What do you consider the first "modern" superhero movie?

[CyberCubed]

The way I see it, there were 4 turning points for what gave us the modern superhero movie:

- Batman 1989. Tim Burton's Batman reinvented Batman for the general public who remembered him from the campy 60's show. It also introduced Batman and Joker to a whole new younger generation of kids from the 80's and 90's (like myself). The series also spawned B:TAS.

- X-men 2000. The first X-men film from 16 years ago, of a movie franchise that's still going today. After Batman and Robin killed superhero movies in 1997....it was only 3 years later that X-men revived it. Its also rather obvious the success of X-men eventually paved the way for Spiderman and the Marvel universe

- Nolan's Batman. The films brought Batman back once again in a brilliant reboot and were critically acclaimed (at least the first two), and paved the way for Batman to be a success in theaters again after Batman and Robin

- Iron Man...the start of the Marvel Universe. Says enough in itself, this paved the way for all Marvel movies that came after it.


What do you consider the first modern superhero movie?

[Amaranthus]

Schindler's List.
Come at me.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Schindler's List.
Come at me.

And this is why most people don't like you.

[Amaranthus]

And this is why most people don't like you.

"Most people"
B*tch please, I'm fabulous.

[CyberCubed]

Well that was fast. 3 posts in and this thread is already ruined. Amazing.

[Amaranthus]

Well that was fast. 3 posts in and this thread is already ruined. Amazing.

You usually ruin other threads so you better shut your goddamn mouth.

[CyberCubed]

Not this early!

[Amaranthus]

I changed my mind, to get this back on track.
The movie Chef. I f*cking love the movie Chef.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

You did pretty much cover the entire spectrum with your first post. I personally have to credit Batman '89, or whichever Superman movie preceded it. I honestly don't know or care when any of the old Superman films came out.

For me, the breakout mainstream comic book movies are Iron Man and The Dark Knight. Other gamechanger modern movies happened, but they were not as widely promoted or enjoyed.

[Candy Kappa]

I guess it depends what you mean with "modern superhero" movies. Blade made superheroes pop back on the list of being marketable after washing away the stank of Pyun's Captain America, Judge Dredd, Spawn, Steel and of course Batman & Robin.

But Blade isn't a costumed superhero per se, so there's Singer's X-Men from 2000 and Sam Raimi's Spider-Man from 2002, especially Spider-man being a hit modern superhero movie with a flashy costume.

There's always 1978 Superman which did great things for superhero movies, and 1989 Batman which showed that Mr. Mom could play a serious superhero.

Most superhero comic book movies are either failed pilots (1978 Doctor Strange), obscure TV movies like Reb Brown's Captain America or not considered actual superheroes or even known that they originated from superhero comic books like 1989 The Punisher is basically Punisher in-name only.

So my final answer is Casabla... Barb Wire, wait... no.

[Amaranthus]

People do like me.
Wtf man.

[ABrown]

For me it's the 1989 Batman movie, and then that movie was followed the next year by the first TMNT movie. However, that's just the way that I look at it. This is something that's just going to vary from person to person.

[CyberCubed]

The funniest part of it all is the 1989 Batman movie is like 26 years old. I wonder how old something can still be to consider it "modern."

The young kids of today who grew up in the late 90's and 2000's would probably scoff at some "80's movie" being modern. The kids of today turn their nose up at older stuff.

[Spike Spiegel]

Superman: The Movie from 1978. Though it is campy by today's standards, it adapted a comic book character into what at the time was a very realistic setting. And those flying effects look better (imo) than the ones in Man of Steel.

It, along with its first sequel, really changed the way superheroes appeared on film.

I may be one of those so called 90s kids, but I still really appreciate it.

[AT-Man]

I think I'd choose the first X-Men movie, because I don't consider Burton's Batman and its sequels modern.

[Etsyturtle2]

The funniest part of it all is the 1989 Batman movie is like 26 years old. I wonder how old something can still be to consider it "modern."

The young kids of today who grew up in the late 90's and 2000's would probably scoff at some "80's movie" being modern. some kids of today turn their nose up at older stuff.

Fixed that for you.

[Aaronardo]

I love how some people are legitimately trying to have a conversation here after the thread's already been derailed. In fact, this very reply pointing out is hypocritical as all hell. F*ck me.

