Category Archives: The Avengers

Comic book movie blunders: ‘Fantastic Four’

Leave a reply

fantastic four cast

It must be hard for some younger comic book movie fans to imagine what it was like in the dark years.

Since 2008, moviegoing fans have been treated to summertime releases of really top-notch versions of their favorite comic book superheroes. I’m counting from the release of “Iron Man” and I’m really talking about the other Marvel-produced films, including “The Incredible Hulk,” “Captain America” and “Thor,” all capped off with “The Avengers” this past summer.

I’m not counting the DC comics movies in part because they’re been wildly inconsistent, with some highlights like “The Dark Night” but more lows such as the stillborn “Green Lantern.”

Yes, back in the dark years, before not only serious-minded comic book adaptations but before adequate special effects and talented directors like Jon Favreau and Joss Whedon, fans were treated to the likes of “The Fantastic Four.”

I’m not even talking about the 2005 Tim Story movie. I’m talking about the 1994 “Fantastic Four,” directed by Oley Sasson (yeah, I know, right?) and produced by legendary cheapie producer Roger Corman.

Even if you’re old enough, you didn’t see “Fantastic Four” in theaters. Legendarily made in about a minute to extend the production company’s rights to film the comic book, the movie reflects its (maybe, possibly) million-dollar budget and the crude effects that the available money could buy.

fantastic four mr. fantastic

The proof of the skimping on effects? Johnny Storm finally fires up as the Human Torch in the final battle of the movie. Prior to that, most of his fire-starting is relegated to sneezes and the like. Sheesh.

I came across a bootleg DVD of the movie at a comic book convention a few years back. It’s a staple of the dealer’s room at every con, along with the truly awful “Justice League” TV pilot and 1960s DC comics cartoons.

The movie traces the familiar origin of the FF: Reed Richards, Ben Grimm, Johnny Storm and Sue Storm go into space, get bombarded by cosmic rays and gain superpowers, becoming Mr. Fantastic, The Thing, The Human Torch and The Invisible Woman.

Along the way, there are run-ins with Dr. Doom and, inexplicably, a hobo/jewel thief/leader of a band of crooks. It’s the most inexplicable villain since Christopher Walken in Tim Burton “Batman” sequel.

If you haven’t seen the movie, you should take any opportunity to do so. Expect the cheap special effects to be improved by the grainy, multi-generations-removed-from-the-original copy you’ll find.

Some observations:

john byrne ff costumes

At least the movie had the courage of its costumes, with the four wearing the light blue and white FF outfits popularized during the John Byrne era on the comic.

Our heroes don’t get their powers until about half-way through the movie. When Sam Raimi does this, it’s character development. Here it was just delaying the inevitable expensive effects scenes.

Somebody told actor Joseph Culp, who plays ultimate villain Dr. Doom, thought he had to be especially expressive since the audience wouldn’t see his face. So he makes BIG HAND GESTURES throughout the movie. The highlight is when he draws, in the air in front of him, the number 12 as he says it.

One bit player in the movie went on to cult stardom. Mercedes McNab, who played airhead-turned-vampire Harmony on “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” and “Angel,” played young Sue Storm in an early scene in the movie.

fantastic four thing

Even though the later, big-budget “Fantastic Four” movies were better, the Corman-produced “FF” movie got one thing right: The Thing should be bigger than the other members of the FF. I love Michael Chiklis but as Ben Grimm and The Thing in the later movies, he wasn’t quite big enough.

Movies I’m looking forward to in 2013

Leave a reply

iron man 3

2012 was a pretty good year for geek movies. I’m still boggled, sometimes, that so many comic book, science fiction and fantasy movies – not to mention big-budget, well-crafted ones – are released these days. We might be in a golden age for the genre.

Looking ahead to 2013, the calendar looks like just as much of a treat for fans.

“Iron Man 3.” After the superhero team-up that was “The Avengers,” why look forward to a solo superhero outing? Isn’t that a step back? Well, it would be but for a few reasons. I trust Robert Downey Jr. and director Shane Black. The preview looks dire and action-filled. And the movie kicks off Marvel’s Phase Two, which culminates in “The Avengers” sequel in 2015, so I’m pretty sure they’ll have some references to the big picture. May 3.

“Thor: The Dark World.” The first “Thor,” in some ways, held the promise (threat?) of being the weakest movie in the first phase of Marvel. Yet it was solid entertainment and laid the groundwork for much of the mythology that followed in “Captain America” and “The Avengers.” I feel very much at ease with this realm of big-screen Marvel. Nov. 8.

