digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at thedeadbolt.com

10 Factors that Could Kill Super Heroes in Hollywood

thedeadbolt.com — Although super hero properies are in high demand there will come a time when the tide turns. It happens with everything in Hollywood when popularity reaches an inevitable peak. Will super hero movies eventually go the way of Catwoman? Here's an interesting list of ten factors that could eventually sink the super hero ship in Hollywood.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • BCCStu, on 05/06/2008, -0/+15Well having a Namor movie...Vinny Chase aside is probably not the smartest idea.
    • Karna101, on 05/06/2008, -22/+1two face kills the joker after rachel dawes is murdered by the joker on the dark knight
    • supertaliman, on 05/06/2008, -0/+11If you ruined Batman for me, I will personally find and destroy you.
      • JackSrenton, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1I will fully fund that expedition.
  • BFNews, on 05/06/2008, -10/+4Great article...
    • KiraDnote, on 05/06/2008, -1/+0I've been worried sick about what might kill the superheroes.
      • CiXeL, on 05/06/2008, -4/+5i can't wait for superhero movies to die.
        plots used and abused.
        just crap cgi these days.
        go ahead and digg me down - dont care.
  • coldfusion1970, on 05/06/2008, -1/+13Very good article and as a major comicbook fan i always worry about the bubble bursting.
    Its a good thing that Iron Man was such a good movie, now fingers crossed for Wolverine.
    • Birdoftruth, on 05/06/2008, -16/+1The movie was bad. It had no conflict until the last 15 minutes. Had an uninteresting villain. They compressed Stark's dialogue after 30 minutes to just mere 1 line quips, Hardly emotional attachment to the character who's only moral dilemma was witnessing war profiteering and one odd as hell relationship with his secretary/maid. I felt I was just suppose to be amazed with his abilities (oh wow I can fly and shoot projectiles).
      • amanilaenvelope, on 05/06/2008, -0/+5get out.
      • Harabeck, on 05/06/2008, -0/+5At least he had some moral dilemas.
      • bagboyrebel, on 05/06/2008, -0/+5what do you mean no conflict? there's conflict from the start.
        • Birdoftruth, on 05/06/2008, -4/+1once he got out of the cave, it was "Wow my suit I am building is awesome" and the conflict didn't arrive until he got an injunction to get kicked out of his job by the board.
          • coldfusion1970, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Have you never seen a superhero "origin" movie before?
            They have to spend time setting-up the hero for the non-comicbook geeks (eg. the rest of the world).
            Then the second movie is able to go "balls out".
    • ZenMojo, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4What bubble? Comic book movies haven't been getting made much until recently, but comic book movies have been summer blockbuster giants since the 70's. This article's kind of retarded for one reason: it implies that no movies were made until the year 2000. Forget Superman I and II, forget Batman and Batman Returns. As long as good movies are being made by good directors, it really doesn't matter what the property is.
      • coldfusion1970, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2The bubble which was nearly burst after Superman IV, Elektra and Batman & Robin.
        All films which were panned and could have put tinsel town off the spandex set.
  • viklounew, on 05/06/2008, -1/+11My crush on Tony Stark shall remain indefinite.
  • rebotfc, on 05/06/2008, -2/+23Any film with Ice Cube in it.
  • indianballer21, on 05/06/2008, -14/+1fapfapfap
  • INDOAZZ, on 05/06/2008, -9/+2Super Hero movies are fantasies that humans love to embellish. They will always be welcomed to the Big screen, just for the MONEY factor alone. There's No Stoppin, What Can't Be Stopped.
  • harrison5394, on 05/06/2008, -13/+3Buried for comparing Superman Returns to Batman and Robin. Anybody who thinks that the movie sucks is an idiot with ADD and felt that it didn't have enough explosions. Go watch a Michael Bay movie.
    • Akaji, on 05/06/2008, -4/+8It's Superman... by definition, it sucks, unless it completely rewrites the franchise. You always have the stereotypical villain with the stereotypical plot to blow up/take over the world that could be solved by Superman doing something really simple like an uppercut throw the villain's face, but no, he has to be a good guy. In the end, the villain gets some Kryptonite (seriously, dumbest idea ever - Superman can't be stopped by a nuke, but a hobo with a rock can render him completely immobile), Superman almost dies, but amazingly manages to escape and thwart the villain's plan.

