The Devil Wears Prada 2 is unfortunately the complete opposite of Miranda Priestly. Lacking bite or edge, it plays it safe with mushy kindness between the characters and leans heavily into nostalgia rather than telling a story of real substance. Unlike a cerulean sweater, The Devil Wars Prada 2 does not feel the product of years of investment and decision-making.

The original, The Devil Wears Prada, was no masterpiece. It played in the same space that many early-00’s chick flicks did with characters engaged in lofty dream jobs oblivious to economic realities. They were a good bit of fantasy, and this one was no different.

That said, The Devil Wears Prada did manage to be a cut above with talented performances and a somewhat uncompromising look at the fashion industry. For every praise about the art of fashion, there were many scenes putting the shallowness and cut-throat nature on full display. Priestly was an antagonist elevated by the nuance of Meryl Streep‘s fantastic performance.

But The Devil Wears Prada 2 enters 2026 in a different world than 2006. It’s as though the screenwriter decided the escapism and bite of the original was not what modern audiences wanted, and rather embarrassingly devotes many a line of dialogue to making Anne Hathway‘s Andy into a spout of the assumed collective frustration towards capitalism, fashion’s excesses, and any other “virtuous values.” Everything from gentrification of old apartment buildings, to corporate downsizing, and the shrinking field of journalism are all throw into the film’s sauce. Andy even makes sure to apologize for complaining about losing her job when so many others have it harder, a line that felt meant to be spoon-fed right to the audience.

Were a more talented chef stirring the pot, perhaps The Devil Wears Prada 2 could have taken these various elements and melded them into a satisfying medley of flavor with both surface flair and deeper appeal. The ideas were all there to make this movie a real commentary on where fashion stands in 2026 and how professionals had to navigate a different economic market than twenty years ago. But instead, they allowed that drug nostalgia to spill into the stew and utterly ravage it.

One of the bigger crimes comes in the characterization of Miranda overall. The first film ended with Miranda making a vicious move to assert the thesis that no matter what Andy did to earn Miranda’s respect, the industry and its head honchos were inherently never going to do so and would betray whoever they needed to get ahead. Thus, Andy exists working for Runaway with her morality intact, if her doe-eyed innocence reduced.

Indeed, it seems director David Frankel decides to make the primary purpose of the editing beats to leap from one nostalgic moment to another without regard to any other narrative flow or telling a cogent storyline. The editing is so all over the place that it feels like three different versions of a movie mashed together. It treats every instance of Andy and Stanley Tucci‘s Nigel interacting with a doe-eyed fondness, hoping to reinvoke the spritely friendship from the first film. And while there is some amusement in seeing Miranda to attempt to navigate a business meeting in 2026 where the workplace tolerates far less verbal thrashing than Miranda dealt out in 2006, these moments too are more played as callbacks than new moments in their own right.

While the ending of this film attempts to have some dialogue vaguely enforce the same principle, it’s a complete kid-gloves version of the scene. Instead, Miranda is lacking the same forceful vigor here and too much of the movie is having Andy and Miranda make nice with each other. By the end, it hardly feels like the same character anymore, though Streep continues to do well. The ending also feels like a betrayal of Andy’s character and not at all what her character would dream of doing.

Emily Blunt‘s Emily, meanwhile, feels added to the film as an afterthought. She’s thrown in haphazardly in the first two acts in ways that feel the product of multiple rewrites with little narrative cogency. This is compounded in a very sloppy final act that attempts to take the idea of Miranda’s corporate espionage from the first movie and put it on overdrive. As part of the theme of everything needing to end with happiness and harmony, Emily’s rather massive betrayal of Miranda and Andy is brushed over.

The movie has its merits, to be fair. There are some funny moments and amusing performances from Justin Theroux and Blunt acting as a dating couple. B.J. Novak always seems at home playing cartoonish corporate executive jerks. The ideas it hints at seem intriguing.

One just wishes something more than 00’s nostalgia was driving this recent wave of movies. Between this and Freakier Friday, it seems only a matter of time until things like 13 Going on 30, How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days, and Failure to Launch get sequels. Hopefully, they can make films that don’t feel like they were edited to be split into Tik Tok reels.

Hopefully, they can have something to say.

Tell us your thoughts on The Devil Wears Prada 2 below and rank it on the new Flickchart now!!!

“Is this all there is? Is there nothing more?”

The self-aware robotic probe V’Ger in Star Trek: The Motion Picture has evolved to the point where it is can ask what may be the quintessential human question. The question is rhetorical, addressed to no one, but even so, it may be the fundamental question of art.

So it makes sense that filmmakers would put the question in the mouths of their heroes. Art is, after all, (according to Ionesco) the process of an artist trying to show us what it is like to be them. And all artists, by definition, ask this question.

The question is so powerful that it can spark the beginning of a hero’s journey. In this article, we examine films which in some way explicitly ask the question “Is there nothing more?”. It is not the framing of the question per se we’re interested in; what is interesting are the answers we get.

The question is, technically, a yes or no question. So we can sort such films into two basic classes: those that answer “Yes, there is more to life than what you see”, and those that answer “No, actually, this is it”.

Neither answer is wholly correct, of course, and neither is wholly positive or negative. It is the aim of each film to make some sort of case for whether the hero finds their destiny “out there”, or whether their ultimate path leads much closer to home.

I would like to book a flight to Fiji

“Biggs is right. I’m never gonna get out of here.”

Thus speaks Luke Skywalker in act one of Star Wars. He has just learned that his best friend intends to join the Rebel Alliance, an almost unimaginable leap beyond the horizon of adventure for a young, orphaned farm worker. Every day Luke thrusts against his traces, firm in the belief that there is more to the galaxy than his uncle’s moisture farm.

So too with Rabbit from 8 Mile, Lloyd Christmas from Dumb and Dumber, the young Flynn in TRON: Legacy, and poor, poor Truman Burbank.

Remy in Ratatouille, Ariel in her underwater cave with trophies of the promised world beyond, Belle bashing the ordinary world of the hard-working villagers right to their faces. In fact, most modern Disney films start off like this, with our hero proclaiming how small their world seems to be, and how much bigger it ought to be.

This whole article is about characters which incite us in the first act towards a sense of cosmic antsyness, the feeling that the confines of their world are too small for their sense of their own potential. We touched on this obliquely a few years ago in our article about characters who find their own adventure – what distinguishes our discussion today is how the film itself chooses to address these plot-inciting frustrations. Does it sympathize and validate? Or does it ultimately deny the character a world any larger than their present one?

For the characters just mentioned (Luke, Rabbit, Remy, etc), the story of the film winds up supporting their claim. It justifies these feelings by unlocking the characters’ cages and showing them that, yes, you’re right, there is so much more to the world than you know, and your destiny is to live “out there” not “in here”.

The personification of this trope is surely Truman Burbank, the orphan who at birth was unknowingly co-opted into a grand project of corporate-media gaslighting, a sentient soul destroyed through archonic manipulation of his free will, all for the purpose of ratings.

Truman’s fable does not, crucially, end in a Men In Black-style reaffirmation of cosmic limits, but rather in their destruction. Truman’s lifelong sense of wanderlust and unbelief in the apparent limits of his world is triumphantly, catastrophically ratified by having him literally find a door in the sky.

The “Truman” class of films takes an “affirmative” stance on the main character’s existential unease. The filmmaker agrees with the hero and, by implication, wants us to as well: The narrow circumstances of one’s current context and cultural situation are not “real” permanent limits but are, at worst, temporary and permeable. At best, they are illusory.

And furthermore, it is laudable (say these filmmakers) for each of us, the main characters in our own films, to question these limits constantly, and to search unceasingly for that door in the sky.

I’ll Never Look Farther Than My Own Backyard

On the flipside from Luke Skywalker, we have another orphan with kind but unimaginative guardians, trying to find joy in a dust bowl. Dorothy Gale is beset with a multitude of persistent, banal problems, but none as persistent as the nagging sensation that there is some other place which embodies her image of how good and beautiful the world could be.

From the same era we must also consider George Bailey from It’s a Wonderful Life – a lifelong dreamer and inner-adventurer for whom circumstances seem to keep him stapled to his sleepy little American town. And there is also Josh Baskin from Big, a child chafing against the gates of an adult’s world.

And perhaps most painfully, Jack Skellington, who having reached the top of Halloweentown’s cultural hierarchy, realizes there are no more pumpkins left to conquer, and he plummets to the deepest, darkest depths of despair ever captured in a children’s film.

Heroes in this class of films start off the same as Luke and Ariel and Belle: they are convinced that their misery is due to the limitations of their current world, or at the very least its failure to be some other greater world that they can imagine. They are given the opportunity to actually genchi genbutsu, to stop imagining and “go and see”, to actually go try and find the adventure that they’re so sure is waiting for them.

But something different happens for them by the third act.

In the “Dorothy” class of films, the denouement is characterized by the hero realizing that their misery was not the result of their world by itself but rather their perception of it. Sometimes the heroes actually regret the journey they felt compelled to make, the time and effort spent representing a kind of rock bottom to their essential spiritual error.

For Jack Skellington, his attempt to break new creative ground by co-opting Christmas was an unmitigated disaster. Within the course of three acts he has gone from crying “empty tears” because of the “empty place in my bones that calls out for something unknown”, to realizing that he now feels like his “old bony self again”.

Jack reclaims his crown as Pumpkin King and returns to where he started in Act 1, now educated and invigorated by his full-circle journey. On the outside nothing has changed, certainly not the world that caused his breakdown. But on the inside Jack has returned to Halloweentown a different person….somehow.

Josh Baskin’s main conclusion from being forced into adulthood is that the grass is not greener – adulting is way harder and way more full of bullshit than being a kid. (Oh and also his mom is still at home grieving the fact that her son has been “kidnapped” for several months and maybe yeah feel a little bad about that.)

George Bailey keeps his dreams of travelling the world alive his whole life. Just like Truman Burbank, his dreams of Fiji and other exotic locales are symbolic of a life filled with the adventure, pleasure, and sublimity that are painfully absent from his current life as a half-deaf townie banker.

It is only through the efforts of an agent of the Christian god that George Baily becomes convinced that all that he thought he was lacking in his life can in fact be found in the gripping adventure of husbandhood, fatherhood, and municipal fiduciary activism. It is his current life that is wonderful, not some other imaginary life out there waiting for him.

And as for Dorothy Gale, her brush with traumatic brain injury taught her that a wonderous world of fantasy and adventure can in fact be quite terrifying. She had never realized how much her peace of mind depended on living in a world she understands.

Dorothy discovers that a world in which the “dreams you dare to dream really do come true”, is a world which is alien to anything resembling real life. It is devoid of the simple, comfortable pleasures of family and familiarity. Such a world, it turns out, is not the world that Dorothy prefers to live in.

The dichotomy between these two types of stories have existed since the birth of storytelling. Both of them fit cleanly into Campbell’s Hero’s Journey framework (each interprets the “Return” stage differently but all the phases are there).

In both cases the hero spends the first act in some sort of torment about their present situation. By the last act they have arrived at a new level of alignment and peace with their situation and thus is “victory” defined for them.

For Truman (and his brethren), the first-act torment is what sews the seeds of their eventual liberation.

But what about for Dorothy, and Josh Baskin, and George Bailey, et al, who all wind up, at least physically, back where they started? What purpose did all that fretting serve? Was it “just” character development?

This is a question we must ask of own lives. Is the value of thinking about some aspect of the world you want to change, measured solely by whether it leads you closer to the world that you desire? When we sit around and dream about things that never come true, and worry about things that we cannot change, are we just wasting time?

What these movies teach us is that the answer is almost certainly no. The hero must start from a place of dissatisfaction, because it is their journey from there, in the first act, to the realization of the third act that allows them to undergo their requisite change. This is simply not possible without them exhibiting some form of frustration or conflict or sense of incompleteness at the start of their story.

And so it is with us: Frequently those chapters of life so characterized by growth and change started with us feeling dissatisfied, some grit in the oyster shell, the sense that something wasn’t right about how we fit into the world.

Maybe we complained to those around us; maybe we started to push back against walls that seemed to others to be immovable. The net result may or may not have been some outwardly visible change our world, but our story did nevertheless move forward.

There is one other point to be made about “Dorothy”-class films, and it’s a hypothesis that is actually made by The Truman Show:

TV: And there’ll be another episode of I Love Lucy same time tomorrow, but right now, it’s time for Film Classics. Tonight we present the endearing, much-loved classic, Show Me the Way to Go Home. A hymn of praise to small town life where we learn that you don’t have to leave home to discover what the world’s all about. And that no one’s poor who has friends. Full of laughter and love, pain and sadness, but ultimately redemption.

In the film, the director of the involuntary-reality-show The Truman Show is engaged in a long-term psy-op against its star. Using the educational system, the media, and carefully choreographed traumas, Christof spends his day psychologically undermining Truman’s urge to explore beyond the bounds of his prison. This is the price of maintaining a televisable status quo.

Even stripped of its gnostic-conspiracy-theory vibes, we must still consider the implication that the screenwriter is making here: Are “Dorothy”-class films (of which the fictional Show Me the Way to Go Home is clearly a stand-in) “bad” in some way? Do stories that punish (or at least argue against) those who choose to peek through their bars serve as a braking force against the human soul?

Is it “spiritually harmful” to consider there may be no place like home? Is it “regressive” to applaud George Bailey’s acceptance of the missionary-position American Dream rather than to insist on embracing his lifelong dreams of a transformative, adventurous life?

What is a child to think when they see that the end result of Jack Skellington’s brave new creative experiment is him crying in a graveyard, and then returning to the safety of his original lane?

A conspiracy-minded, 80s-punk-adjacent viewer would see the sinister hand of conformity propaganda in these films. Seen through that narrow lens, they are “obviously” a concerted effort to subliminally inculcate and reinforce obedience to a Western middle-class cultural norm.

But (as always) the truth is much more subtle and much more kind. Let us reframe the actual difference here in a more judgement-neutral form:

“Truman”-class films nourish the side of ourselves which can see the unseen potential of the world. “Dorothy”-class films help us see the world and live in it.

Neither is correct; both are essential. This hidden dialectic lies beneath some of the most important films ever made. Realizing its existence allows the viewer to pull these films off the screen and into our lives.

Because we live this dialectic every day. Life seems designed to be full of obstacles, but one cannot live in a state of perpetual revolution, constantly at war and never at peace. Nor can one abdicate the responsibility to exert one’s will upon the world. In each moment we must make a choice.

Fortunately, we have been training for this. All these films are “game tape”, thousands of simulations of this choice, both realistically and in metaphor. We can use the examples of these heroes to find our own path, sometimes like Dorothy, sometimes like Truman, sometimes in some third way which strikes a balance between acceptance and escape.

