Cool News
Well It Looks Bad For SANDMAN...
Ok WARNERS, pay attention. Watch TALK BACK. Those people posting down there are not me. They are your.. YOUR IDEAL MARKET FOR THIS FILM. Listen to the elegance with which they discuss Jon Peters' skill as a producer and creative type. Watch what they think about the first line by SANDMAN. And then you would do well to do with Jon Peters as they tell you. Ok TALK BACK people, let's hear from the Warners and Jon Peters fan clubs. Hopefully I'll get my hands on this script soon so I can confirm this with my own eyes, though I have to say I really really trust the source, I'll call her DEATH...
I just read a copy of the unbelievably bad SANDMAN script
Warners/Jon Peters now have. It's by someone named Bill Farmer. It's
really horrible. (His first line is "Foolish mortals! As if your puny
weapons can harm me! The lord of sleep! The Sandman!" and then he launches
himself into space, falls to the floor and complains about his powers being
weakened. It goes downhill very fast after that. )
It's quite the worst thing I've read in years.
Death
-
+ Expand All
-
If Sandman can't be treated with the beauty and delicious darkness and humor that is deserves, then I'd prefer if they never made it. Morpheus evolves so much over the series that it would be hard to pin down a character. Plus, how much you explain about the Endless and how do you make the wonderful Death more than a caricature? As Gaiman once wrote, "Hearts don't break, but they can shatter." It would shatter my heart to see the Sandman destroyed by Hollywood.
-
I was under the impression (probably erroniously) that Neil Gaiman had a special deal with DC/Vertigo that only he could write his version of Sandman. Would this apply to the film version as well (not that he would actually write the screenplay, but that he would be involved)? That line that was quoted wouldn't get by Gaiman if he had anything to say on the matter (unless the movie is about one of DC's OTHER Sandmen). And DC's film adaptations usually have something to do with the source material (Batman and Robin notwithstanding). I mean, it ain't Marvel we're talking about here.
-
Nah, unfortunately Neil has completely absolved himself of all blame as far as the Sandman film is concerned. He's said he's having nothing to do with it ... pity ...
-
If Neil Gaiman isn't writing the screenplay, then I'm not certain I want to see a Sandman film at all. No one else could do the characters and subject matter justice. Anyway, If Harry is right about the sad shape of the current "Sandman" script, *I* could write a better one -- and so could half the people who post here.
-
(Or Terry Semel, for that matter?) I mean, what the hell? Was I just transported to Bizarro World, and no one told me? Warner Bros., let's take a pop quiz in Logic 101: Given - you own an award-winning literary property beloved by countless devoted fans, and have the right to develop it into a potentially spellbinding, unique, and profound piece of cinematic artistry that could be a huge crossover hit. Do you A.) Remain faithful to the source material that inspired you to make the film in the first place, thereby insuring support of the property's core constituency, or B.) say "fuck it, let's make this a shallow, brainless, cookie-cutter superhero romp" and alienate all the very people who would buy tickets opening weekend, while providing no compelling reason for anyone else to pay money to see this movie? HELLO! Get a clue! And you thought "Batman & Robin" was a failure? Do you have _any_ idea the kind of disaster you're setting yourself up for? Do you have even the _slightest_ sense of the following that "Sandman" possesses? Terry Semel, have you even _read_ Neil Gaiman's work? Haven't you noticed the mess Peters has made of the "Superman Lives" project? ARE YOU ALL ON CRACK? God, I wish I'd stayed in bed this morning... My whole day is already ruined.
-
Neil Gaiman was a GOH at a Con here a few weeks back. I chatted ever so briefly to him about the rumours surrounding this vile and damn near sacreligious project. He's on record as saying he doesn't want anything to do with the project because "noone should be made to barbeque their own baby."
His word on the latest script from Warners was "excrescence." Morpheus apparently "fights and f**ks" his way through the screenplay. Yes, the Sandman. Who doesn't have to lay a finger on you to completely elate or destroy you, as suits his whimsy. Fights. And the rest of it.
Gaiman exhorted me to pray to whatever gods I hold dear that this film never see the light of day, and daily candles have been lit, I can tell you. I now exhort you all to do the same.
V. -
I have to admit that Tony's idea of a five year Sandman TV Series is the best idea for bringing Sandman to the screen. Sandman was originally conceived as finite series, with a story that starts in the first issue and ends in the last, with multiple story arcs happening along the way.
Realistically, I doubt it could ever happen. In syndication, it would get perverted, Sandman would get a girlfriend and a kid sidekick and alot of other stuff to make it "more appealing" to as many markets as possible. Also, Sandman is too cerebral for TV and too expensive to produce.
