Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
Movies
Byrne Robotics > Movies Page of 30 Next >>
Topic: DOCTOR STRANGE ~ SPOILERS Begin on Pg 25 Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Gilbert Roland
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 June 2008
Posts: 124
Posted: 30 September 2014 at 10:49am | IP Logged | 1 post reply

From http://www.superheromoviesnews.com/2014/09/doctor-strange-re lease-date-announced.html

Today, Screen Daily has revealed that Marvel's upcoming mystical film Doctor Strange will indeed take that July 8th, 2016 release date we all suspected for months. They also go onto reveal that filming will begin May 2015 at Pinewood UK with pre-production starting this fall. Scott Derrikson has already been announced as director by a screenplay by Jon Spaihts.

Last we heard Joaquin Phoenix was the front runner to play the sorcerer supreme but that has yet to be confirmed. Other names attached have been Benedict Cumberbatch and Tom Hardy.

It will follow the origin story of world renown and arrogant neurosurgeon Stephen Strange. After a terrible accident that makes him lose his ability to be a doctor he seeks out the mystical sorcerer supreme and learns to become one of earth's most mightiest heroes.

Doctor Strange will hit July 8th, 2016

If the Marvel cinematic universe continues this movies to be in line with their philosophy of 'Hard Fiction' as defined by Arthur C. Clarke, then I'll stay away from this movie like the plaque. I'm fed up with the over-explanation of everything that permeates these movies



Edited by Matt Reed on 02 November 2016 at 10:24am
Back to Top profile | search
 
Andy Meyers
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 05 August 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 532
Posted: 30 September 2014 at 11:50am | IP Logged | 2 post reply

Outside of Ditko (and some Marshall Rogers) I've never enjoyed Dr. Strange as a main character. I also don't feel that a movie will work because it will be overloaded with effects and/or too far from the original material. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Kevin Brown
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 31 May 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 7150
Posted: 30 September 2014 at 12:29pm | IP Logged | 3 post reply

Frank Brunner did some great stuff on Dr. Strange, albeit for only 5 issues.

As for the movie, I strongly suspect they'll be using pseudo-science looking like magic to give him his "powers".
Back to Top profile | search
 
Gilbert Roland
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 June 2008
Posts: 124
Posted: 30 September 2014 at 1:00pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply

As for the movie, I strongly suspect they'll be using pseudo-science looking like magic to give him his "powers".

This is where the problems begin for me. The people in control of the movies want to use the 'Hard Fiction' style for apparently everything in their movies. For example, when they use the 'Infinity Gauntlet's' storyline for the next wave of films, will Mistress Death become a mirage the way that Galactus was a cloud?

These movies have become so grounded in their reality of explaining everything, that a lot of the granduer and splendor has been taken out of the stories. Doctor Strange own powers will be explained away with quantum mechanics instead of the mystic arts, I fear. Ultimately though,  I don't feel that this movie will succeed in being faithful to anything except the tropes that have made Marvel's other recent movies money. I would really like to see something that is faithful to the comics actually make it to the big screen, but I won't hold my breath for it.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian J Nelson
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 August 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 365
Posted: 30 September 2014 at 1:29pm | IP Logged | 5 post reply

If you asked me a year ago if I thought they could get Dr Strange to carry a movie, I would have said no. But after Guardians, I'm looking forward to another great adventure.
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106690
Posted: 30 September 2014 at 1:37pm | IP Logged | 6 post reply

If you asked me a year ago if I thought they could get Dr Strange to carry a movie, I would have said no. But after Guardians, I'm looking forward to another great adventure.

That's a bit like saying "My girlfriend baked me a great apple pie, and now her roomie is going to cook me a steak dinner. I expect it to be great!"

Different people, different ingredients. Just like in the stock market, the success of A does not guarantee the success of B -- or even of more A!

Back to Top profile | search
 
Mark Rand
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 May 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 347
Posted: 30 September 2014 at 6:23pm | IP Logged | 7 post reply

Outside of Ditko (and some Marshall Rogers) I've never enjoyed Dr. Strange as a main character. I also don't feel that a movie will work because it will be overloaded with effects and/or too far from the original material.
******

There's really no getting around special effects if you're making a Dr. Strange movie. Are you saying the other Marvel movies have used too many effects?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10930
Posted: 30 September 2014 at 8:00pm | IP Logged | 8 post reply

If the Marvel cinematic universe continues this movies to be in line with their philosophy of 'Hard Fiction' as defined by Arthur C. Clarke, then I'll stay away from this movie like the plaque. I'm fed up with the over-explanation of everything that permeates these movies

------

What movies are you watching? I don't think you understand the concept of hard science fiction. Saying "It's science!", especially in reference to the comic booky pseudo-science in the Marvel movies does not make it hard science fiction. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Andy Meyers
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 05 August 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 532
Posted: 01 October 2014 at 4:30am | IP Logged | 9 post reply


"There's really no getting around special effects if you're making a Dr. Strange movie. Are you saying the other Marvel movies have used too many effects?"