The horror-comedy seems to be in vogue in 2026. Over Your Dead Body is at least the third release in the subgenre in the last two months. Perhaps studios are seeing an appetite for facing darkness with laughter. Or that’s what these creatives need to do in times such as these.

This film comes courtesy of The Lonely Island member Jorma Taccone, his first movie since co-directing Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping. This trio has had quite a career since SNL launched them into the spotlight, writing and directing some of the better comedies of the last ten years, if also some duds.

Over Your Dead Body lands right between gem and dud. Starring Jason Segel and newly-minted scream queen Samara Weaving as a married couple on the outs, who travel to a cabin for a weekend getaway while each has a secret plan to murder the other. If you’re thinking this type of darker comedy premise doesn’t seem in line with typical American comedies, you’d be right. This is a remake of the Norwegian film The Trip, and certainly comes across as an Americanized version of a quirky European comedy.

Because Taccone directs, the movie has plenty of merit. The gory and more morose aspects of the humor play better than they would have had a more typical studio director been at the helm. The film’s careening sensibilities and madcap energy often serve it well. Segel and Weaving strike the right tone in their performances, as do Timothy Olyphant and Juliette Lewis. And Paul Guilfoyle provides one of the best cameo-like roles in a movie like this in awhile.

But American films like this often struggle to dedicate screentime to this type of tonality while also writing consistent characters and a satisfying narrative. It often feels like the script more wants to pay lip service to the central emotional arc of the couple learning to resolve their differences than actually spending time with it. Perhaps it is due to a lack of trust in their audience or simply a laziness. To be fair, creating solid, well-crafted character arcs is easier said than done. Yet so many great movies demonstrate that comedy and good characterization do not have to work independently of each other.

Over Your Dead Body manages to be an enjoyable experience overall. There are several instances of clever comedic set-ups and pay-offs indicative of the filmmakers doing more than phoning it in. Which is perhaps why it’s a shame that this doesn’t quite fully live up to its potential. With a little more in editing, this could have been a new cult comedy classic.

Tell us your thoughts on Over Your Dead Body and rank it on the new Flickchart now!!

Flickchart’s Countdown to Doomsday returns! We’re reviewing every era of Marvel cinema each as we head towards Avengers: Doomsday and the biggest multiverse mashup of Marvel movies. We track the history, the heroes, the thrills, and more, and see who might make the cut to join against Doctor Doom! The latest Doctor Doom, anyway.

We left off Marvel’s story in a great place. After decades of faltering efforts, the late ’90s and early ’00s brought Marvel to the big time. Marvel Studios was founded and money was raining in as they tapped the potential of their best properties, with successful Spider-Man and X-Men franchises leading the way. Even their sole failure made some cash. Looking to the future, key figures like David Maisel and Kevin Feige saw the potential to go further than simply licensing characters to self-contained franchises. They wanted to get bigger and bolder.

Yet, while the seeds were being planted for Marvel Studios to step up, the other studios were in a feeding frenzy. Eager to keep the money train rolling and cash in on the rights they obtained, a flurry of films were rushed into development.

Would Marvel keep the cultural cache they had built, or were things about to get troubled? Join as we tackle the middle 2000s, a time where seven Marvel movies came out in four years.

Era Three: Milking the Marvel Cow

By the summer of 2004, Marvel was starting to look unstoppable. Spider-Man 2 was busting box-office records and competing against the strongest pop-culture franchises. Marvel’s deals had separated many of its characters to different studios, but it was making more money and strong relationships were being built. Stan Lee was turning his cameos into an expected re-occurrence, and even B- and C-list characters like Elektra had movies in development.

Yet with success comes pride. And with pride comes the fall. While there was plenty of money to be made, and indeed box-office grosses continued to burn bright throughout this era, the middle ’00s saw critical success take a nosedive. The reasons for this are varied and something we’ll examine throughout this article, but there’s no denying this batch of movies is lacking by comparison. The highest Rotten Tomatoes score of these seven movies is 62%, with four of them below 30%. Say what you will about whether this score matters, but it does reflect some kind of marked change in what was going on.

Flickchart’s new Flickscore system is even harsher on this era, with Flickscores ranging from 69 to 7!

Either way, the end of 2007 left Marvel feeling shakier. There was a growing feeling among fans that authenticity to source material was being disregarded to the detriment of overall quality. Whether this would spur a turn in a different direction is something future eras will have to answer, and indeed, this era ends on a major change. But we’ll get to that soon.

Blade: Trinity (2004)

Just six years earlier, Blade kicked off the modern superhero blockbuster. While it walked so the X-Men and Spider-Man could run and web-swing, it still served an essential role in the fabric of Marvel’s success by building confidence in superhero films. Blade II raked in even more money, solidifying the Blade franchise alongside the big boys.

Then, Blade: Trinity happened.

As mentioned in the last article, writer and producer David S. Goyer shepherded this trilogy into existence with Wesley Snipes and planned it as a trilogy early on. Before Blade II even released, New Line gave the go-ahead for a third film with Goyer again writing and producing. Despite Guillermo del Toro doing well with the second entry, he declined the director’s chair to pursue the Hellboy franchise. Goyer and New Line next turned to Oliver Hirschbiegel of all people to direct, but he turned it down to make Downfall.

Struggling to find a director, Goyer sought advice from Stephen Norrington and Del Toro. With their encouragement, he forged a deal with New Line to direct himself after making his directorial debut in 2002. It made sense to maintain a singular vision and ensure continuity.

But not everyone was happy. By now, the stories of this movie’s troubled production are widespread and largely center on the star: Wesley Snipes. Snipes disputes others’ accounts of the production, claiming complaints arose from friction that occurred after he became an executive producer and exerted his rightful authority. But most other accounts seem aligned on Snipes causing problems.

Snipes’s conflicts mostly centered on two people: Goyer and Ryan Reynolds. Despite Goyer and Snipes working together since the beginning, Snipes was apparently not happy with him taking the director’s chair. Nor did he like Goyer’s script.

Reynolds, meanwhile, had been cast as Hannibal King, the most comedic character in the franchise to date. Reynolds brought his typical brand of humor, which rubbed Snipes the wrong way. Their falling out during production was widely known and lasted until Deadpool & Wolverine.

Without diving too deep into rumors and hearsay, Snipes’s behavior was reportedly quite outlandish. He allegedly attempted to choke Goyer, spat slurs at Reynolds, smoked weed every day while refusing to leave his trailer, and would only communicate with the use of assistants. Regardless of how much of it is true, Goyer stated the production was “the most personally and professionally difficult and painful thing I’ve ever been through.”

To be fair, the final product may justify Snipes’s anger, if not behavior. Studio interference resulted in a notable mood shift for the third movie. Goyer’s original script was supposed to be a darker, dystopian work before New Line allegedly forced Dracula into the film and fought against the more somber tone. Considering they originally wanted the first film to be a spoof, it seems they finally got their way. One would think greater success would give more freedom to the filmmakers, but the potential of greater profit often raises the stakes for studios and causes them to start sticking their fingers in the sauce. Snipes eventually sued the studio for decreasing his screen time in favor of Reynolds and Jessica Biel.

While production was often described as a miserable experience for most, there were a few positive notes. The film notably cast wrestler Triple H, making him the first WWE wrestler to be featured in a comic-book film, the start of a trend. (X-Men‘s Tyler Mane was a professional wrestler in Canada.) Goyer was resistant at first but wound up expanding his role after enjoying his comic timing. Blade: Trinity also sported a rather notable cast in retrospect with actors like Parker Posey, John Michael Higgins, Patton Oswalt, and James Remar filling out the ranks.

But Blade: Trinity eventually released in December 2004 to a critical thrashing. Even Roger Ebert, who had been positive on the first two, lambasted its failure and descent into terrible action and bad comedy. Goyer himself looked back with regret on the final product.

This didn’t stop it from grossing $132 million worldwide. Certainly not a phenomenal figure, and a drop-off from Blade II, but not a failure. Still, it was enough to kill momentum on further movies in this sub-franchise. The production had burnt out most of the team, and the creative partnership died. A single season of a TV show was produced, not starring Snipes, before being cancelled. There were inklings of desire to do a spinoff series following Deacon Frost, as well as an Underworld crossover, but both sputtered out and the rights reverted to Marvel in 2012. By this point, the Marvel Cinematic Universe was taking off.

Marvel has been trying since 2013 to get a new Blade film off the ground. Perhaps it’s the curse of Snipes and this production, as that attempt has been a production hell of its own. Despite starting it all, the character has been stuck in limbo.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Small

Of course, as previously discussed, Snipes’s Blade did finally return in Deadpool & Wolverine. Seemingly past his feud with Reynolds, they worked together and got along fine when there was a clear pecking order on tonal priorities. As stated before, we think Snipes’s Blade has a decent chance of coming back again. As for anyone else in this movie, Reynolds is probably going to be playing Deadpool in Doomsday, so he won’t be playing Hannibal King again. No one else has a remote chance of showing up.

Elektra (2005)

As 2005 opened up, Marvel Studios was spending most of the year wheeling and dealing. With the studio convinced of president David Maisel’s vision to self-finance, Marvel was hard at work trying to make a deal. Though Blade: Trinity wasn’t burning it up at the box-office, perhaps having Elektra out at the same time would chum the waters.

Unfortunately, Elektra was another troubled production. While not as dramatic as Blade: Trinity‘s, it had its own problem. Namely: no one involved wanted to make it.

There was an attempt to make an Elektra film prior to the ’00s with none other than New Line buying the rights in the late ’80s. Frank Miller, Elektra’s creator, was hired to pen a script directed by Oliver Stone and starring Gabrielle Reece. As intriguing as this creative team was, production fell through and the rights were sold to Fox.

After Daredevil‘s financial success, Elektra was forced into quick production and became the epitome of what happens when money is prioritized over art. Director Rob Bowman was hired on the fly and knew he was going to be working on a crunch as production had to finish before Jennifer Garner returned to filming Alias. Garner didn’t even want to do the movie as she, like most, seemed soured after Daredevil‘s production problems. But she was contractually obligated.

To be fair to Bowman, he at least seemed motivated to give it his best shot. He envisioned a smaller, character-focused film given his small budget, and he tried to craft a darker, more mature work. But Fox wanted a PG-13 rating, which Bowman claimed required him to chop the movie apart from his original cut, staking the claim that only twelve frames of film remained after editing. This should be taken with a grain of salt, as his Director’s Cut on the home release only added three minutes of runtime and nobody credits it as a significant improvement on the theatrical version.

The lack of passion translated to audience response. Elektra opened up in January 2005, and everyone quickly caught on to how bad it was. Critics ravaged it, with even Garner reportedly calling it “awful.” It fell off 69% in its second weekend and finished with a mere $56.6 million worldwide gross, the lowest since Howard the Duck.

While Marvel’s ’00s failures to date were just bumps in the road, there was no silver lining to this one. Even Marvel had to cop to its failure, with Avi Arad telling investors in March 2005 that rushing the movie to release was a big mistake that they wouldn’t repeat. Many blame the movie’s failure, alongside that of Catwoman, for setting back female-led superhero films, as another one wouldn’t be made for over a decade. This isn’t hypothetical either, as an email in the infamous Sony leak from Ike Perlmutter cited the movie’s failure as a reason not to make female-led superhero films.

Strangely, the female part got blamed rather than the rushed production and money-seeking behavior.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Small

Despite the infamous failure, Garner returned as Elektra in Deadpool & Wolverine. Indeed, that movie’s cameos seemed focused on redeeming the unfortunate legacy of certain Marvel characters. That said, we think Garner’s appearance there likely decreases her chance of a Doomsday appearance. That film gave her the proper sendoff and this Elektra isn’t popular enough to take a place in the big leagues.

Fantastic Four (2005)

The light of Spider-Man 2‘s triumph was starting to feel dim by mid 2005. Despite the box-office records, two critical failures and now Marvel’s first unmitigated bomb since Howard the Duck clouded the sun of their success. As Marvel Studios attempted to get favorable terms for self-financing, this certainly didn’t help.

But Marvel’s flagship characters had been their greatest successes, and now at long last, a big-budget film for their first ever superhero team was arriving. Surely, this would turn things back around?

When we last left the First Family, Avi Arad had bought the film negative for the 1994 version from Roger Corman to ensure the brand wasn’t damaged. Well, despite it taking eleven years, Marvel hadn’t let sleeping dogs lie.

In 1995, Marvel sold the rights to Fox and hired Chris Columbus to write and direct; he is someone Marvel kept coming back to as a possible director, though he has not directed a Marvel film to date. Columbus began working with frequent Marvel screenwriter Michael France, but Columbus was fired after he insisted that the film’s visual design pull directly from Jack Kirby’s art. Once again, the studios rejected comic accuracy for what they thought would sell.

Fox cycled through a few directors and writers in the late ’90s, but none of these pairings worked out. Because of this, Fox and producer Bernd Eichinger, who still maintained his portion of the rights, negotiated a rights extension with Marvel. Following the extension, they hired Raja Gosnell to direct, but Gosnell soon dropped out to direct Scooby-Doo (with a script by another big name to come in Marvel).

Then, Peyton Reed signed on and seemed poised to strike onto the superhero scene. Yet after cycling through multiple sets of writers, Reed dropped out due to Fox not meshing with his vision. Of course, Reed would eventually get to direct some superhero movies down the road and bring in planned elements for this film.

Sean Astin of all people was considered to direct next, and Astin went as far as to start approaching potential actors, but Fox ultimately passed on him, finally turning to Tim Story based on the strength of his original cut of Taxi. Story was a comics fan and worked with Mark Frost (who Reed had brought on) to refine France’s earlier screenplay. However, following the successful release of The Incredibles, Story had further rewrites done by Simon Kinberg, apparently due to massive similarities in both film’s stories.

For casting, an extensive auditioning process was done to find the right actors. Mads Mikkelsen auditioned for Mr. Fantastic, but the part went to Ioan Gruffudd. Mikkelsen later described the process as humiliating, though would appear in a Marvel movie down the line. Andrew Walker auditioned for Human Torch, though Chris Evans won the role, starting what would become an extensive career in the Marvel world.

Several women were considered for Invisible Woman such as Christina Aguilera and Cameron Diaz, though Jessica Alba wound up landing the role. As for Doctor Doom, none other than Robert Downey Jr. was initially considered. While Julian McMahon beat him, Downey is now set to play the part in Doomsday. For The Thing, though, Michael Chiklis seemed to be everyone’s first choice. It was Chiklis who insisted on playing the character entirely practically, resulting in a detailed bodysuit being made.

With a cast, filming was underway and finally a big-screen version of Marvel’s seminal team would arrive. During filming, another attempt to spark the idea of an interconnected universe was made. In a scene with Mr. Fantastic, an effects shot was made where Reed’s face morphed into Hugh Jackman‘s Wolverine. This wound up cut for unknown reasons, and the dream of a Marvel cinematic universe remained elusive.

