Jump to content

Superman Movie Coming December 2012 & Flash, Wonder Woman, Aquaman & More Soon To Follow


Wheeljack35
 Share

Recommended Posts

[

The shield is one thing. Wing tips and buccaneer boots are another.

 

 

 

The moment someone says something like this, they should have nothing to do with a super hero movie.

 

Super Hero movies really get a bad wrap like no other genre. You never see a western where the producers look at a cowboy and say, "Those hats and boots are stupid. We need black rubber and armor for today's audiences to buy into this stuff." Jonah Hex and Wild Wild West, however, do contradict this and in doing so earn every bit of the disrespect they get.

 

What works in the comics doesn't always work on the screen. The Batman on film is not a direct interpretation of the comics but when I watch them I still see Batman.

 

And not to burst your bubble but Bryan Hitch's Captain America outfit is a much better design for a character who is basically a soldier in the United States military, which last time I checked Cap was first and foremost.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[

The shield is one thing. Wing tips and buccaneer boots are another.

 

 

 

The moment someone says something like this, they should have nothing to do with a super hero movie.

 

Super Hero movies really get a bad wrap like no other genre. You never see a western where the producers look at a cowboy and say, "Those hats and boots are stupid. We need black rubber and armor for today's audiences to buy into this stuff." Jonah Hex and Wild Wild West, however, do contradict this and in doing so earn every bit of the disrespect they get.

 

What works in the comics doesn't always work on the screen. The Batman on film is not a direct interpretation of the comics but when I watch them I still see Batman.

 

And not to burst your bubble but Bryan Hitch's Captain America outfit is a much better design for a character who is basically a soldier in the United States military, which last time I checked Cap was first and foremost.

 

 

Lord people...STOP trying to make COMIC book movies real. They haven´t made a comic book movie YET. except for a few. Where is the Wolverine costume? We still need to have a comic book X-men movie made. There hasn´t been one yet. Not to mention Green Goblin. That guy wasn´t Green Goblin in the spidey films. Some power ranger villain maybe....

 

Did you see Batman Dead End? Um...Yes a COMIC BOOK ACCURATE COSTUME DOES TRANSLATE WELL TO THE BIG SCREEN. I hate when people say they don´t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[

The shield is one thing. Wing tips and buccaneer boots are another.

 

 

 

The moment someone says something like this, they should have nothing to do with a super hero movie.

 

Super Hero movies really get a bad wrap like no other genre. You never see a western where the producers look at a cowboy and say, "Those hats and boots are stupid. We need black rubber and armor for today's audiences to buy into this stuff." Jonah Hex and Wild Wild West, however, do contradict this and in doing so earn every bit of the disrespect they get.

 

What works in the comics doesn't always work on the screen. The Batman on film is not a direct interpretation of the comics but when I watch them I still see Batman.

 

And not to burst your bubble but Bryan Hitch's Captain America outfit is a much better design for a character who is basically a soldier in the United States military, which last time I checked Cap was first and foremost.

 

 

Lord people...STOP trying to make COMIC book movies real. They haven´t made a comic book movie YET. except for a few. Where is the Wolverine costume? We still need to have a comic book X-men movie made. There hasn´t been one yet. Not to mention Green Goblin. That guy wasn´t Green Goblin in the spidey films. Some power ranger villain maybe....

 

Did you see Batman Dead End? Um...Yes a COMIC BOOK ACCURATE COSTUME DOES TRANSLATE WELL TO THE BIG SCREEN. I hate when people say they don´t.

 

Somebody else will have to take this one while I try to stop laughing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you see Batman Dead End? Um...Yes a COMIC BOOK ACCURATE COSTUME DOES TRANSLATE WELL TO THE BIG SCREEN. I hate when people say they don´t.

 

A costume might work, but not every costume. Batman`s costume works in Dead End because of very contrived situations , lighting and environment.

 

Take Wolverine for instance.

Please.

 

In his classic uniform, he'd look like a big bumble-bee. In his brown costume he'd look.........well.......brown. In his Astonishing costume he'd look like a dressier bumble-bee. But in all the versions he'd have that mask....which does not work in real life, at all.

