Comic Books on Film

Discuss films of the 21st century including current cinema, current filmmakers, and film festivals.
Locked
Message
Author
User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#576 Post by domino harvey » Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:47 pm

Red Band trailer for Logan, the R-rated X-Men movie

User avatar
swo17
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Comic Books on Film

#577 Post by swo17 » Thu Jan 19, 2017 6:06 pm

Because of the scene where Mangold finally delivers those infamous photos to Jeffrey Wells.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#578 Post by knives » Tue Jan 31, 2017 2:08 pm

The General?

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#579 Post by captveg » Tue Jan 31, 2017 2:14 pm

knives wrote:The General?
Certainly a Keaton would be the closest parallel in terms of physical performance, but then he had other elements he didn't have to worry about.

User avatar
Ribs
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#580 Post by Ribs » Tue Jan 31, 2017 2:15 pm

Dances with Wolves, maybe? I get it's not exactly loaded with fight scenes, though. Braveheart might be a better shout.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#581 Post by captveg » Tue Jan 31, 2017 2:23 pm

Those are pretty great examples. Both Costner and Gibson were worn out by the end of them, too. It's definitely a daunting proposition. Add onto that the ridiculous fanbase pressure - just look at the gauntlet of his Live by Night press junket - and you have a recipe for a guy to recognize it's better to find a partner.

Elsewhere online people are speculating that WB is pushing him out. I just can't see that, at least not in the straight up manner online speculation implies. WB clearly wanted him to direct the film, and it was an obvious top reason they hired him for the role in the first place. There's very little positive PR for them in not having him direct.

rawlinson
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 12:35 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#582 Post by rawlinson » Tue Jan 31, 2017 5:40 pm

What about Hong Kong films? The work people like Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung did when they were directing and performing truly exhausting fight sequences.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Not PETA approved
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Comic Books on Film

#583 Post by Mr Sausage » Tue Jan 31, 2017 6:20 pm

Stallone would be the biggest example, no? He directed four Rockys, the last Rambo, and the first Expendables. Those are six major actions films he directed and starred in.

rawlinson
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 12:35 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#584 Post by rawlinson » Tue Jan 31, 2017 7:35 pm

And Eastwood of course, his 70s westerns and crime films he directed and starred in.

User avatar
Brian C
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Comic Books on Film

#585 Post by Brian C » Tue Jan 31, 2017 10:18 pm

Whatever is going on, it confirms that WB's DC franchise is still a trainwreck mess. And though I'm reluctant to say it since I checked out of the movies a long time ago, it makes Marvel's streamlined, relatively drama-free franchise assembly look like a rather amazing accomplishment.

User avatar
Luke M
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:21 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#586 Post by Luke M » Tue Jan 31, 2017 10:58 pm

Brian C wrote:Whatever is going on, it confirms that WB's DC franchise is still a trainwreck mess. And though I'm reluctant to say it since I checked out of the movies a long time ago, it makes Marvel's streamlined, relatively drama-free franchise assembly look like a rather amazing accomplishment.
Imagining if Disney acquired DC around the same time as Marvel, we'd probably be discussing the new Nightwing sequel.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#587 Post by captveg » Wed Feb 01, 2017 4:01 am

Luke M wrote:
Brian C wrote:Whatever is going on, it confirms that WB's DC franchise is still a trainwreck mess. And though I'm reluctant to say it since I checked out of the movies a long time ago, it makes Marvel's streamlined, relatively drama-free franchise assembly look like a rather amazing accomplishment.
Imagining if Disney acquired DC around the same time as Marvel, we'd probably be discussing the new Nightwing sequel.
But we would have never got Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy in their model, so it's a trade-off.

These things are cyclical. Disney will make an outright bad MCU and Star Wars film or two at some point in the next ten years, and WB will make a great DC film or two in the next ten years. It was just a few years ago Disney was being ripped for The Lone Ranger and John Carter.

There will be Batman films in one form or another in the next ten years with or without Affleck directing. I was interested in what he would do as a director on one of them, but there are other directors I'd be just (or even more) curious about, too.

User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#588 Post by matrixschmatrix » Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:09 am

It would be nice to imagine that the superhero boom in general might ease up at some point in the next decade- the idea that all blockbusters will be from the same handful of intellectual property indefinitely is intensely depressing.

dda1996a
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:14 am

Re: Comic Books on Film

#589 Post by dda1996a » Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:27 am

Inevitably its going to switch to a different genre. Like westerns, big studio musicals, die hard ripoff and Tarantino wannabes, disaster movies etc. comic book movies will lessen (I hope sooner than later). We've also got Star Wars now, which judging by box office records, were going to see a lot more of. It will just change to a different IP, and who knows, maybe video games will finally kick off in the near future

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#590 Post by captveg » Wed Feb 01, 2017 12:59 pm

We also got big creature films right now (Transformers, Jurassic Worlds, Godzilla/Kong, Pacific Rim), the Apes films, the Disney live action remakes (Beauty and the Beast is gonna make $1 billion), and so on. Superhero films are currently at the peak, but even if they continue to get made and be successful something else may become #1.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#591 Post by captveg » Sat Feb 11, 2017 1:27 am

captveg wrote:If they get Matt Reeves to direct as mentioned in the article I'd consider that an actual upgrade. I'm a huge Dawn of the Planet of the Apes fan.
Justin Kroll of Variety is reporting that Matt Reeves has been offered the directing job for Batman (and will accept once contract details are hammered out).

