Follow

    Marvel

    Publisher »

    Formerly known by names including "Atlas" and "Timely", Marvel Entertainment is the publisher of comic books featuring iconic characters and teams such as the Fantastic Four, Spider-Man, the Avengers, the X-Men, Iron Man, the Hulk, Thor, Captain America and Daredevil. Currently owned by the Walt Disney Company, Marvel is one of the "Big Two" comic publishers along with DC Comics.

    Marvel Films

    Avatar image for DanialCarroll
    DanialCarroll

    2540

    Forum Posts

    12718

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 5

    Edited By DanialCarroll

    Being a fan of the Marvel comic universe, I love the idea of film adaptations, but very few of them actually seem to work for some reason, averaging only 54% on Metacritic! So I just thought I'd take a quick run-through of the recent ones (Blade onwards), and share my thoughts on why I think this might be...  

    Blade Series 

    No Caption Provided
    The first Blade film rated 45%, which is pretty poor to begin with, but being that it's about a day-walking vampire that kills, well, vampires, this never really surprised me. I remember liking the film when I first saw it, but I loved vampires anyway, so was probably biased. Blade II jumped up to 52%, which is better, but still not great, and although I can't remember it that well, I think it had a bit more action and even scarier vampires, so that probably helped. Then Blade: Trinity came along and, well, pretty-much flopped. It rated 38% on Metacritic, which seems to sync up with what most people I know think of it. My best guess is that they tried to add too many new characters, and with the inclusion in Ryan Reynolds, humour, which didn't really sit well with a "serious" vampire flick... plus it had Dracula, which I think threw most people off. 

    Daredevil Series

    I just re-watched Daredevil the other day, and I can agree with its score of 42%Ben Affleck looked absolutely wooden in his martial arts scenes, and the Director seems to have tried to make the film into some sort of music video, with music like N*E*R*D, which just seemed... wrong. I think the film needed to take itself a little more seriously to have been any good. After this, they decided to give Elektra her own film for some reason, and again, I don't really remember it, but I do remember ninjas that dissolved after being killed, which really says it all. I don't think the general viewing public is really ready for ninja fantasy, which I guess is why it only got 34%

    Fantastic Four Series

    I just re-watched both FF films not that long ago, and I actually liked them more than I remembered. I've never been a FF comic fan, so I'm not sure how faithful they were, but I think they landed themselves into a classification no-mans-land. Fantastic Four had a teen rating, and yet it was so light-hearted, that it seemed directed at children. This is possibly what score it 40%. I think for a teen/adult market, they needed to give it a darker tone. The second film, Rise of The Silver Surfer, didn't score much better with 45%, but I think again, they probably would have been better off making the film more serious, and darker, to aim for the adult market that it was classified for. 

    Ghost Rider

    Ghost Rider only scored 35%, but I think this mainly has to do with the content. How can anyone make a decent film about a guy with a flaming skull-head? I mean, honestly. Whoever thought of choosing this series for a film adaptation must have been having delusions of grandeur or something. 

    Hulk Series

    No Caption Provided
    I think the first Ang Lee adaptation, simply named, Hulk, was trying to be too... intelligent. There were all these weird, trippy scenes of jellyfish floating through the desert, which just did not work at all. The Hulk is a dumb, immensely powerful creature that smashes stuff... and that's pretty-much it. No one goes to a Hulk film to think. They just want to see him fight and break stuff. The best scene in this film was when he was in the desert smashing tanks with other tanks! I guess that is why this one only got 54%, while the newer Marvel version score 61%The Incredible Hulk showed people exactly what they wanted to see. It was darker, scarier, and we got to see Hulk fighting his arch-nemesis, Abomination

    Iron Man Series

    I think the Iron Man owes most of its 79% score to Robert Downey Jr. The man plays Stark with the charm and humour I think the character needed to succeed. It wasan origins story, so it started off fairly slow, but I think that might have actually been its saving grace, because Iron Man 2, which jumped right into the action with FX-galore, only scored 57%. As is often the case with sequels, I think it was too keen to show off as much action as possibly, it forgot about that little thing called "character". 
     

