|
Lightning Lord posted:Have you read Hitman? I used to have the exact same opinion and that just made me 180 on him. Also, his Hellblazer. Sometimes it feels like there are two Ennises. I think there's one with an editor and one without, frankly. Lightning Lord posted:I know he legitimately doesn't like superheroes but at the same time I've never understood how things like this are somehow an unconscionable assault upon them, as if writers who wear Justice League underoos have never written goofy poo poo happening to these characters before. Have you read The Boys? I don't think it's unconscionable - fictional characters don't need defending - but if that's not assault on the genre, I don't know what is.
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 04:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 19:40 |
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:I know he legitimately doesn't like superheroes but at the same time I've never understood how things like this are somehow an unconscionable assault upon them, as if writers who wear Justice League underoos have never written goofy poo poo happening to these characters before. It's the venom Ennis does it with. Like he not only thinks they're silly, but he thinks the ideals behind them are loathesome. The whole thing drips with a level of cynicism that's somewhere between off-putting and pitiable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 04:21
|
|
|
Either of the guys who played Nathan and Rudy on Misfits for Cass. They'd both nail that charming/endearing scumbag thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 14:25
|
|
|
If Ennis' problem is he needs an editor, having Preacher on basic cable actually could be really loving good. There's so many parts I like, and so many parts that would be better if it wasn't so trying to be extreme and "No YOU shut the gently caress up God!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 14:33
|
|
|
We can dream cast all we want...but if it's Rogen's crew producing it, we're going to get Jay Baruchel as Jessie, James Franco as Cassidy and Danny McBride as Starr. Craig Robinson as Hoover.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 14:50
|
|
|
I like many of Rogan's films, but if the Green Hornet is any indication on his level of dedication to the source material, I'll save myself the trouble of getting hyped over this. Preacher is pretty much my all time favorite. It came around at a special time in my life, and I still go back and read it from time to time. It, along with Stormwatch/The Authority - has long been my dream scenario for a Television adaptation... But I'm incredibly skeptical. Especially considering the direction AMC went with the Walking Dead. I think it could be great, but it's going to depend heavily on casting, and what they decide to cut out. Oh, and whether or not they decide to shoot it as a period piece (I don't foresee any way it could work without setting it in the 90's). I'm nothing but cautious.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 14:56
|
|
|
I wonder how much of the marketing for The Boys was handled by Ennis, et. al. I remember there were these really tacky full page spreads of like, the Female or Frenchie ripping off Wonder Woman's face and making some gross quip. Did he write those? If it actually ends up being Rogen and Goldberg doing Preacher, I really hope they do their own thing with it. I didn't love This is The End or anything, but I think a straight-faced adaption of Preacher ala Snyder's Watchmen would be really terrible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 15:13
|
|
|
Sentinel Red posted:Either of the guys who played Nathan and Rudy on Misfits for Cass. They'd both nail that charming/endearing scumbag thing. While Nathan was and is probably my favorite of the two, the actor who plays Rudy is basically perfect, hell, Rudy is basically how I always imagined Cass to be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 15:21
|
|
|
I think Preacher is one of the few cases where a direct page-to-screen adaptation could work. I'm not saying it has to be that way. Part of adaptation is making it work in a different medium, and there's a lot of content in those books that won't work on AMC at 9 o'clock. I'm just hoping they don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 15:26
|
|
|
I loving love Green Hornet. The original serials from the thirties. His character is completely bad rear end. What's crazy is his alter ego news man has an acerbic bodyguard who enjoys getting in fights, and himself carries a gun and uses it when necessary, while Green Hornet only uses a sleep gun and also has a bodyguard who does not carry a gun. He does tons of dangerous stuff when not even in disguise because he's already an established bad rear end. And almost all the villains he fights are basically exploiting workers or making people labor in unsafe conditions, or attacking public infrastructure to make their private for profit alternative more competitive. I loving wish anybody could make a Green Hornet film or TV series that captured the feel of the original radio drama and serials. And he's a direct descendent of the lone ranger! And he predates Batman!
