Marvel's movies vs. DC
Michael
thinking about Marvel's entry into the movie business vs. DC's
attempting to do the same:
Marvel started off with Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk. In Iron Man
you had a director who is a huge fan of the character in Jon Favreau.
He took that love for the character and not a whole lot of personal ego
an spearheaded a really great updated version of Iron Man's origin with
not a little help from Robert Downey Jr. and others.
The came The Incredible Hulk, which had the fortune (for the movie and
it's viewers at least) of having Ed Norton on board, who brought in a
lot of the concepts from the television show to reboot the horrible Ang
Lee movie from a few years ago. Also there was a good director in Louis
Leterrier who was able to juggle quite a few characters. And, no, I’m
not sure how much of it was Norton, how much was Leterrier, and how
everyone did or didn’t get along on the set. I thought I remembered
that everything was pretty amicable on the set but I could be completely
wrong.
So we look at DC’s attempt to start there own movie empire with Green
Lantern.
Good director in Martin Campbell. Seemingly good cast. Not sure about
the writing team. Michael Green seems to have experience in the genre
as does Marc Guggenheim. Maybe the other two writers just tweaked the
script up?
And then the pictures.
From the outside looking in I have to wonder if the movie sucks it’s
because there’s no real GL fan in the cast or crew as far as I know.
Michael
Scott Eiler
> With the Green Lantern pictures having everyone in a tizzy I got to
> thinking about Marvel's entry into the movie business vs. DC's
> attempting to do the same:
>
> Marvel started off with Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk.
Perhaps I might be the first to say, not even the current Marvel movie
studios started out with Iron Man. I recall Ghost Rider one year
earlier, and Fantastic Four before that.
Brenda Clough
And how many X-men movies have there been?
Brenda
Duggy
> With the Green Lantern pictures having everyone in a tizzy I got to
> thinking about Marvel's entry into the movie business vs. DC's
> attempting to do the same:
Yeah. This thread again.
> So we look at DC’s attempt to start there own movie empire with Green
> Lantern.
Huh? Marvel is making a series of Avengers films.
AOL/Time Warner is making a GL film. What do you mean "movie empire"?
AOL/Time Warner has a DC movie development department now, but that's
not the same thing. Marvel had one of the years ago... starting with,
IIRC, Spiderman.
> From the outside looking in I have to wonder if the movie sucks it’s
> because there’s no real GL fan in the cast or crew as far as I know.
Have you asked everyone?
And can you trust thier reply?
Whedon said he was a big Wonder Woman fan... although he hated the
comics and the TV series, so you have to wonder... fan of what?
I think part of the PR training for the films these days is "say 'big
fan of the comics' or 'didn't read the comics as a kid, but read some
as prepare and was really surprise by how good...'"
===
= DUG.
===
Michael
IIRC, Iron Man is the first Marvel only film (i.e. Marvel financed it
themselves). While Ghost Rider may've been closer to Marvel-only
Fantastic Four was NOT. The studio who made it held (and I think still
does) the rights.
Michael
Michael
The X/Mutant/Wolverine franchaise is all 20th Century Fox. They hold
the rights to make the films.
Michael
Michael
> On Jul 19, 10:14 am, Michael <thissp...@for.rent> wrote:
>
>>With the Green Lantern pictures having everyone in a tizzy I got to
>>thinking about Marvel's entry into the movie business vs. DC's
>>attempting to do the same:
>
>
> Yeah. This thread again.
>
>
>>So we look at DC’s attempt to start there own movie empire with Green
>>Lantern.
>
>
> Huh? Marvel is making a series of Avengers films.
Right. Ironman, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2, Thor, and Captain
America: The First Avenger all leading up to The Avengers.
> AOL/Time Warner is making a GL film. What do you mean "movie empire"?
> AOL/Time Warner has a DC movie development department now, but that's
> not the same thing. Marvel had one of the years ago... starting with,
> IIRC, Spiderman.
I was under the impression that DC was trying to do what Marvel did:
Their own movies financed by DC with DC calling the shots. In this case
leading into a JL movie.
>> From the outside looking in I have to wonder if the movie sucks it’s
>>because there’s no real GL fan in the cast or crew as far as I know.
>
>
> Have you asked everyone?
Nope.
> And can you trust thier reply?
Doubt it.
> Whedon said he was a big Wonder Woman fan... although he hated the
> comics and the TV series, so you have to wonder... fan of what?
Whedon didn't impress me with that BS. He also seemed to act like his
planning to involve WW with the Roman/Greek Gods was something new.
Further, I think he's a TERRIBLE choice to write and direct Avengers.
> I think part of the PR training for the films these days is "say 'big
> fan of the comics' or 'didn't read the comics as a kid, but read some
> as prepare and was really surprise by how good...'"
I think so.
Michael
Duggy
> IIRC, Iron Man is the first Marvel only film (i.e. Marvel financed it
> themselves).
Financed by Marvel, distributed by Paramount... who are screwing
Marvel with the Iron Man 3 release date now that Disney owns them.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> Duggy wrote:
> > On Jul 19, 10:14 am, Michael <thissp...@for.rent> wrote:
> >>So we look at DC’s attempt to start there own movie empire with Green
> >>Lantern.
> > Huh? Marvel is making a series of Avengers films.
> Right. Ironman, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2, Thor, and Captain
> America: The First Avenger all leading up to The Avengers.
> > AOL/Time Warner is making a GL film. What do you mean "movie empire"?
> > AOL/Time Warner has a DC movie development department now, but that's
> > not the same thing. Marvel had one of the years ago... starting with,
> > IIRC, Spiderman.
> I was under the impression that DC was trying to do what Marvel did:
> Their own movies financed by DC with DC calling the shots. In this case
> leading into a JL movie.
DC is owned by AOL/Time Warner. Has been for years. Just after
Disney purchased Marvel, AOL/Time Warner announced a department to
develop films. They didn't start a new studio.
> >> From the outside looking in I have to wonder if the movie sucks it’s
> >>because there’s no real GL fan in the cast or crew as far as I know.
> > Have you asked everyone?
> Nope.
Well.
> > And can you trust thier reply?