    Punisher Series 

    There's not really much to be said about these movies. The Punisher scored a massive 33%, while it's sequel/remake, Punisher: War Zone, scored an even worse,30%. I think the problem with Punisher is that even though he does have his own successful comic series, he's not enough of a stand-out character to hold his own in film. He basically is just your run-of-the-mill action-hero, which everyone has already seen in hundreds of movies, so if they were to make a Punisher film work, they would really have to bring something new and exciting to the game.

    Spider-Man Series

    The Spider-Man series started strong, got even stronger... and then flopped. Spider-Man score 73%, which isn't too shabby to begin with, but then Spider-Man 2 came along and brought another 10%, giving it an amazing 83%! It was a touch darker than the first, with scenes such as Doc Oc's awakening featuring Raimi's classic "monster-cam", but still had the perfect mix of Spidey humour throughout. Spider-Man 3,  however, scored a dismal 59%, which most people I know attributing to its "mood" being all over the shop. It starts off all depressing, with Peter moping about, then it turns into some weird Emo comedy skit, and then finishes up as an action blockbuster. What the hell?
     

    X-Men Series

    No Caption Provided
    As with Spider-Man, this series started fairly strong, and then went down-hill... way down-hill. X-Men started off with a modest 64%, followed closely by X2 with 68%, but then The Last Stand started the series down the slippery slope with 58%. Having re-watched this one only recently, my best interpretation is that they just tried to cram too many characters in, which watered down their already-thin character-building. There were mutants in there that you never even saw until the shot where they were being killed, and unless you were an eagle-eyed fan, you were left thinking, "Who the hell was that?" X-Men Origins: Wolverine took the series even further down. It took the hugely-popular character of Deadpool, and turned him into some freaky hybrid Frankenstein's monster for god knows what reason. This would only have upset the fans, however, and doesn't account for the appalling 43% score. That, I attribute mostly to its boring story, including the uninteresting romance. I wonder how the sequel will shape up? 
     

    Conclusion

    After all that, I have come to a few conclusions as to why most of these films fail. First of all, there is the mistake of focusing too heavily on action and FX rather than character-building and plot, as in Iron Man 2 and X-Men: The Last Stand. Then there's the issues of not taking the film seriously (DD), making it too "kiddy" (FF), or too "intelligent" (Hulk). And finally, based on the lowest scoring of all the films, I think "fantasy" is a big issue. Though they might work in comic-form, I don't think the general movie-going public is really interested in concepts such as Ghost Rider's flaming head or Elektra's mystical ninjas, which makes me wonder how well received Thor will be when it's released...  
    Avatar image for jotham
    Jotham

    4576

    Forum Posts

    2321

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 4

    User Lists: 0

    #1  Edited By Jotham

    Good analysis.

    Avatar image for deactivated-5c6600594117e
    deactivated-5c6600594117e

    22316

    Forum Posts

    9027

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 111

    User Lists: 51


    I think for the most part the films have been decent. It's just that they could have been so much better and that frustrates the die hard fans.
    Avatar image for DanialCarroll
    DanialCarroll

    2540

    Forum Posts

    12718

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 5

    #3  Edited By DanialCarroll
    @Jake Fury: 11 of the 19 are above 50%, so you're right, overall they aren't too bad, but you're also right in that they have so much potential, that the disappointment is the real downer...  
     
    @Jotham:
     Thanks :)
    Avatar image for _1elderscrollsfan
    #1ElderScrollsFan

    2010

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #4  Edited By #1ElderScrollsFan
    @Jake Fury said:
    " I think for the most part the films have been decent. It's just that they could have been so much better and that frustrates the die hard fans. "
    Avatar image for DanialCarroll
    DanialCarroll

    2540

    Forum Posts

    12718

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 5

    #5  Edited By DanialCarroll

    Just realised I forgot the Punisher films... I wonder how that could have happened *rollseyes*

    Avatar image for shatterstar
    shatterstar

    5288

    Forum Posts

    176790

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 6

    #6  Edited By shatterstar  Moderator

    Interesting.
     Wasn't a theatrical release but - Man-Thing - 20%

    Avatar image for DanialCarroll
    DanialCarroll

    2540

    Forum Posts

    12718

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 5

    #7  Edited By DanialCarroll
    @Shatterstar: I was hoping no one would notice Man-Thing missing :)
    Avatar image for roadbuster
    roadbuster

    1159

    Forum Posts

    1966

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 2

    #8  Edited By roadbuster

    Nice analysis (Men In Black is arguably missing) but an interesting definition of "work" as relying on critical response when the source material itself generally doesn't pass critical muster.  Sure, there are good comics/stories to non-comic fans but it's still very much an entertainment niche (even the world's largest and most famous comic book convention has less than a third of its floor space, panels, and attendees actually dedicated to comic books!).  PopCulture- whether Katy Perry or Jersey Shore- as a whole is not made for critics or critical acclaim.  Marvel more or less knows and accepts this. 
     
