So we got Phase 3 of the Marvel Universe. DC is working on the Superman/Batman flick to transition to a Justice League movie. What hero should get their own flick? What hero would translate well to the big screen? Who do you wanna see?

Make it two episodes though.

It is interesting to note that Marvel have Mark Ruffalo sighed up for many many film options -- whether these are cameos or full films is unknown but it is well know that Planet Hulk is a popular storyline.

How is Avengers 2 going to end? By shooting Hulk into space - I wouldn't be surprised.

Universal still owns distribution rights to stand alone Hulk movies. But Marvel can do what it wants with the character as long as its NOT a stand alone movie. Weird as fuck. But that is probably why we wont get another Hulk movie.

>Universal still owns distribution rights to stand alone Hulk
>movies. But Marvel can do what it wants with the character as
>long as its NOT a stand alone movie. Weird as fuck. But that
>is probably why we wont get another Hulk movie.

I think they can do a stand alone movie with the Hulk, it's just that Disney would have to pay Universal a hefty chunk to get it out there. And as precarious as things are between Disney/Sony re: Spider-Man, we know them dudes do not like to share.
______________________________________________________________________________

"To Each His Reach"

but.....

Fuck aliens.

They would have to retool the story a lot. Plus some of the main players are missing in the MCU thus far.
______________________________________________________________________________

"To Each His Reach"

but.....

Fuck aliens.

I know those two things look like a joke, but I am dead serious.

as i do about all the other '80s reboots: no, no, no. i get that it's a "bad film," but i've always liked it. i loved when it came on tv and was thrilled it was finally released on dvd and made available on demand. i would probably begrudgingly watch a reboot eventually, but i'm not familiar with the comics so i would only be comparing against the "awful" '80s movie that i enjoy so much.

...I sat thinking, "How the fuck do I pitch Marvel?"

i would be very open to a new one that is true to moore's vision, but i have to admit i enjoyed the '80s jawns at least as b-movies

Imagine trying to condense Miracleman to a two-hour runtime. It'll end up being reduced to just the Kid Miracleman as the bad guy stuff.

.

There are countless interesting heroes and comic stories. The problem often resides in the translation to screen.

But if the script is good? Bring on literally any wack-ass hero. I don't care. Just give me good scripts.

If you can't make a good script of some of my favorite heroes? Keep them the fuck off the screen.

maybe the big studios need to make allllll of the superhero flicks to get it out of their system, spoiling many in the process, so we can get beyond the genre. i am young and enjoy comic films, but i really feel for older generations and people of different tastes who have so few choices at the box office since a good chunk of films every year are superheroes, i.e., "kiddie" movies.

If you include Big Hero 6, there will be six this year, which is pretty much consistent with every other year since Raimi's Spider-Man. There are usually four to six per year, and there are more movies of pretty much every other genre released annually.

Next year only has three currently on the calendar-- Avengers 2, Fantastic Four reboot, and Ant-Man. Only three on the calendar for 2016 too, if you believe the rumor that ASM3 is being bumped to 2017. That's a far cry from over saturation. There will more biopics in an Oscar season month than superhero movies in a year.

It only *feels* like oversaturation because the reporting on them and other major franchises is FUCKING ENDLESS. And that does get super-irritating, and it does make them feel like a never-ending presence in our lives.

But they're not actually overstuffing the calendar with superhero movies. They're too expensive to make for the calendar to be *that* full of them anyway-- pretty much every single genre is cheaper, and will result in more releases per calendar year.

The "people of differing taste" likely don't object to superhero films specifically, but to any summer film with huge CGI spectacle. In which case, yeah, they're kind of fucked for three to four months unless they have an indie theater they can go to. But seeing as how there are endless amounts of wonderful movies for those people on Netflix/Hulu/iTunes/VOD/for rent in public libraries, I'm not terribly sympathetic. It's easier now to see low-budget indie fare, either old or new, than ever before.