Perhaps this is for the best. If Fox had made the connected universe first, it might not have turned out as well. At least Fantastic Four didn’t, from a critical standpoint. Critics ripped it apart after its July 2005 release, with many finding it a tonal mess, lacking in plot, and featuring subpar performances. With Spider-Man 2, as well as Batman Begins and even The Incredibles, critics noted the bar had been raised for superhero films and this clearly failed to cross it. That said, the movie still made plenty at the box-office, finishing with a $330.6 million gross and garnering a sequel.

By this time, despite Elektra‘s bump in the road, Marvel Studios was nearing the endgame of its legacy-shifting deal. Finding a partner in Merrill-Lynch, Marvel worked out a $525-million loan to produce ten films over eight years, collateralized by the rights to ten of its characters. Its dream of self-producing was nearing, though it came with risk, as failure meant losing the rights to even more of its characters which would likely mean the end of any connected universe dream.

The last sticking point was finding a distributor. Despite trying to work with Universal, negotiations were stalling, leaving Marvel to turn to Paramount Studios. This long delay also led to Merrill trying to back out on the deal.

But shrewd business negotiations (and maybe Fantastic Four‘s box office numbers) let everything work out. In September 2005, Marvel publicly announced its financing agreement with Merrill, with Paramount onboard as a marketer and distributor. The industry raised eyebrows over a company like this self-financing and making its own movies. Could it work?

Marvel thought so, and promoted David Maisel to CEO of the newly-named Marvel Entertainment, the owner company of Marvel Studios. Michael A. Helfant would serve as the new president and COO. With the deals made, the question was which movie to make first? Interestingly, that same month, Marvel got the rights back to the character that would start it all. But more on that later.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Small-Medium

This universe actually had an MCU connection already with Evans reprising his role as Johnny Storm in Deadpool & Wolverine. Because of this, we don’t see it as super likely to get further connections, especially with Evans already returning as Captain America. McMahon’s recent passing also means his Doctor Doom probably won’t be coming around. That said, we think there is a small chance Gruffudd’s Mr. Fantastic could feature, due to this character already having a history of multiversal appearances in the comics.

X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)

As 2006 opened, Marvel was enduring two critical duds back-to-back, though it still made money thanks to Fantastic Four. Perhaps the funk could be shook off with the only movie on the calendar for the year: a third X-Men movie. After the success of X2, it seemed inevitable that there would be a trilogy.

Yet production was not all sunshine and rainbows. Bryan Singer, director of the first two films, left to go work on Superman Returns and took his X2 writers and editor with him. With the cast only signed for two movies, everyone’s deals had to be renegotiated as well. The result? Chaos, and James Marsden also essentially leaving the film to go work on Superman Returns. While he is in the early part of the movie, Fox killed his character off, thanks to Marsden’s decision and his frustrations about a lack of screentime in prior movies.

Because Hugh Jackman was the franchise’s face, he managed to get director approval into his contract and pushed for Darren Aronofsky to direct. Aronofsky turned it down, the first of many who would, mostly due to scheduling issues. Big names such as Joss Whedon, Zack Snyder, Guillermo del Toro, and Peter Berg were all among those unsuccessfully pursued. Undeterred, Fox set a release date and a filming schedule with plans to incorporate a recent Whedon X-Men storyline into the script despite Whedon not directing.

Matthew Vaughn initially won the job and hired notable cast members such as Kelsey Grammer as Hank “The Beast” McCoy and Vinnie Jones as Juggernaut. But he too eventually had to leave the project, though he would get to direct an X-Men film down the line. While initially citing family issues, he later revealed in 2023 that he had quit because Fox executives were putting unrealistic deadlines on production and had apparently lured Halle Berry in with a fake script, continuing a streak of mistreating her in this franchise. Vaughn’s lasting casting touch, though, might have been Channing Tatum as Gambit. The character was cut from the film, starting a series of failed attempts by Tatum to play the character that would eventually pay off in 2023.

After all of this mess, Fox finally hired Brett Ratner after he missed on the opportunity to direct the first film. Ratner had no knowledge of the comics and thus relied on his writers to tell an accurate story. Speaking of, the writers in question were Simon Kinberg (fresh off of writing the last two Marvel films) and Zak Penn. Kinberg was keen on adapting the Phoenix Saga, something Singer had wanted to do in the prior movie, and sought a way to combine that story arc with Whedon’s “Gifted” plot. Early results were reportedly poor, leading to Vaughn doing vast uncredited rewrites.

Even after these rewrites, Fox fought hard to remove the Phoenix storyline as they felt it would take the series away from the political metaphors it had used previously. For once, studio executives might have been right, and the final compromised results left Jean Grey with little to do in the film’s second half.

This harried writing and production process had other consequences. Ratner was apparently forced to start post-production simultaneous with filming due to the tight deadlines. Ratner also eventually interfered in the writing process, resulting in the Golden Gate Bridge scene getting shuffled to the end of the movie.

Even while Marvel Studios was in the beginning stages of producing its own film universe, Fox was already seeing the value of expanding their sub-franchise through spin-offs. This put limitations on the writers for which mutants they could use. Additionally, Alan Cumming‘s Nightcrawler was so minimized that the writers ended up cutting the character entirely due to the complicated makeup process.

With all of this mess swirling, X-Men: The Last Stand finally escaped to theaters in May 2006. From a monetary standpoint, Marvel breathed a sigh of relief. It finished its box-office run as the highest-grossing of the franchise with $460 million worldwide, but it fared the poorest critically of the trilogy. Many praised the small aspects of the Phoenix Saga it captured, and Ebert gave the film a thumbs up. Yet it was widely derided as a narrative mess and a step down from the intelligence of the prior movies. Many felt the sloppy way it killed off certain characters ill served their legacies and meant the loss of the heart of the series.

Since then, the writers and Ratner have all admitted regret about the final product. Kinberg would attempt to adapt the Phoenix Saga over a decade later, Singer would eventually direct another X-Men film that retconned many of this film’s choices, and Vaughn commented that the film he storyboarded was completely lost. Though not necessarily planned as a trilogy-ender, the critical reception was enough that a direct sequel never occurred. The box office was enough that Fox kept producing X-Men movies, but their direction with the IP changed after this movie.

While the third X-Men movie was arguably a muted success for Marvel, it didn’t slow down where things were heading. With Marvel Studios having its financing in hand, it started gathering its IP back. It couldn’t get the mega-franchises, but characters like Hulk, Thor, and Black Widow all returned under their control throughout 2006. With enough of their rights back, Marvel Studios now had a real shot of doing something that could stand alongside the X-Men and Spider-Man.

Just what would that be? A series of successful films? Or something larger?

The fight over how many movies they would do, how often they came out, and what the future of Marvel Studios would look like wound up changing the face of Marvel leadership. With executives taking various sides, a seismic change occurred when co-founder Avi Arad left after decades with the company, while Ike Perlmutter backed David Maisel’s vision. As 2007 rolled in, Helfant was also forced out, leading to Maisel being named chairman of Marvel and Kevin Feige being named president of production. With Feige in charge, his long-brewing vision could at last start to take shape.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: High

We already spoke at length in our last article about the returning Fox X-Men characters. But one specific to this film is Grammer’s Beast, who already returned in the post-credits of The Marvels. He is set to reprise his role in Doomsday, so some small part of what originated in this film will live on.

Ghost Rider (2007)

Before Feige’s vision could be enacted, there were a few more films that would release throughout 2007, perhaps cementing that something needed to change. Ghost Rider rolled out in February 2007, though it is perhaps the one film of this era that cannot be described as a quick cash grab. Marvel started trying to develop a Ghost Rider movie as early as the ’90s, though as was the case throughout that era, most of these projects struggled to get off the ground. Jonathan Hensleigh, a name that has popped up more than a few times by now, was attached to do a treatment.

David S. Goyer wrote a script and production was set to proceed in 2001 with Jon Voight producing and Johnny Depp in the lead role. That version stalled over funding issues. Dimension Films eventually stepped up to co-finance, and with more money on the table, Stephen Norrington was set to direct. Avi Arad pulled in Eric Bana to play Ghost Rider, though as described in the last article, he lost the part and would play Hulk instead. Nicolas Cage eventually found out about the movie, and as a big fan of the character he pushed to play the lead, but further delays resulted in him walking out as well as Norrington.

It seemed like the Ghost Rider might never ride until Columbia Pictures got dollar signs in their eyes after Spider-Man‘s success. They leapt onto the rights and had Shane Salerno rewrite Goyer’s script. Despite the stink of Daredevil and Elektra, Columbia hired Mark Steven Johnson based on his experience in superhero films, as well as his apparent passion for the character. He had originally approached Arad about directing a Ghost Rider movie when he was hired for Daredevil. Johnson promptly did his own rewrites and reeled Cage back in as the lead. Cage envisioned an R-Rated film, and jockeying over content continued to delay production.

Finally a workable script was finished, but only after Columbia interfered plenty. Johnson originally wanted Scarecrow as the lead villain, but the studio feared audiences would be confused with the DC character and forced him to change it to Blackheart. He also acquiesced to Columbia’s desire to get the content set at PG-13. Johnson cast Wes Bentley as Blackheart due to Bentley’s friendship with Colin Farrell, whom Johnson had worked with on Daredevil.

Filming started in Australia and Peter Fonda was cast as Mephisto, one of Marvel’s Devil-like characters and a key part of Ghost Rider’s origin, a month after filming started. Cage sought to make a deep mark on the character, though his eccentrics as an actor left something different than depth in the performance. This was a movie that required extensive post-production and effects work due to the lead superhero constantly having a flaming skull and other elaborate transformations.

Despite the years of work and Columbia trying to give time for the movie to be done right, Ghost Rider‘s release was met with universal derision. Many found it silly, over-wrought, and too conventional in its origin story. Cage’s performance was ridiculous enough to earn him a Razzie nomination. Still, it did pretty well at the box office, setting a record for the highest President’s Day-weekend release. It was also Cage’s highest-grossing release at the time. It finished with a $228 million worldwide gross, enough to earn a sequel despite the negative response.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Medium

While neither this film nor the sequel (spoilers!) were well-received, we think there is a decent shot Nic Cage’s Ghost Rider makes a comeback for Doomsday. He was potentially in line to return for Deadpool & Wolverine, but that didn’t come through. With Feige looking to create the ultimate send-off, Cage’s take on the character is an important part of Marvel history, for better or worse.

Spider-Man 3 (2007)

While Columbia’s other attempt to get into the superhero world turned out less than spectacularly, they still had a third Spidey film lined up to hopefully save the day. The writing process had started almost immediately after the second movie released with Alvin Sargent hired as screenwriter as well as Sam Raimi and his brother Ivan working on the story. The Raimis conceived of the theme that Peter was an imperfect hero, seeking to introduce Sandman as the lead villain and the true killer of Uncle Ben to push Peter’s moral compass and challenge his ability to forgive.

Then Avi Arad came knocking. He hadn’t yet been ousted from Marvel at the time of the writing, and he started complaining that Raimi was inserting his favorite villains in the movies over what the fans preferred. The last major Spidey villain that was yet to be used was Venom, whom Raimi didn’t care for as a character lacking humanity. But Arad pressured Raimi and eventually convinced him to use the character. Then another producer pushed to include Gwen Stacy. Raimi had also already planned to include the Vulture and was looking to wrap up the arc of Harry Osborn (James Franco) as the New Goblin.

As one can guess, this was creating such a jam-packed film that Sargent initially wanted to split the script into two movies. But he couldn’t figure out a way to do it and instead they had to jettison Vulture to get the movie down to a somewhat more reasonable number of characters. Still, it made for a crazy shoot with Raimi shuffling between seven sets and the cinematographer having to shoot a multitude of night scenes with three different dark-colored characters. Extensive effects work also required shooting the major FX scenes early in production to allow sufficient time for the work to be done right. This was part of a growing trend in Hollywood where almost every blockbuster was starting to be an effects-laden superhero film.

Still, Raimi noted that production was eased by the familiarity everyone had with each other. As the third film with most of the same crew and cast, there was a working camaraderie that aided the shoot. Raimi and his brother were pushing Peter into some darker (and goofier) places that required pushing Tobey Maguire out of his comfort zone, which they were able to work through.

After all of this extensive work, Spider-Man 3 eventually released in May 2007. On the one hand, the film was a smash success at the box-office. It was the third-highest grossing film of 2007, the highest-grossing of the trilogy, and set multiple weekend records and other sub-records. It finished with $890.9 million worldwide, continuing to show the juggernaut power the genre had accumulated throughout the 2000s.

On the other hand, it had the most mixed critical reaction of the trilogy. While some critics were still quite positive, most derided it as an over-stuffed mess that lost the humanity of the first two films. Ebert shared in the criticism of it having too many villains and subplots, with pacing another common critique across reviews. As Raimi would later admit, he found the production process “very painful” and wasn’t happy with the way the movie had gotten away from him. Arad later apologized for pushing Raimi to include Venom and agreed that trying to jam in too many characters was the wrong approach.

While many awards societies nominated the movie, Raimi saw the fourth film as an opportunity to redeem himself and go out on a high note. Its financial success immediately put a fourth movie into production, and Raimi sought to bring different writers and approaches to the creative process. Sony also started planning a Venom spin-off. During this process, there were even talks of doing an entire new trilogy. Early reports suggested the villains would be Dylan Baker‘s Curt Connors finally becoming the Lizard after two films of development, and the Vulture coming back in as well, with Anne Hathaway potentially playing Black Cat (an ironic casting given who she would end up playing in a Batman movie).

Unfortunately, it wasn’t meant to be. While Raimi was given more creative freedom, Sony was still enforcing strict deadlines and demanded a 2011 release. Eventually, Raimi felt he was being rushed and falling into a repeat of the Spider-Man 3 process. Without creative integrity, it wasn’t worth it to him, and he dropped out.

Sony ended up cancelling the project, and so ended the Raimi trilogy. Despite all of the financial success, Sony decided to reboot the property. At this point, Marvel Studios was having success of their own and Sony needed to find a way to compete in the 2010s. Raimi’s old-fashioned goofiness wasn’t what they wanted. They needed something more sleek and modern and moody. More on that in a future article.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Medium

As already discussed last article, we think Tobey Maguire is a strong candidate to return for Doomsday. But as for the rest of the cast, we continue to believe none of them will be pulled back. Thomas Haden Church did reprise Sandman in Spider-Man: No Way Home, though only as a voice performance.

Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007)

As has been the running theme for most of this article, financial success will usually overcome critical failure. With Fantastic Four making plenty of money, Fox rehired Tim Story and Mark Frost to make the sequel as well as bringing on additional screenwriter Don Payne. They planned the ambitious goal of adapting “The Galactus Saga” and including the Silver Surfer, which would conveniently let Fox set up a spin-off movie as long ago planned.

