Stuff…

Frank Miller is directing a film adaption of Will Eisner’s newspaper comic hero The Spirit. The producer of the film told a crowd of comic buffs at the New York Comic Con that the adaption will not be as light and cheerful as the strip itself usually was. In an e-mail, the absent Miller (he had hurt himself falling on some ice) wrote, “Don’t go expecting a nostalgic tongue-in-cheek romp here…. Get set, we’re on our way to some dark places.”

On the one hand, assuming Miller follows in the step of the Sin City movie he co-directed, and makes The Spirit movie look just like Will Eisner’s classic and brilliantly illustrated comic strip, that would be amazingly cool.

On the other, the reason The Spirit has remained such a classic is that Eisner was a master of tone. He created a quirky and amazingly compelling run of eight page stories, with unique tones that will be difficult to duplicate. Miller obviously writes dark material for his own comics, and so it’s natural he’d gravitate in that direction. However, I somehow doubt that his Spirit will be anything much like Eisner’s. Still, it’d be nice.

They’re punting on the Spirit’s sidekick Ebony, predictably, who won’t be in the movie. That’s probably best. Ebony was definitely drawn in an exaggerated ‘negro’ fashion consistent with the times the strip was made. He was a great character, but a lot of people just can’t get past those aspects. Frankly, if they did include Ebony, they’d ‘update’ him within an inch of his life (and thus make him a 2000’s century stereotype rather than a 1940’s one).

Supposedly Miller also sent word that he and Robert Rodriguez might well be filming a Sin City sequel as early as spring of this year.

 

Warner Brothers (owner of DC comics and thus all their characters) is mulling a live-action Justice League movie, the group that includes all of DC’s most popular characters, including Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, the Flash, etc. Even with the rights all cleared, this would be a logistical nightmare. Fans would probably want the actors currently playing the characters in separate series—Christian Bale as Batman, Whoever that Guy is as Superman—and who knows if that is possible.

On the other hand, it would (potentially) be a nerd’s dream come true, and moreover could help Marvel do that Avengers movie they occasionally talk about. That would be even trickier, since different studios own the rights to different essential characters (Thor, Iron Man, Captain American, maybe the Hulk).

And again, there is the issue of rounding up the actors. Would Robert Downey Jr. be available to play Tony Stark in an Avengers movie as well as the projected trilogy of Iron Man movies? Would they get the guy playing Bruce Banner in next summer’s The Incredible Hulk to be in this? And how would this effect plans to make separate Thor and Captain America movies, and so on. Still…wow. My mind is officially blown. I love no comic like The Avengers, and I would dearly love to see something like this.

 

J.J. Abrahms, officially divorced from Warner’s Wonder Woman movie, apparently is in to direct the upcoming Star Trek prequel movie, which will revolve around Kirk and Spock and the gang at Star Fleet Academy.

  • Ed

    I know that Robert Rodriquez credited Miller as co-director for “Sin City” but my gut tells me it was more hero-worship than Miller actually directing anything. I can imagine Rodriquez using Miller’s (brilliant) black-and-white graphic novels as storyboards and getting Miller involved in the process more as an artistic consultant.

    Still, Miller has quite an eye. I was into his work long, long before “The Dark Knight Returns.” I was into him when he was illustrating the Daredevil comics with Electra and Stick and the cut The Hand. If you read them, you know what I mean. They were way, way beyond the comics of their day. Ultra-serious, ultra-impressionistic. They were Miller pre-Dark Knight but strong as ever. The characters were drawn more realistically than the blocky impressionism of Dark Knight and Sin City and 300. Check them out if you can.

    The Spirit seems like an obvious move for him, but again, I hesitate over masked crime fighter movies. It fits Miller because of the noir element, but can we buy a feature-length film of a guy in an overcoat with a Lone Ranger mask adventuring around w/ a young black sidekick thrown in for humor? If he makes it light-hearted, sure, but Frank Miller is anything but light-hearted. I think it will be good, but nowhere near great. Miller (and I love him) will not pull this off. Number one: he’s not a director. Number two: he’s very, very serious. It may drag like “Superman Returns” (notice I did not say “as much” or “more than” “Superman Returns”). Number three: I just don’t see the appeal of the character.

