This the following quote, from June 7.
Give it two weeks.
Alright thanks
This the following quote, from June 7.
Give it two weeks.
From what I understand, Cameron's OTL draft for the film-that-never-was apparently completely missed the mark. Having enjoyed all three Raimi films (yes, even the third), I look forward to seeing what shape Spider-Man takes ITTL. The success of the recent reboot film seems to demonstrate the character's broad appeal with audiences.Spider-Man: Carolco Pictures owned the rights to this character, but currently there were no real efforts to produce a film based on the character [1]. Seeing Spidey as a low-priority asset, it didn’t take much prodding (or a particularly high dollar amount) to sell this one to Disney.
On the flip side of the coin, the two Hulk films IOTL have shown that the Hulk does not really have legs, no matter what form any film featuring the character might take (and it's hard to find two more divergent takes than the OTL versions). The very steep second-week drops those movies faced might be mitigated with something in this era, when films tended to have more staying power at the box-office; on the other hand, a steep drop would be even more noticeable...vultan said:The Hulk: Then owned by Marvel Studios, though Universal was deep in negotiations to produce a film based on the character. It took Perelman’s lobbying to derail these negotiations and allow Disney to step in, filling the void (these would create bad blood between Bruckheimer and Universal, which would later come back to haunt the producer).
This one seems to be a guaranteed hit. It is the definitive 1990s comic property (well, excluding Image offerings like Youngblood or Spawn) and, of course, ushered in the superhero revival IOTL. Of all the films, I'm most interested in your eventual casting choices for this one.vultan said:The X-Men: Marvel had recently tried developing a movie based on this superhero team with Carolco Pictures and Columbia, to no avail with either. Apparently, 20th Century Fox was interested in the rights at the time, impressed by the animated X-Men television series, but again Bruckheimer seemed to have the upper hand in these negotiations.
This is going to be a tough property to get right. Presumably, the war in which Stark becomes involved ITTL will be the Gulf War, or perhaps one of the many human rights quagmires of this decade (Somalia? Rwanda? Bosnia?), if they aren't deemed too sensitive. We'll see how the "redemption" arc plays in these jaded times.vultan said:Iron Man: Owned by Universal Pictures at the time. Unlike the last two, this acquisition a relatively clean affair, as no one else was interested in the property at the time. [2]
Obviously the least significant property of the five. Though I do feel obliged to suggest BRIAN BLESSED! for the role of Odin.vultan said:Thor: Another simple affair. The rights belonged to Marvel Studios at the time, and Disney (ie, Bruckheimer) was the only one interested. (Interestingly enough, The Dark Knight director Sam Raimi had pitched the concept of a Thor movie to 20th Century Fox in 1990, but they “didn’t get it.”)
You greatly overstate my contributions, good sir But thank you for your kind words, all the same.vultan said:A special thanks to Brainbin for his help in developing this update. He's always supported me in this project, but his feedback in writing this was particularly important.
Great to see this making a triumphant return!
My preliminary thoughts on some of the potential projects:
From what I understand, Cameron's OTL draft for the film-that-never-was apparently completely missed the mark. Having enjoyed all three Raimi films (yes, even the third), I look forward to seeing what shape Spider-Man takes ITTL. The success of the recent reboot film seems to demonstrate the character's broad appeal with audiences.
On the flip side of the coin, the two Hulk films IOTL have shown that the Hulk does not really have legs, no matter what form any film featuring the character might take (and it's hard to find two more divergent takes than the OTL versions). The very steep second-week drops those movies faced might be mitigated with something in this era, when films tended to have more staying power at the box-office; on the other hand, a steep drop would be even more noticeable...
This one seems to be a guaranteed hit. It is the definitive 1990s comic property (well, excluding Image offerings like Youngblood or Spawn) and, of course, ushered in the superhero revival IOTL. Of all the films, I'm most interested in your eventual casting choices for this one.
This is going to be a tough property to get right. Presumably, the war in which Stark becomes involved ITTL will be the Gulf War, or perhaps one of the many human rights quagmires of this decade (Somalia? Rwanda? Bosnia?), if they aren't deemed too sensitive. We'll see how the "redemption" arc plays in these jaded times.
Obviously the least significant property of the five. Though I do feel obliged to suggest BRIAN BLESSED! for the role of Odin.
Looking back, we note that eleven superhero films were released between the years 1994-2001 that grossed over $400 million worldwide. We know the identity of two so far: Watchmen and The Crow. We can presume that The Dark Knight will be another; that leaves eight. Disney has optioned five properties; will all of them be successes?
Perhaps even more than once?
You greatly overstate my contributions, good sir But thank you for your kind words, all the same.
Hmm...
Well, they could do worse than Bruckheimer with Spidey. But thay're still going to have to deal with the Itallian director who got the Sam Raimi film banned in Italy.
They way I would have done it:
...
I find myself not believing Pete would tell Gwen. Also, you do have the option of ignoring elements of the book & not giving Spidey webshooters at all. (I know, I know... I can't help think of the What If? stories.)vultan said:Interesting thoughts, Kalvan! I could certainly use someone with knowledge of Spider-Man to run my ideas for it by.
Added to the success of Watchmen, this will be coming out at the height of X-Men popularity. You're looking at blockbuster territory, here.vultan said:X-Men
You could turn it into "Wolverine & the other guys" if you're not careful. That will depend on the writer liking him, or not liking somebody else better. It also depends on if the film is an origin story (per the OTL one) or not, & on if you're allowing the director/screenwriter to pick & choose which X-Men to focus on (again, per OTL).vultan said:Done right, it could be the Pulp Fiction of superhero movies (and I'd imagine that in the environment of the alternate 1990's, intentionally going for that comparison would be a tempting prospect). Wolverine is the superhero of the 90's, so I'd imagine they'd try to milk the character for all he's worth.
The 1970s Hulk series was just that - a TV series. The parameters for success in film and in television are completely different, and so are expectations on all sides (audiences, critics, producers, executives, etc). Even some of the biggest properties can succeed in one medium only to fail in the other. Since you got the ball rolling with a 1970s live-action superhero series, I'll counter with two others: Wonder Woman, who still has yet to appear on the big screen; and the Spider-Man series, which was a massive flop.Regarding viability of Hulk movies I think you are being too pessimistic. The success of the 1970s Hulk series tells you done right a Hulk movie could be quite popular. The Ang Lee movie was a disaster. I liked the second one quite a bit but it suffered from not having first a set up that really made people care about the characters. Pull a Bixby and the movie will work.
The 1970s Hulk series was just that - a TV series. The parameters for success in film and in television are completely different, and so are expectations on all sides (audiences, critics, producers, executives, etc). Even some of the biggest properties can succeed in one medium only to fail in the other. Since you got the ball rolling with a 1970s live-action superhero series, I'll counter with two others: Wonder Woman, who still has yet to appear on the big screen; and the Spider-Man series, which was a massive flop.
(Whose bright idea was it to cast Doug Simpson, Big Man on Campus, as Peter Parker anyway? Great theme song though )
Since you got the ball rolling with a 1970s live-action superhero series, I'll counter with two others: Wonder Woman, who still has yet to appear on the big screen