I'm Sad Now
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Personally I'm not so sure why people are so upset about the JLA thing.
I guess I don't subscribe to Bob's 'Campy is cool!' view when it comes to comics... but to me, the JLA is one of the worst idea from DC - it's a continuity nightmare and quite frankly, the whole idea that people like red/green arrow or Batman could still be around when the colleteral damage of some of the JLA fight involves entire city block getting leveled is ridiculous... I LOVE Batman is his own books, but when he's in the JLA, I can't stand him, he just shatters my suspension of disbelief... so the idea of seeing superman/batman on the big screen? Ugh.
Yes, I know Caps does it in the Avenger, but let's be frank, by the far the power level in DC is way higher (Superman, Green Lanter and even the Flash are basically 'cosmic being' when it comes to Marvel power level).
I'd much rather Nolan finish his vision of Batman and gives us a good Superman movie than have him work in some tie in... hell, you said yourself that Iron Man 2 was essentially a trailer for Avenger... ok... you think that has nothing to do with it being a much poorer movie than the first one? I don't.
I'm still going to line up to see The Avengers... but I don't expect it to be any good.
I guess I don't subscribe to Bob's 'Campy is cool!' view when it comes to comics... but to me, the JLA is one of the worst idea from DC - it's a continuity nightmare and quite frankly, the whole idea that people like red/green arrow or Batman could still be around when the colleteral damage of some of the JLA fight involves entire city block getting leveled is ridiculous... I LOVE Batman is his own books, but when he's in the JLA, I can't stand him, he just shatters my suspension of disbelief... so the idea of seeing superman/batman on the big screen? Ugh.
Yes, I know Caps does it in the Avenger, but let's be frank, by the far the power level in DC is way higher (Superman, Green Lanter and even the Flash are basically 'cosmic being' when it comes to Marvel power level).
I'd much rather Nolan finish his vision of Batman and gives us a good Superman movie than have him work in some tie in... hell, you said yourself that Iron Man 2 was essentially a trailer for Avenger... ok... you think that has nothing to do with it being a much poorer movie than the first one? I don't.
I'm still going to line up to see The Avengers... but I don't expect it to be any good.
Batman 8 if you count the 60's film....maybe 10, 12 or higher if you also count the animated films....but not counting those, we have:ZippyDSMlee said:
Batman (Campy 60's movie)
Batman (Burton 89 film)
Batman Returns
Batman Forever
Batman & Robin
Batman Begins
Batman The Dark Knight
and the new one.
I know that one of the animated Batman films saw theatrical release (Shadow of the Bat? I forget the name now, remember seeing it in the theatre, though) but the rest were straight to video, I'm pretty sure.
/Batman trivia off
I actually find myself in a position where I can't doubt Nolan. I don't honestly believe he can do no wrong, but as there may be statistical factors pointing to a weaker film, I believe there are some that point to a stronger one. To be honest, however, it's hard to argue the impact Ledger's death had on The Dark Knight's success, though I doubt it would've been so successful had his performance actually been underwhelming (I don't remember a huge fuss being made over his part in Parnassus, his entirely final film role).
You cited the mediocre response to Batman Begins. I would agree, pointing out a trend in fluctuating quality. Except that's not the case. Begins may have only been a solid flick, but it was followed by Nolan's stellar The Prestige. Nolan's successes in the quality of his films, I believe, can't be tracked or categorized in any linear or rhythmic fashion.
There's also the aspect of familiarity and the waning influence of Goyer. Adept though he may be, Goyer's influence can be felt intensely in Begins, yet noticeably more distant in The Dark Knight. That's a trend I don't see reversing. The other part, familiarity, has to do with Nolan's time spent in the Bat-verse. Begins was fresh ground, but Dark Knight reunited him with a tested cast and allowed him to dig deeper into the Bat mythos. I believe Nolan's more psychological and carefully-constructed methodology, combined with a third plunge into this comic book world, will pay off in spades.
