Ghost Rider: Good or Another Marvel Flop?

It looks ok but its seems marvels strat is to make as many comic book movies as possibble and see what sticks.
Xmen and spiderman so far did well but many have floped. Although a lot could have done so much better with those movies.

So if they did this movie right it could be very good. But a few parts of the preveiws make it seem like it may be another bad movie with stupid little side jokes all over.

Not sure if you are saying that it was complete last summer, but that's not the case. On a website last week, the director/writer stated that if was finally completed. A long time creating the effects is the reason for the delay, but this movie has been slated for a Feb 2007 release long before it began filming.

yeah the effects took a while

otherwise someone would've made a thread bitching about how fake the CGI was.

At last years comic con the director stated the reason for the delays was the fire effects. They basically built and re-built a program to do just the fire. Supposedly none of the programs out there did the fire correctly or how he wanted it to look so they ended up building their own. Para phrasing of course.

They're never a "flop" to the true blue diehard fans! Well, maybe the Hulk...possibly Dr. Strange...okay, maybe some of them are flops...

Nicolas Cage is a good fit though, especially if he uses his Elvis voice!

The Avengers and Fantastic 4 were flops. Or are these not Marvel doings?

Wasn't The Avengers based off a 1960's British TV series? Emma Peel and such?

Just askin'.

Art

Maybe. I never saw it but it sounds comic-booky.

Yes... not the comic book avengers we know from marvel..

R~

The trailers look pretty good- better than I expected. But trailers have lied in the past

its 50/50

looks like the worst movie since SNAKES ON A PLANE....

I'll boycot this movie as well...

sad thing is ignorant peeps elsewhere think this movie is ripping off Spawn when GR came decades before Spawn.

Fantastic 4 was a FLOP?

If you are saying it was too corny/childish, then I agree with you 100%. I thought it was that as well.

But the box office #'s, home and abroad, don't lie(and this does not take into account the DVD sales):

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/...tasticfour.htm

I wouldn't call over $330 million worldwide a flop, would you?

Also, are you referring to the animated AVENGERS movie that is out on DVD?

I thought about renting these(there are two of them if I remember) too watch.

Are you saying they are totally not worth the time? Just not that good, or REALLY BAD?

in the commercials,it appears that Sam Elliot is a Ghost Rider from the past,and they team up at some point.the special effects don't look too good,and Eva Mendes seems to have been filmed in an unflattering manner.

I like Nicholas Cage, and it seems like an ok movie. I would not see it expecting something spectacular, but if you like Nicholas Cage and Ghost Rider then you can't go wrong!

Hulk was a WAY better movie than F4 ever could be. Ang Lee outdid himself and it was very critically acclaimed. Unfortunately, the lemmings that actually PAY for movies couldn't be covinced to go.

This is the real Ghostrider.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...19460191897771

Steelersrule, the first Avengers movie was okay. My son (who's 4) watches it quite a bit. Being a fan of Captain America, Hulk, and Iron Man, I loved seeing the characters with some life breathed into them. I'd say 6/10.

The second one is okay, but my son didn't enjoy it as much. A bit draggier...and I hated the fact that the villians from the first DVD were the same as the second. Wanted something more original. Adding Black Panther was a nice addition.


Also, I hear you on F4. It's cornier than hell, at times unwatchable, but it's fun and you can't complain about Jessica Alba in a skin tight suit. Looking forward to the sequel, hopefully with a greatly diminished cheese-factor.

The current TV ads make GR look corny, especially with the girl describing the fire. Let's hope there's actually some action here. I did not really like the 70's run of GR, but the 90's run was great.

Btw, I did not like FF at first, but if you accept it for the campiness, it really is a lot of fun. Remeber The Thing and Johnny like to push each other's buttons. Johnny is kind of a punk. Saying "Flame On!" used to be the only way he could fire up... Etc..

Wow I hated F4, but to me the Hulk is one of the worst movies I ever saw. I get sick just thinking about how bad Nick Nolte's acting was in this movie.

Something I've been thinking about looking at all the comic-book superhero movies due out... has there ever been a successful movie based on a "minor" superhero?

The Ultimate Avengers movie took a comic run that could've been one of the most exciting motion pictures ever and removed all edge and added in corny, generic aliens. It basically chopped the balls right off.

It wasn't particularly critically acclaimed:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hulk/

Blade was virtually unknown before the movie even though he's been around since the 70's. The Crow was also unknown by most outside of comic book readers. They both did better than average.

It wasn't particularly critically acclaimed:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hulk/


60 friggin; % on RT is usually pretty damn good.

What is it with "review lemmings" and "box office profit" obsessed people?

Come on folks this is AVS. Why can't people give their own thoughts and insights to back things up? If ever there was a place for the profitability or mainstream media opinion of a film to be mocked as "evidence" it's here.

I love comic books and and I've seen a few (very few) really great comic book movies. It seems obvious to me this one is going to be awful, but I'll be there opening night to find out anyway - after all who knows. I sure didn't have high hopes for Spider-Man or X-Men and I ended up loving those (the first ones anyway).

Does any real film buff with a nice home theater who hangs out here really make decisions to see things based on reviews and whether or not John Q. Public (the kind of moron that watches Survivor and listens to Justin Timberlake) spent ticket money on it?

If someone disagrees with my movie opinions the last thing I'd ever point out is that a movie I liked did well or was critically acclaimed. I mean come on, that's like claiming the modern oscars is anything more than a one-sided politically correct wankfest.

If someone wants to decry a comic book movie, talk about why you didn't like it, not whether someone else did.

Just as anyone can appraise a film, so might we also appraise the nature and state of prevailing opinion and/or specific opinions of specific individuals on that film. All of these musings are encompassed as appropriate commentary on these pages and germane to the type of unstructured free-style exchange that evolves here.

I note that you, khyron, have assessed the intelligence of persons watching SURVIVOR as in the moron domain, yet surely this observation arises not from personally gathered empirical evidence. You are wrong on that point of course, but beyond that, you have relied upon something other than that which you could collect yourself, such as millions of intelligence tests administered to every SURVIVOR watcher, to support your view. So really it amounts to unfounded conjecture and supposition, most definitely not to be taken seriously, so then what more elevated value does it acquire in the expression, just because you call it your own?

Likewise the opinion of anyone on any subject is tempered, shaped, influenced by myriad, often unidentifiable sources, among which, often figuring prominently, is critical reception to a given thing, whether that reception is seen as valid or not. In any case, it is a point of departure for discussion, in much the same manner as your baiting post.