Best Superhero Movie of Summer 2012 (Avengers, ASM, TDKR)

[Infinity9999x]

I would have paid for it, which I guess from the perspective of the studio is all that matters. But I generally don't like splitting a movie up unless there is no other choice, as in The Lord of the Rings.

I think TDKR is better as a single film. They could split up the Knightfall/No Man's Land plot from the Dark Knight Returns plot, but I'd want it to be a different story with a different villain. Not just expanding the movie we got and cutting it off in the middle.

TDKR is my second favorite comic book movie ever though, so ideally I would just leave it as is.

I think TDKR is really solid, but there were a few things that really bugged me about the film. I thought Blake's deduction of Batman was a bit lazy, and I wished he had a bit more to go on then his gut. I also really did not like the way Bruce escaped the pit. I get that it's a visual metaphor, and I like the idea of the fear thing, but c'mon, when you get down to it, there's just no way a grown man is not going to be able to make a jump that a little girl could do. If Talia could do it at ten, tons of prisoners would be escaping that crap.

And I didn't think Talia was needed. Her role easily could have gone to Catwoman (with the only change being that Catwoman decides to help Bruce at the end) and keep Bane as the child of Ra's. It would have streamlined the story, which it needed. And Bane was much more interesting then the Talia in that film anyways.

Those were my feelings on it anyways. And why it didn't beat out TA for me.

 

[The Joker]

There were a few things. First of all, I always thought they overdid the "nerdy Parker" angle in the Raimi films. Peter was never the socially awkward kid who could barely talk to his other students, he actually asked out girls often, he was just viewed as a nerd because of his interests.

Considering Peter's High School years lasted about 40 minutes of Spider-Man 1 and we only got about two High School related scenes, while TASM's spanned the whole movie, I don't think you can make an accurate comparison on how Peter interacted with his fellow students since the only one you saw him interact with besides Harry was MJ.

Garfield's Peter was awkward around Gwen at the start, too. Just watch the scene where he tries to ask her out on a date in the hallway. She's giggling at him because he's stumbling over his words. Not to mention he had no friends at all.

And it really bugged me that Raimi had people still openly picking on Pete in college the way people do in Jr. High and high school. That doesn't usually happen in college, at least I've never seen it happen like that in any of the classes I've been in.

That one I agree with, but that was in the awful Spider-Man 3, not Spider-Man 2, which is the one I am questioning you about.

ASM Pete was more in line of the Peter I expected to see on screen. Someone who's an outsider, but not boarderline socially incompetent.

ASM Peter had less friends than Tobey's Peter. Tobey's Peter at least had Harry. Who was Garfield's Peter good buddies with?

It also displayed more of the confident, cocky Spidey persona, which is something I thought was a huge part of the PP/Spidey dynamic. Spider-man is an outlet for Peter to be all the things he wishes he was; confident, charming, cocky, a swashbuckling hero type. ASM didn't go as far as I wanted to, but it was a step in the right direction.

That one I'll give you. We did get moments where Peter was a smart mouth in the Spidey costume. But not enough.

ASM displayed Pete's scientific genius in a more prominent way, something I had wanted to see as well.

Alas that's the thing when you decide to go the webshooters route. I mean Raimi's movies did show Peter being a great student, top of his class, bonding with Octavius over the wonders of Fusion etc.

But how does that compare to building your own invention like webshooters?

And most importantly, ASM did not butcher the love interest the way Raimi's trilogy killed MJ's character. That was one thing that really, really, REALLY bothered me. I've always enjoyed MJ's character in the comics, but the character that was written in the movies was not only nothing like MJ from the comics, she was about ten times more bland. I never cared about the relationship between Pete and MJ, and that's not good when their relationship is such a huge backbone of all the films.

Yeah, I agree with that, too. Dunst's MJ may well be the worst superhero love interest ever. Three movies watching her nag, moan, cheat on the guys she's with, scream, and irritate.

And this is a smaller issue, but I wasn't a huge fan of the way the humor was handled in the previous trilogy. Some of it I enjoyed, but a lot of it I thought was too corny and over the top. It just wasn't my thing. It felt outdated. But that's just a personal preference.

There's equally ridiculous humor in TASM. Spider-Man is a light hearted type of character at the end of the day.

 

[Hawkingbird]

Avengers rules over all

 

[Gianakin_]

Still TDKR.