>There are usually four to six per year, and there
>are more movies of pretty much every other genre released
>annually.

>It only *feels* like oversaturation because the reporting on
>them and other major franchises is FUCKING ENDLESS. And that
>does get super-irritating, and it does make them feel like a
>never-ending presence in our lives.

my point was that and that these films stick around at the cinema so pretty much at any time you can see one of these films, not to mention their being advertised to you for purchase/rental and oh so much licensing after. i am sure a lot of people also lump in other genre films like movies based on hasbro toys and monster and robot movies, fair or not. even though i actually go out, see, and enjoy these, i feel like a perpetual child doing so and look at it from the point of view of others who had more sophisticated and grownup choices at the box office in previous years (i realize that many of these comic book movies are sophisticated and grownup, which is a big part of the appeal, yet not everyone grasps that or cares). it's wild just how many superhero movies have been made in the last 14 years compared with before then, and i appreciate it to an extent because a lot of them have been really good, but maybe it is time to move on from them as a big box office presence, and if that means maxing out all of the franchises and trying all of the other superheroes until we're spent, so be it, and then years or decades later we can revisit. it was way too soon to reboot spiderman and batman, and yet here we are (i actually enjoy the ASM movies, but it's still weird). money is the motivator, and that could be why we do see hollywood do something like i am suggesting, which unfortunately and inevitably means a lot of duds that could have been good or great without the feeding frenzy mentality already in place now. sometimes you have to sacrifice something you love. i know, keep dreaming, kid, but i think more people are going to get tired of these movies even if there are only a few true superhero movies per year at the present pace.

The reason why there weren't a ton of hero movies before 2000 is the technology wasn't around, and thus they weren't proven box office commodities.

Raimi's Spider-Man is a mega-hit and changes the game forever. Now we get four to six per year.

We can't really get more than that, because they cost so damn much. And while maybe one or two will underachieve, more often than not they'll make money. The huge expensive tanks in the genre aren't frequent.

And even if we get to a point where superhero movies bat .500 at the box office financially speaking, the hits are big enough that most studios will take the risk. Unless a colossal behemoth budget movie totally bombs and sinks a studio for good, we won't see studios back off the superhero trend.

I actually think it'd be riskier for studios to NOT try to make new superhero movies, because franchise fatigue is far more real than genre fatigue. If they just churn out sequels, the profits will diminish. They have to roll the dice and bust out the new heroes in hopes of finding that next gold mine.

>The reason why there weren't a ton of hero movies before 2000
>is the technology wasn't around, and thus they weren't proven
>box office commodities.

james cameron was going to make spiderman in the early '90s. obviously it wouldn't look as good as raimi's a decade later, but it's not completely true that the technology wasn't there because it was just being used for other genre flicks. of course technology improves all of the time, but as true as it is that improved technology is the main reason more are made today, i think there is also a (perhaps forced) demographic shift. if i were twice my age and grumpier, i would feel like my only choices at the box office were comic book movies, remakes of movies that came out when i was already an adult, frat house comedies, cartoons, tween flicks based on bestsellers, and the sequels to these movies and that my money wasn't green enough for hollywood most of the year. imagine if all of the grownup fare that comes out during oscar season were spread out across the year or if the movies playing in the arthouse ghetto returned to the multiplexes. there are audiences out there ready to spend, but they are shut out because hollywood gets fixated on formula. the studios might need to make every comic book movie before we get back to more maturity and variety within reach of every moviegoer, but that's probably wishful thinking.


>I actually think it'd be riskier for studios to NOT try to
>make new superhero movies, because franchise fatigue is far
>more real than genre fatigue. If they just churn out sequels,
>the profits will diminish. They have to roll the dice and bust
>out the new heroes in hopes of finding that next gold mine.

agreed, and it's a cool time for movies in a sense because the fad can die out as quickly as it came IMO. this may be the only opportunity for an ant-man or guardians movie, so i really don't mind the creative teams for seizing the opportunity.

