Old Man Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 The thing is, Hollywood (and its apologists) aren't advocating "going dark" because they are "open to new looks" as you are. They are convinced that brightly colored costumes can never work in live action, period. It's natural to have a personal preference, say, towards darker tones. It's something else altogether to idiomatically rule out other aesthetics merely because one lacks the necesary creative vision to (figure out how to) make them look good. It's plain risk analysis. You are spending one hundred meeeeellion dollars of someone else's money on a comic book superhero movie; if it fails you are jobless and homeless. Who do you alienate--the 90% of the population who are reasonably willing to see it, or the 5% of hardcore fanbois who will complain endlessly about costume brightness on the internet and then pay to see the movie anyway? Vondy, Enforcer84 and 薔薇語 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew_A Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Yes. I disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vondy Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 It's plain risk analysis. You are spending one hundred meeeeellion dollars of someone else's money on a comic book superhero movie; if it fails you are jobless and homeless. Who do you alienate--the 90% of the population who are reasonably willing to see it, or the 5% of hardcore fanbois who will complain endlessly about costume brightness on the internet and then pay to see the movie anyway? I;ll pick rolling in booze, hookers, and money over homeless and jobless any day. Just sayin'... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragitsu Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 It's plain risk analysis. You are spending one hundred meeeeellion dollars of someone else's money on a comic book superhero movie; if it fails you are jobless and homeless. Who do you alienate--the 90% of the population who are reasonably willing to see it, or the 5% of hardcore fanbois who will complain endlessly about costume brightness on the internet and then pay to see the movie anyway? They aren't even trying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vondy Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Your avatar looks awfully spandexy. Keep tilting at windmills Don Quixote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 They aren't even trying. Trying = risking, so, yeah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greywind Posted May 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Keep tilting at windmills Don Quixote. The world still has its share of windmills to tilt at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 In fact the number of windmills is increasing rapidly now that renewable energy is cost competitive with fossil fuels! And with steel and composite construction, and turbine blade tip speeds approaching 200 mph, tilting at windmills is not child's play! assault 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinanju Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 They aren't even trying. Sure they are. They're trying hard to make sure the downside TO THEM is bearable. A movie that makes boatloads of money is--by economic necessity--going to be one that appeals to the vast majority who don't buy comics. A BIG comic might sell 100,000 copies. A multi-million dollar movie that only sold 100,000 tickets might as well be the boat anchor the money guys are going to use to make sure the body of the guy who greenlit it stays at the bottom of the ocean. If you follow the conventional wisdom (brightly colored costumes won't work) and the movie founders, well, you tried. If you went against the convention wisdom and you succeed, hey, you're a genius! If you do it and fail...you're finished. No more donuts and whores for you. Sure, fanboys are gonna complain. But so what? Anyone who knows anything about ANY field can point out countless ways that Hollywood gets it wrong because either the truth doesn't make for an entertaining story or they just don't care because it looks good enough. Everyone complains about something. "Good enough" is good enough if makes money. Enforcer84 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hopcroft Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 I wasn't even thinking of Cinema Sins! Good catch. Seriously though, is it too much to ask for a little originality? Then we really shouldn't be going to a character created in 1959. There may be a point to that, actually. Sadly, with a few rare exceptions like Heroes and The Greatest American Hero, original-characters superhero shows have usually met ignominious fates in the ratings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragitsu Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Uh... At the recommendation of an IMDB poster, I searched for the main actor's name and found some rather...salacious...results on the images. I don't recommend you do the same. --- Anyhow, from what i've seen thus far, I fear we'll be in for another The Green Arrow live-action adaptation in terms of over-emphasis on romance. Plus, the acting comes off as hitting all the overly safe stereotype notes, so there's nothing amazing on the character front (thus far). 薔薇語 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clonus Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 The thing is, Hollywood (and its apologists) aren't advocating "going dark" because they are "open to new looks" as you are. They are convinced that brightly colored costumes can never work in live action, period. It's natural to have a personal preference, say, towards darker tones. It's something else altogether to idiomatically rule out other aesthetics merely because one lacks the necesary creative vision to (figure out how to) make them look good. Now if I were a film or television producer, I wouldn't listen too closely to anyone who thought any aspect of comic book superheroes was "ridiculous" (to the point of dismissing it out of hand). It's all part and parcel of the genre, and when you reject any of its most prominent elements you end up with a nice, hot, steaming mess that isn't really a member of the genre it purports to be (*cough*Heroes*cough*TimKring*cough*). Oh, and a memo to Hollywood: you've used "re-imagining" a genre to "make it fresh" as code for "we don't understand or appreciate the genre so we're going to butcher it for what we perceive as the lowest-common-denom, er, widest possible audience" for long enough. We're onto you. You can't fake it anymore and get away with it like you used to. At this point I'd like to point that the costume that they actually went with for the show did not in fact use Man of Steel's muted palette, so clearly that the publicity shot that began this thread was before they'd settled on a final look. Also the Flash's future costume looks to be brighter than the one he is currently using, and that probably reflects the idea that (contrary to expectation) as he gains more experience as a hero, he'll spend less time floundering in moral ambiguity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawnmower Boy Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 This thread is an extended exercise in nerdrage parody, right? Right, guys? Guys? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Infidel! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Marcus Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Apostate! