|
Community Links |
Members List |
Search Forums |
Advanced Search |
Go to Page... |
|
Thread Tools |
04-04-2023, 02:24 PM | #3261 |
Dai Shogun
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,532
|
I just want to watch the Blue Beetle movie because I like Blue Beetle. The trailer shows Blue Beetle doing Blue Beetle stuff so I dig it.
Like, they finally made a movie about a superhero I actually care about, they made the suit look good, they do awesome space-bug-Transformers-Buster Sword-shit while Toku posing, life is good. |
04-07-2023, 06:20 AM | #3262 |
Ex-Weather Three leader
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 10,581
|
Quote:
I just want to watch the Blue Beetle movie because I like Blue Beetle. The trailer shows Blue Beetle doing Blue Beetle stuff so I dig it.
Like, they finally made a movie about a superhero I actually care about, they made the suit look good, they do awesome space-bug-Transformers-Buster Sword-shit while Toku posing, life is good.
__________________
|
11-27-2023, 05:05 PM | #3263 |
TokuKnight89
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Central Louisiana (Cenla)
Posts: 2,558
|
A few months ago, legendary creator behind Batman: The Killing Joke and Watchmen Alan Moore said he will no longer accept royalty checks and wants them to be donated.
https://variety.com/2023/film/news/a...er-1235722210/ I know he's been a unique and occasionally controversial figure, but one of his lines on this stood out to me: "I don't really feel, with the recent films, that they have stood by what I assumed were their original principles." I'm not sure I follow his interpretation of "original principles". |
11-27-2023, 05:24 PM | #3264 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 1,961
|
Quote:
A few months ago, legendary creator behind Batman: The Killing Joke and Watchmen Alan Moore said he will no longer accept royalty checks and wants them to be donated.
https://variety.com/2023/film/news/a...er-1235722210/ I know he's been a unique and occasionally controversial figure, but one of his lines on this stood out to me: "I don't really feel, with the recent films, that they have stood by what I assumed were their original principles." I'm not sure I follow his interpretation of "original principles". Also, as a fan of the Question, I doubt Moore was thinking about "original principles" when coming up with Rorschach. And in general, the entire ?British Comic Invasion? essentially achieved popularity due to its permissiveness and shock factor, so not one of them can be accused of betraying the original by modern screenwriters. |
11-27-2023, 08:09 PM | #3265 |
TokuKnight89
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Central Louisiana (Cenla)
Posts: 2,558
|
Quote:
Admittedly, it did take years for the actual creators to be acknowledged and credited. That is one of Moore's legitimate pecking points. |
11-28-2023, 01:32 AM | #3266 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 1,961
|
Quote:
The same. And about Swamp Thing too. Marvel is a little more complicated due to the specifics of their method. The fact that many later works are significantly better than the original comics does not make them not fan fiction. It seemed to me that in the above passage Moore was talking specifically about the original characterization of the characters. Either way, he's not the one who should be upset about this. |
11-28-2023, 02:24 AM | #3267 |
TokuKnight89
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Central Louisiana (Cenla)
Posts: 2,558
|
Quote:
The same. And about Swamp Thing too. Marvel is a little more complicated due to the specifics of their method. The fact that many later works are significantly better than the original comics does not make them not fan fiction.