.there are
>audiences out there ready to spend, but they are shut out
>because hollywood gets fixated on formula.

This is the history of the studio system-- formula. Sometimes exceptions peek through the cracks, but it's always been this way.

>agreed, and it's a cool time for movies in a sense because the
>fad can die out as quickly as it came IMO.

Yeah, this ain't a fad. Now that technology supports making big comic book movies, they aren't going anywhere.

>This is the history of the studio system-- formula. Sometimes
>exceptions peek through the cracks, but it's always been this
>way.

well, sure, and i would even add that formulas more or less work. still, if i can look back a bit with my rose colored glasses, this seems like thee most formulaic time in decades if not movie history. it seems if you are an adult and want some intelligence and thoughtfulness at your maturity level and outside of a superhero context, you have to look to the arthouse, wait out the dryspell until the narrow window of oscar season when everything comes out at once, or stay at home like you said, and none of those is really fair to the average moviegoer who had more options at the multiplexes in the not too distant past. it's nice to live on the east or west coast, but not everyone can make a limited NY or LA engagement or has an arthouse theater nearby for short runs. concentrating all of the good grownup movies in november and december is leaving money on the table. i know i wanted to see even more movies on the big screen than i did last oscar season, but most of us can't manage to see them all before they leave theaters, replaced by the more formulaic genre fare that sticks around a couple months. some of these critically acclaimed films never even make it to the multiplexes even for a week (even in the DC area), but i think they would have in a past era before the superhero explosion. i'm talking about films from arms of major studios, not true indies. i totally get that it's about money, but i think hollywood is so caught up in the tween and teen mindset that it misses chances with underserved demographics, and what gets made and how it is marketed and distributed has a rippledown/cyclical effect with what people see. it's a shame to have 20+ screens showing less than 10 movies, but obviously it reflects the ticket sales.


>Yeah, this ain't a fad. Now that technology supports making
>big comic book movies, they aren't going anywhere.

most of the major characters have already made it to the big screen in the last 14 years. you can only reboot superman, batman, and spiderman so many times within a generation, but maybe i am underestimating hollywood's desperation and people's appetite for the familiar. maybe the people who see comic book movies aren't tiring of them--i'm still going--but i know there are moviegoers out there who feel they don't have as many choices most of the year as they feel they should because the movies that are available to them are aimed at young audiences.

>>This is the history of the studio system-- formula.
>Sometimes
>>exceptions peek through the cracks, but it's always been
>this
>>way.
>
>well, sure, and i would even add that formulas more or less
>work. still, if i can look back a bit with my rose colored
>glasses, this seems like thee most formulaic time in decades
>if not movie history. it seems if you are an adult and want
>some intelligence and thoughtfulness at your maturity level
>and outside of a superhero context, you have to look to the
>arthouse, wait out the dryspell until the narrow window of
>oscar season when everything comes out at once, or stay at
>home like you said, and none of those is really fair to the
>average moviegoer who had more options at the multiplexes in
>the not too distant past. it's nice to live on the east or
>west coast, but not everyone can make a limited NY or LA
>engagement or has an arthouse theater nearby for short runs.
>concentrating all of the good grownup movies in november and
>december is leaving money on the table. i know i wanted to see
>even more movies on the big screen than i did last oscar
>season, but most of us can't manage to see them all before
>they leave theaters, replaced by the more formulaic genre fare
>that sticks around a couple months. some of these critically
>acclaimed films never even make it to the multiplexes even for
>a week (even in the DC area), but i think they would have in a
>past era before the superhero explosion. i'm talking about
>films from arms of major studios, not true indies. i totally
>get that it's about money, but i think hollywood is so caught
>up in the tween and teen mindset that it misses chances with
>underserved demographics, and what gets made and how it is
>marketed and distributed has a rippledown/cyclical effect with
>what people see. it's a shame to have 20+ screens showing less
>than 10 movies, but obviously it reflects the ticket sales.

