Boy, that was quick. For what it's worth, the pics had a very strong Sin City vibe to them; the women all looked like Gail's hookers; Samuel Jackson looked like a gaudy pimp, and The Spirit himself was dressed in black from head to toe, with the exception of the red tie. He also still had the mask and hat.
I'm not too familiar with the comic so I can't say how faithful it all was; but if you looked at the pics without any context, you would probably think "Sin City 2".
Boy, that was quick. For what it's worth, the pics had a very strong Sin City vibe to them; the women all looked like Gail's hookers; Samuel Jackson looked like a gaudy pimp, and The Spirit himself was dressed in black from head to toe, with the exception of the red tie. He also still had the mask and hat.
I'm not too familiar with the comic so I can't say how faithful it all was; but if you looked at the pics without any context, you would probably think "Sin City 2".
More often than not The Spirit comic stories looked like RKO film noirs.The Eisner women-while always very attractive- never looked like anything other than ladies-including the most fatale of the sexy femme fatales.
The Octopus(Jackson's character)was never "on camera".He was always in darkness and usually at a table.All that was ever shown were his gloved hands--much like the Unseen Blofeld of the early Connery 007 films.
The Spirit dressed in a dark blue suit(often a three piece) with a blue hat and blue mask.The leather gloves he wore(and very rarely removed)were blue.Apparently Miller's decided that the blue suits were really black and the blue color indicated highlights.Anyway,The Spirit's hair was usually black (with blue highlights--until Eisner painted some dynamic covers for the 1980s Kitchen Sink reprints.In those,his hair is brown).And yes,The Spirit's tie was red(his shoes were either black or brown).
Sounds like Miller got the hero's tie right-along with his hair.That's something to grateful for.Gabriel Macht may look absolutely terrific as The Spirit.I hope so.I've read that he dyed his naturally blond hair black so as to match the images of The Spirit.And Frank Miller's assembled a great looking group of actresses-among them Eva Mendes(Sand Saref) and Paz Vega(Plaster of Paris).Hopefully he'll give them all some worthwhile dialogue and individual chances to shine.Miller's said in at least one interview that this movie will be largely based upon Eisner's classic "Sand Saref" story.
I did see the pics before they were taken down, and the mask is correct--even down to the very wide eye-holes. In fact, it almost looks like it's painted on the actor's face.
Here's a teaser poster for THE SPIRIT. Already, Frank Miller is making this Sin City 2.0. I'm just getting that vibe from this.
If he blows this movie critically & financially, Eisner should kick the crap out of him even though that's a physical impossiblity...
His writing of All-Star Batman absolutely SUCKS! X-(
Hmmm...when I first saw this poster I thought it was for The Shadow or The Spider,what with that flowing red tie(?).For whatever it's worth,I'm not overly impressed with either of Miller's Spirit posters.The first one with the paraphrase/homage to Raymond Chandler("Down these mean streets a man must go...) probably tries to evoke images of tough guys doing tough things in a tough world.Real hardcase stuff.But that's not very much like Will Eisner's Spirit.Sure,The Spirit was a two-fisted guy, but he didn't go out looking for fights.They found him.
However,compared to this newest poster, the first Miller Spirit poster is nearly vintage Eisner.
"My city screams","She is my lover".Excuse me but,OUCH!.Jeeeezz...Somebody's trying just a tad TOO hard to sound like a Tough Guy.I sincerely hope The Spirit doesn't talk like this in the film,or it'll become a cult movie, and for all the wrong reasons.
All that said,the movie itself might actually turn out to be very good--it might even be more like The Spirit than these unfortunate images currently suggest.I certainly hope that's the case.With his Spirit stories, Eisner left a lot of highly cinematic material behind.It'd be real tragedy if the film tanks because of someone's bizarre interpretation of The Spirit.At least it's not "real world".Miller did say that he agreed to do this film because a Spirit movie was going to be made regardless of his involvement, and that he wanted to protect Eisner.
Brief disclosure:I've been a Spirit fan since I was 13 and read the Spirit story in Fieffer's The Great Comic Book Heroes.I collected the Warren Spirit reprints and the oversized (and regular-sized)Kitchen Sink Spirit magazines.
And that said, I'm probably the only Spirit fan who'll publically admit that I really like the 1987 Spirit TV-movie.I think it's great-extremely respectful to Eisner's work and Sam Jones turns in a delightful performance as Denny Colt/The Spirit.Considering the budget the production had,the filmmakers managed to evoke-in some cases nearly duplicate-Eisner images.Long before Tim Burton won raves fot setting his Gotham City in a timeless era,Steven de Souza did exactly that with The Spirit.In his movie,Central City exists in the 1930s, 40s and 80s, all at once.Men's and women's fashions reflect a multitude of styles.In places there's a real "film noir" look and The Spirit looks as exactly like Eisner depicted him as any human being possibly could.Portions of the script don't work(there are places where it's too cute) but overall.I think the film succeeds-it's even got P'Gell as the villainess.I understand Eisner didn't care for this very much but with all respect to him, it's my suspicion that no dramatized version of The Spirit would've ever pleased Eisner.Maybe this film will come to DVD to coincide with Miller's movie.
To reiterate,I'm hoping Miller will come up with something that isn't overly self-conscious(ala' portions of the Sin City movie),and instead offers audiences -and longtime Spirit fans- a storyline that is both entertaining and true to its source material.We'll see.I'm cautiously optomistic about this.Hopefully other artists produce some of the movie's official posters-maybe even incorporating a few Eisner images.That'd be nice.
I remember a few years ago,Brad Bird(The Incredibles)said he briefly had the film rights to The Spirit.It would've been interesting to see an entirely computer animated version of this character.
And wasn't the animator of The Iron Giant also planning an animated Spirit adventure at one time?I have a vague recollection of this-and it didn't come about because Iron Giant didn't do as well at the boxoffice as anticipated(I think it's great).