      Add some crap about a damsel in distress.
      Stir.
      ????
      Profit?
      • crichton101, on 05/06/2008, -0/+7That is why you don't have Supes fight a regular human. You have to give him villains he can fight mano e mano. You don't see Batmans main villain being a petty thief who robbed a convenience store. You don't see Iron Man or Captain America taking on carjackers. You have to give Superman a real threat to himself, it just goes to show you how unimaginative and lazy the writers are when they just have him face off against people whose only means to beat him is kryptonite.
      • macweirdo42, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Both Batman and Robin and Superman Returns relied heavily on cheese. In my personal opinion, though, Superman Returns made much better use of the cheese factor than did Batman and Robin. It was cheesy, but it was cheesy in an enjoyable "made you feel like a kid again" kind of way. With Batman and Robin, on the other hand, it was just plain embarrassing to watch.
    • crichton101, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1In one light I agree that Superman Returns shouldn't be compared to Batman & Robin, but in the other I can question your taste in movies with thinking anyone who didn't like it is an idiot. I like Superman Returns the first time I saw it when it was Superman the Movie and starred Christopher Reeves and Gene Hackman. I mean come on, the villains plot was the EXACT SAME THING. It was a remake of the original Superman movie which makes it a very lazy and self indulgent piece of film. Sure the special f/x were nice, and it was great to see Superman actually doing really super heroic things, like saving a plane from crashing, but that's it. The whole Lois love triangle, and the kid was just crap, utter crap. For a movie called Superman Returns he had the smallest part in the entire movie and did little more then stare at people, fly around, and lift things. A movie about Superman should focus on Superman, I know a crazy thought right. Instead the movie seemed to be more in love with Lois and Lex, and looking back on my memories of the movie, I really can't remember anything beyond her and him, Supes is a vague shape in my memory of the movie. The Superman setting has progressed very far since the original movies and comics, yet we still get stuck with crazy real estate Lex Luthor who just wants land. And really, what was his plan? Did he think that no one would attack him with their military might? Really? All his alien tech could do was grow land that was rather inhospitable, I didn't see it giving him any weapons or anything like that at all. Talk about a moronic plan. I'm sorry but modern Luthor is a bit more frightening. A super genius who is on the level of Tony Stark and Bruce Wayne as far as getting his hands on toys to try and kill Superman with. Did we get that? Nope, we got petty thug Lex, complete with comical sidekicks. Do me a favor, why don't you and Singer just find a room together, and just watch the Donner movies, and let someone else who will actually do something new with Superman, like oh say, have him fight a real villain from the comics, and not say, Zod again.
  • gregsmamma, on 05/06/2008, -3/+32three separate pages?
    • TROY7, on 05/06/2008, -1/+3Amen. Put it on one.
      • ifire, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2You know... web design 101... pages shouldn't be more than 1.5 screens tall.
        • jgtg32a, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3Thats a BS rule that didn't exist until click ads were prevalent.
    • gryphon50, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1maybe they sell extra ads that way or something.
    • danwallace, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1And ten repetitious points!
  • PhoenixAvatar2, on 05/06/2008, -0/+31He basically has two factors: Time and bad movies. He's right on both counts, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that people won't go to see bad movies and it definitely doesn't take three pages to get these points across.
    • SKLOKAZOID, on 05/06/2008, -0/+0I agree. 2 factors watered down into 10 points over 3 pages. Ugh.

