If there's a lesson to be learned from the failure of Watchmen (and let's face it, it was a failure, money-wise). it's not that "people don't want dark," but that it's foolish to attempt a literal adaptation of a comic. Dark Knight succeeded precisely because it didn't adapt a particular story, but instead captured the mood of Batman (it didn't hurt that everybody knew the basics of the story beforehand). Watchmen was a loyal adaptation, but it did so at the expense of alienating the general audience.
@Wookie1972: It's made more than 180 million dollars, is the 2nd highest grossing R-rated movie of 2009, the 13th highest grossing DC comics adaptation ever made, and the 18th highest grossing movie of 2009. That's not a financial failure, it's just not the success of Zack Snyder's previous film, 300 or quite the success Warner Bros. wanted. Warner Bros. made two errors in their marketing: they emphasized that it was an adaptation of a graphic novel no one outside of comic fandom had ever heard of and the trailers tried to sell it as an action-adventure when it is a drama with superheroes.
Well, that's an awful lot of qualifiers. Yes, it's the second highest grossing R rated movie of the year, but the highest grossing one (The Hangover) beat it by nearly twice its gross "13th highest grossing DC adaptation" (actually, according to Boxofficemojo, it's 9th) puts it behind the unadjusted gross for the first two Superman movies, which came out 30 years ago. and every other Batman except for Batman and Robin. 18th highest of the year? That's nothing to be proud of , putting it behind Paul Blart, Fast And Furious, The Proposal, and Night At the Museum. It made 180 mil worldwide, and if you factor that it you have to factor in that GI Joe made 264 mil worldwide and Transformers made nearly a billion. So "failure" is not quite the right word, but it was by no stretch a success.
I still say that Snyder took the wrong approach. They should have done a less literal adaptation and made a far more interesting movie.
WB wants a 'dark' Superman movie? And Nolan is ambivalent for Batman III without the Joker?
How about a 'World's Finest' movie as Batman III? It was already being talked about once. There's great drama inherent in the mutual friendship of Superman and Batman given their starkly different origins and worldviews.
I think my favorite example of this was written in the first arc of the Superman Batman comic, paraphrased: 'Clark's parents taught him to be the best he could be. My parents taught me a different lesson, twiching and bleeding in the alley.'
Tell me Nolan couldn't do something worthwhile with that.
@josecanUC:
I think it could be done if they really think over the script. Maybe have Bruce a little freaked out because all of a sudden there's this superpowered character flying around. But it's hard to say whether Nolan would go for it.
@Wookie1972: I'm pretty sure Nolan would ensure the script was good. There are a lot of great stories to cherry pick.Although I do think I remember reading that Nolan wasn't too keen on introducing any of Bats' more superpowered villains because he felt it would blow the 'real-world mood/ambiance' of the films. Too bad.I really feel like this would be the best way for both properties to move forward at this point. Though I'm sure there'll be a Batman III - a movie as successful as TDK==followup - with or without Nolan. Which I'd hate to happen given the quality of the first two. I want him to stick around.
I hate when people say a "dark" Superman movie would be bad and wouldn't work. Sure it would. We're not talking about changing the character, at least I wouldn't be. I'm talking about putting him in situtations that would really show how Super he really is. And to do that you have to take him to a dark place. Give him something to lose. Give him a real challenge, someone that can actually hurt or maybe even kill him.
Shazam shouldn't be dark EXCEPT for Black Adam. Everything about him should be dark and serious, to counterpoint Billy Batson's youth and enthusiasm as Captain Marvel.
Watchmen was really an exception because it didn't have a general audience to cater toother than fans of the source works. I mean it's not an action flick, it's not a straight drama, it's just escapist fantasy and taking the superhero/vigilante idea to an extreme and I loved it. But then again I am one who the movie was made for. "Zack Snyder's movie version of Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons' classic graphic novel was everything the studios were saying they wanted: dark, controversial, morally gray, challenging — and it didn't resonate that well with audiences." And that's simply because most people thought they were going to see your run of the mill comicbook flick and it wasn't. it made them think (gasp!)and that's not what they signed on for.