As for Miller and Batman.Aside from Year One(and I have a few problems with that),I haven't much liked what he's done with (and to) The Masked Manhunter.
RogueAgentSpeeding in the Tumbler...Posts: 3,676MI6 Agent
Well the title of this thread is called the 20 Greatest CB Movies, here's Entertainment Weekly's version of the 20 Worst out this week.
1.GHOST RIDER (2007)
2. THE SHADOW (1994)
3.BARB WIRE (1996)
4.CATWOMAN (2004)
5.BRENDA STARR (1992)
6.THE PHANTOM (1996)
7.DAREDEVIL (2003)/ELEKTRA (2005)
8.TANK GIRL (1995)
9.FANTASTIC FOUR (2005)
10.SHEENA (1984)
11.THE PUNISHER (2004)
12.SUPERGIRL (1984)
13.BARBARELLA (1968)
14.HOWARD THE DUCK (1986)
15.STEEL (1997)
16.SWAMP THING (1982)
17.BATMAN & ROBIN (1997)
18.THE LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN (2003)
19.SUPERMAN IV: QUEST FOR PEACE (1987)
20.JUDGE DREDD (1995)
After viewing this, there were quite a few injustices on it. Some of these comic book movies are really held in high regard to me....
I really LOVE The Phantom & The Shadow films... X-(
Obviously the guy who wrote this list has never seen any of the Roger Corman or Golan Globus Marvel epics.
While there are definitely some stinkers mentioned, some of those films definitely don't deserve to be on this list either, and I think their inclusion has more to do with the fact that they were either box office disappointments (Phanton, Shadow, Punisher) or the media's penchant for always bashing certain actors like Jane Fonda (Barbarella), Nicholas Cage (Ghost Rider) and Ben Affleck (Daredevil).
All this article shows me is how vapid, shallow and downright uninformed most of these "journalists" are.
Regarding The Incredible Hulk, I recently read that Tim Roth
was signed to a three film deal, which suggests that his character might not die in the upcoming film.
I find this rumour to be rather interesting, partcularly in regards to its optimism.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
You're not the only one.To most of the writers at EW,when it comes to determining "good" and "bad",quality is often determined by the amount of money a movie makes at the boxoffice and not much else.It's all too easy for one of their "experts" to dismiss a motion picture--of any kind.Remember, these are the same people who are impatiently awaiting the "Sex and the City" movie...:v
Of the films on this list I like:
1)The Phantom
2)The Shadow
3)Judge Dredd(yes,I'm the one)
4)Daredevil
5)Elektra
6)Fantastic Four(I like the Corman version,too)
7)The Punisher(2004)
8)Ghost Rider
And I think there are moments to enjoy in Barbarella and Tank Girl.Heck,parts of Brenda Starr are okay,too--although I prefer the Jane in the Lost City movie,if given a choice among adventurous-comic-strip- female movies.And I respect what Chris Reeve tried to say and do with Superman IV: The Quest for Peace, even if it's a lesser film than Superman II.Helen Slater was the best thing about Supergirl-if only that film had been worthy of its lead performer.
I also like those other comic book movies that aren't on EW's "worst" list:
9)The Road to Perdition
10)Ghost World
11)A History of Violence
12)Art School Confidential
1)The Phantom
2)The Shadow
3)Judge Dredd(yes,I'm the one)
4)Daredevil
5)Elektra
6)Fantastic Four(I like the Corman version,too)
7)The Punisher(2004)
8)Ghost Rider
Other than Electra (who's characters and storyline just aren't my cup of tea), I enjoy all of those films as well and they're part of my DVD collection.
The only thing that slightly mars Dredd for me is Rob Schneider's turn as Fergie, who just tries a little too hard to bring some comedy relief to the part.
Of course, we're now on RogueAgent's hit list for publicly praising Daredevil and Ghost Rider. )
I also like those other comic book movies that aren't on EW's "worst" list:
9)The Road to Perdition
10)Ghost World
11)A History of Violence
12)Art School Confidential
Given the writer's "in-depth" analysis of the movies listed, he probably isn't even aware that these are based on comic books.
I think we are all in accordance with 'Howard the Duck' then?
I haven't seen this one in a good 20 years; and to the best of my recollection, and taken on its own merits, it was bad, but not that bad. At least I was able to get some laughs out of it and I've always wondered if the fact that George Lucas produced it has anything to do with the hate it seems to engender.
For my money, the worst comics film ever (dollar for dollar at least) has to be Batman & Robin - an embarrassing explosion of funky neon, horrible casting, bad acting, hokey stuntwork, lousy storytelling, humorless jokes, latex arses and rubber nipples everywhere you look. Truly one of the worst experiences I've ever had in a movie theater, I'm still scarred by that one.
The worst comics film I ever saw was Catwoman.This one was DOA before a single frame of film was shot.
And I have never appreciated the miscasting of Michael Keaton as Bruce Wayne in Burton's mediocre Batman movies.And no,in my opinion,Keaton didn't give a particularly good performance as Wayne or as Batman;he's adequate, but he remains absolutely wrong in the role.Additionally,Burton was slumming when he made his Batman films.He made no secret of this.That he told the public he "loathed" Batman even as he was filming these movies said a lot to me.I don't like the needlessly grotesque Penguin DeVito played,either.There's not much imagination involved in these films.That said,they're absolute masterpieces compared to the horror that is Batman and Robin...
The overall impression I've developed regarding Warners and their comic book movies(all them drawn from DC Comics)is that they view these specific types of films as product, and don't really care about their content or their quality.As long as they sell toys,videogames,hamburgers,etc.,that's really all that matters.
The suits at Warners seem to say that comics are for idiots--no one reads those anyway.Are they still being published?So there's no real need to try and adapt this kind of stuff with anything resembling respect for the material.It's kid's stuff--and kids don't care.Of course DC has no one at Warners to champion them and thus has no say in the casting of any movie based upon their characters.How sad.