You cited the mediocre response to Batman Begins. I would agree, pointing out a trend in fluctuating quality. Except that's not the case. Begins may have only been a solid flick, but it was followed by Nolan's stellar The Prestige. Nolan's successes in the quality of his films, I believe, can't be tracked or categorized in any linear or rhythmic fashion.
There's also the aspect of familiarity and the waning influence of Goyer. Adept though he may be, Goyer's influence can be felt intensely in Begins, yet noticeably more distant in The Dark Knight. That's a trend I don't see reversing. The other part, familiarity, has to do with Nolan's time spent in the Bat-verse. Begins was fresh ground, but Dark Knight reunited him with a tested cast and allowed him to dig deeper into the Bat mythos. I believe Nolan's more psychological and carefully-constructed methodology, combined with a third plunge into this comic book world, will pay off in spades.
How is the Phantom Menace comparable to the Hobbit? First off, the Hobbit is going to be based on an existing book, one that is widely considered to be an excellent work of fiction. Furthermore, it's not been that long since the LotR trilogy was produced, so we're not going to see such a huge shift in visual style.Not G. Ivingname said:
There is nothing that indicates, to me, that the Hobbit will be a bad movie. Don't let your pessimism cloud your judgment.
Here's something to be thankful about this year: both John Carpenter and Zach Snyder are releasing movies about ridiculously hot chicks in insane asylums.
what's not to love about insane asylum movies? what's not to love about gaggles of hot ladies? what's not to love about john carpenter working again?
(well, those last two questions might be sketchy. but. i think they offer incentive to think positive!)
Plus, David Fincher is shooting his needless remake of Men Who Hate women, and Trent Reznor just announced he's already been working on the score for it for several weeks. Don't know if this progress means it is due to come out this year. but. if so: it's a film to be excited about!
Also, Darren Aronofsky is tackling The Wolverine! I'd bet money he'll get fired before he can make the first genuinely disturbing and artistic comic book movie. but. who knows!
think positive!
(plus, del toro and cameron teaming up to make "the first grand hp lovecraft adaptation" is exciting, no? even though it won't be out for several centuries after the end of mankind's brief reign on this insignificant pebble? Cheer up!)
what's not to love about insane asylum movies? what's not to love about gaggles of hot ladies? what's not to love about john carpenter working again?
(well, those last two questions might be sketchy. but. i think they offer incentive to think positive!)
Plus, David Fincher is shooting his needless remake of Men Who Hate women, and Trent Reznor just announced he's already been working on the score for it for several weeks. Don't know if this progress means it is due to come out this year. but. if so: it's a film to be excited about!
Also, Darren Aronofsky is tackling The Wolverine! I'd bet money he'll get fired before he can make the first genuinely disturbing and artistic comic book movie. but. who knows!
think positive!
(plus, del toro and cameron teaming up to make "the first grand hp lovecraft adaptation" is exciting, no? even though it won't be out for several centuries after the end of mankind's brief reign on this insignificant pebble? Cheer up!)
In other news, i'm sure Nolan and the WB producers are smart enough to already know they can't match The Dark Knight's box office phenomenon, and are designing their film to fit in appropriately as a step down from that super-money-maker.
Also, why be bummed when a batman movie doesn't make enough HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars? I'd be bummed if Nolan had bailed and some hack had taken over the reigns while everyone was trying to pretend it'd turn out "ok" (ala x-men 3). But even if the box office fails to compare, Nolan's final batman will almost certainly be something interesting for us comic book nerds to chew over. forever.
(and it will certainly make many HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars). I agree that making less buck will be the story many douchey press types run with. but. I can't fathom why that's depressing.
Neptunus: I agree with what you're saying. (Phantom menace was an over thought pandering to fanboys that sadly hit all the wrong notes, storywise, without taking any interesting chances - while TheHobbit story was already written before the epic followup)
But, consider this nerd trivia (from the LOTR commentary tracks) : at some point Jackson and writing crew were trying to wedge arwen into the battle at helm's deep so they could have more of a marketable simplified love story. Until it leaked to the internet and they witnessed the frothing fan backlash. The fact that this zany idea was soooo close to going in - deeply worries me. I'm sure it would have been lovely and romantic on some level. but. I think it demonstrates a disturbing interest in formulaic blockbuster pandering over fan-service and adherence to the source material.