“Pacific Rim.” This story about giant robots created to fight giant, Godzilla-style monsters looks like something to appeal to all the 12 year olds within us. July 12.

star trek into darkness cell

“Star Trek Into Darkness.” This J.J. Abrams sequel to the reboot looks awesome. Unleash the Cumberbatch! May 17.

“The Wolverine.” I am not the craziest of fans of Marvel’s snikt-happy mutant. But Hugh Jackman has been so good as the character I’m looking forward to this and his role, however big, in “Days of Future Past.” July 26.

“Hunger Games: Catching Fire.” The first movie was a pleasant surprise. The second book is the weakest of the series, but I’m hoping they pull it off. Nov. 22.

oz_the_great_and_powerful_wicked_witch

“Oz the Great and Powerful.” This retooling of the classic story, a kind of prequel, could be really fun or really awful. March 8.

“The World’s End.” While we’re waiting for director Edgar Wright to make “Ant-Man,” how about this end of the world comedy starring Simon Pegg, Nick Frost and Martin Freeman? Yes, please. Oct. 25.

Movies I’m almost dreading:

“Man of Steel.” We don’t need another origin story. We don’t need a “dark” Superman. We need a Superman who feels like the last of his kind but isn’t mopey about it. We don’t need a “Dark Knight” treatment, but I’m afraid that’s what we’re getting. June 14.

“World War Z.” I’ve said it before, but here it is again. The preview doesn’t look like the terrific Max Brooks book. June 21.

“The Lone Ranger.” A beloved childhood hero. I’m just not sure about the approach. Armie Hammer and Johnny Depp bring a lot of charisma to the proceedings, however. We’ll see. May 31.

My favorite movies of 2012

3 Replies

avengers assembled

Here’s another “let’s pretend it’s the end of the year instead of a couple of days into the new year” recap of what I enjoyed in pop culture in 2012.

This time, movies.

For more than a decade, from the late 1970s to the early 1990s, I reviewed movies as part of my job. I saw a movie or two or three every week. Considering I was a lifelong movie fan, it was cool to be paid (even minimally) to review them.

Reviewing movies for a living meant going to see movies even if you didn’t feel like it and – goes without saying – movies that you had no interest in seeing. I still haven’t fully recovered from “My Dinner with Andre.”

All this is by way of saying that I don’t see nearly as many movies in theaters nowadays. When I do see a movie, I’m pretty likely to really want to see it and have a good idea of how much I’ll like it.

So here’s a look at a few favorite movies – and why they were favorites – for 2012.

For me, no pop culture movie of 2012 topped “The Avengers.” Joss Whedon’s very-nearly-perfect big-screen version of Marvel’s ultimate superhero team was the culmination of four years of Marvel solo superhero movies that kicked off with “Iron Man.”

I don’t have to tell you that Whedon’s “Avengers” worked and worked beyond the expectations of most fans, expectations that have been building since the early 1960s but seemed pretty unlikely during the dark days of lame “Captain America” TV movies with Cap sporting a motorcycle helmet. And now, on to Marvel’s big-screen phase two!

“Dark Knight Rises” and “The Amazing Spider-Man” were, in ways different than “The Avengers,” good treatments of their durable comic book characters. “Dark Knight” had a fairly lame villain but still thrilled with its dark vision. “Spider-Man” promised something it didn’t deliver – a mysterious reworking of Peter Parker’s origin – but it didn’t matter. The characters and performances really swung.

“Chronicle” was a dark and unsettling take on the kind of superhero/super villain fodder that sprang from “The X-Men” stories. Bonus: The director is remaking “Fantastic Four.”

Outside the realm of superhero stories, another movie with Whedon’s imprint, “Cabin in the Woods,” was very nearly as good as “The Avengers.” “Cabin” was a first-rate thriller with a great, twisty plot.

Backlash to the absurd title or not, “Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter” was a competent version of a really very good fantasy novel.

Likewise, “The Hunger Games” was a good approximation of a really good book. I’m looking forward to the sequels.

And I guess we’re back in the realm of superheroes for “Skyfall,” but the latest James Bond action picture was one of the best in the series. It felt like a reboot, in some ways, and has me looking forward to the next adventure of 007.

 

 

 

Thoughts on Disney becoming the master of jedis

1 Reply

So you might have heard this a few days ago, but Disney – home in recent years to Pixar and Marvel – bought Luscasfilm. For a cool $4.05 billion.

Setting aside that staggering figure for a moment – hella big even though the price tag was probably a bargain – the announcement made the Internet freak out and produced wonderful memes like the one above by Geek Girl Diva.

