Worst superhero movies of all time

[Spider-Aziz]

In comic universe and to readers he's definitely A-list. There's no maybe.

What's your criteria of A-list?

Someone with a popular cartoon in the 90s.

 

[batfreakforever]

Catwoman and Steel for me.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Someone with a popular cartoon in the 90s.

I would expand that to include films, live action shows, and various other merchandise. I'd also put a larger emphasis on more recent material since tastes change over time.

Examples: Back in the 60s, The Fantastic Four were A-Listers but they sure as heck aren't now. Meanwhile, Iron Man has become one of the most popular superheroes in the world and a clear A-Lister over the last decade.

This is true of the 90s as well. Rocket Raccoon is a far more popular character these days than Punisher, but that sure wasn't true 20 years ago.

A big hit movie can change things overnight.

 

[Flint Marko]

Marvel has brought a new meaning to the word "A-lister", the lines are sort of blurred. Rocket Racoon was a "D-lister" five years ago, now I see him everywhere. Is he now an "A-lister" like Superman, Batman, and Spider-man? In my personal opinion those are the characters with the most sustained popularity and significance, so almost nothing else touches it. Now Captain America, iron man, Thor, star-lord, rocket raccoon, are everywhere. It's debatable that they, for the moment, have just as much cultural significance as the aforementioned A-listers.
Obviously it's a different story when you talk about the comics. The Fantastic Four are deeply significant to the Marvel universe in the comics, A-listers no doubt, yet their cultural significance is absolutely laughable.

 

[Rowsdower!]

Yeah, I feel like F4 is one of those things no one will ever get right on film. Maybe Marvel could, but at this point, I don't even want them to bother. The first two movies that came out a decade or so ago were too silly and stupid and the Trank movie was just a boring slog that went nowhere. I feel like the brand is so tainted at this point that no one would be interested in another go-around, at least not for a long time.

I personally don't care; I've always found F4 pretty lame and I think things like Reed's stretching abilities are never going to look good on the big screen no matter how much money you dump into the CGI. I do feel that Dr. Doom and the Silver Surfer have a lot of potential though and I'd love to see them show up in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

 

[Erzengel]

Yeah I'd remove Spider-Man 3, TASM2, X:TLS, DD, FF(2005) and maybe Superman III.

I'd give them at worst 2 stars out of 4 or 5. They aren't good but the rest on that list is abysmal.

 

[Lantern Venom]

I would expand that to include films, live action shows, and various other merchandise. I'd also put a larger emphasis on more recent material since tastes change over time.

Examples: Back in the 60s, The Fantastic Four were A-Listers but they sure as heck aren't now. Meanwhile, Iron Man has become one of the most popular superheroes in the world and a clear A-Lister over the last decade.

This is true of the 90s as well. Rocket Raccoon is a far more popular character these days than Punisher, but that sure wasn't true 20 years ago.

A big hit movie can change things overnight.

In an age where every obscure show can be bought on home media or found online, it's obvious which characters are pillars of any fictional universe. Hank Pym has had at least 5 animated TV incarnations and 2 animated movie appearances. That's too much non-print material to be classified as third tier.

 

[Batmannerism]

The template that Iron Man set was pretty obvious in Ant-Man:

*Man invents powerful tech suit
*There is a crisis of conscience about building weapons
*Former associate has sinister motives and uses the hero's work to create an even more powerful suit.

I'm convinced that this is why Marvel threw Lang into the mix. The studio was afraid that Hank Pym would come off too much like Tony Stark (not to mention be a 3rd scientist in the Avengers), so they went with an "Ex-con trying to prove he's not really bad" character.

I see your point. I still think there's a much greater degree of character development (as in Tony actually has an arc ) in IM. Yeah, Hank does get over some of his baggage towards the end and rebuilds some bridges with Hope but in IM Tony was essentially a soulless merchant of death at the beginning of the film (well, that's a bit strong, lets just say that he completely shut his eyes to the carnage and human cost he was making his fortune on ) by the end of the film he's become a better person.

That doesn't mean Tony's not a cocky *****ebag anymore, but he's a cocky *****ebag with more developed social conscience (which is something they kind of failed to pick up on in the sequels).

As for Scott, well he's pretty much exactly the same guy he was at the start - although he doesn't have to work at Baskin Robbins anymore.

While Corey Stoll was convincing as a high-functioning psychopath (probably someone we've all worked for at some time or other) I don't think he was even close to Jeff Bridges' Obidiah Stane.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

Grading IMO would go like this

A List - Long running series and lots of movies, cartoons and/or games

Spider-Man
X-Men
Deadpool
Hulk
Iron Man (post 2008, B-list before)
Captain America
Avengers

B-List- Medium-long running series, cartoon appearances and/or movies but not as iconic

Thor
Fantastic Four
Daredevil
Nova
Guardians (post 2013, C-List prior)
Iron Fist
Punisher
X-Force
X-Factor

C-List - Generally supporting characters not able to hold a long running series

Namor
Black Panther
Black Widow
Hawkeye
Ant-Man
Jessica Jones
Falcon
War Machine

The difference is that in TASM 2 his actions are directly responsible for deaths and injuries. While in SM 2 it's just irresponsibility and not active killing.