Jackson and crew are impressive workers. However. It's valid to guess that TheHobbit isn't going to recapture the magic of LOTR. It'll be a miracle if they dodge the bullet of fanboys (like me) ripping it apart for years after. It'll either be too similar to the book (and thus too kiddy and full of weird songs and zero romance) or too different from the book (adopting darker elements and unnecessary characters from LOTR). walking this line is next to impossible! And even if they do it perfectly, fanboys love to complain about shit on the internet for no good goddamn reason. Which will ruin the magic. It's like the project was fucked at birth. Doomed to be this hobbled thing which some huge group of people is going to perceive as disgusting travesty.
I doubt they'll make weird ruinous changes to the story for romance (??? wait! We'll have to wait and seeeEEEee! remember this! I doubt it less every second!), but I think his team straight fucked up with their last movie, The Lovely Bones : A magical coming of age story we can all enjoy - about child rape and death. I would applaud them as rock stars for tackling this bizarre topic as a "pretty fantasy movie for girls", except they softened it into merely being about child death. TOO LATE, PEOPLE! And then it was bizarrely marketed as something else entirely. Bleh. I'd bet Jackson made the movie because his wife-ish loved the book, but he couldn't resist taking it in rambling wrong directions - to weakly try to please more people.
Also, I would argue that King Kong was a rambling example of : obvious problems.
and hubris.
man. i'm being so mean. sorry. I'm just enjoying fan boy rage rambling here. sorry. I'm not really angry about any of this. eek. heh. hmmf.
Also, why be bummed when a batman movie doesn't make enough HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars? I'd be bummed if Nolan had bailed and some hack had taken over the reigns while everyone was trying to pretend it'd turn out "ok" (ala x-men 3). But even if the box office fails to compare, Nolan's final batman will almost certainly be something interesting for us comic book nerds to chew over. forever.
(and it will certainly make many HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars). I agree that making less buck will be the story many douchey press types run with. but. I can't fathom why that's depressing.
Neptunus: I agree with what you're saying. (Phantom menace was an over thought pandering to fanboys that sadly hit all the wrong notes, storywise, without taking any interesting chances - while TheHobbit story was already written before the epic followup)
But, consider this nerd trivia (from the LOTR commentary tracks) : at some point Jackson and writing crew were trying to wedge arwen into the battle at helm's deep so they could have more of a marketable simplified love story. Until it leaked to the internet and they witnessed the frothing fan backlash. The fact that this zany idea was soooo close to going in - deeply worries me. I'm sure it would have been lovely and romantic on some level. but. I think it demonstrates a disturbing interest in formulaic blockbuster pandering over fan-service and adherence to the source material.
Jackson and crew are impressive workers. However. It's valid to guess that TheHobbit isn't going to recapture the magic of LOTR. It'll be a miracle if they dodge the bullet of fanboys (like me) ripping it apart for years after. It'll either be too similar to the book (and thus too kiddy and full of weird songs and zero romance) or too different from the book (adopting darker elements and unnecessary characters from LOTR). walking this line is next to impossible! And even if they do it perfectly, fanboys love to complain about shit on the internet for no good goddamn reason. Which will ruin the magic. It's like the project was fucked at birth. Doomed to be this hobbled thing which some huge group of people is going to perceive as disgusting travesty.
I doubt they'll make weird ruinous changes to the story for romance (??? wait! We'll have to wait and seeeEEEee! remember this! I doubt it less every second!), but I think his team straight fucked up with their last movie, The Lovely Bones : A magical coming of age story we can all enjoy - about child rape and death. I would applaud them as rock stars for tackling this bizarre topic as a "pretty fantasy movie for girls", except they softened it into merely being about child death. TOO LATE, PEOPLE! And then it was bizarrely marketed as something else entirely. Bleh. I'd bet Jackson made the movie because his wife-ish loved the book, but he couldn't resist taking it in rambling wrong directions - to weakly try to please more people.