      I'm more excited to see what's next for film than I am what Spider-Man is up to. I'm glad X-Men has sort of wrapped things up for now, and that Spider-Man seems to have done the same.

      Of course, I'm still down for another Christopher Nolan Batman movie. Like all movies, they depend on the director. A Tim Burton, a Sam Raimi, Bryan Singer, etc. But, even they get sick of doing these movies after a while.
    • dnields, on 05/06/2008, -1/+3"people won't go to see bad movies"

      I wouldn't be too sure of that. 90% of what gets released is bad... yet, people go see it anyway.
  • Sideshowxela, on 05/06/2008, -0/+11Things with the potential to kills superheroes? Off the top of my head, bullets. Kryptonite, where applicable.
  • jagermeistr, on 05/06/2008, -3/+2511.) Letting Sam Raimi make another Spider Man movie after that debacle Spider Man 3.
    • TheRealToma, on 05/06/2008, -2/+7I wish there were a action figurine of Emo dancing Spiderman.
      Edit: *Will it blend?*
      • AndrewDB, on 05/06/2008, -3/+2***** will it blend, will it dance?!
    • macweirdo42, on 05/06/2008, -3/+4*shrug* I don't get it. Sam Raimi makes a cheesy zombie saga, and people love it. He makes a cheesy superhero movie, and suddenly people hate it. I liked the cheese - it was so "comic-bookish." But that's just me. I can definitely see why people hated it in light of Spider Man 1 and 2.
      • jgtg32a, on 05/06/2008, -2/+2I'm sorry but while SM3 did suck, don't talk down to Evil Dead
      • jonshipman, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2SM3 sucked because of Venom and Sandman. pick one or the other! >:(
    • bagboyrebel, on 05/06/2008, -6/+23 wasn't that bad,it was a fun movie and people tried to take it too seriously.
    • ZenMojo, on 05/06/2008, -1/+3I'm sorry, but Raimi gets a goddamn mulligan on Spider-Man 3 after kicking the ***** out of audiences with 1 and 2 and making them two of the most successful and best reviewed movies of all time. Remember what happened to Batman after Burton left ... you got Joel Schumacher. If you give me another Schumacher-esque superhero movie, I will end you.
  • MasterThief117, on 05/06/2008, -1/+5They forgot one. That is a top ten list strung out on three pages.
  • whatthefu, on 05/06/2008, -5/+33Am I the only one who thinks a Justice League movie would be absolutely retarded?
    • Dumbledorito, on 05/06/2008, -0/+13It most likely will be. Ensemble casts are hard to manage, unless you get a multi-picture deal. Otherwise, you're stuck with A- and B-list actors in the principle roles, all with contracts stating X amount of lines/screen time, regardless of the needs of the story. Conversely, you can have a better script with more Batman, less Wonder Woman, or whatever, but with C-list actors the only ones willing to fill the lesser roles.

      The JLA cartoon did it better than most movies can, I fear.
  • Dumbledorito, on 05/06/2008, -0/+9Superhero movies? Maybe. Movies based on comic books? Those are likely to stick around much longer, as they're much easier to pitch to producers: Comic books are practically storyboards, they're cheap to produce, they establish ownership of a property, and you can tell practically any story you want to convey.
  • Karna101, on 05/06/2008, -15/+1two face kills the joker after rachel dawes is murdered by the joker on the dark knight
  • homer420032003, on 05/06/2008, -12/+410 Factors that Could Kill Super Heroes in Hollywood
    by Reg Seeton

    After enduring years of sub-par super hero movies in the 1980s and '90s, comic book geeks everywhere finally got their wish when the first X-Men ushered in the new age of heroes on the big screen. Not only was X-Men the first super-hero film to truly do its comic justice, it paved the way for other super heroes to follow on the big screen. Since 2000, we've seen two more X-Men films, three Spider-Man movies, the reinvention of the Batman franchise, the return of Superman, Hulk, The Punisher, even second tier characters like Catwoman, and most recently the birth of a new franchise with Iron Man.