> Doubt it.
Zactly.
> > Whedon said he was a big Wonder Woman fan... although he hated the
> > comics and the TV series, so you have to wonder... fan of what?
> Whedon didn't impress me with that BS. He also seemed to act like his
> planning to involve WW with the Roman/Greek Gods was something new.
And he was upset when Batman Begins came out because his origin is all
set out for the writer. I don't recall any defining Batman origin,
certainly not one that BB followed. They may have used Year One, but
that's not the whole film. I don't see how Wondy was that much
harder.
> Further, I think he's a TERRIBLE choice to write and direct Avengers.
Dunno. Very average director. Good writer of dialogue...
> > I think part of the PR training for the films these days is "say 'big
> > fan of the comics' or 'didn't read the comics as a kid, but read some
> > as prepare and was really surprise by how good...'"
> I think so.
Tim Burton has said he doesn't read comics (while over-reacting to a
joke by Kevin Smith).
===
= DUG.
===
Mike Hall
> Whedon said he was a big Wonder Woman fan... although he hated the
> comics and the TV series, so you have to wonder... fan of what?
A fan of the idea of Eliza Dushku in a Wonder Woman suit. That's
enough.
Mike Hall
grinningdemon
wrote:
Well, hell, I'm all in favor of that...not necessarily in a WW movie,
that is, but I wouldn't say no to seeing her in the outfit.
Duggy
I thought he had someone else in mind.
And, frankly, what was stopping him writing someone hiring her as a
doll and doing that?
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> Well, hell, I'm all in favor of that...not necessarily in a WW movie,
> that is, but I wouldn't say no to seeing her in the outfit.
New idea for a reality TV show.
"Casting Wonder Woman"
Each week a new dark haired actress (nominted by audience poll) goes
through rehersals for the role of Wonder Woman. Jumping around
fighting villainesses in costume.
I don't watch reality shows, but I might give that one a look.
===
= DUG.
===
Anim8rFSK
Michael <this...@for.rent> wrote:
> Good director in Martin Campbell. Seemingly good cast.
In GL? They lost me when they cast a too-young blond with a bad figure
as Carol Ferris.
--
TOM SWIFT 100th Anniversary convention! July 16-18 2010, San Diego, CA
TS100 Convention site: http://www.TomSwiftEnterprises.com
TS100 Store: http://www.CafePress.com/TS100
TOM SWIFT INFO: http://www.tomswift.info
grinningdemon
Agreed...I don't bother with reality shows either (I generally
consider them and their riciculous popularity a sign of the impending
apocalypse) but that sounds like damn fine television.
Brad Haga
Michael <this...@for.rent> wrote:
> With the Green Lantern pictures having everyone in a tizzy I got to
> thinking about Marvel's entry into the movie business vs. DC's
> attempting to do the same:
>
> Marvel started off with Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk. In Iron Man
> you had a director who is a huge fan of the character in Jon Favreau.
> He took that love for the character and not a whole lot of personal ego
> an spearheaded a really great updated version of Iron Man's origin with
> not a little help from Robert Downey Jr. and others.
>
> The came The Incredible Hulk, which had the fortune (for the movie and
> it's viewers at least) of having Ed Norton on board, who brought in a
> lot of the concepts from the television show to reboot the horrible Ang
> Lee movie from a few years ago. Also there was a good director in Louis
> Leterrier who was able to juggle quite a few characters. And, no, I雋
> not sure how much of it was Norton, how much was Leterrier, and how
> everyone did or didn靖 get along on the set. I thought I remembered
> that everything was pretty amicable on the set but I could be completely
> wrong.
>
> So we look at DC零 attempt to start there own movie empire with Green
> Lantern.
>
> Good director in Martin Campbell. Seemingly good cast. Not sure about
> the writing team. Michael Green seems to have experience in the genre
> as does Marc Guggenheim. Maybe the other two writers just tweaked the
> script up?
>
> And then the pictures.
>
> From the outside looking in I have to wonder if the movie sucks it零
> because there零 no real GL fan in the cast or crew as far as I know.
>
> Michael
Okay. To be fair both houses have had some pretty horrific false
starts, especially Marvel in the early days (I'm thinking the direct to
video Fantastic Four and Captain America movies, here, as well as two
horrific attempts by DC at early Wonder Woman series/TV movies ... ).
DC (via Warner Brothers) got it right early on with the Wonder Woman TV
series and the first couple of Superman movies (although those went
downhill fast) followed by the Batman movies (which suffered a similar
fate). DC seemed to sputter to a halt for a while.
Marvel had been building themselves up for a while as a multi-media
outfit, principally with Spider-Man's various animated series and then
getting into the movies in a big way with Spider-Man, the X-Men and the
first Fantastic Four movie. Upon founding Marvel Studios the hits just
kept on coming with Iron Man and the Incredible Hulk with Thor upcoming
and Captain America hot on its heels.
The successes have, generally, had one thing in common: a serious
treatment that is true to the source material (the most recent Batman
films, the Spider-Man films, Iron Man, Incredible Hulk, etc). Things
have gone badly when either studio didn't take their source material
seriously enough (I'm thinking Shumacher with the Bat-nipples and all
the day-glo grafitti, the earliest FF movie, etc) or deviated too far
from said source (Superman Returns, the Ang Lee Hulk movie).
I haven't seen much of the Green Lantern movie so far, just what I've
read here and there. The setup looks promising and they don't appear to
be camping it up (as was once planned with Jack Black starring) but the
costume design makes me wonder how far afield they're going to go. If
it is mostly just some graphical tweaks for the sake of all the CGI
they're talking about doing ... I can live with that if the story is
strong enough.
A serious treatment coupled with the talent to do the source justice has
thus far equalled a win every time in my book.
Anim8rFSK
Brad Haga <jad...@adelphia.net> wrote:
>
> Okay. To be fair both houses have had some pretty horrific false
> starts, especially Marvel in the early days (I'm thinking the direct to
> video Fantastic Four and Captain America movies, here, as well as two
> horrific attempts by DC at early Wonder Woman series/TV movies ... ).
Huh? What two Wonder Woman movies were horrific, since you apparently
like the second? And DC movies predate WW by 30 years.