Unless the cast and screenplay of the upcoming Justice League movie prove to be outstanding,it will probably perform beneath Warners' expectations.And the Warners suits will wonder why that happened.They'll never accept responsibility for a failure but will,instead,blame the subject matter and the public.This is a movie with plenty of potential, but based upon the information currently available to the public--the storyline,casting-- it doesn't sound very compelling.I hope I'm proved wrong.
Again,this only my opinion--Aside from the outstanding quality of the animated Batman,Superman,JLA/JLI and Batman Beyond,plus the animated features Mask of the Phantasm and Justice League of America:The New Frontier,probably the "best" DC onscreen(and by this,I mean faithful in various decrees to their source material)are: Batman Begins,Batman Forever,Superman II and V-for Vendetta.The Flash TV series was pretty good, and so was the first season of Wonder Woman.I liked the Batman series,too.Some of the Lois and Clark episodes resembled their source material(the show was well cast),and so did the Superboy TV series--especially when DC comic book writers produced scripts for the show.Maybe now that the Siegel lawsuit(built around his claim that he created Superboy) is settled,this series will come to DVD.I'd like that.
By contrast to Warners' comics movies,Marvel actually seems to really care about the films made about their characters.Maybe that's because they were burned by the earlier and lesser films based on their stuff(some of it not bad,but still...).With Avi Arad they had "quality control"--something the DC movies never had.Although Marvel couldn't always control the entire content and casting of these things, in general terms, most of the recent Marvel films have tended to respect their source material.Marvel's very fortunate that the writers and directors of their movies are often knowledgeable about their comics--many of them are even longtime fans--unlike the seemingly disinterested hired guns who usually wind up writing and directing the DC movies.For example,screenwriter/director Mark Steven Johnson usually tends to get a lot of flak from critics,but in my opinion, he always tries(and generally manages)to put as much as he can from the comics he adapts--Daredevil,Elektra,Fantastic Four,Ghost Rider,et al.,- onto the screen.I respect this.Maybe the casting can occasionaly appear questionable.Obviously some actors are selected for their name value--and not for their resemblances to what they play.Sadly,this kind of thing will always happen--in fact,it happens with every kind of film.
However, even those miscast among the actors in the Marvel films still seem to be better choices than the actors who are usually decided on by Warners to play characters in the DC movies.Now that Marvel has it's own studio,its a safe bet they'll be making films which will continue to closely reflect their material,even when they sometimes choose to cast actors in part on the strength of their public profiles.
Too bad Warners isn't paying attention to why Marvel's live-action comic book films are successful.It's so simple---respect the source material.How difficult can that really be?
Subsequent seasons still haven't been released and I assume that's due to the now (hopefully) settled litigation. I tend to prefer the Gerard Christopher shows but if you're a completist as some of them are available.
As to your other thoughts, it's a shame that DC is a subsidiary of a bottom line driven conglomerate like Time Warner rather than an independent corporation like Marvel. As you say, they don't have a champion at WB who "gets it" and their characters are looked at as "product" to make a buck off before the fad dies out. I continue to be amazed at WB's cluelessness when it comes to these comics properties and at their inability to figure out why Marvel has, by and large, been getting it right while they trot out one disaster after another.
Thanks for the heads up on Superboy,Tony.Like you,I'm more a Gerard Christopher fan than John Newton one.But no matter the Superboy actor,I'll always be a Stacy Haiduk fan.Kristen Kruek is cute and exotic, but for my tastes Stacy remains the more appealing Lana Lang.;)
I can't believe this. I love this film. I think it has everything; a fantastic superhero, a really good villain (yes, I love Treat Williams), a pretty good love interest, great action scenes and a very impressive script. I only wish there was a sequel.
Elektra is pretty bad, although it does have Jennifer Garner kicking butt. Daredevil, however, is IMO a really good film. Oh, and the fight at the playground between Daredevil and Elektra was IMO superb.
Jane Fonda wearing almost nothing at all, Jane Fonda wearing almost nothing at all, Jane Fonda wearing almost nothing at all... Do I really need to repeat myself? :v
No. If you're going to include a Superman film, it has to be number 3, or even the new one. Superman IV isn't great, but I think it's alot of fun and IMO it's a million times better than number 3 (which I can't even watch.) I would also rather watch Superman IV than the new one, so why they included Superman IV is beyond me.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
RogueAgentSpeeding in the Tumbler...Posts: 3,676MI6 Agent
Now I'm not hopping off of the wagon here but I find it odd when your stuntman looks more like The Punisher than the actual star...
Ray's a big guy but his stand -in looks a little more convincing.
And yes, the skull is very visible in the movie...which unfortunately has been pushed back from September to December 5th...
Mrs. Man Face: "You wouldn't hit a lady? Would you?"
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice isUNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
RogueAgentSpeeding in the Tumbler...Posts: 3,676MI6 Agent
Of course, we're now on RogueAgent's hit list for publicly praising Daredevil and Ghost Rider. )
You know I sort of renounce some of my issues with DD after I saw the extended cut. Much better but the costume is still unforgivable.
Ghost Rider on the other hand...
Hero and villian meet in climax...
Blackheart: "You change, she dies!"
Roxanne: "DO IT, JOHNNY!!!"
We have cliched staredown between hero and villian tacked on with whiplash sound effect...That made me cringe.
Yeah...it's pretty safe to say that Mark Steven Johnson = Uwe Boll... 8-)
I loved that moment in Ghost Rider.I also liked the appearance of Carter Slade--the original Ghost Rider.I forgave the filmmakers for using the long-haired and mustacheod 60 year old Sam Elliott,instead of making Slade look more like the comics' young Roy Rogers-type in an all white caped and hooded costume(with Stetson on top).Unlike the comic book Rider, Sam's all-black Rider didn't pack twin .45s.His stallion wasn't snow white in this movie--as it always is in the comics.
And I didn't care!Heck,they even used the great "Ghost Riders in the Sky" as background music.The film's a modern-day Western,for crying out loud.