It also left us wondering what happens next. Well, some of that we already know. Disney immediately announced it would make three more “Star Wars” films, with the first coming out in 2015 (the summer of the “Avengers” sequel). The films would be episodes 7, 8 and 9, the long-rumored continuation of the story that left off with “Return of the Jedi.” Will we see aging Han Solo? Luke leading a rebuilding of the Jedi order?

There was some degree of fanboy moaning about the news, but probably less than there might have been if “Star Wars” creator George Lucas hadn’t made so many mis-steps with the prequel trilogy beginning in 1999.

A lot of people – and I think I count myself in this crowd – think that it’s perfectly fine for somebody other than Lucas to oversee the fate of his creations, for a couple of reasons:

Lucas has been pretty tone-deaf about what’s wrong with the (particularly later) movies.

A billionaire many times over, he’s shown little inclination to make new “Star Wars” movies (maybe that’s not a bad thing considering the prequels).

I will say, however, that Lucas and his people made a very good decision regarding the “Clone Wars” animated series on Cartoon Network. The series has been far more adult, far more diverse and far more interesting than the prequel movies.

Most importantly, although 30- and 40- and 50-something fans don’t like to admit it, the “Clone Wars” series reached a whole new generation of fans.

I just asked my son if, when he thought of “Star Wars,” he thought of the movies or “Clone Wars.” He answered, “Clone Wars.” He’s seen the live-action movies on DVD but that didn’t have the impact on him that seeing the original trilogy had on me, as a teenager and young adult.

“Clone Wars” has kept “Star Wars” alive and relevant for a new generation.

Although a lot of people have complained about changes Lucas made to the original movies – the Han Solo/Greedo shootout comes to mind, of course – for subsequent re-releases, he has, at least, kept them in the public eye and at the top of fanboy discussions. When was the last time somebody had an Internet meltdown about “The Last Starfighter?”

Beyond the new trilogy, what are we likely to see?

More merchandising, of course. Not that there wasn’t plenty of that anyway.

Regular theatrical movies and new TV series and releases of original content on disc.

Someday, in the future, dramatic mashups and re-imaginings of the existing movies and characters. Disney based “Pirates of the Caribbean” on a Disney park ride, after all, so there’s a willingness to try new things if audiences will respond. Who’s to say we won’t see feature films or series based on minor characters and events from the familiar stories, ala “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead?”

And that’s a good thing. There’s always been debate about whether “Star Wars” was for kids or for the general moviegoing audience or for the fans who’ve kept it alive and relevant and in the public eye for decades, even during some pretty lean times.

I think the answer is that “Star Wars” has been for all of those audiences. And Disney has the power to reach all them.

‘Justice League’ movie set for 2015: What we want to know

Leave a reply

DC Comics won a round – maybe the final round – in the long-running legal battle over rights to the Superman character just yesterday, and today’s L.A. Times says DC/Warner Bros. is planning to release a “Justice League” movie in 2015.

Interesting timing there, DC. It just so happens that the “Avengers” sequel comes out in the summer of 2015.

For years now, DC has been unable to get its rich comic book catalogue onto the big screen in any successful manner besides Christopher Nolan’s “Dark Knight” movies. Although Nolan is overseeing “Man of Steel” for next summer, he and his grim and gritty Batman weren’t a likely fit for a “Justice League” movie.

In other words, it seemed like DC/Warners/Nolan were as ashamed of colorful characters and tights as 20th Century Fox was back when they put the “X-Men” in black leather rather than blue and yellow.

The Times article indicates that DC will not try to introduce its “Justice League” heroes in solo big-screen adventures before teaming them up.

Here are some questions we’ll be interested in seeing answered sometime:

Will Henry Cavill, set to star in “Man of Steel” next year, return as Superman in “Justice League?” Or is Cavill one and done before his movie even comes out?

Will Joseph Gordon-Levitt play Robin John Blake as Batman in “Justice League?” Or will DC ensure that Bruce Wayne is the Batman we’ll see in the team-up movie? And we know that won’t be Christian Bale.

Will they find a “realistic” actress to play Wonder Woman? Or will the Amazon Princess be played by a five-foot-tall, 100-pounder?

Will Ryan Reynolds return as Green Lantern? It seems unlikely. How about making GL the GL that kids know, John Stewart?

Which “other” Leaguers will make the cut? We have to have the Flash. How about Aquaman? One of the Hawks? Cyborg, who’s part of the current comic book lineup?

Will DC’s apparent intention to introduce the characters in the team-up movie – a probably necessary reversal of Marvel’s strategy of introducing the future “Avengers” in solo movies – work?

And can we please, please, please avoid mini-origin stories for each JL member?

