Amph Thor: Love and Thunder

Comic book movies that diverge too far from the source material have been awful. Every single one of them. Iron Man works partly because it is absolutely true to the character as Kirby created it and the Bullpen developed it. Too often the license for filmmakers to "use their imagination" in re-creating the character has led to sheer tripe. Creatively enhance and shape the character, yes. Ditch essential elements of the character's iconic status, not so much.

 

Well, I suspect you like comic book movies more than I do. My complaint is that a lot of them seem the same: guy gets superpowers/is bitten by a radioactive spider/builds a super suit, fights ye bad guy/evil scientist [insert random action scenes here], bad guy kidnaps superguy's GF, superguy saves his GF, renounces her or gets bored with her, superguy broods a lot, [insert angsty scene here], ze end. That's the relatively serious treatment. The camp stuff is beneath comment.

It's a bit boring. I frankly didn't much like "Batman Begins", which is a favorite around here. Great cast, but Batman never engaged me in a comic book format, either. He's an overdog. Quite often superguys aren't interesting as characters--they are just wish fufillment figures. Spider-Man I liked--mainly because everyone disdained him, and he was generally punished for his good deeds.

I also liked Thor comix once upon a time, but I liked Loki, not Thor, because Loki is insecure and evil; an outcast. So how would I make a Thor movie? From Loki's POV, naturally.

 

Basing my assumption on your criteria for a good superhero, Zaz, I would think you'd love Batman.

Doesn't that apply to Bats as well? I'm not very familiar with the comics, but I always thought he was disliked by the general populace thanks to the newspapers and pre-Gordon police commissioners. I could be totally off, though (I'd feel pretty lame if that were the case, considering the Dark Knight is far and away my favorite character in any entertainment medium).

 

I admit it: I hate Robin.

 

Chris O'Donnell Robin or comic book Robin? Or both?

Robin's actually had some good storylines outside of the films. Watch both episodes of "Robin's Reckoning" from Batman: The Animated Series if you don't believe me.

 

Both. He's a hopeless character.

 

Also, I'm sure you can find some comic book fans who will point you to some good stories as well.

 

For Zaz? Death in the Family

 

Not for me.

 

Sorry...I thought given your disdain for Robin seeing him pummeled unconsciously by the Joker would be amusing.

 

Plots like that sound like bad fanfiction.

 

Branagh in talks to direct 'Thor'

Kenneth Branagh is negotiating to direct "Thor," the next Marvel Comics property that will be turned into a live-action film by Marvel Studios. Pic will be released in 2010.
Marvel Studios chief Kevin Feige's choice of Branagh is surprising, as Branagh hasn't really directed an action-heavy film since his debut on "Henry V," a bloody telling of the British king's conquest of France.

Branagh is the latest in a string of directors -- such as Jon Favreau ("Iron Man"), Christopher Nolan (the Batman franchise) and Gavin Hood ("X-Men Origins: Wolverine") -- with arthouse roots taking on big-budget comicbook fare.

Marvel will set a distributor for "Thor" shortly.

"Thor" comicbook adaptation, penned by Mark Protosevich, follows disabled medical student Donald Blake, who has an alter ego as the hammer-wielding Norse god Thor.

Marvel will self-finance the film via its $500 million credit facility through Merrill Lynch. Marvel used that coin to fund both "Iron Man" and "The Incredible Hulk" and will do the same for the "Iron Man" sequel that has director Favreau and star Robert Downey Jr. returning.

The "Thor" negotiations come during a resurgence for Branagh. He's currently drawing raves on the London stage in the title role of "Ivanov," and he'll next be seen acting in the Richard Curtis-directed "The Boat That Rocked" and the Bryan Singer-helmed "Valkyrie."

Branagh is repped by Endeavor and manager Judy Hofflund.

 

That is a rather odd choice.

 

I don't agree, Zaz -- Branagh's claim to fame is doing Shakespeare, so I think if anyone bring Thor's Methinks and Ye-s to the screen without it sounding absurd, it's him.

For those who have never seen it:

Henry V Speech

 

From Henry V to Thor, God of Thunder is a not inconsiderable leap, if you ask me.

 

Yes, but he's got Frankenstein bridging the gap.

 

I think this is a fine, if unexpected, choice. Branagh can be masterful in both drama (Henry V, Hamlet) and comedy (Much Ado About Nothing). All he needs is a solid script and the man can do wonders. (Frankenstein lacked that script and so tanked, IMO.) In his hands, Thor can be sculpted into a powerful piece of work, as emotion-provoking as it is entertaining. I for one will have a lot more faith in the casting efforts as well, with Branagh at the helm. He takes his performers seriously.

 

I know very little about the comic, but I'm fascinated by this choice.

 

If you think that's jolly, check out the Olivier version.

The Branagh version should be seen in its entirety though, rather than judging the scene in isolation -- an incredibly earth, gritty adaptation. And a brilliant score - the only soundtrack I actually own.

 

Marvel Studios and Paramount Extend Distribution Agreement

Paramount Pictures and Marvel Studios today announced an agreement under which Paramount will distribute Marvel's next five self-produced feature films on a worldwide basis. The deal, an extension of the original agreement made by Brad Grey when he arrived as CEO and Chairman of Paramount Pictures, includes theatrical distribution in foreign territories previously serviced by Marvel through local distribution entities (Japan, Germany, France, Spain and Australia/New Zealand). The distribution pact capitalizes on Marvel and Paramount's successful efforts with Iron Man, which has grossed $574 million worldwide for Marvel.

The highly anticipated live action releases include Iron Man 2 (May 7, 2010), Thor (July 16, 2010), The First Avenger: Captain America (May 6, 2011), and The Avengers (July 15, 2011). The distribution agreement also includes Iron Man 3.

"Coming off of 'Iron Man's' incredible success this summer, we could not be more excited about extending our relationship with Marvel," said Rob Moore, Vice Chairman of Paramount Pictures. "Marvel's iconic brand, its popular characters and its proven ability to create compelling and visually spellbinding films complement Paramount's great history of filmmaking. We look forward to a long and successful run together."

"Paramount is an excellent partner and an outstanding global distributor," said David Maisel, Chairman of Marvel Studios. "Through our experience on 'Iron Man,' Paramount has demonstrated a passion and ability to release Marvel properties theatrically, allowing us to focus on making great movies for the largest audience possible."

Marvel's Iron Man, starring Robert Downey Jr. and directed by Jon Favreau, was distributed by Paramount earlier this year and was one of the top films of 2008. The DVD, including a version in Blu-ray, will be released on September 30, 2008.

 

Now, that's interesting. Captain America followed by the Avengers five weeks later. I'm guessing that Captain America will be set primarily in WWII, and we'll see him moving forward in time and joining the Avengers in the Avengers movie.

 

My guess: either the Avengers movie opens with them finding him on ice (or whatever alternative they come up with), or his intro is Act II of the movie, after the Avengers have been soundly whooped by the bad guy in Act I.

 

That's what I've been thinking. The Cap movie will most likely end with him being frozen. And we'll probably get a secret post-credits scene of "65 years later" which teases him being found by the Avengers.

 

I'm concerned by the choice. See "Mary Shelly's Frankenstein" for details.