Slog
News & ArtsThursday, July 15, 2010
Film / Nerd Comic Book Movies Are a Bubble
Posted by Paul Constant on Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 3:37 PM
In other news, Entertainment Weekly has just published a photo of Ryan Reynolds in his CGI costume for the upcoming Green Lantern movie. This paragraph is completely unrelated to the above paragraph.
1
Mr. Ryan is sexy as all hell. Now, having established this- that costume manages to make him look completely hideous. I mean really. CG technicians really need to get a clue. Just ask Mr. Cameron- if you want an audience to be sympathetic to a character you make their eyes BIGGER! Not smaller. Ugh. How hard is it to do a green lantern costume?
2
Clearly, they're going for a more "organic" look for the GL suit, which I presume is the reason Ryan has been wearing a MC rig for filming. How the CGI on that translates while he's moving is going to be a major determiner in terms of whether the concept can be sustained throughout the course of an entire film (most of which, presumably will NOT show Jordan in the suit).
4
That costume is terrible. And Reynolds is horribly miscast. Nathan Fillion should be Hal Jordan. Reynolds should've been Guy Gardner. He does "I'm a dick" far too well.
6
@3 That movie is from the pre-bubble days. The bubble really started with the X-men, and then Spider-man movies. Batman movies are really independent of the rest of the superhero marketplace.
7
I think Thor is pretty much going to tank the comic book bubble. If you don't believe me, this picture should sway your opinion.
Yes, that is Anthony Hopkins in techno armor and a gold eyepatch.
Yes, that is Anthony Hopkins in techno armor and a gold eyepatch.
8
The Thor photo looks fantastic. Ryan's GL looks dubious in the photo, but remember that the Tron costumes (both old and new), the Superman Returns outfit, and Tobey McGuire's Spider-Man all look sort of atrocious as static images. But put them in motion with proper lighting and film values, and they all look amazing. Especially the difference on Routh--Superman Returns was average at best, but all the bits of him Supermanning out looked amazing.
10
@6 You make a good point.
OTOH, that movie was so bad I'm surprised there was a bubble at all after that.
OTOH, that movie was so bad I'm surprised there was a bubble at all after that.
11
I agree that it's a bubble, but I doubt it will burst as dramatically as some think. Honestly, I'm dubious about the Avengers, because for film, one-hero-per-universe seems to hold up better.
12
Man, as a Green Lantern fan from childhood who started daydreaming about seeing all those DC heroes on the big screen after leaving the theater from Superman the Movie in 1978, that cover pic is one gigantic downer. Reynolds looks like the classic Hal Jordan character but that costume looks nothing like Green Lantern. It's confusing, because concept art shown earlier for other, alien Lanterns showed them in costumes that were pretty close to the classic 1950s design by artist Gil Kane (still one of the two best superhero costumes ever, with Kid Flash). Why is Reynolds being composited to look look like a green version of the Visible Man?
And Paul, if The Spirit didn't end the comic book movie bubble, I don't know what will. That said, it's sort of amazing how many comic book movies are currently about to be released or else in the pipeline - everything from Scott Pilgrim to Cowboys and Aliens to Thor...
And Paul, if The Spirit didn't end the comic book movie bubble, I don't know what will. That said, it's sort of amazing how many comic book movies are currently about to be released or else in the pipeline - everything from Scott Pilgrim to Cowboys and Aliens to Thor...
13
@12 It probably won't pop, it will likely go out with a whimper slowly deflating like the horror movies of the 80s. Eventually the market will feel saturated and the studios will get diminishing returns on their investment.
14
@13 on the other other hand, as a child of the 60s, I would never in a million years have imagined I'd live to see an actor win an Academy Award for playing The Joker in a Batman movie.
15
Hm, and that's an interesting point @12: do we lump ALL comic-based films together in the bubble, or do we distinguish between the superhero and non-superhero films (which should also include the upcoming "Red")?
17
@15, hee hee that reminds me that I saw you posting on Warren Ellis' forum... :)
This year alone, we've already had Kick Ass, The Losers, Iron Man 2, Jonah Hex -- hey, why didn't Jonah Hex kill comic book movies? Why didn't Wolverine kill them?
This year alone, we've already had Kick Ass, The Losers, Iron Man 2, Jonah Hex -- hey, why didn't Jonah Hex kill comic book movies? Why didn't Wolverine kill them?
19
i may be a bit biased in that i fucking hate comic book movies, but even by fanboy standards aren't most of them really shitty? my partner is a big comic book fan and watches every single comic book film adaptation, but there are so few of them that he actually likes. it seems there is a pretty large hardcore fanbase for comic book movies who will pay money to watch them even when they expect to be let down. hollywood will probably run out of comic books to adapt to film long before the bubble bursts.
