Except that Raimi had already made a superhero comic-book-style movie with Darkman, as you yourself pointed out. One could therefore suppose that Raimi would be hip to doing an actual comic book movie.
And as for Jackson, he was and is clearly passionate about the source material for The Lord Of The Rings. The extended DVDs of each of the three films provide ample proof of that.
I’m not saying they weren’t passionate, I’m saying that we don’t really know how passionate the three men are about their projects and further that passion for the project is not necessarily related to the end result’s quality. IOW, it’s possible that Bay will make a great Superman despite merely going through the motions, and it’s also possible that Bay has been a Superman fan since his childhood but will absolutely botch it. Learning how big of a Superman fan Bay is will not alter my expectations of the film. Learning more about the script, cast, etc. will.
Just off the top of my head, I suspect Ridley Scott had a lot more passion for Legend than he had for Black Hawk Down, but which one is a better movie?
Sam Raimi has been responsible for the creation of several original superhero and fantasy hero franchises, including the very successful Hercules and Xena series, as well as having been involved as a director, producer, executive producer and even actor in the genre as well.
When it comes to making over the top characters come alive on screen, Raimi has the most experience out of any of the above previous to his landing of Spider-Man.
But just going with cheese was the reason there were never great superhero films until people like Bryan Singer and Sam Raimi were given a chance. They were incredibly accomplished before they landed a comic book license and possessed the requisite skill and subtlety to pull it off without being lame. Bay does not have those qualities. We’re going to get overblown, hyper-kinetic, cheese because he just isn’t capable of anything else. And that just isn’t good enough. If it was, we’d have had great superhero adaptation decades ago, but we didn’t. The reason the big superhero comics are so popular is because they feature these archetypal figures and embody these powerful themes creating conflict that resonates almost universally. That sort of thing tends to get lost or cheapened by the explosions, excessive camera moves and emotional manipulation we can expect from Bay.
I thought both X-Men movies were bad. Hmm, not bad, but bland. They reminded me of The Mummy movies, they seemed to have all the components of an entertaining movie, but they lacked a certain something that makes me want to watch them ever again.
And I think Superman is such a larger than life super-super-hero that Bay’s kinetic style can work. Bay can work with archetypal figures and powerful themes, it’s the subtle stuff that he hasn’t shown the ability to do.
I hate to hit and run, but shut up.
I assume you are talking to me, CB? What the fuck?
The X-Men movies were better than anything Michael Bay has ever done, and I only like them a little more than you do. The Mummy movies were just fucking shit.
Just off the top of my head, I suspect Ridley Scott had a lot more passion for Legend than he had for Black Hawk Down, but which one is a better movie?
Legend, but only just.
How about we do it this way:
We’ll agree that it’s possible that a worthless hack like Bay could direct a just-barely-passable Superman movie. But can we also agree that pretty much any other A or B-list Hollywood director could do a better job?
Cool.
The Rock, Armageddon, and Bad Boys were all better than either X-Men movie. Bad Boys II is about the samelevel, in that if I flipped past them on TV I’d watch if it was one of the cool action sequences but not otherwise.
Bay is a perfectly acceptable director. I think he’s a very reasonable choice to direct Superman, but then again I’m not the sort of retard fanboy who starts threads whining about every production decision in movies based on material I like. There aren’t a lot of directors who I would complain about giving this project to.
I’ve liked a lot of Michael Bay films to give his Superman a chance when it does come out.
But what do I know? I liked Daredevil!
I guess. I mean, Superman is a crappy comic and a crappy character, so this definitely fits. But even if you’re not the kind of retard fanboy who starts threads whining about every production decision in movies based on material you like, you are an irritating, anal nerd who defends Michael Bay - repeatedly and at length - from harmless off-the-cuff potshots at an acknowledged hack, and that’s even worse. At least the retard fanboys care about the stuff they’re bitching about - you barely even like Bay’s stuff, yet you dominate a thread crying about how people should quit picking on him. He probably isn’t the scourge he’s made out to be, but he’s still not worth defending, in any capacity.
And none of those movies are better than XMen. The battle rages on!
So, you mean to say David Carradine’s stunning exposition in Kill Bill 2 on Supe’s uniqueness fell on deaf ears?
Theo- I’m irrating? You’re a goddamn troll. You apparently don’t even disagree with me about anything besides the quality of the X-Men movies vs. The Rock, you merely feel I shouldn’t be allowed to debate the merits of various movies and directors.
And as for that, fuck you, I’ll talk about whatever I feel like.
Man, I loved the X-men movies - they’re definitely my favourite superhero movies. But I’ll admit that Bryan Singer wasn’t fantastic with the action scenes – the one thing Michael Bay does well is action scenes.
Since I don’t really care about DC heroes, I’m not really bothered by Bay getting a shot (and I actually think his over the top style would have been great for the Fantastic Four), but I actually have high hopes for Nolan’s Batman movie.
In terms of the existing DC movies - the last two Superman and Batman movies were godawful. The first two Superman movies were great at the time, but have aged really badly. I still sort of like Burton’s two Batman flicks, although they’re more flash than narrative substance.
I think Michael Bay is a worthless hack, and I’d rather he didn’t make any movies at all. Just because I’m a little bored of him being the whipping boy of choice when it comes to hugely successful film directors with no talent whatsoever, doesn’t mean I don’t think he really, really sucks. And you are most certainly allowed to go on and on about stupid shit. Heck, I’ll even allow you to act all crazy and puff your cheeks up with righteous indignation. That could be a real trip.
Anyway, you weren’t debating the merits of films/directors. You were just saying which films you did and didn’t like, like we’re supposed to care what somebody with horrible fucking taste in films thinks. I found that offensive, so I started making bland proclamations about which films really are better and worse than other films to see if you’d get all pissy.
Man, I loved the X-men movies - they’re definitely my favourite superhero movies. But I’ll admit that Bryan Singer wasn’t fantastic with the action scenes – the one thing Michael Bay does well is action scenes.
I thought the actions scenes in X-Men 2 were great, in particular the initial White House sequence and the assault on the mansion. The first movie- not so much but that felt like they were much more hampered on budget and ridiculous schedule constraints.
You think he sucks but you’re bored by other people saying so? Thanks for giving us the heads up about how gripping you find this topic. Are we to expect future Theodore Rex DX amusement level updates?
As little interest as you may have in my opinions about film I can assure you I care much less about entertaining your whiny ass.
Okay.
The reason you have to reach back to The Rock to target and actually good (and not “Set Phasers for Mindless”) Bay film is because The Rock is the last film Don Simpson was alive to help Bruckheimer make (with Bay as their toady director). Sure, Simpson was a coke-snortin’ self-destructive psychopath with legendary Hollywood excess habits, but the guy knew enough to put just enough in a film to make it palatable.
I’ll take your Bruckheimer/Fuqua pairings, though.
You seem to want to denigrate the craft of moviemaking based on a given person’s chosen subject matter. In other words, you seem to want to believe that a film-maker can’t be great unless he makes a non-genre, mainstream, or Ben-approved film. Luckily for us movie fans, you’re completely wrong.[/quote]
Plus, Darkman was fucking great!
I like all five movies you mentioned there, but still: :shock:
Superman 3 and 4 aged pretty badly. 1 and 2 are still great, IMHO. Good blue screen effects even. Superman 2 is by far the best of all of them, whereas Superman 4 is by far the worst. By really really far. Nukular man did not make the movie good. Heheh.
I have the box set on DVD because Suparman = teh <3 !!1!