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 15:34
|
|
|
I'm not talking about objectionable content. I just really, really don't want to see another 'port' of something. If you're going to hire people with a style who are known for a particular type of thing, don't hire them to adapt exactly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 15:38
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:I'm not talking about objectionable content. I just really, really don't want to see another 'port' of something. If you're going to hire people with a style who are known for a particular type of thing, don't hire them to adapt exactly. I get that... But outside of Watchmen, who else has really ever done it? Not to mention it worked really well for that film. (Watchmen's shortcomings all stem from trying to do a genre-deconstructing story in a medium that didn't have enough content to truly warrant it). If you adapted Preacher twice, one as a direct page to screen work, and once as a reimagining, one will clearly work better than the other. I don't think it matters what kind of auteur or showrunner you get, it won't capture the voice of the original story (pun intended). Again, I'm not saying it won't work done in a new way, but for years, Preacher has been the story nerds and spergs have asked for as a direct translation. Because its one of the only stories that can be adapted so easily.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 15:51
|
|
|
Tuxedo Jack posted:I like many of Rogan's films, but if the Green Hornet is any indication on his level of dedication to the source material, I'll save myself the trouble of getting hyped over this. Green Hornet had a pretty messed up production so I'm not sure you can lay all the blame for it being lackluster on Rogen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 16:10
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:Green Hornet had a pretty messed up production so I'm not sure you can lay all the blame for it being lackluster on Rogen. He and Goldberg wrote the script, where most of the problems reside.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 16:14
|
|
|
Tuxedo Jack posted:I get that... But outside of Watchmen, who else has really ever done it? Not to mention it worked really well for that film. (Watchmen's shortcomings all stem from trying to do a genre-deconstructing story in a medium that didn't have enough content to truly warrant it). I'll be honest, I don't think either of your assertions are that true. People have been demanding Preacher as a direct translation because people demand every comic book series be adapted as a direct 'HBO miniseries' translation forever. And the best parts of Watchmen (2009) are easily the parts where it steps outside of the bland comic book criticism to address the history of superheroes in film.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 16:26
|
|
|
Green Hornet had a similar problem to the Lone Ranger, you really had the feeling that they were somewhat embarrassed by their source material.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
Tuxedo Jack posted:He and Goldberg wrote the script, where most of the problems reside. But I actually liked the Green Hornet movie. I thought it was a clever reimagining of the character. Back in the 90's DC was hyping a new Doc Savage book with a splash ad of a high angle shot through a cheap office window. Seated behind a desk was a big guy with his hair in a pony tail. The tag line was 'Doc Savage He's not who you think he is.' When the book came out none of that imagery was in it. It was just Doc and the Five in the future. I still want to see a good modern day version of Doc. TV, Movie...not a DC Comic though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 17:19
|
|
|
e X posted:Green Hornet had a similar problem to the Lone Ranger, you really had the feeling that they were somewhat embarrassed by their source material. How could they possibly be embarrassed by the source material? It's loving awesome. You got this newspaper publisher exposing city wide corruption by day and posing as a criminal to gently caress up their schemes by night. He's a suave motherfucker with a bodyguard on retainer, and his butler is a mechanical genius who also knows karate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
The CW have changed their plans for the Flash on Arrow. Barry is still going to show up pre-powers for a 2 episode arc but instead of showing up later in the season to become the Flash they're going to give him his own pilot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 20:50
|
|
|
Wanderer posted:It seems that for a lot of guys my age, Preacher served as the introduction to non-superhero comics. It came along at exactly the right time and place to appeal to non-religious college kids like me. It didn't hurt that for almost the entirety of its run Wizard magazine never gave up an opportunity to suck it off. This exactly. Preacher is perfect for that incredibly stupid, magical time in your life between the ages of 16-23 where you're still basically a kid but now you can drink and buy your first lovely car and you have to be A MAN. As a teenager I loved that comic and totally bought all its stupid poo poo about What A Real Man Does and Taking No poo poo and I loving died laughing at "bud wupp." It's simplistic, scatological, sexist and incredibly narcissistic in its outlook and thus hits perfectly with the mentality of a late teenager. It's also an artifact from the time that produced Beavis & Butthead, a time that's pretty much gone. Not that there isn't a ton of foul, stupid poo poo still on TV but I think growing computer literacy and changing mores have made that kind of thing less acceptable than it was. Or maybe teenagers have their own equivalents to Boondock Saints and Fight Club and Preacher and all that poo poo that sells a narcissistic, immature rebellious masculinity that I don't know about these days, I dunno. The point is I loved Preacher when it spoke directly to my addled teenage brain but I have absolutely no interest in going back and rereading it. I also can't see how an adaption now would work. I mean it's so nineties. E- They even have an extended Vampire Lestat parody! Harime Nui fucked around with this message at 23:09 on Nov 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 22:55
|
|
|
Piedmon Sama posted:This exactly. Preacher is perfect for that incredibly stupid, magical time in your life between the ages of 16-23 where you're still basically a kid but now you can drink and buy your first lovely car and you have to be A MAN. As a teenager I loved that comic and totally bought all its stupid poo poo about What A Real Man Does and Taking No poo poo and I loving died laughing at "bud wupp." It's simplistic, scatological, sexist and incredibly narcissistic in its outlook and thus hits perfectly with the mentality of a late teenager. I'd also point out here that if you actually do get all the way to the end, one of Preacher's morals--which also shows up in The Boys, albeit not as prominently--is that all of that macho bullshit that it usually revels in is baggage you have to give up if you intend to be a functional adult. One of the big themes is about people who are grappling with issues that are preventing them from exiting a sort of extended childhood, up to and including Jesse, who nearly loses everything on a couple of different occasions because his entire sense of What A Man Does was imparted to him by watching John Wayne movies. The Saint of Killers even reflects that, in that he's the actual reality of the unstoppable killing machine as heralded in story and film; his ability to kill at the drop of a hat has damned him more thoroughly than anything else was capable of. If you drag in the "baddest motherfucker in the world" speech from Stephenson's Snow Crash, the Saint is almost a direct counterargument.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 01:57