Fantastic Four wasn't direct-to-video; it wasn't released at all. Then
people who had worked on it who weren't getting paid except with work
samples that they didn't get, so they were given copies and the genie
was out of the bottle. Of Fantastic Four it can actually be said "It
wasn't released, it escaped"
The rubber ears Captain America wasn't direct-to-video. It got a small
theatrical release.
YKW
C51C4B.125...@news.dc1.easynews.com:
>In article <jademan-77CBDC...@unknown.sj.astraweb.com>,
> Brad Haga <jad...@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>
>> Okay. To be fair both houses have had some pretty horrific false
>> starts, especially Marvel in the early days (I'm thinking the direct
>> to video Fantastic Four and Captain America movies, here, as well as
>> two horrific attempts by DC at early Wonder Woman series/TV movies
>> ... ).
>
> Huh? What two Wonder Woman movies were horrific, since you apparently
> like the second? And DC movies predate WW by 30 years.
Presumably, the reference is to the Cathy Lee Crosby telepic (in which
case, I concur) and the pilot for the Lynda Carter WWII-era series (in
which case, fuck you). But DC didn't make either film. The first time
Warner/DC made a DC character film was the Donner Superman pic.
> Fantastic Four wasn't direct-to-video; it wasn't released at all. Then
> people who had worked on it who weren't getting paid except with work
> samples that they didn't get, so they were given copies and the genie
> was out of the bottle. Of Fantastic Four it can actually be said "It
> wasn't released, it escaped"
The A-plot isn't half bad, either. FX were laughable, though, while the
B-plot is jaw-droppingly bad. I'd rather watch the would-be title
sequence for MANOS on an endless loop than deal with the Corman FF's B-
plot ever again.
> The rubber ears Captain America wasn't direct-to-video. It got a small
> theatrical release.
>
Not as small as it deserved.
--
------------------- ------------------------------------------------
|| E-mail: ykw2006 ||"The mystery of government is not how Washington||
|| -at-gmail-dot-com ||works but how to make it stop." -- P.J. O'Rourke||
|| ----------- || ------------------------------------ ||
||Replace "-at-" with|| Keeping Usenet Trouble-Free ||
|| "@" to respond. || Since 1998 ||
------------------- ------------------------------------------------
"It's not that I want to punish your success. [...]I think
when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
-- The One, 14 Oct 08
M.O.R
> In article <jademan-77CBDC.14413519072...@unknown.sj.astraweb.com>,
I've been looking into the guys behind the current Thor movie. The
four scriptwriters on the movie have, seperately, worked on two movies
to their names, Rise of the Silver Surfer, and Agent Cody Banks.
Considering more recent images from the film have come out, and it is
looking far too much like an 80's fantasy film. I mean golden palace,
literally, camp. They are also writing the upcoming X-Men: First
Class.
Bill Steele
Michael <this...@for.rent> wrote:
> With the Green Lantern pictures having everyone in a tizzy I got to
> thinking about Marvel's entry into the movie business vs. DC's
> attempting to do the same:
>
> Marvel started off with Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk. In Iron Man
> you had a director who is a huge fan of the character in Jon Favreau.
> He took that love for the character and not a whole lot of personal ego
> an spearheaded a really great updated version of Iron Man's origin with
> not a little help from Robert Downey Jr. and others.
>
> The came The Incredible Hulk, which had the fortune (for the movie and
> it's viewers at least) of having Ed Norton on board, who brought in a
> lot of the concepts from the television show to reboot the horrible Ang
> Lee movie from a few years ago. Also there was a good director in Louis
> Leterrier who was able to juggle quite a few characters. And, no, I雋
> not sure how much of it was Norton, how much was Leterrier, and how
> everyone did or didn靖 get along on the set. I thought I remembered
> that everything was pretty amicable on the set but I could be completely
> wrong.
>
> So we look at DC零 attempt to start there own movie empire with Green
> Lantern.
>
> Good director in Martin Campbell. Seemingly good cast. Not sure about
> the writing team. Michael Green seems to have experience in the genre
> as does Marc Guggenheim. Maybe the other two writers just tweaked the
> script up?
>
> And then the pictures.
>
> From the outside looking in I have to wonder if the movie sucks it零
> because there零 no real GL fan in the cast or crew as far as I know.
>
> Michael
Everyone should read "Superman vs. Hollywood." The amount of
behind-the-scenes fiddling before the movie gets made boggles the mind.
But overall, I've always thought Marvel did a better job of controlling
how its characters were presented on the screen than DC. The horrible JL
TV special from the 70s comes to mind, and the first Wonder Woman TV
pilot.
Duggy
> In article <eNM0o.20908$OU6.10...@newsfe20.iad>,
>
> Michael <thissp...@for.rent> wrote:
> > Good director in Martin Campbell. Seemingly good cast.
>
> In GL? They lost me when they cast a too-young blond with a bad figure
> as Carol Ferris.
That's the deal breaker for you?
Wow.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> I haven't seen much of the Green Lantern movie so far, just what I've
> read here and there. The setup looks promising and they don't appear to
> be camping it up (as was once planned with Jack Black starring) but the
> costume design makes me wonder how far afield they're going to go. If
> it is mostly just some graphical tweaks for the sake of all the CGI
> they're talking about doing ... I can live with that if the story is
> strong enough.
I actually think the idea of ring energy glow incorporated into the
suit makes a little bit of sense.
> A serious treatment coupled with the talent to do the source justice has
> thus far equalled a win every time in my book.
I think that SR could fit that category, but I wouldn't count it as a
win.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> But overall, I've always thought Marvel did a better job of controlling
> how its characters were presented on the screen than DC.
Marvel didn't used to. They said, "money for characters, yeah, sure."
These days they demand creative control.
DC is owned by AOL/Time Warner. They didn't have any control.
AOL/Time Warner has now given them a little control.
===
= DUG.
===
Michael
> On Jul 19, 1:32 pm, Michael <thissp...@for.rent> wrote:
>
>>Duggy wrote:
>>
>>>On Jul 19, 10:14 am, Michael <thissp...@for.rent> wrote:
>>>
>>>>So we look at DC’s attempt to start there own movie empire with Green
>>>>Lantern.