Yet with the desire to strike while the iron was hot, production was rushed, and they were still working on Galactus’s design as late as March 2007. Story had brought in an entirely new production team to create a more “mature” look, perhaps feeling the heat of the criticism that the first film looked too cartoonish. But this redesign only further slowed the process.

Fox was doing all it could to build hype for the film. Lawrence Fishburne was cast to voice The Silver Surfer, which made instant headlines, and Fox also let it be known Andre Braugher was part of the cast. As it turned out, Fox wanted Braugher to play none other than Nick Fury, but they didn’t own the rights and by this point, Marvel Studios wasn’t leasing out any other characters, especially not one they had big plans for. Doug Jones was shocked to learn about Fishburne’s casting as the physical actor playing the Surfer, as it meant he would be dubbed over a second time in a comic book film.

Arad was reportedly very hands-on during filming despite no longer being an upper-level executive at Marvel. He apparently had a special fondness for the Fantastic Four, which perhaps explains why he canned the 1994 version twenty years earlier. The effects team tried to create cutting-edge special effects with the time they had to bring iconic looks like the Silver Surfer and Fantasticar to life. Weta did most of the effects work, having become one of the leading names in the industry by this point.

Despite no news of major production strife, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer perhaps just suffered from the confined schedule and lack of talent. It released in June 2007 to a critical drubbing. Most felt it was confusing and lacked fun, with one critic stating it made Spider-Man 3 look good by comparison. The closest thing to a positive review was that it improved on the first movie. Comic fans lambasted its approach to Galactus, saying that turning the giant purple space god into a cloud felt like a complete deviation from what the character should be.

The movie had a moderately successful opening weekend, but it took major drops in its second and third weekend. At last, the chickens had come home to roost. It finished with a decent $301.9 million worldwide, but this was enough to shake Fox’s confidence about continuing the franchise. While Story and others were fine with going forward, Fox put the brakes on doing more in the immediate future and stayed focused on expanding its X-Men property. And thus, another franchise came to an end.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Small

As we discussed above, we think these versions are mostly left in the past. As to this incarnation of Galactus and the Silver Surfer, since the latest Fantastic Four movie just did its own take on these characters, we think these will be left behind, especially with most hating this version of Galactus.

It had just been three short years since the slam-dunk success of Spider-Man 2 and seven movies had come out. While financial successes were still happening, the mystique of Marvel’s glorious burst onto the big-screen was fading. Seven straight movies and not a single one had received critical success or even close to it. Most were mixed at best with some downright stinkers in there.

This era of Marvel certainly represented a downturn. While it wasn’t as bad as the early decades of failed starts, after all there were now successes to build from, it left many wondering if perhaps Marvel superhero films were just a fad. Just as Marvel seemed to have a leg up, Batman Begins released reminding of the staying power of a superstar superhero like Batman. Perhaps Spider-Man and the X-Men were to be Marvel’s pinnacle. After all, there had been a Hulk, Elektra, Daredevil, and Punisher movie and not a single one was seen as an unmitigated success.

Additionally, the frustration over a lack of comic fidelity was increasing. While tolerable at first with the X-Men films, Rise of the Silver Surfer was demonstrative of just how far from the source material the movies were getting. A space cloud? Really? Plus, with all of the rights split apart at various studios and any push for a crossover being shut down, it seemed truly replicating the shared universe of the comics was never going to happen.

As 2008 arrived, perhaps Marvel fans would just have to resign themselves to the reality that the best they could get were some occasional high-quality comic-book films mixed in with plenty of mediocre material. True, Marvel Studios was now self-producing but their first announced title was Iron Man.

Some C-lister better known as part of The Avengers? It looked like Marvel Studios’s venture was doomed from the start.

Or was it?

Ranking Era Three

Back to the doldrums here. A few of these aren’t entirely bad, but this is not the best bunch of movies to rank. Let’s see how they stack up though!

#7: Elektra (Flickscore 12)

Elektra is unfortunately a truly horrendous film. One can feel the lack of enthusiasm dripping from every aspect of it. From Garner’s stale performance, the paltry paper-thin script, and vague facsimiles of the comic-book characters that made it into the movie, Elektra is an unmitigated failure. Nor does it even have the fun ’00s soundtrack that helped prop up Daredevil.

There are the vague outlines of something better here. Elektra finding humanity in mentoring a young hopeful girl, themes of revenge and generational pain, and some occasionally neat camera tricks and movements. But like many of the bad comic-book films, Elektra never resolved its tone issues. Both too self-serious and too goofy at the same time, especially with the Typhoid Mary character and the banal main villain, Elektra shambles about until its lame conclusion.

#6: Ghost Rider (Flickscore 13)

Speaking of tonal problems, Ghost Rider has the worst of this entire era. Coupled with some shockingly bad dialogue, Ghost Rider is one relentlessly cringey moment after the other. It often feels like watching a bad TV-movie. While the effects for Ghost Rider aren’t half bad, he’s written in such an awkward way that there is no menace attached to one of the darker superheroes in Marvel.

This also continues the villain problem from Elektra. Wes Bentley’s Blackheart is amazingly forgettable with no real motivations. Bentley’s main acting choice is scowling and speaking in a slightly deeper voice. His servants, fallen angels with elemental powers, are also super bland, and yet manage to have something more distinctive going for them The saving grace in this department is Peter Fonda as Mephisto, i.e. the Devil. He does bring a presence to his role, even if there is a major cheese-factor.

This movie does manage to have one or two decent moments. Ghost Rider riding alongside Carter Slade (notably played by Sam Elliott, the first actor to star in two Marvel movies that weren’t direct sequels) across the desert is a nice vibes-filled scene and the simple brutality with which Ghost Rider dispatches most of the thugs is something differentiating from other superhero films to date. The famed Penance Stare is also well-represented and the basic tragedy of Johnny Blaze’s backstory brings the faintest echoes of human emotion.

But the bad writing still ultimately dooms this movie. The editing and plotting is sloppy as can be with the film haphazardly vacillating between scenes and moments with little connective tissue. The lack of care overall is evident, a shame for a director who allegedly loved this character.

#5: Fantastic Four (Flickscore 7)

The cheeseball earnestness of this film does suit the source material in a certain sense. The Fantastic Four are a campy team in some respect and with fun larger-than-life performances from Chiklis, Evans, and Gruffudd, Fantastic Four has a certain fun camp factor. The movie remembers to have the team save people too, with the best action scene being the four learning to use their powers and work together to rescue pedestrians on a bridge.

If only that translated to a solid script. This is the third movie in a row with almost no plot, feeling more like a collection of scenes than a strong singular narrative. The film rushes through its opening third, quickly giving the team powers and then having little of consequence happen afterwards. McMahon is either miscast, or at least misplays Doom, another character reduced from his comic-book form into a bland corporate CEO-type villain with little of the gravitas required.

Likewise, Alba seems a bit lost in her role as the adhesive female force that holds the Fantastic Four together. She’s played more like a jilted lover than her own strong independent character, perhaps more a fault of the script than Alba. Once Doom blandly recreates the arc of Green Goblin in the first Spider-Man, the movie stumbles into a final battle with little pomp. While not as outright awful as the two proceeding works, Fantastic Four is still a dud overall.

#4: Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (Flickscore 12)

Rise of the Silver Surfer somewhat improves on the first film in the plot department. While struggling to put together three acts and scenes that feel like they matter, there are at least slightly better character arcs and moments in this. McMahon’s Doom feels included out of obligation sadly and doesn’t do much though.

The goofy comedy of the middle part of the movie still leaves it treading water narratively, if the hijinks of Human Torch constantly swapping powers with the rest of the team does lead to some good moments occasionally. But the humor of this is still more awkward than truly funny, with an especially dumb scene of Mr. Fantastic breakdancing at a club with his powers.

The biggest crime comes in the form of reducing Galactus to bland space dust. While perhaps they were concerned about being able to render a large purple man in a way that would be taken seriously (and fair point given the tonal problems in both movies), the better choice would have been to go with a different villain entirely. This way just feels anticlimactic, which is especially disappointing in context of a somewhat decent take on the Silver Surfer. The best scenes of this film come in Sue interacting with Norinn Radd and teaching him to find his humanity (of a kind) again.

Despite having one of the cuter Stan Lee cameos, and having Andre Braugher chomp it up in a fun role, Rise of the Silver Surfer is still a stilted mess of a movie.

#3: Blade: Trinity (Flickscore 58)

There’s a good argument for Blade: Trinity being worse than the Fantastic Four duo. It’s of kin with all four movies below it on this list with the tonal flaws. Awkward comedy combined with overly dramatic plotting is just a bad formula that ran throughout this set of movies. And the comedy here was often quite horrible, especially in context of a bloody horror action movie. Ryan Reynolds has a very particular schtick that can work if done right, but as used here, is super grating.

Plus, like the others, Blade: Trinity struggles to have a competent plot. There is a somewhat better three-act structure here, likely the product of Goyer being an at least decent screenwriter most of the time, but the beats and act turns are still rather thin. It bizarrely makes the choice of having Dracula be a reluctant villain, then with pivoting motivation, creating narrative whiplash. And while one can appreciate trying to do something different with an iconic movie character in his own right, this version of Dracula is simply lacking menace and feels quite bland. All the more so once he transforms to a giant CGI monster in the third act.

The redeeming grace of this besides better technical competency than the preceding movies is Snipes continuing to be standout as Blade. Regardless of how angry he was during production, he at least brings it on-camera. Granted, his role is indeed reduced and he feels sidelined in his own film at times. But Snipes just had an “it” factor that raises the quality of what is otherwise a pretty bad work.

#2: X-Men: The Last Stand (Flickscore 69)

The first of the only two passable movies from this era is the trilogy ender for the X-Men. The Last Stand bears all the signs of the production problems earlier described. It’s mishmash of plotting resulted in an overstuffed work that doesn’t give sufficient weight to anything happening. The Shakespearean tragedy that is the Phoenix Saga in the comics is reduced to a half-baked version with Jean Grey indeed simply standing around for half the movie and her vast psychic powers reduced to dissolving people into CGI dust (suck it Thanos!).

But with a cast three movies deep into the process, the acting at least brings it most of the time. For every goofy moment of Vinnie Jones shouting as the Juggernaut, there is Stewart and McKellan trading verbal blows or Famke Janssen tearfully asking Jackman’s Wolverine to end her life. While Anna Paquin’s Rogue was much reduced from the first movie, she still has a decent little arc in this and does her best. Ellen (now Elliott) Page is also a welcome new addition as beloved X-Woman Shadowcat. It’s also neat to finally see an iconic comics element like the Danger Room.

It lacks in the excellent action scenes like X2 and brings a shallower approach to its themes than before. It tries to do too much with too little. But there is enough to lift The Last Stand above most of this era, even if we all wish this era of X-Men had a better send-off. Indeed, they would get a better one to come, even if not a direct sequel, and Doomsday may well give this iteration of the property a true goodbye.

#1: Spider-Man 3 (Flickscore 63)

There is plenty to criticize about Spider-Man 3. Indeed, the choice to have three villains was a massive mistake with none of them given sufficient time to develop properly. And in order to resolve the narrative gluttony, the script’s solution is sidelining each villain with nothing to do for large chunks of screentime. Sandman simply disappears from the movie for awhile and Harry is given amnesia to delay resolution of his story. The final act occurs only because Sandman and Venom randomly find each other in an alley.

The aforementioned tonal problems also sneak into this movie. Topher Grace was not a strong choice for Eddie Brock/Venom, feeling more goofy than scary once he gets the symbiote. And speaking of goofy, Raimi’s much maligned and now memed choice to have Maguire’s Peter start wearing all black and dance speaks for itself. The jazz club scene is still uncomfortable to watch, even if that is somewhat part of the point.

Still, despite all of the problems, the core thematic ideas that Raimi had come through in many scenes. Seeing Peter truly hurt MJ, falling into self-obsession, anger, and revenge against Sandman as the true killer of Uncle Ben, bring some real emotional weight. Having the symbiote present to amplify those feelings wasn’t an entirely wrong narrative choice and Maguire is actually quite competent at bringing a malice to his performance of Peter Parker. As always, scenes between him and Rosemary Harris’s Aunt May are standout in exploring the thematic concepts of the movie.

And for a final time, Raimi brings an ending scene strong on the emotion and surprisingly melancholic. The movie ends on the hope that forgiveness of multiple kinds can be found and that Peter will be able to weather his way through his storms. But it doesn’t bring a contrived happy conclusion either, and the last shot of the trilogy winds up carrying some uncertainty, just as the second movie did.

That seems a perfect way to end things in this era. Both of the main Marvel trilogies to date came to an awkward conclusion with many bumps, if having elements of something better. There was hope for more, but could that hope be realized? Stay tuned for next time and find out!

Marvel Chart

1. Spider-Man 2 (2004)
2. X2: X-Men United (2003)
3. Spider-Man (2002)
4. X-Men (2000)
5. Blade (1998)
6. Spider-Man 3 (2007)
7. X-Men: The Last Stand (2007)
8. The Punisher (2004)
9. Hulk (2003)
10. Blade II (2002)
11. Daredevil (2003)
12. Blade: Trinity (2004)
13. Fantastic Four (1994)
14. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007)
15. Fantastic Four (2005)
16. The Punisher (1989)
17. Ghost Rider (2007)
18. Howard the Duck (1986)
19. Captain America (1990)
20. Elektra (2005)

The movie’s official title didn’t need to be Lee Cronin’s The Mummy to tell us it was from Cronin. This movie feels exactly like his breakout major feature, Evil Dead Rise. So much so that one wonders if this wasn’t simply a repurposed Evil Dead script, as it plays out much more like an entry to that franchise than a Mummy one.

It contains many of the strengths of Rise. It has gore that is not holding back or trying to comfort the audience as major studio horror is wont to do. There are some truly gross and unnerving scenes, all the more enhanced because they often involve children, which most of us find disquieting. The Mummy also has that dark Irish humor in its sensibilities. Rise had some darker jokes, as does this one, either involving gore or certain situational jokes.

Yet where this one completely falls flat compared to Rise is, in part, the tonal issues. This film feels much more like a compromised studio project, with Blumhouse or someone jamming in more conventional big budget storytelling, and tonal beats that mostly clash with the humor and more visceral approach to gore. It feels like Cronin’s vision is fighting through the weight of muck.

To that end, The Mummy can be frustratingly mummy-free. It feels like the Egyptian connections are entirely ancillary and this certainly has nothing to do with any of the story of prior Mummy films. Again, this feels more like a Deadite or demon possession movie; indeed, the script directly states it is a demon possessing the lead child. Aside from a flair or sand or some scarabs, it feels like the mummy flavor was tossed aside.