    The measure of what "works" for them is not critical acclaim, necessarily, but profitability... thus the Blade series worked well by tripling investment at the box office alone (say nothing of DVD, cable licensing, network rights, etc.) whereas Hulk- no matter how faithful- struggles to meet expectations (despite doubling the budget, it only breaks even after marketing).  It's why a ridiculously successful, in absolute terms, film like Superman Returns is still below expectations for Warner Bros.  No studio sets out to fail but there is no magic rule or formula for capturing popular culture.  You can't make a rule that predicts Pokemon, Ninja Turtles, Power Rangers, Transformers, etc. over their contemporary competitors.  Putting film making first, or story first, or character first, or action first, etc. as a philosophy all have examples of successes and failures.  As a really broad generalization, DC is targeting the two extremes- producing their large properties as films first (directors like Noland) and then throwing their small properties to the wind hoping for a TMNT or Blade, whereas Marvel properties (more or less by default) pursues popculture (directors like Raimi) with as much polish as they can afford before release. 
     
    Critical reception is what converts into awards and it can't be said that Marvel properties (not all under Marvel's control) are chasing those awards... they just want popular money makers.

    Avatar image for DanialCarroll
    DanialCarroll

    2540

    Forum Posts

    12718

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 5

    #9  Edited By DanialCarroll
    @Mainline: I was only really using Metacritic as a baseline, which is why I gave my own views with them... I just happen to personally agree (roughly, anyway) with the scores given :)
    Avatar image for roadbuster
    roadbuster

    1159

    Forum Posts

    1966

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 2

    #10  Edited By roadbuster

    That's fair!

    Avatar image for king_saturn
    King_Saturn

    250025

    Forum Posts

    509

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #11  Edited By King_Saturn
    now this is something
    Avatar image for DanialCarroll
    DanialCarroll

    2540

    Forum Posts

    12718

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 5

    #12  Edited By DanialCarroll
    @Mainline: You actually brought up a really valid point, so I went back to my list and added profits (from Screened) and as you can see, besides the exceptions of the Hulk films and Fantastic Four, the profits roughly match the scores: 
     
    No Caption Provided
    Thanks for bringing that to my attention :)
    Avatar image for DanialCarroll
    DanialCarroll

    2540

    Forum Posts

    12718

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 5

    #13  Edited By DanialCarroll
    @King Saturn: Thanks :)
    Avatar image for roadbuster
    roadbuster

    1159

    Forum Posts

    1966

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 2

    #14  Edited By roadbuster
    @Danial79 said:
    " @Mainline: You actually brought up a really valid point, so I went back to my list and added profits (from Screened) and as you can see, besides the exceptions of the Hulk films and Fantastic Four, the profits roughly match the scores: 
     
    No Caption Provided
    Thanks for bringing that to my attention :) "
    No problem, that's a great chart and break down.
     
    The only issue is that the profit is box office minus reported budget which doesn't include marketing (for costs) and merchandising/licensing/etc. (for profit).  For example, Blade spawned a syndicated TV series and a videogame but everything above Hulk on that list can tack on $100M+ in marketing costs (if Scott Pilgrim spent $100M on marketing, you better believe more was spent on the Fantastic Four, X-Men, etc).  That said, you can see that critical acclaim only broadly correlates with profit... Incredible Hulk was received better by critics than all but the best superhero films yet it's amongst the worst performers in terms of profit.  Spider-Man, in absolute terms, is a middling critical success (C- score on average) but an insane over-performer... and Spidey 2, by that measure, considerably below expectations. 
     
    I mean, from Hulk 2 to Spidey 3 you only have a critical spread of 3 points but 229% difference in profitability (with Hulk 2 actually on top in terms of acclaim)... I think that level of uncertainty doesn't really make for clear rule making.

    This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

    Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

    Comment and Save

    Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.