Fine like wine: how well have superhero films aged?

[metaphysician]

A movie no one has mentioned yet ( or such as I've noticed ): Daredevil. The stunt work and effects are just awful. You've got your choice of bad CGI or bad wirework. The only decent fight scene is the Ben Affleck/Jennifer Garner flirt fight.

 

[CConn]

Daredevil always looked cheap in general.

 

[The Joker]

I think X-Men and X-Men 2 both aged poorly.

How has X-Men 2 aged?

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

^Yeah, I dont think either of them, X2 especially, have aged at all, they both still look great to me, better than X3 and Wolverine anyway.

 

[Octoberist]

X1 looks modern due to the cinematography but you can tell it has a lower budget (since the film faced some hurdles from Fox/being one of the first forefathers of the 2000's Comic movement in Hollywood.) That includes certain locales/set, which were mostly isolated interior settings.

We still haven't had an X-Men film where the team are fighting in the crowded streets of NYC (or any big city) yet. Kinda baffling. The closest thing would be X3 in San Fran but even then it's just the Golden State bridge and then Alcatraz. Rise of the Planet of the Apes had more city action.

X2 has aged well in most cases. Even the CG was and still is decent.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

^The CG still looks brilliant, not one moment looks out of place with a lot of modern blockbusters in all fairness. Some of the X1 ones look a bit ropey though.

 

[Sentinel X]

The Hulk and Batman Begins have aged the best so far. I would include The Dark Knight too but 2008 is still pretty recent.
I think Daredevil has aged the worst; it looks so dated. Plus, putting popular rock songs at the time certainly doesn't help.

 

[CConn]

The only thing that's changed with the X-Men movies is they seem a lot...smaller now. It's not that they seem old or cheesy or anything like that, but they most definitely are not the big-budget spectacles that all superhero films are nowadays...and you can tell.

Not that that's a bad thing, they're still very good movies, but you can tell they're not among the more recent grouping of superhero films just based on their budgets.

 

[Duke]

Daredevil always looked cheap in general.

And with Ben Aflac being cast in the title role isn't helpful either.

 

[Octoberist]

in the past I would have agreed, but if they made Daredevil now, the modern day post-Gone Baby Gone/The Town Afleck would have been awesome.

 

[Octoberist]

Nor does it help that Affleck was in great shape in The Town and looked out of shape in Daredevil. Ironic.

 

[The Morningstar]

A movie no one has mentioned yet ( or such as I've noticed ): Daredevil. The stunt work and effects are just awful. You've got your choice of bad CGI or bad wirework. The only decent fight scene is the Ben Affleck/Jennifer Garner flirt fight.

I actually watched Daredevil (directors cut) last night. The fight choreography is actually really, really good. Some of the "wire-fu" is bad. But the fight scene in the bar and Elektra vs Bullseye were really well done. Some nice tracking shots in there where the choreography was fast, fluid and brutal. You could actually understand why people were hitting the deck, unlike some other comic book movie that features a character who is supposed to be good at martial arts...

 

[Octoberist]

I think what really aged Daredevil was the damn church scene; it has one of the worst CGI I've seen in a big Hollywood.

 

[The Morningstar]

Yea the movie was full of bad CGI. Overall though i think it's an underrated film, the directors cut at least. I thought the origin story was unique and well told. The scenes with young Matt and his dad were really good. I thought MCD and Farrell were a lot of fun as the villains. Love the scene on the plane where Bullseye flicks the peanut into that old ladies throat, choking her. Pure Bullseye. It had a good character arc for the lead character, learning as the film goes on that he doesn't have to be the "bad guy", which culminates in a great scene at the end against Kingpin. In the directors cut it showed his detective skills and more of him as a lawyer. I also thought Joe Pantoliano was great and i liked his sub plot.

It's got a lot of flaws, like skipping out Murdock's training, should have had training with Stick rather than the romance sub plot. Bad CGI. The romance overall just seemed forced even though it did have some good moments like on the rooftop with the rain and the funeral.