And I was surprised to discover that I even came to like the middle-aged Nic Cage as Johnny Blaze.Cage is not somebody I've have ever cast in the role-Chris Evans,the guy who plays Johnny Storm in the Fantastic Four films would've much been closer to the mark.But Cage grew on me,nervous tics and all.Besides,Sam Elliott was also in the movie,and his presence served to keep Cage under control.Not knowing anything about the political decisions he probably faced in regards to casting and budget,I think Johnson did a fine job.
Once Ray dyes his hair he'll be fine as The Punisher.
Perhaps the leather-clad DD looks too "real-world"...;)
We have cliched staredown between hero and villian tacked on with whiplash sound effect...That made me cringe.
Yeah...it's pretty safe to say that Mark Steven Johnson = Uwe Boll... 8-)
I loved that moment in Ghost Rider.I also liked the appearance of Carter Slade--the original Ghost Rider.I forgave the filmmakers for using the long-haired and mustacheod 60 year old Sam Elliott,instead of making Slade look more like the comics' young Roy Rogers-type in an all white caped and hooded costume(with Stetson on top).Unlike the comic book Rider, Sam's all-black Rider didn't pack twin .45s.His stallion wasn't snow white in this movie--as it always is in the comics.
And I didn't care!Heck,they even used the great "Ghost Riders in the Sky" as background music.The film's a modern-day Western,for crying out loud.
And I was surprised to discover that I even came to like the middle-aged Nic Cage as Johnny Blaze.Cage is not somebody I've have ever cast in the role-Chris Evans,the guy who plays Johnny Storm in the Fantastic Four films would've much been closer to the mark.But Cage grew on me,nervous tics and all.Besides,Sam Elliott was also in the movie,and his presence served to keep Cage under control.Not knowing anything about the political decisions he probably faced in regards to casting and budget,I think Johnson did a fine job.
Ghost Rider was a fun movie, plain and simple. I also think Sam Elliot stole the show and visually speaking, the imagery of the Ghost Riders in the film leaves most comics movies in the dust. Also, say what you want about Nick Cage, but he does leave a lasting impression. I used to hate his movies but, owing to the fact that he keeps appearing in so many movies that I happen to enjoy (The Rock, National Treasure, GR, Lord of War), I've slowly come around to the notion that he must be a good actor.
Great post WG, but I've given up trying to make Rogue see the light on this one. )
Once Ray dyes his hair he'll be fine as The Punisher.
I dunno about this one though. When I saw the first images of Ray as Punisher, the first thought that entered my mind was "straight to video" and, although I hope I'm wrong, I still think that's where this movie will end up.
Perhaps the leather-clad DD looks too "real-world"...;)
As I've told Rogue on many occasions, if you condemn DD for his costume, then you may as well write off the Nolan Bat-movies as well because their visualizations of the heroes and villains just plain suck - from Robo-Bat on down.
I loved that movie, I really enjoyed seeing how Burton made a great story, and made a new stance for two very memorable villians. I also loved his depiction of Gotham as being so artistic, yeah it wasnt realistic - but it was damn impressive.
The whole movie felt like it had much more character than Batman Begins
I loved that movie, I really enjoyed seeing how Burton made a great story, and made a new stance for two very memorable villians. I also loved his depiction of Gotham as being so artistic, yeah it wasnt realistic - but it was damn impressive.
The whole movie felt like it had much more character than Batman Begins
I know you directed this at WG, but. . .great story? Good grief, Batman Returns is a complete mess. A storyline about an energy plant that goes nowhere, Batman hardly being in the first 45 minutes of the movie, the villains arbitrarily declaring war on Batman. . . Yes, the movie looks great, but it's still an incoherent freak show.
I dont know if the plot lines went no where. Okay, so the power plant never amounted to much - it certainly did show a large amount of Schrek's character and motivation. As for Batman being marginalised - I think that works well for the movie. The villians always have been a very important part of the Batman universe, and I think it would be a crime to not give a villian adequete screen time (think spidey 3.)
Batman returns had some great villians, and I liked the dark, quiet version of Batman that we saw. He wasnt jumping up and down and the star of the show. That was what happened with George Clooney
RogueAgentSpeeding in the Tumbler...Posts: 3,676MI6 Agent
I loved that movie, I really enjoyed seeing how Burton made a great story, and made a new stance for two very memorable villians. I also loved his depiction of Gotham as being so artistic, yeah it wasnt realistic - but it was damn impressive.
The whole movie felt like it had much more character than Batman Begins
I'm glad you like this movie.However,we'll just have to disagree.
I think it's an example of a director who was-by his own admission at that time- absolutely disinterested in his subject matter.Warners overindulged Burton and the free hand they gave him resulted in an incoherent mess which bears only minimal resemblance to its source material.It's an example of a director looking at the rich material afforded him--a character immediately recognizable and internationally famous-- and saying,"I can do BETTER than that.I can IMPROVE that immensely."Well,he couldn't...but he did make a mess of things.I guess I'm impressed that Burton likes Nosferatu,so he named a villain after its star, but that's neither here nor there.And turning The Penguin into a freak was uncalled for.It's bad enough Burton's version of Batman was rendered unbelievable the instant he cast Michael Keaton in the role.This film is essentially an exercise in Burton's excesses.I don't care about the characters and the story is aimless.There's no purpose to it, and aside from the Anton Furst Gotham City sets and the Danny Elfman theme music,I can't find much to like in this movie.
I've been a Batman fan most of my life.Accordingly.I've had the time to become quite familiar with the Batman character and his supporting cast and rogue's gallery.
Overall,Batman--being a modern day Zorro who fights crime with his detective skills coupled with remarkable athletcism--seems a natural for movies.Why so many filmmakers have bizzarely assumed that they must radically change this character prior to any filming escapes me.It makes no sense at all--especially from a creative standpoint.
