tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4417567493132970208.post2220309788001108843..comments2023-04-06T07:24:15.935-07:00Comments on 24 Panels Per Second: DRU v. DAVE: To Reboot or Not to Reboot?Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16733379553450512870noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4417567493132970208.post-27349850216807628182012-05-17T03:52:48.218-07:002012-05-17T03:52:48.218-07:00Okay, I'm not going to carry this on too much ...Okay, I'm not going to carry this on too much longer, considering we've moved away from the 'should actors be replaced?' debate. I will say, as a contained story, All Star Superman is the exception (would I like to have had Morrisson's take on the origin? Absolutely).<br /><br />Yet, comic books and film are two very different forms of storytelling, and both function in vastly different ways. What works in one, may not work in the other. I'm saying that for film, I think it's necessary.Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00084981459337587456noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4417567493132970208.post-78599579451961347542012-05-16T14:05:47.990-07:002012-05-16T14:05:47.990-07:00"David, you have to also consider the intenti..."David, you have to also consider the intention of the story. The purpose of All Star Superman is not to re-tell Superman's origin. Clearly, Morrisson has no interest in it. I think a character's origin is completely necessary, particularly when it comes to moving a character forward."<br /><br />But again James, you are contradicting yourself: if indeed it is necessary to know a character's origin to move a character forward, then by your very belief, Morrison should have done the origin BEFORE All Star Superman in order to move his take on the character forward. To which I ask: did the absence of an origin in that story negatively impact your enjoyment of it and make it harder to care about what is going on?<br /><br />We've already went through Batman Returns before, but once again I disagree with your characterization of the film, as Burton's approach isn't so much to "grow" the character as it is to peel back the layers so that we see more of him. Burton accomplishes this by shifting the perspective of the film from the first one: in Batman, we are aligned with the perspective of the "everyday" character as she probes into the world of Batman, trying to understand him; in "Returns", our perspective shifts to that of the outsiders themselves. Batman is about Vicky trying to reach Bruce; Returns is about Bruce finding a connection with someone who shares his outsider status. Factor in the way in which the film explores the sexuality of the characters (a topic not even touched upon in "Batman") and yes, I think we find out more about Bruce in this film.<br /><br />But most importantly, while I certainly share your love of seeing different takes on these characters, I simply do not share your need for going back to the origin with each interpretation. At the end of the day, the defining event in Bruce Wayne’s life is the death of his parents: all version share that in common and always will (otherwise, it ain’t Batman). If he copes with this differently, that will come through in his actions in a well written film: seeing him train with either a bunch of ninjas or a magician does not really matter to me.Noyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03694828358799780115noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4417567493132970208.post-10733475913871170382012-05-16T09:41:28.545-07:002012-05-16T09:41:28.545-07:00David, you have to also consider the intention of ...David, you have to also consider the intention of the story. The purpose of All Star Superman is not to re-tell Superman's origin. Clearly, Morrisson has no interest in it. I think a character's origin is completely necessary, particularly when it comes to moving a character forward. You need to know where the character has been to know where to take them. Burton's characterization of Batman (and Mann's of Will Graham, for that matter) work just fine in one-off features, but as serialized fiction wouldn't hold up. Just look at Barman Returns. Does Wayne "change" or "grow" as a character? Not really. He doesn't even seem to be affected by his failed relationship with a woman who knows his secret identity. (You call Burton's Batman "psychologically ambiguous," I call it "lazily scripted")<br /><br />While Superman may have multiple origins, none of them are - in effect - the same character. Mark Waid's Superman is a different person than John Byrne's, and I love that. I love that these characters can share so many similar things and can be so vastly different. If Burton's Batman were in The Dark Knight, Batman would've killed the Joker without giving a second thought. While, in essence, they're the same characters, they cannot occupy each others' worlds. Boom.Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00084981459337587456noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4417567493132970208.post-33830251699800804832012-05-16T09:36:06.646-07:002012-05-16T09:36:06.646-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00084981459337587456noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4417567493132970208.post-85786411717778984722012-05-15T21:50:40.315-07:002012-05-15T21:50:40.315-07:00Oh David, I thought we had a moratorium on publicl...Oh David, I thought we had a moratorium on publicly discussing"the Scottish film!" You will be in direct violation if you post this opinion piece. I forbid it.Druhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04588066922380662371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4417567493132970208.post-32001119493965135952012-05-15T21:24:36.491-07:002012-05-15T21:24:36.491-07:00I find it funny you quote All Star Superman James,...I find it funny you quote All Star Superman James, as the whole point of Morrison's All Star Superman intro is to point out how A) well known the origin is, and B) how really those big beats are the only things that really matter at the end of the day. He doesn't waste any more time on the origin then necessary because Superman as a concept is understood: we don't need a full blown origin to make us care about the story he is telling. It just has to be damn well written.