Liz Hurley still does it for me. I can fast forward just to her scenes and enjoy that movie like it's There Will Be Blood.

MSJ tried to do what Zack Snyder now does so well. Capturing comic book panels and putting it into film. Had Zack Snyder done this, it would have been fan-fucking-tastic, he gets it.. he understands it. MSJ doesn't understand comic book movies and should have had the knowledge, like Kevin Smith does, that he's not a comic book movie director.

Once the crap that was Ghost Rider came out, I understood this fact and gave up on defending Daredevil.

^ I thought Ghost Rider seemed like one of those pitiful attempts to make a live-action Marvel movie from the early 90s (Captain America, Fantastic Four) except with name actors and a decent FX budget.

I don't understand what one movie has to do with the other, aside from being directed by Mark Steven Johnson. Surely one doesn't like a film less because it shares a credit with another film one dislikes? No one has ever said that The Godfather, Part III exposes Apocalypse Now as self-indulgent, meandering crap. They just say those things about Part III.

No, but it showed me that MSJ just can't direct a comic book movie. Period. My argument for DD was that, "look, MSJ tried and there are flashes where you can see F. Miller's panels come to life...", but in the end, he just wasn't a good director. Ghost Rider ended up proving that point.

All it shows is that he failed with Ghost Rider. Yes, as director the blame falls on him, but film is entirely too collaborative--especially an effects-heavy, merchandise-conscious film like this--for the guy's filmography as a whole to be called into question. There comes a point where criticism--even discerning, thoughtful criticism--no longer uses other works to establish a context, but uses the example at hand to go after those other works. It's misguided.

MSJ wrote and directed both comic book properties. I would say a lot of that effort fell upon him. He got some of his vision in the DC version of DD and he had extra post time on GR to complete his vision. So, yes, a lot of the blame can be placed on him. And Daredevil happened to be my favorite Marvel character, so I gave it a little more leeway as far as what his 'vision' was supposed to be. I could open DD #181 and see the comparison to the film. That's the optimistic fanboy in me saying, "yeah, he came close.. cut him some slack." I listened to his sales pitch for DD, I liked what he was saying, but after all that was said and done. I didn't feel the effort. And upon seeing Ghost Rider, which he had the same things to say about and enthusiasm for. He didn't deliver there, either. And it opened my eyes to see that he was just not cut out for adapting comic book properties.

Am I throwing in Simon Birch or When in Rome? No. They are not comic book properties. I love Simon Birch, but I refuse to see When in Rome. But I can't compare them to DD or GR.

Really? I've been to the Field Museum a couple of times over the years and loved it. I'll have to look into The Relic now.

As for the ongoing Mark Steven Johnson debate, I've made as much of an argument as I care to make. I still think it's wrong to allow the disappointment of one film taint the enjoyment of another, but ultimately enjoyment is in the realm of individuality.

Pretty much anything Star Wars. The incessant carping over the prequels and the changes in the OT have taken the fun out of it all for me. I have changed my views of the prequels somewhat over the years (I now cringe at the "acting" of Jake Lloyd, for example, but don't recall noticing it on the first viewing in the theater—what was Lucas thinking?).


In a different vein, I don't bother to defend—or even mention—certain of my favorite movies because they weren't made for the DVD Talk demographic and I find it wearing to see the utterly juvenile bashing they get here. But that's not because I've changed my view of those movies, as the OP was suggesting.

Yeah it was hot stuff in the late 90s/early 00s at the same time as Pokemon mania and was the talk of school anticipating each new ep but now the original DB is still the best one.

Actually now people have valiantly rose to defend this one after predators has come out. Gary Busey and Bill Paxton together creates the magic.

Yeah....Predator isn't so bad now. It ain't my cup of tea, it really hasn't aged well honestly. BUT it's not as bad looking at it now. It's just no Predator 1 and that's the problem. People wanted that feel to it and it gets a taste of it here and there but it's not Arnold's Predator.

Yeah what the heck was that, came outta nowhere.

Ah yes, the ever popular "like a crappy movie because it stars a chick you've got the hots for" syndrome. We've all been there, to one degree or another.

A few years back a friend pulled "Catwoman" off the shelf at a local store. I asked "why the hell do you want to buy that steaming turd?"

"I know it sucks, but it's got Halle Berry in it."

"Does she get naked?"

"No."

"So the only thing in the movie worth watching is a hot chick, but she doesn't get naked?"

"Yep."

"So basically, you're buying porn. Without the porn."

(silence)

Sadly, he bought the movie anyway. The Y chromosome is a powerful force indeed.

I'll join in with the P2 love. Even Silvestri came back with guns'a'blazin' for this sequel. Seriously, have you ever listened to the end credits-score in it's entirety? It's easily one of the best pieces of thrill-music I've ever heard:
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fTqxErnM3EQ?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fTqxErnM3EQ?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

yeah those beating drums are pretty badass.

I still defend "Predator 2". I rather enjoy the different take on it instead of "Get to da choppa" Part 2.

It is kinda hard to fault a movie that doesn't shit upon the movie before it, and expands some of what was presented in the previous movie.

Blade Runner - last time I watched it, I realized that it is just not a very enjoyable movie. Yes, I appreciate the special effects and art design, but there is very little plot, awful pacing, so dark and depressing.

Which cut of the movie are you referring to?