Doug: Potpourri today, friends. Earlier this week Marvel's newest solicitations went live on the web, and the next installment in the Alex Ross alternate covers celebrating Marvel Comics' 75th Anniversary was unveiled. You can see it below: Daredevil #1.
Doug: Additionally, Sony Pictures, which holds the license to Marvel's Spider-Man films, announced late last week that they intend to not only make an Amazing Spider-Man 3, but also two spin-off films: Venom and the Sinister Six. Thoughts?
 |
| http://www.supermegamonkey.net/chronocomic/entries/scans/ASMann1_SinisterSix.JPG
Karen: Speaking of Amazing Spider-Man 2, here's a new international trailer that highlights the humor in the film:
|
11 comments:
My understanding (such as it is) is that Paul Giamatti is going to play the Rhino. Between him and Jamie Foxx, it seems like they are pulling out the big guns.
Ever since the Batman T.V. show in the 60's, there has been a time-honored tradition of having the best actors and coolest people play supervillians.
This might be worth going to see.
This preview doesn't make me any more excited that the previous one. As for the humor, that chimney-cleaning joke was groan-out-loud, 1980s-sitcom bad. Gwen screaming "Peter!" and then catching herself, however, did bring a smile to my face.
Also, Venom and Sinister Six spin-offs? You mean movies that will focus on the bad guys? Not sure how that's going to work out.
And Doug, I actually like that Daredevil image - maybe because it's a little more 'cartoony' than most of the other stuff Ross does.
That is an excellent Daredevil piece. Between that and the current movie Spidey suit I really have to balk at the entire notion that the comicbook costumes can't work in live action. They can when filmmakers give enough of a damn to make them work. Again Spidey is more Bagley than he is Ditko or Romita but he still looks basically right.
Except for the gratuitous "woo!" I enjoyed the latest trailer despite my issues with Rhino and Goblin's designs (which are even weirder when they've gone out of their way to get Spidey right.)
As for the spin-offs, seriously? So either we're going to have movies where the protagonists are scumbags (which I guess for some would be just dandy) or they're gonna go the whole "lethal protector" route with Venom which makes the Sinister Six what exactly? The lethal Avengers?
Never understood trying to give the villain their own seperate series. Why the hell would I want to see these guys in any capacity where the hero is not around to stop them?
But I admit that I am the kind of reader/viewer who wants a character to root for and see triumph. I don't see anything entertaining or deep about seeing evil win or watching people fail or observing misery.
That Daredevil cover is incredibly boring. He's a man of action, a man without fear, a man just...standing around? Really? Should've had him doing a trademark DD acrobatic move at the very least, maybe swinging with his club & line into a den of crooks armed with guns...I must be old: I remember when a cover was supposed to draw you in with an exciting scene or a mystery to make you want to read the story. Now it's all cheesy pin-ups, and poorly-thought-out ones at that. DD just standing stiff as a wax dummy is exciting?
Can't get the Spidey commercial to play, but honestly it must be better than X-Men 3, Thor 2, and Iron Man 3. At least the cast is good, whatever else one may say. I love Spidey. He & DD are my two favorite Marvel characters.
Considering that the new franchise hasn't even been going long enough to have introduced the classic members of the Sinister Six -- they haven't even gotten to Doc Ock yet, for Pete's sake! -- I'm curious as to why they're making an announcement of plans to do a film focused on them so soon. As far as I recall the only real motive of the S6 was to mop up the floor with Spidey in revenge for him having beat them all before, which just doesn't strike me as likely to work in a film expected to appeal to a much larger audience than comic book geeks. Guess we'll see if & when it shows up.
@MattCells. I can see an argument could be made that it's a better poster than a cover but my god the art is good enough to get away with it IMO.
Besides, it strikes me as being Daredevil mere moments before he's about to leap into action. He may be still but there is movement in the piece via in the Radar Sense effect and the flashbacks of his origin going on within it.
For all that he's in a static pose this a lot more going on with it than one the typical modern cover.
At least it's not another shot of a hero hunched on ledge at night in the rain, yelling in rage over a dead body, or characters floating in empty space.
Amen, MattComix.
Doug
'Oh heavens, if the Sinister Six makes it to the big time, can the dreaded Emissaries of Evil be far behind..?'
Hmmmmmm. Watch out, Daredevil.
Back to the Ant-Man movie and the reservations of some of our readers that it may be a comedy --
David, if they did the Emissaries of Evil flick, I'd expect it to actually play better as a comedy. Stilt-Man and Leap Frog? The Matador?
Doug
Not really on topic, but movie related: I just learned that Tom Laughlin (Billy Jack) died. Sad news...
Post a Comment