    Although comic book geeks are basking in their own glory days of cinema, with no signs of super hero movies slowing down anytime soon, there will come a time when the tide turns. It happens with most properties in Hollywood when popularity reaches an inevitable peak, the times change, and new concepts take hold for up and coming generations. When the tide will actually turn, we're not quite sure. When the day comes, and we hope it's not anytime soon, we're preparing ourselves with a list of the "10 Factors that Could Kill Super Heroes in Hollywood."

    10. Time

    Just like Westerns were cool back in the day, it's safe to say that cinematic super heroes will ride off into the sunset only to reappear sometime in the future. At some point, it's likely people will ask, "Are super hero movies dead?" Although us comic book geeks are finally having our day in the big screen sun, thanks largely to the advances in technology, time is an unstoppable villain that even our greatest heroes can't defeat. Time is the one factor that transcends all forms of entertainment. Just like bands such as Warrant and Poison rode the final wave of glam-metal back in the late 1980s and early '90s, time will eventually usher in a new era of action ass-kickers. Although our favorite super heroes are already doomed to a predestined fate, it's undeniable that whatever comes next will be heavily influenced by the popularity of super hero movies. While big screen super heroes might be in their prime, you can expect Hollywood to use the genre as a springboard into something new and innovative. Think about it for a second. In 20 years, will the likes of Iron Man, Spider-Man, Hulk, Batman and X-Men be sitting atop the box-office?

    9. Failed Heroes and Movies:

    There's nothing worse than waiting for your favorite hero to hit the big screen only to walk out of the theater hoping no one sees you standing under the sign that reads "Now Playing - Catwoman". The fact is - just because some of our favorite super hero movies made money, doesn't mean we'll see them again, or need to for that matter. After Batman & Robin and Superman III (Superman IV, even Superman Returns) the Bat-franchise and Superman movies have been the exception to the rule. Either critically or monetarily, there have been a number of misses over the years. It goes without saying that Catwoman was a disaster. Despite being resurrected in 2008, the 2003 Hulk was a disappointment. The Punisher was critically "punished" by fans in 2004 and, although he's not your typical super hero, John Constantine/Hellblazer went down in a ball of flames in 2005. Hell, we're not even talking about the likes of Judge Dredd and Spawn. Although some heroes have lived to see another turn on the big screen, we already know others have met their untimely demise and won't be back (for at least a couple of decades of eternity). The exception to the rule... Superman, who's getting yet another cinematic turn in the next couple of years.

    8. Questionable Heroes:

    There's nothing better than being surprised when some super heroes unexpectedly work on the big screen. Let's be honest here - when Iron Man was first announced, most fans were intrigued and curious as to how Jon Favreau would pull it off. It wasn't like Iron Man was beyond the question, "Can Tony Stark support his own movie?" Throw in Robert Downey Jr. and a kick-ass trailer and we all felt A LOT better. Although there's a ton of territory for Hollywood to mine when it comes to established super heroes, do some of them really need their own movie? Sure, some characters have potential given their popularity, but many only appeal to a niche market of fans. In recent memory, Elektra forced us to question whether the warrior assassin really deserved her own film. As far as female super heroes go, where the hell is Wonder Woman hiding? Daredevil, as popular as he is off-screen, certainly had an uphill climb given the fact that much of the super hero market was cornered at the time by X2 and the first two Spider-Man films. Some super heroes are no-brainers while others are nothing but questionable at best. Captain America? Sure. The Sub-Mariner? Not so sure. The Avengers? Maybe. Green Lantern? Would love to see. Shazam? Not so sure. Thor? Not so sure. Luke Cage? Not so sure. Justice League? Was a maybe for us, but now not sure at all. That's eight super hero properties and a number of characters that we question whether they can truly stand on their own. It's not that we don't want to see them, but the X-Men, Spider-Man, Iron Man, and Batman franchises have set the bar so high that each one would have to blow us away on the scale of Iron Man to work. What are the chances?

