So wat was so bad???

[Hmarrs]

At the risk of being attacked I'm going to ask a question that has been plaguing me but then too afraid to ask...

Ok so here goes>>>

As far as Superhero Marvel movies go..

What was so wrong with:

Daredevil

Spider-man 3

Fantastic Four

Fantastic Four 2

X-men 3

Now while they may have been epic or and had some particular flaws.
I hardly think they were as bad as their made out to be.I mean ok maybe people didn't like the Daredevil suit but that one modification that I actually didn't feel was that bad and yes maybe Spiderman 3 was a little silly at times and had too many heroes but it didn't make for a bad film for me. Fantastic Four had a weak Doom yes but it had the epic feel of the Comic and yes maybe we didn't see Galactus in prt.2 and I was as disappointed as the rest of you but watching the Silver Surfer on the screen was phenomenal.(after all it was called "Rise of the Surfer")it was never about Galactus.it was about the Surfer.So did these films get a bad wrap???
Many of these films were actually very
accurate.I actually still watch them. Yes I think they could have been better but they still make for enjoyable films and some of the arguments presented here can be made for some of the films that were popular and are actually good compared to other films.

Some scenes were actually taken right from the pages...

So okay guys help me out what was soooooo bad about these films???
Is it just a FOX thing???

 

[Sexy Magician]

They were not good movies, that's what's bad about them..........

 

[BoredGuy]

I'll try to answer, at least semi-seriously, about X3....

To me, one of the biggest problems with X3 is that they tried to cram too damn much in one film.

Both the "cure" and Dark Phoenix storylines are massive stories worthy of their own individual films, it was a mistake to try to mash both of them into one. The result was a very poorly paced film, with every scene flashing by to make way for the next. This left next to no time for the emotional moments to take hold or the repercussions of certain things to be felt. Xavier's death was the only moment that had anything in the way of impact, and even that was fairly rushed over so they could get to the next scene of Wolverine and Jean having weird, pseudo-rapey sexual tension.

Add to that the mistreatment of various characters such as Cyclops, Angel, Juggernaut, Kitty, Mystique, "Psylocke", Callisto, Colossus, and Rogue and the focus once again being on Wolverine (which I'm sort of ok with but many others aren't) and you can start to see why many fans were rubbed the wrong way by the movie. It still did well at theaters because the special effects and action were pretty top notch, and the trailers were damn good at polishing up that turd.

But to take two tremendous and beloved stories (the "cure" was in Whedon's Astonishing X-Men run) and crank out that lackluster affair was pretty damn close to being a felony, at least as far as we fans are concerned.

 

[Farren]

I don't think any of them are as bad as they generally are made out to be. People love to lump things into love and hate categories so they something to hoist up as an example, especially 5-10 years in hindsight. That being said, those movies do have problems.

The FF movies were -- IMO -- simply vanilla plain. Contrary to most people I actually thought the casting was pretty good. I also don't have a big problem with the take on Doom -- at least it was one of the better executed parts of the movie. Every thing else though...they was just so boring and uninspired and by the numbers. They were the type of movies I watch and wonder why they were even made.

Actually that's sort of how I feel about Spidey 3 and X3 too: they didn't justify their existence. Spidey wasn't that bad -- I actually enjoyed it and thought it was decent -- but it just didn't have the focus and the urgency of SM2: it had three great villains, any of which could have carried the film, raised the stakes and moved along the character development, but in trying to juggle them all none of them really rose to the occasion.

X3 was had a decent plot, generally good acting (and the casting of Grammar as Beast was gold), and technically it was well made and hit the basic marks of a serviceable film. But it also felt like a movie trying to put a lid on all the great escalation and ideas of the previous films. Like, I get it, the story has to end, that's fine: but it was just handled so unambitiously, as if the plot points were annoyances to be tied up as easily as possible. The story and characters didn't matter. What mattered was wrapping things up in the least risky way possible.

Daredevil I only saw once and have forgotten almost all of it, so I won't comment.

 

[israeldorneles]

Warning, poor English ahead.

Well, I don't think X3 and Spidey 3 are bad, they're just a huge disappointment, although X3 is slightly better IMO. X3 had some great things, specially the casting of Grammer and Page as Beast and Kitty respectively. However, the underutilization of some characters like Cyclops, Mystique and Rogue bothered me and the terrible portrayal of Psylocke and Juggernaut are unforgivable. The Dark Phoenix storyline should've been the focus, not a subplot of the Gifted arc. Anyway, a decent film but a horrible adaptation. Spidey 3 suffered from an unfocused narrative and an overabundance of villains. There was too much going on, they tried to juggle all of the subplots but didn't know how to handle it. Both could be the best movie of the trilogy but were sabotaged by the studios.

