| |
|
Most of this argument could be tackled in the 'Comic Book Movies That Do or Will Suck' thread but Jack's right in that, bottom line, they want franchises because franchises make them heaploads of money. That said, I think AICN's Moriarty, in his review of the Abrams Superman script, brought up an excellent point. Marvel, under the gun financially there for a while, knew that they had to find great directors for their properties who loved the material and also knew they had to gamble that by getting the hell out of the director's way. Blade was a shot in the dark. And it saved them.
Warner Bros. on the other hand is such an immense entity that it doesn't know when to leave things well enough alone. Much less get over their property paralysis (when was the last DC hero you saw on the big screen since Shaq's Steel?) to allow it to be worked with. I for one will believe the Nick Cage/ Constantine-as-a-Yank-who-likes-to-have-sex-with-teakwood-furniture-stories only when I see it. Till then, it's just one more rumor that Warner Bros. is actually churning something out. Feh. Riiight.
As to the second point, movie suits don't see comics as evil. Hell, it's the only place they can unabashedly pillage for movie ideas. But some studios know how to handle comics properties well and some interfere and glam them to the point of burdensome. Marvel had to play their cards well. Warner Bros. can lose money (and franchises) with no major loss. It's the fans, ultimately, that are the only ones that suffer. |
|
|