It seemed to me that in the above passage Moore was talking specifically about the original characterization of the characters. Either way, he's not the one who should be upset about this. It seems as though your interpretation is that a character made years ago had their truest stories by the original creator. A couple of years ago, I read an article on Marvel's Miles Morales and a commenter called Miles fan fiction cause Miles isn't Peter and it felt needlessly judgmental. Each person has a different take and different interpretation of a character. Some interpretations are good and some are bad. It's up to a reader to determine what is and isn't good. I know people who loath Frank Miller Batman, but who have little problem with Live-Action Adam West Batman and Animated Kevin Conroy Batman. This also feels like it could apply to other franchises. Is any Optimus Prime made after 1984 a fan-fiction Optimus Prime? Is any Ultraman made after UltraSeven without Eiji Tsuburaya Not Ultraman? Is any Kamen Rider made without Shotaro Ishinomori Not Kamen Rider? Is Star Trek without Gene Roddenberry Not Star Trek? In the World of Fiction, there is fan-fiction as well as fan-canon. What is and is not acceptable depends greatly on one's own interpretation. I myself know that there are many stories not made by the original creators that I like, and many stories not made by the original creators that I don't like and partly because I think the people behind them take too many liberties and made them too complicated by oversimplifying things. Fan-canon 'allows' me the right to accept or reject a story, whether it's crafted by the original creators or someone else. The Multiverse concept exists to the point of oversaturation in the World of Fiction to account for such things. Batman and Superman have multiple origin stories. The bare bones elements exist amongst many of them, but in many instances the details change from time to time. Many different versions of Clarks adoption by the Kents, many different versions of how Lois and Clark met each other, and many different versions of Bruce's childhood trauma. It took years to reach what some might call a consensus on these events and what constitutes the bare bones elements. Granted, years of disparate elements which seems to contradict each other can get confusing at times even in a Multiversal setting. That's why Crisis on Infinite Earths even exists. The original creators of many timeless characters have passed on. Should their characters exist solely on the weight of their original stories or can they have multiple versions with similar and dissimilar qualities and attributes? If a character has a new story with a non-original writer at the helm, is this new writer beholden to the characterization of the original or can they turn things on their head? I believe they have that right, cause fans always try to craft their own versions of things, so why can't hired writers who started as fans do it on a professional level? Don't we all wish we could do the same? All of that being said, I do believe that the original stories and the authorial intent of the original creators cannot be ignored or forgotten. It was their character, after all. If the idea is to not conflate new iterations with the original interpretation, then it's a valid argument. If the idea is to maintain the 'original vision' over and over again, then it becomes not only repetitive but monotonous. What's the point of making anything new? To quote John De Lancie, who played Q on Star Trek: TNG (and DS9, and Voyager, and Picard): "Are we trying to create, or recreate?" |
11-28-2023, 04:30 AM | #3268 |
Avi by @CSarracenian
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,186
|
I'm pretty sure 'original principles' refers to the narrative purpose Moore intended that the movies did not pick up on, the man has been very vocal about disliking adaptations of his work as a whole outside of the Justice League episode For The Man Who Has Everything. Haven't seen V For Vendetta nor read the original but I have read and seen the other two. For example, ehen The Comedian is about to rape Sally, the camera sexualizes Sally's body with certain camera shots, making her more 'alluring', the fact it is a rape scene should tell you all you need to know about why this is wrong. For the Killing Joke, at one point, Joker says "Why aren't you laughing?" In the movie, he angrily yells this while beating the shit out of Batman but in the comic he seems puzzled, confused, as if he was questioning if his 'one bad day' point was truly wrong before Batman appears out of a mirror, as if to symbolize shattering Joker's point of view. Moore was a man that was very particular with details like that
TLDR: I think he's massively upset that they missed the point of his work to the point he doesn't want association, feeling ashamed about the perversion of his work
__________________
|
11-28-2023, 10:46 AM | #3269 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 1,961
|
Quote:
So Miles is a fanfic for me, just like Bendis' Spiderman in principle. But for all other versions of Miles, Bendis' Miles is the original and the foundation for further stories. |
11-28-2023, 10:56 AM | #3270 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 1,961
|
Quote:
I'm pretty sure 'original principles' refers to the narrative purpose Moore intended that the movies did not pick up on, the man has been very vocal about disliking adaptations of his work as a whole outside of the Justice League episode For The Man Who Has Everything. Haven't seen V For Vendetta nor read the original but I have read and seen the other two. For example, ehen The Comedian is about to rape Sally, the camera sexualizes Sally's body with certain camera shots, making her more 'alluring', the fact it is a rape scene should tell you all you need to know about why this is wrong. For the Killing Joke, at one point, Joker says "Why aren't you laughing?" In the movie, he angrily yells this while beating the shit out of Batman but in the comic he seems puzzled, confused, as if he was questioning if his 'one bad day' point was truly wrong before Batman appears out of a mirror, as if to symbolize shattering Joker's point of view. Moore was a man that was very particular with details like that
TLDR: I think he's massively upset that they missed the point of his work to the point he doesn't want association, feeling ashamed about the perversion of his work I generally agree about film adaptations of Moore?s works. But here I can only repeat what I heard from one screenwriter: ?If you want the film to turn out the way you intended, you must shoot it yourself.? Directors are also creative people with their own quirks, and few are able to meticulously transfer a script to the screen without introducing something of their own. What bothered me more was that Moore once said that Watchmen was impossible to film. This is already an exaggeration. It's impossible to film One Hundred Years of Solitude, but Watchmen is quite easy. Although, personally, I would make a series, entrusting each chapter to a separate director. Because Snyder's glamorous bombast really doesn't suit the story. |
|
TokuNation News & Rumors |
Memorial Edition GoPhone Announced |
Kakuranger: 30 Years After |
ToyRise RyuKenDo |
Alternative Cut of "Day Of The Dumpster" Released |
Shodo SUPER Kyoryuger Teaser |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:58 AM.
|