Worst of all, though, is the near lack of characterization or plot. The lead parents, played by Jack Reynor and Laia Costa, have little to them past being worried parents. There are the barest semblances of themes of marital conflict and guilt, but they seem left on the cutting room floor of this already overly-long 134-minute work. The coexisting Egyptian investigation side plot feels tacked on as well.

Once again, The Mummy franchise has been plagued with an unsuccessful reboot. Of course, the studio hardly seems to care, as they announced a continuation of the Brendan Fraser franchise months ago. Whatever happened behind the scenes, this mummy probably should have stayed buried.

Tell us your thoughts on Lee Cronin’s The Mummy and rank it on the new Flickchart now!!!

CRAWL (2019) is a horror/thriller written by Michael and Shawn Rasmussen, and directed by Alexandre Aja (The Hills Have Eyes, Piranha 3D), with a simple premise: If battling a hurricane wasn’t enough, what if our movie’s heroes also had to deal with terrifying creatures of the natural world? THRASH (2026), written and directed by Tommy Wirkola (Dead Snow, Violent Night), rips off the exact same premise and makes a change that is ultimately just cosmetic, while sacrificing tension and character development for ramped-up action.

In Crawl, Kaya Scodelario stars as Haley, a competitive University of Florida swimmer who receives the call from her sister that she hasn’t heard from their estranged father (Barry Pepper), despite the Category 5 hurricane headed for their small home town. Haley makes the ill-advised trek into Coral Lake and discovers her father trapped in the crawl space of their former family home, and hunted by a pair of ill-tempered alligators. Together, the pair must find a way to escape the crawl space before the waters rise so they can hopefully signal for help.

Thrash follows Lisa (Phoebe Dynevor), who gets caught in the hurricane threatening Annieville, South Carolina after she is called into work. Eight and a half months pregnant and alone after the father has left her, Lisa fears losing her job if she doesn’t stay. Meanwhile, young Dakota (Whitney Peak) is alone in town because her growing agoraphobia in the wake of her mother’s death won’t allow her to leave, even as the situation worsens. Of course, these two ladies will wind up working together to survive the storm, but, to complicate things, as the waters rise the town is being overrun by a pack of bull sharks.

Extremely similar setups – waters rising, apex predators circling – but these films diverge in the execution. Aja keeps Crawl lean and scary, focusing on developing his two stars into full-fledged characters, and letting the tension of their situation breathe. A few other characters are briefly introduced into the film – a trio of looters, a pair of police officers – but as they quickly succumb to the gators, they serve just to underscore the peril facing Haley and her dad.

Meanwhile, while Thrash is a similarly lean length (both movies clock in under 90 minutes), Wirkola packs his film with a bevy of characters and perilous situations. There are three foster children (Alyla Browne, Stacy Clausen, Dante Ubaldi) under the “care” of abusive Mr. Olsen (Matt Nable), who has refused to leave town out of sheer stubbornness. And Djimon Hounsou stars as Dr. Dale Edwards, a marine biologist who has been tracking the unusual movement patterns of the sharks. He happens to be the uncle of orphaned Dakota, and takes up with an ambitious news reporter (Andrew Lees) so he can get into Annieville and rescue his niece.

With so many more characters comes the opportunity for Wirkola to craft more deadly scenarios, and the pacing of Thrash is frenetic. The film zips from one small-town shark encounter to the next, scarcely taking the time to breathe. The result is consistently entertaining, but not overly scary, particularly as the fates of most of Wirkola’s characters become pretty predictable.

Aja, meanwhile, consistently ramps up the tension in Crawl. There’s plenty of action, but also time taken to let the story breathe, and help the audience care about the characters at the center of it.

Both movies are brisk, don’t overstay their welcome, and should satisfy fans of gnarly creature action or tales of survival. But there’s no doubt that Crawl‘s alligators take a bigger bite of proper storytelling, while the sharks just kind of Thrash around, making noise.

Crawl is currently available to stream on Paramount+. Thrash is recently released on Netflix.

The Drama (2026)

With The Drama, Norwegian director Kristoffer Borgli continues his fascination with the fragile absurdities of identity and relationships, following up his sleeper hit Dream Scenario (2023) with something both more romantic and more quietly unsettling.

The film centers on Emma (Zendaya) and Charlie (Robert Pattinson) in the days leading up to their wedding. It opens with a wonderful meet-cute as Charlie spots Emma reading alone in a coffee shop, but Borgli quickly fractures that familiarity. What follows is not a linear love story, but a mosaic: moments from the past, present, and imagined realities intercut and reframed, testing not just the relationship, but the characters’ ability to withstand the weight of intimacy itself.

Formally, The Drama is alive in a genre that often isn’t. The editing and cinematography inject a restless dynamism, constantly shifting perspective and tone. Scenes don’t just progress, they echo, contradict, and reinterpret each other, creating a feeling that love is not a story we move through, but one we rewrite as we negotiate one another.

Borgli cleverly stages the film within the recognizable framework of a romantic comedy, the aforementioned meet-cute, first date, eccentric friends, screwball beats, but plays every note slightly off-key. The humor is sharp, but tinged with melancholy; the absurdity lands, but leaves a bruise. It’s a film that indulges in the mechanics of the rom-com while toying with it.

Pattinson’s Charlie feels like a distant cousin of a Woody Allen protagonist—neurotic, self-conscious, and emotionally evasive, but freed from Allen’s incessant autobiography. His anxieties read less as performative quirk and more as genuine self-sabotage, giving the character a surprising emotional arc beneath the irony.

Zendaya, meanwhile, is the film’s emotional center. She gives Emma a layered interiority, balancing independence with vulnerability. This is a woman who does not need Charlie, but wants a connection with him, and fears what his absence might reveal about her. Zendaya communicates this tension with remarkable control, often through silence: a glance, a pause, a shift in posture.

What emerges is a fascinating tonal blend, rom-com structure, dark comedy sensibility, and the observational bite of a comedy of manners. The film is at once humane and ridiculous, grounded and hyperbolic, tender and cruel. It resists easy catharsis, instead lingering in the uncomfortable truth that love is as much about projection and fear as it is about connection. I don’t know what the future holds for Emma and Charlie. The Drama doesn’t resolve love it observes it, distorts it, and honors its complexity.

There’s nothing like the release of a new horror-action-comedy. Especially when it’s about two sisters fighting back against corrupt rich people who are secretly Satanists that have confined said two sisters in a fancy hotel. But enough about Ready or Not 2!

As funny as it is that these movies with major plot similarities released in back to back weeks, They Will Kill You proves that a movie is not what it is about, but how it is about it. Director Kirill Sokolov adopts a Quentin Tarantino approach to the material, quite apparently influenced by Kill Bill and Tarantino’s overall aesthetic. They Will Kill You wields stylized action, eccentric music choices, and title cards to set up character backstories in a way that makes no attempt to hide who Sokolov looks up to.

The result is a fun and gory movie. Zazie Beetz bring a strong presence as the lead. Her character isn’t exactly complicated or full of dramatic heft, but she brings a plucky and forceful charisma that makes the character work as much as it needs to for this type of movie. Likewise, Heather Graham and Tom Felton are delightfully goofy as some of the minor antagonists. Patricia Arquette is a little rougher, sliding in and out of an Irish accent that doesn’t quite work; one wishes they dropped that angle entirely, since it could only ever distract from the performance.

Those looking for depth or nuance won’t be rewarded. They Will Kill You only makes the vaguest assertions of a thematic concept, and the characters are rather thinly written. Emotional investment isn’t something you will get here, and thus it is missing something that could elevate it to the next tier of quality.

Yet for a facsimile of a Tarantino movie, Sokolov has a grand time. There is plenty of wry humor, and it plays with its endless array of immortal thugs, letting them get chopped up in a variety of ways. A notable sequence involves a dislodged eyeball mobilizing across the hotel setting in what looks like some mixture of practical and digital effects. If self-ambulating eyeballs are your thing, They Will Kill You is likely your type of movie.

Comment below on They Will Kill You and rank it on Flickchart!

A common critique of modern trailers is that they often spoil too much story. Many give away key plot beats, the funniest jokes of a comedy, or the best scare scenes. The intent is obviously to lure in an audience with the best parts. Yet if the best parts are the only good parts, it can feel like watching the movie is a waste of time.

The Super Mario Galaxy Movie, on the other hand, has so little story that it feels more like watching an extended trailer than a feature film. It is the sequel to the successful The Super Mario Bros. Movie, a film that was a smash success even though it had a rough and uneven plot. At least it had a plot, as trope-laden and shallow as it was.

There is essentially no plot in this movie. It opens with a new villain, Bowser Jr., kidnapping new princess Rosalina, with the goal of powering a device that will let him take over the universe. This is the only plot beat to come for the remaining 99 minutes, with the rest of the film consisting of main characters wandering around reference-laden environments with the general aim of rescuing other characters but with little actual agency in doing so.

Reference-laden is the most generous description of what feels like a Where’s Waldo? of movies. Each scene is a new page where Nintendo loyalists can spot a different property or game element being referenced. Admittedly, this goes deep into the well and seems to be priming for a Super Smash Bros. movie due to the berth of pulls, if not because of any actual plot point. There is a childish fun to this approach, and Brian Tyler’s score is a delight with its musical references.

But the movie unfortunately has as much character development as a Where’s Waldo? book, which is to say none. Mario and Luigi have no arc or development of any kind, and the introduction of Yoshi adds nothing besides a cute pet creature. Bowser and Peach get the closest approximation of character arcs due to each having new familial relations, yet Peach never has an actual dialogue scene with her new relation, so it hardly matters. Bowser, meanwhile, has actual change, but Jack Black‘s performance is so shoved to the periphery that it never really has impact. There’s no attempt to replicate the success of the song “Peaches,” a bizarre choice for such a commercially-inclined movie, but another hallmark of what feels like a lazy and rushed work.

Admittedly, Illumination‘s animation approach suits these Nintendo characters well. There are some beautiful environments and recreations of various Mario video game landscapes, though sadly the actual Galaxy parts are minimal. For a movie named after one of the most highly-regarded 3D Mario games, this pulls very little from the named source material. Given the animation quality, it would have been neat to see some of Galaxy’s finer moments brought to life. But this is too busy serving as a reference book than actual movie.

One could say these Super Mario movies represent a sea-change for video game movies. More and more are being made, and many are more successful than the embarrassing attempts of the past. The last Mario made tons of money, and this one is doing the same. Yet it’s a shame that mediocrity defines The Super Mario Galaxy Movie. The filmmakers should have reached for the stars instead of merely drawing a reference to one.

Tell us your thoughts on The Super Mario Galaxy Movie and rank it on the new and improved Flickchart!

Last time, we examined the nascent efforts to adapt Marvel Comics onto the big screen, and why they failed. After one massive dud and three movies that didn’t even get an American release, it looked like Marvel movies were destined to be a joke. How much brand damage could happen before accepting fate? Yet luckily (depending on who you ask), this was not to be the end of Marvel’s forays into movie-making. And despite decades of false starts, cheap films, and looking with envy at the success of Superman and Batman movies, the spark remained to bring some of the most famous comic book characters to life. Come 1998, everything changed.

Come with us as we dive into the late 90s and early 00s where the future of blockbuster filmmaking was decided.

Era Two: The Modern Age Begins

Marvel’s second period would be night and day from the rough start that came before. While this era was not without struggles, filmmakers finally figured out how to hit the right tone to make these characters work on the big screen. That, and studios allocated serious budgets to these movies. It would become clear, though, that money wasn’t everything.

There is no denying that the ability to hire talented actors, directors, and create cutting-edge special effects were central to the success of this era, and led to serious box office numbers for the superhero movie. Of course, Warner Bros. had already been doing this with Tim Burton‘s highly successful Batman series, carving the path forward for confident investment into the genre. Where Batman ran, Marvel could fly, or web-swing as it were. The big-budget success of Marvel’s flagship characters of Spider-Man and The X-Men signaled a sea change in the industry.

All the same, not all was roses and butterflies. There were a few notably weaker efforts, and monetary success motivated studios to start churning out movies left and right, leading to the third era of Marvel movies. For comic fans, despite higher-quality filmmaking, there were varying approaches to comic book authenticity. One could tell there was still some embarrassment about the subject matter, and there were attempts to tone down the more outlandish qualities of the source material. There are varying thoughts on whether this was a smart idea, but the battle between being overly seriousness or overly silly would be ongoing.

Blade (1998)

When we last left our story, Marvel had just had a movie completely canned to avoid embarrassment and damage to the brand. Whether that was a truly necessary decision, it did reveal a changing approach to their adaptations and that guys like Avi Arad (Marvel Studios founder and major producer for most Marvel movies at the time) saw the potential for more. This potential was cemented in 1996 with the creation of Marvel Studios.

Marvel had already created one film company back in 1993, and was successful in optioning rights for animated TV shows in the early 90s. But with the lack of success on the movie front, they needed a new tack. Thus, Marvel closed the first company, and with personal investment from Arad and Issac Perlmutter, Marvel Studios obtained the necessary start-up capital to begin again.

Their goal was simple: pre-production would be controlled by Marvel Studios where a singular creative team could commission scripts, hire a director and cast, and take the fruits of this work and sell it to a larger studio for production and distribution. This would help preserve the quality of the art while getting around their inability to fully finance production. 20th Century Fox was an early studio open to this arrangement, having already struck deals with Marvel for particular characters, and it forged a seven-year agreement with Marvel.

Troubles arose as Marvel Entertainment Group was forced to declare bankruptcy in December 1996. Overall problems in the comics industry came to a head, leaving Marvel with lots of work to resolve their massive financial issues. This resulted in some projects being canceled and Marvel Studios losing bargaining power. Marvel was forced to option off a massive chunk of their character rights to aid in recovering from bankruptcy.

The result?

Their character’s film rights scattered to almost all the major studios. This would make for a very long road for the rights to find their way back to Marvel Studios. Some of Marvel’s desired projects were never made as a result, such as a Namor movie.

The bright side was Marvel Studios now had many lines in the water for film production. Surely, with deals for their famous characters like Spider-Man or Wolverine, one of their golden boys could change their fate.

Their fate did change. Yet it came from an unlikely source: Blade.

Prior to this film debuting, Blade was a C-tier character at best. He was a somewhat goofy remnant of Blacksploitation stereotypes, fanatically fighting vampires in the smaller, supernatural side of Marvel’s universe. The character was certainly an odd choice for one Marvel’s first big-budget movies.

The early concepts for Blade bore little resemblance to the final product. New World Pictures initially obtained the rights in order to make a western-style film with the character, though this went nowhere. Marvel’s first film company then started developing a concept that would star LL Cool J, though this also fizzled out. Simultaneously with Marvel’s bankruptcy, New Line became interested in developing a low-budget Black superhero film. Seeing Marvel was desperately optioning off rights, it pounced.