|
|
|
I don't see how, that monologue is about the same thing. While you're a child (snow crash points out that all men below the age of 25 or so want to be the baddest motherfucker) the capacity for instant and excessive violence is the dream. Then you grow up and realize violence gets you nothing in and of itself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
That moral, and also its presence in Fight Club, are why I still appreciate those works today.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 02:34
|
|
|
Mr. Maltose posted:I don't see how, that monologue is about the same thing. While you're a child (snow crash points out that all men below the age of 25 or so want to be the baddest motherfucker) the capacity for instant and excessive violence is the dream. Then you grow up and realize violence gets you nothing in and of itself. The point is that in a narrative full of characters who qualify as badasses, the Saint is the biggest, and is also the most fundamentally broken. He's the only character in the book who can inflict violence as he sees fit, indiscriminately and without immediate consequence, and it never gets him anywhere. It's just what he does along the way to not getting what he wants. The Snow Crash quote is about realizing one's limits, and why I'm dragging it in here is basically about how the goal itself is a poison pill. If you find anyone who wants to be the Saint of Killers, they either haven't thought it through or they got some brain problems.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 04:06
|
|
|
I think a lot of conversations that Raven has later in the book give pay to the idea that being the biggest badass is at the end of the day useless in and of itself, but it really doesn't have much to do with Preacher on TV so I'll drop it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 04:13
|
|
|
greatn posted:How could they possibly be embarrassed by the source material? It's loving awesome. You got this newspaper publisher exposing city wide corruption by day and posing as a criminal to gently caress up their schemes by night. He's a suave motherfucker with a bodyguard on retainer, and his butler is a mechanical genius who also knows karate. You don't have to tell me, I like pulp heroes as much as the next guy, but just compare the Green Hornet to the 90' Shadow movie. The later had an immortal Gengis Khan and it still took itself more serious than the Green Hornet, that was pretty much winking so hard at the camera you feared Seth Rogens eyes would fall out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 16:31
|
|
|
Jonathan Frakes will be on tonight's AOS episode
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
Or maybe just directing it. I made the same mistake.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 18:12
|
|
|
Ha! Little bit of dialogue from Dollhouse there at the end of this week's SHIELD.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 09:44
|
|
|
Sony said today they will begin to focus on TV from now on. Does anyone know whether they have any comicbook IPs aside from Spider-Man?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
ufarn posted:Sony said today they will begin to focus on TV from now on. Does anyone know whether they have any comicbook IPs aside from Spider-Man? They still have Ghost Rider too as far as I know. Edit: Nope, it was regained this year. So Spider-Man is all they have. And Men in Black, which is also a comic book IP (I think Marvel might even own the comic rights to MiB, still?) Hakkesshu fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Nov 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 20:56
|
|
|
But... They don't own the TV rights to Spider-Man, I thought? So confused...
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 21:01
|
|
|
Sony is allegedly planning TWO more ASM related movies/sequels (not counting ASM2) so while they may be scaling back their normal film development, they are certainly expanding their Spider-Man movie brand.Tuxedo Jack posted:But... They don't own the TV rights to Spider-Man, I thought? Marvel regained TV rights to all their characters, but they are basically only using them for cartoons, not counting anything that is specifically involved in the Movie Universe they have going. They cancelled the wonderful Spider-Man cartoon that they didn't create to put on the horrible one they have now. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 21:04
|
|
|
Tuxedo Jack posted:But... They don't own the TV rights to Spider-Man, I thought? I just imagined they might try to get in on the comicbook TV craze, if they had the IPs for it. That is, I don't think they'll do it for live-action TV. Maybe we'll get something else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 21:04
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:They cancelled the wonderful Spider-Man cartoon that they didn't create to put on the horrible one they have now. That's not how it went down.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 23:36
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:That's not how it went down. Why did they cancel Spectacular then? I was under the impression that Disney did not own that show fully, prompting its cancellation after Disney got the rights to make a Spider-Man show.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 23:40
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:Why did they cancel Spectacular then? Disney never owned the show, in fact SSM was off the air before Disney even bought Marvel. It got canceled because Sony sold all their animation rights on Marvel characters back to Marvel. However, Sony retained the rights to SSM, and its character designs, storylines, etc, so they got stuck where neither Marvel or Sony could produce it. Additionally, it was got hosed over even before the Marvel/Sony deal by switching networks from the CW to Disney XD in between seasons, which lost it a lot of viewers/ratings (because a lot of people don't even get Disney XD). TwoPair fucked around with this message at 00:58 on Nov 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:Why did they cancel Spectacular then? Long story short, after the rights changed hands the show physically couldn't continue without being in violation of their contract. It was pretty much a case of horrible timing. Now the abject shittiness of Ultimate Spider-Man though? That's all on Loeb. On the bright side, the good, not-Drake Spider-VA seems to be taking it all in stride.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
So doing a bit of googling last night I found out that the guy at the end of Arrow who survived his injection from Brother Blood is Cyrus Gold. Looks like we're getting Solomon Grundy this season too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 03:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 19:40 |
|
|
They never said his last name just his first, so I dunno where you got Gold from. There's a couple of supervillians I think in DC that have that first name.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 03:36
|
|