![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
But, with the massive box office failure of Speed Racer, which came in third in its opening weekend (up against comic book flick Iron Man and the critically panned Ashton Kutcher/Cameron Diaz vehicle, What Happens in Vegas...), will studio heads rethink their plans regarding these flicks based on popular anime and manga?
As a PR/marketing professional, I think that studios will have to reconsider their publicity/marketing plans in terms of how they "sell" their movies to both the fan base and the general public. They can't assume that it'll be an automatic moneymaker because it has great actors and directors, amazing effects, and is based off of a profitable property (as Speed Racer did). Additionally, they need to consider their core audience. The Wachowski sibs wanted to make a family-friendly flick and ended up making a seizure-inducing, two-hour technicolor headache.
And, of course, there's no denying the fact that comic book-based flicks are successful because, overall, they're just good movies. See: Hellboy, Batman Begins, and the aforementioned Iron Man. Good movies still need to be good movies - as a PR person, I know you can't "sell" crap to people, no matter how much you try to spin it.
Lastly, studios need to make sure they don't alienate all the hardcore fanboys and fangirls out there, either. Especially since those are the people who will be the first to critically praise or pan any adaptation. So, studios need to find a good balance (in terms of story adaptation) and closely watch production, as opposed to simply "trusting" filmmakers to do what's in the best interest of the audiences.
Anyway, how do you think this affects M. Night Shyamalan's live-action adaptations of Avatar: The Last Airbender, if at all? Any thoughts on how this might affect the other anime- and manga-based flicks?
- Location:la oficina
- Mood:
contemplative
Comments
About Avatar, since Shyamalan and Mike and Bryan seem to work together, and the latter two seem to approve of his work so far, I think it's gonna be a pretty decent movie, as long as one does not compare it directly to the series. Of course there will be disappointments, but if regarded separately, I think it has potential to be a great hit.
And, yeah, the ATLA movies sound like they'll go somewhat well, especially with the creators exec producing. I'm still keeping my fingers crossed, though, because a lot can happen over the course of production on a film.
And, let's face it, producers are just looking for a way to make money. I'm just hoping that DiCaprio comes to his senses and, as a fan of the original, makes an adaptation that more closely mirrors the original.
My hubby's pretty much the same way - I only get to watch subs when I'm watching all by my lonely. Otherwise, it has to be dubbed for him to follow along/not get frustrated trying to read quickly...
But adapting to American tastes is pretty much the only other reason I can think of as to why they'd change the setting. Either that or it's because of taping locations, which I can't imagine it would be because New Manhattan will look (hopefully) so different from the New York we know today (it being built off of the yen and all) that they'll have to use a lot of sound stages and special effects.
I never understood that mentality, but then again, I'm not someone who is bound to a specific country.
Spiderman: Teen angst +Superhero powers+ New York (Granted, I know it's more complicated than that but Raimi did capture all the core elements that make Spiderman, Spiderman. The angst, the superhero powers and the cynical attitude of the New York public as well as the villain angst, unrequited love etc etc)
I think you really hit the nail on the head there - any GOOD comic book-based property has done that and all the bad ones, well, the bad ones don't (see: Batman & Robin, Ghost Rider, and Fantastic Four).
the #1 thing m. night can do to help the atla movie appeal to its fanbase is FILM IT OUTSIDE. a majority of the series takes place outdoors, so it needs to LOOK like it's taking place outdoors.
And I agree on the whole acid trip thing - it doesn't look anything like the '70s version of Speed. It's more of a rendition of Speed in the future, but without all the goofy, somewhat self-effacing/tongue-in-cheek humor I remember. And it looks like the Speed film takes itself too seriously anyways (or maybe that's the Wachowskis?) - part of the original's attraction was the fact that it's totally cheesy.
And directors definitely need to pull back on using CGI/special effects for EVERYTHING. Part of the attraction of the Lord of the Rings was the fact that they used outdoor shots that looked like Middle Earth, not some digitally manufactured impostor. Granted, they need to use special effects for the bending and all that, but I want to SEE the Earth Kingdom, Fire Nation and North/South Poles as they exist in nature...
IT WILL END IN CANON ZUTARA WHAT A TWEEEEEST
HAVE AN INTERNET
But yeah, just because shit blows up doesn't make it a good movie. They need to develope an actual plot, one that ties in with the original, and go with that.
I'm sure that Avatar won't be affected. The anticipation is already set. or so it would seem with all I've been hearing about it.
And agreed on the blowing up shit part - actual story, character and plot development, and well done cinematography are needed, too.
And, with the cartoon coming to an end, I think the movies will become the next focus of the ever-rabid fandom pretty soon here (if not already).
As for the Avatar live-action movie. I think M. Night thinks the fans will totally watch it. (I know I will even though I'm a bit worried) But it woun't nessesarly do well in my opinion.
I think people who are fans of M. Night and/or ATLA will watch it (I most likely will, too), but I don't think it'll have the blockbuster success that Nick and Universal are hoping for.
And awesome icon, my dear!