Well, it wasn’t unanimous, but there was certainly a clear winner. The movie that the vast majority of you are looking forward to?
With 38% of the vote, Star Trek Into Darkness easily takes home the gold. Ultimately, I agree with this — although it’s a pretty tough call for me between Into Darkness and Iron Man 3. And, coincidentally, Iron Man 3 does take a distant second place with Man of Steel coming up for third. (I care considerably less about this one.)
The movies that nobody is terribly keen to go see? Fast and Furious 6, Lone Ranger, The Wolverine, and Mortal Instruments: City of Bone. No joy for these movies — apparently, they aren’t anyone’s top priority this summer.
None of them, however, are the movie that overwhelmingly won for Least Interesting Summer Blockbuster. That movie?
Nearly half of you voted for The Hangover Part III — I can only assume because the sequel was so reputedly terrible. (I never did actually see it.) Fast and Furious 6 scored a distant second place, and the bronze medal was split in three, between the YA adaptation, Mortal Instruments: City of Bone, my own personal least favorite, Lone Ranger, and my most anticipated film, Star Trek.
The movies that nobody voted for in this poll? Iron Man 3, Man of Steel, Kick-Ass 2, and The Wolverine.
As far as I can tell, the winner for Most Meh Summer Blockbuster is going to The Wolverine, since it’s the only movie that nobody voted for shit on either poll.
7 thoughts on “It Was The Best of Summer, It Was the Worst of Summer, It Was the Ho-Hum of Summer . . .”
…and the Tom Cruze movie waxed everyone…go figure…love, Papa
Yeah, I didn’t include Oblivion cause it came out this month, and the summer movie season usually starts in May.
I was interested in “The Wolverine” when Darren Aronofsky was going to make it. Now it’s being directed by James Mangold who directed films like “Identity” (which I hated) and “Knight and Day” (which I’ve heard bad things about). I didn’t like his rather better received film “3:10 To Yuma” either. I’d heard that the script had attracted Aronofsky to the project, but I’m a little puzzled by the trailer. If Wolverine loses his healing powers doesn’t that kind of stop him using his adamantium claws? You can’t very well keep piercing your arms from the inside with razor sharp blades if you aren’t going to heal up afterwards….
I voted for “Lone Ranger” in the poll for least anticipated movie, but I suddenly noticed “The Hangover III” after I’d voted. I am so ridiculously apathetic about the whole “The Hangover” thing that perhaps I was best off sticking with my original vote anyway. Neither of them look very good.
A lot of people seem seriously hyped for “Man Of Steel”. What are your misgivings about it? Personally I’m kind of troubled by the whole thing with his mum saying “make the world small, pretend it’s an island”. It just feels like weird new-age hippy BS. And while I know this is a whole new reboot and they need to distance it from the previous set of films, the decision to do an origin story seems problematic for me too when “Superman – The Movie” handled the origin so well. At very least I’m concerned that the origin is going to feel rushed. The biggest concern I have after “Superman Returns” is that they’ll spend too much time repeating stuff from Richard Donner’s original movie. Bryan Singer’s film felt pretty much like a straight-up rehash of “Superman – The Movie” in many points, setting up some scenes in a very similar way and re-using the exact same dialogue from certain scenes. This needs to do something we haven’t seen before and we’ve SEEN the origin already, y’know?
I think the choice between Star Trek II and Iron Man III is a tough call for all of us, but with The Avengers tying up things with the Marvel heroes so neatly and with that film only having been released just last year, I think there’s more urgency to find out what’s happening next with the rebooted Enterprise crew. I’ve felt for quite a while now that Star Trek XI would always feel a little redundant if they didn’t produce a decent sequel. Benedict Cumberbatch looks like he’s going to make an awesome villain (which is something I felt they were missing last time around).
Really not convinced by the Kick-Ass 2 trailer. Jim Carrey saying “haha you’ve got a dog on your balls!” does not bode well. I’d like to hope that it’s just a bad trailer, but without Matthew Vaughn in the director’s chair I’ll probably give this one a miss at the cinema.
This needs to do something we haven’t seen before and we’ve SEEN the origin already, y’know?
That was 1978. Kids don’t watch movies that old.
Someone recently had an argument with me on Youtube when I decided to suggest that many people would not have seen “The Wizard of Oz” when they were young. That is, remember, a movie whose original cinema release was just two months after the outbreak of World War II (November 1939).
The thing is, children today might well see the original “Wizard of Oz” now. It’s a lot easier to track movies down than it used to be. Whereas when I was a young child, something like “Wizard of Oz” was not just massively dated, but was unlikely to be easily located too.
But yeah, just because “Wizard of Oz” is more easily available doesn’t mean that parents are showing it to their children and the same goes for “Superman – The Movie”. That said, I still reckon it’s the best superhero movie of all time.
Mangold has directed a movie I really like, a movie I really don’t, and a movie I have mixed feelings about. (3:10 to Yuma, Kate & Leopold, and Identity respectively.) So for me, just about anything could happen. I’ll probably see Wolverine, but The Last Stand and Origins aren’t exactly leaving me with high hopes. Plus . . . I love Wolverine as a character, and Hugh Jackman is a lot of fun, but Wolverine’s actually not one I really WANT to see in solo adventures. I don’t need him to always be the star of the show, and his crazy time in Japan isn’t doing much for me as a storyline. So . . . yeah. Hopes aren’t high. Maybe that will work out in my favor.
I have no real interest in The Hangover, Part III, but The Lone Ranger just looks bad and kind of offensive, so it easily takes the cake for me.
As far as Man of Steel goes . . . like I’ve said before, I’m just not a huge Superman fan, so it’s not like my interest would be super high anyway. In fact, I don’t know if I’ve ever seen any live-action Superman movie all the way through, and if I have, I was younger than seven at the time. I’m not sure about specific misgivings with this film . . . I just have a hunch it’s not going to be all that good. But I’ve been wrong before.
I loved Kick-Ass, but I actually didn’t want a sequel. Now that I’ve got one, I’ll see it, but . . . again, my hunch is that it will be disappointing. Actually, Jim Carrey doesn’t really bother me, and I have hope that he’ll surprise everyone in it by being good — although I’m not putting up money just yet — but once I realized that Matthew Vaughn wasn’t returning to write and direct, I lost almost any interest. And when I realized that Jeff Wadlow was his replacement, I was even less impressed, because Jeff Wadlow wrote and directed the fairly abysmally bad horror-lite film, Cry Wolf.
As someone who hated the previous Star Trek movie – for a number of reasons, but mainly the laziness – I’m not looking forward to the sequel. However, I’ll see it because of Benedict Cumberbatch. I wouldn’t mind being surprised.