ABC is currently developing a new Incredible Hulk series. Marvel thinks the Incredible Hulk will have legs as a television series like the 80s series on CBS. The Incredible Hulk did not do well in feature film format, as there have been two movies in the last ten years, and neither did particularly well.
Marvel also may be looking at developing a Cloak and Dagger series based upon the Marvel characters of Tyrone Johnson and Tandy Bowen, with the powers of a cloak of darkness and light daggers, respectively.This show may be developed for ABC Family.
Also, from DC Entertainment, David E. Kelley (creator of Picket Fences, Chicago Hope, The Practice, Ally McBeal, Boston Public and Boston Legal) is developing a new Wonder Woman TV series. The character barely left the ground under Joss Whedon's pen last year, and hasn't made much progress as a feature film since. Lynda Carter's Wonder Woman was a hit television show on ABC and then CBS in the 70's.
Showing posts with label marvel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label marvel. Show all posts
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Joss Whedon confirmed as director of Avengers
As i mentionned earlier today, at Comic-con today, Joss Whedon, eager to please his fans, finally confimed what we all knew - that he'll be directing Marvel Entertainment's The Avengers, to be released in 2012.
The current cast includes Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man, Chris Hemsworth as Thor, Chris Evans as Captain America, Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye, Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury.
It is rumored that Mark Ruffalo is in talks to take over the part of Hulk, last played by Edward Norton.
Scarlett Johansson is rumored to be in the film, again as the Black Widow, as is Don Cheadle as War Machine.
There are also some rumors that both Ant Man/Hank Pym and Wasp/Janet Van Dyne will be in the film. The most rumored actors for these roles are Eva Longaria and Nathan Fillon (but these are just rumors).
The current cast includes Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man, Chris Hemsworth as Thor, Chris Evans as Captain America, Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye, Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury.
It is rumored that Mark Ruffalo is in talks to take over the part of Hulk, last played by Edward Norton.
Scarlett Johansson is rumored to be in the film, again as the Black Widow, as is Don Cheadle as War Machine.
There are also some rumors that both Ant Man/Hank Pym and Wasp/Janet Van Dyne will be in the film. The most rumored actors for these roles are Eva Longaria and Nathan Fillon (but these are just rumors).
Monday, July 19, 2010
X-Men # 1 Comic Review
1991's X-Men # 1 sold over eight million copies, partially fueled by the speculator's market at the time, becoming the best selling comic book of all time. This is the first time since 1991 that Marvel Comics has released an X-Men # 1.
While the first X-Men # 1 was written by X-Men and Comic legend Chris Claremont, this time Marvel took a different approach. This issue was written by crime novelist turned comic book writer Victor Gischler.
The artist here is Paco Medina. The art here is good - perfect for an X-Men comic. The figures are recognizable, and not all the same. The coloring is bright and colorful. The art is not too photo-realistic for this type of comic, and it doesn't look like all the faces are traced like many comics these days.
22 pages is the length of a standard comic, and usually that is enough to tell an issue's worth of story. Unfortunately, as this is the beginning of not just a new story, but also a new series, I found it lacking. Marvel should have gone for a double sized issue (or at least 32 pages) because not too much happened in this issue. I expected some setup, but this issue was all set up. I have faith that given a few more issues, the action and characterization will be ramped up, but for a # 1, this issue is not likely to create any new X-Men fans.
The issue starts off with former fan-favorite kid X-Man Jubilee (she lost her powers a year or so ago) and current fan-favorite kid X-Men (taking the place of Jubilee) Pixie sitting at a table talking somewhere in San Francisco (where the X-Men are now based), while this big guy wearing a mask and full trench coat starts walking towards them. Pixie conveniently goes to get nachos just as big black Trench coat guy reaches his destination.
He opens his trench coat and "BWOOOOOM" he explodes, getting big black trench coat guy goo all over Jubilee.
Keeping in mind that the storyline is called "Curse of the Mutants" and it was advertised as an X-Men Vs. Vampires storyline, guest starring Blade, the vampire hunter, the characters proceed for the next twenty or so pages to dance around the word vampire, avoiding it at all costs.