So lemme balance it out. I honestly consider The Avengers a turning point in superhero movies, as most people saw them as standalone flicks before. When Avengers came out, however, the ability to make an entire series out of multiple superheroes was no longer just a nerd's wet dream, and superhero movies pretty much became its own "genre", if you will, because of The Avengers and the movies after The Avengers.

[Mew]

https://media.giphy.com/media/qvVJ36yWjbq24/giphy.gif

[Zak The Neutrino]

I feel like this thread is a trap. Tell Cubed your opinion so he can tell you why you are wrong. :lol:

Anyways for me it's Spiderman (2002). This was the first huge box office success and mainstream comic book movie of this era. It propelled us into a plethora of movies base on comic books and had we not had that time of some of those sub par comic book movies we wouldn't be getting the amazing ones we are today. I think that movie really opened studios eyes and Marvel hit the oh crap button.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Howard the Duck. Supes did movies first, but Howard was the first to use a non-"human" comic character and is STILL the most obscure charcater to get a movie of his own. In a way, he paved the way for many other little-known heroes to get movies. "If they could do it with Howard...."

I win.....

[NinjaPug]

Not to take away from what X-Men did in 2000 but I feel like 2008 when Iron Man and The Dark Knight were released is what set us on the superhero movie path we're currently on.

[Spike Spiegel]

Skip to 1:20 to hear Richard Donner talk about superhero films today and his legacy.

nYcytoIenls

I guess it depends what you mean with "modern superhero" movies. Blade made superheroes pop back on the list of being marketable after washing away the stank of Pyun's Captain America, Judge Dredd, Spawn, Steel and of course Batman & Robin.



Spawn is especially awful when you compare it to that fantastic animated series based on the same character that was airing on HBO at around the same time.

[Powder]

Not to take away from what X-Men did in 2000 but I feel like 2008 when Iron Man and The Dark Knight were released is what set us on the superhero movie path we're currently on.

I'd agree with that. There were different waves, if you will.

[T-U-R-T-L-E POWA!]

I would say the first Raimi Spiderman and the early X-Men movies really seemed to kick the whole "comic book movie" fad in to high gear. The first Batman from Burton was wildly successful but the avalanche of superhero movies really seemed to get kicked off at Spiderman or the X-Men movies.

[snake]

Spidey or X-Men for sure

[CyberCubed]

I don't even remember Iron Man 1. I didn't see it in theater and I first saw it on DVD/blu ray and even then I don't remember.

I actually didn't watch any Marvel films until Avengers came out in 2012. Leading up to that movie I figured I might as well watch all the movies the heroes originally appeared in so that movie would make sense.

Am I the only one who got into the Marvel universe late? Its weird because I watched all the X-men and Spiderman movies in theaters when they came out, but I didn't do the same for the Avengers movies. Maybe because I barely knew them.

[TurtleTitan97]

I'm gonna go with either Spider-Man (2002) or X-Men (2000)

[MikeandRaph87]

Superman The Movie (1978 ). 'Nuff said!

[CyberCubed]

Superman The Movie (1978 ). 'Nuff said!

I think that's a little too old to be modern.

[Spike Spiegel]

I think Captain America: The First Avenger deserves some kind of special mention due to how it did a historical '40s setting but never felt forced, kitschy, or campy. I hope whatever Wonder Woman film DC does is at least half as good.

Also, I don't know if this counts as a movie, but has anybody seen the pilot to the 1970s Hulk TV show? On paper that series should have looked awful and been written terribly, but they managed to adapt that character in a way that appealed to a very large demographic of people.

I think that's a little too old to be modern.

http://i.picpar.com/d0d181ebd221530b4a979a3290ef7ab677903e0f.gif

[Turo602]

I feel like Batman, Spider-Man, Batman Begins and Iron Man were all important in shaping the modern superhero movie. I'd also give credit to The Avengers for paving the way for large scale superhero team up films.

[Candy Kappa]

Also, I don't know if this counts as a movie, but has anybody seen the pilot to the 1970s Hulk TV show? On paper that series should have looked awful and been written terribly, but they managed to adapt that character in a way that appealed to a very large demographic of people.

The David Banner series is fantastic, the movies are great too although The Incredible Hulk Returns with Thor is a little corny, or... Thor is a little corny. :lol:

It's a shame The Trial of the Incredible Hulk didn't start a Daredevil series, cause he was pretty solid.

And they might be the first superhero movies that had a team-up that wasn't hero & sidekick

[ABrown]

Superman The Movie (1978 ). 'Nuff said!

