I enjoyed Spider-Man for various reasons, though would have prefered that it started from the beginning and not included mary jane or the GG in that dodgy outfit. There were a lot of Ditko-esque Spidey bits which I liked too.
I preferred Blade to the Comic, and thought it was a good conversion. Batman was also well done, but I'm more of a Marvel fan than DC so I don't know how good ro bad it was in comparison to the original comics.
Daredevil was appalling - too much like Batman though it did stick to the original comic quite well in other respects. They shouldn't have linked Battling Murdocks death to the Kingpin or used the actor they did. The fight scene with electra in the playground was so embarrasing too..
The Hulk was a nice try at trying to make an intelligent film, but failed IMHO. The ending destroyed any credibility it may have had in the beginning. It was like a cross between the Absorbing man and Zaxx (sp?) - but why??. They'd have done a better job by sticking to the original origin withouth the 90s childhood trigger theory/split personalities. The Hulk survived 30 years without that addition to him, so one movie would have done OK too.
X-Men was OK, but X-Men 2 was far better. It's dissapointing they started form the new X-Man and not the original X-Men, but I guess they have to appeal to the biggest audience (sam for the other films too). They have to make money after all, so doing it for a minority won't get them big box-office. Cyclops is definately a bad characterisation of the comic character - he's nothing like the guy from the comic! Would have been good to see The Angel, Iceman and Beast from day one...
Spidey 2 looks good, but I haven't seen it yet - just the opening few minutes which seemed very much like the early Spidey comics when Ditko did a lot of the plotting. That's a big plus in my (comic) book.
gary.