Top Super Hero Movies

It'd be so easy to be put off this film by the Batman fanboys, but that just wouldn't be fair.
This is not the perfect film it's made out to be, BUT it's still an awesome piece of work.
There's very, very little I can fault in the film. All I can think of is Batman seriously needs a lozenge and Two-Face turned evil almost instantly. Apart from that, it's almost flawless.
The acting is all round great, but Heath Ledger is on another level. He is incredible. He just found a way to play the Joker which embodied everything I expected, yet found a unique take on pretty much all of his dialogue.. it's sort of hard to explain. I still don't believe he deserves this Oscar nomination people are talking about, purely because the Joker is an easy role for an actor to pick up and play, but he's still brilliant. I mean, the man is actually beating Jack Nicholson, that's no easy feat.
The film's action is a little choppy, but fairly adrenaline pumped and it may be a little long, but it never drags. I'm not going to bother going into any other specific details about the film purely because I can cover them all by saying they're all great.

I've never cared much for Batman, but there's no denying this is a brilliant film.

Personal enjoyment: 9/10
Actual quality as a film: 9/10

An absolutely fantastic super-hero film and welcome proof that the genre hasn't been milked dry yet. I can see how many people would be put off of the film by the liberties it takes with how plausable things are, but at the end of the day, this is a comic book movie set within the Marvel universe. If you can accept that, then there shouldn't be any problems. It is sci-fi after all.
Robert Downey Jr. is absolutely fantastic in his role. Many reviews have said that he makes the film and whilst moreorless everyone involved here deserves praise, it is somewhat true. With someone less brilliantly cast in the lead role, the film certainly would have dropped down a few levels.
The pacing is super-fast which means there's never a chance to get bored, but in spite of this it's actually got quite a meaty running time. At times it's predictable, but who cares when it's this much fun?
As it stands, I wouldn't say the film is better than Spider-man 2, but it's probably better than the first Spidey film and certainly is better than 3 (and I actually like 3).

Personal enjoyment: 8/10
Actual quality as a film: 8/10

Just brilliant.

This is one of those true 80s action flicks. It's great. It could have so easily been a PG family film but no, with the 80s being what it was, they went full out with the violence and it only ups what a cool film this is.
That's basically how I'd sum up this film. "Cool". It's a friggin' cyborg policeman in a dystopian future, short of zombies, what more could you ask for?
Acting, writing? Bah, who cares. There's nothing wrong with them, but what this film is about is the action and the special effects which are both great and to top it off it has a great little, dark sense of humour.
Overall, it's basically the same premise as The Six Billion Dollar Man, but way more badass.

Personal enjoyment: 8/10
Actual quality as a film: 8/10

Woo! They did it! They made amends for the god awful 2003 Hulk AND Marvel continued their winning streak. If they can keep this going I am going to be so happy.
This film is great fun, it's not even close to Iron Man's standards, but it's great fun. Ed Norton is brilliant, most of the cast are decent, the music is good, the action is spectacular (say what you will about the CGI, this film has the best helicopter crash I have ever seen on film in it). The story is alot more intimate this time, infact, there's very little hulk up until the end, which is a good thing. The 'less is more' approach really works wonders by keeping the hulk in shadows and hidden away for most of his early encounters.
That and the end scene is just the stuff of geek wet dreams.
All in all, this film is great fun and a must see for any Hulk fans, Marvel fans or just superhero fans.

Personal enjoyment: 8/10
Actual quality as a film: 7/10

I honestly don't really know how I feel about this film. Aspects of it are amazing; better than the comic. Aspects fall flat on their arse. Zack Snyder's direction is for the most part, outstanding, but at times it's horribly distracting. The acting is a mixed bag too with performances ranging from amazing to laughable.
I did enjoy it, but I think if I hadn't read the comic I wouldn't have had a clue what was going on. There's little character development and proper explanation given to things thanks to so much being dropped from the source material (thanks to time constraints). And the ending being changed. It still works, but why? The ending was the best thing about the comic and the ridiculousness of it was justified and awesome at the same time. There's no reason that wouldn't have worked in the film, and it would have explained what the shit the villain's mutant tiger thing was all about.
I also feel like I only cared about most of the characters because of getting to like them in the comic. I don't think I'd have cared about any of them if I just took a dive straight into the film.

But yeah. It's a good film, but I think it only works as a companion piece for people to enjoy once they've read the comic. On standalone terms it's a mess.

Personal enjoyment: 8/10
Actual quality as a film: 7/10

Here is a crossover movie that actually works. It's not an incredible piece of film by any means, but it's damn fun and that's all it's meant to be.
It's basically an extremely good episode of the Batman or Superman cartoon series extended over a feature-length without outstaying it's welcome. If you're a fan of either franchises (or even better, both), it's well worth watching.

