| |
|
No. It will be bad, bad, bad.
Every film based on a well-known corporate franchise comic book is, without exception, mediocre at best. There's always too much money riding on them (these films really make their money on their merchandising tie-ins, remember), and it acts as a straitjacket--nobody wants to be the one who breaks the franchise: so they're inevitably tarted-up and dumbed-down to within n inch of their lives.
The SUPERMAN films? Sucked rocks, each and every one. The BATMAN films? Junk, albeit visually lush junk. X-MEN? Better than most, but you could feel the schizophrenic pull between providing "Easter eggs" for fans of the comics and straight, comprehensible adventure with lotsa splosions for the action-movie crowd--and the tensions tore the film apart, so it failed on both accounts.
The best--maybe the only good--comic book movies are those based on lesser-known properties, because there's less to lose, and therefore more to gain: BLADE was a decent little chopsockey picture--precisely because it ignored "continuity" for the sake of a good story: after all, who gives fuck about Blade? Same with GHOST WORLD: free to be its own thing.
SPIDER-MAN is going to blow dead goat. Too many cooks, too much at stake. |
|
|
