Kevin's Watch

Posted: **Wed May 28, 2008 10:35 am**

Seems Tuesday's totals have been added here's and update.

Posted: **Wed May 28, 2008 12:08 pm**

It made over $450k on a tuesday? Wow, at that rate it'll pass the Incredibles by this weekend.

Posted: **Wed May 28, 2008 12:16 pm**

How does Zorro classify as a Superhero, precisely? Better yet, how does The Mask of Zorro classify as a film?

Posted: **Wed May 28, 2008 12:27 pm**

I saw 21 of those films at the theatre, have 16 of them on dvd, and one of them on vhs.

Posted: **Wed May 28, 2008 12:29 pm**

As to Superman II.....

Well crap. I watched part of Superman II last night and I have to confess to being a little shocked. Sure it's been a few years since I viewed the film last but I've always held the belief that S2 was somewhat more exciting than the original film and therefore possibly superior. BBBBBZZZZZZZZ!!! WRONG! Superman I has its flaws to be sure. I CAN'T STAND THE FLYING SCENE WITH LOIS, THE HORRIBLE POETRY! AAAAAGGGGGGGHHHHHH! Where's the remote! Which button is the fast forward! AAHHHHH! There it is! <press> <press> <press> Whew! But as I watched S2 right from the beginning I noticed something that I had never really noticed before....this film sucks! The direction is clumsy, the story is simply idiotic, the special effect are nauseatingly poor, real world physics are ignored, common sense is ignored...its just really really bad. The love story between Supes and Lois is just painful to watch from beginning to end. Only Anakin and Padme are harder to accept on screen. The terrorist plot in Paris, the hydrogen bomb blast in space that frees the trapped prisoners, the illogic that a hydrogen blast (which is thousands of times weaker than the output of even a small star) is the catalyst for the breakout, is all nonsense. The scenes on the moon are just difficult to watch. There are continuity issues everywhere. I just can't get into it all. What I'm on about here isn't so much that S2 is a horrible film but that I never really noticed it before last night. Must have been something really wrong with me or back in 1981 there wasn't very much to compare S2 with like we are able to do today. Especially with Iron man in the theaters.

from Glurpworld.

Posted: **Wed May 28, 2008 12:37 pm**

I think the Anakin/Padme romance is a tie with the Clark/Lois romance in its pointlessness. I never saw a reason for Padme to have anything but motherly feelings towards Anakin, and I never saw why Clark would want to give up his powers for a woman who looked ten years older than him (even though she was only 4 years older), when he had Lana Lang waiting for him at home. Mebbe he watched 'That Girl' as a kid......Margot definitely had it going on then.

Posted: **Wed May 28, 2008 12:38 pm**

dANdeLION wrote: Mebbe he watched 'That Girl' as a kid......Margot definitely had it going on then.

Wasn't that Marlo Thomas?

Posted: **Wed May 28, 2008 12:46 pm**

aTOMiC wrote:
dANdeLION wrote: Mebbe he watched 'That Girl' as a kid......Margot definitely had it going on then.
Wasn't that Marlo Thomas?

Margot's so damn boring I don't know who the hell she is, and don't really care. I am glad she's not 'That Girl', though; it makes me feel better about how good my tastes in women were when I was a pre-adolescent.

Posted: **Wed May 28, 2008 12:49 pm**

Well if Superhero is too vague there is a "Comic Book Adaptation" section too.

Posted: **Wed May 28, 2008 1:11 pm**

I saw 21 of those films at the theatre, and have 14 of them on dvd.

Posted: **Wed May 28, 2008 1:17 pm**

Hulk made more than Rise of the Silver Surfer.
I would have thought that the second FF film would have a chance to make more since it was almost universally agreed that it was in fact better than the first film (though both films suck). I watched the Incredibles a while ago and spent most of the time thinking "My God if only Fantastic Four had been made with this much clever enthusiasm." If Marvel has any intention of re creating FF they'd do worse than use Incredibles as inspiration. What a freaking shame.

Posted: **Wed May 28, 2008 5:31 pm**

Montresor wrote:How does Zorro classify as a Superhero, precisely? Better yet, how does The Mask of Zorro classify as a film?

I'm guessing there are a number of definitions of the term "Super Hero". At it's core a SUPER hero would be anyone able or just willing to do something extraordinary in the course of a heroic act. In that event Zorro most certainly would be defined as a superhero. However in contemporary terms superhero is better associated with the costumed characters populating comic books and flourishing generally since the 1960s. However is should be noted that comic book superheroes have been around some 70 years or so. I guess it all depends on your perspective.