The FF films are my guilty pleasure. I loved them when I was younger so it's hard to say they're bad movies. I see them as dumb popcorn flicks now. Doom was really miscast and mistreated and Jessica Alba is a bad actress but I liked the casting of The Thing and Human Torch and I adored Silver Surfer. I understand the hate though.

I enjoyed the Daredevil Director's Cut, but the theatrical version just plain bad. Elektra is even worse.

 

[Mace Dolex]

I thought Daredevil was rather good, granted it was a bit weak in spots mostly with Ben Affleck and his inconsistency of not knowing where to look with those creepy blind contact lens. It didn't necessarily convert me to a DD fan but it did pique my interest in seeking out Frank Miller's DD run.

 

[Johnny-Oh]

With Spider-Man 3 I feel like it was an okay movie, could still on its own more than TASM and TASM 2. The problem was that Spider-man 2 set the bar SO HIGH that it made SM3 look worse than it should have.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

I don't think Spider-Man 3 and X-3 were that bad. I think their main problem was having too much put into one movie. There is still a lot of good things in those movies that stop them from being bad.

 

[psylockolussus]

X3 and Spider-Man 3 weren't that bad, but they are disappointing simply because their predecessors were great. But compare them to films like Ghost Rider 2, Hulk (*yawn*), Punisher 3, Jonah Hex, Catwoman and Elektra. Its like night and day.

The good thing about Fantastic Four/Rise of the Silver Surfer is they are entertaining. I think its two of those movies that you can switch your brain off and just have fun. But of course, once you review things and compare them to the source material, you will really see the big flaws.

With Daredevil, well its better than the Fantastic Four but the structure of the film is just not good. I felt like it lost its way during the second act of the film.

 

[Human Torch]

Yeah,I like all of the films mentioned.(I'll even throw in Green Lantern &Origins Wolverine.) I think that the fact that they were not "masterpieces of the genre" tends to get the fanboys to beat up on them to show their "superior film critiquing prowess".

 

[Johnny-Oh]

Yeah,I like all of the films mentioned.(I'll even throw in Green Lantern &Origins Wolverine.) I think that the fact that they were not "masterpieces of the genre" tends to get the fanboys to beat up on them to show their "superior film critiquing prowess".

So much this!

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

They were not good movies, that's what's bad about them..........

There's plenty of others that aren't good but are viewed better than these.

While not good I think most of these were okay, certainly no all absolutely dreadful like they're made out to be

 

[kguillou]

Yeah,I like all of the films mentioned.(I'll even throw in Green Lantern &Origins Wolverine.) I think that the fact that they were not "masterpieces of the genre" tends to get the fanboys to beat up on them to show their "superior film critiquing prowess".

I respectfully disagree. Obviously, there must have been something wrong with those movies that turned people off because you don't hear fans griping about: Spiderman 1&2, X-men 1&2, the MCU Films etc. The only one I would consider a "masterpiece" out of the bunch is Spider-man 2, but the rest are just well done comic book films.

I never understood that popular notion of "Fans are never satisfied and just complain about everything". Fans give props where props are due and criticize where criticism is due. Simple as that.

 

[the gael]

I don't think Daredevil was bad ( except for the playground fight ), it's just That the Movie was butchered in it's theatrical version, and it may be to much a litteral translation of the comic book in some scene.

Spiderman 3 ? The movie clearly suffers from the Venom inclusion. He felt out of place. Consequences ? Too many things happened in the Movie and Nothing wasn't mastered. It was a week movie, but TASM movies were worst or at least as bad. ( with the same problems in the first movie )

X Men 3 ? Well, it's the same. Too many idea son one Movie. And because Rattner Is far from being Singer, it Is a mess. But, well, at least se have Jackman and McKellen. New characters, on the other hand, are butchered and have ridiculous cameo like in the infamous Mortal Kombat 2 movie.

The Fantastic Four. Well, like Daredevil and Spiderman 3, they are pre Batman Begins Movies, but they are the ones That have aged the worst. They have a good casting ( minus Alba who Is all wrong ), but the plot... What were the writer thinking ? Doom Is trashed, there Is Nothing epic nor mystérious about the Movie, and writers were gong for cheap laugh and terrible one liners ( Marco... Polo ? ) Should I mention the ridiculous Galactus ? They are the worst in the list, but since Fox Is about to give us a Movie even worst next year, they will be remembered has ok

 

[metaphysician]

The Fantastic Four movies were almost entirely stripped of an actual sense of the fantastic to them. Everything gets reduced to the wonder of a TV sitcom.

The sequel added the extra joy of an extraneous "evil dumb government" plot.