I think that's a little too old to be modern.

This goes back to what I said earlier in the thread about this topic being different for each person. If you were a teenager when the old Superman movie came out in 1978, then you'd likely consider it to be the first "modern" superhero movie.

[sdp]

The OP is missing Superman 1978 and Spider-Man 2002. Sure Superman is very old but it still has what made "modern superhero movies" become that, it was the first step of making a "realistic" movie. And for those that don't remember it was Spider-Man that created the new Boom for superhero movies, I still remember the news saying that "after the success of Spider-Man, _____ has been greenlit.". It started the wave of modern SH movies. Those two examples are far more relevant than Batman Begins or X-Men. I'd also argue Blade and X-Men have far more in common with 90s superhero movies than modern. If I really have to choose I think I'd say Spider-Man with Superman a close second it just depends how you want to define "modern".

The funniest part of it all is the 1989 Batman movie is like 26 years old. I wonder how old something can still be to consider it "modern."

The young kids of today who grew up in the late 90's and 2000's would probably scoff at some "80's movie" being modern. The kids of today turn their nose up at older stuff.
For what it's worth when I was a kid Batman 1989 was only a few years old and I always considered it "old". That way film looks in 80s movies is very distinct and as a kid I could easily recognize it and know it was an "old" movie.

It's definitely modern enough that many of my High School friends thought Batman Begins was a prequel to Batman '89 when that movie came out.



Spawn is especially awful when you compare it to that fantastic animated series based on the same character that was airing on HBO at around the same time.

Spawn was a great film for its time and only looks silly when compared to modern superhero movies. You can only argue that it was "neutered" to be PG-13 but whatever. Sure the HBO show was fantastic but how many people actually watched it? I didn't until the DVDs came out and found out about its existence; You can also argue that Batman: The Animated Series is fantastic and when compared to the Batman movies they are not as good as the cartoon.

I don't even remember Iron Man 1. I didn't see it in theater and I first saw it on DVD/blu ray and even then I don't remember.

I actually didn't watch any Marvel films until Avengers came out in 2012. Leading up to that movie I figured I might as well watch all the movies the heroes originally appeared in so that movie would make sense.

Am I the only one who got into the Marvel universe late? Its weird because I watched all the X-men and Spiderman movies in theaters when they came out, but I didn't do the same for the Avengers movies. Maybe because I barely knew them.

Iron Man is easily the best Marvel movie to date and possibly the best superhero movie in general. It just worked out and had everything perfect which every post-Iron Man Superhero movie sans the Nolan trilogy has followed. I mean while comic fans knew who he was to the average person including me he was a nobody or C-List hero at best and this movie made him an instant A-list hero among Batman and Spider-Man. The movie was able to compete with The Dark Knight and that movies hype was through the roof. This movie was what convinced Disney CEO Bob Iger to buy Marvel and finally this movie also convinced Marvel to go ahead and gamble with their cinematic universe following the same formula this movie set up.

Definitely watch it again, maybe it doesn't feel as special when you watch all the other Marvel movies since they all basically copied it but it should still hold up without a problem. You were definitely late to the Marvel CU but I think most people did too, IIRC Captain America, Thor and The Incredible Hulk all did fine in the Box Office but weren't huge hits like the two Iron Man movies and people were unsure of how Avengers would do because of that since they thought only Iron Man was going to carry the film. Post Avengers all Marvel movies got a huge Box Office bump.

[Spike Spiegel]

So what's the first modern superhero movie you saw theatrically? How'd you react to the ad campaigns, tie-ins, etc? Did it feel like an "event"?

My dad took me to see Spider-Man twice in '02...I remember seeing the ads on Toonami and those insanely poseable ToyBiz action figures at Wal-Mart.

[sdp]

So what's the first modern superhero movie you saw theatrically? How'd you react to the ad campaigns, tie-ins, etc? Did it feel like an "event"?

My dad took me to see Spider-Man twice in '02...I remember seeing the ads on Toonami and those insanely poseable ToyBiz action figures at Wal-Mart.

That's probably worthy of its own thread, at least in movies in general. For me pretty much any big movie marketed at me felt like a huge event, if I saw the ads everywhere and promotions at fast food places and the movie all over the food at the supermarkets I knew it was for a reason.....it was a movie worthy of all that. Little did I know it was all marketing to get me to watch the movie but yeah everything that big seemed like a big event. First superhero movie I watched in theaters was Batman Forever, it probably wasn't as big of an event as other movies but I was definitely excited to watch it.