 

[kit1982]

I liked Affleck as Daredevil, whilst back in the day you may have loved him or (more likely) hated him I thought he gave alot of heart in his performance.
I agree with Morningstar on Joey Pants, it's one of the more underrated performances in comic book films (he's almost like Daredevils Gary Oldman) and also on the stuff with young Matt and his dad, I really liked the scene with Daredevil returning home from the bar and the little piece of music plays as he touches his dads boxing gloves.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

But the fight scene in the bar and Elektra vs Bullseye were really well done.

Yeah, the fight scene in Josie's bar is *great*, I think it works very well because it is in very darkened light, with some strobe type lighting throughout. Because what usually happens with these types of scenes, where the hero is wearing a constricting leather outfit, is that there doesn't seem to be much power or fluidity to the blows.
But, because it is in the dark with strobe lighting, the hits *don't* have to be that solid, they only have to vaguely connect, as they usually do, and the strobe lighting gives a greater sense of speed.
this is exactly why the best fight scene involving Batman in full costume is in Maroni's club in TDK.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

In X-Men First Class there are a few cheesy scenes that resemble old school Sci Fi. Although some of that may have been intentional

 

[Art_of_Crime]

I may be in the minority, I usually am, but I think the original live action TMNT has aged well, and is still a good movie. The two Keaton Batman films still have a lot of rewatch value, and while I'm sure that I'm seeing them through nostalgia goggles, I firmly believe they are well made and awesome movies. Especially the first one.

 

[The Morningstar]

Yeah, the fight scene in Josie's bar is *great*, I think it works very well because it is in very darkened light, with some strobe type lighting throughout. Because what usually happens with these types of scenes, where the hero is wearing a constricting leather outfit, is that there doesn't seem to be much power or fluidity to the blows.
But, because it is in the dark with strobe lighting, the hits *don't* have to be that solid, they only have to vaguely connect, as they usually do, and the strobe lighting gives a greater sense of speed.
this is exactly why the best fight scene involving Batman in full costume is in Maroni's club in TDK.

Yea definitely. That fight scene in Maroni's club is the only one that's up to scratch for me. The flashing strobe lights, like you say, make it seem more kinetic and bone crunching.

 

[Duke]

in the past I would have agreed, but if they made Daredevil now, the modern day post-Gone Baby Gone/The Town Afleck would have been awesome.

I just don't like Aflac as an actor. His acting comes off as too "wooden", essentially bad acting skills in my opinion. If they would've cast another actor & worked on the script a little more, then DD would've been a totally different & better movie.

 

[Art_of_Crime]

I just don't like Aflac as an actor. His acting comes off as too "wooden", essentially bad acting skills in my opinion. If they would've cast another actor & worked on the script a little more, then DD would've been a totally different & better movie.

He always plays his roles the same way. The "I'd be tough if I weren't such a pompous D Bag" approach.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

I just don't like Aflac as an actor. His acting comes off as too "wooden", essentially bad acting skills in my opinion. If they would've cast another actor & worked on the script a little more, then DD would've been a totally different & better movie.

There is nothing wooden about his performance in DD, he's pretty good in the film, if some of the more popular actors had given the same kind of performance, more people would be raving about it. I think there is a personal prejudice against Affleck amongst the public, and at the time of this film, it was due to his being in all the tabloids due to his relationship with Jennifer Lopez. Some people were tired of hearing about him, and didn't want to take him seriously.

 

[Art_of_Crime]

There is nothing wooden about his performance in DD, he's pretty good in the film, if some of the more popular actors had given the same kind of performance, more people would be raving about it. I think there is a personal prejudice against Affleck amongst the public, and at the time of this film, it was due to his being in all the tabloids due to his relationship with Jennifer Lopez. Some people were tired of hearing about him, and didn't want to take him seriously.

I guess we have to agree to disagree then. I've had a low opinion of his acting since I first saw him in Mallrats.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Jon Favreau having a much bigger role in the Director's Cut helps a lot. He and Affleck have good chemistry.

 

[CConn]

I actually think bum's kinda right.

I really don't think many people like Affleck's personality all that much. He can certainly act, he can certainly immerse himself into a role, but there's always that sliver of the actor's real personality that shines through...and most people just don't like Affleck's.

Conversely, the sliver of Matt Damon's personality that shines through makes people want to cuddle him like a newborn kitten.