Why things look better at a distance

[trinityvixen]

I admit to being totally excited about Captain America, definitely more than that dated comic character's movie update deserves. I know it won't be "good," but I've been more excited about other movies before with bigger letdowns than Captain America could ever have. ::Sobs over Tron Legacy some more::

Point is, excited as I am, I'm not stupid. I'

Comments

[six_demon_bag]

I was going to ask why you assume Captain America is going to be bad when (in my opinion) Marvel films have been pretty entertaining and well made as of late. But then I read on and discovered who's directing it. Argh. You never know, though -- it could turn out great (says he of the eternal "cup is half full" mentality).

I read about Marvel's refusal to pay Favreau what he's worth a few years ago and it infuriated me. Doubly when I later read that Howard was jumping ship for the same reason -- I like Cheadle, too, but I thought Howard was great and great for the role, not that Cheadle isn't a good replacement.

I was annoyed a couple years ago when I read The Wolfman was being remade and the stoked when I read that they cast Del Toro because he seemed absolutely perfect for it. Sigh, then I finally saw it and it was nothing more than "meh". A crime considering the cast.

[lnbw]

Yeah, I like Cheadle, but I was really sad that Howard didn't come back because I'd already gotten used to him in that character.

[trinityvixen]

That's entirely the problem. It's so distracting when they change out people. I mean, I'd take Maggie Gyllenhaal over Katie Holmes any day, but it's so distracting to swap her out.

[six_demon_bag]

Yeah, that's a big thing for me.

[trinityvixen]

I try to remain optimistic, especially as Chris Evans is, like, instant lady-boner material. :D

Marvel's strategy regarding its movies infuriates me. Part of the reason Iron Man did so well is that they were kind of hands off. They weren't expecting anything from it, they weren't overly invested (monetarily) in the movie, so Favreau and RDJ basically did whatever the hell they wanted, and it turned out awesome. (Unlike, say, the heavily meddled-with The Incredible Hulk, which I still liked, but which suffered, at least in the press, for all the bickering.)

Instead of following this obviously successful strategy, Marvel, as soon as money was involved, freaked the fuck out. If Favreau hadn't been re-hired, they would have pissed off their star, so that was a narrow victory and one entirely dependent on money. Howard, on the other hand, was paid more than RDJ on the first movie and wanted the same raise everyone else got and was let go. They also insisted on a shit-ton more stuff about the Avengers in Iron Man 2. Aside from the always

[six_demon_bag]

Wow, that's really bad business. I had all kinds of respect for Marvel Studios because all of these great movies (some animated and straight to video and others big budget box office releases) were coming out, but I was giving them too much credit. I liked The Incredible Hulk, too, but you're right and you can very easily tell the difference in quality between that and Iron Man. Too bad.

So if Favreau isn't involved in the third Iron Man film (are they making a third?), will RDJ still be in?

Also, I knew who you were talking about, but never knew Clark Gregg by name until now, so I IMDB'd him to find out what else he's been in/is going to be in and it looks like they're making a Nick Fury film as well. That's news to me. Also, I geaked out a bit when I saw he was in an episode of the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles.

Haha yeah, that scene was my favorite in The Wolfman, too.

[trinityvixen]

Favreau is out, but for better or worse, Marvel and RDJ are bound to each other for at least two more movies. It's possible they booked him for several installments of The Avengers, depending on how well that franchise does. Favreau is actually quite happily working on another project elsewhere, probably with a better budget and less meddling and good on him. He doesn't sound bitter about it at all. I think he might be relieved. What that means for the franchise, I don't want to guess.

Haha yeah, that scene was my favorite in The Wolfman, too.

It was made even funnier by my friends and I imitating the people freaking out about what was going on behind the guy's shoulder in the voice of that pizza-faced kid from The Simpsons...

[six_demon_bag]

I also meant to mention I thought Chris Evans was cast to play Captain America, but it doesn't look like him in the pic up there.

While on the topic of comic book adaptations, I was very unimpressed with what I've seen of The Green Lantern, but I've been seeing a lot more on and it's starting to at least look entertaining enough for me to want to see it, although it still doesn't look good by any means.

[trinityvixen]

Actually, Chris Evans was on the cover of Entertainment Weekly in their sneak-peak feature (from which the beefcake photo above comes), and people's response to the cover was "...Nathan Fillion is gonna be the Cap?" It's exaggerated, but not overly. (The cover is here.

You know what it is? It's the hair. It's almost entirely the hair. The hair isn't just different for Evans, who is usually seen with spikier, gelled looks, but it's different for a superhero character of this age. Of course, that's because the majority of the Captain America film will take place in WWII, so, naturally, he's a got a very retro haircut. Honestly? It suits him. I swear I'm not just biased by naked chestyness. It's a good look for him in that it makes him look slightly more mature without making him look old. It also changes his look an inordinate amount. Did you ever see Danny Boyle's Sunshine? He had a shaggy haircut in that, and I totally didn't even recognize him for fully half an hour.

Green Lantern looks dreadful from the trailer. I mean, a good