God bless you! God bless everyone!

We never see anyone hurt or killed from his actions.

The intricate storytelling of the MCU is going to keep all of their films afloat. Even when the story's frame is redundant (Ant-Man was a tweaked version of the Iron Man film) and the main character is bland like Scott Lang, important shared universe nuggets are still dropped in the film.

I doubt that the reaction to Ant-Man would have been the same prior to 2008, but Marvel Studios has created something like a cinematic shopping mall. The anchors are in place and it's increasing traffic for everything around them.

Timing is a thing too. A bad MCU movie is easy to get over as there'll be a new one in six months but a bad non-shared universe movie usually has a two year wait for the next one so people having longer to stew before getting a new entry.

Marvel are masters of marketing and generating hype more than storytelling IMO. They know how to get people's butts in seats. They basically started the 24/7 hype machine where people are updated with tidbits on a daily basis to keep their attention focused.
By doing that they've built a brand and amassed followers (like Apple) who'll consume whatever movie or TV show they release in order to be kept in the loop. After all would anyone have taken notice of Jessica Jones if not for the brand its part of

 

[Flint Marko]

Good thing there's never been an outright "bad" MCU movie.

 

[First Avenger]

Deadpool A-list and Thor B-list? X-factor B-list? Really?

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

Deadpool is hugely popular and was so before his movie. Thor is more popular since his movies but not as much as Deadpool is. X-Factor is probably C-List now I think about it

 

[TeeKay]

Good thing there's never been an outright "bad" MCU movie.

Which is an achievement within itself. Their films range from mediocre to great. The only film I was like whatever was IM2. Not a bad film but was just meh.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Ultimately the difference is that Raimi's first two films were competent, well written and directed and had a good handle on what story they wanted to tell with Peter and why. Character was king, and the stories centered on him.
The ASM franchise had no idea what they wanted to do with Peter, let alone the entire franchise other than a slew of spin-offs. There's no real comparison.



Ant-man is head and shoulders above any Wolverine movie. Not even gonna touch the ridiculousness of saying films like Ant-man are going to "kill" the genre.

Ant Man was great but I would put the 2nd Wolverine movie above it myself. Ant Man is head shoulders above the first Wolverine movie though.

 

[Erzengel]

I liked the Wolverine but I'd put it under Ant-Man, the end battle was so much more satisfying than the battle with the Silver Samurai.

 

[Flint Marko]

Ant Man was great but I would put the 2nd Wolverine movie above it myself. Ant Man is head shoulders above the first Wolverine movie though.

I just posted about this yesterday in the wolverine section, the 2nd Wolverine movie is easily the most forgettable and inconsequential superhero movie in recent memory. It's not bad, but it's also not good either. Just completely flatline across the board.

Grading IMO would go like this

A List - Long running series and lots of movies, cartoons and/or games

Spider-Man
X-Men
Deadpool
Hulk
Iron Man (post 2008, B-list before)
Captain America
Avengers

B-List- Medium-long running series, cartoon appearances and/or movies but not as iconic

Thor
Fantastic Four
Daredevil
Nova
Guardians (post 2013, C-List prior)
Iron Fist
Punisher
X-Force
X-Factor

C-List - Generally supporting characters not able to hold a long running series

Namor
Black Panther
Black Widow
Hawkeye
Ant-Man
Jessica Jones
Falcon
War Machine

X-factor or X-force on the same level as Thor? Deadpool an A-lister above Thor? You vastly over-estimate anything X-men related. I'm not sure what your standard is, but it doesn't make any sense.

Marvel are masters of marketing and hype more than storytelling IMO. They know how to get people's butts in seats. They basically started the 24/7 hype machine where people are updated with tidbits on a daily basis to keep their attention focused.

They wouldn't get butts in seats if they didn't consistently tell good stories.
Your average audience member isn't checking superhero websites on a daily basis, so your point is moot.

By doing that they've built a brand and amassed followers (like Apple) who'll consume whatever movie or TV show they release in order to be kept in the loop. After all would anyone have taken notice of Jessica Jones if not for the brand its part of

It's funny how I'm nearly positive you haven't watched any Jessica Jones, yet here you are saying people only paid attention to it because of the brand it's associated with. You're wrong, and I have a feeling you know it.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

X-factor or X-force on the same level as Thor? Deadpool an A-lister above Thor? You vastly over-estimate anything X-men related. I'm not sure what your standard is, but it doesn't make any sense.