I was thinking specifically about the different dimensions Dr. Strange visits in his stories. How would it look when he was in Nightmare's world? The entire sequence would be effects and it would be difficult to make it all believable. Dr. Strange animated or in comics seems easier to pull off than a live action movie. 

As to the other movies they seem different to me with regards to special effects because they are (usually) in a real world type setting. I haven't seen Gardians so maybe they go to different dimensions, I don't know. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106690
Posted: 01 October 2014 at 4:46am | IP Logged | 10 post reply

Scott Derrickson directed the 2008 "remake" of THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL, pretty well demonstrating he has no respect for, or even comprehension of, the source material.* So I wouldn't expect a particularly recognizable Dr. Strange.

__________________

* The original TDTESS has almost nothing in common with the source, the short story "Farewell to the Masters," but that gives it a pass, from my perspective. Since it changed so much, and did not even use the same title, it's not really pretending to be the same story.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Dave Kopperman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 27 December 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1566
Posted: 01 October 2014 at 9:55am | IP Logged | 11 post reply





Edited by Dave Kopperman on 01 October 2014 at 9:56am
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Brian J Nelson
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 August 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 365
Posted: 01 October 2014 at 10:08am | IP Logged | 12 post reply

"That's a bit like saying "My girlfriend baked me a great apple pie, and now her roomie is going to cook me a steak dinner. I expect it to be great!"

Different people, different ingredients. Just like in the stock market, the success of A does not guarantee the success of B -- or even of more A!"

It a bit more like saying, my girlfriend made me a great meal and now her sister is going to make me a meal and I hope it is great too since they both learned from their mom. 

It lease it would be like saying that if we wanted to marginalize the entire movie production process into a series of just a few steps with only a few resources over just a couple of hours.

Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106690
Posted: 02 October 2014 at 2:23pm | IP Logged | 13 post reply

No Joaquin Phoenix, apparently.

LINK

Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106690
Posted: 02 October 2014 at 2:24pm | IP Logged | 14 post reply

It a bit more like saying, my girlfriend made me a great meal and now her sister is going to make me a meal and I hope it is great too since they both learned from their mom.

That is SUCH a starry-eyed view of how Hollywood works, it almost brings a tear to my eye.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian J Nelson
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 August 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 365
Posted: 02 October 2014 at 4:31pm | IP Logged | 15 post reply

What can I say...even when presented with such a veil of sarcasm over baseless metaphors because of my personal excitement in something, I enjoy the feeling of superiority that my glass-half-full kind of attitude grants me. I can see how that could impress enough to bring a tear to the eye.

Not surprised about Joaquin. I would love to see him do something like this because of his skill as an actor and how he might run with it. But it definitely is outside of his cinematic milieu. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Conrad Teves
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 1360
Posted: 02 October 2014 at 5:16pm | IP Logged | 16 post reply

Brian,  you can look at this as a "glass half full" situation, which is fair enough,  but the real problem in Hollywood morphing the properties to their own specifications, is the disrespect being shown the fans.  They wouldn't be in a position to make a movie about these characters had the fans not made them popular and famous in the first place.  It doesn't matter how good a job the original creators did if the fans don't cotton to it and make it popular.  Hollywood then takes these characters (made popular by said fans and no one else), says the fan base that made them popular is far too small to give a crap about, then changes things to suit their own impressions of what will sell.  Often, from a financial standpoint they aren't wrong.  Feedback loop ensues.
There is an assumption that what made them popular in the first place, no one else will buy.  So Galactus becomes a cloud, because people will buy a cloud.  Civilians won't buy Galactus as a non-cloud.
The cynicism is from Hollywood.    What we as fans have, is disappointment.    Movies like Avengers and GotG have improved the situation, but it still very visibly exists.
Back to Top profile | search | www | email
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106690
Posted: 02 October 2014 at 6:04pm | IP Logged | 17 post reply

Movies like Avengers and GotG have improved the situation...

This comment negates the rest of you post!

Back to Top profile | search
 
Conrad Teves
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 1360
Posted: 02 October 2014 at 7:04pm | IP Logged | 18 post reply

You could read my acceptance of the "glass half full" position that way also.