Dark Howard the Duck would be nice :D
Seriously, being a huge fan of the Bat, I say what works for Bruce Wayne doesn'T work for everyone else. Gotham is supposed to be the dark, gritty sister of Metropolis and a dark Superman just doesn't work, execpt for few special occasions maybe. Every hero by his own style (or hers, of course).
@FrankN.Stein:
The thing is Howard The Duck was an awesome comic. It's always bugged me that its reputation was soiled by the movie.
I truly think that a new version that with a CGI Howard that stays true to Gerber's vision would be brilliant. My first thought for the voice would be Steve Buscemi, but now I'm leaning towards Larry David.
I was all excited to see the Watchmen Directors Cut, I think I just forgot what the movie was about... Except for the opening credits showing events leading up to the start of the movie, I nearly fell asleep. Didn't even finish watching the damn thing. Nothing really happens, the plot doesn't follow any cohesive chain of events ( except for the end of course!) and the action scenes just seem like dull matrix copycats (although I had just seen some of the legendary Chan's earlier works pre-hollywood, it's hard for any action scene to compete with that). Mr. owl was completely miscast. I think the only thing I mildly enjoyed was R-shack, but even he was too over the top upon a second viewing. If I had read the comics it probably would have helped, or made me dislike the film more, who knows.
i would have to say that you really needed to read the graphic novel before you watched the movie.
i went with a couple people who never read the book or even really heard of the novel
and they would not stop asking me questions at the end of the movie
i hadn't realized the movie left so many questions unanswered.
But because i had read the novel my brain automatically filled in gaps and led me to hail the movie as a great adaptation.
yea so read the novel then watch it again.
i think you will enjoy it a bit more
However, a lot of people who wanted to look cool by calling TDK a great movie quickly became overwhelmed by the masses, and decided it would be more cool to call it overrated. So now you have to be careful not to be lumped in with that crowd.
@Alizarin: You're entitled to your opinion, but I have a hard time taking anyone seriously who 'claims' the dark knight was a bad movie. Actually I just flat out don't believe you, or weigh your advice on movies less than nothing. May seem a little harsh, but then again calling TDK trash is beyond ludicrous, at that point you're just seeking attention. In my opinion, TDK was thoroughly entertaining, thanks in no small part to Ledger. Sure, it had it's faults (what doesn't), but nothing that would take away from the film.
@TheGreenRanger: Alizarin didn't call it trash or a bad movie, he just said he was unimpressed. As you said, matter of opinion... one that I happen to share.
Ledger was great despite being over-hyped, but Bale wasn't and I found myself bored during most of the movie.
Claiming someone is a liar, just seeking attention or that they have bad taste just because they don't agree with you, or even the majority, is just ignorant though.
@Demolitionist: Yea I admit, I overreacted. Calling someone's opinion wrong just because they differ from my view is ludicrous. I had just come from a thread trashing the dark knight, got me all hot n bothered. And yes, alizarin in no way said the movie was horrible, just that it wasn't his cup o joe. Someones, you could say, I rant.
whoa whoa whoa GI Joe was a success? It still hasn't made back what it cost to make. GI Joe bombed. Point to braindead light flicks doing well - transformers 2.
I think it was really Watchmen and T4 that did it. Well, and Star Trek. TDK made everyone want to do Dark things, but then Economic Crisis and election of Obama and everyone said hold your horses, maybe not. Let's see how watchmen does. It crashed and burned so we got a pg-13 that crashed and burned when it went up against the bright Star Trek.
@WeAreNeverGoingBackToAZ: GI Joe bombed stateside, but it's making most of it's money (like 70+%) overseas. So a sequel is definitely in the works.
Watchmen did peter out like Ang Lee's The Hulk and Superman Returns, but I think it's going to see good DVD sales.
Star Trek is weird. It was a success, but a lot of people are neither praising or condemning it at this point. It's almost like the movie never came out.
From my point of view, Batman and Watchmen weren't "dark" movie, but serious movie. Serious is a quality that has to do with content: TDK, Watchmen, even Iron Man, all dealt with serious, realistic content. You can be serious even while being funny, just like Iron Man did.