Deadpool being over Thor is a natch. It'd be vastly over-estimating Thor to think he's as popular as Deadpool.

X-Men were marvels flagship team from the seventies until late 2000s so I don't over-estimate them at all.

They wouldn't get butts in seats if they didn't consistently tell good stories.
Your average audience member isn't checking superhero websites on a daily basis, so your point is moot.

Transformers gets butts in seats, would you say that's because of good storytelling? I'm not comparing their content or quality only the importance of branding in box office over storytelling.

After all movies with excellent storytelling often flop as they aren't spectacle based.

It's funny how I'm nearly positive you haven't watched any Jessica Jones, yet here you are saying people only paid attention to it because of the brand it's associated with. You're wrong, and I have a feeling you know it.

Whether or not I've seen it is immaterial as I never made a judgement of its quality, only that it attracted such attention because of its brand association. Assuming people would've gotten hyped about it if it wasn't for the logo above is just plain naive.

I liked the Wolverine but I'd put it under Ant-Man, the end battle was so much more satisfying than the battle with the Silver Samurai.

Agreed about the end battle.

 

[Flint Marko]

Deadpool being over Thor is a match. It'd be vastly over-estimating Thor to think he's as popular as Deadpool.

So from what I'm hearing, Thor has two movies with a combined gross of over a billion dollars, yet he's a B-lister. But Deadpool, a character whose popularity is relegated to only people like us, is somehow an A-lister. Lol.
Let's resume this conversation once Deadpool has finished it's box office run. If what you are saying is true, it should comfortably outgross Thor.

Transformers gets butts in seats, would you say that's because of good storytelling? I'm not comparing their content or quality but the importance of branding in box office over storytelling.

After all movies with excellent storytelling often flop as they aren't spectacle based.

Talk to me when Transformers is 12 movies in and audiences are still shelling out big bucks to see each installment. If the MCU were as devoid of story or value like you say, or on any level comparable to the Transformers film, it wouldn't have lasted this long.
And Jessica Jones was about the worst example you could have chosen, it's almost entirely devoid of spectacle.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

I didn't say they were devoid of story. Don't put words in my mouth.

As to the rest I won't regurgitate my points about brand association being a large factor in JJs interest as this is all off-topic for this particular thread topic

 

[Flint Marko]

I didn't say they were devoid of story. Don't put words in my mouth.

Your exact words:

Marvel are masters of marketing and hype more than storytelling IMO.

And you're wrong. You don't get 12 successful films in a row off of hype. It's that simple.

 

[4thWallBreaker]

Daredevil, even with the ever so slightly better director's cut.
Elektra really missed the mark on her mythos.
Catwoman REALLY, REALLY missed the mark on her mythos.
Ghost Rider was so painful to watch as a big fan of the character. Everything was easy for him and it was Nic Cage. Bleh.
Hulk was weak. Gamma poodles aside, it was pretty off-point, even for an interpretation.
Spider-Man 3. The dancing. Why? Venom was clearly shoved in, then wasted.
X-Men 3: The Last Stand. A mish-mash of special effects and no substance on THE Phoenix Saga. Waste.
Blade: Trinity. Did a complete disservice to Marvel's Dracula. Sigh. And The Nightstalkers and Hannibal King.
Son of Mask. Jamie Kennedy. 'Nuff said. While PG-izing the comic, The Mask was at least fun.
League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. It made it too cartoon serial compared to the source's feel. Shame.
Jonah Hex. A gritty, macabre western turned into Wild Wild West. Guh.
Batman Forever. All flash, no substance. Robin was annoying. The villains were too silly.
Superman Returns. The plotholes and inconsistencies were ridic.
Green Lantern. A greenhorn takes on the antithesis of the entire Corps. based on willpower & courage, and Hal showed none throughout. Not forgetting other problems with the damn thing.

There are plenty of other I know suck, but I've never watched them or completed them, like Batman and Robin. I'd put Howard the Duck, but honestly, to me, it's a so-bad-it's-good. Same goes for Supergirl.

 

[Iron_Stark]

MCU movies are devoid of story? Thor a B-lister? Deadpool A-lister? X-Factor and X-Force on the same level as Thor?

Oh dear. Someone's been drinking too much of that spiked eggnog. Lol.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

MCU movies are devoid of story?

No one said that.

What was said was 'Marvel are masters of marketing and generating hype more than storytelling IMO.' and that does not equate "devoid"

Deadpool A-lister?

Without question.

 

[Flint Marko]

Just to reiterate, you are claiming that Deadpool is an A-lister up there with Spider-man and Batman, and Thor, X Force, and X-factor are B-listers.
Never change, Cyclops.

 

[harryoscop]

Deadpool is B-List..