I'm not sure if the writer wasn't aware that it would be advertised this way, or if he thought it would be a neat thing to do, but it wasn't. Especially with the previous weeks tie-in issue "Death of Dracula" also written by Gischler. This just seemed forced and to that effect, the characters wasted an awful lot of words dancing around the word "Vampire" when they could have just said it and been done with it.
Back to the story, we see Jubilee being tested by the X-Club (a group of X-Men scientists) and it appears she has a virus, caused by the vampire bomb. So next issue..Vampire Jubilee anyone?
That aside, characterization is solid throughout the issue. We learn that the Vampire Bomb target was in fact Jubilee, which right now seems pretty random, but i imagine this will be explained later.
The main X-Men we see in this issue are Wolverine, Pixie, and Angel. They have a good action scene later in the issue, doing some scouting work where they get attacked by a few vampires.
There are a couple more gripes i have with the issue, such as why send a kid (Pixie) to fight what you think are Vampires? In the X-Men universe, they are a pretty big threat. Also, it was frustrating that Angel didn't turn into Archangel once in the issue (something that likely wouldn't be known if a new reader were to pick this up).
My final problem with the issue is its accessibility. We see Cyclops Jubilee, Pixie, Storm, Angel, Dr. Nemesis, Dr. Kavita Rao, and Wolverine. If a new reader were to pick this up, besides Cyclops, Wolverine, Storm, and possibly Angel, they would have no idea who these characters are. At the very least, text boxes introducing the characters should have been used here, like they are in many other comics, including Matt Fractions Uncanny X-Men.
I give the issue 2 1/2 out of 5 stars. I see potential for this series, but a lot of rookie mistakes were made in this issue. Hopefully things will get ironed out in the issues moving forward.
Response to A Marvel Writer's Plea to stop downloading his comics April 1 2007
My response to "A Marvel writer’s plea to stop downloading his comics" April 1st, 2007
“If the person downloading had no intention to buy before downloading, then no money is really involved either. Revenue can only be considered to have been forgone by the publisher if the download is of an item which would otherwise have been purchased by the downloader had the download not been available.”
If the person downloading had no intention of buying then they shouldn’t be allowed to read the comic.
So you’re saying I don’t have the right to let my brother/uncle/whatever borrow it and read it? Because they’re not willing to pay for it?
If they can’t afford it or it’s out of reach then they should wait for the trade. Yeah the system sucks and somebody should create an ITunes system for it or whatever Chris Hunter is describing but that hasn’t happened yet so you should just deal with it. It’s not the big events that are being affected here, it’s the smaller books that are always on the razor’s edge of being cancelled.
Maybe the reason that some of the best titles are so close to being canceled is that the comic buying population is so inbred without newsstands that all the majority wants to read is the moderate titles – those that are not great but not bad, also those that are squarely in the center of their respective squared universes (aka receive the most publicity, etc)and any way of garnering new customers (accepting the cash cow that is civil war/cap 25) is almost impossible.
And every argument that’s being thrown around about Slott’s download record isn’t changing the fact that if She-Hulk get’s cancelled then everybody who downloaded it, liked it, and never paid for it should be punched in the face. We’re not talking about royalties so much as whether people have a JOB next month.
Just because you like something does NOT mean that you would be willing to spend 40 dollars a year buying issues of it.
This doesn’t make it right, but it also is a reality. People download music and movies illegally.
They’re having the same issue, except for unlike those other two, comic book collectors/readers are collectors, not just readers, so it’d be near impossible to get rid of the written comic book (but i do see a future without CDs and once internet technology catches up, without DVDs)
I’ve been collecting comics since i was a child, and i can tell you i HATE the comic book format. It is flimsy, easy to rip and crinkle, etc. the stories are never long enough, and the ads these days detract majorly from the content. Not to mention that there has been a lot of junk put out over the last ten years.
Would i spend more money on X-men if i got a novel sized story every month? Without a doubt. But that’s not going to happen and waiting for paperbacks is painful since by the time you read it, the team is on their next storyline, moving forward without you.
Comic Books are books. You can go to the library and read about your favorite novelised heroes there. Is this copyright infringement?
Would there be less people downloading comics if they were available at their local library? Perhaps, but why is this library any different from downloading? Didn’t the author only get the revenue from that book once (just like if it were a comic book). Should we close down all libraries?