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 At this point I'd like to point that the costume that they actually went with for the show did not in fact use Man of Steel's muted palette, so clearly that the publicity shot that began this thread was before they'd settled on a final look. Also the Flash's future costume looks to be brighter than the one he is currently using, and that probably reflects the idea that (contrary to expectation) as he gains more experience as a hero, he'll spend less time floundering in moral ambiguity. You make some valid points. However, in the specific case of Supergirl's costume, while I applaud the brighter colors, I am nevertheless disappointed by the general style of the outfit. Its conservativeness feels more suited to the 1950s than to the superhero aesthetics of the last couple decades. That's not a knock on their creative vision, merely me pointing out that their particular vision is not going to make me eager to tune in, that's all. As for The Flash, I think you may be giving them too much credit. I suspect that the dark-to-bright red transition is their timid attempt to appeal to the hardcore fans while simultaneously placating the clueless suits who control the money (and who have an outdated and misguided view of the general, non-comic-savvy audience). I can only imagine the kind of wheeling and dealing that had to occur to give Reverse Flash a bright yellow suit and to have Grodd in the show at all. (Though honestly, I don't think anyone at Warners would have ever loosened their sphincters enough to approve Grodd had Marvel not shouldered all the so-called risk with Rocket Raccoon in GotG). Ragitsu 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vondy Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 I tried to watch the Supergirl pilot. I didn't finish. Yech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 It was the costume, right? It was too bright. Or too dark. Or too dated, or too revealing. Lawnmower Boy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pattern Ghost Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 Apparently, the entire pilot has been leaked on bit torrent. Some guy at IO9 says it's pretty good: http://io9.com/i-saw-the-supergirl-pilot-and-it-s-actually-pretty-sup-1706318019 This is why we saw all those chick flick tropes in the six-minute preview below released last week, as Kara is the harried assistant for her no-nonsense-to-the-point-of-cruelty boss (played by Calista Flockhart), fetching coffee, wishing for something more, awkward around cute guys, etc., etc. The good news is that most of those scenes were already in the preview, so the Devil Wears Prada-esque, working woman aspect of the show is only a small part of Supergirl. I'll admit that last sentence comes as a bit of a relief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 I think the fact that there's any whiff whatsoever of a Devil Wears Prada vibe in a Supergirl show turns off a lot of fans just on general principle. I dunno. I think I sorta expected a Supergirl show today to be influenced more by Carrie Bradshaw than by Xena. *shrug* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Mhoram Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 Watched the pilot. I really enjoyed it. About as much as the leaked Flash pilot. It's rough, but it's a pilot, and I expect that. The superhero action was good, had some great references, and a really good reason why there will be supervillians on the show. Pay attention to the name of the head of DEO. The whole Devil wears prada, I think that will go away, and morph into something else. At one point her sister talks about "before you came I was the star, and then you could touch the stars, and yeah, when you decided to hide yourself it made me feel better" as an apology speech. Then at the end we see Cat looking at supergirl fly by the office and has an interesting look on her face - I expect she was feeling what the sister was talking about - and that could lead to some good character growth / change (for good or evil) The rescue of the plane was perfect. This is on my must watch list with Flash and Arrow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher R Taylor Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 Um yeah reading that review makes me want to avoid it entirely. ...a powerful man tells her she can’t accomplish anything (Hank Henshaw, leader of the inevitable secret government organization tasked with dealing with superpowered people), and the episode’s villain — because there are absolutely supervillains in Supergirl — is a misogynist who does everything but tell Kara to get in the kitchen and make him a sandwich Then he goes on to talk about cliches, unoriginal storytelling, and while he's earnestly hoping the reason all that chick flick stuff is in the show is that its a pilot introducing the character, there's no real reason to expect that. And I don't get how Jimmy Olsen went from copy boy geek to big studly dude suddenly in the recent Superman universe; I don't care about Jimmy one way or another, its just... odd. Maybe copy boys just don't exist any longer so the character made no sense any more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinecone Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 I think that morphing Jimmie is made nessisary by the changes in the story. Changing him into a minority would go over Much worse if he is weak, and subservient. So he needs a "stud" upgrade. They will likely make him a on staff Photographer rather than a "copy boy". And despite adding in romance, you know for realism, normal guys are not good enough for a fantasy. I don't mind that it has not found it's footing, shows need to evolve organicly. I just hope they find their vibe before they get cancelled. Apparently Hollywood thinks a female fantasy can't stop at Flight and super strength, and invulnerability...it has to include bashing male chauvinists. Ragitsu 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vondy Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 It was the costume, right? It was too bright. Or too dark. Or too dated, or too revealing. I found the acting insipid and the script infantile. It was like breathing cultural nitrous oxide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranxerox Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 I think the fact that there's any whiff whatsoever of a Devil Wears Prada vibe in a Supergirl show turns off a lot of fans just on general principle. I dunno. I think I sorta expected a Supergirl show today to be influenced more by Carrie Bradshaw than by Xena. *shrug* Um yeah reading that review makes me want to avoid it entirely. Then he goes on to talk about cliches, unoriginal storytelling, and while he's earnestly hoping the reason all that chick flick stuff is in the show is that its a pilot introducing the character, there's no real reason to expect that. And I don't get how Jimmy Olsen went from copy boy geek to big studly dude suddenly in the recent Superman universe; I don't care about Jimmy one way or another, its just... odd. Maybe copy boys just don't exist any longer so the character made no sense any more. Making a couple wild assumptions here, that a) many women actually enjoy entertainment with common chick flick tropes and that with Supergirl they are hoping to get some female viewership. So with these assumptions in mind, what chick flick tropes if any would people here be okay with in this show? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.