Doubt that? Watch the end of Batman and Robin, where Batman's ears are wiggling something fierce as he runs towards camera.

Imagine that with Wolverine.

G'wan......we'll wait.

 

Stupid, huh? Really dumb looking.....which is why those kinds of costumes do not always work on screen.

That is why comics have to be translated to the screen--and have changes made. It might work in print.......might seem perfectly logical even.......but on screen, in cinema....its a completely different thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gonna add replies to several people in one post for the sake of space and time.

 

Lady Jaye wrote:

 

These movies are meant to make money and to appeal to the general populace, not just comic nerds that know every aspect of the superhero's backstory!!

 

That is Fallacy #1 of Comic Book Movie Debates. It is completely untrue that you cannot be faithful to the comics while also appealing to wider audiences. The first Spiderman movie proved that, though not directly. Had Spiderman been given his proper mechanical webshooters, had Green Goblin been given a costume more accurate to the comics, had Flash Thompson been given blond hair...the movie still would have earned what it did. It would not have earned a penny less. The logic behind Fallacy #1 is that the general masses don't know as much about the comic characters as the comic fans do, and since they don't know what's faithful and what isn't, there's no harm in being faithful. For example, general audiences have no idea how Spiderman shoots his webs in the comics. Therefore, any on-screen solution works for them, whether it is mechanical or organic webshooters. I have heard the utterly idiotic argument that audiences would not accept a boy genius inventing a failed adhesive, while at the same time acknowledging the fact that the audience is willing to accept a far more incredible concept of a guy obtaining super powers through a spider bite. I have yet to hear an argument against mechanical webshooters that has not been proven to be idiotic once examined honestly. So if it doesn't matter, why not be faithful and make both camps happy? It's a win/win.

 

and with the new Batman trilogy I don't mind!!!! Both took general ideas of the characters and played with them and made it work!!! Both films to date have been superb!!!

 

Those movies sucked. Especially the one with Batman growling through his cowl. We laughed with derision through the entire thing.

 

If you can't get past the differences from the comic then ya need to stick to the cartoons. But I bet you complain there too!!! LOL!!

 

The cartoons are hideous.

 

Master Jailer wrote:

 

I, for one, have far more faith in Xorr being able to produce a good super-hero movie than I am in Warner Bros. or Marvel Studios or anyone else.

 

Well thank you! :D

 

Of course, given how poorly the studios are making superhero movies these days, that isn't much of a compliment! ;)

 

Captain America lost me the moment I read the wings are gone from the costume.

 

Oh good lord. First bad news about Thor, now bad news about Cap. I think Iron Man 1 was an anomaly.

 

Cjflan32 wrote:

 

So the X-Men franchise was awful because Bryan Singer chose to go with black suits as opposed to the classic blue and gold outfits. Noted.

 

Well, yes, the stupid BMX biker suits and the crappy camera work, and the bad acting, and the warping of the origins of the characters, and the lies Singer told about the costumes, only to give Magneto a silly-looking half-costume, and...

 

Yeah, the Xmen sucked.

 

You don't always capture the essence of the character, this is true. But nine times out of ten these films have. If you don't think that was Batman and the Joker in TDK, regardless of the changes they made for story's sake, then you've either never read a Batman comic or you need a serious refresher course.

 

Nonsense. Going back to the 1980's and the Superman movies, we had Luthor turned into a comedy act, we had the entire background of Superman changed, we saw Batman and the Joker turned into some weird symbiotic twin-origin thing, Bruce Wayne became a bumbling idiot, Mary Jane became a whiney abused loser, Justin Hammer turned into a sniveling failure, the Joker turned into a fat clown, the Joker turned into a philosopher who looks like he had a bike accident in a Max Factor sales store, a Silver Sufer who looked like badly done CGI and who had powers never given to him in the comics, a Reed Richards who parties with college chicks...need I go on? None of this captured the essence of the comics. Batman in TDK was a growling, excessively violent psychotic, not the darknight detective he was in the comics. Joker became a pathetic philosopher and nowhere near as psychotic as he was in the comics. It was crap. I need no refresher course. I've been reading Batman in the comics for almost 40 years. I know what's accurate and what's not.

