Failed Comic Book Movie Franchises

The Overlord

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
With the release of the second Ghost Rider movie, which made less money then the first one and still wasn't a quality film, it seems like Ghost Rider is a failed comic book movie franchise, a franchise that hasn't produced a single quality film. Since Ghost Rider is a failed franchise, I think audiences would be less likely to give another Ghost Rider film much of a chance, the same drop off happened with the second Fantastic Four movie.

Franchises like Batman and X-Men have had bad films sure, but they have also have had some good films as well, so the general public would be more willing to give these franchises a chance after a bad movie is released. What should be done with these failed comic book movie franchises?
 
Last edited:
Sadly, the Punisher. It's something that could write itself, but all we're getting are pretty ****ty PG-13 movies. With that said, I'd love to see them go back to Ray Stevenson come back Punisher if something better is made.
 
Sadly, the Punisher. It's something that could write itself, but all we're getting are pretty ****ty PG-13 movies. With that said, I'd love to see them go back to Ray Stevenson come back Punisher if something better is made.

Actually all the Punisher films were rated R, so its not really the rating that hurt these films. I think the problem with the Punisher is what makes him unique in the comics, makes him seem generic in terms of Hollywood films. There have been tons of movies where someone's family is killed by criminals and that person becomes a vigilante to fight crime. It would take a lot more clever writing to make a Punisher movie stand out, compared to say a Spider-Man movie. The fact that the Punisher movies were incompetently written and directed didn't help much either.
 
Actually all the Punisher films were rated R, so its not really the rating that hurt these films. I think the problem with the Punisher is what makes him unique in the comics, makes him seem generic in terms of Hollywood films. There have been tons of movies where someone's family is killed by criminals and that person becomes a vigilante to fight crime. It would take a lot more clever writing to make a Punisher movie stand out, compared to say a Spider-Man movie. The fact that the Punisher movies were incompetently written and directed didn't help much either.

Right. The sub-genre's old hat in Hollywood. Punisher always struck me as an attempt at Death Wish the same as Shang-Chi, Iron Fist, and Luke Cage played on other exploitation genres. And throw in a dash of John Rambo with the origin story.

Still, there aren't a lot of vigilante movies that don't glorify the protagonist. Most of them (the ones I can think of anyway. Punisher movies included) establish unwavering sympathy with the protagonist so it seems explicitly justified when he goes mowing people down. There's not a lot of moral examination. The best I can think of are Taxi Driver and First Blood. Hell, really, the closest I can think of to the Punisher film I'd want to see is American Psycho. We need a protagonist we can't sympathize with, who sometimes makes us sick. So probably something with the protagonist being someone other than Frank.

Though, in terms of where it's derivative, I wouldn't compare it to Spider-Man so much as hard boiled revenge stories like Death Wish or Dirty Harry or Taken.

Man, I could write a Punisher series.
 
Last edited:
Weird thought... Ennis Punisher film, with Liam Neeson as Castle.

I also felt that War Zone suffered a lot from terrible acting on the supporting cast, as well as the director's need to make it look like the set of the Crow had sex with the neon of Batman Forever.
 
Last edited:
When I saw the trailer to TAKEN, my initial reaction was: "This is going to be the best Punisher movie ever."
 
I also think Green Lantern is in danger of becoming a failed movie franchise, considering how lackluster the first movie was. First impressions are important and the general public is less forgiving then comic book fans are. A bad first movie can "poison the well" for a franchise.
 
I also think Green Lantern is in danger of becoming a failed movie franchise, considering how lackluster the first movie was. First impressions are important and the general public is less forgiving then comic book fans are. A bad first movie can "poison the well" for a franchise.

.....
..............
..........................

What?

Where are you getting these assumptions?
 
.....
..............
..........................

What?

Where are you getting these assumptions?

If you look at a lot of comic book movie franchises, where the first movie was bad, the second makes less money then the first one. The second Ghost Rider film made half as much as the first one in its opening weekend and the second FF movie made less then the first. There is almost always diminished returns if the first movie in the series wasn't very good. Its all about word of mouth, a franchise that has a good first installment will get more good will from an audience then one with a bad first installment. Compare this to more successful franchises, where the sequel often makes way more money then the first one (Batman Begins and Dark Knight, for example).

Now this isn't a hard and fast rule, if the next Green Lantern movie is amazing, it may revitalize the franchise. But I think Green Lantern has a smaller margin of error then other franchises at this point.
 
Last edited:
Where are you getting these assumptions?

I think he's talking more about the critical response to the movie. Kind of moot - haven't they already moved forward on the sequel?

There is almost always diminished returns if the first movie in the series wasn't very good.

I'm interested to see how GI Joe fits this trend. I watched the first out of bored curiosity, but I'm actually kind of interested in the second.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top