 

[dude stannis]

*Bane breaks into the production meeting between Avi Arad and Marc Webb*
Webb: This is a production meeting! There's no ideas you can steal!
Bane: Really? Then why are you people here?

 

[psylockolussus]

The Avengers. Out of those three movies, it was the one that I had the most fun.

 

[ShadowBoxer]

Avengers for me. It was more entertaining that TDKR and AMS and it also had better action than those two movies combined. And it did something no other superhero movie has done before. Haters bash Avengers because it doesn't have a complex, grim, gritty story like Nolan's Bat films but it doesn't need one. Not every superhero movie "DARK" to be good.

 

[terry78]

I think the movie itself was pretty dark where it needed to be. The entire concept has always been that the Avengers teams are fully of some wacky, colorful characters but the **** they deal with is pretty serious and sometimes mentally draining.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Still TDKR for me.

Seconded

Rises on the other hand doesn't come close to it or Batman Begins.

Fully disagree.

And while the consensus may be that TDK is the better film of the trilogy, at least consensus tells us TDKR is at least better than BB with reviews/ratings/etc.

TAS is something I don't think I'll watch again until it's on tv or if someone happens to have it, I might watch it. But I don't see myself seeking it out to buy it.

I like the movie and wasn't disappointed by it and it was no SM3. But at least with SM3, Raimi's flair for memorable images and moments remain consistent, despite not being up to par with the other two. Say what you want about the story, but at least there were memorable moments whether you liked them or not. With TAS, there were no memorable images, nothing really special in the end. It was pretty much the movie I expected it to be which was a more drawn out remake of the original film that did everything much better in a shorter amount of time. Which is a shame because I loved that second trailer and went in excited as hell wanting to give it a fair chance because Spider-Man is tied with Batman as my favorite comic book character.

When it comes down to it, it's more of an afterthought compared to TDKR and TA. It's not even in my top 10 this year.

Agree with all of this. TAS-M is certainly better than S-M 3, but it's just a film that I can definitely forget about and will never bother to buy it and own it.

I would have paid for it, which I guess from the perspective of the studio is all that matters. But I generally don't like splitting a movie up unless there is no other choice, as in The Lord of the Rings.

I think TDKR is better as a single film. They could split up the Knightfall/No Man's Land plot from the Dark Knight Returns plot, but I'd want it to be a different story with a different villain. Not just expanding the movie we got and cutting it off in the middle.

TDKR is my second favorite comic book movie ever though, so ideally I would just leave it as is.

I would have rather TDKR be longer than split into two parts, but sadly, the IMAX run time limit forbids it. If Nolan wasn't so fascinated with IMAX, perhaps we would have had a much longer film that would feel more coherent at certain parts as well.

*Bane breaks into the production meeting between Avi Arad and Marc Webb*
Webb: This is a production meeting! There's no ideas you can steal!
Bane: Really? Then why are you people here?

Avengers for me. It was more entertaining that TDKR and AMS and it also had better action than those two movies combined. And it did something no other superhero movie has done before. Haters bash Avengers because it doesn't have a complex, grim, gritty story like Nolan's Bat films but it doesn't need one. Not every superhero movie "DARK" to be good.

I don't think I've ever heard of the complaint of Avengers not being "good" because it didn't have a complex, grim or gritty story. It is a great movie for sure, but I am much more invested into Nolan's trilogy than to give Avengers the edge as Marvel Studios have only really won me over with Iron Man and Avengers, and that's it.

 

[The Shape]

I don't really know how anyone can say that Batman Begins is a better film than TDKR. Yes, the first hour of BB is wonderful and unlike anything that had been seen before in a comic book film. The whole film overall is great and was an amazing introduction to a new version of Batman.

But so much of the second half of this film is poorly directed and clearly shot on a big movie set. The editing is way too choppy and so much of the second half of the plot is TOLD to us rather than show. I understand that this is a common criticism of Chris Nolan, but c'mon, nothing is worse than when the ridiculously fat-faced Batman is standing there explaining a bunch of crap to Gordon, ending with "Can you drive stick?". Then we've got the ridiculous "it's gonna blow!!!" guy explaining more crap to us.

All in all, it was Chris Nolan's first foray into blockbuster filmmaking so I still give him credit for not having a completely compromised vision (cough Marc Webb cough), but his filmmaking and storytelling had become so much more refined and well-executed by the time he came to TDKR. It's a stronger film and an excellent trilogy-capper, which IMO is much harder to accomplish than an origin film.