That all Burton was more concerned with was leaving his directorial "mark" on Batman Returns rather than making a suspenseful motion picture packed with mystery and adventure was the worst thing he could've done.The result is-at best- a mediocre movie that's ultimately about nothing.
As for Batman Begins?Finally a motion picture about Batman-and it's the origin story which had never been filmed before.I thought this was very good-it explores the character and reveals why Bruce Wayne selected his striking alter ego.It also explaind how he could get his hands on his equipment and vehicle.The character is treated with respect-something missing entirely from Burton's films, where Batman's a dazed bit player in his own movies.
And Christian Bale is a much better choice to play Bruce Wayne than most of the other actors ever were.Like the comic book Wayne,he too,is darkly handsome with a dangerous edge and an impressive physique.He even has a square jaw.Gary Oldman looks exactly like the drawings of the middle-aged James Gordon.And no one among the cast feels the strange desire to camp things up--for which I'm very grateful.
Is BB a perfect Batman film?No--but it's SO superior to Burton's movies(and Schumacher's sequels),that I can't honestly find very much to complain about.So I won't.
RogueAgentSpeeding in the Tumbler...Posts: 3,676MI6 Agent
Is BB a perfect Batman film?No--but it's SO superior to Burton's movies(and Schumacher's sequels),that I can't honestly find very much to complain about.So I won't.
B-) Good man. Then TDK will hopefully have you equally as impressed, W.G.
I did like how Batman seemed to haplessly kill the villians in BR though. )
Mrs. Man Face: "You wouldn't hit a lady? Would you?"
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice isUNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
Is BB a perfect Batman film?No--but it's SO superior to Burton's movies(and Schumacher's sequels),that I can't honestly find very much to complain about.So I won't.
B-) Good man. Then TDK will hopefully have you equally as impressed, W.G.
I did like how Batman seemed to haplessly kill the villians in BR though. )
I liked the sets,the machine guns on the Batmobile in Batman and Michael Gough's turn as Alfred.Conversely,I found little in Batman Returns to be particularly appealing--aside from Michelle Pfieffer.
As for TDK?We'll just have to wait and see.
With all due respect to the late Heath Ledger,I'm not at all pleased by his new "real world" look as The Joker.For that I completely blame Nolan.Hopefully Ledger will surmount this unfortunate appearance by virtue of his talent.
I've said before that I think Nolan's a little embarassed to be associated with movies about a lowly comic book character--hence the "real world" mantra.And thinking along those lines, I find it difficult to accept the idea of somebody dressing up like a giant bat and believably playing vigilante in the "real world".
But those caveats aside,I still hope TDK wil be a good movie.
I notice it was the 2004 Punisher movie that was on that list, and not the sublime 89 version with Dolph Lundgren. I'm sure when the author compiles the 20 best comic book moves ever made, that Punisher 89 will be in the top 5.
Comments
Ugh...they've been removed...
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
Boy, that was quick. For what it's worth, the pics had a very strong Sin City vibe to them; the women all looked like Gail's hookers; Samuel Jackson looked like a gaudy pimp, and The Spirit himself was dressed in black from head to toe, with the exception of the red tie. He also still had the mask and hat.
I'm not too familiar with the comic so I can't say how faithful it all was; but if you looked at the pics without any context, you would probably think "Sin City 2".
I never thought I'd be jealous of a copier. Why doesn't that sort of thing ever happen in my office?
More often than not The Spirit comic stories looked like RKO film noirs.The Eisner women-while always very attractive- never looked like anything other than ladies-including the most fatale of the sexy femme fatales.
The Octopus(Jackson's character)was never "on camera".He was always in darkness and usually at a table.All that was ever shown were his gloved hands--much like the Unseen Blofeld of the early Connery 007 films.
The Spirit dressed in a dark blue suit(often a three piece) with a blue hat and blue mask.The leather gloves he wore(and very rarely removed)were blue.Apparently Miller's decided that the blue suits were really black and the blue color indicated highlights.Anyway,The Spirit's hair was usually black (with blue highlights--until Eisner painted some dynamic covers for the 1980s Kitchen Sink reprints.In those,his hair is brown).And yes,The Spirit's tie was red(his shoes were either black or brown).
Sounds like Miller got the hero's tie right-along with his hair.That's something to grateful for.Gabriel Macht may look absolutely terrific as The Spirit.I hope so.I've read that he dyed his naturally blond hair black so as to match the images of The Spirit.And Frank Miller's assembled a great looking group of actresses-among them Eva Mendes(Sand Saref) and Paz Vega(Plaster of Paris).Hopefully he'll give them all some worthwhile dialogue and individual chances to shine.Miller's said in at least one interview that this movie will be largely based upon Eisner's classic "Sand Saref" story.
Hmmm...when I first saw this poster I thought it was for The Shadow or The Spider,what with that flowing red tie(?).For whatever it's worth,I'm not overly impressed with either of Miller's Spirit posters.The first one with the paraphrase/homage to Raymond Chandler("Down these mean streets a man must go...) probably tries to evoke images of tough guys doing tough things in a tough world.Real hardcase stuff.But that's not very much like Will Eisner's Spirit.Sure,The Spirit was a two-fisted guy, but he didn't go out looking for fights.They found him.
However,compared to this newest poster, the first Miller Spirit poster is nearly vintage Eisner.
"My city screams","She is my lover".Excuse me but,OUCH!.Jeeeezz...Somebody's trying just a tad TOO hard to sound like a Tough Guy.I sincerely hope The Spirit doesn't talk like this in the film,or it'll become a cult movie, and for all the wrong reasons.
All that said,the movie itself might actually turn out to be very good--it might even be more like The Spirit than these unfortunate images currently suggest.I certainly hope that's the case.With his Spirit stories, Eisner left a lot of highly cinematic material behind.It'd be real tragedy if the film tanks because of someone's bizarre interpretation of The Spirit.At least it's not "real world".Miller did say that he agreed to do this film because a Spirit movie was going to be made regardless of his involvement, and that he wanted to protect Eisner.