 

Arrow wrote:

 

And he's knows WHAT about film, or directing film?

 

Far more than any modern director or writer, that's for sure! For example, I know that audiences should be able to actually see and comprehend fight scenes and not to hand the camera to a guy with Parkinsons's who's also jacked up on caffeine. That's just for starters.

 

Matthew Green wrote:

 

Lord people...STOP trying to make COMIC book movies real. They haven´t made a comic book movie YET. except for a few. Where is the Wolverine costume? We still need to have a comic book X-men movie made. There hasn´t been one yet. Not to mention Green Goblin. That guy wasn´t Green Goblin in the spidey films. Some power ranger villain maybe....Did you see Batman Dead End? Um...Yes a COMIC BOOK ACCURATE COSTUME DOES TRANSLATE WELL TO THE BIG SCREEN. I hate when people say they don´t.

 

Batman (1966) is the one totally faithful superhero movie. Or at least, far more faithful than any movie that's come after it. And I also agree about Green Goblin. He looked more like Jet Jaguar. People in the audience I was in actually laughed out loud when Green Goblin gave that speech to Spiderman on the rooftop and his costume mouth was sculpted open and didn't move as he spoke. It looked like bad dubbing from a Japanese tv show like Space Giants or Spectreman! And while Cjflan will ridicule your last statement about comic costumes being able to translate well to the big screen, I agree with you 100%. Nobody laughed at Spiderman's almost totally accurate costume. Nobody laughed at Superman's totally accurate costume. But people like to make absurd claims about people laughing at costumes with nothing whatsoever to back them. It's a combination of stupidity and arrogance. They just arbitrarily believe something they heard someone say and don't even bother to fire up a brain cell and think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arrow wrote:

 

But in all the versions he'd have that mask....which does not work in real life, at all.

 

What kind of absurd statement is that? Did you ever stop to think that people who go to see superhero movies expect the superheroes to wear masks and costumes because that's what they wear in the comics? If they don't have masks or costumes, why bother to make a superhero movie at all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What kind of absurd statement is that? Did you ever stop to think that people who go to see superhero movies expect the superheroes to wear masks and costumes because that's what they wear in the comics? If they don't have masks or costumes, why bother to make a superhero movie at all?

 

Had to quote you there cause the same kind of changes made to the Spidey costume was made to that Green Lantern mock up/fan made poster!!! Pretty much same costume, just a few added lines, in the same color scheme, and yet to Master Jailer it's busy!!! I'd like to point out that Spidey's costume is very different due to the material. I've never seen material like that on Spidey, Cap yes, Spidey no!!

 

So you say Spidey costume translates well, but Master Jailer says otherwise that the Green Lantern costume doesn't!! Do you agree??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My enjoyment of the Batman movies were greatly diminished because they left out the underwear on the outside of the batsuit. I also could not enjoy the Spider-Man movies because the spider design on the back of the suit was a slightly different design than what the original artist drew 50 years ago. How dare they.

 

How dare they.

 

:rolleyes:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What works in the comics doesn't always work on the screen.

 

Once again, the moment someone says this, they should not be involved in a super-hero movie. If you don't have confidence in the source material, step aside. Don't try to turn it into something else just to satisfy your sensibilities which clearly were never invested in that material to begin with. hen Joe Johnston read a Captain America comic, was he saying to himself, This is cool. too bad Cap looks so stupid?"

 

[ The Batman on film is not a direct interpretation of the comics but when I watch them I still see Batman.

 

 

 

When I see the recent Batman films, I see a long, boring pretentious piece of fluff staring a ridiculously outfitted, pumpkin-headed Batman speaking in nearly incomprehensible over-done growl. Those films aren't the best example to prove your point with me. I hated them.

 

 

And not to burst your bubble but Bryan Hitch's Captain America outfit is a much better design for a character who is basically a soldier in the United States military, which last time I checked Cap was first and foremost.