Personal enjoyment: 8/10
Actual quality as a film: 7/10

Is it flawed? Yes, but hell, aren't most of even the best films around? As it stands, it's absolutely brilliant fun.

There's something so incredibly warm and charming about this film's special effects. It's a great film, slightly better than Superman returns.

Not as good as the first, but still good all the same.

I fail to understand why the X-Men films are so popular. They're good fun, but little else. I suppose if you're a huge fan of the franchise, it probably helps, but I never really found the X-Men mythos particularly interesting.
I also in many ways preferred the first film to this. It was focused on a smaller selection of characters and as such felt less all-over-the-place. The plot was also much tighter.
The casting is pretty good, and the plot, etc is all good for a fun film, but there's really very little beyond a popcorn flick in this movie.

Personal enjoyment: 7/10
Actual quality as a film: 7/10

The best animated Batman anything I've seen so far. Much darker than the others (and I hear they had to heavily cut it to make it less dark). It also features a brilliant Joker (2nd best Joker I've seen after Heath Ledger's -for some reason Mark Hamill's take just seems more right here) and some nice animation on the Joker himself too.
Not bad, not bad at all. It starts to outstay it's welcome within the last 10 minutes or so however, but so has every other animated Batman movie I've seen.

Personal enjoyment: 7/10
Actual quality as a film: 7/10

One of the better animated Batman movies, but it suffers the same problems as the others too; a very strong start, but it runs out of steam about half way through. It's still a nice diversion though. Worth watching if you're a batfan anyway.
Whilst there's some CGI thrown in, it's not really movie quality animation. And the voice acting isn't up to par either (with the exception of Mark Hamill's Joker). Normally I wouldn't complain about this, but this is the only theatrically released animated Batman movie I know of.

Personal enjoyment: 7/10
Actual quality as a film: 7/10

About as good as the first one, but mildly better and more enjoyable. So yeah, good, but not great.
Seth MacFarlane's inexplicable appearance was nice, his character was actually a lot of fun. And all the creature effects were cool. I still wish Guillermo would spend his time on more worthwhile projects, but he does love his Hellboy so fair enough.

Personal enjoyment: 7/10
Actual quality as a film: 7/10

I really resent Guillmero del Toro's adamance to spend his time on lesser projects. He turned down Alien Vs. Predator to work on Hellboy, he could have made that abortion of a film something good. He turned down Harry Potter & the Prisoner of Azkaban too, and Harry Potter + Guillermo del Toro is a match made in Heaven. And don't even get me started on him turning down I Am Legend in favour of Hellboy II, but, I only feel like this because he's so extremely talented and Hellboy is his 'dream project' to work on, so who am I to critique what he chooses to make, you know?
Hellboy as it stands is good. Not great, just mildly good. The acting, music, etc, it's all there. The only real problem is the flickering tone the film seems to have. I can't quite tell how I'm supposed to read the film. It's like attempting to be serious on some levels, but on others it's almost like a cartoon. It's really odd. I feel as if the subject matter deserved a more serious realisation, but this is a comic book adaptation and it would be hard to make something of this nature work in 'the real world'. As such, this film works as a bit of fun, and is most likely a movie-orgasm for fans of the comics, but it's not much more than that.

Personal enjoyment: 7/10
Actual quality as a film: 7/10

This wasn't even close to being as bad as I remembered it. In my mind, it was only marginally better than Batman & Robin, in reality it's only a bit worse than Batman and Batman Returns. It lacks those films' edge and sense of purpose, but it's very entertaining, despite being an emulation of Tim Burton's style and coming accross as a bit hollow for it.
Jim Carrey, as much as I love him just isn't right as The Riddler. He's just Jim Carrey, which is much more like The Joker than The Riddler, but when he's being E. Nygma, it's just cringey. It's just Jim, being Jim, but he's supposed to be this mad scientist.
None of the characters really develop either. Two-face is Two-face from the word go, which is fine, I suppose, except he's given a bit of backstory, but it's never properly fleshed out.
The same can be said for E Nygma and even Robin to an extent. Their motives are there, they just don't seem to actually care about them. Rather, it comes off as if they're saying it because they have to.

Nicole Kidman is hot.

I actually really like Val Kilmer as Batman. I think he suits the role better than Keaton. All in all, this film's entertaining, but fairly stupid and not very fleshed out and deep. When you see what's capable with Batman with our newer Batman films, it's a disgrace, but that's not fair. Judged on it's own terms, this is an entertaining film, though a step back towards the camp TV show as opposed to towards Batman Begins.