Personally, as mentioned before, I am VERY happy with this. Affleck is a strong director, but none of his films are action-effects or fight-choreography heavy like Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is and Batman will need to be. Dawn also has a confident balance of action and character driven story. IMO, from a directing standpoint of a (ideally) smart tentpole action film, this is an upgrade.

Now, here's hoping Kroll's recent tweet saying that the latest draft of the script is something both the WB execs and Affleck are very happy with is true. If Reeves is signing on right now that's a good sign that it is, though one would expect a few tweaks from Reeves through collaboration.


User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#593 Post by captveg » Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:38 pm

The first Guardians is probably my favorite MCU film, so if Vol. 2 can actually live up to the hype I'll be more than ecstatic about it.


User avatar
flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Comic Books on Film

#595 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Tue Feb 14, 2017 1:26 pm

No surprise. I can't imagine this will mend whatever bridges at WB that might have at least started smoky with the failure of his last film.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#596 Post by captveg » Tue Feb 14, 2017 1:45 pm

I'll say a few things about this latest report:

1. It comes from the most "internet" of sources. Campea cites a few people he knows who claim to know Affleck wants out. Now, Campea says he's not a scooper, and that he doesn't want to have this picked up - and then proceeds to tell his audience as though he's speaking to a buddy in private, as though he doesn't know how the internet is gonna handle what he says. Then when it's inevitably picked up and spread as gospel against his preamble to not do that very thing he complains that other websites did that. Come on, John, you knew *exactly* how this was gonna get spread around, and if you didn't you're exceptionally naive.

2. Affleck, if you want out then just get out. Don't dawdle about it, or leave in piecemeal.

3. Internet fandom is a weird thing. First Affleck was the worst thing to ever happen to Batman. Now fandom freaks out of he has a hangnail and might not play the role. Just gotta laugh at that.

beamish13
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:31 am

Re: Comic Books on Film

#597 Post by beamish13 » Tue Feb 14, 2017 2:01 pm

captveg wrote:I'll say a few things about this latest report:


3. Internet fandom is a weird thing. First Affleck was the worst thing to ever happen to Batman. Now fandom freaks out of he has a hangnail and might not play the role. Just gotta laugh at that.
Exactly. He was a wooden mess adrift in a terrible vortex of ill-conceived ideas.

User avatar
dx23
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:52 pm
Location: Puerto Rico

Re: Comic Books on Film

#598 Post by dx23 » Wed Feb 15, 2017 10:35 am

I have talked with some of my friends who work for DC comics and WB and apparently there's a huge power struggle between the people that brought Geoff Johns to the fold and Zack Snyder's team. In big part, it has to do with the whole DC Comics Rebirth in the comic books, which Geoff Johns basically created and championed. Rebirth celebrates the history of DC Comics as well as the lighter (and more well known side) of the company characters. Snyder and his group are still using the New52 as well as cherry picking from DC's most important (well-known) stories without thinking about fluidity, pacing and when those stories were released. Apparently, Ben Affleck is in the middle of the whole thing. Warner wants to keep all of the actors involved in the DC Cinematic Universe instead of rebooting since Wonder Woman and Justice League are still coming out as scheduled. Geoff Johns and his team feel that they can do a soft reboot and make story changes that would make sense and go from there with actors, stories and characters that he would prefer using. This is one of the reasons the Ryan Reynolds name has been floating around to come back as Hal Jordan for the Green Lantern Corps movie.

The big thing is that WB and DC know that they have fallen way behind to Marvel/Disney in the superhero movie business. They are trying to catch up but want to do it now in a very different manner than what Snyder did. Internally, they know that the two only properties that are truly working for DC are the shows on CW (Arrow, Flash, Supergirl, Legends of Tomorrow, iZombie) and their straight to DVD animated film releases ( one per quarter, usually Batman or Justice League related films). DC is now working on more Arrowverse TV shows like Black Lightning. If Affleck leaves the DCCU projects, that would give Warner a good enough reason to follow Johns vision.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#599 Post by captveg » Wed Feb 15, 2017 1:24 pm

Well, if true, that's just stupid. It's like each side has half of the right idea, but also half of the stupid ideas. Post-Justice League is the right time to do a "soft reboot", but there's no reason to alienate the actors you've cast, who have been generally well received. And bringing back Reynolds is a terrible idea because it brings the baggage of the 2011 GL movie that was never meant to be part of this continuity.


Locked