 

 

That Hitch design is a perfect example of how ...and this goes for comic artists as well... current super-hero designers love to half-ass it to an absurd degree. They want to do a super-hero story yet they're afraid of a classic super-hero costume with all the iconic trappings of bright colors, a mask, a chest emblem etc. Their compromised solution is this over-detailed, foolish looking mess that looks to drab to be a super-hero and yet still too ridiculous to be taken seriously. The end result is still dismissed as stupid by adults and fails to capture the imaginations and attention of children. (Yeah. I know. "Kids don't read comics anymore." I rarely wonder why...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Take Wolverine for instance.

Please.

 

In his classic uniform, he'd look like a big bumble-bee. In his brown costume he'd look.........well.......brown. In his Astonishing costume he'd look like a dressier bumble-bee. But in all the versions he'd have that mask....which does not work in real life, at all.

Doubt that? Watch the end of Batman and Robin, where Batman's ears are wiggling something fierce as he runs towards camera.

Imagine that with Wolverine.

G'wan......we'll wait.

 

Stupid, huh? Really dumb looking.....which is why those kinds of costumes do not always work on screen.

That is why comics have to be translated to the screen--and have changes made. It might work in print.......might seem perfectly logical even.......but on screen, in cinema....its a completely different thing.

 

 

I wouldn't want you working on a Wolverine movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Well, yes, the stupid BMX biker suits and the crappy camera work, and the bad acting, and the warping of the origins of the characters, and the lies Singer told about the costumes, only to give Magneto a silly-looking half-costume, and...

 

Yeah, the Xmen sucked."

 

Magneto is a character who saw million of people just like him wiped out for being different. First time around it was Jews, now it's mutants. And he'll be damned if it happens again.

 

Charles Xavier is a character who sees the potential in humans and mutants to rise above their hatred and live in peace. The first step in that process is to teach mutants to use their powers properly so he created a school to teach them.

 

Wolverine is a character tormented by a past he can't remember.

 

Even with "revisionist history" those characters were the same as I read them in the comics.

 

"Luthor turned into a comedy act"

 

The con man hustler who beats Superman with his mind which eventually evolved into comic books greatest villain? Maybe they should have put him in a green and purple suit screaming "WORLD DOMINATION!"

 

"we saw Batman and the Joker turned into some weird symbiotic twin-origin thing"

 

Made sense for the movie. And it was a good movie.

 

"Mary Jane became a whiney abused loser"

 

That role could not have been casted worse.

 

"Justin Hammer turned into a sniveling failure"

 

This one was so bad you had to go see it right?

 

"a Reed Richards who parties with college chicks"

 

Now your reaching. This is called comic relief. When your fiancee catches you out dancing with women prettier than she is it's funny. Though I suppose I wouldn't expect you to get a joke anyway.

 

That's one scene in a span of two films and your using it to destroy a character that was still fairly recognizable personality wise.

 

"a Silver Sufer who looked like badly done CGI and who had powers never given to him in the comics"

 

I could explain the Power Cosmic basically being a gift from a god but you're just gonna cry about the power being in the surfboard. Plot device. Every movie has them.

 

"And all the other crap I said about Batman and the Joker because it's not that your opinion doesn't matter, it's just not as good as mine."

 

I have to agree with this one. TDK should have had a red phone to call Bruce Wayne and the Joker should have been jumping around slapping people with fish. Better yet he should have poisoned all the fish in Gotham until all the advertisers gave him likeness rights. That would have brought Gotham to its knees.

 

You obviously don't understand the relationship between Batman and Joker. Joker is the anti-Batman. What you call "growling, excessively violent psychotic" the rest of us call a man being pushed to the brink trying to hold a line he swore never to cross. That's what real Batman fans saw.

 

The Joker's M.O. is to push people to the brink so everyone loses it, particularly Batman and Gordon. He's also a brilliant criminal mastermind. There are different ways to portray a character. Jack Nicholson did one way, Heath Ledger did another.

 

I realize that some old timers think Caesar Romero, with his "WOO HOO HOO HAHAHAHA" laugh and badly painted mustache, is the true Joker, but it's the 21st Century and charatcers have evolved since the 60's. Feel free to catch up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I realize that some old timers think Caesar Romero, with his "WOO HOO HOO HAHAHAHA" laugh and badly painted mustache, is the true Joker, but it's the 21st Century and charatcers have evolved since the 60's. Feel free to catch up.

