Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Big studios don't know how to deal with antiheros


Mr. Scot

Recommended Posts

I think this is why characters like Deadpool. Ghost Rider and The Punisher never quite seem to be 'captured' in big budget movies, whereas short features like "Deadpool" and "Dirty Laundry" bring them to life as you'd imagine them.

 

I think the studios just need to accept that if you're going to get these characters right, you've got to accept the R rating.

 

Now, it could be argued that Wolverine is an exception to this rule.  Likewise, some will point to Batman, but does Batman truly qualify as an antihero?

 

You tell me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know. War Zone was R.

But, would the comics have been considered R?

Read a Walking Dead comic. Those should be R if it translated to screen correctly.

Basically, a Punisher comic could be an episode of the A Team if you want to get all particular.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless you're talking specifically about the comic book genre I think Hollywood has given us our fair share of quality antiheroes

 

Richard Riddick
John McClane
Gordon Gecko
Tony Montana
Luke Jackson
Harry Callahan
Travis Bickle

The Man with No Name (Eastwood's character from the Spaghetti Westerns)

Fast Eddie Felson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know most people trash them, but I liked things about both Punisher movies.

If you think about it, the comics themselves wouldn't really generate an R rating. Why should the movie?

 

Didn't care for the sequel, but I liked Thomas Jane in the role of the first one. Travolta as the villain was the first mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless you're talking specifically about the comic book genre I think Hollywood has given us our fair share of quality antiheroes

 

Richard Riddick

John McClane

Gordon Gecko

Tony Montana

Luke Jackson

Harry Callahan

Travis Bickle

The Man with No Name (Eastwood's character from the Spaghetti Westerns)

Fast Eddie Felson

 

Probably should have specified comic book antiheroes.  My fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gritty comic characters need to be on a show, on cable or hbo/Netflix.  I think the Marvel shows will be decent on Netflix and be more gritty.

 

Also you have to remember that Disney owns Marvel now, so the chances of an R-rated film for their people are slim (even though I know Fox has Deadpool, etc). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I fully agree, Batman is CLEARLY an anti-hero if you read the comics.

 

Wolverine is NOT an exception...how much better would he be had they accepted the R rating?

 

Spawn was almost on point with the comics...and was R. I didn't like the actor but the characters like the clown were true to the comic book nature.

Most comics even books but especially comics tend to be very 'adult' written and I think when making a movie it should stay that way.

 

Again I agree 100%, I think these kinds of movies should be made first and rated later...instead of made with a rating in mind. I don't know if they do that but it sure seems like it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know. War Zone was R.

But, would the comics have been considered R?

Read a Walking Dead comic. Those should be R if it translated to screen correctly.

Basically, a Punisher comic could be an episode of the A Team if you want to get all particular.

 

 

I read a lot of comics, sort of a nerd in that sense and teh Punisher movies are a JOKE.

 

Punisher should most certainley be an R rated movie if done properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • if  ANYONE actually goes & looks at the FACTS on rookie Qb's after 2 full seasons as a starter in the NFL & they are still well below average do they rarely ever actually become top tier Qb's & instead most likely either do not recieve a second contract & or become life long backups...just saying 
    • So he became GM and decided not to address the weakness in the QB room following one of the worst rookie QB performances in NFL history?  There were options last season other than signing Dalton to a 2 year deal. Brissett and Jones by a wide margin, both of whom outplayed Bryce, Wilson, Winston, hell even Rivers off the couch was more exciting at the QB position. The time to address the failure in the QB room was last year but instead people on the Huddle cheered when we brought Dalton back then cheered when we were able to get anything for him after they finally realized he was washed up like a few of had been saying all along and got poo'd for even mentioning.  This year, the options were more limited obviously, especially since we lost Icky. It changed the dynamic of our draft. I think we were stuck this year keeping Bryce, but i still think giving him a 5th year option for what has amounted to replacement worthy performance was the wrong move. Why guarantee 25m if you're planning to replace him? You think he's going to want to be a bridge QB? Hell no. He's going to want out and we'll end up cutting him if he has another lackluster season because no one is trading for him with that price tag.  Were there better options as far as production available. A couple. Were there guys available with more physical tools than Bryce, Pickett or Grier, you damn well better believe there were. I've been saying all along, you always keep looking for your 1b. Bryce has yet to prove he can be a starter. Keep looking for someone who may. Put competition in camp. Let the best QB lead the team. Stop settling for less than mediocre. 
×
×
  • Create New...