TDKR was the best superhero film for me, with The Avengers and ASM being about tied now. Upon re-watching Avengers several times, it's really not that masterpiece it has ben hailed to be. Yeah, it's loads of fun and it's like watching a comic book/video game sometimes which is awesome, but it has plenty of flaws as well and doesn't hold up the same way upon repeat viewings.

 

[TheGuy]

I don't really know how anyone can say that Batman Begins is a better film than TDKR. Yes, the first hour of BB is wonderful and unlike anything that had been seen before in a comic book film. The whole film overall is great and was an amazing introduction to a new version of Batman.

But so much of the second half of this film is poorly directed and clearly shot on a big movie set. The editing is way too choppy and so much of the second half of the plot is TOLD to us rather than show. I understand that this is a common criticism of Chris Nolan, but c'mon, nothing is worse than when the ridiculously fat-faced Batman is standing there explaining a bunch of crap to Gordon, ending with "Can you drive stick?". Then we've got the ridiculous "it's gonna blow!!!" guy explaining more crap to us.

All in all, it was Chris Nolan's first foray into blockbuster filmmaking so I still give him credit for not having a completely compromised vision (cough Marc Webb cough), but his filmmaking and storytelling had become so much more refined and well-executed by the time he came to TDKR. It's a stronger film and an excellent trilogy-capper, which IMO is much harder to accomplish than an origin film.

Exactly.

Had Nolan shot the Narrows on a real setting, the film who'd have improved a ton visually. Microwave emitter is also the worst plot device of the trilogy.

 

[DarkSovereignty]

There were a few things. First of all, I always thought they overdid the "nerdy Parker" angle in the Raimi films. Peter was never the socially awkward kid who could barely talk to his other students, he actually asked out girls often, he was just viewed as a nerd because of his interests. This depiction of Peter was much more in line with the one I expected. The corny humor involving Peter in the old films just got to be too much to me, to the point where I was getting annoyed during the "raindrops" sequence in SM2.

And it really bugged me that Raimi had people still openly picking on Pete in college the way people do in Jr. High and high school. That doesn't usually happen in college, at least I've never seen it happen like that in any of the classes I've been in.

ASM Pete was more in line of the Peter I expected to see on screen. Someone who's an outsider, but not boarderline socially incompetent.

It also displayed more of the confident, cocky Spidey persona, which is something I thought was a huge part of the PP/Spidey dynamic. Spider-man is an outlet for Peter to be all the things he wishes he was; confident, charming, cocky, a swashbuckling hero type. ASM didn't go as far as I wanted to, but it was a step in the right direction.

ASM displayed Pete's scientific genius in a more prominent way, something I had wanted to see as well.

And most importantly, ASM did not butcher the love interest the way Raimi's trilogy killed MJ's character. That was one thing that really, really, REALLY bothered me. I've always enjoyed MJ's character in the comics, but the character that was written in the movies was not only nothing like MJ from the comics, she was about ten times more bland. I never cared about the relationship between Pete and MJ, and that's not good when their relationship is such a huge backbone of all the films.

And this is a smaller issue, but I wasn't a huge fan of the way the humor was handled in the previous trilogy. Some of it I enjoyed, but a lot of it I thought was too corny and over the top. It just wasn't my thing. It felt outdated. But that's just a personal preference.

Now, that said, I think ASM had a lot of flaws. Looking at them purely as films, I will say SM2 was much more complete and rounded. But I enjoyed the way the characters were handled much more in ASM. The story was just a little iffy. Not horrible, but it needed work. And it needed most of the scenes they cut from it.

Not to mention the fact that the characters in tas actually felt like people and not Saturday morning cartoon characters like in the raimi films, and I speak as somebody who liked them. Even flash, in his five collective minutes of screen time, was more complex then the 2 dimensional guido stereotype they gave us in the first one.

 

[Matt Mortem]

The Avengers. That's a no brainer for me. The Avengers was the most fun I had in a theater this year.

 

[moviedoors]

I seriously just cannot understand what people saw in The Amazing Spider-Man. I thought it was truly awful. Nearly Green Lantern bad.

 

[DX]

I seriously just cannot understand what people saw in The Amazing Spider-Man. I thought it was truly awful. Nearly Green Lantern bad.