Brief disclosure:I've been a Spirit fan since I was 13 and read the Spirit story in Fieffer's The Great Comic Book Heroes.I collected the Warren Spirit reprints and the oversized (and regular-sized)Kitchen Sink Spirit magazines.
And that said, I'm probably the only Spirit fan who'll publically admit that I really like the 1987 Spirit TV-movie.I think it's great-extremely respectful to Eisner's work and Sam Jones turns in a delightful performance as Denny Colt/The Spirit.Considering the budget the production had,the filmmakers managed to evoke-in some cases nearly duplicate-Eisner images.Long before Tim Burton won raves fot setting his Gotham City in a timeless era,Steven de Souza did exactly that with The Spirit.In his movie,Central City exists in the 1930s, 40s and 80s, all at once.Men's and women's fashions reflect a multitude of styles.In places there's a real "film noir" look and The Spirit looks as exactly like Eisner depicted him as any human being possibly could.Portions of the script don't work(there are places where it's too cute) but overall.I think the film succeeds-it's even got P'Gell as the villainess.I understand Eisner didn't care for this very much but with all respect to him, it's my suspicion that no dramatized version of The Spirit would've ever pleased Eisner.Maybe this film will come to DVD to coincide with Miller's movie.
To reiterate,I'm hoping Miller will come up with something that isn't overly self-conscious(ala' portions of the Sin City movie),and instead offers audiences -and longtime Spirit fans- a storyline that is both entertaining and true to its source material.We'll see.I'm cautiously optomistic about this.Hopefully other artists produce some of the movie's official posters-maybe even incorporating a few Eisner images.That'd be nice.
I remember a few years ago,Brad Bird(The Incredibles)said he briefly had the film rights to The Spirit.It would've been interesting to see an entirely computer animated version of this character.
And wasn't the animator of The Iron Giant also planning an animated Spirit adventure at one time?I have a vague recollection of this-and it didn't come about because Iron Giant didn't do as well at the boxoffice as anticipated(I think it's great).
As for Miller and Batman.Aside from Year One(and I have a few problems with that),I haven't much liked what he's done with (and to) The Masked Manhunter.
1.GHOST RIDER (2007)
2. THE SHADOW (1994)
3.BARB WIRE (1996)
4.CATWOMAN (2004)
5.BRENDA STARR (1992)
6.THE PHANTOM (1996)
7.DAREDEVIL (2003)/ELEKTRA (2005)
8.TANK GIRL (1995)
9.FANTASTIC FOUR (2005)
10.SHEENA (1984)
11.THE PUNISHER (2004)
12.SUPERGIRL (1984)
13.BARBARELLA (1968)
14.HOWARD THE DUCK (1986)
15.STEEL (1997)
16.SWAMP THING (1982)
17.BATMAN & ROBIN (1997)
18.THE LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN (2003)
19.SUPERMAN IV: QUEST FOR PEACE (1987)
20.JUDGE DREDD (1995)
After viewing this, there were quite a few injustices on it. Some of these comic book movies are really held in high regard to me....
I really LOVE The Phantom & The Shadow films... X-(
http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20186843,00.html
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
While there are definitely some stinkers mentioned, some of those films definitely don't deserve to be on this list either, and I think their inclusion has more to do with the fact that they were either box office disappointments (Phanton, Shadow, Punisher) or the media's penchant for always bashing certain actors like Jane Fonda (Barbarella), Nicholas Cage (Ghost Rider) and Ben Affleck (Daredevil).
All this article shows me is how vapid, shallow and downright uninformed most of these "journalists" are.
You're not the only one.To most of the writers at EW,when it comes to determining "good" and "bad",quality is often determined by the amount of money a movie makes at the boxoffice and not much else.It's all too easy for one of their "experts" to dismiss a motion picture--of any kind.Remember, these are the same people who are impatiently awaiting the "Sex and the City" movie...:v
Of the films on this list I like:
1)The Phantom
2)The Shadow
3)Judge Dredd(yes,I'm the one)
4)Daredevil
5)Elektra
6)Fantastic Four(I like the Corman version,too)
7)The Punisher(2004)
8)Ghost Rider
And I think there are moments to enjoy in Barbarella and Tank Girl.Heck,parts of Brenda Starr are okay,too--although I prefer the Jane in the Lost City movie,if given a choice among adventurous-comic-strip- female movies.And I respect what Chris Reeve tried to say and do with Superman IV: The Quest for Peace, even if it's a lesser film than Superman II.Helen Slater was the best thing about Supergirl-if only that film had been worthy of its lead performer.
I also like those other comic book movies that aren't on EW's "worst" list:
9)The Road to Perdition
10)Ghost World
11)A History of Violence
12)Art School Confidential
Other than Electra (who's characters and storyline just aren't my cup of tea), I enjoy all of those films as well and they're part of my DVD collection.
The only thing that slightly mars Dredd for me is Rob Schneider's turn as Fergie, who just tries a little too hard to bring some comedy relief to the part.
Of course, we're now on RogueAgent's hit list for publicly praising Daredevil and Ghost Rider.
Given the writer's "in-depth" analysis of the movies listed, he probably isn't even aware that these are based on comic books.
I haven't seen this one in a good 20 years; and to the best of my recollection, and taken on its own merits, it was bad, but not that bad. At least I was able to get some laughs out of it and I've always wondered if the fact that George Lucas produced it has anything to do with the hate it seems to engender.
For my money, the worst comics film ever (dollar for dollar at least) has to be Batman & Robin - an embarrassing explosion of funky neon, horrible casting, bad acting, hokey stuntwork, lousy storytelling, humorless jokes, latex arses and rubber nipples everywhere you look. Truly one of the worst experiences I've ever had in a movie theater, I'm still scarred by that one.