 

 

Why we should care about ‘Ant-Man’

Leave a reply

Disney announced today the Nov. 6, 2015 release of “Ant-Man,” directed by Edgar Wright and featuring the longtime Marvel Comics hero. No casting has yet been announced.

Why should we be excited about “Ant-Man?” He’s just a guy who shrinks, right?

Wrong. Here’s why we’re excited about “Ant-Man.”

Edgar Wright. This is the guy who directed cult classics like “Shaun of the Dead” and “Hot Fuzz.” And he loves Ant-Man. He’ll bring an offbeat approach to a somewhat offbeat hero.

He’s important. Ant-Man, also known as Henry Pym, was a founding member of the Avengers. He’s been there since the beginning – in the comics, at least. He’s linked to the Wasp, his girlfriend/wife Janet Van Dyne, who in the comics gave the team its name.

He might be edgy. If they choose to go that way, “Ant-Man” as a solo movie or member of “The Avengers” paves the way for some domestic drama. In some versions of the character, Pym has anger control issues and even abuses his wife. It’s a character point not unlike Tony Stark’s alcoholism. It might not make its way into the movies, but a lot of people will be wondering and speculating, and that creates buzz.

Ant-Man is not Aquaman. I love Aquaman as much as anybody, but he’s (unfairly) received a reputation as the worst member of the Justice League. And to the outside observer, Ant-Man seems just as limited. He shrinks. Hmm. But in reality, Henry Pym has a lot of cool capabilities – apparently the Ant-Man test footage screened this summer at conventions demonstrated this – and they’re not all based around shrinking. Pym has also, at various times, adopted other personnas including Giant-Man (Guess what? He not only shrinks!) and Yellowjacket (Goes with Wasp, get it?). Plus he’s a genius, not unlike Tony Stark and Bruce Banner. Getting Pym on the team will add a lot to the roster.

Most of all, Ant-Man’s existence in the Marvel movie universe paves the way for my favorite Avengers villain of all time, Ultron, an android created by Pym who becomes a recurring and deadly enemy for the supergroup. If the next “Avengers” movie – due out a few months before “Ant-Man” – revolves around Thanos – that guy glimpsed in the end credits of “The Avengers” – then Ultron would make a great bad guy for the third movie.

Excited yet?

Coulson Lives? Coulson Lives in new ‘S.H.I.E.L.D’ series?

Leave a reply

Is Clark Gregg destined to return as Agent Phil (“His first name is Agent”) Coulson in the upcoming “SHIELD” TV series?

Those newsy guys and gals at Comic Book Resources are reporting that Jeph Loeb, head of Marvel’s TV unit, and Joss Whedon, “Avengers” director and Marvel movie and TV universe consultant, took the stage (the latter via video) at New York Comic Con and announced that Clark Gregg would be part of the upcoming “SHIELD” TV series:

“He’s headlining the S.H.I.E.L.D. show and always was.” said Whedon.

Loeb confirmed Clark Gregg is the first member cast in Whedon’s “S.H.I.E.L.D.”

Gregg was on hand too.

Assuming this wasn’t some kind of joke that was misinterpreted, it’s pretty cool news. As everyone who saw “The Avengers” knows, Coulson – who had small roles in most of the Marvel movies leading up to “The Avengers” – died by Loki’s hand in the movie.

His death gave the Avengers something to avenge.

Despite an on-stage reference – which might have been a joking one – to Life Model Decoys (lifelike robots developed by SHIELD in the comics and mentioned by Tony Stark in “The Avengers”), we’re left wondering how Coulson will return in the “SHIELD” TV series.

Did he not really die at Loki’s hand in “The Avengers?” If so, that kind of cheapens his death.

Will the TV series be set before the events of “The Avengers?” If so … not another prequel.

Will Coulson be a hologram, something like the hologram doctor in “Star Trek: Voyager?”

Or will Phil be reborn as the Vision, the android Avenger?

We’ve already seen this cool fan-made sculpture of Gregg as the Vision, and we’ve noted here before that “The Avengers” seems to hint at Coulson being the Vision. Remember the whole “cellist girlfriend” thing? Remember how Ain’t It Cool noted that Vision’s wife in the comics, Scarlet Witch, is a cellist?

Here’s to some more news, and soon.

 

Our favorite geek year: Marvel comics milestones

Leave a reply

It’s a staggering thought: Many of the Marvel comics characters that dominate modern movies were created, by a handful of talented artists and writers, within the space of little more than a year about five decades ago.

Sure, everybody knows Marvel of the early 60s was an a creative hothouse. But it’s truly impressive how quickly the staff turned out one soon-to-be classic comic and character after another.

