I jus think it would have been cool if they had gotten Sting to play him
Talk about going full circle.
Another Hellblazer fan checking in.
For the next couple of weeks I get to cling to the wispy hope that while the movie appears to bear almost no resemblence to the comics, it will at least be a decent movie in its own right. The trailers don’t instill much confidence, but a fangirl can dream. I think stripping Constantine of his London-based working class background is a huge mistake, but in and of itself I’m not opposed to a movie featuring an American equivalent. However, to be an American equivalent the character would have to be, in the entirely accurate words of the OP, more intelligent than a paving stone. The X-men movies worked because, although they played fast and loose with the details of the comics, adhered very much to the spirit of them. Based on the movie adaptation and the trailers, the spirit of the comics has been jettisoned along with the details.
The filmmakers may not “owe” comics fans more than a good movie for their admission fee, but if they’re not trying to tap into the goodwill of fanbase at all, then why use the Constantine name? How hard would it have been to create a new character and setting from whole cloth (which, based on what we’ve seen so far, is pretty much what happened)? The studio must see some marketing advantage in what they’re doing. I wouldn’t have thought there were enough Hellblazer fans to make it worth their while, but the character has wandered through enough Vertigo and DCU titles that perhaps he has more name recognition than I would have guessed. I guarantee this film wouldn’t be drawing such ire from the comics fans if it were being marketed as a standalone effort unrelated to Hellblazer. And, as a previous poster quite rightfully pointed out, if the movie’s bad, all we’ll hear is that it’s bad because it’s based on a comic.
On the other hand, without the movie I’m sure we wouldn’t have seen the publication of All His Engines and Rare Cuts. The former is wonderful, and I’m sure the latter is quite useful to those who hadn’t tracked down those issues in singles.
These are my sentiments exactly with regards to Hollywood adapting other mediums. I just don’t get it. They’re making a DOOM movie and, aparently, it’s going to be about a space-virus. What this has to do with DOOM I’ll never know.
Again, why alienate the (relatively) few fans when the teeming masses that they’re targetting don’t care what the source material is anyway? If you want to make a space-virus movie, then make it and call it Space Virus (or whatever); not DOOM.
(it’s my first posting in pit thread… be gentle)
for a good site for pitting of ALL new releases, go to Mr. Cranky
if you want to see the worst movie EVER MADE, rent: Battlefield Earth.
a buddy of mine forced me to see that over Gladiator, because he refuses to sit through a 3 hour movie. Fucker.
Anyway, almost back to the original topic: … Hollywood has sucked ass for over a decade. I can’t remember the last time i saw a genuinely GREAT hollywood movie. There’s been some indy films that were pretty good (and released by a hollywood studio maybe, but that duzn’t qualify as a ‘hollywood’ movie)… but mostly for at least the past decade, Hollywood has been shoveling out nothing but shit… why? because the morons who are the American Public will continue paying $10 a ticket to watch SHIT. Until these morons finally STOP paying $10 a ticket to watch SHIT, Hollywood will be happy to keep shoveling it our way.
First of all, they want the “conceit”. So, they have to pay for it.
Second of all, they know that you comic book fans are going to see it anyway because you ALWAYS buy every piece of swag associated with your heros, without fail.
What else are you going to be doing, hanging out with your girlfriends?
Yeah but you see we don’t really care much what you think of the movie, either. We are going into the thing as fans of the comic. And we’re the ones who’ve been giving DC/Warner money to help them piss all over something that we’re a fan of. And we sure as hell are being targeted as a core market for this – the title/logo of the comic has been changed to incorporate the movie’s title, and there are ads all over comic shops promoting the movie.
The big problem is that this is one of the worst cases of Hollywood pandering in recent memory. They’ve taken an interesting license and sucked away everything that made it unique, specifically to cater to people like you, who just want to see explosions and demons and angels duking it out.
That’s fine; I like big stupid action movies, and I’ll probably end up seeing Constantine and it’ll probably be entertaining enough. But this is a bait-and-switch operation counting on fans’ love of the character to draw them in to see what is basically a different movie, and it also means that a real Hellblazer movie will never get made. I read the thing for years; just about every story arc had a huge amount of movie potential, and any one of them would’ve been a truly innovative story that’s unlike anything movie audiences have seen before. Instead DC took the “safe” route and just said give the people what (we think) they want, and give it this title so we can tie it in for more sales.