Also, I would argue that King Kong was a rambling example of : obvious problems.
and hubris.
man. i'm being so mean. sorry. I'm just enjoying fan boy rage rambling here. sorry. I'm not really angry about any of this. eek. heh. hmmf.
There is no way it can be bad.
When DelTorro was gonna do it I was skeptical but hopeful... but with Peter Jackson doing it himself... It's gonna be gold.
May not be as good as LOTR, but it will be up to par.
LOTR is his baby when it comes to film, and I'm sure he's gonna wanna wrap it up in a good way.
Now, if we start hearing talk about "The Samarillian" some 10 years down the line... god help us. There is NO way that a book like that can be put into film, and if it does ever happen it's gonna be a complete mess.
uggghhhh.... don't even wanna think about that. (shutters)
When DelTorro was gonna do it I was skeptical but hopeful... but with Peter Jackson doing it himself... It's gonna be gold.
May not be as good as LOTR, but it will be up to par.
LOTR is his baby when it comes to film, and I'm sure he's gonna wanna wrap it up in a good way.
Now, if we start hearing talk about "The Samarillian" some 10 years down the line... god help us. There is NO way that a book like that can be put into film, and if it does ever happen it's gonna be a complete mess.
uggghhhh.... don't even wanna think about that. (shutters)
So Peter Jackson is going to take control of the Hobbit after all? Then there is some hope.akkuma420 said:
As for the Silmarillion being impossible to make into a film, they said exactly those words about LOTR ten years before it came out. Look at it now.
I largely agree with your view on Inception, though I liked the ending because of it's ambiguity (also, "Matrix for the pretentious" is redundant). Nolan did a couple of good things in the movie, but it was hardly worthy of the praise people showered on it.CatmanStu said:
Question, here.
According to boxofficemojo.com, Batman Begins had a production budget of $150 million. It made $205,343,774 domestically and $167,366,241 in foreign markets, for a grand total of $372,710,015, or $222,710,015 over production cost (which notably most likely does not include advertising budget.)
Conversely, The Fantastic Four had a production budget of only $100 million, made $154,696,080 domestically and $175,883,639 in foreign markets, for a grand total of $330,579,719, or $230,579,719 over production cost.
In short:
1) Batman Begins had higher box office receipts;
2) Batman Begins had significantly higher domestic take than FF, and a higher overall percentage of take from the domestic market, and
3) The films made very close to the same amount of money, the slight advantage going to FF being the result of a lower production budget.
So, how exactly was Batman Begins only "modestly successful" while The Fantastic Four was "the movie that broke the slump"? Because on paper, it sure as heck doesn't look that way.
According to boxofficemojo.com, Batman Begins had a production budget of $150 million. It made $205,343,774 domestically and $167,366,241 in foreign markets, for a grand total of $372,710,015, or $222,710,015 over production cost (which notably most likely does not include advertising budget.)
Conversely, The Fantastic Four had a production budget of only $100 million, made $154,696,080 domestically and $175,883,639 in foreign markets, for a grand total of $330,579,719, or $230,579,719 over production cost.
In short:
1) Batman Begins had higher box office receipts;
2) Batman Begins had significantly higher domestic take than FF, and a higher overall percentage of take from the domestic market, and
3) The films made very close to the same amount of money, the slight advantage going to FF being the result of a lower production budget.
So, how exactly was Batman Begins only "modestly successful" while The Fantastic Four was "the movie that broke the slump"? Because on paper, it sure as heck doesn't look that way.
Two things:
1. Of COURSE The Dark Knight Rises isn't going to reach the same levels as its predecessor, that doesn't happen a lot. It'll still probably make a ton at the box office, get good reviews, and altogether be a good sendoff for the franchise. And if you whine about how Robin isn't in it I suggest you be ready to get a load of angry e-mails telling you shut up and let that crap go.
2. About the Justice League: GOOD. Comic campiness is best kept solely to comics. On the big screen it has little to no place. The idea of the team up is what has me worried about The Avengers.