Well, the most recent Batman movie zooms right back to those old days.

Check out Batman XXX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know Master Jailer, I'm hearing a lot of I hate this and I hate that but no real solutions other than the "source material". Batman & Robin almost buried the comic book genre. Blade gave it a shot in the arm and X-Men totally rejuvenated it. Why? Because the creators took it seriously. And characters running around in blue and piss yellow would have been laughable.

 

That direct-to-video Captain America film featured a dead on balls accurate Captain America costume. The movie was terrible, but hey, at least they got the outfit down right? People like you are never going to be satisfied. "Batman has a stuffy cowl". WHO CARES! He's still the man obsessed with making sure what happened to him doesn't happen to someone else.

 

And don't bring up a "well he should wear a polka dot costume" argument because that's not what I meant. A guy who gets shot at needs body armor. Did they pull it off? They could have done better, but they didn't. The yellow and black emblem may work well for the cartoon but not for a movie trying to target multiple demos.

 

You don't like it, don't go see them. That way when The First Avenger comes out we don't have to hear about how much you hate it because of the wardrobe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What kind of absurd statement is that? Did you ever stop to think that people who go to see superhero movies expect the superheroes to wear masks and costumes because that's what they wear in the comics? If they don't have masks or costumes, why bother to make a superhero movie at all?

 

Had to quote you there cause the same kind of changes made to the Spidey costume was made to that Green Lantern mock up/fan made poster!!! Pretty much same costume, just a few added lines, in the same color scheme, and yet to Master Jailer it's busy!!! I'd like to point out that Spidey's costume is very different due to the material. I've never seen material like that on Spidey, Cap yes, Spidey no!!

 

So you say Spidey costume translates well, but Master Jailer says otherwise that the Green Lantern costume doesn't!! Do you agree??

 

 

Just to clarify my points...

 

Green Lantern wears an excellent example of a costume that could survive an intact translation to the big screen if given the same respect that the Superman costume received in the Salkind films. There's no need for armor, rubber molding, or any of the unnecessary tagged on details that cluttered up the version of the costume on that fan-made poster.

 

As for the Spider-Man costume, I can live with its interpretation in the Spider-Man films. I don't need a lot of the little changed details like the silvery raised webbing, the eyes and the overall texture, but it was largely true enough to the comic book for me to find it adequate. Overall, it could've been a lot worse.

 

Another point that should be raised here is that often times, movie studios will demand some sort of gratuitous change to an adapted character's design simply to distinguish the movie version of the character from previously established versions of the character. This way they can claim the character's movie merchandise as strictly theirs and something to which they're entitle to profit from. Notice the subtle difference in the Batman logo from the comic book version to the 1989 movie version. Then also note how that logo changed again from movie to movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot get overly excited over someone announcing dates for films that have no script, director, or cast. More importantly, Warner Bros has had so many issues in the past with trying to get their DC properties on film that this means almost nothing.

 

But I do hope they manage to get these films into production. I would love to see the Flash, WW and Aquaman finally get their own films and a new Superman movie wouldn't be too bad either.

 

And to the nut jobs and wackos who think they know better than the entirety of Hollywood on the subject of making movies, I say go enroll in Tisch or USC or UCLA and learn about movie making. Understand that it's a business and an art form and that sacrifices need to be made for creative types like actors and directors to get the movies made they want. The studios also have to take gambles on the creative types, but they do so with an eye as to how much money can be made. There would never have been an X-Men film if Bryan Singer put Wolverine in blue and yellow spandex, Cyclops in a blue jumpsuit with utilities belts all over and Rogue in a green leotard. And you know what would have happened? Nothing. Every single superhero movie owes it's life to the X-Men. The X-Men showed Hollywood executives that a comic book movie, done with drama and seriousness and taking cues from the source materials and treating it not solely as a children's movie can make money. Tons of money. It got Sony to finally pony up the dough to make Spiderman. And if X-Men got the ball to the top of the hill, then Spiderman got the ball rolling down. Yes there have been mis-steps; Catwoman, both Fantastic Four films, Daredevil, Elektra, Blade Trinity come to mind. But the successes far outweigh them; Iron Man, Batman Begins, TDK, Spiderman 1 and 2, Iron Man 2. So go study film making. Understand the business. Learn how it all works. Then come back and complain that Captain America won't have wings on his head, or that Thor has a beard, or any of the other creative choices that were made in order to get the film green lit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bandito, that...was awesome. Except for the nutjobs and whackos park.