So you’re getting cheated too, because you could be watching a better and more original movie. Like a modern classic as opposed to Generic Supernatural Action Film of 2005. There’s a place for that movie, and there’s an audience for it. Just don’t dick over a license because of it.
And it’s not just the hair that people are bitching about. A short list: the time setting (Thatcherian England vs. modern-day LA), the character (wry supernatural con artist vs. haunted magic-using whatever the hell Keanu’s’ supposed to be), the name (lots of jokes in the comic about how stupid Americans pronounce it “Constanteen,” which is how the movie title is pronounced), the premise (it’s not an action comic; it’s more like The Sting with demons and angels), the car (Constantine can’t drive, which is the impetus for half the stories), the accent (not only is Keanu American, but they cast a British actress and have her doing an American accent), and so on, and so on. Bleah.
Oh, but you’re mistaken. Ennis’ stuff on Hellblazer is great, sure, but it would’ve come across as shallow and crass without the years of Delano’s building up the character. Delano’s stuff is a lot slower-paced, but it’s compelling and deep – closer to real horror.
Hmm. Apparently I was too polite to you in the last post. You’re a moron who’s exactly the kind of audience that DC/Warner is pandering too. “I want to watch shit blow up and look at titties! Whoo hoo!”
And no, he’s going to be hanging out with his boyfriend, jack-ass. Who would be me.
Oh Trunk, so witty!
So, on another note, to make this a bit more fun… Friends of mine and I were trying to come up with the top 100 people who’d be better to play John than Keanau, and towards the bottom, it got pretty humorous. The one that had us rolling:
#77, Don Knotts.
You don’t actually know what the word “conceit” means, do you?
Not I. I do not intend to spend a dime on this movie. Maybe when it shows up on HBO, I’ll watch. So take your empty-headed generalizations and cooler-than-thou attitude and cram 'em, buddy.
Well, ya got me there.
Now you’re just being an asshole. I’m a huge HellBlazer fan, and I have no intention of seeing this piece of shit.
Again, I think the asshole label applies. If it’s any business of yours, I’ll be hanging out with my wife, thanks for asking.
I think Trunk might be a self-loathing comic book fanboy!
Or maybe just a jerk. 
You know, this all sounds exactly like the complaints about the movie I, Robot. Using a name of a famous work, and letting hollywood writers turn it into something completely different.
The writers involved with these projects must be the most conceted group of assholes to ever cross this planet. “Gee, this story is really popular. Imaging how good it will be if I re-write it!”
A lot of these movies are “made to order” and the writer has very, very little to do with the actual final product. If I was going to blame someone for the bastardization of a favorite license of mine I’d be looking more towards the producer[s] and director.
Oh, but they are.
The way Hollywood treats Alan Moore’s stuff, I won’t be surprised if we’re pitting the casting of Rob Schneider as Ozymandias a year from now.
So, I guess his new star on the “Hollywood Walk of Fame” doesn’t help? Oh, that’s right, he paid for it.
I know this is the pit n all, but this is still really moronic and offensive. If you’re gong to pit, at elast do so intelligently. Hollywood movies aren’t bad, usually. And I personally think the good/bad ration has improved from a low point in the early 90’s.
I don’t know how I missed this the first time.
Study your film history. The entity we commonly refer to as “Hollywood” has NEVER been about the “art”. Even in the dawn of the film area, the movie business has always been just that - a business. Do you think the 1890s through the mid 1990s were rolling great arthouse flicks off the production line and they suddenly just turned to shit in the last 10 years?
There are no more or less of what you consider “great” films coming out today and there never will be. The average American doesn’t want them and it’s not up to “Hollywood” to foot the bill for something that isn’t going to turn a profit.
Are they? Then why do they insist on making movies based on formulas that seem to generate more painful bombs than successes when it comes to adaptations?
You do have a bit of a point there with regards to this one niche. They keep letting this guy Uwe Boll direct video game movies. Take a look at his track record and then go ahead and try to tell me we don’t have another Ed Wood on our hands.