Personal enjoyment: 7/10
Actual quality as a film: 5/10

Good fun and very interesting to watch purely to get an idea of how the upcoming live action The Avengers is going to pan out. However, the majority of the film just sets up the Avengers as a team and so very little of it is devoted to their plot against these alien bad guys. And on top of that, everything is fixed with a little fight a bit later on.
So yeah, very watchable, but don't expect more than straight-to-video quality.

Personal enjoyment: 6/10
Actual quality as a film: 6/10

A few years ago I'd have probably given this 7/10 because it's watchable and mildly amusing. I'm just getting cynical with age, I suppose. It's a pretty good premise that starts out fairly well but soon devolves into sub-Saturday-morning-cartoon territory. The humour is hit and miss, never amazing... but I tell you what, Seth Rogen is brilliantly cast as BOB. I expected to dislike his voice-acting because Seth Rogen's suddenly in everything and I'm not a big fan of A-list voice-actors in films... but he was definately the best thing about this film.
BOB and Insectzilla were both great, everything else varied from bad to mediocre. There were also too many shots obviously designed to work in 3D.

Personal enjoyment: 5/10
Actual quality as a film: 5/10

After watching the sequel first I had the lowest expectations for this film and so I was mildly pleasantly surprised. It's watchable. It is shit, but it's watchable. I can see what they were going for. It's a shame this franchise was handled so poorly because the comics had potential for some Spider-man quality movies (yes, I like Spider-man, fuck off). Obviously the Fantastic Four could never compete with the big guns (Batman, etc), but all the same, they deserved better than this, but at least it's better than Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer.
I imagine that read like my view is a bit all over the place. It's not, this is a bad film but I expected wordse so I'm going easy on it.

Personal enjoyment: 5/10
Actual quality as a film: 5/10

A loud, obnoxious anime that pretty much epitomises the genre. But as far as Sonic adaptations go, it could be (and has since been) WAY worse.
The animation is cheap, but fair enough. The voice acting is apallingly bad. It's fun to see stuff getting lost in translation though, like Sonic giving Robotnik the finger and Tails groping a girl's boobs.
It's watchable, I'll give it that.

Personal enjoyment: 5/10
Actual quality as a film: 4/10

A compilation type thingy of 2 short segments in which Hulk has a fight with someone. The half where he fights Wolverine is clearly leading into this upcoming X-Men cartoon and it suffers for it -feeling as if it was built around the TV show. It also ends on a cliffhanger.
The vs Thor segment is much better, but still not really up to much. If you only want action scenes, it's a good little film; but if you want a decent plot too then this isn't where you're going to find it.

Personal enjoyment: 5/10
Actual quality as a film: 5/10

For those of you who don't know, this film was produced on practically no money back in 1994 so that the movie-rights to the franchise wouldn't revert back to Marvel. Unknown to the cast and crew, it was never intended for release, a release it never got and it shows.
It's terrible. It's actually mildly worse than the 'real' Fantastic Four movies that came out more recently.
It's not THAT bad though. I'm surprised they never stuck it on TV or straight-to-video or anything like that. It's watchable.

Personal enjoyment: 4/10
Actual quality as a film: 4/10

A load of pseudo-intellectual, self-important babble and worst of all: boring. It's shot nicely and the score is competent and grand enough even if it is incredibly bland and cliched, but honestly, who cares if there isn't a plot or a character to enjoy?
The only half-interesting character is Jonathon but he is pretty much a 100% rip-off of Rorschach from Watchmen and a poor rip-off at that.
About a third of the plot is set in a crappy not-so-distant future which takes a lot from V For Vendetta and is ultimately completely irrelevant because (spoiler ahead, but who cares, the film is shit) it's all part of one of the character's imagination.
The other characters are just incredibly boring people with mental illnesses and issues living in London who enjoy wallowing in how messed up they are.

Basically, it's not very good although the visuals and such are quite impressive for a first-time director.

Personal enjoyment: 3/10
Actual quality as a film: 4/10

I honestly cannot get over how amazingly stupid this movie is. Seriously, all I could think of when I finished watching were plot holes.

Watchable, just.
Pretty crappy, clearly made on no budget and some of the worst dialogue I have ever heard.
For example, at one point a villain says "Dr. Vaselli's diary! I'll take this for the Red Skull!". He is all alone and just comes out with a phrase explaining everything he's doing. It's just awful writing.
And then there's some terribly contrived moments. For instance, a scene in which 2 children are sat, playing in the middle of the road whilst a car speeds towards them and Captain America has to save them. Kids play in the road, yes. They don't SIT in the road and play with toys like building blocks or whatever. And they tend to move if they hear and see a speeding car flying towards them.
And the acting is shit too.

Personal enjoyment: 5/10 (but mostly on a laughing at how lame it is level, hence this wont be increasing the score)
Actual quality as a film: 2/10