Dark, however, has more to do with atmosphere. Sin City and Batman Returns are dark movie. Their aesthetic and atmosphere is dark, brooding. A lot of gothic imagery and film noir ambiance.
TDK isn't dark. A good part of the movie is set in daylight. The building are contemporary, ultra-modern even.
What do other people think of this?
- No villain is ever going to shine in the wake of Ledger's Joker. He set the bar, and more over-the-top performances will be compared to him.
- How many more iconic heroes -- that enough non-comics readers will buy tickets to -- are left to explore dark themes amidst complex plots?
- TDK was what, $250 million to make? Hardly viable in this economy without the sure bet of being spring boarded by the wildly successful and well-liked Batman Begins. Everyone knew TDK would rake in a billion before they began shooting.
- There's no sense in going dark for the sake of it. F4 can't be dark without the kind of suspension of disbelief it would take a bottle of pills to conjure. Superman is a gentleman and Boy Scout; he doesn't work all angst-ridden and tortured. Dark is Batman's thing, and because of it he's darker than most *villains*; let him keep it.
Don't go 'dark' just because a movie with that word in the title made a billion dollars. Take the material seriously, tell a good story in a fresh way, let the characters motivate the plot, an impress us with some fresh (and in-context) visual stunts.
Firstly..Fantastic 4 doesnt need any more films. Dark or not! They both had their tounges firmly in their cheeks when making these films. It had some action, some funny moments but best of all heart. They both tried their hardest and the dynamic of the 4 was great. You really thought the was a solid family unit. Why make it darker! Maybe the Thing could rape sue or the Torch could become an alcholic and kill hundreds...please! Superman Returns is another. The film was actually ok. Why spend millions on a remake when you could just get Brandon Ruth back and involve Doomsday. Make it slightly darker but not loads and just make it a follow up! Wolverine should have been a bit darker and Batman was dark enough. The Watchmen pushed boundarys in loads of ways, but because of its rating and the fact that people thought it was dark..but didnt realise it was that dark, really hurt its overall income! There is a time and a place for dark comic book films. Supes and FF are not the ones to bring this to light. Maybe Lobo or the second Wolverine. The Dredd film by DNA studios..that could be ultra dark! But not FF or Supes!
Edited by CoffinDodger (If the typos crap. Blame my keyboard) at 09/03/09 2:24 PM
CoffinDodger (If the typos crap. Blame my keyboard) was starred
CoffinDodger (If the typos crap. Blame my keyboard) was unstarred
@omgwtflolbbqbye: But, but, why make the effort to create a really good movie, when you can slap Hollywood's latest fetish on an old concept and make millions? Remember, it doesn't matter so much if people liked a movie, or if it was good, just if they went and saw it in the first place.
I like to think one of the reasons Star Trek did so well is that it's ultimately very positive. It can be smart without being so dark and hopeless and people in an economic crisis like the idea of a universe of peace keepers and no money.
I think that this is the tone they should use for Green Lantern. I realize this is a strange thing to say considering that Blackest Night is the current GL arc, but there's something about a guy who flies around in a bright green costume that doesn't say "dark" to me. If it's going to be Hal Jordan, it should be basically Chuck Yeager with a power ring - the idea that good can come just around the horizon - or is that way too corny?
@SJ_Edwards:
Well, actually, if you read the original Gil Kane GL comics, the idea is that Hal Jordan is not unlike Peter Parker after he got bitten but before Uncle Ben died. He's an arrogant hotshot, and it's his encounter with Abin Sur that humbles him. TOny Stark in iron Man would be another examp[le.
If there was a movie that actually should've been dark it was the horribly disappointing Wolverine. I hope they forget about that movie's depiction and come out with a Marvel Studios' Deadpool that's somewhat goofy yet dark with humor like the character.
Spidey became fail because of the ridiculous attempt to make it more of an 'epic' and the fact that they never had any real Spidey humor in the series at all. Need a Brian Michael Bendis script if they're gonna reboot that.