[CyberCubed]

Funny thing is wasn't Batman dead before Batman '89? I mean the comics were still going of course, but after 60's Batman he was pretty much gone besides the Superfriends cartoon.

Batman '89 completely revitalized the franchise. People often forget B:TAS was actually originally a tie-in cartoon to the movie. The theme song is from the movie, and Penguin's design is from Batman Returns.

[Spike Spiegel]

Funny thing is wasn't Batman dead before Batman '89? I mean the comics were still going of course, but after 60's Batman he was pretty much gone besides the Superfriends cartoon.

Batman '89 completely revitalized the franchise. People often forget B:TAS was actually originally a tie-in cartoon to the movie. The theme song is from the movie, and Penguin's design is from Batman Returns.

The comics had already been going through a renaissance starting with Neal Adams and Dennis O'Neil in the '70s. Factor in Frank Miller's work on Year One and Dark Knight Returns, as well as Alan Moore's Killing Joke, and the stage was set for Batman's live action portrayals to catch up with his evolution in the comics.

It's kind of like the improvements in Superman's characterization after the Donner films (with the Crisis on Infinite Earths saga happening in the mid-80s). A lot of the good things about Man of Steel had their genesis there.

I wonder (no pun intended) what will happen with Wonder Woman. The Lynda Carter series, as iconic as it was, happened pre-Crisis. It'll be interesting to see what they do with a modern retelling of her backstory for the moviegoers who don't watch the cartoons or read comics.

[Commenter 42]

Schindler's List.
Come at me.

This is why I love you.

The funniest part of it all is the 1989 Batman movie is like 26 years old. I wonder how old something can still be to consider it "modern."

The young kids of today who grew up in the late 90's and 2000's would probably scoff at some "80's movie" being modern. The kids of today turn their nose up at older stuff.

So true. Superman: the Movie is clearly the first modern superhero film. It set the Bar pretty damned high.
Anyone who doesn't know or care when that film came should show a little respect. It paved the way for all that came after.

[Spike Spiegel]

This is why I love you.



So true. Superman: the Movie is clearly the first modern superhero film. It set the Bar pretty damned high.
Anyone who doesn't know or care when that film came should show a little respect. It paved the way for all that came after.

^
https://powboombang.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/superman-1978-christopher-reeve-modeled-after-the-curt-swan-interpretation-of-superman.gif?w=700

[CyberCubed]

Its a shame the young punk kids of today have no respect for the classics. Why back in my day we didn't have explosions every 5 seconds and characters leaping 100 feet into the air destroying buildings and smashing each others faces in with special effects, we had GOOD storytelling with well done characterisation and enjoyable high emotionally charged writing.

The kids of today need to be educated on the classics and brought up to speed.

[Spike Spiegel]

Its a shame the young punk kids of today have no respect for the classics. Why back in my day we didn't have explosions every 5 seconds and characters leaping 100 feet into the air destroying buildings and smashing each others faces in with special effects, we had GOOD storytelling with well done characterisation and enjoyable high emotionally charged writing.

The kids of today need to be educated on the classics and brought up to speed.

Not sure if you're trolling or not.

It's good to know there are a few things on this forum that never change :P

[chrisdude]

Superman: The Movie is beyond reproach. But modern? I dunno. As crazy as it sounds, the gap between the Superman movies and Batman movies is really about a small as the gap between the Batman movies and the X-Men movies.

Maybe we should draw the line at reboots? Like Batman Begins. As for answering the question,I feel like the MCU defintely ushered in an era. So I'll have to say Iron Man.


And Cubed, I feel your pain. One of my best friends turned off Superman: The Movie, because he thought it was too slow. He just never finished it. Huge nerd, this guy. We go see comic book movies all the time. Breaks my heart.

[Commenter 42]

Well, my girl is younger than me by a few years. She can't be bothered with most CBMs today - and I can't really blame her. Most are style over substance, and as Cubed said, not good stories. Then again, kids today seem to only want hype, BVS being the perfect example. It's about quotable lines and memes.

So she sat through most of MOS, and endured my little tirade after the screening when it was released. I was pissed. "It's all wrong!" I stammered. "they blew it! it's legitimately stupid."

"Superman's stupid though, right?" Her words like knives, "It's silly, just nonsense...". she continued, but I couldn't hear it.