>>>
>>>Huh? Marvel is making a series of Avengers films.
>>
>>Right. Ironman, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2, Thor, and Captain
>>America: The First Avenger all leading up to The Avengers.
>>
>>>AOL/Time Warner is making a GL film. What do you mean "movie empire"?
>>>AOL/Time Warner has a DC movie development department now, but that's
>>>not the same thing. Marvel had one of the years ago... starting with,
>>>IIRC, Spiderman.
>>
>>I was under the impression that DC was trying to do what Marvel did:
>>Their own movies financed by DC with DC calling the shots. In this case
>>leading into a JL movie.
>
>
> DC is owned by AOL/Time Warner. Has been for years. Just after
> Disney purchased Marvel, AOL/Time Warner announced a department to
> develop films. They didn't start a new studio.
Ah. Okay. Bit of a difference. Hopefully they'll get some pull over
who gets to have major say in films.
>>>>From the outside looking in I have to wonder if the movie sucks it’s
>>>>because there’s no real GL fan in the cast or crew as far as I know.
>>>
>>>Have you asked everyone?
>>
>>Nope.
>
>
> Well.
>
>
>>>And can you trust thier reply?
>>
>>Doubt it.
>
>
> Zactly.
>
>
>>>Whedon said he was a big Wonder Woman fan... although he hated the
>>>comics and the TV series, so you have to wonder... fan of what?
>>
>>Whedon didn't impress me with that BS. He also seemed to act like his
>>planning to involve WW with the Roman/Greek Gods was something new.
>
>
> And he was upset when Batman Begins came out because his origin is all
> set out for the writer. I don't recall any defining Batman origin,
> certainly not one that BB followed. They may have used Year One, but
> that's not the whole film. I don't see how Wondy was that much
> harder.
IIRC Batman Begins only real major change to the origin is making Ra's
Al Ghul the primary trainer for his physical abilities. Most of the
detective work seemed to be self-taught.
IMHO, Whedon's just pissy he didn't think of it hisself.
>>Further, I think he's a TERRIBLE choice to write and direct Avengers.
>
>
> Dunno. Very average director. Good writer of dialogue...
Don't get me wrong as I enjoyed Dollhouse, but Whedon's stuff outside
the Buffyverse seems to have a select audience rather than he mainstream
appeal Marvel's want.
>>>I think part of the PR training for the films these days is "say 'big
>>>fan of the comics' or 'didn't read the comics as a kid, but read some
>>>as prepare and was really surprise by how good...'"
>>
>>I think so.
>
>
> Tim Burton has said he doesn't read comics (while over-reacting to a
> joke by Kevin Smith).
His first Batman Movie wasn't too bad (though the ever-present smile on
the Joker looks like abad case of the mumps) but Returns was horrible.
Michael
Michael
> In article <eNM0o.20908$OU6....@newsfe20.iad>,
> Michael <this...@for.rent> wrote:
>
>
>>Good director in Martin Campbell. Seemingly good cast.
>
>
> In GL? They lost me when they cast a too-young blond with a bad figure
> as Carol Ferris.
>
Ryan Reynolds, Stellen Skarsgard (spe?), and Angela Basset would usually
be seen as a really good beginnig to your cast.
Michael
Michael
Hold on there. The Captain America (directed by Albert Pyun) and FF (by
Corman's company) were from Marvel selling rights to whoever came along
first. They had no say about those films.
> DC (via Warner Brothers) got it right early on with the Wonder Woman TV
> series and the first couple of Superman movies (although those went
> downhill fast) followed by the Batman movies (which suffered a similar
> fate). DC seemed to sputter to a halt for a while.
Again, DC had no real effect on how good/bad WW and Suerman were.
> Marvel had been building themselves up for a while as a multi-media
> outfit, principally with Spider-Man's various animated series and then
> getting into the movies in a big way with Spider-Man, the X-Men and the
> first Fantastic Four movie. Upon founding Marvel Studios the hits just
> kept on coming with Iron Man and the Incredible Hulk with Thor upcoming
> and Captain America hot on its heels.
>
> The successes have, generally, had one thing in common: a serious
> treatment that is true to the source material (the most recent Batman
> films, the Spider-Man films, Iron Man, Incredible Hulk, etc). Things
> have gone badly when either studio didn't take their source material
> seriously enough (I'm thinking Shumacher with the Bat-nipples and all
> the day-glo grafitti, the earliest FF movie, etc) or deviated too far
> from said source (Superman Returns, the Ang Lee Hulk movie).
>
> I haven't seen much of the Green Lantern movie so far, just what I've
> read here and there. The setup looks promising and they don't appear to
> be camping it up (as was once planned with Jack Black starring) but the
> costume design makes me wonder how far afield they're going to go. If
> it is mostly just some graphical tweaks for the sake of all the CGI
> they're talking about doing ... I can live with that if the story is
> strong enough.
>
> A serious treatment coupled with the talent to do the source justice has
> thus far equalled a win every time in my book.
Michael
Michael
There's alos, among other things, episodes of Fringe. That's a plus.
Michael
grinningdemon
wrote:
I still think Reynolds would have been a better fit for Flash than GL.
Duggy
> Ah. Okay. Bit of a difference. Hopefully they'll get some pull over
> who gets to have major say in films.
Hopefully. And hopefully whoever is in charge is as good at the job
as Avi Arid was.
> >>>Whedon said he was a big Wonder Woman fan... although he hated the
> >>>comics and the TV series, so you have to wonder... fan of what?
> >>Whedon didn't impress me with that BS. He also seemed to act like his
> >>planning to involve WW with the Roman/Greek Gods was something new.
> > And he was upset when Batman Begins came out because his origin is all
> > set out for the writer. I don't recall any defining Batman origin,
> > certainly not one that BB followed. They may have used Year One, but
> > that's not the whole film. I don't see how Wondy was that much
> > harder.
> IIRC Batman Begins only real major change to the origin is making Ra's
> Al Ghul the primary trainer for his physical abilities. Most of the
> detective work seemed to be self-taught.
