If you’d be interested in hosting one of my guest articles, please let me know at superheronation-at-gmail-dot-com.  I’d really appreciate if you would suggest an article topic (e.g. How to Write an Interesting Sidekick) or some general genre of articles (e.g. anything about characterization) you find interesting, but it’s not necessary.

*Never proven in a court of law, but Batman isn’t much into legal niceties (like verdicts).  Double points if he does Roethlisberger with a Terrible Towel.

• The writing was consistently clever and entertaining.  I’m not sure how much of it I will remember a few weeks from now–most of it wasn’t brilliant–but it was a very fun time.
• The movie played with a few superhero tropes.  For example, there’s the obligatory chase scene where a villain tries to escape by throwing a civilian into danger.  A villain throws a boy into a river and runs off.  The Captain glances at the boy, who says something like, “I can swim.  Go get him!”  However, I think they could have more smoothly handled the trope that the super-serum could not be replicated.  Spoiler: The project falls apart because one scientist gets killed and he didn’t have any notes or additional doses of the serum anywhere?  Didn’t he have any lab assistants?  (I don’t think it would’ve been hard to plug this hole.  Maybe he was worried that the Nazis would steal his notes, so he did as much from memory as possible and/or he used a code that only he could understand).
• I liked that Steve Rogers proved himself, whereas many other superheroes are just passively chosen for greatness (e.g. they’re born with superpowers or happen to be in the right place at the right time for a genetically-modified spider bite).   Rogers is selected as the test subject for the serum because he shows uncommon character, cunning and bravery.  The bravery struck me as a bit banal (he leaps on a hand-grenade without knowing it was a dummy).  The cunning was much more memorable. That flagpole scene was pretty kickass.

• If you think too hard about the plot, it probably makes less sense than most other good superhero movies.  For example, Captain America uses a car-door and a Hollywood prop shield to stop bullets and he’s instantly brilliant with his superpowered shield even though he’s never shown practicing with it.
• It was a bit refreshing to have a superhero story without a secret identity.  Among the superhero movies with secret identities, I feel the only two that have used them notably well have been Kick-Ass and The Incredibles.  For example, after Kick-Ass gets mauled by a criminal, he begs a paramedic to get rid of his costume so his father doesn’t find out his secret identity.  This leads to a touching and grimly hilarious scene where the father misconstrues just what the crime was.
• As in First Class, there was some minor historical whitewashing.  Rogers’ unit is racially-mixed, which would have been uncommon in World War II.  (Most Army units were segregated until the Korean War).
• As with most superhero universes, pretty much everything is hereditary.  (I didn’t see any notable traits distinguishing Shannon Carter from her grandmother or Tony Stark from his father).
• I found the Stan Lee cameo highly amusing.  ”I thought he was going to be taller?”

1. I’ve included the movies that have come out in the past year (X-Men: First Class, Thor and Green Lantern).
2. A few people thought that it would be fairer to look at only the current wave of superhero movies (starting in 2000 with X-Men).  I’ve added a section comparing both companies’ performance post-2000.

Summary

• Including the older movies, the average Rotten Tomato score was 50.2% for DC and 58.1% for Marvel.  If we look only at the modern movies, the gap narrows somewhat.  Since 2000, DC has averaged 54.8% and Marvel has averaged 59.9%.

• Marvel has been having more critical success with more series.  Since 2000, DC’s non-Batman movies have averaged 47.1%.  Since 2000, Marvel’s non-Spiderman movies have averaged 55.8% and its non-X-Men movies have averaged 56.4%.

DC Movies

A-Grade (80+ on Rotten Tomatoes)
The Dark Knight-94%
Superman-94% *
Batman: Mask of the Phantasm-87% *
Batman Begins-85%
Superman II-83% *

B-Grade (60-79 on Rotten Tomatoes)
Batman Returns-77%*
Superman Returns-76%
V for Vendetta-73%
Batman-71%
Watchmen-64%

C-Grade (40-59 on Rotten Tomatoes)
The Losers-47%
Constantine-46%
Batman Forever-44%*

D-Grade (20-39 on Rotten Tomatoes)
Green Lantern – 25% (after three days of reviews–this figure may change slightly as more reviews come in)
Superman III-23% *

F-Grade (19 or less on Rotten Tomatoes)
Steel-13% *
Jonah Hex-12%
Batman and Robin-12% *
Superman IV: The Quest for Peace-11% *
Catwoman-10%
Supergirl-8% *

*–These movies came before 2000.