"It's not Superman." I said evenly. "I know you don't read comics, but you remember the original, right? Christopher Reeve"

"Of course I do, but it's pretty old. Kevin Spacey was good but it was boring too. I honestly don't know why you even care! "

I let it go... disillusioned in my life partner, but too exhausted to try to explain. It was late, and we both had an early morning.

A few weeks later, I come home to find her on the couch, watching a movie.
She takes no notice as I hang up my jacket, but a familiar sound hits my ears...

"You're right" she says.

"About?"

"Say Jim, WOOOOO!" "s'cuse me."
The TV interjects..."That's a bad outfit!"

I smile.

"Everything, as usual" She says. "I'd never watched the original. He has so much charisma. This is completely different, and I get it now. People today, they're not like that. They're not kind or sincere. You really believe he's Superman."

"Easy Ms, I've got you"

She hugs me tight. "He reminds me of someone..."

"You've got me; whose got you?"

"Yeah, they cast that other actor because he looked a bit like...."

"No. I mean you."

Boom. a huge compliment. I think of the Indy scene with the grail. No ones ever compared me to Superman; pretty sure they never will again.

Point is, Superman 78 is the Nexus; remove that touchstone and you never get Batman 89, and you sure as hell don't get Spider-man from Ramis.

I would argue that without the huge success of those three films, no one would have considered venturing out to any of what followed. CBM's would still be considered MOW's, and Marvel and DC would likely be changed entirely, possibly dead.

All of that said, it was Iron Man that was proof of concept of a blockbuster based on a comic book with no track record in hollywood. If anything, it's success kicked off the race to a cinematic universe.

[Turo602]

What are we doing now, fanfics?

[Amaranthus]

This is why I love you.


*Blushes heavily*

[Coola Yagami]

I'd say Iron Man and Batman Begins. Especially Iron Man given that the series still continues today and isn't being rebooted. I mean, technically speaking the avengers movies and civil war are pretty much iron man (and anyone else) sequels.

[sdp]

The kids of today need to be educated on the classics and brought up to speed.

Did you watch all the B&W Batman and Superman serials before watching any of the "classic" versions? Guess you weren't educated or brought to speed either.

[CyberCubed]

No, but I did watch 60's Batman.

[Candy Kappa]

Did you watch all the B&W Batman and Superman serials before watching any of the "classic" versions? Guess you weren't educated or brought to speed either.

And gun toting Captain America :lol:

[Spike Spiegel]

No, but I did watch 60's Batman.

That show was apparently meant to be a kind of parody of those old serials. I tried watching it, but it quickly loses its charm after season one.

The Shelley Winters episode in season 2 is what made me quit watching entirely.

And gun toting Captain America :lol:

I think Batman carried a gun in his early comic book appearances. I really like this Bruce Timm version of Golden Age Bats:

IFwOS2R9o_8

[CyberCubed]

Man I forgot about that short. Was it ever released to DVD?

[Candy Kappa]

I think Batman carried a gun in his early comic book appearances.

He did, even killed with guns. But it didn't last too long.

But the Live-Action Captain America 1944 serial, though. Cap didn't use his shield but a gun instead, since using Captain America was a later addition to the show.

http://www.b-westerncollectables.com/images/captain-america.jpg

[MsMarvelDuckie]

What, no love for Howard?! What about Nick Fury: Agent of SHIELD?! I know they were kind of campy but they both introduced aspects of the Marvel comics that haven't been touched since. Madame Viper, LMD's, the Nexus, etc.

[Candy Kappa]

Howard was a disaster, though. Sure it was Marvel's first proper feature film, but it had so many problems during production, it was super expensive and just a hot mess. But it did give us Pixar, so there's that I guess.

Nick Fury was just a D2V movie, campy fun. But nothing game changing for Superhero movies.

[Krutch]

Y'know, I kinda want to throw in Batman & Robin and maybe Catwoman as honorable mentions for important steps in the genre. They pretty much served as blueprints on how not to do superheroes. And if B&R didn't go so far into toy selling camp fare as it did, WB might not have been so willing to go completely in the other direction to distance themselves from it with Batman Begins.

[Spike Spiegel]

What would have happened if Superman Returns was a reboot instead of a pseudo-sequel?

Maybe we might have have gotten something like BvS a lot sooner.

[chrisdude]

What would have happened if Superman Returns was a reboot instead of a pseudo-sequel?