And I have never appreciated the miscasting of Michael Keaton as Bruce Wayne in Burton's mediocre Batman movies.And no,in my opinion,Keaton didn't give a particularly good performance as Wayne or as Batman;he's adequate, but he remains absolutely wrong in the role.Additionally,Burton was slumming when he made his Batman films.He made no secret of this.That he told the public he "loathed" Batman even as he was filming these movies said a lot to me.I don't like the needlessly grotesque Penguin DeVito played,either.There's not much imagination involved in these films.That said,they're absolute masterpieces compared to the horror that is Batman and Robin...
The overall impression I've developed regarding Warners and their comic book movies(all them drawn from DC Comics)is that they view these specific types of films as product, and don't really care about their content or their quality.As long as they sell toys,videogames,hamburgers,etc.,that's really all that matters.
The suits at Warners seem to say that comics are for idiots--no one reads those anyway.Are they still being published?So there's no real need to try and adapt this kind of stuff with anything resembling respect for the material.It's kid's stuff--and kids don't care.Of course DC has no one at Warners to champion them and thus has no say in the casting of any movie based upon their characters.How sad.
Unless the cast and screenplay of the upcoming Justice League movie prove to be outstanding,it will probably perform beneath Warners' expectations.And the Warners suits will wonder why that happened.They'll never accept responsibility for a failure but will,instead,blame the subject matter and the public.This is a movie with plenty of potential, but based upon the information currently available to the public--the storyline,casting-- it doesn't sound very compelling.I hope I'm proved wrong.
Again,this only my opinion--Aside from the outstanding quality of the animated Batman,Superman,JLA/JLI and Batman Beyond,plus the animated features Mask of the Phantasm and Justice League of America:The New Frontier,probably the "best" DC onscreen(and by this,I mean faithful in various decrees to their source material)are: Batman Begins,Batman Forever,Superman II and V-for Vendetta.The Flash TV series was pretty good, and so was the first season of Wonder Woman.I liked the Batman series,too.Some of the Lois and Clark episodes resembled their source material(the show was well cast),and so did the Superboy TV series--especially when DC comic book writers produced scripts for the show.Maybe now that the Siegel lawsuit(built around his claim that he created Superboy) is settled,this series will come to DVD.I'd like that.
By contrast to Warners' comics movies,Marvel actually seems to really care about the films made about their characters.Maybe that's because they were burned by the earlier and lesser films based on their stuff(some of it not bad,but still...).With Avi Arad they had "quality control"--something the DC movies never had.Although Marvel couldn't always control the entire content and casting of these things, in general terms, most of the recent Marvel films have tended to respect their source material.Marvel's very fortunate that the writers and directors of their movies are often knowledgeable about their comics--many of them are even longtime fans--unlike the seemingly disinterested hired guns who usually wind up writing and directing the DC movies.For example,screenwriter/director Mark Steven Johnson usually tends to get a lot of flak from critics,but in my opinion, he always tries(and generally manages)to put as much as he can from the comics he adapts--Daredevil,Elektra,Fantastic Four,Ghost Rider,et al.,- onto the screen.I respect this.Maybe the casting can occasionaly appear questionable.Obviously some actors are selected for their name value--and not for their resemblances to what they play.Sadly,this kind of thing will always happen--in fact,it happens with every kind of film.
However, even those miscast among the actors in the Marvel films still seem to be better choices than the actors who are usually decided on by Warners to play characters in the DC movies.Now that Marvel has it's own studio,its a safe bet they'll be making films which will continue to closely reflect their material,even when they sometimes choose to cast actors in part on the strength of their public profiles.
Too bad Warners isn't paying attention to why Marvel's live-action comic book films are successful.It's so simple---respect the source material.How difficult can that really be?
http://www.amazon.com/Superboy-Complete-John-Haymes-Newton/dp/B000EU1Q2M/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1207596231&sr=8-1
Subsequent seasons still haven't been released and I assume that's due to the now (hopefully) settled litigation. I tend to prefer the Gerard Christopher shows but if you're a completist as some of them are available.
As to your other thoughts, it's a shame that DC is a subsidiary of a bottom line driven conglomerate like Time Warner rather than an independent corporation like Marvel. As you say, they don't have a champion at WB who "gets it" and their characters are looked at as "product" to make a buck off before the fad dies out. I continue to be amazed at WB's cluelessness when it comes to these comics properties and at their inability to figure out why Marvel has, by and large, been getting it right while they trot out one disaster after another.
What?
Give me a break.
Elektra is pretty bad, although it does have Jennifer Garner kicking butt.
Jane Fonda wearing almost nothing at all, Jane Fonda wearing almost nothing at all, Jane Fonda wearing almost nothing at all... Do I really need to repeat myself? :v
My only complaint is, why is this not ranked number 1? I have no problem with this film being here, but it didn't even make the top 5.
No. If you're going to include a Superman film, it has to be number 3, or even the new one. Superman IV isn't great, but I think it's alot of fun and IMO it's a million times better than number 3 (which I can't even watch.) I would also rather watch Superman IV than the new one, so why they included Superman IV is beyond me.
Ray's a big guy but his stand -in looks a little more convincing.
And yes, the skull is very visible in the movie...which unfortunately has been pushed back from September to December 5th...
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
You know I sort of renounce some of my issues with DD after I saw the extended cut. Much better but the costume is still unforgivable.
Ghost Rider on the other hand...
Hero and villian meet in climax...
Blackheart: "You change, she dies!"
Roxanne: "DO IT, JOHNNY!!!"
We have cliched staredown between hero and villian tacked on with whiplash sound effect...That made me cringe.
Yeah...it's pretty safe to say that Mark Steven Johnson = Uwe Boll... 8-)
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
I loved that moment in Ghost Rider.I also liked the appearance of Carter Slade--the original Ghost Rider.I forgave the filmmakers for using the long-haired and mustacheod 60 year old Sam Elliott,instead of making Slade look more like the comics' young Roy Rogers-type in an all white caped and hooded costume(with Stetson on top).Unlike the comic book Rider, Sam's all-black Rider didn't pack twin .45s.His stallion wasn't snow white in this movie--as it always is in the comics.