I would like to see Superman/Captain Marvel: First Thunder adapted for the big or little screen. It's a great story, does a good job of showing us the Superman we know & love and introducing us to Billy Batson & Captain Marvel.
@Soupytwist: And has a young boy being machine gunned to death and pretty much points out that Billy Batson is homeless. Lots of fun. Needless to say, it came from Winnick.
@AngriestGeek: That's why I think it could work for a regular audience - Billy Batson is a kid whose life is horribly bad and, yet, he ends up with these powers that allow him to help other people - but he's still a kid and he doesn't know how to manage it, and things get out of hand and then... Superman!
09/05/09
09/05/09
09/06/09
Well, that's an awful lot of qualifiers. Yes, it's the second highest grossing R rated movie of the year, but the highest grossing one (The Hangover) beat it by nearly twice its gross "13th highest grossing DC adaptation" (actually, according to Boxofficemojo, it's 9th) puts it behind the unadjusted gross for the first two Superman movies, which came out 30 years ago. and every other Batman except for Batman and Robin. 18th highest of the year? That's nothing to be proud of , putting it behind Paul Blart, Fast And Furious, The Proposal, and Night At the Museum. It made 180 mil worldwide, and if you factor that it you have to factor in that GI Joe made 264 mil worldwide and Transformers made nearly a billion. So "failure" is not quite the right word, but it was by no stretch a success.
I still say that Snyder took the wrong approach. They should have done a less literal adaptation and made a far more interesting movie.
09/04/09
WB wants a 'dark' Superman movie? And Nolan is ambivalent for Batman III without the Joker?
How about a 'World's Finest' movie as Batman III? It was already being talked about once. There's great drama inherent in the mutual friendship of Superman and Batman given their starkly different origins and worldviews.
I think my favorite example of this was written in the first arc of the Superman Batman comic, paraphrased: 'Clark's parents taught him to be the best he could be. My parents taught me a different lesson, twiching and bleeding in the alley.'
Tell me Nolan couldn't do something worthwhile with that.
09/04/09
I think it could be done if they really think over the script. Maybe have Bruce a little freaked out because all of a sudden there's this superpowered character flying around. But it's hard to say whether Nolan would go for it.
09/05/09
09/06/09
Funnily enough, there's a movement to get Stephen Colbert to play the Riddler. It's not as crazy as it sounds...
09/04/09
Shazam shouldn't be dark EXCEPT for Black Adam. Everything about him should be dark and serious, to counterpoint Billy Batson's youth and enthusiasm as Captain Marvel.
Watchmen was really an exception because it didn't have a general audience to cater toother than fans of the source works. I mean it's not an action flick, it's not a straight drama, it's just escapist fantasy and taking the superhero/vigilante idea to an extreme and I loved it. But then again I am one who the movie was made for. "Zack Snyder's movie version of Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons' classic graphic novel was everything the studios were saying they wanted: dark, controversial, morally gray, challenging — and it didn't resonate that well with audiences." And that's simply because most people thought they were going to see your run of the mill comicbook flick and it wasn't. it made them think (gasp!)and that's not what they signed on for.
09/04/09
Watchmen (the movie) didn't make me think, except thinking how much Snyder trashed the book.
09/04/09
Seriously, being a huge fan of the Bat, I say what works for Bruce Wayne doesn'T work for everyone else. Gotham is supposed to be the dark, gritty sister of Metropolis and a dark Superman just doesn't work, execpt for few special occasions maybe. Every hero by his own style (or hers, of course).
09/05/09
The thing is Howard The Duck was an awesome comic. It's always bugged me that its reputation was soiled by the movie.
I truly think that a new version that with a CGI Howard that stays true to Gerber's vision would be brilliant. My first thought for the voice would be Steve Buscemi, but now I'm leaning towards Larry David.
09/03/09
09/03/09
i would have to say that you really needed to read the graphic novel before you watched the movie.
i went with a couple people who never read the book or even really heard of the novel
and they would not stop asking me questions at the end of the movie
i hadn't realized the movie left so many questions unanswered.