    7. The New Kid on the Block:

    Let's see, cop movies in the 1970s, cheesy action movies in the '80s, non-linear pulp pics in the '90s, torture horror, remakes, and super hero flicks in the 2000s. If we follow historical patterns, something else always comes along to keep things fresh. It's hard to predict what will come down the pike to knock our favorite super heroes off the box-office throne. Given the latest string of war-movie flops, we doubt the Iraq war epic will get its due for quite a while. There is a ton of fertile ground with the Internet, but how that could possibly take shape (if at all) as a sub-genre is anyone's guess. We do see a ton of potential with the animated universe to break new ground as the years go by, but animation has always been popular and in play to some degree. There was a time when Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sly Stallone were as popular as Wolverine and Peter Parker, so is there any reason to think that today's successful big screen super heroes will be able to stay atop the box-office longer than The Terminator and Rambo in their day?

    6. Fatigue:

    What's better, to be teased with little bits and pieces of your favorite upcoming super hero movie or to be slammed over the head every day for an entire year until the movie hits theaters? After the hype surrounding Iron Man, fans or not, there's no doubt that some people will simply become exhausted by the buzz. Sure we were all looking forward to Iron Man, but it came damn close to being over-exposed by the time it was released. With the glut of super hero projects in the works, fans could possibly see three or four super hero movies a year for the next three to four years. If each film comes with the same barrage of hype and marketing, it's inevitable that some fans will suffer burn out. Although the hardcore comic book fans will be there, several super hero projects will need a wider mainstream audience to bring in the girlfriends and wives. Like it or not, fatigue will be setting in at some point. When? Who knows. As always though, too much of anything will kill any good property, super hero related or not.

    5. Sequels:

    When it comes to the topic of sequels, it's a two-sided debate. There's good and bad, but the battle of attrition will eventually win out on the downside. For studios, sequels are often money in the bank because of brand loyalty. For the fans, it's a 50/50 crap shoot. An interesting question comes to mind - how many movies is it going to take to put the X-Men and Spider-Man franchises to bed for a few years? We all know it's coming. What 20th Century Fox is doing with the upcoming Wolverine spin-off movie appears to be a smart move to continue the X-Men universe on the big screen. Also, given the reports of an upcoming Venom movie, the Spidey franchise looks set to live on in a varied form for a few more years aside from the inevitable Spider-Man 4. Add to that, despite our concerns whether he even warrants a movie as a lead/title character, the Silver Surfer will be surfing into his own big screen adventure from the last Fantastic Four film. Yeah, we know it's the Silver Surfer, but it's not like he made such an impression last year that people are still talking about him today. We hope we're wrong. As far as sequels go, there are a lot of points in favor of future success. However, as much as the spin-off sequel formula might ensure a certain longevity, no super hero sequels to date have been met with the same reception as the initial films. Reaction to X-Men: The Last Stand was much less positive than the first, and the same can be said about the third Spidey movie. Batman Begins was met with mostly positive reaction but there was still a mixed sector of fans. Don't believe me... go look up old reviews and forum posts. At this rate though, The Dark Knight will ease our sequel fears for now. However, it's only going to take a couple atrocious sequels, maybe two, to kill X-Men and Spidey for a few years. It's a fate almost all super heroes will eventually meet on the big screen, even Batman and Superman at some point.