Plus it’s insulting to the people who shell out our hard earned money each month for a comic to tell us it doesn’t matter whether somebody paid to read it or not. We’re the ones who have to decide whether to add something to our pull list or drop it. So to tell us that it’s fine for YOU to be able to download whatever you want as long as you pay for what you can when you feel like is just a shot bird in the face. If you can’t afford it then don’t read it. Buy what you can. Deal with the way things are until the inevitable change finally comes.
Without any easy access to comic books today (where i lived when i was a kid, the nearest comic book store was in a part of the city that my parents would never go to) many people can’t get to a shop. Is that their fault? They could order online, but in my opinion, this brings to light a falsity in thinking. This is no ones fault but the publishers. if they really longed for those sales, they’d be available at more than just your local comic book store, which may be 25 miles away.
The perfect places to sell these comic books would be at places like Toys R Us, Best Buy, Gamestop, Barnes and Noble.
Book Stores
Video Game Stores
Movie Stores
Toy Stores
all places where their future base readership is quietly fading away due to lack of availability and mainstream presence.
If everyone just “deals with the way things are until the change inevitable comes”, then guess what, that change will not inevitable come. Do you think if Marvel and DC could be promised thats they wouldn’t have to deal with people trying to illegally download comic books ever again, that they would ever get to the point where comic books are a digital medium? No…the thing pushing them to make it digital would be the illegal downloads. Just like for music and movies, the illegal downloading is the push the industry needs to grow into its digital form.
“Infringing copyright. Not stealing. Not even illegal in many countries. ”
Whether you like it or not, “infringing copyright” by definition is wrong. Morally, ethically, and most of the time LEGALLY wrong. When your argument comes down to whether or not something is stealing of just infringing on copyright then you’ve totally lost the moral high ground and the point.
I submit that copyright infringement is breaking a US law. Do not, however, say that breaking a copyright is by definition wrong. Many countries have no copyright laws.
In my opinion, the copyright code has to be rewritten for a downloading age, it is so archaic that it can’t even work any longer within its own established rules and regulations.
And to the argument about sharing with a group of friends being no different: Well there’s a difference between 3 or 4 friends and 3 or four HUNDRED “friends” now isn’t there?
Only if any of those 3 0r four HUNDRED friends would have bought it otherwise, which isn’t always the case.
Many people see free, and read it anyways, even if they otherwise wouldn’t. Some of these people who download are the people that skim the books in the shops or wait for spoilers online, etc. None of those are illegal, and yet they have exactly the same effect.
In all these cases, no one without half a brain would say “this is bad for the industry” because it isn’t. It is helping the industry grow to areas where it otherwise wouldn’t – including online, places without access to shops, and don’t forget – if you read something for free and then enjoy it, you might just pick it up at the store next time you see it or heaven forbid search out more from this character or more from the artist/writer. and this time you may be willing to PAY for it!
Must be bad business when companies scare away profits. That’s what the music industry ended up doing by suing college students. What is happeining now? Itunes is slowly removing DRM protection from it’s songs…
All things in time come full circle..
“If the person downloading had no intention to buy before downloading, then no money is really involved either. Revenue can only be considered to have been forgone by the publisher if the download is of an item which would otherwise have been purchased by the downloader had the download not been available.”
If the person downloading had no intention of buying then they shouldn’t be allowed to read the comic.
So you’re saying I don’t have the right to let my brother/uncle/whatever borrow it and read it? Because they’re not willing to pay for it?
If they can’t afford it or it’s out of reach then they should wait for the trade. Yeah the system sucks and somebody should create an ITunes system for it or whatever Chris Hunter is describing but that hasn’t happened yet so you should just deal with it. It’s not the big events that are being affected here, it’s the smaller books that are always on the razor’s edge of being cancelled.
Maybe the reason that some of the best titles are so close to being canceled is that the comic buying population is so inbred without newsstands that all the majority wants to read is the moderate titles – those that are not great but not bad, also those that are squarely in the center of their respective squared universes (aka receive the most publicity, etc)and any way of garnering new customers (accepting the cash cow that is civil war/cap 25) is almost impossible.
And every argument that’s being thrown around about Slott’s download record isn’t changing the fact that if She-Hulk get’s cancelled then everybody who downloaded it, liked it, and never paid for it should be punched in the face. We’re not talking about royalties so much as whether people have a JOB next month.
