Superhero Movie Help Needed!!!

Watchmen. A very decent version of the groundbreaking graphic novel.

Vince524 said:

That’s right, the Hulk. Not the version with Eric Bana (God forbid) or even the one with Edward Norton, which was much better.

Click to expand...

Uh, gonna have to disagree with you on that one. As for the TV series, David Janssen did practically the same thing better in The Fugitive, apart from turning green.

Were I teaching a film class, I'd go back to at least take a brief look at the first super-hero adaptations due to their historical importance, then work my way up to Nolan's impressive but flawed Batman films. Republic's Adventures of Captain Marvel (1941) and Spy Smasher (1942), and Columbia's Batman (1943), Superman (1948), Batman and Robin (1949), Atom Man vs. Superman (1950) and Blackhawk (1952) in particular deserve a mention, along with an explanation of the place of the serials in movie history. There were other cliffhanger comic book adaptations, but these are the main ones. I'm not sure I'd do more than give a passing mention Republic's 1944 Captain America, which is fun but has almost nothing to do with the comic books. Then there's Superman and the Mole Men (1951), which was the two-part pilot for the George Reeves TV series, spliced together and released as the first comic book based feature film.

All the superhero action was on TV for about the next fifteen years, until the 1966 Batman feature based on the TV series. Both the Superman and Batman TV series are important for their impact on popular culture outside their medium, in the myriad marketing tie-ins - toys, bubble-gum cards, halloween costumes, etc. - they spawned. The World's Finest team weren't the first characters to generate such a huge amount of ephemeral entertainments - that would be Hopalong Cassidy - but we're still buying Superman and Batman stuff to this day, along with all the action figures and such that accompany every other new superhero movie release. I haven't bought a Hopalong Cassidy item in years, haven't even seen one for sale since I picked up a Hoppy pocket knife a decade back or more, but I can't walk into WalMart without tripping over Superman or Batman regalia.

Good call on the first two Superman films, although they have their own flaws. The Salkinds played a little loose with the mythology, but, damn! They were impressive in their time and still hold up pretty well today. I wouldn't slight The X-Men 1 or Spider-Man 1 on my way to The Dark Knight, though. And the upcoming Avengers film is apt to be a game changer, one way or another. Either superhero team ups will become the vogue if it succeeds, or never be seen again if the movie bombs. We shall see what we shall see.

Iron Man should get a mention imo

while its no Dark Knight, Iron Man made producers and the studio realize it didn't need to be Spider-Man, Batman, or Superman to make great bank. you just needed a solid story, good cast, and entertaining action. i think Iron Man really deserves a lot of the credit for the mass hysteria the film studios have with superheroes these days, and their constant attempts with lesser known characters. let's face it, the mainstream didn't give much of a damn about Iron Man before the movies, but now he's a much more popularized figure.

and of course, that would lead into the outburst of superhero films we have today, with the massive culmination of events that will be The Avengers.

as mentioned above me, the early stuff needs to get a mention too. that's really where it all began.

i don't know if you guys are doing animated films as well, cuz if you were, i could go on for days about the important animated stuff. (from Mask of the Phantasm all the way All-Star Superman). i usually find the animated films better than most of the live-action ones, like All-Star Superman for example, or Batman's Under the Red Hood.

Of course, what I posted above only applies to superheroes from comic books. If he wants to consider characters from other media -comic strips, radio, pulps - that's a whole 'nother bunch of films to consider. Three Flash Gordon serials from Universal, two Green Hornet serials from Republic, Columbia's Shadow serial (plus six cheaply made features from 1937 to 1958 and the 1994 big-budget feature with Alec Baldwin), two Columbia serials based on the pulp character The Spider, the Phantom (1943 Columbia serial to 1996 feature with Billy Zane), and on and on. Then there are cartoons, from the Fleisher Studios' theatrical Superman cartoons of the early 40s - among the best short cartoons ever made - all the way to this week's episode of Batman Brave and Bold.

I'd say he'd have enough material for at least a couple of classes.

mulcahy67 said:

Iron Man should get a mention imo

Click to expand...

Doh! He sure should. The first Blade, too, probably. And another dozen or so I can't think of given my sleep deprivation.

The Crow was awesome.

Still can't believe they're going to remake that one. (sigh)

I also loved the Hellboy movies.

I personally loved the second X-Men movie and it challenges Dark Knight and some of the others as my favorite superhero film.

What? You can't give reppies back anymore?


The answer is: The Scarlet Pimpernel, published in 1902.

From the Wiki page:

The Scarlet Pimpernel is a play and adventure novel by Baroness Emmuska Orczy, set during the Reign of Terror following the start of the French Revolution. The story is a precursor to the "disguised superhero" tales such as Zorro and Batman.

I'd say UNBREAKABLE is worth a look, as is DARKMAN. The former, from back when M Night Shyamalan wasn't a punchline to a sad joke, is a downbeat and interesting take on the superhero genre in the 'real' world with what I at least thought was a really effective twist. The latter's Sam Raimi not being able to get a big-name license and instead inventing a nifty superhero out of whole cloth (though there are definitely echoes of The Question and Hourman) - it's the aesthetic of the superhero movie without having to interpret an established canon.

A superhero movie that doesn't get nearly enough credit for kick-starting the superhero movie genre is Blade (1998). Before it the last caped crusaders we had the bloated mess that was Joel Schumacher's Batman and Robin (1997)that killed the franchise until Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale breathed life back into it minus the Arnold Schwarznegger quips and nipples on the Bat-suit.