I mean, there isn't one big "The True Origin of Batman" story. But
rather hundreds of little stories and different continuities. Joss
was upset that Batman's origin was all set out for the Batman Begins
writer but it isn't for Wonder Woman. I disagree.
> IMHO, Whedon's just pissy he didn't think of it hisself.
Possibly.
> > Tim Burton has said he doesn't read comics (while over-reacting to a
> > joke by Kevin Smith).
> His first Batman Movie wasn't too bad (though the ever-present smile on
> the Joker looks like abad case of the mumps) but Returns was horrible.
Returns looks good cf Forever and & Robin.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> I still think Reynolds would have been a better fit for Flash than GL.- Hide quoted text -
Wally or Barry?
===
= DUG.
===
Michael
Wally West yes, Barry Allen not so much.
At least IMHO.
Or Green Arrow, Booster Gold, Nightwing (though that opens a whole mess
with the Bat-Franchaise), Blue Beetle (Ted), or Guy Gardner (maybe).
Michael
Michael
> On Jul 20, 12:44 pm, Michael <thissp...@for.rent> wrote:
>
>>Ah. Okay. Bit of a difference. Hopefully they'll get some pull over
>>who gets to have major say in films.
>
>
> Hopefully. And hopefully whoever is in charge is as good at the job
> as Avi Arid was.
>
>
>>>>>Whedon said he was a big Wonder Woman fan... although he hated the
>>>>>comics and the TV series, so you have to wonder... fan of what?
>>>>
>>>>Whedon didn't impress me with that BS. He also seemed to act like his
>>>>planning to involve WW with the Roman/Greek Gods was something new.
>>>
>>>And he was upset when Batman Begins came out because his origin is all
>>>set out for the writer. I don't recall any defining Batman origin,
>>>certainly not one that BB followed. They may have used Year One, but
>>>that's not the whole film. I don't see how Wondy was that much
>>>harder.
>>
>>IIRC Batman Begins only real major change to the origin is making Ra's
>>Al Ghul the primary trainer for his physical abilities. Most of the
>>detective work seemed to be self-taught.
>
>
> I mean, there isn't one big "The True Origin of Batman" story. But
> rather hundreds of little stories and different continuities. Joss
> was upset that Batman's origin was all set out for the Batman Begins
> writer but it isn't for Wonder Woman. I disagree.
As do I. In both cases the moviemaker has a really good outline that
gives a lot of guidance if needed but allows lots of leeway for new
(hopefully good) ideas.
The problem with Whedon & Wonder Woman is he didn't know the charater
and didn't have the honesty to admit such.
>>IMHO, Whedon's just pissy he didn't think of it hisself.
>
>
> Possibly.
>
>
>>>Tim Burton has said he doesn't read comics (while over-reacting to a
>>>joke by Kevin Smith).
>>
>>His first Batman Movie wasn't too bad (though the ever-present smile on
>>the Joker looks like abad case of the mumps) but Returns was horrible.
>
>
> Returns looks good cf Forever and & Robin.
The Peguin was way too over-the-top gross. Pfeiffer was great as
Catwoman though. And Keaton did a good job as Batman again. Just not
eough to save the movie.
Forever's my favorite of that 4-movie run, though I thought Two-Face's
look was a bit too neon. B&R was really bad, though I think Clooney
gives himself too much of the credit/blame for causing the end of that
Bat-run of Bat-movies.
Michael
Anim8rFSK
Michael <this...@for.rent> wrote:
Basset as Amanda Waller??? Not hardly.
Anim8rFSK
YKW <Y...@YKW.YKW> wrote:
> Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net> wrote in news:ANIM8Rfsk-
> C51C4B.125...@news.dc1.easynews.com:
>
> >In article <jademan-77CBDC...@unknown.sj.astraweb.com>,
> > Brad Haga <jad...@adelphia.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Okay. To be fair both houses have had some pretty horrific false
> >> starts, especially Marvel in the early days (I'm thinking the direct
> >> to video Fantastic Four and Captain America movies, here, as well as
> >> two horrific attempts by DC at early Wonder Woman series/TV movies
> >> ... ).
> >
> > Huh? What two Wonder Woman movies were horrific, since you apparently
> > like the second? And DC movies predate WW by 30 years.
>
> Presumably, the reference is to the Cathy Lee Crosby telepic (in which
> case, I concur) and the pilot for the Lynda Carter WWII-era series (in
> which case, fuck you).
Me?? Or Brad?
Anim8rFSK
<fdd38dc8-a7b2-4bb5...@v6g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
Duggy <Paul....@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
A friend dragged me to Returns in the middle of the work day. About ...
2/3 of the way in, when they were dancing, I said to him "hey, this
isn't bad, it might even be better than the original" at which point the
Peguin duck boat broke through the floor and the entire rest of the
movie was a total crapfest. :\
Scott Eiler
> Basset as Amanda Waller??? Not hardly.
She beats Adrienne Barbeau as Matt Cable in the Swamp Thing movie.
grinningdemon
Wally...though I imagine a movie version would probably blend aspects
of both characters...I certainly don't think they were make the legacy
distinction.
grinningdemon
wrote:
>grinningdemon wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 19:46:43 -0700, Michael <this...@for.rent>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Anim8rFSK wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article <eNM0o.20908$OU6....@newsfe20.iad>,
>>>> Michael <this...@for.rent> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Good director in Martin Campbell. Seemingly good cast.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>In GL? They lost me when they cast a too-young blond with a bad figure
>>>>as Carol Ferris.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Ryan Reynolds, Stellen Skarsgard (spe?), and Angela Basset would usually
>>>be seen as a really good beginnig to your cast.
>>>
>>>Michael
>>
>>
>> I still think Reynolds would have been a better fit for Flash than GL.
>
>Wally West yes, Barry Allen not so much.
>
>At least IMHO.
Even Barry would be a better fit than Hal, as far as I'm
concerned...and, come to think of it, his playing against type could
make it more interesting.
>Or Green Arrow, Booster Gold, Nightwing (though that opens a whole mess
>with the Bat-Franchaise), Blue Beetle (Ted), or Guy Gardner (maybe).