Maybe we might have have gotten something like BvS a lot sooner.I think there were whispers of it. There was a reference to Gotham City in Returns. And there was that Batman Superman sign in I Am Legend. And they were, after all, introduced back to back. They could've beaten Marvel to the cinematic universe.

[shuriken]

Pretty interesting topic. I'd say that Superhero movies have waves that they go in. The First truly significant Superhero movie has to be Superman (1978 ).
It was successful and it saw superheroes in a positive and somewhat serious light. Robocop (87), The punisher (89), Batman (89), TMNT(90), The Crow(94) sort of kept that serious tone with varying degrees of success.
Steel(97), Judge Dredd (95), Batman and Robin(97) and Spawn (97) sort of killed a lot of the momentum that Superhero movies had going for it, and even though Blade(98 ) was good, the fact that it was Rated R hurt it's chances for being as big of a success as it should have been.
(1978-1994)
The second wave of it would have to be the Spider-man (2002). Yeah X-men came before it, but they were sort of embarrassed about it's roots (All leather outfits, unnecessary redesigns, poking fun at the comics themselves). Spider-man embraced the campiness, but still told an entertaining and somewhat serious story that captured the audience in a way that Superman did, 24 years prior. Spider-man brought in a boom period that sort of fizzled in 2007 with Fantastic four 2 and Spider-man 3.

3rd wave would have to be Iron Man and The Dark Knight movies both released in 2008. Said movies have influenced both of the studious backing both DC based movies and Marvel based movies ever since. So I'd say our "Modern Superhero movies" started in 2008. The Dark Knight was a game changer in a lot of ways (not all of them good) in and of itself. Since then every year has essentially had a Superhero movie released.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Howard was a disaster, though. Sure it was Marvel's first proper feature film, but it had so many problems during production, it was super expensive and just a hot mess. But it did give us Pixar, so there's that I guess.

Nick Fury was just a D2V movie, campy fun. But nothing game changing for Superhero movies.


True on both counts. However, both proved that even less well-known characters could carry a movie- a fact that helped lead to Ant-Man and GotG being made. Which might explain the Howard cameo at the end of GotG. Point is, they were among the earliest super hero movies, and deserve recognition for that if nothing else.

[Candy Kappa]

They really didn't show that the characters could carry their own movie, though. Howard was a flop, costing more then Return of the Jedi to make. And Nick Fury was unsuccessful as a pilot, and came the same year Blade was out. Blade on the other hand, that movie showed that a obscure character can hold their own movie.

And neither of the two are among the earliest superhero movies, just Howard there is over 30 titles, movies and serials included that precedes that movie. And Nick Fury the number have at least doubled, so as a whole both movies in general is pretty late Superhero titles.

That we got Ant-Man and Guardians of the Galaxy is because Marvel Studios don't have X-Men and Spider-Man (hence why we're getting Inhumans as possible Mutant analogues).

[sdp]

True on both counts. However, both proved that even less well-known characters could carry a movie- a fact that helped lead to Ant-Man and GotG being made. Which might explain the Howard cameo at the end of GotG. Point is, they were among the earliest super hero movies, and deserve recognition for that if nothing else.

You're grasping at straws. The reason we got Ant-Man and GotG is because of Iron Man who was an unknown superhero to the general public and now is an A-Lister. Disney's decision to buy Marvel was because of this, not because Spider-Man or the X-Men but seeing how they could make this old unknwon character into a B.O. success in the present.

[Sumac]

Batman'89 with old Superman movie being precursor.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

They really didn't show that the characters could carry their own movie, though. Howard was a flop, costing more then Return of the Jedi to make. And Nick Fury was unsuccessful as a pilot, and came the same year Blade was out. Blade on the other hand, that movie showed that a obscure character can hold their own movie.

And neither of the two are among the earliest superhero movies, just Howard there is over 30 titles, movies and serials included that precedes that movie. And Nick Fury the number have at least doubled, so as a whole both movies in general is pretty late Superhero titles.

That we got Ant-Man and Guardians of the Galaxy is because Marvel Studios don't have X-Men and Spider-Man (hence why we're getting Inhumans as possible Mutant analogues).


Hmm, thought Fury was a bit earlier than that- Maybe it was the fact that Hasselhoff was in it, and hadn't been big for a while. However, as low-budget as it was, it was no worse than some others that have been done before or since- namely Cat-Woman, Fan4stic (aka Floptastic 4) or the aforementioned Hulk/Thor movie from the Incredible Hulk series.

