RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,911
Posts: 5,478,030
Members: 25,052
Currently online: 517
Newest member: vova123

TrekToday headlines

New Star Trek Funko Pop! Vinyl Figures
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

QMx Mini Phaser Ornament
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Stewart as Neo-Nazi Skinhead
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Klingon Bloodwine To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Trek Actors In War Of The Worlds Fundraiser
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Star Trek: The Next Generation Gag Reel Tease
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Shatner In Haven
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Retro Review: Covenant
By: Michelle on Nov 22

Two Official Starships Collection Previews
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Saldana: Women Issues In Hollywood
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science Fiction & Fantasy

Science Fiction & Fantasy Farscape, Babylon 5, Star Wars, Firefly, vampires, genre books and film.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 15 2008, 09:49 PM   #91
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: What's Alan Moore's Problem?

Lapis Exilis wrote: View Post
Hirogen Alpha wrote: View Post
I'm guessing they figured that comic book adaptations were hot, and that the "Wanted" title would bring in an audience that they wouldn't otherwise have. Studio executives aren't exactly brilliant thinkers, mind you.
Know a lot of studio executives, do you?
I've read enough books and seen enough interviews with them or about them to know enough. Also, my roommate worked at one of the production companies that was developing Wanted last fall, and his impression was that "Wanted" was made because anything comic-related is expected to do gangbusters at the box office right now.

And I don't think I've offered universal praise for directors (many of whom are little more than hired guns), for you to get that worked up over it. As for studio executives, from my range of knowledge, the ones who actually love film and deserve to be praised are a very, very rare breed. Nine times out of ten, there in it for the money. Which isn't a bad thing, per say, but that's usually where they're coming from.
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15 2008, 09:51 PM   #92
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: What's Alan Moore's Problem?

Derishton wrote: View Post
I'm not questioning a story change between mediums - far from it, as I've said before. But Wanted is a superhero story, and "good assassins" play no role in it. Neither a league of assassins nor the word "Wanted" would be actionable. There was no need to pay Millar, unless they thought the title would bring people into the theatre. You imply that wasn't the case for you, so I don't know that they did save any money doing it this way. But it neither offends me nor bothers me ... I use the word "baffle" in a light-hearted way.
Fair enough. At the risk of being crass towards studio executives again, I'd say baffled is my usual reaction towards them.
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15 2008, 10:36 PM   #93
Lapis Exilis
Rear Admiral
 
Lapis Exilis's Avatar
 
Location: Underground
Re: What's Alan Moore's Problem?

Derishton wrote: View Post
I'm not questioning a story change between mediums - far from it, as I've said before. But Wanted is a superhero story, and "good assassins" play no role in it. Neither a league of assassins nor the word "Wanted" would be actionable. There was no need to pay Millar, unless they thought the title would bring people into the theatre. You imply that wasn't the case for you, so I don't know that they did save any money doing it this way. But it neither offends me nor bothers me ... I use the word "baffle" in a light-hearted way.
I understand. I'm just a little fascinated by the adaptation process so I was kind of thinking out loud about what happens during the adaptation process. As for why they paid Millar, studios often option works as much to keep them out of others' hands. Meaning they might well have had the idea for a league of assassins story, knew the comic book Wanted was out there and purchased it so no one could beat them to the punch with a similar movie based on the book. They get the best of both worlds - their picture plus the extra insurance of a comic property behind it.

Hirogen Alpha:
I've read enough books and seen enough interviews with them or about them to know enough. Also, my roommate worked at one of the production companies that was developing Wanted last fall, and his impression was that "Wanted" was made because anything comic-related is expected to do gangbusters at the box office right now.

And I don't think I've offered universal praise for directors (many of whom are little more than hired guns), for you to get that worked up over it. As for studio executives, from my range of knowledge, the ones who actually love film and deserve to be praised are a very, very rare breed. Nine times out of ten, there in it for the money. Which isn't a bad thing, per say, but that's usually where they're coming from.
I was speaking more to a generally accepted stereotype amongst fans - that directors are the artists and studio execs are shallow money-grubbers who wouldn't know a good story if it bit them in the ass. Yet it was a studio exec somewhere who hired Christopher Nolan to redo Batman. It was a studio exec who helped develop the Iron Man script and got Robert Downey Jr. It was a studio exec who made sure Speilberg had everything he needed on set to make Raiders. It was a studio exec who looked at Peter Jackson and said, "Why would you want to make this in two movies? It's three books, let's make three movies." (<That one would be Weinstein at New Line).

Studio execs are involved at every point in creating movies. So every great movie came as much from a studio exec as it did from any other top brass on the production. So to smack them all with a blanket villification just strikes me as strange from anyone who loves movies.
__________________
Don't try to win over the haters; you're not the jackass whisperer. - Scott Straten
Lapis Exilis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15 2008, 11:27 PM   #94
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: What's Alan Moore's Problem?

I don't know anything about WANTED, but it's not unknown for a studio to like the basic idea of something, even if they intend to change all the details, and buy the movie rights just because it's cheaper than fighting a lawsuit later on.

Or they discover that a project that's already in the works bears a possibly actionable resemblance to some earlier book or movie. So they buy the rights and make their movie an "adaptation" rather than risk getting sued somewhere down the road.
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
alan moore, watchmen

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:20 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.