Initial conversations focused on a Black Panther movie, which attracted Wesley Snipes, but that too fell apart. Screenwriter David S. Goyer then aligned with Snipes and producer Peter Frankfurt to pitch their version of Blade to New Line. They wanted a gritty vampire action film that would modernize the character for the 90s.

As studios are want to do, New Line kept pushing the project in strange directions, such as trying to make it a spoof or changing Blade to a white man. Goyer fought hard, though, and eventually got New Line committed to financing his version of Blade. While the studio tossed out names like Denzel Washington to star, Goyer remained committed to Snipes, and the deal was done.

Goyer and Snipes recruited Stephen Norrington to direct, whose career is a strange story of its own. David Fincher was an early possibility for director, though he eventually moved on. With the creative team set, filming underwent and the movie was prepared for release. Yet initial test screenings were disastrous, requiring extensive reshoots that delayed the release by a year. Stan Lee shot a cameo as well, which was also cut. Then, finally, the film released in August 1998.

Thankfully, Blade slayed at the box office. It dethroned Saving Private Ryan and held the top spot for two weeks, finishing its run with a $131.2 million gross. While critical reviews were mixed, there were a number of notable positive reviews including from Roger Ebert who praised its visual style. Perhaps it wasn’t an unmitigated success, but it did more than enough to prove that Marvel movies could be taken seriously. Talks were already ongoing for a sequel and even trilogy, and at last Marvel’s fortunes seemed to be turning.

Despite this success, Marvel itself made only a mere $25,000 from the film. With the nature of the deals and signing away the rights, Marvel only saw a sliver of the success. This would be something that haunted Marvel moving forward and would soon motivate them to get more of a slice.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Medium-Small

As we’ll mention with the other Blade movies, Blade already returned to the MCU in Deadpool & Wolverine. Because his character got a sendoff of sorts there, we think his chances of returning are smaller, but not outside possibility. As for any other character such as Stephen Dorff‘s Deacon Frost or Whistler, we think it is super unlikely.

X-Men (2000)

Despite taking till the year 2000 for a movie to release, attempts at adapting the X-Men started back in the 80s with Orion Pictures. The first effort was among the many unproduced films mentioned in the last article. A second attempt saw Stan Lee and Chris Claremont working with James Cameron and Kathryn Bigelow. This effort went farther, with Bigelow set to direct and producing a story treatment. But after Lee mentioned Spider-Man to Cameron, it diverted his attention and lead to the collapse of this version.

With multiple failures in hand, Marvel tried to get Columbia Pictures to buy the rights to no avail. Thus returns Avi Arad to the picture. Arad was having success with the animated X-Men cartoon on Fox, which did well enough that Arad managed to entice Laura Donner to purchase the film rights. She agreed to work with Fox and hired Andrew Kevin Walker to write the script. While this early script would be edited repeatedly, early elements such as focusing on Wolverine joining the X-Men, his rivalry with Cyclops, and having Magneto as the main villain all stayed in the finished film.

Several directors were offered the job, including Robert Rodriguez, and Paul W.S. Anderson, who both turned it down. Eventually, Bryan Singer was offered the role on the strength of The Usual Suspects. Active development started in 1996 with further rewrites that put focus on Rogue and sought to bring out more of the themes of prejudice and the dichotomy between Professor X and Magneto as the MLK and Malcolm X analogues. Yet by late 1998, the disastrous failure of Batman & Robin left studios cautious. While Blade‘s success convinced Fox that Marvel characters could carry movies, Fox decided to reduce X-Men‘s budget, requiring some ideas to be cut.

Despite cuts, X-Men‘s production started to heat up and signaled the entry of some figures that will become notable later in our story. Kevin Feige, future president of Marvel Studios, was hired as an assistant producer based on his impressive knowledge of comics, and he became Arad’s second-hand man. He was also reportedly charged with reigning in Singer during filming, as Singer was prone to tantrums and allegedly abusing pills. Singer also banned the comics on set, so Feige would sneak them to the actors to help them understand the characters.

Joss Whedon, meanwhile, was hired to provide rewrites to the third act, but he ended up rewriting the entire film. Fox and Singer dumped most of this script, feeling it was too focused on sardonic wit and pop-culture references, though some lines survived. Keep that in mind for later!

Just as the filmmakers realized the importance of getting the script right, they also realized a proper cast was needed. The inclusion of famed actors like Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen was only natural, but casting Hugh Jackman as Wolverine was a big risk, as he was a relatively unknown actor at the time. The studio wanted Russell Crowe, but Crowe pointed them to Jackman. The rest is, as they say, history.

Realizing that they had something brewing between this and Blade, Marvel Studios negotiated a deal with now-defunct Artisan Entertainment to license 15 characters into development, including TV shows, films, and more. Unfortunately, or fortunately for the future, most of these deals lead nowhere.

X-Men debuted in July 2000 and dwarfed Blade‘s box office by earning $296.3 million worldwide. While Blade brought the keys to the door of success, it was X-Men that stuck the keys in and unlocked it. Unlike the mixed critical response of Blade, X-Men received largely positive reviews with many noting that it finally found the way to take fantastical comics characters and place them in a lived-in aesthetic that felt grounded and made something cartoonish into something more realistic and digestible. Ebert did thumb it down, though.

Despite some detractors, X-Men is now recognized as revolutionizing the genre. No longer were comic-book movies dependent on major characters like Batman or Superman, nor were they cornball. Instead, audiences could experience popular comic-book teams like the X-Men in a modern action movie that actually worked. Though they didn’t realize it at the time, Marvel had just changed the face of the box office forever. Outside of Marvel itself, this film changed how DC approached their movies, despite the fact that they had been more successful to date.

Much is made of the movie’s sleek 00s aesthetic and abandonment of classic comic-book costumes. While some credit this choice as a reason for the film’s success, many detractors felt the movie abandoned its comic-book roots in the process. To be fair to Singer and Fox, Stan Lee and Claremont completely supported the decision. Speaking of Lee, he finally filmed a cameo that made it into a movie, starting a trend that would occur in most Marvel movies until Lee’s passing. The torch of change was shining bright.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Happening

Recent trailers confirmed the return of this era of X-Men to Doomsday. Stewart, McKellan, James Marsden‘s Cyclops, and Rebecca Romijn‘s Mystique are already officially part of the cast. We think the possibility of further cast members returning is fairly high as well, with this film’s version of Sabretooth and Toad having already popped up in Deadpool & Wolverine. It seems a certainty that Fox’s X-Men franchise is going to be a foundational part of the Doomsday/Secret Wars duo.

Blade II (2002)

Plans for a Blade trilogy were already brewing prior to the first film completing production. All it took was box office success, and they had that. Sequels were nothing new to action franchises, but comic-book films seem particularly suited due to the source material due to their serial nature. While Goyer wanted to use Morbius for the second film, apparently Marvel Studios wanted to give him his own franchise. It seemed the rights hadn’t gone to Sony at this point.

Regardless, Norrington turned down directing the sequel. Thus, New Line Cinema turned to up-and-comer Guillermo del Toro to direct, as Goyer and producer Frankfurt had become fans after working with him on Mimic. Studios were already recognizing the value of obtaining talented directors to raise the quality of the work, and they hoped Del Toro would bring his skillful visual style to the table.

Indeed, Del Toro left the script alone and focused on visuals and tone, wanting to make vampires monstrous again in the wake of a recent literary turn towards rendering them as tragic heroes. Little did he know what the late 00s would bring. To hone his craft, Del Toro studied all of the first film’s dallies as he wanted to make his movie look like a blend between comics and anime.

Snipes was happy to return, as his turn as Blade had redefined the character. Snipes was responsible for creating many of Blade’s mannerisms, weapon choices, and more, and he was essential to the sequel. Returning would cement his legacy as the character.

Blade II released in March 2002 and became the highest grossing of the franchise, earning $150 million worldwide. While critical response was even more mixed than the first film (though Ebert was positive once again), it was becoming clear that Marvel movies were no longer jokes but serious box office forces. This would be proven all the more true later that year.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Small

Aside from what we already said about the Blade character, nothing else from this film specifically seems likely to return. The villains in this one weren’t particularly memorable, and aren’t notable past being played by character actors like Ron Perlman and Norman Reedus, who would have successful genre careers afterwards.

Spider-Man (2002)

Now we come to Marvel’s big gun. If there were three comic-book characters that were the peak of recognition and popularity prior to the 2010’s, it was Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man. While the other two belonged to DC and already had successful decades-long franchises, Spider-Man had somehow managed to elude hitting the big screen and was beat to the punch by more minor characters in Marvel’s catalogue.

It wasn’t for a lack of trying. Many iterations throughout the 70s and 80s reached various stages of development. Roger Corman made an attempt with Orion Pictures but got into financial disputes with Stan Lee about budget, and the failure of Superman III left studios balking on more superhero movies at the time.

Then Cannon Group obtained the rights and for some reason thought Spider-Man was a werewolf character. Tobe Hooper was set to direct a script where Peter Parker turned into a human spider monster. Lee caught wind of this and essentially killed it. Another version came to be with John Cusack considered for Spider-man and Doc Ock as the main villain. That one faltered too, and following two of Cannon’s movies bombing (including notably Superman IV), it slashed the budget, leading to more creatives dropping out and another version failing.

The last serious attempt was in the 90s. As previously mentioned, Lee brought the character up with James Cameron, who wound up getting fairly deep into development of an adaptation. Cameron was perhaps too far ahead of the curve and envisioned a darker take with profanity and a sex scene atop the Brooklyn Bridge. He planned on casting Leonardo DiCaprio as Spider-Man, but disputes arose between Cannon and other companies as the rights had split apart at this point. One more version thus died.

It seemed that Spider-Man would never be made until the success of Blade and impressive development of X-Men reignited interest in the genre. Nothing like the possibility of money to shake studios into action. Marvel had left bankruptcy by 1998 and reclaimed all of the rights to Spidey before promptly selling them to Sony.

While Sony grabbed the rights to all prior treatments, it opted to use none of them and sought its own screenplay and director. After cycling through many big names such as Michael Bay, Tony Scott, and Ang Lee, it landed on David Fincher. Just when it seemed Fincher might direct a superhero movie after all, he balked at the idea of doing an origin story while Sony insisted they needed one. Chris Columbus was then offered the job but turned it down for Harry Potter. We’ll leave it to you to decide whether he made the right choice.

It would be none other than the Chair of Columbia Pictures, Amy Pascal, who suggested Sam Raimi. Despite the flak Pascal gets today, at the time she picked Raimi because she knew he was passionate for the character. Raimi earned the job in a big meeting with Pascal, Arad, and others because of the clear love he showcased.

David Koepp was hired to write a new screenplay, though he ironically borrowed heavily from the Cameron treatment. He did make some notable changes such as keeping Peter and Mary Jane apart at the end of the movie and changing the main villain to the Green Goblin. Further rewrites were done by other screenwriters, though one controversial constant from Cameron’s script was that Peter would organically shoot webbing, rather than creating a device that did so. Raimi felt it pushed credibility to have Peter invent such a device, which would become one of the most criticized elements by comics fans.

While the studio considered many actors for Peter Parker, Raimi always had his eye on Tobey Maguire based on his work in The Cider House Rules. Columbia was initially hesitant, but his audition blew them away. Stan Lee, meanwhile, wanted to cameo as J. Jonah Jameson, but the studio felt he was too old. Thankfully they did, as this led to J.K. Simmons being cast, which is considered perhaps one of the most pitch-perfect castings for any comic-book character. Lee later admitted Simmons did much better than he would have done.

For Norman Osborn, diverse actors such as Nicolas Cage, Jason Issacs, and Billy Bob Thornton were all offered the part, but each turned it down. Willem Dafoe was intrigued at the idea of a comic-book film and accepted it, insisting on wearing the costume himself. Speaking of the costume, a more comic-book accurate version was initially created with an animatronic mask, but Dafoe was reportedly derisive of it. The film changed tacks to a more battle-armor look costume, much to fan’s disdain, with many feeling it looked cheap and resembled a Power Rangers villain.

While any concept of a connected cinematic universe was still years off, Feige was lurking in the background as an associate producer and made an effort to have Hugh Jackman cameo as Wolverine. Ironically, it wasn’t rights issues that prevented it but rather the fact that they couldn’t find the Wolverine costume. Still, the hope of a connected universe could be said to first realistically brew with this movie. Spider-Man is also notable for being the first film to use the classic “flipping pages” Marvel title card, which served as a nice nod to source material.

Spider-Man debuted in May 2002. With production occurring over much of 2001, initial posters and some scenes featured the Twin Towers, but these were removed after the 9/11 attacks. None of this prevented a buzzing critical response. CG effects were not new at this point, yet Spider-Man had implemented them in a seamless, advanced way. It blew the minds of many executives and audience members to learn many shots were not someone in a stunt suit.

Critics were quite positive, with many feeling the character had been rendered with real heart and that comic-book films had leapt forward with a grounded drama alongside the costumed hijinks and action. The upside-down kiss became a pop culture moment, and Danny Elfman’s score helped cement an iconic superhero theme. Ebert thought it was… fine.

Audiences responded with their dollars too. Spider-Man blew past expectations, becoming the first film ever to gross $100 million in a single weekend and had the highest opening of all-time at that point. Despite stiff competition from the second Star Wars prequel, Lord of the Rings film, and Harry Potter film, Spider-Man claimed the top spot at the box office in 2002 domestically and finished with a worldwide gross of $825.8 million. This was coupled with a super successful home video release and plenty of merchandising tie-ins.

Needless to say, Marvel finally hit the big time. Continuing our metaphor, if X-Men unlocked the door, Spider-Man kicked the door off its hinges. The trifecta of Blade, X-Men, and Spider-Man had shown that Marvel comic-book films could matter, had potential, and did matter. Not only were they to be treated seriously but could dominate the box office.

Marvel’s financial troubles were left behind and with the money trough opened, Marvel Studios was no longer a desperate whelp trying to make cash however it could. It now wanted a bigger piece of the pie that its properties were earning. Marvel Studios thus hired David Maisel as its new president and COO on the promise he would make Marvel more money.

Maisel started working out deals for TV films with the Sci-Fi Channel, though they went nowhere. Marvel also licensed Namor to Universal for a film. That too never came to fruition. As is so often the case with the smell of cash luring, decision-making is compromised and the art suffers. Despite this early success, Marvel was not immune.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Medium-High

Both Tobey Maguire and Willem Dafoe already debuted in the MCU in Spiderman: No Way Home, which was the first MCU movie that really showed the possibility of the multiverse concept. However, while we think it isn’t likely that much of the Raimi films will be in Doomsday, we speculate that it is highly likely Tobey will reprise his Spider-Man once again. As one of the Marvel cornerstones alongside X-Men, Feige will likely want some element of these in the grand finale to this era of Marvel filmmaking.