And I didn't care!Heck,they even used the great "Ghost Riders in the Sky" as background music.The film's a modern-day Western,for crying out loud.
And I was surprised to discover that I even came to like the middle-aged Nic Cage as Johnny Blaze.Cage is not somebody I've have ever cast in the role-Chris Evans,the guy who plays Johnny Storm in the Fantastic Four films would've much been closer to the mark.But Cage grew on me,nervous tics and all.Besides,Sam Elliott was also in the movie,and his presence served to keep Cage under control.Not knowing anything about the political decisions he probably faced in regards to casting and budget,I think Johnson did a fine job.
Once Ray dyes his hair he'll be fine as The Punisher.
Perhaps the leather-clad DD looks too "real-world"...;)
Ghost Rider was a fun movie, plain and simple. I also think Sam Elliot stole the show and visually speaking, the imagery of the Ghost Riders in the film leaves most comics movies in the dust. Also, say what you want about Nick Cage, but he does leave a lasting impression. I used to hate his movies but, owing to the fact that he keeps appearing in so many movies that I happen to enjoy (The Rock, National Treasure, GR, Lord of War), I've slowly come around to the notion that he must be a good actor.
Great post WG, but I've given up trying to make Rogue see the light on this one.
I dunno about this one though. When I saw the first images of Ray as Punisher, the first thought that entered my mind was "straight to video" and, although I hope I'm wrong, I still think that's where this movie will end up.
As I've told Rogue on many occasions, if you condemn DD for his costume, then you may as well write off the Nolan Bat-movies as well because their visualizations of the heroes and villains just plain suck - from Robo-Bat on down.
I loved that movie, I really enjoyed seeing how Burton made a great story, and made a new stance for two very memorable villians. I also loved his depiction of Gotham as being so artistic, yeah it wasnt realistic - but it was damn impressive.
The whole movie felt like it had much more character than Batman Begins
I know you directed this at WG, but. . .great story? Good grief, Batman Returns is a complete mess. A storyline about an energy plant that goes nowhere, Batman hardly being in the first 45 minutes of the movie, the villains arbitrarily declaring war on Batman. . . Yes, the movie looks great, but it's still an incoherent freak show.
Batman returns had some great villians, and I liked the dark, quiet version of Batman that we saw. He wasnt jumping up and down and the star of the show. That was what happened with George Clooney
Yeah, I think so too...
No...just too HBO Real Sex ...
Just like the Dark Knight's getup, I hate DD's with the S&M-type mask.
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
I'm glad you like this movie.However,we'll just have to disagree.
I think it's an example of a director who was-by his own admission at that time- absolutely disinterested in his subject matter.Warners overindulged Burton and the free hand they gave him resulted in an incoherent mess which bears only minimal resemblance to its source material.It's an example of a director looking at the rich material afforded him--a character immediately recognizable and internationally famous-- and saying,"I can do BETTER than that.I can IMPROVE that immensely."Well,he couldn't...but he did make a mess of things.I guess I'm impressed that Burton likes Nosferatu,so he named a villain after its star, but that's neither here nor there.And turning The Penguin into a freak was uncalled for.It's bad enough Burton's version of Batman was rendered unbelievable the instant he cast Michael Keaton in the role.This film is essentially an exercise in Burton's excesses.I don't care about the characters and the story is aimless.There's no purpose to it, and aside from the Anton Furst Gotham City sets and the Danny Elfman theme music,I can't find much to like in this movie.
I've been a Batman fan most of my life.Accordingly.I've had the time to become quite familiar with the Batman character and his supporting cast and rogue's gallery.
Overall,Batman--being a modern day Zorro who fights crime with his detective skills coupled with remarkable athletcism--seems a natural for movies.Why so many filmmakers have bizzarely assumed that they must radically change this character prior to any filming escapes me.It makes no sense at all--especially from a creative standpoint.
That all Burton was more concerned with was leaving his directorial "mark" on Batman Returns rather than making a suspenseful motion picture packed with mystery and adventure was the worst thing he could've done.The result is-at best- a mediocre movie that's ultimately about nothing.
As for Batman Begins?Finally a motion picture about Batman-and it's the origin story which had never been filmed before.I thought this was very good-it explores the character and reveals why Bruce Wayne selected his striking alter ego.It also explaind how he could get his hands on his equipment and vehicle.The character is treated with respect-something missing entirely from Burton's films, where Batman's a dazed bit player in his own movies.
And Christian Bale is a much better choice to play Bruce Wayne than most of the other actors ever were.Like the comic book Wayne,he too,is darkly handsome with a dangerous edge and an impressive physique.He even has a square jaw.Gary Oldman looks exactly like the drawings of the middle-aged James Gordon.And no one among the cast feels the strange desire to camp things up--for which I'm very grateful.
Is BB a perfect Batman film?No--but it's SO superior to Burton's movies(and Schumacher's sequels),that I can't honestly find very much to complain about.So I won't.
B-) Good man. Then TDK will hopefully have you equally as impressed, W.G.
I did like how Batman seemed to haplessly kill the villians in BR though.
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
I liked the sets,the machine guns on the Batmobile in Batman and Michael Gough's turn as Alfred.Conversely,I found little in Batman Returns to be particularly appealing--aside from Michelle Pfieffer.
As for TDK?We'll just have to wait and see.
With all due respect to the late Heath Ledger,I'm not at all pleased by his new "real world" look as The Joker.For that I completely blame Nolan.Hopefully Ledger will surmount this unfortunate appearance by virtue of his talent.
I've said before that I think Nolan's a little embarassed to be associated with movies about a lowly comic book character--hence the "real world" mantra.And thinking along those lines, I find it difficult to accept the idea of somebody dressing up like a giant bat and believably playing vigilante in the "real world".
But those caveats aside,I still hope TDK wil be a good movie.