The Comic Books and Comic Book movies thread

"By the power of Grayskull!"

Alex Zalben, MTV Geek (4/7/12)
Get ready, He-Man fans: DC Comics is getting ready to launch a brand new take on the Masters of the Universe this July, in a six issue comic book series written by James Robinson, with pencils by Phillip Tan and inks from Ruy Jose. And that's not the end of the surprises... As the series starts, the evil Skeletor has already won!

That's right: the skull faced arch-enemy of He-Man has figured out a way to rewrite the reality of Eternia, casting himself as the ruler of Castle Grayskull, and our heroes - including He-Man - as regular peasants with no memory of their previous life. And while simple woodsman Adam may dream of wielding a massive sword, and fighting in battles, he thinks they're just dreams. That is, until a mysterious sorceress approaches him, and sends him on an epic journey to save all of Eternia.
Click to expand...


HeMan_cyvyd.jpg
 
jerseydevil said:
DC Brings Back Kid Eternity For The New 52 – So What Will Get Canned? | Bleeding Cool Comic Book, Movies and TV News and Rumors

Too bad, Frankenstein:AOS, Deathstroke, Resurrection Man all on the block...
Click to expand...

First off, is Lemire is doing Kid Eternity, I'm all in.

Will be sad to see Frankenstein go, if that one ends up getting the chop. Even though Lemire is leaving the book, and sales will probably drop even further, the character/scenario they set up has so much potential for great stories. Shame.

I haven't read Deathstroke or Resurrection Man yet, but I was planning to pick up the trades.
 
I HAVE to think it's going to be some bastardized version of Mandarin. Look, there is no way a major franchise is going to go all 'Ming the Merciless' w/that character because it is (public opinion,not necessarily mine) in really bad taste. I could see some nanotech version of the rings and an extremely toned down version of the villain...hell, the name is even politically incorrect from what I have read. So, as perfect as Kingsley is for that part it there is no way that Marvel/Paramount(?) are going to risk killing the golden goose. They need a solid critical/public hit with IM3. It is the engine that drives the whole Avengers/Thor/Cap'n money printing machine and IM2 was not as well liked as the first one was.
 
CBR TV @ WC12: Khary Payton on POWERS

Finally, Payton discusses his role on “Powers,” the FX pilot based on Brian Bendis and Michael Oeming’s comic series, expressing his hope that the project makes it to the small screen, describing it as the “coolest thing that’s going to be on television,” though he may not be a part of the final project if it’s picked up as he’s moved on to other projects.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, not looking good if they are allowing players to 'move on to other projects'. I salute Fx for basically saying if it can't be done right no reason to do it.
 
jerseydevil said:
I HAVE to think it's going to be some bastardized version of Mandarin. Look, there is no way a major franchise is going to go all 'Ming the Merciless' w/that character because it is (public opinion,not necessarily mine) in really bad taste. I could see some nanotech version of the rings and an extremely toned down version of the villain...hell, the name is even politically incorrect from what I have read. So, as perfect as Kingsley is for that part it there is no way that Marvel/Paramount(?) are going to risk killing the golden goose. They need a solid critical/public hit with IM3. It is the engine that drives the whole Avengers/Thor/Cap'n money printing machine and IM2 was not as well liked as the first one was.
Click to expand...

So I take it I shouldn't expect Yellow Claw or Sunfire either...... Seriously, I like your take on it, though. What is also intriguing is the sort of conflicting statements from Black and Favreau regarding the Mandarin character. Is he in or not. Will he be called Mandarin. All very interesting.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Editorial: Contemporary Superhero Films Should Take a Lesson from BATMAN: THE MOVIE

This July, Christopher Nolan will complete his Batman trilogy with The Dark Knight Rises. Nolan’s approach to Batman has been to set the character in the “real” world. Anything remotely comic-book-y is verboten. There is no Batmobile; there’s the Tumbler. There’s no Two-Face; there’s “Harvey Two-Face”. In The Dark Knight, Gotham City looked like Chicago, and because of tax breaks for the production, Gotham City will look like Pittsburgh in The Dark Knight Rises. Say what you will about Tim Burton and Joel Schmacher‘s takes on Batman (and there’s plenty to say), but they dreamed bigger. Nolan’s take has merit, but it also wants to take the “super” out of superhero. Yes, Batman doesn’t have superpowers, but he’s still extraordinary. But there’s no room for Bat Shark-Repellant.

