Better trilogy: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man or Nolan's Batman?

[Mephariel]

Originally Posted by HotTastyChili

While I don't really agree that the Nolan films are too serious, I would think that the argument is that Nolan's films seem self-important, pretentious, and dark for the sake of being dark, because that's what's hip right now. I think Nolan sort of kicked off that trend of everything being of life or death importance in films, with dark blue and black dominated cinematography. I think the criticism is that a man dressing himself up as a bat is taken to an operatic level of stone-faced intensity. The criticism is that Nolan wants people to think that his films are a lot deeper and more important than they really are. I like all three Nolan Batman films (the last one a lot less), but I can definitely see where the people who say they're too serious are coming from.

Being so serious works with Batman, but it's why I think Man of Steel was absolute shit. Superman isn't dark and depressing, he's supposed to be an endearingly campy distillation of patriotic hope. Him saying that "Do you bleed?" line in Justice League made me want to vomit. Totally contrived "edge". Which some people think Nolan's Batman films are.

I am sorry, but that is just a dumb explanation. So anytime you make a film where a guy wears a mask, you are not allow to make a serious movie? Why can't a comic book movie be serious and self-important? Why is that limited to art films or whatever you are thinking about?