Just because you like something does NOT mean that you would be willing to spend 40 dollars a year buying issues of it.
This doesn’t make it right, but it also is a reality. People download music and movies illegally.
They’re having the same issue, except for unlike those other two, comic book collectors/readers are collectors, not just readers, so it’d be near impossible to get rid of the written comic book (but i do see a future without CDs and once internet technology catches up, without DVDs)
I’ve been collecting comics since i was a child, and i can tell you i HATE the comic book format. It is flimsy, easy to rip and crinkle, etc. the stories are never long enough, and the ads these days detract majorly from the content. Not to mention that there has been a lot of junk put out over the last ten years.
Would i spend more money on X-men if i got a novel sized story every month? Without a doubt. But that’s not going to happen and waiting for paperbacks is painful since by the time you read it, the team is on their next storyline, moving forward without you.
Comic Books are books. You can go to the library and read about your favorite novelised heroes there. Is this copyright infringement?
Would there be less people downloading comics if they were available at their local library? Perhaps, but why is this library any different from downloading? Didn’t the author only get the revenue from that book once (just like if it were a comic book). Should we close down all libraries?
Plus it’s insulting to the people who shell out our hard earned money each month for a comic to tell us it doesn’t matter whether somebody paid to read it or not. We’re the ones who have to decide whether to add something to our pull list or drop it. So to tell us that it’s fine for YOU to be able to download whatever you want as long as you pay for what you can when you feel like is just a shot bird in the face. If you can’t afford it then don’t read it. Buy what you can. Deal with the way things are until the inevitable change finally comes.
Without any easy access to comic books today (where i lived when i was a kid, the nearest comic book store was in a part of the city that my parents would never go to) many people can’t get to a shop. Is that their fault? They could order online, but in my opinion, this brings to light a falsity in thinking. This is no ones fault but the publishers. if they really longed for those sales, they’d be available at more than just your local comic book store, which may be 25 miles away.
The perfect places to sell these comic books would be at places like Toys R Us, Best Buy, Gamestop, Barnes and Noble.
Book Stores
Video Game Stores
Movie Stores
Toy Stores
all places where their future base readership is quietly fading away due to lack of availability and mainstream presence.
If everyone just “deals with the way things are until the change inevitable comes”, then guess what, that change will not inevitable come. Do you think if Marvel and DC could be promised thats they wouldn’t have to deal with people trying to illegally download comic books ever again, that they would ever get to the point where comic books are a digital medium? No…the thing pushing them to make it digital would be the illegal downloads. Just like for music and movies, the illegal downloading is the push the industry needs to grow into its digital form.
“Infringing copyright. Not stealing. Not even illegal in many countries. ”
Whether you like it or not, “infringing copyright” by definition is wrong. Morally, ethically, and most of the time LEGALLY wrong. When your argument comes down to whether or not something is stealing of just infringing on copyright then you’ve totally lost the moral high ground and the point.
I submit that copyright infringement is breaking a US law. Do not, however, say that breaking a copyright is by definition wrong. Many countries have no copyright laws.
In my opinion, the copyright code has to be rewritten for a downloading age, it is so archaic that it can’t even work any longer within its own established rules and regulations.
And to the argument about sharing with a group of friends being no different: Well there’s a difference between 3 or 4 friends and 3 or four HUNDRED “friends” now isn’t there?
Only if any of those 3 0r four HUNDRED friends would have bought it otherwise, which isn’t always the case.
Many people see free, and read it anyways, even if they otherwise wouldn’t. Some of these people who download are the people that skim the books in the shops or wait for spoilers online, etc. None of those are illegal, and yet they have exactly the same effect.
In all these cases, no one without half a brain would say “this is bad for the industry” because it isn’t. It is helping the industry grow to areas where it otherwise wouldn’t – including online, places without access to shops, and don’t forget – if you read something for free and then enjoy it, you might just pick it up at the store next time you see it or heaven forbid search out more from this character or more from the artist/writer. and this time you may be willing to PAY for it!
Must be bad business when companies scare away profits. That’s what the music industry ended up doing by suing college students. What is happeining now? Itunes is slowly removing DRM protection from it’s songs…
All things in time come full circle..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)