Movie was screened by the press last night
Caville is in it, with a technicolour suit and accompanied by the John Williams score
DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond
- Thread starter dahj
- Start date
Very very bad. Given the marketing push, I'd guess they expected it to be a billion dollar franchise defining movie.
I have never heard of this movie outside of this thread
I have never heard of this movie outside of this thread
I imagine you are not alone in that experience, as Black Adam has never been one of the A-list DC characters, especially to the general public, so no one is going to project earnings on a level one would see for a more widely known character.
About a certain scene...it is what fans of the character have been waiting to see.
Been seeing this rumor a lot. Guess we'll know for sure soon enough.
Congrats to Cavill's fans, if true.
No, but they could make larger projections based on the actor who's sort of a known thing in Hollywood.
Make a good enough movie, it doesn't matter if the character's well-known or not. The MCU has proven that a number of times.
Hell, back in the beforetime, Hollywood movies often featured entirely original characters. (Don't believe me? Look it up!)
Hell, back in the beforetime, Hollywood movies often featured entirely original characters. (Don't believe me? Look it up!)
Don't need to. I entirely miss that time.
It's a myth that that was any more common in the past than it is today. There has never been a time when Hollywood did not do remakes or adaptations. The Judy Garland Wizard of Oz was something like the seventh film adaptation of the book. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde was adapted to film in 1920, 1931, and 1941. The 1931 Frankenstein was preceded by two silent adaptations of the book in 1910 and 1915 (and an Italian adaptation in 1921).
If anything, remakes were a lot more common a century ago than they are today, partly because a ton of silent films got remade with sound, and partly because they didn't have TV reruns or home video to keep movies in the public eye for decades after their release.
They also had plenty of sequels and long-running film franchises, like Sherlock Holmes, The Thin Man, Universal Monsters, Tarzan, Dick Tracy, Blondie, Ma & Pa Kettle, Torchy Blane, etc. Quickie movie series with 2-3 installments churned out per year were a precursor of series television.
Indeed, many of the most popular films ever made are adaptations of books or plays -- Casablanca, Gone With the Wind, The Godfather, Jaws, Psycho, etc. Or they're biographical films like Lawrence of Arabia and Raging Bull. A huge percentage of films have always been adaptations of earlier things.
The difference is that in the old days, once a movie was out of theaters it was gone. No way to see it again unless the story gets a remake. Now, especially in the streaming age, everything is with us forever.
Given that I was speaking in dead earnest and intending to be entirely factual, and not at all exaggerating for effect in an off-the-cuff forum post, this encyclopedic refutation is clearly the appropriate response.
As you said.Given that I was speaking in dead earnest and intending to be entirely factual, and not at all exaggerating for effect in an off-the-cuff forum post, this encyclopedic refutation is clearly the appropriate response.
Just finished watching DC League of Super-Pets. Absolutely delightful, and highly recommended.
What would Alan Moore say about this, since he thinks watching Batman as an adult is the gateway to fascism?
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...hor-alan-moore-im-definitely-done-with-comics
Poor Alan... how can someone so well read (he might be the most well read person in all of modern literature with the sheer number of books and stories he sites) come to such a dumbass conclusion?
What time was that? Even early silent films were adaptations of books, so there is literally no time period to go to.
More a nostalgic wistful time when I was less aware of all the adaptations in the shows and films I watched as a youngster. Things like 3 Ninjas, Surf Ninjas, Undercover Blues, Mel Brooks of all stripes, etc. where what I grew up with. Plus Adam West's Batman, but I didn't read comics so I was unaware of the whole comic book thing.
Yeah, the time didn't exist but still my preference for what I enjoyed.
Yeah, so seems the issue here is that we just know too much in the internet age. Obviously when you know the sources for every movie ever made through IMDB and wiki, nothing seems original.
I think it makes things less appealing than before.
You know, this always happens when Moore gives an interview, the journalist will always ask him about superheroes, even when he has no desire to talk about superheroes anymore. But, being asked, he says what he thinks. And then the internet goes on a "How dare he" tour that was only topped once, when Martin Scorsese dared to have an entirely taste-based opinion. The only good thing is that, this time around, the responses have been relatively few, because I guess enough people have grown tired of it.
Or, and that is the optimist in me, it might have something to do with his daughter Leah's plea from a few years ago:
This whole "Alan Moore implores you to please vote and save our broken country from actual f-cking oblivion" might've landed better if his birthday had not been spent noting that he clearly has not read any of the many wonderful modern comics that he might actually rather enjoy. He has also clearly never watched any of the rather enjoyable comics-based movies, or experienced any of the joy, support or inspiration they bring to millions of people. He hasn't sat next to a ten-year-old girl watching Captain Marvel or Wonder Woman for the first time.
The idea that the man who loved superhero stories so much he gave up his job and plunged recklessly into writing comics, which at that time was *insane* of him to do, loved them so much he filled every panel (and arguably every balloon and caption) with that love, loved them so much he tried to make them into something that provoked thought and feelings, that addressed issues, that spoke to people the way superheroes had always spoken to him. That seems crazy to me. I have his collection of Marvel comics, dogeared from reading, from love.
I heard so many times about his excitement at finding a stash of second hand Marvel comics in a junkshop, in a box, or buying them off the spinners in Great Yarmouth on holiday. He could not love superhero comics more if he tried. Jack Kirby was his idol, Ditko was his idol. It was that love that made him who he was! In the 80s he brought ecology and politics into his superhero comics, in the 90s he wrote 1963 which was a glowing fizzing love letter directly to his beloved superhero comics, he wrote that at the same time as From Hell, Lost Girls…
He did not see any opposition between his ABC line of superhero comics, and his beloved mind-boggling huge concept GNs. If I rang, he would spend 45 minutes explaining a cool bit of Tom Strong, a load of daft bits in Splash Brannigan, a clever thing he had done and was proud of. His problem was that the medium he adored was ruled by corrupt despots, that the people who made that magic were abused, that their contribution was not valued, that it was stolen from them. He already hated that before Watchmen. He already knew Kirby had been shafted. So when it happened to him, and then again, and then again, it wasn't just a business deal gone awry, or a bit of bad luck, it broke him. The thing he loved most, the thing he poured *all* his time and energy into for his whole entire life, he couldn't do it anymore.
He fulfilled his obligations to his fellow creators, he did the projects he could control and own, but he didn't want to browse comic shelves anymore. That's so f-cking sad it actually breaks my heart. So for people who thrive now, in this amazing industry we can all find our niches in, where there are so many comics we couldn't possibly buy them all, to say that Alan Moore is out of order for hating superheroes, or what they became, for him, is unbelievable. To see him dismissed as Crazy Old Alan Moore again and again, and people not know what made him that way? To see people dissing him when their job, their industry their medium was partly built on 40 years of his hard work? I am not heartbroken, just really f-cking disappointed.
Can you imagine if he hadn't been f-cked over? If instead of being Grumpy Alan Moore Shouting From His Cave he had spent the past 40 years putting out book after book for DC and the rest? Creating vast worlds full of the superheroes he loves? Enjoying comics? It's a damn shame.
So, instead of throwing shade at "crazy old" Alan Moore, I think it is more fitting to acknowledge that this genre we love comes from a deeply flawed industry, and that it is because of these flaws have kept us from any more superhero stories from one of the greatest genre writers of all time.
I know you want to defend your hero, but none of what you wrote has any relevance since nobody asked him to connect fascism to Batman. Comics and movies are written to sell, not to appeal to perverted senile crazy people.