 

You know what could really settle this? Actually making a movie.

 

So, Master Jailer, you and Xorr, who actually said he "KNOWS" he could make a better movie, should just make one. It's a pretty simple process now:

 

You say "I can't make a better movie"

 

or

 

you start production and keep us appraised of your progress.

 

Because, and I'm serious when I say this, it would be really cool if people from this forum got together and made a fan film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot get overly excited over someone announcing dates for films that have no script, director, or cast. More importantly, Warner Bros has had so many issues in the past with trying to get their DC properties on film that this means almost nothing.

 

But I do hope they manage to get these films into production. I would love to see the Flash, WW and Aquaman finally get their own films and a new Superman movie wouldn't be too bad either.

 

This is important. If you recall Wonder Woman had a director (Joss) plus an actress in mind to play Diana and it still got shelved.

 

If the WW animated feature was great (and it was) I have no doubt a live action film would be great as well.

 

I didn't have a problem with Superman Returns, but if WB wants to restart then they want to restart.

 

Flash and Aquaman are tricky. I personally don't find them boring but I imagine they will be a challenge to adapt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know Master Jailer, I'm hearing a lot of I hate this and I hate that but no real solutions other than the "source material". Batman & Robin almost buried the comic book genre. Blade gave it a shot in the arm and X-Men totally rejuvenated it. Why? Because the creators took it seriously. And characters running around in blue and piss yellow would have been laughable.

 

 

 

I liked the X-Men movie but it was barely an X-Men movie. Singer borrowed a few names and a few powers and created a movie called X-Men but it only had a threadbare superficial connection to the comic book. It was one of the reasons why the success of the film didn't at all help the performance of the comic book. I saw first hand how enthusiastic fans of the movie picked up an issue of X-Men only to be disappointed. This movie succeeded largely due to an acceptable script, decent performances and very definitely lowered expectations! Singer is the classic example of a movie maker who claims to be a fan of the comic book but in fact finds the source material childish and stupid. Not only were the X-costumes gone but so was Storm's ability to fly because Singer thought much like the highly derided Jon Peters that flying characters were stupid!

 

 

That direct-to-video Captain America film featured a dead on balls accurate Captain America costume. The movie was terrible, but hey, at least they got the outfit down right? People like you are never going to be satisfied.

 

The direct to video Captain America movie isn't the best example of your point. This one had HUGE problems that couldn't be overcome by a neat Captain America costume no matter how faithful.

 

A guy who gets shot at needs body armor.

 

Batman is an acrobat who largely relies on his agility and ability to move in order to AVOID being shot. MY Batman is better than yours because MY Batman is good enough at what he does to not need stupid armor.

 

As I said before, I can't stand any of those recent Bat-films. One of the biggest problems is that Batman always looks chunky, uncomfortable and ridiculously immobile. To make things worse, he SOUNDS laughably awful. Imagine a monster movie where the monster is the cheapest, most ridiculous effect of the whole movie ...and not in a charming Ray Harryhausen sort of way. It's hard to buy into a movie where I wince every time the main character waddles and growls on the screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And to the nut jobs and wackos who think they know better than the entirety of Hollywood on the subject of making movies, I say go enroll in Tisch or USC or UCLA and learn about movie making.

 

I've been suggesting that for years now. I've taught in film schools for 10 years, I've storyboarded for TV and film for 20 years now--that does not happen without a pretty in-depth understanding of the medium.

 

The folks are just all-talk and no walk. They "know" nothing. They'll never even crack a book open on film theory, much less go for schooling on the matter.

 

You know what could really settle this? Actually making a movie.