Daredevil (2003)

If any film is emblematic of that turn in the story, it is Daredevil. To be fair, this wasn’t rushed into development because of money. Fox had obtained the rights to Daredevil back in 1997 and was keen to have Chris Columbus direct. But perhaps they wanted to focus mostly on X-Men and allowed the rights to expire.

Disney was in talks to get the rights, but those fell apart and Columbia wound up with Daredevil alongside Spider-Man. Yet like Fox, Columbia let the rights expire. Daredevil wound up split between two studios, with New Regency getting the primary rights and Fox signing back on to distribute.

Mark Steven Johnson was hired to write and direct based on his experience writing the Grumpy Old Men series for Fox, and the strength of his Daredevil script. Many were floored by it, with Kevin Feige noting it was one of the best Marvel Studios received. One of Feige’s jobs at Marvel at this time was reviewing scripts, and he among others were gung-ho at what seemed to be a more mature, darker, character-driven work. With Spider-Man‘s box office success, Fox threw more money at the film, ready to get their own mega-hit.

While Fox wanted to film in Canada, Johnson fought hard to film in LA to better recreate the gritty feeling of Hell’s Kitchen. Plus, Ben Affleck was reluctant to travel to Canada, causing Fox to acquiesce. As to Affleck himself, he was cast on the back of the leading-man status he obtained in the late 90s and early 00s. The studio had considered a number of other actors first, including Affleck’s best friend Matt Damon; Damon turned it down despite the fact that he and Affleck had grown up as big fans of the character.

Jennifer Garner was cast as Daredevil’s love interest and famed femme fatale, Elektra. It was on set that Affleck and Garner met and fell in love, resulting in a major Hollywood marriage that lasted thirteen years. Affleck ironically calls this the one movie he regretted doing.

As for the major antagonists, Michael Clarke Duncan was cast as Kingpin, notable for being a Black version of a character who is always white in the comics. Colin Farrell also joined as the super-accurate killer Bullseye. Johnson intended to present a source-accurate version of the psychotic villain, but the oft-derided writer and Marvel’s one-time editor-in-chief Joe Quesada apparently talked him out of using the comics costume, and Farrell wound up depicting Bullseye with his native Irish accent.

Daredevil released in February 2003, with everyone involved ready to replicate Spidey’s success. Unfortunately, they found critics far less kind, and the latter ripped the movie apart on multiple levels. Most found the film dramatically shallow with a confusing story and mismatched tonal issues. Contemporary reviews were kind to the performances, though people have become less favorable towards those as time has gone on.

Even Stan Lee felt they took his creation and made it too tragic. The film’s reputation has soured more and more, with Johnson admitting he tried to put too much into the movie, though he also blames the studio for forcing him to cut it down and emphasize the romantic elements. Daredevil has a director’s cut that many consider a better movie.

This critical response didn’t kill the movie’s box office, though. It was one of the biggest February openings at the time and finished with a worldwide gross of $179.2 million. Arad commented that he saw it as an unmitigated success, with all five Marvel releases since 1998 doing well and two potentially strong ones still coming that summer.

It wouldn’t be enough to get a direct sequel. While there was a spin-off film (we’ll get to that next article) that Affleck recorded a cameo for, Affleck was not pleased with the final product and only agreed to return if they told the stories he wanted to tell. Apparently they refused, and Affleck soured on the idea of playing anymore superheroes (though this wouldn’t last).

Daredevil is notable for starting a trend that soon became a signature of Marvel movies: a post-credits scene. While cinema had had post-credits scenes in the past, they were usually jokes and funny little stings more than storytelling devices or sequel teases. Daredevil used its post-credits scene to tease the return of Bullseye, if in a semi-humorous way. Of course, this wouldn’t pay off, but the idea of a stinger intrigued Feige and others. There would be one or two more experiments before stingers became a foundational part of the MCU.

Anyway, while Fox eventually tried to do a reboot in the late 00s, nothing came together in time and the rights reverted to Marvel. By that time, Marvel Studios was pursuing its own path, a path that would change the course of comic-book movies. Daredevil would have a future, but not on the big-screen. We’ll get to that later.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Medium

Daredevil is a street-level character and not necessarily suited to the cosmic exploits of Doomsday. Not to mention, there is an MCU version of the character that is well-liked. That said, we think there is some chance of Affleck returning for a small cameo. Despite the issues with this version of the character, Feige will likely want him back, as he is part of the history of Marvel movies. Plus, Jennifer Garner already came back. We think there is little chance of Farrell’s Bullseye coming back, and Duncan sadly passed in 2012, so his Kingpin won’t be making a return.

X2: X-Men United (2003)

The success of the first X-Men started immediate development of a sequel. Envisioning his own Empire Strikes Back, Singer searched for a darker storyline that could bring real gravitas to the series. David Hayter and Zak Penn were hired to write separate scripts which later were combined, taking the best elements from each. Hayter worked further with Singer to refine the script. Singer initially turned to the famed Dark Phoenix saga, but Penn convinced him that plot line needed further development first. Further rewrites were done by Michael Doughtery (Trick ‘r Treat) and Dan Harris.

The team made initial attempts to give more screen-time to other X-Men such as Cyclops and Storm, but Fox demanded the movie be cut down and the focus wound up on Wolverine again. Elements such as the Danger Room and Sentinels were cut out once again, as they had been in the first film. By summer 2002, filming started with most of the cast returning and newcomers Brian Cox, Alan Cumming, and Kelly Hu joining.

Speaking of Cumming, he joined as popular character Nightcrawler, another element cut from the first film. Despite the notable use of digital effects, Singer still utilized practical effects, which remain the standout aspects of these early superhero movies. The looks of characters like Mystique and Nightcrawler remain impressive due to the makeup and costuming.

The cost is an often arduous process of application, with Rebecca Romijn having to spend nine hours in the makeup chair for the first film to get all of the scales applied. The process was thankfully refined to a mere six hours for this movie, and Nightcrawler’s look only required four hours, except for Nightcrawler’s shirtless scene which needed nine hours. Little mercies.

Adding to the overall struggles was an extensive production. While praise is rightfully directed for filming not entirely on green- or blue-screen sets, the other side of that is the labor involved. This film had over 64 sets in 38 different locations, and many a problem had to be solved such as finding insufficient snow in Alberta, two stuntmen suffering nearly fatal injuries, Hugh Jackman’s stuntman enduring an injury, and hilariously, McKellen and Stewart lacking knowledge on how to play chess for their scenes together. Worst of all was Singer’s continuing erratic and demanding behavior, which caused clashes with Halle Berry and others.

Despite Singer’s crazed antics, it did not hinder X2. It released in May 2003 as the widest release ever, debuting on 7316 screens. It was part of a mighty 2003 box office season that saw itself and four other films all cross $200 million in one summer. It finished at $407.7 million worldwide and received rave critical reviews. The movie was not without detractors, but most felt it improved upon the first film and deftly handled its ensemble cast to provide great thrills, real humanity to its underlying themes of prejudice, and continued to up the ante for comic-book movies. With X2, not only did Marvel confirm its popular success, but it also saw comic-book films taken seriously as top-grade action movies. Even Ebert liked it!

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Happening

While we already discussed that a chunk of the main cast of the X-Men are returning for Doomsday, X2 is getting its unique character joining as well, with Cumming’s Nightcrawler reprising the role for the first time since this film. It really is all hands on deck.

Hulk (2003)

One of the few original successes joined this era of Marvel movies. Outside of Spider-Man, Hulk was probably the only other Marvel character that mainstream audiences had familiarity with. Avi Arad had been trying to make a movie happen since the 90s, with Universal acquiring the rights at that time. Universal remains one of the few non-Disney studios to still have stake in any Marvel characters. Stan Lee worked alongside John Turman to develop a script that included all of the key elements from the comics. But Universal was concerned and developed further scripts, though many elements of this initial script wound up in the final film.

The creative team of Jonathan Hensleigh and Joe Johnston was put at the helm, but Johnston soon dropped out. Further rewrites were done, with Zak Penn providing some treatments. Two of his scenes did not wind up in this movie, but would be put into the 2008 film. Hensleigh was prepared to take over as director and pre-production began, yet in 1998 escalating costs caused Universal to put the movie on hold. Hensleigh attempted rewrites to lower costs, but his frustration over the process caused him to drop out as well.

Michael France, who initially helped out Lee and Turman back in the 80s, returned to rewrite, yet he found Universal’s executives split on whether to make it a serious action film or a comedy. He decided on the serious route and added the element of Bruce Banner’s father being a primary antagonistic figure. While producers were finally pleased with his script, still more rewrites were commissioned. Ang Lee became involved by 2001, passing on the opportunity to direct the third Terminator. He had further rewrites done, drawing inspiration from Universal horror and Greek mythology.

Lee cast Eric Bana as Banner after seeing him in Chopper. Bana was simultaneously auditioning for Ghost Rider, but he lost that part. Bana was a fan of the Hulk show, though he wasn’t the first choice for this part either, with Tom Cruise, Ed Norton (more on him in a future article), and Billy Crudup all reportedly turning down the role. Lee also lured in Jennifer Connelly and Nick Nolte with his Greek tragedy pitch.

At last, filming was underway in early 2002. Unlike most, cowriter James Schamus didn’t feel inspired by the success of Spider-Man in the middle of filming. Instead, he was worried they weren’t up to the level of that movie. Bana reported that the sets were deadly silent with Lee bringing a serious arthouse approach to the filming. Production finished all the same, and Stan Lee provided what was starting to become his standard cameo. Lou Ferrigno, who played the TV Hulk, also cameoed. Extensive CGI was used to create Hulk and the comic panel look that Ang Lee wanted.

Indeed, Lee’s entire approach was to recreate the feeling of a comic onscreen. The results of his committed direction were mixed. While critics appreciated his ambitious attempts and stylistic depiction of comic visuals, with Ebert providing a positive review, others criticized the movie as dramatically lacking and then too silly when the action scenes came. Despite being comic-accurate, the Hulk dogs were singled out for criticism as well as most of the other digital effects for looking cheap and cartoonish. Retrospective reviews have lauded it for standing out among the other comic films at the time and even those since.

Hulk certainly didn’t fail at the box office. It had a fairly strong opening weekend and finished worldwide with a $245.4 million gross. Still, a high mark had been set. While plans for a sequel were immediately underway, Schamus eventually walked out due to creative differences and Universal never got anything else off the ground in time for the release date Arad wanted. The rights reverted to Marvel, with the odd caveat that Universal retained first right of refusal on distribution for returning the rights early, thus still holding the keys on Hulk movies making it to the theater. This is why there has only been one solo Hulk film since.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Low

We think the only character with any chance of making it to Doomsday would be Eric Bana’s Hulk. But funnily enough, Bana has directly commented on his returning to the role by opining that he very much saw it as a one-off role and said he could not see it happening. While actors have lied about returning to their roles in the past, we think Bana is genuine in his lack of desire. This movie probably won’t make it to the big dance.

The Punisher (2004)

By the end of 2003, Marvel Studios was looking brighter and brighter. Without any box office bombs and many sequels brewing, they were trying to strike the iron while it was hot. As previously mentioned, Marvel had hired David Maisel as its new president and COO, earning the job by pitching that Marvel should self-finance and produce its own films. This would give Marvel the most profit and most control. Kevin Feige liked this idea as he saw the potential of having a shared cinematic universe that mirrored the comics. But could such an idea work with so many characters licensed out? Well, Feige noted that Marvel maintained control of some of the key Avengers characters, and many other characters would soon return under Marvel’s wing.

This happened after The Punisher released (see our earlier article in this series). As Blade entered production, Marvel saw the potential for another Punisher film and included the character in their 2000 deal with Artisan Entertainment. This deal was unique for giving Marvel equity ownership and a stake in the cost of production, thus functioning as an experiment of sorts for the type of production Maisel envisioned, even if it wasn’t intended as such.

Despite the issues with Hulk‘s script, Marvel still liked Jonathan Hensleigh and signed him here to write and make his directorial debut, with his wife Gale Anne Hurd producing. He drew primarily from two main comic storylines, aiming to give Frank Castle a gritty, grounded storyline to differentiate him from the other comic characters in development at the time. However, Hensleigh was quickly frustrated with Artisan not providing the budget he wanted, requiring more of the same type of edits that had driven him from Hulk. Action scenes were cut down, storylines reduced, and studio interference played the unfortunate role it often does.

France, another cowriter from Hulk, joined to help Hensleigh in the rewrites and was key in pushing the film to shoot in Florida, where it would be cheaper. Hensleigh wanted to replicate the griminess of ’60s and ’70s action movies such as Bonnie and Clyde, Mad Max, and Dirty Harry, with a dose of Othello for good measure. France attempted to introduce comics characters like Jigsaw and Microchip, but was shut down by Hensleigh.

The Punisher opened on April 16, 2004 and did decently in its opening weekend. However, it was the least successful Marvel movie in the new millennium, finishing with a worldwide gross of only $54.7 million against its $33 million budget. Critics rather harshly derided it as cheerless violence and sporting a silly plot. Most of the cast was criticized as well, with John Travolta singled out as not up to the task of his role, though Thomas Jane‘s turn as Punisher was one of the few bright spots. Some did praise the throwback to grittier revenge movies of the 70s and as accurately aping the aesthetic of Punisher’s 70s comics.

This wouldn’t be enough to get it to a sequel. As production wrapped, Lions Gate purchased Artisan and took over distribution. Though Lions Gate was never involved with the actual production, it was initially interested in working with Avi Arad on a sequel. Development lingered for three years but never made it anywhere due to creative issues and budgetary fights.

Though Lions Gate would eventually produce another Punisher film, it was a reboot. And the difficulties seemed to push Lions Gate off making more comic-book movies. Lions Gate had acquired all of the deals Artisan had with Marvel and initially produced eight animated films for the direct-to-DVD market. But afterwards, whether because of a positive relationship with Arad and Marvel, or annoyance, Lions Gate decided to release the rights for all other characters except Punisher back to Marvel. And thus, Marvel’s dream of self-financing seemed to grow closer to reality.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Low

We rate the chances of Jane’s Punisher appearing just slightly higher than Dolph Lundgren’s. While neither seem likely to get the nod with so many other higher-profile characters to fit in, there is some small chance Marvel may want to gather all of the Punishers since all of the actors are still living. But we just don’t see it happening.

Spider-Man 2 (2004)

Despite The Punisher being the first arguable failure for Marvel Studios, this would be quickly forgotten in the wake of its biggest success to date. Because Spider-Man was the juggernaut that it was, a sequel was immediately greenlit with Raimi returning. They also hired Smallville‘s Alfred Gough and Miles Millar to write a script, with David Koepp soon joining the writing team and Michael Chabon hired to do rewrites.