 

[DrCosmic]

At the risk of being attacked I'm going to ask a question that has been plaguing me but then too afraid to ask...

Ok so here goes>>>

As far as Superhero Marvel movies go..

What was so wrong with:

Daredevil

Spider-man 3

Fantastic Four

Fantastic Four 2

X-men 3

...

So okay guys help me out what was soooooo bad about these films???
Is it just a FOX thing???

They failed to capture the heart of the audience. It's not about being comic accurate, because many less accurate films (ie X2 and First Class) have done much better because they engaged the audience. This is something that we, as fan critics, often miss when analyzing films. Sometimes we think that things are explained, that these are origin stories because the audience is dumb or needs to understand intellectually. Far from it, they need to care. They need to understand so they care about the stakes of the hero.

Now there are some people that don't care about these things. They loved all these films, Green Lantern and Ghost Rider too, however, they are a relatively small group. They may feel very comfortable reading the most ridiculous contrived comic book storylines, but as long as there's something cool, like with, say, Civil War, they're good.

So when I talk about these films, understand I'm talking about why no one cares about them, and why they were disappointed with everything that happened because it was meaningless, random or silly. Usually it's because the film tried to do too many things, and thus never won the audience either cause.

Daredevil - Like Green Lantern many years later, this film suffers from a very grim heavy presentation style layered on top of a nearly zany kitchy cheeky almost campy storyline. This dissonance doesn't work, and the zany comicness of a Bullseye just seems zany instead of disturbing. The emotional heart of the film, Daredevil's thing with his dad and Kingpin was so brief, it was hard to care about it. The emotional climax was with Elektra's death but their whole bonding experience was a cutesy playing on the playground. Like Green Lantern, nothing is earned from the audience, the audience is just expected to like it just because its from the comics.

Spider-Man 3 - With a similar problem to Amazing Spider-Man 2, this film suffers from 3 villain syndrome. This lack of focus on any particular emotional touchstone makes the entire film pretty random and uninteresting emotionally. Like Daredevil it has the same 'let's have fun with dark stuff' problem, so we're supposed to care about this dark Venom symbiote storyline, but it has its height in a dance routine. Even the relationship which has been the major touchstone for the film is bogged down with a random and uninteresting love interest that doesn't even bother to interact/rival with Mary Jane personally... because there's no time.

Fantastic Four - FF has a slightly different issue. It seems to take no risks at all and is a largely by the numbers comic book film, even to the point where the script lacks any shining moments even in dialogue. The movie doesn't have any significantly bad moments, it's just that it doesn't have any good ones. The things supposed to be meaningful are so convenient why bother caring about things that come so easy. The movie attempts to ride on Johnny's comedy, but... the other characters are so very dull, devoid of good moments... why bother?

Fantastic Four 2 - Imagine the first FF film, same conveniences, same boring characters, but now with higher stakes! What was supposed to make anyone care about Silver Surfer? He has cool powers... his whole pathos came down to being captured in a lab... which kinda subverts the whole grand powers thing. It was better than the first FF film as it gave the characters some kind of stakes and even Reed got to be interesting for a moment, cheesy as it was, but that's not saying much.

X-Men 3 - It doesn't get much more random or pointless than X3. It suffers from too many bad guys (Magneto? Phoenix? Warren Worthinton II?) it suffers from trying to pull a lot of emotion out of something light (Logan and Jean's relationship takes place over only a few days according to the previous films, but we're to care that they are soulmates. Our other original viewpoint character Rogue is off doing nothing nowhere and the movie is actually obvious, even to non comics fans, in it's attempt to make Wolverine something he fundamentally is not, and then builds the whole movie around you caring about that.

In the end, it's only fans that care about these movies and think of them as bad. Keep in mind some fans were created by the previous films in the case of Spidey and X-Men. Most people, however, just don't care about these films and consider them forgettable and uninteresting, or at worst, a waste of time.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

The Fantastic Four movies were almost entirely stripped of an actual sense of the fantastic to them. Everything gets reduced to the wonder of a TV sitcom.

The sequel added the extra joy of an extraneous "evil dumb government" plot.

Silver Surfer was the best thing about the FF sequel.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Daredevil was ruined by Fox executives. The original cut (ie. The Director's Cut version) is actually a very good film. But it was butchered in the editing room to get a PG-13 rating, shorten the length to around 100 minutes, and to emphasize Elektra more (she is very much a supporting character in the DC version and is the only character to have more screentime in the theatrical cut) at the expense of the main Kingpin plot and Matt's personal journey.