However, Howard, at least WAS one of the oldest superhero MOVIES (we're not talking about serials or cartoons- just full-length films, of which there were very FEW prior to the 80's, Mostly just Reeve's Superman films.) And was certainly expected to do much better at least initially. That it flopped was partly due to Lucasfilms' being heavily in debt at the time, not to mention having a rather large budget for the time- the duck suit alone cost 3 million $! But it has aged well for a campy film, has the honor of being the FIRST Marvel movie, and has also developed a cult following.

The fact that either of them even HAD movies at all is far more telling than how "big" or popular those movies turned out to be. You're forgetting the very relevant fact that these movies were made LONG before the time of superhero movies becoming "trendy" big-budget films. Oddly, in spite of getting several Golden Raspberries, Howard is still in print, is sold FAR more often than say- Elektra, and started the careers of several now-big names in Hollywood, like Holly Robinson- who went on to do 21 Jumpstreet. A number of future celebs also auditioned for it, among them Jay Leno, Martin Short, Kim Basinger, and Tori Amos. (Interestingly, Lea Thompson did all her own singing, and still has the guitar she used in the movie!) Not bad for a "flop", eh?

Hollywood has always been slow to catch on to new ideas that don't send box office sales through the roof. Comic book-based movies is one of them. Because from Superman to Blade there is a HUGE gap where there were only a scant handful of movies based on comic properties! (And lest we forget, I'm including others like The Crow in that number- which is another I'm surprised no one has mentioned!)


You're grasping at straws. The reason we got Ant-Man and GotG is because of Iron Man who was an unknown superhero to the general public and now is an A-Lister. Disney's decision to buy Marvel was because of this, not because Spider-Man or the X-Men but seeing how they could make this old unknown character into a B.O. success in the present.

Unknown? I'm sorry, but as a superhero who has existed for well over 50 years (or more,) and is a founding member of the Avengers and one of Marvel's highest-selling heroes for DECADES, I would hardly call him unknown. Maybe to someone who knows NOTHING about comic books outside of Superman or Spider-Man, but any kid who has EVER picked up a Marvel comic has at least HEARD of him. And for the record, he was ALWAYS an A-lister. He's mentioned or advertised even in comics not featuring him, and appears frequently in other Marvel books. So no, he's NOT unknown by any means. And it's one of the reason his movie did so well. MANY fans and people who knew he was an Avenger were among the audiences for the Iron-Man movie. But to hear Hollywood talk, he'd never existed previously- but Hollywood has NO clue when it comes to comic book heroes. Iron-Man's success came right on the heels of Spider-Man and X-Men- both of which are Marvel comic properties; his success was mostly due to the FANS.

[NinjaPug]

Iron Man was a C-list character for Marvel prior to the 2008 movie. I think RDJ's portrayal of Stark is the main reason the character has turned into an A-lister. People love that guy now especially as Stark. Plus the 1st movie was really good.

[Candy Kappa]

However, Howard, at least WAS one of the oldest superhero MOVIES (we're not talking about serials or cartoons- just full-length films, of which there were very FEW prior to the 80's, Mostly just Reeve's Superman films.) And was certainly expected to do much better at least initially.

I never mentioned (or counted) cartoons. And if we're not counting the serials, we would still be in 30+ Superhero movie titles that came before Howard.

It's not the first Marvel movie, it's the first proper theatrical released movie since 1944 Captain America, since 1977 Spider-Man only had a limited theatrical run and 1990 Captain America was in development hell for years before they started shooting.

From 1978 Superman to 1994 The Crow there's 10+ superhero movies I can think off, so no not so few all things considered.

[CyberCubed]

Y'know, I kinda want to throw in Batman & Robin and maybe Catwoman as honorable mentions for important steps in the genre. They pretty much served as blueprints on how not to do superheroes.

They should have known not to make bad movies in the first place since what came before it wasn't awful though.

My view of those movies:

http://gifyu.com/images/1bb778.gif

[MsMarvelDuckie]

I never mentioned (or counted) cartoons. And if we're not counting the serials, we would still be in 30+ Superhero movie titles that came before Howard.

It's not the first Marvel movie, it's the first proper theatrical released movie since 1944 Captain America, since 1977 Spider-Man only had a limited theatrical run and 1990 Captain America was in development hell for years before they started shooting.

From 1978 Superman to 1994 The Crow there's 10+ superhero movies I can think off, so no not so few all things considered.