1. Of COURSE The Dark Knight Rises isn't going to reach the same levels as its predecessor, that doesn't happen a lot. It'll still probably make a ton at the box office, get good reviews, and altogether be a good sendoff for the franchise. And if you whine about how Robin isn't in it I suggest you be ready to get a load of angry e-mails telling you shut up and let that crap go.
2. About the Justice League: GOOD. Comic campiness is best kept solely to comics. On the big screen it has little to no place. The idea of the team up is what has me worried about The Avengers.
![Fr]anc[is](https://eg-forums-escapist-data.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/data/avatars/l/93/93202.jpg?1620797781){kind=avatar}
I think you've been hitting the nerdbrew a bit much, Bob.
You seem to really distrust the idea of Christopher Nolan having a say over how Batman is handled, and I really can't see why.
I think that if Warners ever dared a JLA movie people wouldn't go for it. Really enjoyed the cartoons by Bruce Timm et all but I don't think it really works especially with the Christian Bale Batman so firmly planted in the audience's mind.
For rescuing Batman and giving us Inception, Memento and the like I'd follow Nolan into movie hell itself.
Also Armie Hammer as Batman... Not a chance in hell! Good as he is, he might be able to do a passable Bruce Wayne but he just doesn't look right to me.
Superman rumours... meh... Again, he'll need to bulk up.
Hang in there, Bob. You never know, things might just surprise you.
And come on, Rises was never going to be as BIG as The Dark Knight, but that doesn't mean it's going to have Ewoks!
You seem to really distrust the idea of Christopher Nolan having a say over how Batman is handled, and I really can't see why.
I think that if Warners ever dared a JLA movie people wouldn't go for it. Really enjoyed the cartoons by Bruce Timm et all but I don't think it really works especially with the Christian Bale Batman so firmly planted in the audience's mind.
For rescuing Batman and giving us Inception, Memento and the like I'd follow Nolan into movie hell itself.
Also Armie Hammer as Batman... Not a chance in hell! Good as he is, he might be able to do a passable Bruce Wayne but he just doesn't look right to me.
Superman rumours... meh... Again, he'll need to bulk up.
Hang in there, Bob. You never know, things might just surprise you.
And come on, Rises was never going to be as BIG as The Dark Knight, but that doesn't mean it's going to have Ewoks!
Oh, thank God, you basically wrote what I was too afraid toAiddon said:
I've blown up on the forums about the addition of Robin in the Nolan-verse before... I loved him in the Animated Series, but that's about as far as you can go outside the comics.
The ship has sailed and the people have spoken. I'm sad to say I've very little sympathy for Bob.. although I do agree that Transformers are going to be very shit.
And the JLA just wouldn't work- the two comic houses have ripped one another off way too many times in the past for it not to look like a pale copycat attempt at making money.
Always look at the bright side of life Bob!
Anyway, as I've expressed so many times, the Godzilla movie would suck and/or be unwanted because there's a Godzillion of 'em. Not to say that they're bad, they're actually pretty good!
Godzilla doesn't need a reboot, as much as I'd love to see the huge B.M.F. on screen I'd much rather prevent more shit Godzilla movies.
And about Spiderman, as long as they make a good movie with the symbiote (I want Carnage D=) I'll be happy.
Just because it's a prequel doesn't mean it's going to suck, check who's actually involved in the movie.
Anyway, as I've expressed so many times, the Godzilla movie would suck and/or be unwanted because there's a Godzillion of 'em. Not to say that they're bad, they're actually pretty good!
Godzilla doesn't need a reboot, as much as I'd love to see the huge B.M.F. on screen I'd much rather prevent more shit Godzilla movies.
And about Spiderman, as long as they make a good movie with the symbiote (I want Carnage D=) I'll be happy.
Hey who's directing it. Is that Peter Jackson? Huh, isn't he that guy that never makes a bad movie? (So I've heard and agreed with for the movies I've seen so far)Not G. Ivingname said:
Just because it's a prequel doesn't mean it's going to suck, check who's actually involved in the movie.