Thing is people in this thread know what a good comic is, they tend to neglect what a good movie is. Most superhero scripts are just goofy, and thats why they need some change (Snyder knows this, and thank god that he directed Watchmen). The Avengers was a good comic book adaptation but it was only a decent movie, at best. After reading plenty of comic books, and watching far more movies, I have to say, movies are a far more artistic medium IMO. I know that comparing the two is pointless (just like comparing any 2 different artforms), but the truth is that people usually forgive far more in comic books, especially super-hero themed ones.

I doubt taht we will ever see any superhero movie, that will be a top-end movie. Like it or not writing fresh scripts and ideas, almost always has better results

That is true for anyone that understands/appreciates the story-telling and acting skills displayed in TDK.Even so ,you should really see The Avengers.It's a great movie,but it doesn't come close to TDK / Spider-Man 2 / Watchmen / Sin City,which are purely amazing.

Best modern "candy floss" super hero movie (i.e. pure but light entertainment) for sure - wisecracking script, a cast having fun and a lot (I'd argue too much) of wacky action. I'd rate the orginal Superman to have been just as good in the same vein at the time as a comparison point.

But as a film TDK easily outstrips it for high level quality of script and depth - particularly with the handling of The Joker and Two Face.

To me Avengers is indeed a movie whereas I watch stuff like the TDK as a film - if I can borrow the definition of movie and film from James Cameron and Ridley Scott (Cameron says he makes movies and Scott makes films and that works for me).

Was for sure a lot of fun - but as a more serious guy my eyes are on Prometheus and The Dark Knight Rises as my main meal of the summer. But this was a heck of a good appetiser.

hunter_alien said: Thing is people in this thread know what a good comic is, they tend to neglect what a good movie is. Most superhero scripts are just goofy, and thats why they need some change (Snyder knows this, and thank god that he directed Watchmen). The Avengers was a good comic book adaptation but it was only a decent movie, at best. After reading plenty of comic books, and watching far more movies, I have to say, movies are a far more artistic medium IMO. I know that comparing the two is pointless (just like comparing any 2 different artforms), but the truth is that people usually forgive far more in comic books, especially super-hero themed ones. I doubt taht we will ever see any superhero movie, that will be a top-end movie. Like it or not writing fresh scripts and ideas, almost always has better results

I'm fairly confident I know what a good movie is, having watched over 90 of the Top 100 AFI movies of all time, along with a smattering of the highest rated foreign flicks.

The Avengers was a very good movie, just as Star Wars was a very good movie, just as ET was a very good movie. I don't see anyone here arguing how well The Avengers compares to Casablanca, The Hustler, or On The Waterfront. They're not even comparable past the fact that all of them are "movies". The Avengers is a lot of fun, is well-written, and is a great summer blockbuster. Does that mean it's Schindler's List? Of course not. But that doesn't mean it doesn't do what it's supposed to do very, very well.

PS. If you don't think comics are an artistic medium, you haven't read many comics. Maus says "hi".

PPS. The fact that you think Snyder directing The Watchmen was a good thing (my God, one of the most painful and terrible sex scenes put on film since Cronenburg's Crash) puts into doubt whether you actually know what makes a movie "good". The movie was decent but Jesus-Tap-Dancing-Christ, many of his music choices were agonizing (Sound of Silence during a funeral scene? Yay, Captain Obvious! Hallelujah during a sex scene? Someone shoot the director already.) and the way he dealt with most of the cast just felt a little... lacking. Again, not a bad film but certainly not something that should be put on a pedastal. I mean, this is the guy that brought us Sucker Punch and 300. His storytelling ability could use a bit of refinement.

He does crack wise a lot in the trailer, which gives me hope.

You have good eyes,but you shouldn't count The Amazing Spider-Man out.It's looking to be pretty incredible !

Okay, I have to ask. Outside of the visuals, what makes Sin City so great? Its schlocky dialogue? The gratuitous T&A? The corny acting? Once you get past the stunning visuals, the movie is incredibly mediocre. I enjoy the movie and have watched it a half dozen times but as an overall movie, The Avengers is a better film. The Watchmen was okay. Spider-Man 2 was decent.

Outside of TDK, all the movies you listed are somewhere between mediocre and good, not great.

It's been kind of flying under my radar - but I did really like the latest 4 minute trailer I saw.  Garfield looks very promising and I'm actually glad they may have created a new backstory.  I hate when films based on comics feel they have to mimic some previous backstory to keep the fans happy.  Don't piss on the franchise but be creative is my motto.  Peter mysterioudly abandoned by his parents and it might tie into what happens to him and mutation in general?  I'll take that over the overly familiar Uncle Ben story.

Parts of the soundtrack were great. The Times, They Are A Changin' during the intro was fantastic. Unforgettable during the introductory fight scene was great. After that, it went downhill quickly. Every song on the soundtrack is great but their use in the movie actually caused me physical pain at times. Their choices were a mix of obvious, inappropriate, and lame.

That doesn't mean the movie will be bad (though after the last trailer, it looks like Alien Redux, a terrible disappointment). Sunshine and Moon are two of the best sci-fi movies of the past decade and neither one did very well at the box office.