i dont see how anyone thought it looked like something of the fantastic four?

it looked like a vampire movie to me.

i hate vampire movies. i hope its not mostly about vampires.

Hmmmm....
Went from thinking...."Hey it's the Fantastic Four!"
to
"Hey it looks like Mystery Men!"
to
"Ooohhhh it has Sean Connery!"
They had me at Connery

Seriously, it's cooler having Quatermain whip out some huge elephant rifle from under his coat, or seeing a harpoon cannon on the Nautilus than seeing some ridiculous ninja type enemies firing smgs. Same thing with the car -- 6 wheels? WTF? I want to see a good old fashioned transom driven by some freaky looking guy like the second issue of Vol 2.

Tuan Jim

As has already been pointed out, I have not yet judged the movie. I just said that, judging from the trailer, it looks awful and has strayed too far from the source material.

It appears as if they took a brilliant book, took out all the brains and humor, and threw in a whole lot of guns. While other have said that they were reminded of "The Avengers", the trailer made me think of "The Shadow". (This is not a good thing.)

Of course, since it is only based on a comic book, these changes won't phase most people. If it is bad, it will just serve as more "proof" that comics are for kids and mildly retarded adult virgin males.

But let's change things a bit, just for the sake of argument, and decide if my negativity about the film because the trailer shows that the book ignored the source material, is at all justified.

Let's say that one of your favorite books is "Catcher In The Rye", and you're excited because someone's finally making it into a film. This is a truly awful idea, but let's say that you feel that "Catcher In The Rye" is actually adaptable and could make a great film.

And then you see the trailer. And it's not like how you remember the book. Holden Caufield is played by Kevin Spacey. And he's now a New York City cop. And he has a new partner....a talking dog.

Now, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that this movie will be awful? And wouldn't you be a bit more upset than usual since it is a based on a book that means a lot to you?

Of course, this is an exaggeration, but perhaps it has made my point.



As for the suggestion that the movie will at least sell more books for Alan Moore, I can't say that I agree. If the movie is any good, this may happen (although many people would probably still avoid it because it's "just a comic book"). If it's bad, then it will steer people away from a book that they may actually enjoy.

At a convention last year, I tried to talk my friend into buy Alan Moore's "From Hell", a $35 collection that someone was selling for only $5.00. He refused. Why? Because he'd already seen the movie, hated it, and decided that the book must not be any good, either.

jim

Well...maybe not The Invisible Man

heh heh

jim

Ok - I'm not going to waste my time since it's obvious you're just out to try and make me look like a hypocrite rather than understand my points.

Trigger a hypocrite? My stars and garters, I do believe Im shocked.

To say a movie will suck before it even starts filming is stupid. I am judging this movie on many diffrent things:

1) The comic books is intelligent, sharply written, subtle and very good. Hollywood, by it's very nature is anything but intelligent and sharp. That's one strike against it.

2) I have been following the production and behind the scenes action on the production. Remember how out of touch the studio was with Kevin Smith's draft of Superman. With the Superman that doesnt fly or wear the uniform? With the giant robotic spider? With Brainiac (and his black, gay sidekick robot) wresteling polar bears. With guards at the Fortress of Solitude? Everything I have heard about LEG's handleing by the studio is this train wreck a thousand times worse. Strike two.

3) Points 1 and 2 might have been dismissed as an over active rumor mill and nay-sayers spouting doom and gloom. However the amazingly bad trailer seems to comfirm everything that I've heard and feared. Hollywood is incapable of handling an intelligent source material and has screwed the pooch yet again.

I hold out hope for the best, but from everything I know this movie is going to suck.

Sarcasm and contempt noted... I still don't care what you think.

I don't know - my main point is just that I don't like how people say movies suck before seeing them. It just comes off as really uber-snobby. It's also very common on this forum... it irritates me and serves no real purpose at all. I have to realize that these are my standards and not everyone elses' so I can't expect people to stop being movie nazis.

I agree, I think it's bad form for someone to say a film definitely sucks before seeing it. It's just too bad nobody on this thread has said that.

saw the trailer... it sucked, it was stupid and made no sense if you didn't know the comic.

What were they thinking? It didn't name any of the characters---

Where exactly do you see contempt? I mean isnt this arguement the same arguement we've all been having over different movies?

Cases in point...

xXx
Spider-Man
Episode II
X-Men
X2
Daredevil

the list goes on and on....

That's a gross generalization. This film isn't directed by Hollywood, although it may be, to a large extent, dictated by it. Besides, can't a bad mother produce a good child?

I liked half those movies and disliked the other half and I don't even know what x2 is, so either you've got me confused with someone else or you're failing to prove your point... let alone even make one.

Mmmm looks interesting, a definite rental at least. Not knowing the comic I was a bit confused; looks like a serious "Mystery Men" neo-goth vampire superhero movie.

And the CGI Sean Connery was REALLY well done!!

What movies playing at the moment is this trailer playing with?

The trailer doesn't make me want to see it. Man they need to kill that LXG stuff... right there they make it sound cheesy...

I don't understand Tom Sawyer's presence in the movie. He was 10 or so in the early 1860s, now he's 25-30 in 1895-98?

Maybe he found Ponce DeLeon's fountain.

Trigger not every post is directed towards you, Im pointing out that all of us (yes that does include you) seem to have a complaint about a movie before any of us see it.

Dorian Gray! HA! You're right. It's on IMDB.

What's the target audience here? Who's gonna know who Dorian Gray is?

Right now. don't look it up, who wrote about Dorian Gray?

Not sure how "Dorian Gray" is Americanizing it considering the novel was written by Oscar Wilde. At the same time, while the story is definitely weird, it's really lacking in the overall extraordinary sector -- just like Tom Sawyer. A more interesting character by Twain would be the Yankee from "CYIKAC" -- fits a lot better with the other characters and still relatively relevant timewise -- Nemo was cruising around right after the civil war, and there was also a great appearance by Auguste Dupin from Poe's mysteries.

Tuan Jim

tom sawyer vs. cyikac vs. dorian gray. tow sawyer boasts name recognition whilse cyikac does not. which must be why dorian's in there. so that this logic can be totally inconsistent.

but yeah, i agree. cyikac would be cooler. they should make a movie out of that. and i dunno, casting henry rowengardner from rookie of the year didn't really make the movie as dark as i think it could be. and should be.

Do you think anyone knows who Allan Quatermain is -- I'm assuming he's the one that Connery will be playing? If I hadn't picked up "King Solomon's Mines" on a whim in 7th grade, I'd probably still be in the dark. It's a cool name, but hardly recognizable for any modern "reader".

Tuan Jim

I know my wife will want to see the movie because it has Sean Connery in it.