But because i had read the novel my brain automatically filled in gaps and led me to hail the movie as a great adaptation.
yea so read the novel then watch it again.
i think you will enjoy it a bit more
09/04/09
Yeah, that's exactly the opposite of a great adaptation.
09/03/09
09/03/09
09/03/09
However, a lot of people who wanted to look cool by calling TDK a great movie quickly became overwhelmed by the masses, and decided it would be more cool to call it overrated. So now you have to be careful not to be lumped in with that crowd.
09/03/09
09/04/09
Ledger was great despite being over-hyped, but Bale wasn't and I found myself bored during most of the movie.
Claiming someone is a liar, just seeking attention or that they have bad taste just because they don't agree with you, or even the majority, is just ignorant though.
09/04/09
09/03/09
I think it was really Watchmen and T4 that did it. Well, and Star Trek. TDK made everyone want to do Dark things, but then Economic Crisis and election of Obama and everyone said hold your horses, maybe not. Let's see how watchmen does. It crashed and burned so we got a pg-13 that crashed and burned when it went up against the bright Star Trek.
09/03/09
Watchmen did peter out like Ang Lee's The Hulk and Superman Returns, but I think it's going to see good DVD sales.
Star Trek is weird. It was a success, but a lot of people are neither praising or condemning it at this point. It's almost like the movie never came out.
09/06/09
Watchmen is doing okay on DVD sales, but not fantastic. And remember, it has to compete with all the movies that also did well in the box office.
I personally didn't like Watchmen, but I wouldn't begrudge it being a hit if it was one. But... it wasn't.
09/03/09
Dark, however, has more to do with atmosphere. Sin City and Batman Returns are dark movie. Their aesthetic and atmosphere is dark, brooding. A lot of gothic imagery and film noir ambiance.
TDK isn't dark. A good part of the movie is set in daylight. The building are contemporary, ultra-modern even.
What do other people think of this?
09/03/09
09/03/09
09/03/09
09/03/09
- No villain is ever going to shine in the wake of Ledger's Joker. He set the bar, and more over-the-top performances will be compared to him.
- How many more iconic heroes -- that enough non-comics readers will buy tickets to -- are left to explore dark themes amidst complex plots?
- TDK was what, $250 million to make? Hardly viable in this economy without the sure bet of being spring boarded by the wildly successful and well-liked Batman Begins. Everyone knew TDK would rake in a billion before they began shooting.
- There's no sense in going dark for the sake of it. F4 can't be dark without the kind of suspension of disbelief it would take a bottle of pills to conjure. Superman is a gentleman and Boy Scout; he doesn't work all angst-ridden and tortured. Dark is Batman's thing, and because of it he's darker than most *villains*; let him keep it.
Don't go 'dark' just because a movie with that word in the title made a billion dollars. Take the material seriously, tell a good story in a fresh way, let the characters motivate the plot, an impress us with some fresh (and in-context) visual stunts.
And don't cast Shia TheBeef. In *anything*.
09/03/09
09/03/09
09/03/09
09/03/09
09/03/09
09/04/09
I think that this is the tone they should use for Green Lantern. I realize this is a strange thing to say considering that Blackest Night is the current GL arc, but there's something about a guy who flies around in a bright green costume that doesn't say "dark" to me. If it's going to be Hal Jordan, it should be basically Chuck Yeager with a power ring - the idea that good can come just around the horizon - or is that way too corny?
09/04/09
09/05/09
Well, actually, if you read the original Gil Kane GL comics, the idea is that Hal Jordan is not unlike Peter Parker after he got bitten but before Uncle Ben died. He's an arrogant hotshot, and it's his encounter with Abin Sur that humbles him. TOny Stark in iron Man would be another examp[le.
09/03/09
Spidey became fail because of the ridiculous attempt to make it more of an 'epic' and the fact that they never had any real Spidey humor in the series at all. Need a Brian Michael Bendis script if they're gonna reboot that.
09/04/09
Actually, I thought with Spidey 3 they went for dark and ended up with emo Parker.
09/03/09
09/03/09
09/03/09