We all think 'Avengers Assemble' is awesome, yes?
I didn't think that of Hurt Locker. I thought it showed the conflict from the perspective of the Americans because it wasn't really about the war, it was about the bomb squad guys and what their jobs are like, their addiction to the adrenaline, etc.
Yeah, it showed them being very suspicious of every local, but if you were in their situation, you'd be suspicious of every local too because you never know which one is going to try to blow you up. That's how that war is. That's part of the insurgent's strategy. That's why it's awful (among other reasons). The token nice kid had to be there just so the film could show that the characters weren't just racists.
As for superhero films:
There are tons in the pipeline. (http://www.superherohype.com/) Other than the upcoming Batman film, which should be excellent, most are going to follow the pattern of The Avengers or the recent Green Lantern - origin of hero, origin of major villain, threat to earth, hero stops threat, credits. It's a hard pattern to break. The Batman films break the pattern partially because the character is very different, and partially because of Warner's faith that Nolan and Bale could do it so well that the film could make money without appealing to kids. (Well, the Dark Knight films would appeal to kids, but their parents probably wouldn't want them to see them, especially the last one with The Joker).
The new Spider-Man reboot should be interesting. Odd that they'd reboot a series that was so well liked and so soon after the other one, but this will tell a somewhat different version of the story. It will be more about Peter Parker's relationship with his dead father, etc, who barely got a mention in the Raimi series. And "the girl" will be Gwen Stacy instead of Mary Jane. Not sure what difference that really makes. Still, what makes Spider-Man Spider-Man is the swinging around New York bits, so it will mostly focus on that, I guess.
There's going to be a new Superman effort with Henry Cavill in the lead. Not sure how that will go. The last one was ok, but really an imaginative flop in my view for lots of reasons. It was too in love with the Christopher Reeve/Donner films and stuck to that formula. It even had the same music. Those were good in their time, but to do Superman properly, they need a more interesting Lex Luthor like the one in the comics where he becomes President, etc. And they need to make Kal-El a bit more conflicted over his dual identities/adopted status, which relates directly to the Jewish origins of the character in the 30s. Smallville, the TV show, was actually way better at developing the characters because it covered all of that (along with a lot of tedious teenage shlock, and it went on for 10 years so got a bit encumbered by side plots, but it got the basics right).
I thought Green Lantern was ok. I think it's something you either buy into or don't. The sequel will get all into Sinestro and his betrayal so that could be interesting, but it won't be ground-breaking.
X-Men First Class will get a sequel.
Apparently Marvel is thinking of trying again with Daredevil, and it should. Daredevil is one of Marvel's two or three best characters - albeit a bit derivative of Batman - and the film they made out of it was very weak. Poor casting, poor script.
There have been a few attempts to get a Wonder Woman film or TV show off the ground. Joss Whedon was going to do it, and then they had a TV pilot either done or about to be done and the plug got pulled.
Aquaman had a pilot too, with the title character played by the guy who played Green Arrow on Smallville and, oddly, not the guy who played Aquaman on Smallville. It was going to be a lot like Smallville. Didn't get picked up. I think there's some potential there for a film especially if they can do a lot of interesting underwater stuff. Aquaman gets a lot of shit on South Park and Family Guy, but he's actually a cool character who just has never been given much chance. The fact that Green Arrow, Cyborg, Black Canary, Aquaman, Martian Manhunter, and the Flash appeared on Smallville suggest DC has no greater plans for them, because the writers were constantly asked if Bruce Wayne would ever appear on Smallville and they said no because DC didn't want to "dilute" or "interfere" with all the other Batman stuff they had going.
A lot of films are based on comics but you wouldn't necessarily know that because they aren't promoted as such and don't have superheros. Wanted was very loosely based on Mark Millar's book, but bares little resemblance to it. The film is actually better, although nothing to write home about. He also did Kick-Ass, which is getting a film sequel.
Red, about old assassins coming out of retirement, was pretty good. That was based on a graphic novel, I think. The Losers wasn't a very good film. That's actually a comic from the 50s that was redone more recently. There's lots of stuff like that.