    4. The High Cost of Marketing:

    If you haven't figured it out by now, there's a reason why Cloverfield was marketed in such a low-cost, viral manner. We all know that the most successful super hero movies have cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make. Given the financial evolution of Hollywood blockbusters and summer tentpole movies, some films have been nearly half a billion dollars (plus) in the hole before the start of production. In order for a big budget super hero film to get the proper amount of cash for a large marketing campaign, studios need to know ahead of time that there will be a sizable return at the box-office to still make money well beyond production costs, casting, marketing and distribution. Although it's not quite like the days of Cleopatra, which almost bankrupted 20th Century Fox into becoming a cinematic memory, we're wondering how many studios will be able to finance other films if it costs $200 million just to market one blockbuster, super hero movie or not. Extrapolate those numbers over a few more years and some super hero movies won't be feasible. Like I mentioned, there's a reason why Cloverfield was marketed in such a viral manner. It didn't cost nearly as much as larger films but it made a ton of cash. Throw in a bunch of no-name actors, and Paramount didn't have a lot of costs. Look at the marketing for The Dark Knight, it's similar in its viral nature to Cloverfield. After the huge marketing costs associated with Spider-Man 3 (some estimates of $120 million), studios have had no choice but to explore other options if they want to even think about making another super hero movie.

    3. Crap:

    There may come a time - and it might be here sooner than we think - when there could be so many sub-par super hero movies coming down the pike that fans will lose faith in the genre. Actually, you can take some of the factors already mentioned on this list and roll them into one neat pile called "eventual crap". I remember having long discussions with other webmasters prior to the release of X-Men and almost everyone was in agreement - it's only going to take a few consecutive stinkers to render our favorite super heroes powerless in Hollywood. Obviously it hasn't happened yet, but in relation to #10 and "Time", eventually the day might come when you won't be able to pitch a super hero project to anyone in Hollywood without someone laughing you out of an office. That's when it'll all come full circle. We're not sure how many actual nails it takes to hammer a coffin shut, but, in relation to the many upcoming super hero based movies in the works, just imagine a string of eight or nine potential super hero stinkers at the box-office over a two year period. We're not sure if the combined forces of Wolverine, Iron Man, Spidey, and Batman would be able to save the super hero day if that happens.

    2. Hollywood:

    Just like with every hot commodity in Hollywood, super heroes are the current "flavors of the day." It wasn't that long ago when a super hero flick couldn't make its money back no matter how big the marketing campaign. There was a time when a Spider-Man movie was only a dream and most hardcore fans threw their hands up in the air in resignation over the fact that it would never happen. When the floodgates opened after the first X-Men film, Hollywood execs quickly began to jump on the bandwagon when it was proven that super hero movies could turn a huge profit. All one needs to do is look back at the many super hero properties that were resurrected from development hell and given a green light since. Looking ahead to the future, fans can expect a lot more super hero based properties to find their way into theaters. From the studio side of the fence, you can't really fault a business for wanting to cash in on the action. However, as much as studio insiders can blame fans for poor ticket sales or overblown internet hype, Tinseltown has to shoulder much of the blame when the super hero bubble eventually bursts. In the end, like th
    • AlphAssassin, on 05/06/2008, -10/+3WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT PENIS WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT PENISWALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT PENIS WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT PENIS WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT
  • CynicSight, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4I disagree that time will be a factor in diminishing of superhero movies because once they do run out of superheroes to turn into silver screen stars after continuous sequels, they will most likely just reboot them with a remake... A lot like they did with Batman and now with the new Hulk film that's coming up. Superhero movies, I have a feeling whether you like them or not, will be around for a lot longer then most people think.
  • carbonetc, on 05/06/2008, -1/+5I predict "Ant Man" is the beginning of the end.
    • RetlawST, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2::praying Ant Man doesn't make it into a SHIELD movie::
    • danwallace, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I'm still gunning for Aqua Man being the harbinger of doom.
    • dok333, on 05/06/2008, -0/+0either Atom or Hawkman, or an unholy convergence of pure unadulterated suck
    • jonshipman, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I don't know... Thor is being made :o
  • rompolompo, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4Bad scripts?
  • Black6x, on 05/06/2008, -1/+6It's pretty stupid to put out a list like this after Iron Man kicks ass, and everyone and their mom is waiting for Batman. The #1 reason is the dumbest of all:

    "It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the day our favorite super heroes fail to turn a profit at the box-office is the day the sun will set on the current trend that we're enjoying at this moment in time."