Marvel Movies

A-Grade (80+ on Rotten Tomatoes)
Spiderman 2-94%
Iron Man-93%
Spiderman-90%
X2: X-Men United-88%
X-Men: First Class-87%
X-Men-81%

B-Grade (60-79 on Rotten Tomatoes)
Thor-77%
Iron Man 2-73%
Incredible Hulk-66%
Spiderman 3-63%
Hulk-62% (How!?)

C-Grade (40-59 on Rotten Tomatoes)
Blade II-58% *
X-Men: Last Stand-57%
Blade-55% *
Daredevil-44%

D-Grade (20-39 on Rotten Tomatoes)
X-Men Origins: Wolverine-36%
Fantastic Four-36%
The Punisher-30%
FF: Rise of the Silver Surfer-26%
Ghost Rider-26%
Blade Trinity-26% *

F-Grade (19 or less on Rotten Tomatoes)
Elektra-10%

*–These movies came before 2000.

Here are some other ways to look at the data.

ALL OF THE ABOVE MOVIES (REGARDLESS OF YEAR)

Including the older movies, the average Rotten Tomato score was 50.2 for DC and 58.1 for Marvel.

ONLY MODERN MOVIES (SINCE 2000)

Excluding the older movies, the average Rotten Tomato score was 54.8% for DC and 59.9% for Marvel.  That’s closer, although Marvel movies are still a bit better on average.

Some other trends that stuck out.

• In the modern era, Marvel is having more critical success with more series. In the modern era, DC averaged 54.8% with all movies included, but 47.1% in non-Batman movies.  Marvel averaged 59.9% with all movies included and 55.8 in non-Spiderman movies and 56.4 in movies without X-Men.  In the modern era, DC has had 4 non-Batman movies rated A-grade or B-grade.  Over the same period, Marvel has had 8 non-Spiderman and 8 non-X-Men A-grade or B-grade movies.  
• Hollywood is still as inept with female leads as it was 25 years ago. Elektra (10%) and Catwoman (10%) turned out as bad as 1984′s Supergirl (8%).  That probably can’t just be attributed to budget: Catwoman had a production budget of $100 million in 2004 and Elektra had $43 million in 2005.  According to IMDB, Supergirl’s budget was $35 million, which (if adjusted for inflation) works out to about $80 million in 2005.  Other films did much better with comparable budgets, such as X-Men ($75 million in 2000).  That said, most of the above movies had budgets between $100-200 million.

Questions? Concerns?  Other comments?  Please let me know and I might incorporate them when I update the survey with more recent releases.

Filled with unintentionally laughable characters, intergalactic gobbledygook, sudden pacing shifts and a hero whose superpower is downright cartoony, this latest comic adaptation makes something like “Spider-Man” look both grounded and brilliant… The Big Bad in this film turns out to be a huge smoky cosmic octopus of sorts (which speaks English, no less). Certainly a candidate for the 10 Worst Villains of All Time list.  – Detroit News

…it’s not the concept that’s so mightily flawed. It’s the execution. The motivation behind the villains, including the yellow fear monster, could have been thought up by a reasonably priced blender. The plot doesn’t flow in the slightest. The whole mess is an extended trailer, or the sound a 10th grader makes when he knows he hasn’t done his homework and the teacher is about to ask him about it. The movie shouts at you the entire time, punishing the audience, but it never says anything remotely important or interesting.  – Laremy Legel

This blobby ever-changing monster is fueled by “the yellow power of fear,” which is almost as frightful as the movie’s other nemesis: the gray power of boredom.

Sure, comic lovers will thrill when Jordan (Ryan Reynolds) recites the Lantern oath for the first time, but I bet they’d be a lot happier if he had something interesting to do afterwards… Parallax is more special effect run amuck than actual villain. Strong’s terrific turn as Sinestro – Right there, people! Right there mocking us! – only pours salt in that wound. – Rob Vaux

Certainly Ryan Reynolds possesses the xylophone abs to play a superhero, and the smart-aleck persona to make him fun.  Only one of those gifts is displayed in Green Lantern, thanks to a digitally painted-on costume hugging his physique. This movie has little else to offer except gaudy CGI doodles including a villain resembling an overflowing septic tank with teeth. – St. Petersburg Times

