Forgotten Comic Films

zuludelta · May 08, 2007, 10:49:51 PM

Quote from: Pyroclasm on May 08, 2007, 02:42:11 PM
Anyone remember the short Spider-Man appearances on "The Electric Company"?

I do... I wonder how the licensing for the thing worked? Would any DVD re-releases of the Electric Company have the Spidey segments cut out?

thanoson · May 09, 2007, 08:22:43 AM

"Superman, meet Nuclear Man!"

Alaric · May 09, 2007, 08:58:49 AM

Quote from: GogglesPizanno on May 08, 2007, 09:41:18 PMI think the most entertaining Shadow stuff done thus far are the old radio shows.

Well, since the Shadow radio show started around the same time as the Shadow pulp series, and both were actually based on teh Shadow 'narrator" from an earlier radio series (not actually a character), that wasn't really an adaptation, it was the original. Well, one of the two or three original versions, anyway...

For that matter, since the Shadow wasn't originally a comic-book character, I'm not sure any movies based on the character really belong in this thread...

Flying_Infant · May 09, 2007, 09:33:23 AM

So what, noone liked Howard the Duck? :D

catwhowalksbyhimself · May 09, 2007, 10:42:13 AM

The Bulletproof Monk is based on a comic book, but it seems to have been mostly forgotten already. I really liked it, though.

GogglesPizanno · May 09, 2007, 10:45:48 AM

QuoteFor that matter, since the Shadow wasn't originally a comic-book character, I'm not sure any movies based on the character really belong in this thread...

Yeah I guess technically you are correct, but over the years the character has infiltrated all forms of media, and it did have a couple of solid runs as a comic at DC. I'll argue that he falls into a acceptable "gray" area :)

QuoteSo what, noone liked Howard the Duck?

As a really stupid comic turned into a really stupid movie, I think it works... but it wasn't good.
And it had Lea Thompson as rocker (who really doesn't rock)... that gets a few points from me.

QuoteThe Bulletproof Monk is based on a comic book, but it seems to have been mostly forgotten already.

I REALLY wanted to like that movie, but it just wasn't doing anything for me.

Pyroclasm · May 09, 2007, 11:20:15 AM

Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on May 09, 2007, 10:42:13 AM
The Bulletproof Monk is based on a comic book, but it seems to have been mostly forgotten already. I really liked it, though.

I own that one. I really liked it also.

zuludelta · May 14, 2007, 01:07:26 PM

I know it's been mentioned in this thread before but it bears repeating: The Punisher (1989) starring Dolph Lundgren is a vastly underrated comic book movie. Sure, they ditched the skull costume and the Vietnam War origin but I think the writers did a respectable job of preserving the essence of the character. Lundgren's Frank Castle was a cold, unemotional (I'll leave it to you to decide whether or not this was a natural by-product of Lundgren's "acting"), and single-minded borderline serial killer who just happened to prey on criminals, which, on the face of it, is really all that the Punisher is about. That's why good Punisher stories always need strong villains to carry them through... and what this movie lacked in villain quality, it made up for in quantity: Yakuza henchmen, mafia hitmen, a deaf-mute female ninja, a reluctant mafioso ally, a creepy female Yakuza oyabun... all of whom were way better than John Travolta's over-acted Howard Saint in the 2004 Punisher movie

On a side note, anybody else think that Travolta should've quit while he was ahead in Pulp Fiction? He could've cemented his status as a pop culture god with his defining roles in Welcome Back, Kotter, Saturday Night Fever, and Pulp Fiction but like an aging ballplayer chasing one last homerun, he keeps swinging and missing with celluloid turds like Battlefield Earth, Michael, Swordfish, Broken Arrow, and Wild Hogs.

GogglesPizanno · May 14, 2007, 02:17:33 PM

QuoteThe Punisher (1989) starring Dolph Lundgren is a vastly underrated comic book movie. Sure, they ditched the skull costume and the Vietnam War origin but I think the writers did a respectable job of preserving the essence of the character. Lundgren's Frank Castle was a cold, unemotional (I'll leave it to you to decide whether or not this was a natural by-product of Lundgren's "acting"), and single-minded borderline serial killer who just happened to prey on criminals, which, on the face of it, is really all that the Punisher is about.

I have to totally agree with you.
while some of the the characterization and details were way of the mark (living naked in the sewers?), the film captured the tone and feel of the punisher way better than the new film did.

I think that Thomas Jane nailed the character in the new one, but I felt like they put the Punisher in a Punisher-Lite movie. If they could do it over again, Let Thomas Jane play the role, but give him a stripped down, stupid, but viscerally brutal movie to inhabit like the first one, and I think you'd have a winner.

QuoteOn a side note, anybody else think that Travolta should've quit while he was ahead in Pulp Fiction

I think the problem is that he reinvented himself with Pulp Fiction, but the reinvention consisted of a mannerism change (cocky was replaced, with glazed over detachment). He can alter the volume and arm gestures, but every movie since seems to be just a version of Vincent Vega in a different situation with a different wardrobe.