    Between the first Batman and Batman Begins, the movies got worse and worse. Buried.
    • JackSrenton, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1not to mention that he says "n 20 years, will the likes of Iron Man, Spider-Man, Hulk, Batman and X-Men be sitting atop the box-office?" which is most likely what Batman is going to be doing this summer. I mean, 19 years, but still.
  • StevesJobs, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3buried for forgetting kryptonite
  • jamessavik, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Hollywood doesn't like heros unless they have feet of clay.
    • ZenMojo, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Too bad Metamorpho's such a crappy character.
  • jhails, on 05/06/2008, -1/+8*****! Humans will always imagine stories with heroes that must battle against the forces of evil. Its one of the things we have always done. Create stories with characters we imbue with great powers. Its older than the bible. The Greek Gods, The Roman Gods, Egyptian Gods, Homer, David Goliath, The minotaur, Don Quiote, Shakespear and on and on whatever. Superheros will die when we do and not before.
    • shoc, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1notice the last part of the title? the one where it says "...in HOLLYWOOD"?

      yea, that's the part i'm talking about.
    • skeptic42, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Don Quixote is hardly a hero

      lern2classicspanishliterature
    • danwallace, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Remember the one where Shakespeare fought Killer Croc?
  • supermose, on 05/06/2008, -0/+0I think the IDEA of Super Hero movies will always be a good one. Just like jhails said above. Humans like to believe that one person can make a difference. The reason I think we've seen some good ones is mainly due to good writing. In the 70s-80s the special effects just weren't there. Ever seen the REALLY old TV episodes of 6 million $ man? Yeah. Good writing is good writing though. If a screen writer can take advantage of a good character then the movie can ALWAYS be good....sometimes Hollywood manages to muck it up though
  • protodon, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I would've read that if I didn't have severe astigmatism and they didn't put white type on a black background. I ***** hate that!
  • dnields, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1"it might be a string of potential super hero stinkers that fail to produce at the box-office that brings the big boys to their knees. Thankfully, we're not there yet."

    Guess again, slappy.
  • HaloZero, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Captain America is a sure? I think he's a maybe only for the fact that his concept is bit corny. He's decent when you pair him with other characters but on his own (Or without Winter Soldier) he's kinda.... lame.
    • jivatmanx, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1He was an intentionally patriotic creation, depicted fighting the Axis powers. In the context of a movie involving this time period, it could work.
    • ZenMojo, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Captain America could work pretty easily ... it's just a war movie with a guy in a snazzy costume. Done. Actually, most comic books could be made to work if you had the right director and screenwriters behind the project. It's not the CONCEPT that's usually the problem (if it works on the page), it's usually the execution. Just look at the Brubaker Captain America run.
  • HouseofEl, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3This is all under the impression that the quality falls as well. The reason superhero films were not popular was not just because they were crap, but they also looked like *****. With digital effects, a lot more of the fantastical can now be real on film. In the end it was about lacking tools to present these characters in a realistic manner. Filmmakers don't really have that problem now. The only thing slowing them down is the cost of these effects. Yes a good writer and director are needed to tell a great story. But, there isn't really a shortage on those people right now. The corporate machine holds them up as well. But I think Marvel has crushed that now. Marvel made Iron Man all on their own. I think these films haven't even started to ramp up. They're going to get better.
  • AlexanderZero, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Which super hero is that in the caption image? Also the image used for 8. Questionable Heros.
  • LongLiveRock2, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1What about the films like Asterix in Europe and things like that?
  • macweirdo42, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Bah... Super hero movies, or more accurately comic book movies, lend themselves most readily to sequels. I mean, yes, part of it is Hollywood milking the franchises, but on the other hand, there are ALWAYS more stories to tell when it comes to comic book movies. And frankly, when it's something that could be expanded upon without seeming to rehash tired plot lines, I'm all in favor of sequels. Granted, in Hollywood, even when the opportunity for more storytelling is available, it doesn't necessarily guarantee that the sequel won't be a rehash, but my point is, the potential is there.
  • vichussmith, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1An interesting piece, but I think that if people aren't getting tired of seeing crap-ass movies, then the occasional bad sequel or bad comic book movie isn't going to destroy the comics-to-film industry. There are so many comics properties from so many sources that comics-to-films cannot die. They can grow weak, sure.
  • KingGorilla, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Samurai Jack!!!
  • Halfling64, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4#1: Uwe Boll.
  • SgtBulldog, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1Totally off the mark. As long as there are kids and as long as there adults who remember being kids, super heroes and their movies will be here to stay.

