Originally posted by -Pr-
What's wrong with being invested?How is change automatically good?
Said nothing was wrong with being invested, come on. When a character dies in a book, I don't really care like some fans (Not that it's a bad thing), for the exception of Colossus back in the day.
And I NEVER said change was an automatic win, but change can be a good thing.
WB seems like it wants to reach out to the GA. And that will more than likely piss off a lot of comic fans.
Originally posted by -Pr-
How does altering a character so hugely automatically make reaching the general audience easier?
Depends on what they're doing. I have no idea what they have in store for Aquaman. Neither does anyone here.
Example is what Marvel did to Mandarin. Did it piss a lot of people off? Sure, but I think the GA didn't care either way.
Originally posted by Golgo13
Depends on what they're doing. I have no idea what they have in store for Aquaman. Neither does anyone here.Example is what Marvel did to Mandarin. Did it piss a lot of people off? Sure, but I think the GA didn't care either way.
So is it perfectly all right to ruin a character just to make money, then?
Also, Aquaman is a far, far bigger name than Mandarin.
Originally posted by Golgo13
If that's your opinion. Not everyone shares that. And it depends on character to character. Not all of them will be ruined.
I'm just trying to understand your logic here, is all.
"It made money for Mandarin" isn't an excuse imo, especially when they're supposed to be adapting the DC universe for the big screen. These aren't characters that were invented yesterday, and they have just as much right to be kept intact, to a reasonable degree, as any character from any work of fiction being adapted.
I want to see a good adaptation. Not a bad one.
Originally posted by -Pr-
I'm just trying to understand your logic here, is all."It made money for Mandarin" isn't an excuse imo, especially when they're supposed to be adapting the DC universe for the big screen. These aren't characters that were invented yesterday, and they have just as much right to be kept intact, to a reasonable degree, as any character from any work of fiction being adapted.
I want to see a good adaptation. Not a bad one.
It's not my logic. Studios want to reach out to the wider audience to cash in. Marvel did it with the Mandarin. DC/WB will probably do it too. And "ruined character" is totally subjective. You and a lot of comic nerds might not like it, but you people (hahah🙂) only count for 1 percent of the movie audience.
Originally posted by Golgo13
It's not my logic. Studios want to reach out to the wider audience to cash in. Marvel did it with the Mandarin. DC/WB will probably do it too. And "ruined character" is totally subjective. You and a lot of comic nerds might not like it, but you people (hahah🙂) only count for 1 percent of the movie audience.
You can do without the condescension, thanks.
I'm asking you how casting Momoa, someone that isn't remotely close to being an a-list star, means that they're trying to reach out to a wider audience. How does that work?
Originally posted by -Pr-
You can do without the condescension, thanks.I'm asking you how casting Momoa, someone that isn't remotely close to being an a-list star, means that they're trying to reach out to a wider audience. How does that work?
Wasn't trying to. 🙂
And you don't need an A list star in every role. Momoa seems pretty popular on tv thanks to Thrones TV show.
Originally posted by Golgo13
It's not my logic. Studios want to reach out to the wider audience to cash in. Marvel did it with the Mandarin. DC/WB will probably do it too. And "ruined character" is totally subjective. You and a lot of comic nerds might not like it, but you people (hahah🙂) only count for 1 percent of the movie audience.
It was really stupid what Marvel did with Mandarin. It just ruined the movie. Not just for me but for friends who had no idea who the Mandarin was. It wad just a silly twist in the movie. But Marvel And Iron Man were at a stage in their popularity where it didn't matter what the movie was about it was already going to make shit loads of money. Wb/Dc can not afford that luxury right now.
These movies make shit loads because people enjoy live action versions of Epic comic lore. So they should only really contradict that lore when it's absolutely clear that won't translate well on the big screen e.g. Wolverine being a midget.
But this idea of "we have to completely change it from the comics to reach the general audience" is exactly the kind of retarded thinking that made the first 3 X-Men movies complete Wolverine wankage films, not giving a chance for Other characters to shine and ultimately limiting the franchise potential.
These superhero movie franchises don't have to change the basic comic book lore to fit on the big screen. And in fact they shouldn't.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
It was really stupid what Marvel did with Mandarin. It just ruined the movie. Not just for me but for friends who had no idea who the Mandarin was. It wad just a silly twist in the movie. But Marvel And Iron Man were at a stage in their popularity where it didn't matter what the movie was about it was already going to make shit loads of money. Wb/Dc can not afford that luxury right now.These movies make shit loads because people enjoy live action versions of Epic comic lore. So they should only really contradict that lore when it's absolutely clear that won't translate well on the big screen e.g. Wolverine being a midget.