<br /><br />Furthermore, Morrison's approach to the origin in All Star is exactly what I have been calling for the entire time! When the audience is already familiar with the big beats, they can adapt to the more specific details of the world being created without having to go over the ground of the origin again. Look at how Morrison establishes Superman’s entire universe in that story with perfect economy, laying out the relationships, tone, etc. of his universe in a manner which is perfectly clear.<br /><br />And again, you point out how many times the origins of these characters have been retold, which again, is kind of my point. I am at the point of not caring about Superman's origin because it seems to be the only story anyone seems to be able to write these days. There is no point in doing serialized fiction if you just going to retell the same damned story over and over again. Even Grant Morrison's retelling has lost my interest. Beyond this, most superhero origins share the same beats: death of the mentor/father figure, the self-doubt, etc., which is why I find most of them fairly dull. It is back story that is more or less required so we can get onto what is interesting. <br /><br />Allow me to give an example: I’ll take Burton’s Batman over Nolan’s Batman Begins any day of the week, in large part because of how it handles the origin. While I respect Nolan’s choice to follow the character as he is built from the ground up, an approach which allowed Nolan to make The Dark Knight where we see and feel Bruce having to confront some difficult moral choices, Burton’s choice to keep the audience distanced from Wayne works so much better for me overall. In terms of psychology, Nolan’s approach makes everything far too clear and rational: there is clear cause and effect. In Burton’s universe, the death of Bruce’s parents has defined him, but the way in which it plays into his psychology is far more ambiguous. As an audience member, I get to spend far more time trying to piece together Bruce Wayne and who he is, based on what he does – and does not – do and say, and I love that. I love that Bruce’s memory of his parents’ death is impressionistic rather than realistic, that he himself doesn’t fully understand what he is doing, and that when you get right down to it, he is not fully knowable. It is the same reason I love characters like Will Graham (as played by William Peterson), Frank Black from Millennium, and Daniel Plainview: I may know about them, but I’ll never fully know them.<br /><br />This is not to say that I am entirely against reboots and origins: I am not. However, when you are telling Spider-Man’s origin’s onscreen again a mere ten years after the last time, there is a problem. You cannot ask me to believe for one second that with only three films about the character and 40+ years of comics to swipe from, the origin was the story screeming to be retold above all others. You want to reboot Spider-Man, fine: start with the death of Gwen Stacy, and flashback to the events of how Peter became Spider-Man in a manner which thematically ties into the main story. You get you’re origin elements while still telling a tale which has not been told, whose ramifications can easily be the driving force of an entire series of films.<br /><br />Now, as to Dru’s point about the story of Peter’s parents being worth telling, I am going to write up a whole separate opinion piece on that for this blog. Keep your eyes peeled!Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733379553450512870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4417567493132970208.post-3257479341738702042012-05-14T07:24:53.966-07:002012-05-14T07:24:53.966-07:00It seems pretty clear to me that "the untold ...It seems pretty clear to me that "the untold story" of Peter's parents in the upcoming "Scottish film" (and its sequels) should be added to Dave's list of potential Spidey stories ripe for film adaptation. That he dismisses it so readily (presumably because of its incorporation into a new interpretation of the origin story) is, in my opinion, wrong-headed.Druhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04588066922380662371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4417567493132970208.post-17380189430165070752012-05-13T18:53:02.793-07:002012-05-13T18:53:02.793-07:00I'm inclined to agree with Dru on this. I thin...I'm inclined to agree with Dru on this. I think reboots are the way to go in this situation, particularly when it comes to the lead actor. Dru touches on this a bit, but continuity has become a little more important in superhero films (and franchises in general) than in the 80s and 90s. There’s no real reference (to my memory anyway) to Burton’s Batman films in Schumacher’s. The original Superman films only had a sense of continuity when it suited the needs of the story, and ignored it most of the time (particularly in 3 and 4).<br /><br />I liken the reboot of Spider-Man – and all retellings of origins – to cover versions of songs. (Not exactly the best analogy, since we tend to privilege the original because of primacy.) For example, we have the original version of “Summertime” from Porgey and Bess, but we can also hear various interpretations by the likes of Sam Cooke, Nina Simone, Me First & The Gimme Gimmes, the Twilight Singers, and countless others. Just as we have Raimi’s take on Peter Parker, we now have Webb’s. And come to think of it, how many times have superhero origins been retold in our lifetime? All by various writers and artists, and all with their variations on a theme, and mostly are vastly different. Just look at Superman’s origin as told through Man of Steel, Birthright, and Secret Origins; Basically the only common elements are – to quote All Star Superman – Doomed planet, desperate scientist, last hope, kindly couple.<br /><br />It’s in the nature of comic books to revisit and revamp a character’s origin. You said it yourself Dave, there is no singular story of Spider-Man. So to disregard the merits of a retelling of the origin, by saying "we already have one" in effect, partitions off Raimi’s film is THE story of Spider-Man, putting a limit on creatively re-interpreting the character. Again, look at how Shakespeare has been interpreted over the last 400+ years.Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00084981459337587456noreply@blogger.com