Despite having an enjoyable, self-aware leading man, Ryan Reynolds, in the title role of test-pilot-turned-superhero Hal Jordan, Green Lantern fails on almost all levels. The story seems determined to hit every cliché in the universe, the dialogue is consistently trite and therefore instantly forgettable, and every film reference (tons of Star Wars, The Last Starfighter, Superman) only reinforces the realization that this movie can’t even gain any upgrade in class with its thievery of superior movies… Was the casting director drunk the night the 40-year-old Sarsgaard was deemed the right choice to play the son of the 51-year old Robbins? – Atlantic City Weekly

Thor did a better job with this, by mostly ignoring backstory except for movie’s first ten minutes and working it in as the movie went along. Then again, the Odinson’s background was comparatively simple (Dad strips the arrogant Thor of his powers and sends him to Earth to learn humility). Director Martin Campbell and his bevy of writers had the opposite problem: cramming the Green Lantern Corps history and Jordan’s initiation into their ranks into less than an hour’s running time in order to allow the new GL a chance to show his stuff. And it’s all terribly rushed. Jordan zips from receiving the ring from Abin Sur to the early manifestations of its powers to perfunctory boot camp on the planet Oa…it’s feels like we’re speed dating all these characters. – Houston Press

‘Green Lantern’ doesn’t follow in the same footsteps of recent superhero films and instead a being a dark and compelling companions to them, the film is as campy as ‘The Fantastic Four.’ – Wilson Morales

So they’ve combined that [serious] element with a jokier one that turns the hero into a callow hipster more in tune with today’s juvenile sensibilities. He may be called Hal Jordan and be a great test pilot, but in terms of personality the hero is a great deal closer to that other Lantern, Kyle Raynor. — OGO

Even by the standards of the current run of mediocre comic-book movies, this one stands out for its egregious shoddiness. Its characters, dialogue, and pacing recall a destined-to-be-canceled Saturday morning cartoon from the early ’80s or possibly an extended Hasbro infomercial.  — Slate

One of the commenters responds:

While critics in general are happy to give approval to comic book films (and, I think, many critics do treat them fairly), I think there’s no question that there are elements of bias in many critics’ reviews.

First, look at the language many critics use. When giving a positive review, many will say things like “despite its comic book origins,” or “leaping beyond comic books,” as if being based on a comic book is in some way a handicap.

Actually, I think being based on a comic book (or a novel or TV show or anything else) is a handicap for a movie.

1. It’s harder to surprise viewers with an adaptation.  Whether you’re adapting Spiderman or the Bible, 90% of the audience knows 90% of what is going to happen.  In particular, readers will know about any substantial failures/setbacks in advance, such as the death in Kick-Ass. In contrast, it’s much harder for somebody watching The Incredibles to guess whether it will end with a stereotypically happy conclusion or something more bittersweet.  (For example, the health inspectors close the rat-staffed restaurant in Ratatouille and the boy’s family is just as screwed up at the end of Up as it was at the beginning).

2. The studios usually want sequels, which badly limits the screenwriters’ options. This just in: Batman will survive every Batman movie, the villain will lose, and the villain (probably) won’t even accomplish anything important enough to get mentioned in any of the subsequent movies. When a villain DOES accomplish something meaningful in an adapted movie (such as Ozymandias vs. New York), it’s almost always known to viewers beforehand.  Most cinematic adaptations can only surprise us with execution and concepts that don’t have much bearing on the arc of the plot.  Is Spiderman going to marry Mary Jane in this movie or the next?  Which national landmark will Magneto attack this time?

3.  The original material may not be well-suited for cinematic adaptation. For example, you might have to gut the story to get the movie short enough.  Avatar’s first season has 21 episodes totaling  ~7 hours of running time but the movie was 94 minutes long.  The first six Harry Potter movies had ~2.5 hours each to cover an average of 150,000 words of source material.  In such cases, I think the best-case scenario is to make serious cuts to make a coherent, well-developed movie rather than try to gloss over everything that happened in the original.  Subplots and perhaps even some characters may need to go.  Some people will still be unhappy because they’re attached to what got cut.  Although a movie might somehow come up with a coherent, unbloated plot without shortchanging fans that want a straight retelling of the story, I think it’s clearly harder than just creating your plot from scratch for the movie.

