Spoiled by The Dark Knight

Thought CBF had no genre? But agreed about western and horror movies being trash since the glory days. Now we got crap like Final Destination and Wild Wild West.

9:10 to Yuma was a great Western. But I agree about Horror movies.
 
Thought CBF had no genre? But agreed about western and horror movies being trash since the glory days. Now we got crap like Final Destination and Wild Wild West.

Both of which were more than 10 years ago. And there were bad ones long before that. There will be good comic book movies 10 years from now and bad ones. TDK is not a template; it's just one man's approach based on how he felt the source material should be handled.
 
Thought CBF had no genre? But agreed about western and horror movies being trash since the glory days. Now we got crap like Final Destination and Wild Wild West.

Superhero films are a genre, comic books are a medium. The phrase Comic Book Movie annoys me to no end.
 
Not for me, no. But Im SICK of people thinknig EVERY damn movie has to on par with TDK. Whether it be Superman.Spider-Man, G.I. Joe etc.

Give it a rest people!


I'm also sick of it at this point. Not every comic book movie should try to follow the same formula.
 
Superhero films are a genre, comic books are a medium. The phrase Comic Book Movie annoys me to no end.
I'm with you here. You don't see The Da Vinci Code and Bridget Jones' Diary being referred to as 'novel movies' do you? Or Mission Impossible and The Fugitive as 'tv series movies'? It's a ridiculous classification.
 
I'm with you here. You don't see The Da Vinci Code and Bridget Jones' Diary being referred to as 'novel movies' do you? Or Mission Impossible and The Fugitive as 'tv series movies'? It's a ridiculous classification.

novels don't have the same public perception as comic book movies though...thats why the label is there....
 
I'm with you here. You don't see The Da Vinci Code and Bridget Jones' Diary being referred to as 'novel movies' do you? Or Mission Impossible and The Fugitive as 'tv series movies'? It's a ridiculous classification.


Who cares ? Hell , half the time people are unaware the film is based on a book. I think Comic Book film is easy because sometimes in comic book /gn adaptations the characters aren't Superheroes.
 
I think they might be thinking the Dark Knight styled comic book films are sure fire hits, like when comics themselves became way too dark because Dark Knight and a few others were successful.
Studios are thinking a sure fire hit would be to make all comic movies Dark Knights.
I heard they are going to do that with Captain Britain.
 
yeah, don't know if this is true or rumor,
but I can see a studio thinking that Dark Knight made so much money and was so successful that they should recreate that success.

http://www.showbizspy.com/article/190900/gerard-butler-to-be-captain-britain.html

Gerard Butler to be Captain Britain?


Gerard Butler is being lined up to play Captain Britain in a movie version of the cult comic book character. It will be yet another movie inspired by Marvel’s tales and would see Gerard in an all-British blockbuster.
The role would make the Scottish hunk — who can currently be seen starring opposite Katherine Heigl in chick flick The Ugly Truth — as the UK’s answer to Captain America.
“This would be a different angle on the usual superhero movies and not just because it is set outside of the US,” dished a Hollywood insider. “It will be darker and grittier than movies like Spider-Man and Iron Man — kind of like Marvel’s answer to The Dark Knight.
“There are few British actors who could take the title role but Gerard is the clear favorite. He’s perfect for it.”
Butler, 39, was recently seen making out with his The Bounty costar Jennifer Aniston — while the cameras weren’t rolling!


could all be a rumor though, not sure.
But I always thought Captain Britain would be a comedy.
 
novels don't have the same public perception as comic book movies though...thats why the label is there....

Not every comic book movie is a superhero movie, though.
300.jpg

JohnDebney_SinCity.jpg

And not all superhero movies are comic book movies.
71174503.jpg

Incredibles.jpg

The distinction makes sense to me, & the phrase doesn't bother me in the least.
 
I agree...The Matrix wasn't based on any previous book or graphic novel?? was it??

I think you get some fans who get on the "this material needs to be treated with respect" train and get that confused with the film being super serious and adult
 
I have no problem believing that he did snap I just don't believe that a little speech from the Joker would have convinced him to go after Gordon intstead of the guy who f**ked his face up and killed his girlfriend...which was obviously the Joker himself.

You either believe that hospital scene or you don't and I didn't.


He did go after Joker, though. He flipped for him, remember? Dent went after everyone he believed responsible - and flipped for each of 'em!
 
You could say TDK raised the bar but when SM 4 comes out I want it to be as good as SM2 and when IM2 comes comes out I want it to be as good as IM. TDK is a dark movie and I don't want spiderman to attempt to emulate it (although less cheese in SM3 would have been nice).
 
if we are going to count the matrix as a comic book movie then the matrix rather than the dark knight is the best comic book movie ever. I class the matrix as sci-fi.
 
Id consider the Matrix a sci-fi/action movie....but it's not based off of any previous material (comic book or graphic novel)
 
CW put a sentence just above the Matrix poster saying 'And not all superhero movies are comicbook movies.'
I'd consider it a superhero movie too, some superhero movies can be classed as sci-fi too of course.
When I first saw the Matrix my immediate thought was 'this is what a superhero comicbook adaption should feel like onscreen.'
 
I have never thought that about The Matrix, never saw any reason to....it's a high concept sci-fi movie...
 
Last edited:
I have never thought that about The Matrix, never saw any reason to....it's a high concept sci-fi movie...

Well to me they are superpowered(within the Matrix) folk who fight other superpowered bad folk(Agents).
They are heroes and they are superpowered(in the Matrix), and one of them even develops superpowers in the real world.
That all follows the superhero template for me. Just look at the stunts they pull, it's pure superhero stuff 'straight out of a comicbook'[/Jim Kelly]
 
CW put a sentence just above the Matrix poster saying 'And not all superhero movies are comicbook movies.'
I'd consider it a superhero movie too, some superhero movies can be classed as sci-fi too of course.
When I first saw the Matrix my immediate thought was 'this is what a superhero comicbook adaption should feel like onscreen.'

True, but when it comes down to it The Matrix is NOT based on a comic book. And if it's considered one of the best comic book films, people will constantly bring that up. Superhero movie? Yeah. I'd classify it as that. It's like a Sci Fi Batman Begins.
 
True, but when it comes down to it The Matrix is NOT based on a comic book. And if it's considered one of the best comic book films, people will constantly bring that up. Superhero movie? Yeah. I'd classify it as that. It's like a Sci Fi Batman Begins.

Yeah, I've thought of it as a superhero movie and wondered if others did too, but I'd never describe it as a comicbook movie, just as an example of filmaking that some comicbook movies could learn from.

Y'know, at a push, you could describe 'Unbreakable' as a comicbook movie. Strictly speaking it isn't, it's not based on any single comicbook, but it is based on the history of comicbooks and the rules and concepts that they invented. It is, in a way, a film about comicbooks.
 
prior to this conversation, no one I know that has even seen The Matrix has ever referred to it as a superhero movie
 
I'm not pawning off the blame.

I'm talking about peoples reactions to it. Not whether it was a great movie or a shoddy movie. There is a difference between how good/bad a movie is, and how it is received.

What I'm saying is if Wolverine came out before TDK it's flaws wouldn't of been picked apart and wouldn't bother people as much. People can deny that all they want, but I think it even happens on a sub conscious level.

Really so if Wolverine came out say July 1st of last year I wouldn't notice that Deadpool was just about one of the worst comic to movie translations ever? Or I guess if it came out last year, when Wolverine and Gambit were facing Sabertooth at the end of the alley, it would've made sense to fight each other than the person both are pissed at? Wolverine was just god awful in so many ways that have nothing to do with the quality of The Dark Knight.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"