20
@17: Because few people outside of a select nerd contingent associate Kick Ass, the Losers, or Jonah Hex with comic books. And Wolverine was only mediocre; it wasn't AWFUL. You'd be better off asking why Daredevil didn't kill them.
(And also, I liked the DVD "Director's Cut" of Daredevil. The plot is more coherent and it makes a lot more sense. Elektra was still terribad, though.)
(And also, I liked the DVD "Director's Cut" of Daredevil. The plot is more coherent and it makes a lot more sense. Elektra was still terribad, though.)
24
There's been craptaculars like Spiderman 3, Catwoman, and Jonah Hex, but all it takes is a Dark Knight to make everyone forget the crap.
25
@19:
But, that same argument could be made for the entire medium of cinema, regardless of genre. Walk into any Blockbuster, check out the new releases and ask yourself, "how many of these do I really, REALLY want to spend my hard-earned $$ watching, even in the comfort of my own home?" If you're a person of reasonable intelligence and taste, my guess is your answer would be, "not very many."
So, really, one could just as easily ask, "Why didn't 'Gigli' kill the romantic comedy genre?" or "Why didn't 'Ultraviolet' kill the action genre?" The simple fact is, no single movie, no matter how abysmal, can shove an entire genre into the trash bin; genres wax-and-wane, according to the tastes of the suits who produce them, and that is predicated almost exclusively on whether or not people will still watch them.
As long as there are fanboys, the comic book superhero movie will never go away completely, because even the most cynical Hollywood producer understands, they'll still shell out $$ to watch the worst piece of drek imaginable, if only so they can complain about it in high dudgeon in the comments section of Aintitcool.com.
But, that same argument could be made for the entire medium of cinema, regardless of genre. Walk into any Blockbuster, check out the new releases and ask yourself, "how many of these do I really, REALLY want to spend my hard-earned $$ watching, even in the comfort of my own home?" If you're a person of reasonable intelligence and taste, my guess is your answer would be, "not very many."
So, really, one could just as easily ask, "Why didn't 'Gigli' kill the romantic comedy genre?" or "Why didn't 'Ultraviolet' kill the action genre?" The simple fact is, no single movie, no matter how abysmal, can shove an entire genre into the trash bin; genres wax-and-wane, according to the tastes of the suits who produce them, and that is predicated almost exclusively on whether or not people will still watch them.
As long as there are fanboys, the comic book superhero movie will never go away completely, because even the most cynical Hollywood producer understands, they'll still shell out $$ to watch the worst piece of drek imaginable, if only so they can complain about it in high dudgeon in the comments section of Aintitcool.com.
26
@25
Dead on. Please, are we going to say that this or that movie will end the "adapted from a novel" genre?
Lumping Watchmen or Dark Knight in with Teenage Ninja Mutant Turtles because they all started as comic books, not to mention lumping Daredevil or Catwoman (or the no doubt worse ones - I avoid many of the more dubious ones) together is ridiculous.
Yes, there's going to be overreach. But just as hugely popular novels are always going to be made into movies, successful comics will too.
What's going to end is the idea that all they have to do is slap some spandex on somebody and they'll have a blockbuster - Ben Affleck, really?
What will "kill" them will be whatever the next big trend is. Something new will be the Next Big Thing and off they'll go in that direction.
Special effects aren't going away. And as TV gets more and more able to do amazing action and supernatural effects easily week-to-week, movies have to be bigger and bigger. Comics have a huge amount of material to mine.
Really, though, I'm waiting to see what TV does. Comics are far better suited (ahem) to the serial nature of TV, and as special effects technology gets better and better, I thing we may see fewer big blockbusters and more TV shows.
Dead on. Please, are we going to say that this or that movie will end the "adapted from a novel" genre?
Lumping Watchmen or Dark Knight in with Teenage Ninja Mutant Turtles because they all started as comic books, not to mention lumping Daredevil or Catwoman (or the no doubt worse ones - I avoid many of the more dubious ones) together is ridiculous.
Yes, there's going to be overreach. But just as hugely popular novels are always going to be made into movies, successful comics will too.
What's going to end is the idea that all they have to do is slap some spandex on somebody and they'll have a blockbuster - Ben Affleck, really?
What will "kill" them will be whatever the next big trend is. Something new will be the Next Big Thing and off they'll go in that direction.
Special effects aren't going away. And as TV gets more and more able to do amazing action and supernatural effects easily week-to-week, movies have to be bigger and bigger. Comics have a huge amount of material to mine.
Really, though, I'm waiting to see what TV does. Comics are far better suited (ahem) to the serial nature of TV, and as special effects technology gets better and better, I thing we may see fewer big blockbusters and more TV shows.
27
You mean like... Superman (1978), or Conan (1982), or Batman (1989), or X-Men (2010)...?
That's a pretty long bubble.
That's a pretty long bubble.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (27) RSS