Movies since the early 2000s have generally performed quite well in Rotten Tomato ratings, as Jim Emerson noted.  If superhero movies did that well despite the adaptation-related handicaps above and the critics generally being prejudiced against the concept, that would be quite remarkable.  I think the most plausible explanation is that critics are receptive to good movies whether the hero wears bright tights or not.

For the sake of convenience and clean numbers, I took the top 20 grossing movies from each publisher and then gathered their Rotten Tomato rankings, which are averages of hundreds or thousands of reviews.  (A RT ranking isn’t a perfect measure of quality, but it’s probably pretty accurate).

DC Movies

A-Grade (80+ on Rotten Tomatoes)
The Dark Knight-94%
Superman-94%
Batman: Mask of the Phantasm-87%
Batman Begins-85%
Superman II-83%

B-Grade (60-79 on Rotten Tomatoes)
Batman Returns-77%
Superman Returns-76%
V for Vendetta-73%
Batman-71%
Watchmen-64%

C-Grade (40-59 on Rotten Tomatoes)
The Losers-47%
Constantine-46%
Batman Forever-44%

D-Grade (20-39 on Rotten Tomatoes)
Superman III-23%

F-Grade (19 or less on Rotten Tomatoes)
Steel-13%
Jonah Hex-12%
Batman and Robin-12%
Superman IV: The Quest for Peace-11%
Catwoman-10%
Supergirl-8%

Marvel Movies

A-Grade (80+ on Rotten Tomatoes)
Spiderman 2-94%
Iron Man-93%
Spiderman-90%
X2: X-Men United-88% (How!?)
X-Men-81%

B-Grade (60-79 on Rotten Tomatoes)
Iron Man 2-73%
Incredible Hulk-66%
Spiderman 3-63%
Hulk-62% (WTF? I would put this at 20, tops)

C-Grade (40-59 on Rotten Tomatoes)
Blade II-58%
X-Men: Last Stand-57%
Blade-55%
Daredevil-44%

D-Grade (20-39 on Rotten Tomatoes)
X-Men Origins: Wolverine-36%
Fantastic Four-36%
The Punisher-30%
FF: Rise of the Silver Surfer-26%
Ghost Rider-26%
Blade Trinity-26%

F-Grade (19 or less on Rotten Tomatoes)
Elektra-10%

Here are some other ways to look at the data.

The average Rotten Tomato ranking was 51.5% for DC and 55.7% for Marvel. So the movies on the whole tend to be pretty comparable, although most of the truly horrendous movies were DC.

Some other trends that stuck out.

• Except for possibly Ironman, all of the excellent movies came from the largest franchises (Batman, Spiderman, X-Men and 1980s Superman).  My theory here is that studios are far more likely to spend on quality actors, screenwriters and directors if they think the franchise has a large-enough fanbase to support the investment.
• Movies based around teams or multiple characters tended to do slightly worse than ones with a more singular focus. Team movies comprised just 16% of the movies that were A-grade or B-grade (3 out of 19).  But they comprised 20% of the total sample.
• The three movies centered on a solo female protagonist were unmitigated disasters. Supergirl, Catwoman and Elektra weren’t just in the F-grade, but the three worst of all forty surveyed.  Some possible explanations: the studios made a half-assed effort because the franchises were minor and/or because they didn’t think superheroines would sell well.  Audience discrimination might have played a role, but women reviewers on RT seemed to hate these movies as much as the men did.
• The five movies with black leads (the Blade trilogy, Steel and Catwoman) scored an average of 32%, worse than average (53%) but much better than the movies with female leads (9%).  I’m a bit surprised black protagonists fared worse than average because Wesley Snipes is actually pretty decent, Halle Berry has won an Oscar, and the Blade movies made enough money (half a billion dollars) to justify substantial studio support.  PS: Whoever cast Shaq as Steel is going to the same circle of hell as the guy that put nipples on the Batsuit.

According to Box Office Mojo, 18 films adapted from comic books took in over $150 million.  All but three of these blockbusters (Men in Black, MIB II and 300) were superhero movies.  Of the 15 superhero blockbusters, 8 came out from 2005-2010, 4 came out from 2000-2005, and just the three early Batman movies came out before that.