Can you actually name any though? Not made for TV or movies with "limited release" but ACTUAL theatrical release films? Cause I sure as heck can't, and I was alive and already into middle school by the mid 80's. I GREW UP with Robocop (not actually a "superhero", BTW) Star Wars trilogy, (and technically, those shouldn't even be mentioned, since they never had comics until well after they were made) even the Star Trek films- and for the record, if we want to include movies with comic books, why not just throw Logan's Run in there, too? See, just because there is a comic of a title, does NOT mean it should be included in a discussion of superhero comic book-based films. anything prior to Superman really does NOT count as "modern", and certainly has little impact on today's comic films, as it was too long ago to have influenced anything. And movies that were in development hell for years, never got released, or were only in limited release really do not count. So okay, maybe Nick might not, but since it was between Supes and Blade, it is still a "modern" comic hero movie. Seeing that the character has existed since the mid-40's.


"Iron Man was a C-list character for Marvel prior to the 2008 movie. I think RDJ's portrayal of Stark is the main reason the character has turned into an A-lister. People love that guy now especially as Stark. Plus the 1st movie was really good."

Sorry, but I beg to differ. As a former member (and Mod) on the Marvel boards, I can tell you FOR A FACT that Iron-Man was NEVER considered a "C-list" character. For one thing, he has long been one of their top-selling characters. He had his own entire board section, SEVERAL vs. threads, and was one of the most popular Avengers AND solo-characters even as early as 2001 (when I joined). So NO, he was not a C-lister, by ANY means.

In fact, his resemblance to the character was the primary reason RDJ was chosen for the role. Just as Jackson was picked because the Ultimate version of Fury was modeled after him. Those decisions were discussed almost ad nauseum on Marvel's boards at the time. In fact, the entire community was extremely excited about getting an Iron-Man movie- precisely BECAUSE he was very popular and well-known. It might surpise some of you to know that an animated Iron-Man movie was also released not long after that, and it sold relatively well- enough so that Dr. Strange soon followed.

[sdp]

We get it you're a fangirl but you're still wrong. Iron Man was a c-list hero until 2008 to the general audience. Of course to comic geeks he was an important hero but don't confuse the two audiences which we both already mentioned.

[shuriken]

I never mentioned (or counted) cartoons. And if we're not counting the serials, we would still be in 30+ Superhero movie titles that came before Howard.

It's not the first Marvel movie, it's the first proper theatrical released movie since 1944 Captain America, since 1977 Spider-Man only had a limited theatrical run and 1990 Captain America was in development hell for years before they started shooting.

From 1978 Superman to 1994 The Crow there's 10+ superhero movies I can think off, so no not so few all things considered.

10+... OK lemme see
All four Superman movies
Howard the Duck (not really a superhero but meh)
Swamp Thing Returns
Rocketeer
Flash Gordon
The Punisher
The Shadow
Batman, Batman Returns
Guyver 1-2
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 1-3
The Crow

That's what...18 movies?
Crazy to think we have that many Superhero/comic movies in like the past 6 years

[Candy Kappa]

Duckie, are you asking me for names for theatrically released superhero movies between 1978 and 1994?

You know there's websites for that kind of stuff, right?

But, sure. There's Batman, Batman Returns, Supergirl, Swamp Thing, Return of Swamp Thing, Darkman, Hero at Large, The Rocketeer, Superman 2, 3 and 4, Condorman, Meteor Man and the Toxic Avenger trilogy.

Excluding movies that was released in 1994 being The Crow, The Shadow, The Mask and Blankman.

And The TMNT trilogy could be considered superhero type movies as well as Flash Gordon and Howard the Duck.

Of course, now we're going way off topic, since neither of them could be considered first "modern" superhero movie.

[THGhost]

Blade.

Well that was fast. 3 posts in and this thread is already ruined. Amazing.

3? Try 2.

[Spike Spiegel]

Batman: Mask of the Phantasm was released in '93. It's animated, sure, but it was still released theatrically.

[Andrew NDB]

- X-men 2000. The first X-men film from 16 years ago, of a movie franchise that's still going today. After Batman and Robin killed superhero movies in 1997....it was only 3 years later that X-men revived it. Its also rather obvious the success of X-men eventually paved the way for Spiderman and the Marvel universe

Sadly, yes, I have to give it to Bryan Singer for kicking in the door on modern superhero movies with X1. Which is actually the only halfway decent X-Men movie he's ever made, IMHO.