Search the Site:
Loading...
Follow Us:

View Poll Results: What was the best Comic Book Movie of 2013?

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • Iron Man 3

    7 31.82%
  • Man of Steel

    6 27.27%
  • The Wolverine

    1 4.55%
  • Thor: The Dark World

    8 36.36%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 24 of 24
  1. #21
    Tohya's Avatar
    Tohya is online now deficit omne quod nasciture
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Northrend
    Posts
    436
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Like This Thread!

    Quote Originally Posted by WickedChild View Post
    I said that the extreme reactions (on both sides) are a SIGN that it was great because it implies that it went so far and took bigger risks which caused such reactions.
    You seem to be making a broad and generalizing statement that movies which take great risks and receive polarizing reactions are to be considered great movies, or at least this is an indication of a great movie. My question is can your logic apply to other movies? If you're claiming this is a false equivalency I'm not seeing how. I'm not comparing an action movie to a comedy, or even a superhero movie to an action movie, I'm comparing a superhero movie to other super hero movies.

    Quote Originally Posted by WickedChild View Post
    And honestly, I don't think Avengers was as beloved as you think it was. Yes, it made a ton of money and was more widely received than MoS, but there are a lot of people like me out there who only saw it as "just ok", but we're not as loud as comic book fans who feel spurned. Conversely, I don't know too many people in the middle on MoS. It took risks, which I thought paid off. What risks did Avengers take? It's about as safe a movie as I've ever seen. Very well made, but ultimately nothing that we haven't seen.
    Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. Plus what proof is there that the risks actually paid off? It certainly wasn’t reflected critically nor was the box office domestic results all that encouraging. Yeah it made its money but there certainly wasn’t any indication of steady box office participation. And an incendiary reaction isn’t really a measure of a risk that paid off so everything your saying here is based on personal opinion. Which is fine but please refrain from making ridiculous statements like this “But MoS basically went further and achieved more than pretty much every Marvel movie combined” because it makes you look like an incredibly biased person whose aim is to simply troll Marvel fanboys.

    Quote Originally Posted by WickedChild
    And furthermore you need to quit implying that MoS was some kind of bomb or huge BO disappointment. I'm pretty sure they were happy with the returns, or else why fast track the sequel?
    The studios fast tracking a sequel I feel it's more out of desperation for a franchise since they wrapped up Harry Potter and Batman. Look at what they're doing with the LotR...drawing out what should have been two movies into three movies. They decided to fast track the sequel before the movie even came out, indicating that performance was irrelevant.
    "If that's what it means to be wise, I guess that means I'll be fool all my life" - Naruto, after Jiraiya has told him to wise up and give up on his friend.

  2. #22
    WickedChild's Avatar
    WickedChild is offline Kissing the shadows
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    330
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Tohya View Post
    You seem to be making a broad and generalizing statement that movies which take great risks and receive polarizing reactions are to be considered great movies, or at least this is an indication of a great movie. My question is can your logic apply to other movies? If you're claiming this is a false equivalency I'm not seeing how. I'm not comparing an action movie to a comedy, or even a superhero movie to an action movie, I'm comparing a superhero movie to other super hero movies.
    I'm saying that taking great risks and being polarizing (in film or any other art form) is ONE indicator of potential greatness, not the only indicator. My logic applies to other superhero movies in that I never said that NOT taking risks was a sign of weakness. You can still make a different kind of great superhero movie in a more safe and broadly appealing fashion (Avengers). So then why not make all superhero movies broadly appealing so you don't have to worry about haters? Why make anything that doesn't appeal to everyone? Maybe because, like myself, some people don't care much for the safer movies because they don't usually contain much that we haven't seen. When a director shows a willingness to take risks and anger traditionalists, that interest me more because it means that he likely has a greater conviction about what he wants to show or say, and that it won't be the same thing I've already seen in many other films. This doesn't automatically make a movie great, but I believe this attitude in a filmmaker is more likely to produce a more compelling result.

  3. #23
    CyclonatorZ's Avatar
    CyclonatorZ is offline Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    967
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    The only comic book movies I saw this year were Iron Man 3 and Thor 2. Of the two, Iron Many 3 is by far the bolder and ultimately better sequel in my mind. It may have screwed with a lot of Iron Man conventions, but as far as I'm concerned that was for the better, especially regarding the film's brilliant deconstruction of one of Marvel's most outdated villains.

    Thor 2 on the other hand, was decent but nothing to write home about. It was probably the most cookie cutter Marvel Movie-verse film yet, with literally its only unpredictable element being the continued excellence of Loki. It's also too bad Malekith got the short end of the stick as far as characterization and dialogue go. Laufey from the original movie had about as much screen-time, but felt much more like an actual character and was (pardon the pun) way cooler. That said, the acting, art, and action were awesome as usual, and as a whole the movie was not in any way a trainwreck.

    I'll end up seeing Wolverine on DVD eventually, and maybe Man of Steel if I'm really bored. In conclusion. Marvel continues to knock it out of the park, and DC keeps looking more and more pathetic in comparison.

    "Two thousand five hundred tons of awesome!" Dr. Newton Geiszler, accurately summing up Pacific Rim.


  4. #24
    hobbyfan is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Troy NY
    Posts
    5,584
    Blog Entries
    23
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Haven't seen Thor II yet, and didn't see Wolverine. I voted for Man of Steel simply because it was better than Iron Man III. 'Nuff said.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

 
toonzone quick jump
This community is listed in
the mega forums index project
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO