It sounds like Jon Favreau has thought a lot about why some superhero movies just didn’t work while others are super successful. Here is a quote from the Iron Man director from a recent LATimes chat:

“Either the director was unfamiliar [with the] source material or the director chose to depart from it for personal reasons. Another reason is that the studios that had the rights to a particular franchise would never think twice about compromising the source material if thought it would enhance the commercial appeal.”

But is Marvel Studios trying to “enhance the commercial appeal” by rushing the project into production for a 2010 release?

“The date is daunting. We are making much faster progress than the first time around and have much less to design and fewer casting issues. I am confident that 2010 is achievable if we continue working together as we have for the past few months. It has to be great, though. It has to be great.”

  • Steelo
    I was watching the second disk on the DVD and as fate would have it, as glorious as it was there wasn't as much Iron Man on screen as I would like to see. That said the models and designs, aside from some changes and tweeks, will yield a faster turnaround. So it's more possible than assumed I think.
  • Captain Awesome
    Jon Favreau is a superhero himself. And his name is "Captain Obvious".

    But to add to his point. It also comes down to the right director. Not just anyone who does respond to the original source material. It has to be a director who can elevate whats been done in the comics for years and brings it to life properly and not do it in such an insulting manner.

    It's like any other film that's based on a book.
  • orange cinema
    i think one of the main reasons is that some characters just don't appeal to the masses. yes a solid director/script are vital, but another piece to the puzzle is if people will care about the person we are following. ie. i don't believe the flash or the hulk will ever blow up the way batman or spiderman did, despite being staples of DC & Marvel.

    now, hellboy is another example of an amazing character in print, amazing director/story, but not the grand-slam everyone was hoping - though it didn't fail either. opening up just before TDK wasn't bright, but i still wish HB2 had done better.
  • Captain Awesome
    I call bullshit OC...

    It has nothing to do with the appeal of a character to the masses. We've had films for years showcasing the most anti-social and most non-conformist lead characters that have now become idealized heroes and historical cinematic Gods.

    It's that type of thinking that set's the footwork for projects to fail down the road. Then the changes come to pass. Because they think Frankenstein wouldn't be as impacting as Spider-Man. If a film based on a comic didn't do as well as another comic film. It's because of how it was handled.

    Not the appeal of the character.
  • Goobity
    Any comic property translation, if handled with care, can work fine in film. It's disappointing at times when Hollywood thinks it 'knows better', and disregards the source. If a story is good, it will support itself no matter the medium. Aside from the obvious choices, just look at The Rocketeer, Road to Perdition, Sin City, and yes - thankfully this summer gave faithful translations of Iron Man and TDK and even the Hulk to some extent. It can be done...
  • Tom
    I think the point about studio willingness to compromise the material is strongest. I'm glad Favreau is on this project — could you imagine if they'd cheaped out and went with a different director and kept this slam-bang release date? Would have been disastrous.
  • Most superhero movies fail because nowadays annyway because people are getting sick of them, before Spider-man there were rarely any, the Bat franchise of the 90s burned out, Superman was struggling to get another movie. it was every now and then did the people see a comic book movie, like Blade or X-Men, but after Spider-man there are alot, every yaer now a superhero movie is getting released or getting made, Spider-man, X-Men and Batman are the only successful ones because they came out when hardly any comic book movie was out.
    But now its hard for any superhero movie to be successful because another might have come out before it, like the Incredible Hulk, the movie wasn't that massive a hit beacuse of Iron Man, the people were still seeing Iron Man, the Dark Knight was different because again Batman is familiar to the public.
    So in the future, a Flash movie or a Green Lantern or any DC property will have it bad becuase the overflow of Marvel movies that have been beaten against the heads of the public, they will be bored of it, but a good director and a good script could help, it will also help if the writer had knowledge of the comic book or a director who is enthusiastic about the project. Batman, Spider-man and Iron man got lucky
  • Steelo
    The appeal of Iron Man was the human aspect. There was a face behind that mask and you could relate to it. Dude built his way up.
  • Steelo, you are right that it is the human element... but it was the human element that made Batman work, same with Spiderman. The X-Men succeeded as much due to casting as due to story (probably more). The same elements that make any movie a success apply to superhero movies. It is not faithfullness to the source material, it is trying to understand why the source material worked and translating that into a new medium successfully. Spiderman doesn't work because he can shoot webs, he works because a lot of people can see themselves acting the same way in the same situations.
  • JE WORLD
    The first Hulk sucked bad, and the remake was even worse. Edward Norton? Gag me.

    Someone taking someone elses work, and making something new out of it, will always be subject to criticism based on opinion of the people.

    In other words, watch the fn movies and quit your damn bitching.
blog comments powered by Disqus