    Could be wrong on all of this of course. The absolute best comic never filmed is “The Watchmen” – I understand someone was undertaking it, but it looked like a train wreck from the pics I saw from the set.

    Miller directing “The Spirit”? Whatever. Do you remember “The Phantom”? Neither do I.

  • Jack Spencer

    The Spirit? Wow. Anyone else rememeber the Spirit TV movie/pilot from the late 80’s?

  • Danny

    Oddly enough, I just yesterday picked up a compilation of “The Spirit”, and had been wondering why no one was making a film of it.

    But Frank Miller has the director? It’ll be Sin City in a Domino Mask.

    Still, at least this news has inspired me to actually read the damn thing…

    And hey, now I’ll be entertained all day thinking of Frank Miller’s take on other comics, like Eisner’s “A Contract With God” (Which, actually, Miller might be better suited to do than the Spirit), or, dear god, Bryan Lee O’Malley’s “Lost at Sea”.

    Oh, and Ed….you see pics from the Watchmen set? Link?

  • The Daredevil comics to which you refer have been conveniently collected into glossy color trade paperbacks under the title Daredevil Visionaries: Frank Miller volumes 1 & 2. They are indeed among the best stuff Marvel has ever published, the original “grim & gritty” take on superheroes that so many people since have tried so ineptly to duplicate.

  • Patrick Coyle

    Though a huge nerd myself, I was never of the comic-book variety, so I’m confused about something: if there are problems making a live-action Avengers movie because of different studios owning the rights, how was it that the Ultimate Avengers animated movies were made? Are animated and live-action versions legally distinct, or maybe the Ultimates aren’t techincally the same characters as the originals?

    Meanwhile, that little footnote at the end was a sucker punch. A Starfleet Academy movie? Would there be anybody interested in this except raving fans, the same people who are chronically displeased with any form of change or superficial inconsistency? No matter who they pick to play Kirk and Spock, they’re going to wail and gnash their teeth about it… and then go watch it anyway.

    If nothing else, I hope they don’t try too hard to retroactively connect the movie with everything that comes after, like the Enterprise series did. (Wow, we just did the first transport of a human being! Cool, we just invented the phaser! Whoops, we just inadvertently helped establish the Romulan Empire!) And if they somehow manage to work the Borg or Khan into it… well, then they’ve officially run out of ideas.

  • Ed

    The buzz on the Star Trek franchise, which has been run by absolute losers (with the exception of “Wraith of Khan” and the Nemoy effort, “Star Trek IV” and ok, well, I liked the first movie as well somewhat), is that Star Trek XI (I believe it’s eleven) will take place during the early years of Kirk on board the Enterprise. The director will be J.J. Abrams of “Lost” fame.

    Casting has begun and the buzz is that Matt Damon will play the young Kirk.

    I certainly hope so.

    If the teaser poster is any indication of their seriousness, then we’re in for a GREAT Star Trek movie and rebirth of the franchise a’la “Casino Royale” and the Bond franchise. Check out the details and the poster:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_XI

  • Danny

    “Though a huge nerd myself, I was never of the comic-book variety, so I’m confused about something: if there are problems making a live-action Avengers movie because of different studios owning the rights, how was it that the Ultimate Avengers animated movies were made? Are animated and live-action versions legally distinct, or maybe the Ultimates aren’t techincally the same characters as the originals?”

    They’re technically different characters. Meaning, theoretically, an Ultimate Avengers movie, even live-action, wouldn’t be impossible.