I didn't think that of Hurt Locker. I thought it showed the conflict from the perspective of the Americans because it wasn't really about the war, it was about the bomb squad guys and what their jobs are like, their addiction to the adrenaline, etc.
Yeah, it showed them being very suspicious of every local, but if you were in their situation, you'd be suspicious of every local too because you never know which one is going to try to blow you up. That's how that war is. That's part of the insurgent's strategy. That's why it's awful (among other reasons). The token nice kid had to be there just so the film could show that the characters weren't just racists.
As for superhero films:
There are tons in the pipeline. (http://www.superherohype.com/) Other than the upcoming Batman film, which should be excellent, most are going to follow the pattern of The Avengers or the recent Green Lantern - origin of hero, origin of major villain, threat to earth, hero stops threat, credits. It's a hard pattern to break. The Batman films break the pattern partially because the character is very different, and partially because of Warner's faith that Nolan and Bale could do it so well that the film could make money without appealing to kids. (Well, the Dark Knight films would appeal to kids, but their parents probably wouldn't want them to see them, especially the last one with The Joker).
The new Spider-Man reboot should be interesting. Odd that they'd reboot a series that was so well liked and so soon after the other one, but this will tell a somewhat different version of the story. It will be more about Peter Parker's relationship with his dead father, etc, who barely got a mention in the Raimi series. And "the girl" will be Gwen Stacy instead of Mary Jane. Not sure what difference that really makes. Still, what makes Spider-Man Spider-Man is the swinging around New York bits, so it will mostly focus on that, I guess.
There's going to be a new Superman effort with Henry Cavill in the lead. Not sure how that will go. The last one was ok, but really an imaginative flop in my view for lots of reasons. It was too in love with the Christopher Reeve/Donner films and stuck to that formula. It even had the same music. Those were good in their time, but to do Superman properly, they need a more interesting Lex Luthor like the one in the comics where he becomes President, etc. And they need to make Kal-El a bit more conflicted over his dual identities/adopted status, which relates directly to the Jewish origins of the character in the 30s. Smallville, the TV show, was actually way better at developing the characters because it covered all of that (along with a lot of tedious teenage shlock, and it went on for 10 years so got a bit encumbered by side plots, but it got the basics right).
I thought Green Lantern was ok. I think it's something you either buy into or don't. The sequel will get all into Sinestro and his betrayal so that could be interesting, but it won't be ground-breaking.
X-Men First Class will get a sequel.
Apparently Marvel is thinking of trying again with Daredevil, and it should. Daredevil is one of Marvel's two or three best characters - albeit a bit derivative of Batman - and the film they made out of it was very weak. Poor casting, poor script.
There have been a few attempts to get a Wonder Woman film or TV show off the ground. Joss Whedon was going to do it, and then they had a TV pilot either done or about to be done and the plug got pulled.
Aquaman had a pilot too, with the title character played by the guy who played Green Arrow on Smallville and, oddly, not the guy who played Aquaman on Smallville. It was going to be a lot like Smallville. Didn't get picked up. I think there's some potential there for a film especially if they can do a lot of interesting underwater stuff. Aquaman gets a lot of shit on South Park and Family Guy, but he's actually a cool character who just has never been given much chance. The fact that Green Arrow, Cyborg, Black Canary, Aquaman, Martian Manhunter, and the Flash appeared on Smallville suggest DC has no greater plans for them, because the writers were constantly asked if Bruce Wayne would ever appear on Smallville and they said no because DC didn't want to "dilute" or "interfere" with all the other Batman stuff they had going.
A lot of films are based on comics but you wouldn't necessarily know that because they aren't promoted as such and don't have superheros. Wanted was very loosely based on Mark Millar's book, but bares little resemblance to it. The film is actually better, although nothing to write home about. He also did Kick-Ass, which is getting a film sequel.
Red, about old assassins coming out of retirement, was pretty good. That was based on a graphic novel, I think. The Losers wasn't a very good film. That's actually a comic from the 50s that was redone more recently. There's lots of stuff like that.
Comment