as everyone else does, or point out that the dark knight counts for at least three marvel movies
or you could just get all butthurt because people disagreed with you on the internet
I am implicitly saying that I didn't enjoy these purportedly quality films Marvel has put out over the last decade. Of the list put up on the last page, I personally enjoyed maybe four of them:
Blank you should watch the title sequence of Wolverine and that's about it. It was a pretty cool sequence though. What came before and after it are better left unspoken.
The whole building-a-consistent-mythology-across-multiple-films thing is such an ambitious and interesting project, and I fucking love that they've had the balls to take it on.
The term graphic novel is not strictly defined and is sometimes used, controversially, to imply subjective distinctions in artistic quality between graphic novels and other kinds of comics. It suggests a complete story that has a beginning, middle and end, as opposed to an ongoing series. It can also imply a story that is outside the genres commonly associated with comic books, or that deals with more mature themes. It is sometimes applied to works that fit this description even though they are serialized in traditional comic book format. The term is sometimes used to disassociate works from the juvenile or humorous connotations of the terms comics and comic book, implying that the work is more serious, mature, or literary than traditional comics.
Nope. A comic book is a usually monthly serialized story released in issues. It can be ongoing or a miniseries.
A graphic novel is a piece of sequential art told in a completed volume. There can be multiple novels in a series but they are released in the graphic novel format not in single issues.
Writer Neil Gaiman, responding to a claim that he does not write comic books but graphic novels, said the commenter "meant it as a compliment, I suppose. But all of a sudden I felt like someone who'd been informed that she wasn't actually a hooker; that in fact she was a lady of the evening."
That's sort of what I always perceived it as -- comic book fans' attempts to try and give a more formal title to the medium. As a comic book fan, I didn't feel any particular compunction to dress up a medium I enjoy, because I don't feel ashamed of reading "comic books."
Posts
Hell even Batman Begins had Batman beating up ninjas and being a playboy every once in a while
I am implicitly saying that I didn't enjoy these purportedly quality films Marvel has put out over the last decade. Of the list put up on the last page, I personally enjoyed maybe four of them:
Where did I say this?
EDIT: Oops, Iron Man 1&2 should not be on that list!
that was pretty neat!
The Avengers is going to cause me to go into a never-ending joy-seizure, I know it
That was one of my favorite parts of Iron Man, the introduction of SHIELD
"That's quite a mouthful."
I was bouncing in my seat
It'll be like the comic-version of the Rat Pack.
welp better take maus' pulitzer back, green lantern movie got made
also this guy probably has the worst opinions i've ever seen
like 'watchmen being a really good comic book adaptation'
'iron man is boring'
like that isnt even an opinion, that just makes him an idiot
they should make a Batman movie with Michael Emerson as the Clock King
if our ideas were good we'd be millionaires
Not true! People with good ideas fail all the time!
For Example:
they could have Michael Emerson as Killer Croc for all I care
I just need my Emerson fix
Everyone in my theater just did this big "ooooohhhhhhhhh"
Anne Hathaway as Killer Moth
Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Aquaman
let's do this
If we're so smart, why aren't we rich?
Are they not?
comic books are single issues of a series
graphic novels are exactly that; novels depicted in the comics medium.
watchmen, maus, sandman, things with finite narratives
I still don't think that makes me an "idiot," but I may be slightly biased in that judgement.
A graphic novel is a piece of sequential art told in a completed volume. There can be multiple novels in a series but they are released in the graphic novel format not in single issues.
in the context of the rest of your oeuvre it certainly does
Bulletball
Joker by Brian Azzerello and Lee Bermejo is.
this isn't true at all
That's not really a good definition of graphic novel considering Sandman was a series of single issues and Watchmen was a 12 issue miniseries.
I get what you're saying, but I think your description is flawed.