Raimi picked through the various treatments to pick the elements he liked best and narrowed down on a story that would focus on Doc Ock as the main villain and Peter Parker’s struggle between personal responsibilities and being a hero. It would be Raimi who altered Doc Ock’s backstory into a tragic figure that Peter admired, which added further dramatic weight.

Despite the excitement, there was trouble in paradise. Tobey Maguire had back issues develop and he was reportedly quietly pushed aside for Jake Gyllenhaal. Maguire fought hard to get the role back, including getting the head of Universal Studios to pressure Columbia into restoring him to the cast. It worked, and Maguire delighted in the reverse of fate by performing many of his own stunts and even dropping a line about his back that wound up in the final film.

While CGI effects were growing in prevalence in Hollywood, Raimi still leaned into practical effects and stunt work. Massive sets were commissioned in addition to filming in NYC and Chicago, including one for Doc Ock’s lair that put filming on hiatus for eight weeks. But with that much financial success, the studio got of the way to let the creatives cook. Doc Ock’s tentacles were physically created as well to add realism in addition to the CGI that was used.

With the right elements in place, Spider-Man 2 was another smash success. Critics lauded what was seen as a step up in the dramatic storytelling with true emotional weight. The performances and action were all universally praised as well, with Ebert giving it a 4/4 and calling it the best superhero film since the genre launched. Many today still consider it one of the best comic-book movies and action films of the 00’s. It won an Academy Award for Visual Effects to top it all off.

As for what really gets the studios salivating, money rained down on this movie. It hit $200 million within eight days, a record at the time. It took many other weekend and day of the week records, and finished with a gross of $795.9 million worldwide. A third film was already approved before release, but this gross likely emboldened them all the more.

Likelihood of Doomsday Connection: Medium-High

As already mentioned with Tobey above, we think he’ll likely return again after No Way Home was so well received. But as with Spider-Man, we don’t think any supporting characters like Kirsten Dunst‘s Mary Jane or James Franco‘s Harry Osborn will return. Alfred Molina already reprised his role as Doc Ock but likely won’t be in any Avengers film.

As we close the door on this era of Marvel, it’s clear the intrepid company was in a much better place. Saved from the brink of destruction and bankruptcy, it found itself with an opposite view as 2004 closed its doors. Despite mixed critical reception to a few films, most were positively received and two were considered among the best of the decade. Not only was Marvel saved, it was starting to take over as a dominant cultural force.

Still, there was a price to this for comics fans. As good as the movies often were, there were numerous changes from the source material as many felt comic-accurate costumes or character origins were still too zany for mainstream audiences with the X-Men being the notable victims of this mentality. Furthermore, Marvel Comics thrived on its shared universe and crossovers. Yet with so many different studios owning the rights, the chances of such crossovers seemed near impossible. It seemed there was only an appetite for Marvel’s flagship characters. More obscure characters like Iron Man, Thor, or Ant-Man didn’t seem the most marketable.

Next time we’ll see how the fruits of success fed Marvel Studios and motivated them to go further. Already, the seeds were being planted for Marvel to get into film production. This would take time though, and in the meantime, there were sequels and spin-offs to be made. Will comic book movies be able to escape the plague of diminishing returns and creative bankruptcy that often seizes studios when they sense a money opportunity? Or will Marvel mar the reputation it had built up over the course of late 90s and early 00s?

Ranking Era Two

Time to rank the next era! We have a much stronger set of movies this time, even if with some duds. Let’s see how they stack up!

#9: Daredevil

Pulling up the rear of this era is Daredevil. It’s not an entirely terrible movie and if we were ranking the director’s cut, it might not be last. Despite the reputation of this era being a bunch of origin stories, this and many others were actually trying somewhat unique approaches to avoid a simple rote telling of a hero’s creation. But Daredevil still felt obliged to tell the origin in flashback and it hurts the dramatic momentum when it happens.

The film takes so long to reach its main plot that it then rushes through the introduction of Kingpin, Bullseye, and more. Focus is instead put on extended scenes of Affleck and Garner flirting, with little dramatic heft. Garner is a clear miscast for fans of the comic-book character, unable to come across as convincingly intimidating. Affleck fares slightly better, if only just. The movie is also hilariously bound to the early 00s with the soundtrack wielding the notable “Bring Me to Life” and other such songs punctuating moments.

The villains are given quite a bit of short shrift with no clear idea of the threat they pose, past Bullseye just appearing and killing people. The taint this had on the reputation of the character is unfortunate, given the few neat things the movie does. The depiction of the radar vision brings one of the few genuine romantic moments and the potential was here for a solidly gripping take on the character. Sadly, it fell short.

#8: Blade II

The Blade sequel isn’t an entirely bad experience, but it lacks more than a bit in plot. While Wesley Snipes is more assured in the role, the script is even weaker than the first movie. The vague overtones of more thematic depth involved in a family of original vampires who are cruel to each other are lost in the silliness that started to overtake this entry. Further, none of these villains are distinctive and well-written enough to really work.

Kris Kristofferson’s Whistler returns in a convoluted manner, but he’s a welcome presence all the same. The smaller performances from Reedus and Perlman who were still building their reputations are fun to see, both suiting their roles well. It’s also funny how this plot resembles that of the superior X2 by having heroes and villains team up. Must have been something in the writing room air.

#7: Hulk

Hulk suffers from many of the same problems as Daredevil. With comic-book films still navigating tone, many of the scripts layered on too much melodrama without the proper balance of true character development. Ang Lee saw the dramatic potential for a Hulk movie and tried to develop it into the epic tragedy it could be. But it gets far too self-serious at times for a film with super poodles and a giant green rage monster.

The cast is solid all around. Bana seems a suitable Banner, and Sam Elliot as General Ross is also inspired casting. Nolte’s character is too erratically written to truly work as a villain, but it’s no fault of Nolte. This is just another movie that tried to do too much. Like Daredevil, it wanted to put all the good stuff on screen at once and ended up giving everything short shrift.

That said, Hulk avoids last place due to Lee’s admittedly unique approach and making the movie look like a comic book come to life. With screen transitions and other editorial cuts trying to resemble panels changing, Hulk does remain distinctive even over 20 years after its release. One can admire what Lee was going for with it, even if it often didn’t work.

#6: The Punisher

The Punisher is carried over some of the other movies in this era purely on the strength of Thomas Jane’s performance. Jane brings a real gravitas to the role and anger that most other takes on the character lack. But like the other movies below this one, it is laden with script issues.

It features an overly-long origin story that goes on and on. The villains are underbaked with it seeming to rely mostly on John Travolta’s star power. But Travolta seems directionless with his character, and is easily one of the weakest Marvel villains across all of the movies.

While the unrelenting tone is a strength in some ways, it is almost too relentlessly grim. This needed better designed action scenes to sustain the method the movie used. But at the least, the grit the movie has suits the character. Like all of these lower half films that are half-baked, it has good ideas. We think at least this one’s good ideas shine the brightest.

#5: Blade

Blade is where the films cross from average or mixed to good. Not to say Blade doesn’t have its own flaws, but the strengths outweigh the weaknesses here. It all starts with Snipes who owns the role and helped transform the character forever. While he may reflect certain tropes of the era, the stoic, black-leather clad, and sporter of occasional whips Daywalker remains a distinctive character today and the comics version changed to match this portrayal. Snipes brings a natural presence that carries the entire trilogy.

Not to be overlooked is Kris Kristofferson as Blade’s mentor. His gruff take on Whistler almost seems in disbelief about the movie he’s in, which somehow works with the tone Norrington created. His relationship with Blade is perhaps the highlight of the movie.

To be fair, Blade comes across as dated in many respects. This is the era where The Matrix took off and everything felt derivative of that aesthetic. The pounding club music that comprises the score also dates it to a late 90’s style. Yet, there is a visual flair throughout that helps make the action pop. While Stephen Dorff is a better villain than the one in Blade II, his motivations aren’t much more complicated than conquering the world.

Blade probably could have used with some beefing up to the script. But it is by and large entertaining at the least, and set the mold for all of Marvel’s future success.Plus, the cheese of Blade’s iconic line is hard not to smile at. It was the first Marvel film to recognize that comic characters can work on the big screen if treated like human beings, even when they aren’t.

#4: X-Men

For all that Blade does right, X-Men expands on it positively, and in some pretty direct ways. The black leather look carried over to this film and the overall cool color palates as well as having a grizzled veteran as the lead character. It’s easy to take for granted how much this movie does right, now that we have over 25 years of experience furthering the strengths of big screen superheroes, but everyone involved deserves lots of credit. Special effects finally caught up enough to display the diversity of powers in these characters without it looking totally silly.

While the depth of the conflict between Magneto’s Brotherhood and Professor X’s X-Men wouldn’t be developed further until the sequel, all of the basic ingredients are here. The battles take on their appropriate gravitas because actors like Stewart and McKellan bring their stage training to the forefront and lend it power. The metaphor of mutants as the disenfranchised part of society works even here because the bigoted behavior of Senator Kelly feels recognizable.

And, even if limited in scope, the battles between the mutants still have a spark and fun. Seeing Cyclops blast Sabretooth with an eyebeam for the first time or Storm sparking Toad with lighting (ignoring the infamous cringey line) had to be a blast. The extensive makeup work for Mystique remains impressive as well. Though Berry’s failed attempt at an African accent in this movie is amusing. The film also let Hugh Jackman show his talents to the world. He may have had complaints regarding comic authenticity but he brought enough of the attitude to cement his career.

X-Men does have awkward pacing at times and it does feel like the ensemble gets short shrift to Wolverine more than a bit. Yet it does just enough to cement itself as a solid comic book action flick and still presents as a decent alternative to the Avengers-style team-up movie.

#3: Spider-Man

With now three major big-screen takes on the Webhead, different generations all have their favorites. Newer fans consider this take dorky and silly now, but we find it is the best interpretation of Stan Lee’s awkward hero to date. Tobey Maguire alone has portrayed Peter Parker as the dopey moody dork that he is in when he first gets his powers. While he may not nail the quippiness of Spidey’s costumed form, he still has his share of solid funny moments.

So much of Raimi’s film still works. The moments where Parker learns and discovers his powers are excellent. Raimi approaches it with such a love for the comics and his desire to bring to life not just the lead characters but a complicated supporting cast and making the civilians as much of a force as anything else is still appreciated. The MCU should be lauded for advancing the boundaries of where superhero movies were in this era, but one thing that’s been lost is that these heroes are saving regular people most of the time in the comics pages. Spider-Man spends plenty of time with the costumed hero helping out average Joes and it pays off in the climax with Green Goblin. Speaking of, Dafoe’s performance still remains a delight with Raimi’s quick zooms helping emphasize the finer points of it.

This movie has its problems too, to be fair. The origin story does feel rather split from the second half where Spidey deals with the threat of Green Goblin, though Raimi does thread Goblin’s origin into the first half to be fair. The Goblin costume has also aged horribly and one wishes they had stuck with the original concept. And as important as the MJ and Peter romance is supposed to be, with the iconic upside kiss scene, it still feels somewhat underdeveloped. But overall, Spider-Man is a strong introduction to the character and remains a fun time 20+ years later.

#2: X2

While the stereotype is that sequels provide diminishing returns, in this early era of superhero movies, sequels benefited from the filmmakers figuring out the finer points and getting bigger budgets. Such was the case here, as X2 improves on the first film in every way. There is still a large focus on Wolverine but the ensemble gets more breathing room here with Magneto and Xavier’s relationship becoming a standout with more screen time. It’s not an accident that this frenemy relationship wound up as the centering point for the prequel, later sequels, and in the Doomsday trailer. Their metaphorical representation of the extremist and moderate response to oppression works well on the page and these actors deliver it live neigh perfectly.

The interesting part of X2‘s plotting structure is that the Brotherhood are not the main villains and team up with the X-Men for a chunk against a greater threat represented in William Stryker (a perfectly smarmy Brian Cox), who wants to eradicate all mutants. The film picks up from the threads of the first movie quite well, using Mystique as a wild card character to introduce other Brotherhood characters at the right moment. The introduction of Pyro, Iceman, and more focus on Rogue as the younger mutant characters forms a strong subplot on the way people react to somebody different and why Magneto’s viewpoint feels right to so many people.

That’s not to mention the excellent action set-pieces. The opening Nightcrawler White House attack remains iconic and may be Singer’s finest moment as a director. Not to be overlooked are the brutal battle between Wolverine and Lady Deathstrike (sadly a bit underdeveloped) and Jean Grey’s heroic rescue of the team from being drowned. X2 understands why grand moments on the comic-book page work and found a way to bring the tone of such scenes to the silver screen.

X2 isn’t without chinks here and there, but it remains one of the best comic films out there. While it may have lost the friendly war with the Spider-Man films as far as quality or money goes, this rivalry was to both franchise’s benefit. With the releases of these two flagship movies, it felt like the sky was the limit for Marvel.

#1: Spider-Man 2

And boy did Spidey ever swing through that sky in this one. We won’t bury the lead here: Spider-Man 2 rules this era and will likely remain as one of the top films even after the MCU gauntlet arrives. This features one of the best recreations of a comic book storyline with its translation of “Spider-Man No More.” It understands the weight of Peter’s struggle between being a hero and a regular human being from the opening scene, humorously featuring real NYC pizza joint Joes. Indeed, much of the opening act is showing how much Peter has falling through the cracks by being a hero, a running theme in the comics.

The film’s structure asks the important question of why heroes matter and what sacrifices they require. The dissolution of friendships with Harry and Mary Jane for varying reasons, failings in a professional capacity, and feeling helpless against the superpowered threats he faces all are given proper weight. This movie feels so much like the 70’s era books brought to life, especially with Raimi’s funny camera cuts and framing techniques. And speaking of threats, Alfred Molina’s Doc Ock remains the standout Raimi villain for the depth he has. The scene of his tentacles coming to life is also some excellent horror in the middle of an action film.

Peter’s navigation of this conflict is so relatable to those of us who have split responsibilities in life. Which makes the scene at the 2/3rds mark with Aunt May sound so strongly on why we need heroes. Dare we say it outshines Uncle Ben’s famed statement on great power and great responsibility? If only because Rosemary Harris is such an excellent and unheralded gem of these movies. She nails that scene.

An article as long as this one already is could be written on Spider-Man 2‘s merits. We cut it short here by stating this one rocks from start to finish. Even the final shot packs a punch of melancholy and thus more emotional depth into what seems like a moment of triumph for the characters. Hats off to you Sam Raimi and company.

Marvel Chart

1. Spider-Man 2 (2004)
2. X2: X-Men United (2003)
3. X2 (2003)
4. Spider-Man (2002)
5. X-Men (2000)
6. Blade (1998)
7. The Punisher (2004)
8. Hulk (2003)
9. Blade II (2002)
10. Daredevil (2003)
11. Fantastic Four (1994)
12. The Punisher (1989)
13. Howard the Duck (1986)
14. Captain America (1990)