But Marvel was even more dead in the water. Think about what kind of superhero movies they had cranked out. The Punisher? The Fantastic Four? Junk.

Then along came a little movie about a third-rate supporting character in the long canceled Tomb of Dracula comic book. Nobody had any expectations from Blade , but it totally kicked ass with a tough performance from Wesley Snipes and surprisingly stylish direction from Stephen Norrington.

Blade didn't make a ton of money ($75 million), but it made money and showed Hollywood there was a market for super hero movies that didn't insult the intelligence of its audience.

Marvel picked up the lesson. Next up were Bryan Singer's X-Men (2000) and Sam Raimi's Spider-Man (2002) and that got the superhero movies off the mat and back into the business of being summer movie blockbusters.

Not until Batman Begins (2005) did DC get back in the game and though The Dark Knight Returns is the best superhero movie ever made, Marvel has been far more successful in diversifying their portfolio with multiple characters having lucrative launches.

But it all began with Blade and though it's kind of been forgotten, it shouldn't be.

nighttimer said:

A superhero movie that doesn't get nearly enough credit for kick-starting the superhero movie genre is Blade (1998).

Click to expand...

+1 for that, if this is on TV I often end up watching it. Pity the sequels sucked.

It isn't just the big name stuff you have to look at if you really want to understand the comic-book works being translated to the big screen - for one brief moment, before RL got in the way, Indonesia had a thriving comic book industry, with films to match. The adaptations of Ganes Th's work (specifically the proto-superhero Si Buta Dari Goa Hantu), are stunning. And going back to the adaptations early readers were experiencing (The Better 'Ole, Ally Sloper, Captain And The Kids gives a better understanding of how the groundwork was prepared for the more visually aesthetic superhero characters.

Don't forget to take at least a brief look at all of the projects which substitute martial arts for true superheroics, or use supernatural elements to give characters powers (both the Sky High television series and the film play fast and loose with the source material, but seeing that gate... Oh boy, that gate is sooo beautiful on screen), as well as the never-were's - there was an early 80s Dan Dare television series planned, and there are still scripts floating around if you know where to look.

I look at superhero films as a sub-genre of comic-book adaptations (and it is a rather small sub-genre, given the numerous slice-of-life strips which have had adaptations), so I'm not as beholden to the notion that superheroes are the prime reason comics are successful. I'd rather read Charles Burns or Robert Crumb than the latest issue of Superman.

I would also consider Kick Ass as important in any discussion of superhero films because it looks not at the superheroes but the fans who might copy them and the recent thing for masked vigilantism which is currently in vogue.

As for Watchmen, what interests me about the film is the assumed superheroic status of the characters. In the comic, only Dr Manhatten is truly a 'superhero' - he has powers which probably exceed even superman. The others are merely ordinary guys - albeit ordinary guys who are very fit and healthy and trained and with exceptional equipment. Of course, this also applies to both Iron Man and Batman - both of whom cannot really be called 'superheroes' in the literal sense of the word because if you take away their gadgets they are merely humans. Though very fit and skilled humans with government contacts and the resources of vast corporations to call upon... Yes, Tony Stark and Brucce Wayne are no more supermen than Bill Gates. Which I suppose is still more super than you or I

And if the numerous Batman films really are that important (and, arguably, they are), then the flip side of the coin is worthy of mention as well -Danger: Diabolik, which uses panel-layouts on-screen forty years before Ang Lee tried it in Hulk, gives prominence to the villain of the strip about a decade before American comics would attempt such a thing, and had better music than the Bond films. The Killink rip-offs are only worth watching to see just how revolutionary Diabolik really was.

Darkman and Unbreakable.

Both were quite important, imo.

Btw Vince, this might be useful: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2075455_2075373_2075293,00.html

robeiae said:

Darkman and Unbreakable.

Both were quite important, imo.

Click to expand...

Hey, that was what I said!

BigWords said:

And going back to the adaptations early readers were experiencing (The Better 'Ole, Ally Sloper, Captain And The Kids gives a better understanding of how the groundwork was prepared for the more visually aesthetic superhero characters.

Click to expand...

Even moreso with Dreams of a Rarebit Fiend, I think.

BigWords said:

And if the numerous Batman films really are that important (and, arguably, they are), then the flip side of the coin is worthy of mention as well -Danger: Diabolik, which uses panel-layouts on-screen forty years before Ang Lee tried it in Hulk, gives prominence to the villain of the strip about a decade before American comics would attempt such a thing, and had better music than the Bond films. The Killink rip-offs are only worth watching to see just how revolutionary Diabolik really was.

Click to expand...

Good call. Keep going back and you find Louis Feuillade's Fantomas in a similar vein. Not quite as, um, diabolical as Diabolik, though. Also his Les Vampires is worth a look; Musadora's bat costume seems vaguely familiar.

And I almost forgot Fritz Lang's Dr. Mabuse, who did have supranormal abilities and is therefore the earliest true supervillain I can think of.

robeiae said:

Btw Vince, this might be useful: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2075455_2075373_2075293,00.html

Click to expand...

Doh! How could I forget the woefully under-rated Rocketeer? Any film that includes a Rondo Hatton look-alike has to be reckoned with.

How about Men in Black? Not exactly superheroes, but it is based on a comic book. It gets my vote as one of the greats, especially since I went to college with creator Lowell Cunningham.

Torgo said:

Hey, that was what I said!

Click to expand...

Ha! I missed your post, somehow.

Vince, let me rephrase my post: What Torgo said.

I'm so glad you included The Incredibles, my favorite superhero movie.

My next favorite is Hellboy, so wonderful and so true to the superhero world.