What was the last movie you've seen?

[prfsnl_gmr]

Superman Returns was a sold film, but not a great one. I thought that Brandon Routh did an admirable job in the lead role, and it - along with Ang Lee's Hulk - is one of the few big budget superhero films to take serious risks with the character (which is probably why a lot of people dislike both movies). I respect it for that, but I will not be adding it to my film collection any time soon.

EDIT: Here is an excerpt from Dana Stevens' largely positive review of The Man of Steel (2012). I think her colleague's observation regarding the similarities between superhero films and medieval religious art is spot-on:

"A colleague of mine made the astute observation that superhero blockbusters have something in common with medieval religious art. Both rely on rigidly fixed iconographies drawn from a narrow range of canonical subject matter. The individual creator may vary the style, but the terms of the representation are governed by a larger divine or quasi-divine cosmic order: hence the endless variations on the Annunciation, the descent from the cross, the first appearance of the cape and tights, the final fistfight atop a skyscraper."

[Retrodude]

it - along with Ang Lee's Hulk - is one of the few big budget superhero films to take serious risks with the character.

I would argue that Ang Lee's Hulk also does not deserve the hate it gets. Is it a good Hulk film? Maybe not. Is it a good film taken on its own? Yes, most definitely. Ang Lee made an Ang Lee film. What a shocker! Seriously though, I've always liked it because instead of being the smash-and-bash film you would expect, Ang Lee used the opportunity to examine the psychology of these characters and take a serious look at what makes Bruce Banner tick and why General Ross is so against him as a person. It's really more of a character study than anything. I understand that that's not what fans of the comic were looking for, but that does not in itself mean it's a bad film. As Steve Shives said, don't confuse "I wouldn't have done it that way" with "that sucks" 'cause that's a really shitty attitude.

[AppleQueso]

Ang Lee's Hulk actually has a lot of fans on here. I know Dave likes it.

Personally, I greatly respect it for what it attempts to do, but it just doesn't work for me.

[prfsnl_gmr]

Ang Lee's Hulk actually has a lot of fans on here. I know Dave likes it.

Personally, I greatly respect it for what it attempts to do, but it just doesn't work for me.

I actually liked it too. It captured the "man on the run" feel of the television show, btu I do not think that is what fans expected from the movie.

[Pulsar_t]

Phantom

Couldn't help but be reminded of the poor souls who drowned in Kursk for the sake of a lousy cover-up. Actual events speculated in this film are highly contentious, and the production itself could have been better, but for one I enjoyed Ed Harris' performance.

(out of five)

[BurningDoom]

Ang Lee's Hulk actually has a lot of fans on here. I know Dave likes it.

Personally, I greatly respect it for what it attempts to do, but it just doesn't work for me.

Ang Lee's Hulk isn't a bad movie at all, it's pretty enjoyable, for sci-fi movie. But that's the problem, it's not supposed to be a sci-fi movie, it's supposed to be a high-action super-hero flick.

The problem a lot people have with it is that:

A. It veered from the comic story and origin way too much.

and

B. There just wasn't enough action. Hulk is all about chaotic action, all the time ("HULK SMASH!"), and Ang Lee's Hulk didn't deliver enough action.

[Retrodude]

It veered from the comic story and origin way too much.

When asked about that in an interview, Avi Arad said "Guess what? You missed one. It's all there in the comics. The father, the mutated baby, all of it." Just sayin'.

[dsheinem]

With the exception of Iron Man 1 and maybe Spiderman 2 and/or X-men 2, I can't think of a better Marvel based film than Ang Lee's Hulk.

[Jrecee]

If the basis for whether a movie is good or not is how popular it was, then Watchmen didn't do so hot on that front either.

I never use popularity as a gauge for quality. Speed Racer bombed, but it became a bit of a cult classic among animation fans (myself included). Twilight was super mega successful, but it's one of the worst films I've ever seen, if not the worst. Popularity means jack as far as I'm concerned. If a film I enjoyed becomes popular, great, but most of the time I don't even think about it.

It seems like the only thing you use as a gauge for quality is whether you personally liked it or not. Which is fine on a personal level when deciding what you like, but not on a level of telling others what they should like. You say that Watchmen was better than the critics said (64% RT), so how do we gauge whether that's true? It's all subjective. If historically your opinions on movies don't align with the critics, then don't read them.

[Jrecee]

With the exception of Iron Man 1 and maybe Spiderman 2 and/or X-men 2, I can't think of a better Marvel based film than Ang Lee's Hulk.

My only real problem with it was that it thought that in order to be a serious, it had to be extremely slow paced. Batman Begins didn't introduce Batman til 1 hour in, but it was entertaining from beginning to end. Hulk was. . . boring.

The cast was perfect, the CGI was excellent, especially for the time, and the big chase through the desert was pretty good. Unfortunately the final battle and the poodle attack were terrible.