>
>Michael
I could see him as Kyle Rayner before Hal Jordan...but that's just me.
Then again, I like Ryan Reynolds and I don't like Hal Jordan so maybe
I just don't want to see him wasted on the character.
M.O.R
> In article <eNM0o.20908$OU6.10...@newsfe20.iad>,
>
>
>
>
>
> > With the Green Lantern pictures having everyone in a tizzy I got to
> > thinking about Marvel's entry into the movie business vs. DC's
> > attempting to do the same:
>
> > Marvel started off with Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk. In Iron Man
> > you had a director who is a huge fan of the character in Jon Favreau.
> > He took that love for the character and not a whole lot of personal ego
> > an spearheaded a really great updated version of Iron Man's origin with
> > not a little help from Robert Downey Jr. and others.
>
> > The came The Incredible Hulk, which had the fortune (for the movie and
> > it's viewers at least) of having Ed Norton on board, who brought in a
> > lot of the concepts from the television show to reboot the horrible Ang
> > Lee movie from a few years ago. Also there was a good director in Louis
> > not sure how much of it was Norton, how much was Leterrier, and how
> > that everything was pretty amicable on the set but I could be completely
> > wrong.
>
> > Lantern.
>
> > Good director in Martin Campbell. Seemingly good cast. Not sure about
> > the writing team. Michael Green seems to have experience in the genre
> > as does Marc Guggenheim. Maybe the other two writers just tweaked the
> > script up?
>
> > And then the pictures.
>
>
> > Michael
>
> Everyone should read "Superman vs. Hollywood." The amount of
> behind-the-scenes fiddling before the movie gets made boggles the mind.
>
> But overall, I've always thought Marvel did a better job of controlling
> how its characters were presented on the screen than DC. The horrible JL
> TV special from the 70s comes to mind, and the first Wonder Woman TV
>
> - Show quoted text -
Was there another Justice League special in the 70's? I know there
was a 90's one, which is just atrocious, never knew there was a 70's
one also.
Yeah, there is a Kevin Smith college talk where he talks about
writing the abandoned Superman Lives script, the idiot that is Jon
Peters, who clearly is not a clever man, nor is he worthy of being a
producer on any movie, let alone a multi-billion dollar potential
property such as Superman.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgYhLIThTvk
Smiths script was poor, but there were a number of great scripts by
different writers, one of which involved Metallo which made him tragic
and deadly at the same time. That would have been a great script, and
a great story. Every single writer who wrote a script knew more about
the character than the guy who was in charge of the franchise, which
pretty much tells you that this guy has no clue. It's estimated he
cost WB about 50 million bucks in project development that never got
off the ground.
And looking at Superman Returns pretty much tells us that he would
have appoved any plot which conformed to his ideas.
Anim8rFSK
<500fdd47-033f-4d63...@z34g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
Scott Eiler <sei...@eilertech.com> wrote:
LOL
How about Sandrine Holt
http://www.perfectpeople.net/photo-picture-image-media/Sandrine-Holt-653x
864-56kb-media-1539-media-86712-1074155100.jpg
as Guran
http://www.deepwoods.org/misc/guran_intro.gif
in The Phantom?
Anim8rFSK
<b8b8c1d7-327f-4234...@f6g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
"M.O.R" <sean.ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Was there another Justice League special in the 70's? I know there
> was a 90's one, which is just atrocious, never knew there was a 70's
> one also.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legends_of_the_Superheroes
be sorry you asked. This is the version where GL had to recite the oath
to fire the ring ...
YKW
news:ANIM8Rfsk-2B7CE...@news.dc1.easynews.com:
>In article <Xns9DBA86E8DCDBC...@69.16.186.8>,
> YKW <Y...@YKW.YKW> wrote:
>
>> Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net> wrote in news:ANIM8Rfsk-
>> C51C4B.125...@news.dc1.easynews.com:
>>
>> >In article <jademan-77CBDC...@unknown.sj.astraweb.com>,
>> > Brad Haga <jad...@adelphia.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Okay. To be fair both houses have had some pretty horrific false
>> >> starts, especially Marvel in the early days (I'm thinking the
>> >> direct to video Fantastic Four and Captain America movies, here,
>> >> as well as two horrific attempts by DC at early Wonder Woman
>> >> series/TV movies ... ).
>> >
>> > Huh? What two Wonder Woman movies were horrific, since you
>> > apparently like the second? And DC movies predate WW by 30 years.
>>
>> Presumably, the reference is to the Cathy Lee Crosby telepic (in
>> which case, I concur) and the pilot for the Lynda Carter WWII-era
>> series (in which case, fuck you).
>
> Me?? Or Brad?
>
Anyone who says the Lynda Carter TV movie was awful. :)
Anim8rFSK
YKW <Y...@YKW.YKW> wrote:
> Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net> wrote in
> news:ANIM8Rfsk-2B7CE...@news.dc1.easynews.com:
>
> >In article <Xns9DBA86E8DCDBC...@69.16.186.8>,
> > YKW <Y...@YKW.YKW> wrote:
> >
> >> Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net> wrote in news:ANIM8Rfsk-
> >> C51C4B.125...@news.dc1.easynews.com:
> >>
> >> >In article <jademan-77CBDC...@unknown.sj.astraweb.com>,
> >> > Brad Haga <jad...@adelphia.net> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Okay. To be fair both houses have had some pretty horrific false
> >> >> starts, especially Marvel in the early days (I'm thinking the
> >> >> direct to video Fantastic Four and Captain America movies, here,
> >> >> as well as two horrific attempts by DC at early Wonder Woman
> >> >> series/TV movies ... ).
> >> >
> >> > Huh? What two Wonder Woman movies were horrific, since you
> >> > apparently like the second? And DC movies predate WW by 30 years.
> >>
> >> Presumably, the reference is to the Cathy Lee Crosby telepic (in
> >> which case, I concur) and the pilot for the Lynda Carter WWII-era
> >> series (in which case, fuck you).
> >
> > Me?? Or Brad?
> >
>
> Anyone who says the Lynda Carter TV movie was awful. :)
Whew!