That's all well and good, but none of those things are true because Hollywood makes six superhero films a year. Those things are true because the profit margins are thinner on most adult dramas, and there isn't a huge outcry for the indie shit outside of the big cities. If there was, movies would go there and have sustained runs. Superhero films don't make things the way they are, the audience does.

And you see more female-led and black-led films now than ever, because female audiences and black audiences are rallying to those movies nationwide. Hollywood follows the money. Always has.


>>Yeah, this ain't a fad. Now that technology supports making
>>big comic book movies, they aren't going anywhere.
>
>most of the major characters have already made it to the big
>screen in the last 14 years. you can only reboot superman,
>batman, and spiderman so many times within a generation, but
>maybe i am underestimating hollywood's desperation and
>people's appetite for the familiar. maybe the people who see
>comic book movies aren't tiring of them--i'm still going--but
>i know there are moviegoers out there who feel they don't have
>as many choices most of the year as they feel they should
>because the movies that are available to them are aimed at
>young audiences.

If young audiences keep going, they'll keep making them. And young audiences will keep going.

>That's all well and good, but none of those things are true
>because Hollywood makes six superhero films a year. Those
>things are true because the profit margins are thinner on most
>adult dramas, and there isn't a huge outcry for the indie shit
>outside of the big cities. If there was, movies would go there
>and have sustained runs. Superhero films don't make things the
>way they are, the audience does.

what i am trying to get at is that movies that were actually successful in decades past--just not at the third or half a billion dollar mark of a superhero movie now--would be relegated to the arthouse movie theater in the current climate because hollywood has thoroughly shifted gears, including to superhero movies even if you only count 3-6 of them a year. if we could get the comic book movie out of our system by making them all, which it seems like we are on track to do, maybe we could then get back to some of the other types of movies grownups like, be they dramas, comedies, biopics, thrillers, sci-fi not too heavy on the CGI, romantic movies with a brain, etc. audiences have shifted to accommodate what is available to them, but i don't think it's true that they aren't interested in the other types of movies that were hugely popular in decades past. they just aren't being made or marketed anymore because they are seen as riskier. it's a pretty nasty cycle IMO because it panders to the lowest common denominator and results in less variety at the box office. running out of superhero movies won't solve this, but i think it would help.


>And you see more female-led and black-led films now than ever,
>because female audiences and black audiences are rallying to
>those movies nationwide. Hollywood follows the money. Always
>has.

counterprogramming works and shows that there are wider audiences out there who will see other kinds of films. they don't have to be just counterprogramming; hollywood should take that risk and expand the variety of films at the multiplexes beyond the male-dominated, juvenile audience. those action and lowbrow comedy movies are fun, but they shouldn't be practically the only offering for most adults.


>If young audiences keep going, they'll keep making them. And
>young audiences will keep going.

of course they will, they would see just about anything, but there are other demographics willing to shell out cash at the movie theater, and i think there is a backlash against the current climate of what is offered to them since better days are still in recent memory.

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/simon-pegg-worries-that-adults-obsessed-with-comics-sci-fi-have-become-infantilized-by-our-own-taste-20150519

And not with Angela Bassett. She was miscast. I'd prefer Monique.

I'd like to see Deadpool and other X-Men characters.

I know Ryan Reynolds is really trying hard to get an adult/R rated version produced - given the success of the other X-Men films, it might be possible.

Need I say more: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSuvOVH0aSQ

perhaps they could even get these people to make it.

There is a Black Panther (T'Challa) post floating around PTP somewhere - link to it mods?

This could be awesome if they did it right and it might be expensive plus they would have to cast it appositely.

But i'd be there opening night and introduce the character correctly and they could then use T'Challa in other movies too.