Bat Shark-Repellant was used by the Caped Crusader in 1966′s Batman: The Movie. For those who haven’t seen the film, it’s an absolute joy. It’s big, it’s cartoony, it’s campy, and it doesn’t care. No filmmaker or studio would risk a plot where the villains dehydrate the world leaders into colored sand. And if a modern superhero movie dared to make this leap, it would twist itself into circles to provide some reasonable explanation, which would defeat the purpose of making such a grand leap in the first place. Can teenagers not accept a movie where Batman is running down a boardwalk, carrying a giant bomb over his head? Contemporary superhero movies don’t have to be this campy, but an over-the-top, exuberant style has merit. There’s no shame in liking a bombastic, unabashedly silly superhero movie if it’s done right (if it’s done wrong, you have Batman & Robin). The shame comes from keeping superheroes in rigid box of “reality” when the genre has so much more to offer. Like Bat Shark-Repellant.
Click to expand...

great editorial...really. And it makes you wonder, have things skewed too far over the line. Will there be some great FUN comic book that Anti-Dark Knights up the world of comic books and comic book movies? Or will comic book movies continue towards one dimensional grimness to the point of redundancy? Kick-Ass was a nice straddle over the line and yet not too successful. Do superhero movies have to be joyless to be successful?
 
Jesus Christ. Does everybody forget Batman & Robin where Batman pulls out a god damned Bat Credit Card?

We HAD CAMPY. This current era of films is a reaction TO THAT.

I'm not reading that articel but I hope there's some nod to reality and not just what their personal nostalgia machine wants everyone to see.

*GRUMBLE*
 
jerseydevil said:
Editorial: Contemporary Superhero Films Should Take a Lesson from BATMAN: THE MOVIE



great editorial...really. And it makes you wonder, have things skewed too far over the line. Will there be some great FUN comic book that Anti-Dark Knights up the world of comic books and comic book movies? Or will comic book movies continue towards one dimensional grimness to the point of redundancy? Kick-Ass was a nice straddle over the line and yet not too successful. Do superhero movies have to be joyless to be successful?
Click to expand...

What about Iron Man, Thor and Captain America?
 
I think this is more of a singular reaction to the thought of a Nolan-like Superman. For some reason that's a stone in my shoe as well. Superman is the antithesis of Batman...which is why I never really cared for him. But he is what he is. He is the bright blue schoolboy. Even those three you cite Adgy have their fare share of angsty stuff. Marvel just makes movies geared for wider audiences so of course they don't have that Dark Knight edge. You also have a point Doc, the Batman tv show would be one and done in this day and age. But Adgy, isn't that Batman & Robin comic supposed to be more of a fallback to the 'golden age' stuff? And, if I remember correctly you really liked that book...as do a lot of others. I said it was an interesting editorial...did not say that I agreed with it hook line and sinker. But(Doc, talking to you here) whats the harm in listening/reading alternative opinions? Just made me think that these 'funnybook' movies have had an exceeding lack of lightheartedness. There is a balance. Perfect example...if a Deadpool movie got done right. Over-the-top violence mixed with sight gags/fourth wall breaking/and other silliness. If you remove the fun from that you wind up with that godawful Wolverine flick. And the darker these things get the more repetetive they get. Which does not do much to advance the genre. Another sort of example...horror movies tend to be samey just as well. Yet you get a movie like Zombieland that expanded things a bit by being charming, sweet as well as a good zombie flick. That's what this article really made me think about...that we could use a expectation bender in the superhero category. You are hyperfocusing the argument too much Doc. Here's an idea...instead of making a Superman movie that mirrors the 'dark/edgy' mold maybe throw Bizaaro/Mr. Mzxtxlplx(you know who i mean) into it and make a different kind of movie more in line with the original concept. It's just something to talk about really...what do I know? Maybe there is no room in these movies for innocence. Look at how the Rocketeer failed.
 
you actually argue my point...albeit with a cartoon. See also Megamind. Incredibles was a tremendous superhero movie with nary a moment of ultrarealism/grittiness in sight. Why can't that same 'whimsy' be applied to an actual superhero movie?
 
Because actual superhero movies need actual superheroes and actual superheroes are owned by megamulitbillion dollar corporations who aren't going to take chances on a creative vision that hasn't recently proved itself in the marketplace.

They'll just keep churning out Pirtates 4 or Godzilla.

BOOM!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Now Chirping

Share this page

Back
Top