Of course, I kind of liked the Crosby flick too.
Duggy
> Wally...though I imagine a movie version would probably blend aspects
> of both characters...I certainly don't think they were make the legacy
> distinction.
Agreed on all counts.
===
= DUG.
===
STRATEGY
> >> Okay. To be fair both houses have had some pretty horrific false
> >> starts, especially Marvel in the early days (I'm thinking the direct
> >> to video Fantastic Four and Captain America movies,
> > The rubber ears Captain America wasn't direct-to-video. It got a small
> > theatrical release.
I thought it was made for TV?
STRATEGY
Tim Turnip
>Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net> wrote in news:ANIM8Rfsk-
>C51C4B.125...@news.dc1.easynews.com:
>
>>In article <jademan-77CBDC...@unknown.sj.astraweb.com>,
>> Brad Haga <jad...@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Okay. To be fair both houses have had some pretty horrific false
>>> starts, especially Marvel in the early days (I'm thinking the direct
>>> to video Fantastic Four and Captain America movies, here, as well as
>>> two horrific attempts by DC at early Wonder Woman series/TV movies
>>> ... ).
>>
>> Huh? What two Wonder Woman movies were horrific, since you apparently
>> like the second? And DC movies predate WW by 30 years.
>
>Presumably, the reference is to the Cathy Lee Crosby telepic (in which
>case, I concur) and the pilot for the Lynda Carter WWII-era series (in
>which case, fuck you).
He may also be referring to the even earlier Wonder Woman pilot in
1967 with Ellie Wood Walker. The pilot was begun but unfinished and
never aired, as only just under five minutes of footage were
apparently shot. This Wonder Woman would have been a sitcom where
Diana lived with her nagging (mortal) mother. More here:
http://www.wonderland-site.com/html/series/wonder/60s/ww67-00-00.htm
FSogol
Nope, I saw it on the big screen. Only lasted a week or two and was gone.
--
FSogol
Anim8rFSK
<41ae5601-b988-4e30...@v35g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
STRATEGY <strat...@gmail.com> wrote:
Nope. Even then Albert Pyun made theatrical films. There were Cap TV
movies, but those were the Reb Brown "son of Captain America" projects.
Bill Steele
<b8b8c1d7-327f-4234...@f6g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
"M.O.R" <sean.ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Was there another Justice League special in the 70's? I know there
> was a 90's one, which is just atrocious, never knew there was a 70's
> one also.
I can't think what the 90s one would be. The one I remember I saw on a
motel TV set while driving across country, which places it in the late
70s or early 80s. There were two half-hour shows back to back, one a
sort of "adventure" in which all the villains were played by comedians.
IIRC, Charlie Callas played Sinestro and Howard Morris was Dr. Sivana,
with absolutely wonderful makeup that made him a perfect replica of the
comics image. Adam West and Burt Ward were on hand as Batman and Robin,
and the show was in the same vein as their series. The second half-hour
was a sort of panel show, which I've totally repressed. From lines in
the script I had the impression that they had written it with Superman
but substituted Captain Marvel because they realized how stupid it was
and didn't want to damage the character. Hawkman's wings reminded me of
the Flash Gordon serial.
Ah. Found it on IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0131675/
Also found the 1997 one, which somehow I completely missed. IMDB says it
was released in Israel, which might explain that.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118365/
M.O.R
> On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 20:15:43 GMT, YKW <Y...@YKW.YKW> wrote:
> >C51C4B.12531619072...@news.dc1.easynews.com:
>
> >>In article <jademan-77CBDC.14413519072...@unknown.sj.astraweb.com>,
> >> Brad Haga <jade...@adelphia.net> wrote:
>
> >>> Okay. To be fair both houses have had some pretty horrific false
> >>> starts, especially Marvel in the early days (I'm thinking the direct
> >>> to video Fantastic Four and Captain America movies, here, as well as
> >>> two horrific attempts by DC at early Wonder Woman series/TV movies
> >>> ... ).
>
> >> Huh? What two Wonder Woman movies were horrific, since you apparently
> >> like the second? And DC movies predate WW by 30 years.
>
> >Presumably, the reference is to the Cathy Lee Crosby telepic (in which
> >case, I concur) and the pilot for the Lynda Carter WWII-era series (in
> >which case, fuck you).
>
> He may also be referring to the even earlier Wonder Woman pilot in
> 1967 with Ellie Wood Walker. The pilot was begun but unfinished and
> never aired, as only just under five minutes of footage were
> apparently shot. This Wonder Woman would have been a sitcom where
> Diana lived with her nagging (mortal) mother. More here:
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Nicola Scott, penciller extraordinaire, used to work part time as a
model and actress, while working as a waitress.
Anyway, while perusing the internet, and a certain set of film
adverts, she discovered that there were plans for a new Wonder Woman
series, where Diana would live with Steve Trevor, and she was
constantly fawning over him, and he was a total wimp and pretty much
useless. She did not know the plot at the time, discovering it upon
getting the script. She went over to the states, auditioned in her
own homemade costume, and did an audition reading the script. The
script was terrible, and while she did not get the part, nobody else
got the part either, because the project was scrapped.
The producers went in a different direction, and instead decided to
create a new show. The subsequent result was Smallville. She recounts
the tale in a podcast interview here.
http://www.aroundcomics.com/index.php/ep-135-down-under-with-nicola-scott
M.O.R
http://www.headinjurytheater.com/article24.htm
You may need to reformat your brain after seeing this. They use the
Guy Gardner GL, albeit with the Kyle Rayner mask. Barry Allen is the
Flash, but he is given Hal Jordan's personality (inability to maintain
a job, for example.)
Martian Manhunter, as played by David Ogden Steirs, has a big gut, and
all of the costumes look awful, many because they had to sew corsets
into them to hold in the heroes beer guts.
Mark Waid hammered this, simply because it was awful.
Michael
> In article <n681o.28961$4B7....@newsfe16.iad>,
> Michael <this...@for.rent> wrote:
>
>
>>Anim8rFSK wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article <eNM0o.20908$OU6....@newsfe20.iad>,
>>> Michael <this...@for.rent> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Good director in Martin Campbell. Seemingly good cast.