  • Ed

    I have not seen pics from “The Watchmen” set because as far as I know there hasn’t even been one. I’ve seen conceptual stuff but the film seems mired in production chaos. This was the last thing I read:

    http://www.aintitcool.com/node/22841

    For those of you not familiar w/ this graphic novel by Alan Moore (of “V is for Vendetta” fame), you actually have already seen the film version of the story. It’s called “The Incredibles.” The story revolves around middle-aged super heroes going through the proverbial mid-life crisis (no such thing scientifically…just an fyi) after having been outlawed for years. Back-stories include adultery, long dead heroes from the glory age who got to close to something, and lots of domestic strife.

    I love “The Incredibles” backwards and forwards, but they lifted the entire movie from Alan Moore’s “The Watchmen.” I’m surprised Moore didn’t sue. Perhaps they bought him out on that, who knows. Pixar//Disney is not lacking in money.

    I wish I had shots from “The Watchmen” set but it hasn’t even gotten that far (from what I understand). Perhaps it’s just best left as a comic for now. It’s a great comic. You can read it as an adult and see what I mean. I encourage anyone who has not to do so. When you do, you can envision the movie, but I doubt this can accurately be translated to film by any of the hacks out there today. This is far beyond “Spiderman 2” or “Ghost Rider” – and those in the know know what I mean.

  • Pip

    Ken! You have email! Galadriel the Beautiful and Terrible expects a reply! (ha!)

    Eva

  • Ed

    CHA-CHING!!!

    Star Trek XI rumors cont:

    “On January 7, 2007, J.J. Abrams announced that the first draft script for the movie was complete and awaiting what he referred to as “tweaking.” He remarked that it will satisfy “non-Trekkers” and that for those who love Star Trek, “the fix that they get will be very satisfying.” He has said that it will begin filming in 2007, with a release date of 2008. Contrary to some reports, Abrams pointedly did not confirm details of the film or its plot. One possible hint was that the plot revolves around Captain Kirk’s first mission aboard the Starship Enterprise.”

  • Ed

    Just some clarification on an earlier post of mine where I said I saw some pics from “The Watchmen” set and then a following one where I more or less denied it.

    About a year ago, pics were put up on aintitcool.com that totally appeared to be taken from a movie version of this great graphic novel. I clearly saw Dr. Manhattan and a few other characters. After a previous poster asked me if I had seen pics, I searched on aintitcool.com for them and came up empty-handed. Ergo, I think the project was canned. aintitcool does have a reputation of Photoshop pics coming in like wildfire though, so I would err on the side of “No, there never was a set” although I did see pics of what appeared to be one and it did not look like it was concocted in someone’s bedroom on a computer. I have to Wikipedia it as I don’t know what has happened to the project.

    Ken touched on a possible Avenger’s movie. Who wouldn’t love seeing Thor (period, in a stand-alone film or in a “team” superhero movie) kicking major boo-tay with the likes of Iron Man and the Hulk? Wow. The X-Men movies showed that you can easily get a “team” movie to make money, but I agree w/ what Ken suggested: it does come down to the bottom line and the bean counters will probably side on making individual movies w/ these superhero archetypes. I can’t imagine a $200 million dollar film w/ about five great superheros being on the spreadsheet when they could have five separate films about each one bringing in money.

    I can see it w/ the X-Men because, outside of Wolverine, the superheros in that series (and I mean the comics, not the movies) were never really that famous. With The Avengers, you’re taking Thor, Iron Man, The Hulk, Captain America….I mean, imagine you’re a Hollywood producer and you have a hundred million dollars or even three hundred million dollars and you know those characters. Personally, I would make The Avengers movie, but the die is already cast. Iron Man comes out next year and my gut tells me they’re going to run them all separately. Perhaps a team thing will happen after that. Who knows.

    Still, we can dream….

  • “They’re technically different characters. Meaning, theoretically, an Ultimate Avengers movie, even live-action, wouldn’t be impossible.”

    From the comicbook nerd point of veiw they are very different characters, yes, but legally I’d be interested to know what their status is. For example, if DC had published “Ultimate Spider-Man” on the premise it wasn’t really Spider-Man wouldn’t Marvel go berserk?

    Any by the same token, if you own Acme Movie Studios and pay $10million for the rights to make an Iron Man movie then find out that another studio is making “Ultimate Iron Man” don’t you sue the pants off someone?