Honestly, I consider both TASM and Green Lantern on the same level of "meh".

 

[The Shape]

I seriously just cannot understand what people saw in The Amazing Spider-Man. I thought it was truly awful. Nearly Green Lantern bad.

Are you serious? Other than certain parts with the Lizard and the horrid crane guy sequence at the end, I don't see how it was a bad origin story by any means.

Some great character moments in there and I love how from the opening scene, it's clear that this is a very different version of Spider-man. Sure, it hit some of the same beats as Raimi's along the way but only because it HAD to (Uncle Ben's story, Peter developing his powers, love interest). Now, TASM has set the stage for what could truly be a ground-breaking sequel.

All that Green Lantern did was disappoint nearly EVERYONE who witnessed it, except for The Guard. He lovessssss it.

 

[DCW]

I seriously just cannot understand what people saw in The Amazing Spider-Man. I thought it was truly awful. Nearly Green Lantern bad.

TASM's so funny because peoples opinions vary so widely with it. For me I can't imagine how someone could think it's even near the level that Green Lantern was. Green Lantern was far far worse to me.

That being said, TASM is still my least favorite of the three this summer, Dark Knight Rises is still my favorite.

 

[The Joker]

And while the consensus may be that TDK is the better film of the trilogy, at least consensus tells us TDKR is at least better than BB with reviews/ratings/etc.

By that logic The Avengers is better than TDKR based on reviews and ratings.

 

[Visceral]

just because a film is smart doesn't mean it can't also be fun.

 

[jaqua99]

TDKR bored me the first 2/3 of the movie to the point of annoyance.

Though the last third of it made up for it.

Avengers was a fun summer flick, as it was suppose to be. A comic book movie, a fun ride, like a comic book. It was EXACTLY what it was suppose to be. Best super hero movie in my eyes.

TDKR was a GREAT movie, but boring for a little bit. Too serious It's a distance second, with TAS a close third for me

 

[Anno_Domini]

By that logic The Avengers is better than TDKR based on reviews and ratings.

And...that's fine?

Although, not a whole lot better with "that" logic...TDKR - 87%, 76% Top Critics, 92% audience liked it; Avengers - 92%, 84% Top Critics, 96% audience liked it. And Metacritic? TDKR - 78/100, 8.5 user score; Avengers - 69/100, 8.0 user score.

I am speaking on Nolan's trilogy though. I think it's honestly silly to say TDKR isn't even as good as Batman Begins when "that" logic says otherwise. Of course it's personal taste, but when someone says Batman Begins is leaps and bounds better than TDKR...I scratch my head.

 

[Doc Ock]

I will probably always think The Avengers was the best superhero movie of 2012, its the comics come to life in my eyes. I am a fan of many comic book films but the Avengers really captures the essence of the comics perfectly. This is what I want more of in these movies. Dark and gritty is overrated.

I enjoyed the Amazing Spider-Man and TDKR as well, Spidey more than Batman. But Avengers was a better experience over both. TASM was good but I think the villain could of been better (the Lizard being my favorite Spidey villain in the comics) but I see so much potential set up for the sequel. A part of me still wishes we got Spidey 4 with Raimi but I can see this being a great Spidey series as well.

TDKR was best in its last moments and Tom Hardy and Michael Caine were great but overall I wasn't too excited about it. It was a good movie and a good trilogy, but i'm glad its done with. I'm more of a fan of BTAS, the Arkham games, the Burton films and the likes of Mr. Freeze/Killer Croc/Poison Ivy and more fantastical elements of Batman instead of the Bruce Wayne focused realistic stuff Nolan presented. I may even see Batman Begins as my favorite of the trilogy...

 

[Bren]

Avengers. The rest weren't all that great imo. TASM was okay to fun, nothing exceptional, and I found TDKR boring and longwinded.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Avengers was a fun summer flick, as it was suppose to be. A comic book movie, a fun ride, like a comic book

I hope the assertion here is not a sweeping one, a notion that a comic book by definition is and only fun and a fun ride. Because I've read comics that are anything but fun. Would one categorize Alan Moore's From Hell fun? It is a comic book.

 

[747]

Funny that TDKR won this poll but Avengers won the official awards.

Both movies are fantastic in their own ways and even though I personally prefer TDKR by a little margin, The Avengers winning the awards is totally fine and deserving to me.