 

So, Master Jailer, you and Xorr, who actually said he "KNOWS" he could make a better movie, should just make one. It's a pretty simple process now:

 

You say "I can't make a better movie"

 

or

 

you start production and keep us appraised of your progress.

 

Because, and I'm serious when I say this, it would be really cool if people from this forum got together and made a fan film.

 

Yep, that would put things in a different light.

 

But it will not happen. It'll never happen.

The folks doing the yapping are too lazy. They don't know enough, and they will never learn enough to pull it off. All they are is just talk, just another toothless opinion.

 

And that is a shame.

Its a shame because I would LOVE to see someone rise to the challenge. I'd applaud someone making the effort and going the distance and actually not only make a movie, but doing it right cinematically, and doing justice to the characters they profess to love.

That is why I used to teach the stuff, it was inspiring to see people take up the reins and make the attempt, and some succeeded. The industry needs fresh talent all the time.

 

But time and again, people spout off about how they are gonna do this, gonna do that.....and they say they have started a script and yadda yadda.....and you never hear from them again. Usually its because they realize they don't know enough, and they give up.

And that I say: that's just fine, because the biz cannot use people that give up, or who do not know what they are doing.

 

( and recognize the above for the challenge it is :rolleyes: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know Master Jailer, I'm hearing a lot of I hate this and I hate that but no real solutions other than the "source material". Batman & Robin almost buried the comic book genre. Blade gave it a shot in the arm and X-Men totally rejuvenated it. Why? Because the creators took it seriously. And characters running around in blue and piss yellow would have been laughable.

 

 

 

I liked the X-Men movie but it was barely an X-Men movie. Singer borrowed a few names and a few powers and created a movie called X-Men but it only had a threadbare superficial connection to the comic book. It was one of the reasons why the success of the film didn't at all help the performance of the comic book. I saw first hand how enthusiastic fans of the movie picked up an issue of X-Men only to be disappointed. This movie succeeded largely due to an acceptable script, decent performances and very definitely lowered expectations! Singer is the classic example of a movie maker who claims to be a fan of the comic book but in fact finds the source material childish and stupid. Not only were the X-costumes gone but so was Storm's ability to fly because Singer thought much like the highly derided Jon Peters that flying characters were stupid!

 

 

That direct-to-video Captain America film featured a dead on balls accurate Captain America costume. The movie was terrible, but hey, at least they got the outfit down right? People like you are never going to be satisfied.

 

The direct to video Captain America movie isn't the best example of your point. This one had HUGE problems that couldn't be overcome by a neat Captain America costume no matter how faithful.

 

A guy who gets shot at needs body armor.

 

Batman is an acrobat who largely relies on his agility and ability to move in order to AVOID being shot. MY Batman is better than yours because MY Batman is good enough at what he does to not need stupid armor.

 

As I said before, I can't stand any of those recent Bat-films. One of the biggest problems is that Batman always looks chunky, uncomfortable and ridiculously immobile. To make things worse, he SOUNDS laughably awful. Imagine a monster movie where the monster is the cheapest, most ridiculous effect of the whole movie ...and not in a charming Ray Harryhausen sort of way. It's hard to buy into a movie where I wince every time the main character waddles and growls on the screen.

 

 

Actually, since all you've been crying about is how the characters costumes are never accurate, I felt the Captain America example was great. On that note I believe the FF costumes in the direct-to-garbage pail version from 1994 had accurate costumes as well. Feel free to stop cutting my quotes off at anytime.

 

Of course it's also been written at least three times that the blue and gold X-Men outfits would not translate well on screen. I believe you've ignored it every single time. That answers that.

 

"I saw first hand how enthusiastic fans of the movie picked up an issue of X-Men only to be disappointed. This movie succeeded largely due to an acceptable script, decent performances and very definitely lowered expectations! Singer is the classic example of a movie maker who claims to be a fan of the comic book but in fact finds the source material childish and stupid"

 

And you explain the three subsequent sequels how? And if the black outfits sucked so much how did Grant Morrison's run at become the best since the Claremont era at that time? If there was that much backlash people would have dumped it. And newsflash! For fifty-plus years comic books were aimed at children! Do you even know what your saying anymore?