Another 19 films adapted from comic books took in $75-150 million.  Of these, 12 were superhero movies.  Of the superhero movies, 6 came out from 2005-2010, 3 came out from 2000-2005, and 3 were older than that (Superman, Superman II and Batman & Robin).  The non-superhero movies tended to be significantly older.  The only non-superhero movie from 2005-2010 in this range was Wanted (possibly*).  From 2000-2005, there was only Road to Perdition.  Then there were five older ones.

*The Wanted comics feature superheroes and supervillains quite prominently.  The movie used assassins instead.  (Other murky calls: I consider Blade, Constantine and Hellboy to be superheroes, but not the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles).

In the past year, his comics have consistently been outsold by Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Flash, Green Lantern, Deadpool, and every A-list franchise.   (For example, his top-performing comic book in June 2009 placed #43 on the bestsellers list).

According to io9, even DC Comics acknowledged that the Superman movie franchise is struggling.  Superman’s latest film-outing grossed about $390 million on a production budget of $270 million.  That’s notably worse than 1996′s Batman Forever, let alone either of the two most recent Batman films.  Yes… even Joel Schumacher, the “director” that put nipples on the Batsuit, beat Superman.

Here’s how I would reboot Superman.

1.  Give him a real personality with some actual flaws. This does not mean that he has to be brooding.  (Please see Spiderman or Ironman– characters can be three-dimensional and fun!) For example, maybe he’s a bit overconfident or careless.  Even a small flaw would make him more likable and believable.

2.  Have him discover his alien ancestry as an adult or remove the alien origin altogether. Right now, there’s a ~30 year gap between his origin story (landing on Earth) and the events of the front-story.  In contrast, most successful superhero franchises place the origin story fairly late in the protagonist’s life, as part of the front story.  For example, Tony Stark built the Iron-Man suit as an adult, Peter Parker was bitten by the spider in his late teens, the X-Men mostly develop mutant powers in their late teens, etc.  Even Batman Begins focused on the second part of Batman’s origin: his ninja training with the Legion of Shadows as an adult rather than the murder of his parents as a child.  When the origin story is part of the front story, the pacing usually benefits. One of the advantages of this is that a story like Spiderman doesn’t have to describe what happens to the character when he’s an infant or six or whatever.  No one cares! 

3.  Revamp his powers so that he depends more on agility and skill than raw strength and speed. Strength and speed make for Hulk-like action sequences that are stale and monotonous.  Most top-selling superheroes rely on agility instead: Spiderman, Batman, Wolverine, etc.  Remember, no one loves Neo because he could punch hard enough to leave a crater in the concrete.  The action scenes in The Matrix were freakishly successful because the heroes did acrobatic stunts that were far more gripping than flying straight at the enemy.  Additionally, agile heroes are usually easier to threaten.  Overcoming threats helps makes a hero compelling.

4.  Lose the kryptonite. If the character weren’t overpowered to begin with, the kryptonite wouldn’t be necessary.  Kryptonite is terrible for several reasons.  First, a helpless Superman is even less interesting in battle than an invincible Superman.  Second, relying on kryptonite rather than reducing Superman’s powers entirely means that 99% of criminals can’t even conceivably threaten him.

5.  Recast everyone. Brandon Routh (Superman) and Kate Bosworth (Lois Lane) turned in particularly lifeless performances.  I’d especially recommend looking for a pair that’s fun and energetic.  This is a superhero movie, after all.  Also, it would help if the actors had the gravitas to play two award-winning journalists.  Kate Bosworth as a Pulitzer winner?  Please.

6.  If Superman is going to be 100% moraled, at least test his morals. Even Spiderman made mistakes– he let the robber run off, for example.  Superman’s morals are never tested and generally poorly-developed.  For example, why does someone so powerful empathize with humans?  Why does he care about human laws?  If he’s going to be so faithful to human legal systems– which are often quite flawed– then make sure there are consequences.  Test him!  If he just turns in Lex Luthor to the police, Lex will get off with the best lawyers and witness-killing assassins money can buy.  If Superman wants to beat Lex without giving up his law-abiding morals, he has to build a case that sticks.  To do so, he has to rely on more than just his superpowers.  That’s more impressive than just beating his way to the end of the story.

7.  NO LEX LUTHOR. Apparently the writers missed the memo that this is a superhero movie.  Sure, he’s got megalomania, rugged good looks, and premature male balding going on, but he isn’t any more qualified to be a supervillain than I am. If using Lex is really necessary, at least give him superpowers and a more compelling motivation than greed.