    Any Jabootu-worshipping lawyers have an opinion.

  • Ken HPoJ

    I think the problem with the Ultimate Avengers exception is that a UA movie would have to be R rated. (I know the animated movie wasn’t, but I think that partly flew under the radar as a STDVD cartoon.)

    And again, there’s the casting issue. If Downey Jr.’s Iron Man takes off, it would be hard to do an Avengers movie with a different actor, meaning that again they’d have trouble selling it as a discrete Ultimates Iron Man. And would mainstream audience even get that there is a regular Iron Man and an Ultimate Iron Man even if they chose that route?

    In any case, Warner’s certainly has an easier time of it.

  • Ken HPoJ

    Pip: Sorry!! I’ve changed e-mail accounts and am all in a dither. Please drop me a line at ken@jabootu.com so that I have your address again and I’ll write ASAP.

  • Ken HPoJ

    Ed has some good points, ones that further stack against the idea of an Avengers movie. (Again, best case scenario; the JLA movie gets made and is the biggest movie ever and Marvel wants in.)

    But let’s look at it another way, and put aside the rights issue nightmare. Let’s say Iron Man does really well, as does the Hulk movie. (Technically I don’t think you’d need the Hulk for an Avengers movie, but in reality that doesn’t strike me as a good idea.) You convince Downey Jr and Nobody Guy Playing the Hulk to do an Avengers movies–Downey is already signed for three Iron Man movies, of which this could be one–and use it as a flyer to establish Thor and Captain America and whoever (Wasp and Giant-Man, presumably) and see if the reaction warrents solo projects for anyone.

    Everything has to align correctly, but I think there is a logic there.

  • Pilgrim

    “From the comicbook nerd point of veiw they are very different characters, yes, but legally I’d be interested to know what their status is. For example, if DC had published “Ultimate Spider-Man” on the premise it wasn’t really Spider-Man wouldn’t Marvel go berserk?”

    Not a lawyer, but it’s my understanding that there is a difference here. Marvel owns Spider-Man, period. DC (or Dark Horse, or Image, or what have you) cannot infringe on that copyright. However, Marvel can sell the media rights to make that character into a movie. They can ALSO sell TV rights to a different company. Same character, different medium, so still perfectly legit.

    They can also sell the rights for a Spider-Man movie and then sell the rights for an Ultimate Spider-Man movie to someone else. They are not technically the same character so this is still Kosher. What they are selling is the media rights to a character they own, rather than attempting to create a new spin on a character they don’t. So long as they own the copyright on the character, they are pretty much free to sell the media rights to whomever they want, the only exception being – as I understand it – you can’t sell the rights to the same version of the same character in the same medium to two different companies.

    Again, not a lawyer, but that’s my understanding.

  • Altair IV

    Um, sorry, no. The Incredibles was NOT The Watchmen by any stretch of the imagination. While it certainly and obviously borrowed heavily from it on a superficial level, it had absolutely none of the gritty reality and end-of-the-world tension that Watchmen had. Nor did it have the story, the characters, the cold-war background, the incredible ending, or anything else that made the Watchmen such an unforgettable experience to read.

    Comparing the two stories is like comparing oranges and grapefruit. Yes, there are a lot of similarities between them. They’re both fruits, they’re both citrus fruits, with peels and wedges. And yes, they’re both very satisfying in their own ways. But just try eating them both side-by-side and see if you come up with the same experience.

  • D.R.M.

    Just a little thing to clear up the “Avengers” movie stuff. Marvel actually owns the film rights to all the major Avengers and does plan to pool all those characters together into one big film around 2011. They managed this because, once all the rights on films like Iron Man and the Hulk expired, Marvel gave them to its own production company Marvel Studios. Currently, it owns the rights to all of the Avengers mainstays, as well as Nick Fury, Dr. Strange, Cloak and Dagger and pretty much anyone else not currently being made into a movie.

    I’d also wager that animation rights are a separate thing, like video game rights.