I'm simply convinced at this point that incremental improvement is the only kind we're going to get.  I'll take it over no improvement, or things getting worse (see DC superhero movies).  

We are definitely trying to teach an old dog a new trick, but Hollywood seems to respond well to treats.  Avengers was a pretty big treat. Marketing people do listen to feedback.  It may take a while for it to sink in, but I don't think Iron Man or Avengers could have happened the way they did had they not.

The situation is kind of like how Science Fiction and Fantasy movies were never taken seriously as anything but B-movie fodder.  Those attitudes in Hollywood have clearly changed.  Now, astonishingly, they can win Best Picture at the Oscars.  I think the popularity of the genre is in and of itself a driver of change.  I hope I'm not mistaken in sensing a similar change happening with Superhero movies.  Even if it is by fits and starts.

In the meantime, I will feel free to be disappointed when they get it wrong.  Particularly way wrong.
Back to Top profile | search | www | email
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106690
Posted: 03 October 2014 at 3:16am | IP Logged | 19 post reply

Avengers was a pretty big treat.

Destruction porn wins!

Back to Top profile | search
 
Eric Ladd
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 August 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 2823
Posted: 03 October 2014 at 9:50am | IP Logged | 20 post reply

I think Galactus represented as a cloud instead of the giant being we know in comics came about due to budgetary constraints and not speculation about what would be accepted by the viewing public. I have nothing to back up that assumption, but got giddy with possibilities when we got that brief shot of the Celestial in GotG.

Money dictates a great deal in Hollywood right down to what is and is not possible for your production. What upsets me the most is when huge budgets with almost any possibility ignore the character development and story elements that make comics great. For me, comics are imagination on a grand scale. So when I see a film derived from comics that tries to literalize and justify the concepts and conceits that make comics great I am baffled. Sure we have radioactive spiders giving humans super powers, but there is no way a kid can build web shooters?

Comic and superhero related TV and film is still evolving so there is a bit of hope we will see some faithful adaptations, but perhaps we shouldn't hold our breath.
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106690
Posted: 03 October 2014 at 11:27am | IP Logged | 21 post reply

Portraying Galactus AS Galactus would have changed the whole shape of the movie. A "cloud," at least, avoids the idea of an intelligent being with whom the audience might expect discourse.

(Also spares the Mark Waids in the crowd the intellectual turmoil of a being who annihilates planets but is "above good and evil.")

Back to Top profile | search
 
Conrad Teves
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 1360
Posted: 03 October 2014 at 1:39pm | IP Logged | 22 post reply

Eric>>I think Galactus represented as a cloud instead of the giant being we know in comics came about due to budgetary constraints<<

I can't see how.  Realistic smoke and clouds take waaay longer to render than a hard surface object, plus they are an unbelievable pain to light well.

JB>> A "cloud," at least, avoids the idea of an intelligent being with whom the audience might expect discourse.<<

Well, we wouldn't want any of that!
Back to Top profile | search | www | email
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106690
Posted: 03 October 2014 at 2:22pm | IP Logged | 23 post reply

JB>> A "cloud," at least, avoids the idea of an intelligent being with whom the audience might expect discourse.<<

Well, we wouldn't want any of that!

Not if you're a Hollywood mogul, no. You wouldn't be looking to make a four hour movie!!

Back to Top profile | search
 
Conrad Teves
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 1360
Posted: 03 October 2014 at 3:46pm | IP Logged | 24 post reply

Eric>>For me, comics are imagination on a grand scale. <<

For myself, this is where they dropped the ball the hardest in the FF movies.  To me, the FF are about Big Things.  Aliens, Monsters, The Negative Zone,  Galactus!  The idea that like a great storm, he just was.  He wasn't a malevolent entity bent on world destruction because he was bwahahaha!  EVIL!, he was uncontrollable hunger scaled to a cosmic level.

And of course, they were led by a leader who had the confidence fueled by always being the smartest guy in the room, but who didn't think that made him better than anyone (whereas Doom was pretty sure it did).

Huge amounts of the above were missing from those movies.  In the second one, if you lose the awkward romance, the Reed dances bit, the pointless presence of their sad, half-assed version of Doom, you could probably trim the noted 4-hour movie down to Peter Jackson lengths.

Apologies for any thread-drift.  The FF movies were certainly the biggest disappointment I've had in superhero movies, because the FF are my favorite superheroes.
Back to Top profile | search | www | email
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10930
Posted: 03 October 2014 at 3:55pm | IP Logged | 25 post reply

I was not disappointed by the FF movie because I refused to watch it. :)
Back to Top profile | search
 

Page of 30 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login