It started with Fantastic Four No. 1, with a cover date of November 1961. An important word about cover dates: Then, as now, comics and magazines were given cover dates that were slightly in advance of the period they were actually available. I’m guessing that if you went to a newsstand (remember those?) today, in early October, you’d find November or December or even January editions of many monthly magazines. The practice was (is?) aimed at making comics and magazines look like they have a longer shelf life (literally). So while FF was dated November 1961, it was in the hands of fans weeks before that.

Writer Stan Lee and artist Jack Kirby (with inker George Klein) introduced Reed Richards and the rest of the FF in that November 1961 issue and Marvel published several issues until, six months later, the first issue of The Incredible Hulk came out in May 1962. To create just the Fantastic Four would be an accomplishment for any two men. But for Lee and Kirby to create the Hulk within weeks or months is truly impressive.

Then things got crazy.

August 1962 saw the publication of Amazing Fantasy No. 15, which fans know introduced Spider-Man and his mild-mannered alter ego, Peter Parker. Lee and artistic genius Steve Ditko get the credit here for creating one of the world’s most enduring superhero characters.

That same month, August 1962, saw Journey into Mystery No. 83, with Lee and his brother, Larry Lieber, behind the plot and script and Kirby and inker Joe Sinnott introducing none other than Thor.

(Now keep in mind that during this time, Marvel continued to produce follow-up issues of FF and Hulk.)

In September 1962, Lee, Lieber, Kirby and Dick Ayers gave the world Tales to Astonish No. 35, introducing scientist Henry Pym, better known as Ant-Man.

Remember, by this point, we’re still not a year past the introduction of the FF.

By March 1963, another major character was introduced when Iron Man debuted in Tales of Suspense No. 39. Lee and Lieber and artist Don Heck were the men behind the future Avenger.

That same month, the unexpected response to Amazing Fantasy No. 15 led to the debut of Amazing Spider-Man No. 1, by Lee and Ditko.

The Marvel era was firmly in place in September 1963 with the debut of Avengers No. 1, featuring characters from the recent Marvel comics teaming up. Lee and Kirby and inker Ayers were reacting to – but actually topping – DC’s Justice League.

So, in the space of less than two years – little more than a year if you’re counting only the debuts of most of these characters – Lee, Kirby, Ditko and their cohorts gave us characters that not only entertained many readers but laid the foundation for the biggest movie hits of today.

‘Fantastic Four,’ ‘X-Men’ movies getting back on track?

Leave a reply

We’re accustomed by now to how Marvel’s in-house movie process works – and how well it works. With “The Avengers” done and Marvel’s big-screen “phase two” on the calendar, leading up to an “Avengers” sequel in 2015, the comic characters controled by Marvel seem on track.

This week, news broke of moves that could help ensure some continuity for other Marvel characters that don’t fall under Marvel’s control.

No surprise here, really, but “Amazing Spider-Man” director Marc Webb and star Andrew Garfield will return for a sequel and Emma Stone is likely to return as Gwen Stacy.

There were a number of things to like about Webb’s first shot with the character. While the Lizard wasn’t a compelling antagonist, Garfield and Stone were well-cast and had great chemistry. The tone of the movie was right, although the story failed in its (I think) misguided efforts to build some mystery into Peter Parker’s past.

But the movie was pretty entertaining and a sequel – without the burden of having to explain the origin story yet again – could be fun.

Maybe more importantly, 20th Century Fox announced this week that they’ve signed longtime comic writer Mark Millar to consult on future film adaptations of Marvel comics like “Fantastic Four” and “X-Men.”

Millar’s Ultimate X-Men comic forged a new direction for the longtime super team and his Ultimates take on the Avengers influenced the movie version.

Millar has plenty of experience writing comics, but more importantly he might be a creative decision-maker not unlike Joss Whedon has become for Marvel’s in-house movies.

Marvel movies producer Kevin Feige provided the structure and strategy that led to Whedon’s “The Avengers.” Whedon might also help shape the future of Marvel movies. It’s the kind of long-term cohesive thinking that Warner Bros. wishes it had with its DC adaptations.

It’s too much to hope for, but Millar’s role in both these properties might also lead to some cross-over on film.

Cool new ‘Avengers’ poster

Leave a reply

How cool is this? Artist Matthew Ferguson created this poster, part of a promotional set of four available in connection with the purchase of “The Avengers” on DVD.

There’s something kind of reminiscent of the end credits of “The Incredibles,” here, a Saul Bass kind of vibe.

Beautiful.

Check out Ferguson’s site here.