>There is a Black Panther (T'Challa) post floating around PTP
>somewhere - link to it mods?
>
>This could be awesome if they did it right and it might be
>expensive plus they would have to cast it appositely.
>
>But i'd be there opening night and introduce the character
>correctly and they could then use T'Challa in other movies
>too.

still hurts....

Daredevil (Bendis * Maleev) version with Mr. Fear or The Hood as lead villian

Scarlet ( Bendis * Maleev)

Nemesis ( Mark Millar)

Deadpool!!! For God sakes make this film already and make it rated R




On The Lookout 4:
some new music. WTF is going on this year?

>Daredevil (Bendis * Maleev) version with Mr. Fear or The Hood
>as lead villian
>
>Scarlet ( Bendis * Maleev)
>
>Nemesis ( Mark Millar)
>
>Deadpool!!! For God sakes make this film already and make it
>rated R
>
If i'm not mistaken, Joe Carnahan wrote a draft of Nemesis that Mark Miller PERSONALLY approved...

I want to say that an adaptation of SCARLET has been greenlight but i don't know if they've gotten a writer (i hear they're looking for a woman to write this and direct it if it ever happens...

Deadpool: a draft is being written now or in the process of being written...
>
>
>On The Lookout 4:
>some new music. WTF is going on this year?

I'm tangentially familiar w/the character, cuz I'm a marvel head, but never really got into him.

Why does he garner such devotion?

plus he's very unafraid to hit pop culture topics in his jokes which is an easy route to being a fan favorite in most fiction, I think.


http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_super/6/66472/1238285-deadpool_starwars.png


~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

Marvel and hollywood love making Mark Millar movies.

>Marvel and hollywood love making Mark Millar movies.

to date it hasn't...they have a script but not green light it's at 20th Century Fox right now.

But they have not started casting, having found locations for this, nothing.

In fact, this is one of MANY movies on Ridley Scott's Scott Free Productions development slate...

Hopefully we'll hear something soon....or not.

His main book isn't a mature readers book, nor have the previous volumes, only one MAX series (there may have been 2 volumes of it, I don't recall, but it's not still being published is the point). Deadpool could be a PG-13 movie with the same spirit and humor that people love about the comic character. Nudity and f-bombs aren't needed for a faithful translation; in fact, I thought the DP video game went too far at times and felt like it was written by a group of 10 year olds who just started cursing.

However, an argument can be made that the violence should be R-level for a guy whose main weapons are two big honkin' swords (ref Wolverine's movies to see how it shouldn't look).



"I halfway hope people put "btw, rappers lie and shit" on CD covers, like a parental advisory sticker." - OKP Villain

www.twitter.com/lexlamont

His story can't be told without the humantorch, the original human torch and the vision imo.

.

Keep it simple.

His brother corrupts him. Tony Starks gets him arrested. Baron Zemo gives him powers for revenge against him. His conscience takes over and he fights back against Zemo and possibly his brother with help from Tony. At the end he can fall into that "coma" or not.

Next movie, he moves to LA becomes an actor/stuntman because he's too paranoid to become a hero again. While on the west coast, that Gravity dude from the comics attacks LA, Avengers aren't available, so they form the WCA or at least introduce some of the members to stop the threat.

Him and the Human Torch are needed more for the Vision's origin, imo.

Madman's off-beat world & funky powers, weapons, costume & story would be really cool on the big screen

http://www.comicvine.com/madman/4005-6704/

~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

but i want to see an adam warlock/magus


tie in gaurdians whatever

do it



now if only they could get the rights to silver surfer

Evil Ernie and Lady Death

Dark Reign
Blue Marvel
The Sentry
Avengers vs. X-Men

4-5 seasons

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/y-last-man-tv-series-831981

'Y: The Last Man' TV Series in the Works at FX
OCTOBER 14, 2015 9:00am PT by Lesley Goldberg

Comic creator Brian K. Vaughan is attached to develop the graphic novel.