 

And your Batman analogy is ridiculous. Batman Begins has a guy in training who needs protection. In TDK he is more confident in his abilities and switches to lighter armor to be more agile. What else you got?

 

In any event, from what I gathered here is you can't make a better superhero movie. Thank you, that's all I needed to hear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And to the nut jobs and wackos who think they know better than the entirety of Hollywood on the subject of making movies, I say go enroll in Tisch or USC or UCLA and learn about movie making. Understand that it's a business and an art form and that sacrifices need to be made for creative types like actors and directors to get the movies made they want. The studios also have to take gambles on the creative types, but they do so with an eye as to how much money can be made. There would never have been an X-Men film if Bryan Singer put Wolverine in blue and yellow spandex, Cyclops in a blue jumpsuit with utilities belts all over and Rogue in a green leotard. And you know what would have happened? Nothing. Every single superhero movie owes it's life to the X-Men. The X-Men showed Hollywood executives that a comic book movie, done with drama and seriousness and taking cues from the source materials and treating it not solely as a children's movie can make money. Tons of money. It got Sony to finally pony up the dough to make Spiderman. And if X-Men got the ball to the top of the hill, then Spiderman got the ball rolling down. Yes there have been mis-steps; Catwoman, both Fantastic Four films, Daredevil, Elektra, Blade Trinity come to mind. But the successes far outweigh them; Iron Man, Batman Begins, TDK, Spiderman 1 and 2, Iron Man 2. So go study film making. Understand the business. Learn how it all works. Then come back and complain that Captain America won't have wings on his head, or that Thor has a beard, or any of the other creative choices that were made in order to get the film green lit.

 

 

Oh brother... It's the old childish "Oh yeah? Can you do better?" argument.

 

How many years of film school do I have to sit through before I've earned the credibility to say that a Batman who can't move his neck is a stupid idea?

 

And before someone chimes in with, "They addressed this in The Dark Knight," I've never had a day of film school in my life but I know enough that Batman should be capable of some basic natural unencumbered movement so he doesn't look painfully stiff and awkward. Without any film school training, I have the insight that would have made that scene in The Dark Knight where Bruce Wayne addresses his immobility unnecessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And before someone chimes in with, "They addressed this in The Dark Knight," I've never had a day of film school in my life but I know enough that Batman should be capable of some basic natural unencumbered movement so he doesn't look painfully stiff and awkward. Without any film school training, I have the insight that would have made that scene in The Dark Knight where Bruce Wayne addresses his immobility unnecessary.

 

You wanted the Adam West costume in Begins and TDK...we get it.

 

However, I think you should first take a photo of West in spandex posing with his best "O" face and but it side by side with Bale from TDK. See which one is more prepared to go out there and fight crime in the real world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I've never had a day of film school in my life but I know enough that Batman should be capable of some basic natural unencumbered movement so he doesn't look painfully stiff and awkward. Without any film school training, I have the insight that would have made that scene in The Dark Knight where Bruce Wayne addresses his immobility unnecessary.

 

The neck thing wasn't an issue.

 

And thank you for admitting you've never had "a day of film school in my life". It makes it easier to ignore.

 

He can address the problem with Batman's neck but can't address the positives and negatives of lame costume designs on screen. He's ready for the big time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Find Action Figures on Ebay

×
×
  • Create New...
Sign Up For The TNI Newsletter And Have The News Delivered To You!


Entertainment News International (ENI) is the #1 popular culture network for adult fans all around the world.
Get the scoop on all the popular comics, games, movies, toys, and more every day!

Contact and Support

Advertising | Submit News | Contact ENI | Privacy Policy

©Entertainment News International - All images, trademarks, logos, video, brands and images used on this website are registered trademarks of their respective companies and owners. All Rights Reserved. Data has been shared for news reporting purposes only. All content sourced by fans, online websites, and or other fan community sources. Entertainment News International is not responsible for reporting errors, inaccuracies, omissions, and or other liablities related to news shared here. We do our best to keep tabs on infringements. If some of your content was shared by accident. Contact us about any infringements right away - CLICK HERE