Posted: **Thu May 29, 2008 12:31 am**

how cool is the Heroes series

its all good - super heroes are not ordinary heroes they are super ones .. lol

i have always figured
batman as a super hero and zorro too

but its not about acceptable conventions surely its fiction .. doesnt that make the scope somewhat as broad as you want ..

otherwise .. scary freaky nerdom .. which is quite a different class of nerdom

Posted: **Thu May 29, 2008 4:32 am**

Zorro wears a mask, has a gimmick, has a secret identity. what is not a super hero about that?

Posted: **Thu May 29, 2008 8:25 am**

Ned Kelly is a superhero, because he wears a mask and is invulnerable and does heroic things.

Posted: **Thu May 29, 2008 10:25 am**

Iron Man creeps closer to 4th. At this rate it could happen tomorrow.
The next question is whether IM can ring the 300 mil bell before calling it quits.

Posted: **Thu May 29, 2008 1:09 pm**

Loremaster wrote:Ned Kelly is a superhero, because he wears a mask and is invulnerable and does heroic things.

I would agree.

Posted: **Thu May 29, 2008 6:12 pm**

aTOMiC wrote: Iron Man creeps closer to 4th. At this rate it could happen tomorrow.
The next question is whether IM can ring the 300 mil bell before calling it quits.

Quick, everyone! Go see it again!

---

Damn you, George Lucas, you slaughtered my childhood!

Posted: **Thu May 29, 2008 6:31 pm**

aTOMiC wrote:As to Superman II.....

Well crap. I watched part of Superman II last night and I have to confess to being a little shocked. Sure it's been a few years since I viewed the film last but I've always held the belief that S2 was somewhat more exciting than the original film and therefore possibly superior. BBBBBZZZZZZZZ!!! WRONG! Superman I has its flaws to be sure. I CAN'T STAND THE FLYING SCENE WITH LOIS, THE HORRIBLE POETRY! AAAAAGGGGGGGHHHHHH! Where's the remote! Which button is the fast forward! AAHHHHH! There it is! <press> <press> <press> Whew! But as I watched S2 right from the beginning I noticed something that I had never really noticed before....this film sucks! The direction is clumsy, the story is simply idiotic, the special effect are nauseatingly poor, real world physics are ignored, common sense is ignored...its just really really bad. The love story between Supes and Lois is just painful to watch from beginning to end. Only Anakin and Padme are harder to accept on screen. The terrorist plot in Paris, the hydrogen bomb blast in space that frees the trapped prisoners, the illogic that a hydrogen blast (which is thousands of times weaker than the output of even a small star) is the catalyst for the breakout, is all nonsense. The scenes on the moon are just difficult to watch. There are continuity issues everywhere. I just can't get into it all. What I'm on about here isn't so much that S2 is a horrible film but that I never really noticed it before last night. Must have been something really wrong with me or back in 1981 there wasn't very much to compare S2 with like we are able to do today. Especially with Iron man in the theaters.
from Glurpworld.

Well, I know every Superman movie I've gone to see, what I really was in the theater for was the realistic bits. Everything that went outside of the realm of possibility, I just stood up and shouted, "THAT CAN'T HAPPEN!" And the other audience members shook my hand and we all went to management and demanded our money back at the whole unreality of it.

Posted: **Thu May 29, 2008 6:43 pm**

Yes I know. I understand. I've said such things before myself. While watching The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen someone said something like "The Nautilus can't fit in the canals of Venice" and I said something like "That's what bothers you? That is what you find hard to believe? Not vampires or invisible men or Mr. Hyde? THAT is what you are complaining about?"

Try to forget my comments that relate to the fact that superhero movies exist in a world beyond reality and break physical laws as a matter of survival.

Except for a few scenes the film is poorly directed. It's a terrible script. The camp level has been ratcheted up to nearly the level of a 60s Batman television episode.
My point was that I never had considered such things in the past. Superman II was the first superhero film that featured a halfway decent superhero/villain slugfest. That was pretty exciting except that the movie, from a simple production standpoint, is pretty poor. IMHO of course. I just had a flash of Clark Kent returning to the diner and spinning the bully guy around on his stool as super sonic speed. That'll show 'em.

Kevin's Watch

Top Box Office Takes For Superhero/Comic Book Movies