Brian K. Vaughan's beloved comic Y: The Last Man is coming to television.

FX is teaming with Vaughan and Color Force's Nina Jacobson and Brad Simpson to develop the dystopian sci-fi comic as an ongoing series, The Hollywood Reporter has learned. A search is under way to find a writer to develop the series with Vaughan. A director for the potential series has not yet been determined. Y: The Last Man, which is purely in development at this time, will be produced by FX and FX Productions.

FX declined comment.

Y: The Last Man ranks as one of the most beloved and critically acclaimed comic book series of all time. The Vertigo title was first launched in 2002 and revolves around Yorick Brown — the last surviving human with a Y chromosome — and his Capuchin monkey, Ampersand. The series follows escape artist Yorick after the mysterious plague as he sets out to find what might have wiped out the world's male chromosomes.

The series, written and created by Vaughan and artist Pia Guerra, ran for 60 issues and has been collected in multiple graphic novels.

The news of a Y: The Last Man TV series comes after a long waiting period as rights to the series reverted back from New Line to Vaughan after the company's plans to convert the comics to a feature film were scrapped.

New Line — a corporate sibling to publisher Vertigo — acquired the film rights to the series in 2007 and set David Goyer, Carl Ellsworth and director D.J. Caruso to adapt. The latter wound up walking away from the project after New Line didn't want to produce the saga as a three-film franchise but rather a two-hour stand-alone feature.

In March 2012, Jericho's Matthew Federman and Stephen Scaia were in final negotiations to take on the property with J.C. Spink, Chris Bender and David Goyer producing and Mason Novick and Jake Weiner set as executive producers. The latter fell apart in September 2014 when Vaughan announced that the rights were in the process of reverting back to him and the movie was dead.

"We wanted to tell a complete story … but not the whole story," Vaughan said at the time, noting that he had hoped that "in success, we could get tell the rest of our serialized adventure."

Y: The Last Man counts fans in Joss Whedon, French film director Louis Leterrier (The Incredible Hulk, Clash of the Titans and Now You See Me) as well as Chuck alum Zachary Levi, who expressed interest in taking on the role of Yorick — going so far as to have his character on the former NBC comedy read the graphic novel in an episode. Quizzed by THR in September 2014 ahead of the fall comic book invasion on broadcast, Y: The Last Man was singled out as a property that should be the next to come to the small screen.

A Y: The Last Man series at FX would mark Vaughan's return to television following CBS' Under the Dome (which he developed for Showtime and ultimately departed following its freshman season on CBS) and Lost. He's currently writing Image Comics' critical hit Saga.

For Jacobson and Simpson, meanwhile, Y: The Last Man extends the duo's relationship with FX, where the company is under an overall deal with its in-house production arm FXP. The duo, whose credits include The Hunger Games franchise, are currently teaming with Ryan Murphy and Brad Falchuk on FX anthology American Crime Story.

Should Y: The Last Man go to series, it would give FX perhaps the crown jewel of comic books and put the cable network on the map with fanboys. AMC has ratings juggernaut The Walking Dead and its companion, Fear the Walking Dead, as well as controversial take Preacher due next year; ABC has Marvel's Agents of SHIELD and Agent Carter; The CW has Arrow, Flash and Legends of Tomorrow; CBS has Supergirl; Fox has Gotham, the upcoming Lucifer and is developing X-Men; while Sony's PlayStation has Powers, which was developed multiple times at FX. Syfy, meanwhile, is developing Superman prequel Krypton from Goyer and TNT has Titans, among others in the works.

I swore it was in development hell for the longest. It'll be interesting to see if they can make it happen.

I LOVED Preacher but the show just doesn't capture the spirit of the comic to me. It was a real disappointment.

I REALLY want Y to be great, but I'm worried we're going to have the same outcome.....

Animated or live action.

-------------------
http://twitter.com/Melanism

It checks a lot of boxes.