    Secondly, this guy doesn't realize that all of the previous movies about Marvel characters were not produced by Marvel, but by other studios. Yeah, they gave us the occasional gem like Spider Man and X-Men, but most of the time we got Daredevil, Elektra, Fantastic Four, Punisher, and the Hulk. And even THOSE stinkers made money! Now that Marvel is producing their own films under their banner Marvel Studios, they will definitely take care of future characters much better. Oh, and Marvel Studios made Iron Man, not Paramount who was just the distributor.

    Buried.
    • ZenMojo, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Exactly. Because we all know Superhero movies weren't popular at all in the 70's, 80's, and 90's so this is just a fad.

      /sarcasm
  • Rocketbird, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Point 10 is the same as point 7..
  • ZenMojo, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Time my ass. Every ten years on schedule (AT MINIMUM) you'll have a Superhero movie dominating the box office.
    1978 and 1980 = Superman I and II
    1989 and 1992 = Batman and Batman Returns
    2000 and 2003 = Xmen and Xmen 2

    Throw in Spider-Man and Iron Man to round it out and you've got a pretty good streak of successful superhero movies. It's just that studios haven't ever devoted much effort to securing the properties in the first place.
  • Nemoso, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1"Think about it for a second. In 20 years, will the likes of Iron Man, Spider-Man, Hulk, Batman and X-Men be sitting atop the box-office?"
    The first Batman movie (the Michael Keaton one, not Adam West) was released in 1989. 19 years later, The Dark Knight is set to be one of the biggest releases of the year. So if he's asking whether or not comic-based movies will stand the test of time, I'm going to side with history here and say yes, they will.
    • replikhant, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2As long as it is not a sequel, we will take the reboot.
  • evolvor, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I can think of a few other superheroes that got "old" too..."hercules,jesus, washington"...these "heroes" are still around, and will be forever, just like our Spidermen and Batmen will. Where there is faith and hope and a messenger to look up to, there will be followers willing to be reminded that these concepts exist.
  • bjs3171, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I wish James Cameron would really make that AquaMan flick. Those 30 seconds looked bad ass.

    btw, he said that no sequel has been met with the same reception as the initial film, but I thought X2 was far better than the first.
    • bytor4232, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1X1 and X2 were the same movie, really. Just filmed a few years apart.
  • bytor4232, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I would much rather read "Top ten things that will kill top ten lists." Don't waste your time diggers, this one's a snoozer.
  • aLienC, on 05/06/2008, -0/+0one more factor was Bittorent ...... since download speed so fast :)
  • rlvis, on 05/06/2008, -0/+0How about because of the internet providing free and easily accessable gay porn, people will stop being interested in watching muscular dudes in unitards with capes wrestle?
  • Cebo, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1The sooner it happens, the better.
  • kickoff22, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1Ice Cube is a great actor I love his films
  • KCRose, on 05/11/2008, -0/+0"...super hero projects will need a wider mainstream audience to bring in the girlfriends and wives."
    Wait, I'm usually the one dragging people to see these.
    Am I the only chick out there what likes superhero movies?
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.