But this idea of "we have to completely change it from the comics to reach the general audience" is exactly the kind of retarded thinking that made the first 3 X-Men movies complete Wolverine wankage films, not giving a chance for Other characters to shine and ultimately limiting the franchise potential.
These superhero movie franchises don't have to change the basic comic book lore to fit on the big screen. And in fact they shouldn't.
I'm not saying everyone is going to like it, but would you say the GENERAL audience hated it? Because the fact remains that most people went to see IM 3 twice, which is why it made so much at the BO.
Originally posted by Golgo13
Wasn't trying to. 🙂And you don't need an A list star in every role. Momoa seems pretty popular on tv thanks to Thrones TV show.
When I saw Momoa in Game of Thrones, I never thought to myself, "Wow! His barbaric portrayal of Khal Drogo would make a good Aquaman!" When I look at him, I see Lobo, not Aquaman. Even my brother couldn't help but shake his head when I showed him that Momoa is rumored to be Aquaman.
Aquaman doesn't need the image of Khal Drogo to be accepted by the general audience. He just needs to be taken seriously. It wasn't too long ago that Batman was considered campy before Burton took him seriously (debatable now) and when Nolan had to resurrect him from WB's ill-advised direction of Schumacher.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
It was really stupid what Marvel did with Mandarin. It just ruined the movie. Not just for me but for friends who had no idea who the Mandarin was. It wad just a silly twist in the movie. But Marvel And Iron Man were at a stage in their popularity where it didn't matter what the movie was about it was already going to make shit loads of money. Wb/Dc can not afford that luxury right now.These movies make shit loads because people enjoy live action versions of Epic comic lore. So they should only really contradict that lore when it's absolutely clear that won't translate well on the big screen e.g. Wolverine being a midget.
But this idea of "we have to completely change it from the comics to reach the general audience" is exactly the kind of retarded thinking that made the first 3 X-Men movies complete Wolverine wankage films, not giving a chance for Other characters to shine and ultimately limiting the franchise potential.
These superhero movie franchises don't have to change the basic comic book lore to fit on the big screen. And in fact they shouldn't.
Agree.
Originally posted by Femi32
When I saw Momoa in Game of Thrones, I never thought to myself, "Wow! His barbaric portrayal of Khal Drogo would make a good Aquaman!" When I look at him, I see Lobo, not Aquaman. Even my brother couldn't help but shake his head when I showed him that Momoa is rumored to be Aquaman.Aquaman doesn't need the image of Khal Drogo to be accepted by the general audience. He just needs to be taken seriously. It wasn't too long ago that Batman was considered campy before Burton took him seriously (debatable now) and when Nolan had to resurrect him from WB's ill-advised direction of Schumacher.
Agree.
I doubt his portrayal in Game of Thrones will be the same as Snyder's Aquaman. 2 different characters.
Also, the staff of AMC movie talk loves this casting. Says he's quite talented, with a lot of charisma. Not confirmed, though.
uh oh, now Hollywood Reporter confirms it.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/jason-momoa-playing-aquaman-batman-711899
Jason Momoa Playing Aquaman in 'Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice'
Game of Thrones actor Jason Momoa will take on the role of Aquaman in Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, sources tell THR.
The Hollywood Reporter exclusively broke the news that Momoa was in talks to join the film in December. Since then, the actor has been cagey about revealing what role he would play, or if he was even going to appear in the film, as the whole project has been shrouded in secrecy. Warner Bros. and reps for Momoa declined to comment
Aquaman is a founding member of the Justice League, so it makes sense he would appear in Warner Bros.' film along with several other founding members, and again in the Justice League film, which will shoot back-to-back with Dawn of Justice. Arthur, King of Atlantis, is the ruler of the Earth's oceans and has super strength and the ability to communicate with sea life.
Momoa played the barbarian leader Khal Drogo in the first season of HBO’s Game of Thrones, as well as Conan in 2011’s Conan the Barbarian. He most recently starred on SundanceTV's series The Red Road and made his directorial debut with Road to Paloma.He's attached to direct and star in a fighting drama titled Kane, and is repped by APA, Kritzer Levine Wilkins Griffin Nilon and Entertainment and Edelstein, Laird & Sobel.
****. Thanks WB. Thanks a ****ing lot.
I really still don't get this attitude that somehow changing shit makes it better for the general audience.
Iron Man adapted well enough without making wholesale changes. So did Thor. Cap. Hulk. Even in MOS, it was a solid adaptation without changing too much.
Or is Aquaman somehow not worthy of being brought over.