The Dark Knight vs. The Watchmen vs. Iron Man

[Blackhole]

My preference:

Watchmen > Iron Man >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Dark Knight

Someone agrees with me?

Not that TDK was a bad film, far from, but I'm just sick of people saying it was the best film in the world...

I cringe every time it's in a top 10 movies of all time list...

Watchmen was exciting and new, I'd never seen a superhero film with a rating that high before...unless you count the stuff like Blade or The Punisher...

And Iron Man was RDJ fun...

 

[creature4000]

How in the world can Watchmen even be considered. No one even liked the book until they found out there was going to be a movie!


Iron Man for the win!!

 

[Goggles89]

TDK was a better movie, but I liked Iron Man more... wait, is that even possible?

 

[jye4ever]

TDK was a better movie, but I liked Iron Man more... wait, is that even possible?

LOLOLOLOL

 

[Blackhole]

TDK was a better movie, but I liked Iron Man more... wait, is that even possible?

Same way Raiders is the better film, but I like Last Crusade more...

 

[Josette]

The Dark Knight is one of the best films I've ever seen.....and I'm not much of a Batman fan (liked the first Tim Burton film, watched the animated series sometimes, and picked up The Long Halloween and enjoyed it). It's the way that everything came together.... It's not just about one particular thing. And it definitely wasn't because it was Batman.

That said, I think in the long run, I'm going to enjoy Watchmen more, on a more personal level, because I loved the world of Watchmen, and I especially loved the characters.

It's sort of how the original Star Wars trilogy is with The Lord of the Rings. I love them both. Lord of the Rings is the best trilogy, IMO, the better sequence of films, in the way that it all came together so perfectly. But Star Wars (original, not counting the prequels here) is my favorite of the two because I like the characters and the world/universe more.

 

[IrishJedi]

How in the world can Watchmen even be considered. No one even liked the book until they found out there was going to be a movie!

Speak for yourself (and probably your generation). Unless you're over 23, I was reading WATCHMEN before you were even born.

 

[Eli26]

Iron Man

Dark Knight




...


...


...

Watchmen

 

[jye4ever]

Same way Raiders is the better film, but I like Last Crusade more...

Blasphemy!!!

:emperor:

 

[IrishJedi]

You kids....

 

[abnpredator]

You kids....

Ehhh... see that's the thing sir. I am 29. I knew of Watchmen long, long before the theatrical release and was just never into it. The movie itself left me feeling bitter I had just spent THAT LONG in a seat for a movie like that. To be honest, I probably would have appreciated it more if it wasn't nearly as long as it was. I'll stick to my guns in saying that no superhero/antihero/(whatever you'd like to call it) movie should EVER be as long as Titanic. An opinion is an opinion ya know? Different strokes for different folks and all..

 

[IrishJedi]

I'll stick to my guns in saying that no superhero/antihero/(whatever you'd like to call it) movie should EVER be as long as Titanic.

But it's not.

It's also only 1 (one) minute longer than IRON MAN:

TITANIC... 3 Hours, 14 Minutes

WATCHMEN... 2 Hours, 43 Minutes

IRON MAN... 2 Hours, 42 Minutes

THE DARK KNIGHT... 2 Hours, 33 Minutes

Even the eventual full Director's Cut of WATCHMEN (3 Hours, 10 Min) won't be quite as long as TITANIC.

Besides, I don't get the point you're trying to make here. What's the impetus behind your notion that superhero movies need to be shorter? Is it the attention span of most people that are attracted to the spectacle? I'm not being facetious... I'm genuinely curious.

Because, the way I see it.. I'd rather watch 3 hours of interesting, cool superhero stuff than 3 hours of stuff like Leo teaching Kate how to spit off the side of a boat anyday.

 

[EVILFACE]

Don't forget Return of the King which was like 3 hours and 20 min in the damn theaters. Thought the movie was never going to end.

 

[IrishJedi]

I also don't think ROTK was helped by the way Jackson edited the final act (you know, the whole "gazillion endings" thing).

 

[abnpredator]

But it's not.

It's also only 1 (one) minute longer than IRON MAN:

TITANIC... 3 Hours, 14 Minutes

WATCHMEN... 2 Hours, 43 Minutes

IRON MAN... 2 Hours, 42 Minutes

THE DARK KNIGHT... 2 Hours, 33 Minutes

Even the eventual full Director's Cut of WATCHMEN (3 Hours, 10 Min) won't be quite as long as TITANIC.

Besides, I don't get the point you're trying to make here. What's the impetus behind your notion that superhero movies need to be shorter? Is it the attention span of most people that are attracted to the spectacle? I'm not being facetious... I'm genuinely curious.

Because, the way I see it.. I'd rather watch 3 hours of interesting, cool superhero stuff than 3 hours of stuff like Leo teaching Kate how to spit off the side of a boat anyday.

Now that's funny! See, I didn't know the official times to any of the movies, all I knew is that Watchmen had me checking the time on my cell every few scenes. If I wasn't in that theater with more than just the gf, I would have left right around the time they felt it necessary to show birdman and whatsherface reminiscing. I was just bored to tears. I know, I know, here comes the usual snide comment about "attention spans of an ADD child" but seriously. That movie bored me to tears. If I wanted to watch an epic movie that required critical thinking, I would see a movie in line with that genre. The graphic novel was "groundbreaking". Great, we get that. But I'll tell you this, and it's obvious I'm not alone when I say that I don't go to a comic book movie looking to be "moved". I want to be entertained.

 

[abnpredator]

Don't forget Return of the King which was like 3 hours and 20 min in the damn theaters. Thought the movie was never going to end.

No comparison. (Although yes, DEFINATELY a long, long movie.) At least the LOTR movies had unbelievable war scenes. What did Watchmen give me? A naked blue guy making the VC in Vietnam explode into goo. Yay.

 

[SpawnFan]

I also don't think ROTK was helped by the way Jackson edited the final act (you know, the whole "gazillion endings" thing).

It was just one ending, or should it have ended with everyone standing at Mordor saying" Well, see ya!"?

 

[IrishJedi]

No comparison. (Although yes, DEFINATELY a long, long movie.) At least the LOTR movies had unbelievable war scenes. What did Watchmen give me? A naked blue guy making the VC in Vietnam explode into goo. Yay.

So lots of war scenes make really long movies okay? Got it.

 

[CelticPredator]

Duh. You didnt know this? 10,000 BC = greatest movie ever made. It has war scenes.

 

[IrishJedi]

It was just one ending, or should it have ended with everyone standing at Mordor saying" Well, see ya!"?

It's not that... it was the way it was edited and presented (including the music). Way too many fades to black with resolved musical cues. Seriously, both times I saw it in packed theaters there were people snickering and laughing. And when the credits started, one smart alec said something like "Wait. Is it really over yet?". Of course, that was much more annoying than anything in the flick (which is great). Just saying... the presentation and editing does give a lot of people the feeling that it could have ended 2-3 times before it actually did.