>>>
>>>
>>>In GL? They lost me when they cast a too-young blond with a bad figure
>>>as Carol Ferris.
>>>
>>
>>
>>Ryan Reynolds, Stellen Skarsgard (spe?), and Angela Basset would usually
>>be seen as a really good beginnig to your cast.
>
>
>
> Basset as Amanda Waller??? Not hardly.
Not from that picture, granted.
Michael
Michael
Cable's bath in the swamp made me smile!
Michael
Michael
Just wondering.
Michael
Anim8rFSK
Bill Steele <ws...@cornell.edu> wrote:
It's on youtube.
M.O.R
That scene, and the one with the waitress, were not in the final
print, apparently. I saw those scenes too, but apparently, when it
went to the cinema, those scenes were not included.
Strange.
I would love to see someone take a stab at the character, at least in
a series. We know animation has become more adult, and has gained an
audience in the process, I am sure a series could be done in an
animated style, simlar yet different to Spawn.
grinningdemon
I wouldn't mind seeing an adaptation of Fables that goes that route
either...I don't think they could do it justice in live action.
Brad Haga
YKW <Y...@YKW.YKW> wrote:
> Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net> wrote in
> news:ANIM8Rfsk-2B7CE...@news.dc1.easynews.com:
>
> >In article <Xns9DBA86E8DCDBC...@69.16.186.8>,
> > YKW <Y...@YKW.YKW> wrote:
> >
> >> Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net> wrote in news:ANIM8Rfsk-
> >> C51C4B.125...@news.dc1.easynews.com:
> >>
> >> >In article <jademan-77CBDC...@unknown.sj.astraweb.com>,
> >> > Brad Haga <jad...@adelphia.net> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Okay. To be fair both houses have had some pretty horrific false
> >> >> starts, especially Marvel in the early days (I'm thinking the
> >> >> direct to video Fantastic Four and Captain America movies, here,
> >> >> as well as two horrific attempts by DC at early Wonder Woman
> >> >> series/TV movies ... ).
> >> >
> >> > Huh? What two Wonder Woman movies were horrific, since you
> >> > apparently like the second? And DC movies predate WW by 30 years.
> >>
> >> Presumably, the reference is to the Cathy Lee Crosby telepic (in
> >> which case, I concur) and the pilot for the Lynda Carter WWII-era
> >> series (in which case, fuck you).
> >
> > Me?? Or Brad?
> >
>
> Anyone who says the Lynda Carter TV movie was awful. :)
There was the one with the blonde super-agent Wonder Woman (Cathy Lee
Crosby) and there was an aborted attempt at doing a campy Wonder Woman
in the 60's when the Adam West Batman was in vogue that turned her into
a spaced out ditz. It made it as far as a pilot
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tKZJVhn7M4 ).
H. Brad Haga
Michael
> On Jul 21, 10:57 pm, Michael <thissp...@for.rent> wrote:
>
>>Scott Eiler wrote:
>>
>>>On Jul 20, 7:51 am, Anim8rFSK <ANIM8R...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>Basset as Amanda Waller??? Not hardly.
>>
>>>She beats Adrienne Barbeau as Matt Cable in the Swamp Thing movie.
>>
>>Cable's bath in the swamp made me smile!
>>
>>Michael
>
>
> That scene, and the one with the waitress, were not in the final
> print, apparently. I saw those scenes too, but apparently, when it
> went to the cinema, those scenes were not included.
> Strange.
The extra Barbeau footage in the swamp was likely removed due to wanting
a particular movie rating I'd think.
> I would love to see someone take a stab at the character, at least in
> a series. We know animation has become more adult, and has gained an
> audience in the process, I am sure a series could be done in an
> animated style, simlar yet different to Spawn.
USA did a live-action series oh SO many years ago.
Michael
Anim8rFSK
Michael <this...@for.rent> wrote:
Two words: Kari Wuhrer!
M.O.R
> In article <CTl2o.29479$4B7.15...@newsfe16.iad>,
>
>
>
>
>
> Michael <thissp...@for.rent> wrote:
> > M.O.R wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 21, 10:57 pm, Michael <thissp...@for.rent> wrote:
>
> > >>Scott Eiler wrote:
>
> > >>>On Jul 20, 7:51 am, Anim8rFSK <ANIM8R...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > >>>>Basset as Amanda Waller??? Not hardly.
>
> > >>>She beats Adrienne Barbeau as Matt Cable in the Swamp Thing movie.
>
> > >>Cable's bath in the swamp made me smile!
>
> > >>Michael
>
> > > That scene, and the one with the waitress, were not in the final
> > > print, apparently. I saw those scenes too, but apparently, when it
> > > went to the cinema, those scenes were not included.
> > > Strange.
>
> > The extra Barbeau footage in the swamp was likely removed due to wanting
> > a particular movie rating I'd think.
>
> > > I would love to see someone take a stab at the character, at least in
> > > a series. We know animation has become more adult, and has gained an
> > > audience in the process, I am sure a series could be done in an
> > > animated style, simlar yet different to Spawn.
>
> > USA did a live-action series oh SO many years ago.
>
> > Michael
>
> Two words: Kari Wuhrer!
>
> --
was a fox. She also starred in Command and Conquer Red Alert 2.
She has had three kids now, and she aint the stunner she used to be.
Anim8rFSK
<70af1704-b5ef-472f...@q35g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
"M.O.R" <sean.ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
I recently (like last week) stumbled on a movie she made BEFORE the
implants where she is quite completely and most thoroughly naked.
M.O.R
>
> - Show quoted text -
Are ya sure, because she was about a B cup, and now she is a double A.
But she has had three kids now, and I don't think her figure will have
held up as well. Sorta like how Kathy Ireland now looks, I would
imagine.
Anim8rFSK
<e4bd45fa-8d87-4b59...@y11g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
"M.O.R" <sean.ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
Yeah, this is from the early 2000s, before her run of nudie cuties with
the big inflatables. She looks like she did in her Remote Control days.
>
> But she has had three kids now, and I don't think her figure will have
> held up as well. Sorta like how Kathy Ireland now looks, I would
> imagine.
--