 

[Spiderine]

I think the FF films although enjoyable and fun are quite bland. They left no emotional impact. And failed to truly get you invested in any of the characters. Julian McMahon could have been a great Doom but he was written as a Norman Osborn knockoff probably because Spiderman was a huge hit at the time. In the end they are just forgettable at best.


I always thought DD suffered from what could have been an overarching story being crammed into his origin film. Elecktra should have not been introduced and killed in this film. This should have been more about the rise of DD and his vigilance and threat to Kingpin's established criminal empire. Bullseye should have been an escalation in the sequel therefore requiring the use of another main physical villain for DD. In the end it was underwhelming with lackluster performances.


The biggest problem for me with SM3 was how it tried to incorporate different plot elements that ended up being forced together in the film's climax. That's just one issue for me. There are many others but it takes too long. However I will bring up the destruction of MJ's character whom just flatlined in the third film. In the end it failed to live up to the standard of its predecessor and thus was a disappointment.

As far as X3, go read Dr Cosmic post. He sums it up perfectly.

 

[Human Torch]

I respectfully disagree. Obviously, there must have been something wrong with those movies that turned people off because you don't hear fans griping about: Spiderman 1&2, X-men 1&2, the MCU Films etc. The only one I would consider a "masterpiece" out of the bunch is Spider-man 2, but the rest are just well done comic book films.

I never understood that popular notion of "Fans are never satisfied and just complain about everything". Fans give props where props are due and criticize where criticism is due. Simple as that.

Sometimes it's the "trendy" thing to do.Nobody wants to be seen supporting a "bad" movie that the "cool kids" have deemed a failure.No one wants to be "that guy" that bad mouths a film getting rave reviews.(Granted there are always a handful of contrarians.)And that's where you get posters lining up like little lemmings behind the popular opinion on message boards.

Take Spider-Man 3 for example.It should be rated for what it is.A good,but flawed movie.Yet some try to sink it to Catwoman levels.(Usually for the most absurd reasons."Dancing,Crying,I don't like so & so,etc" So it's a prime example of the "piling on effect."Fanboys punishing a decent/good film for not living up to their expectations.

It's similar for X3.I don't think it's a bad film by any means.The stuff with Charles, Erik & Jean in the house was a highlight of the series.The Beast was gold.The worst was Scott getting kicked to the curb again.(and Rogue,I suppose) But I never got the complant "They killed everyone!" They actually raised the stakes,imagine that!So people might not make it out.Wow.And what happened at the end of the day?Jean got killed,(which happened in the comics and probably would've happened in any filmed version of the story)Scott died (off screen.Wouldn't take an act of genius to bring him back) and they even had a post screen tag for Charles and showed Eric getting his powers back,outright guaranteeing a return to the status quo.So why all the hubbub,bub?

Daredevil is one I don't get the hate for.(And I prefer the theatrical) I actually gave this one the full 5 Stars.It had a quality origin without getting getting bogged down into a full hour (like most origin's do),Several characters all getting their due.(no one shoe horned in like some of the Spidey films)And it had a great dark weighty feel,without descending into unplesentness.(which is a problem most "dark" SH films have.)When I first watched the DVD,I was blown away.I probably watched it 10 times that month.

And I think what it comes down to for me is,if I enjoy a movie.That's all that counts really.I'm not trying to be a "film critic" and go by production values and if a performance is "Oscar caliber" or if it "re-defines the genre".If it's a film that entertained me,and a film I want to watch again,it's done it's job.So I fully stand by my 5 stars for Daredevil.Is it perfect?Heck,no.But I enjoy it.

I mean I enjoy Batman & Robin.I really do.I probably only watch it every 2 or 3 years,because it's not a very good movie,but I still enjoy it.That's why I'm not as hard on the "Not bad/above average" efforts like GL & the FF films.Are they masterpieces?No.But I'm not ashamed to admit I liked them alot.

 

[Iron_Stark]

The bad thing about Daredevil was that the director's cut wasn't released in theaters.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The bad thing about Daredevil was that the director's cut wasn't released in theaters.

Yep. That's a good way of putting it.

 

[Human Torch]

I didn't like the directors cut.

 

[Soapy]

I think a lot of people just need to be less defensive about liking bad movies. Just accept that some of the movies you like are bad. There's nothing wrong with it. I like some bad movies. Pretty much everyone does. Trying to defend a ****** movie just makes you look like an idiot.

 

[spidermanJLA!~]

I used to love the F4 films a few years ago. The SFX was fantastic, the characters were fun, and I liked them for how under appreciated they were in the CBM world. I thought that they were hidden gems. But after sitting down and watching them, the movies are FILLED with goofy moments and they are very superficial. Most of the conflicts were solved in a hot minute. I also hate the portrayal of the F4 as "celebrities".