As far as making it into a major motion picture, I think the best way to go would be DON'T! Just leave it alone. It's a great comic and just leave it that way. No movie will ever compare to the Sandman that we all have in our heads. Certainly the aspects that mean the most to me, from the series, are probably not the same things that you thought were great.
Regarding Gaiman's involvement: From what I've read and heard from Gaiman, he wants nothing to do with a Sandman movie, (I think) because he knows that it can't be done well. I saw him speak and he was very excited about the prospect of "Death: The High Cost of Living" being made into a nice small movie. He said his greatest fear for Sandman is that they would get Arnold for the title role.
"Pleasant Dreams, mather focker" -
Jon Peters is notorious for his ham-fisted approach to film making. Remember, this is the guy who wanted to introduce a parent/child scenario into the film version of "Contact" with a sub-plot about the child sneaking into the alien ship and making emotional contact with his/her parent. He's also responsible for the Nicholas Cage/Superman casting fiasco. Rumors that Peters can barely read and seldom reads scripts have been rampant in Hollywood for years, this could explain the cheesy dialogue in the proposed Sandman script. Only a former hairdresser with the subtlety of car crash could think that crap is interesting dialogue. For my part, I think a Sandman animated series a la Batman/Superman or even a Dreamworks animated film version might be worth watching.
-
The Sandman project has been riddled with problems, this is nothing new. Capturing the spirit of the characters and the setting is a monumental task, one that cannot be abused or manipulated under the auspices of "market viability" - a business philosophy demonstrated by most of the studios today and the reason The Avengers was such a disappointment, not to mention the trouble Superman has experienced.
I think Jon Peters is a fine producer, but I don't believe he is appropriate for the job of translating much loved graphic novels and comic books to the screen. His inability to get Superman off the ground is proof enough of that, not to mention, of course, The Sandman.
I think it may be a metter of Peters not understanding the material. The Sandman is far more complex than Batman, Superman, and Tango & Cash. The Sandman is, in all respects, mythology for the new millenium.
The key to a successful Sandman franchise is to take Peters off the project (which he has already spent millions on), replacing him with a producer having the correct passion for the property, someone who acknowledges it for the masterpiece that it is, and one who is willing to bring Gaiman on as a consultant.
This correct passion goes for the screenwriter as well. Avoid the Hollywood scribes and go for someone who's written some historical scripts such as the upcoming Shakespeare in Love, Elizabeth, and Howards' End.
The writers of these scripts understand the intricacies of a fine plot and alluring characters (if those are the words I'm looking for.
All in all, The Sandman shouldn't be made with the kind of crew attached to the project unless, of course, WB is looking for another bomb. -
Peters-Sandman, a marriage made in hell. Like giving Flaubert to Michale Bay (probably a perfect director for Sandman in Peters mind0. I had heard reliable rumors about Sandman having a SANDMOBILE and a SAND-CAVE (so to speak). The knowledge of Peters involvement makes all this possible, horribly possible indeed. The fact that the movie industry confuses wild, unruly behaviou as proof of genius, finds its most execrable specimens in people like Peters. The Shampoo boy has made it big. Now we have a Hairdresser in charge of good portions of our Pop 20th century mithology. Looking forward to Stallone playing Sandman, Rosseanne playing Dispair, Jim Carrey as Destiny, Pam Anderson Lee playing Death, etc
-
OK, I know nothing about Sandman. I don't read comics. Hell, I'd never even heard of the character until today. But when I read that line ("foolish mortals...") I just couldn't stop laughing. I just got the crazy idea that the Austin Powers people could get a hold of that script, change the character names, lower the tone, and make the ultimate super hero spoof. That line is just soooooo FUNNY!!! OK, fine, don't destroy a comic that people have strong feelings for. But attach it to an original, totally derivative hero, do it as a spoof, and it could be great. "foolish mortals, as if your weapons could harm me!". I love it!
-
You know, the idea of a series ain't half bad. Animated might be the way to go, too, if only to make the budget feasible. The problem is who would be doing it? A movie could be made to work if they didn't have idiots in charge. The source material is so great I'd be up to see it in ANY form, but apparently the original work is the first thing to get thrown out the window with these morons. Why bother making a Sandman film if it bears no resemblance to Sandman? Just grab some old script out of the trash can and make that! At least then you're not ruining something that used to be good.
-
Although I hesitate to get involved in this, I am a dedicated reader of Sandman, so here's the 2
-
What's all this about bad mouthing the very fine Jon...(mmph) Peters, he's a fine producer (giggle) that turns to gold (mmph, giggle) everything he touches (guffaw). Well, I almost did it, almost kept a straight face.
If HBO can do a cool animated Spawn series (movie whatever! Okay it wasn't great but it was still infinintely better than the live action) and WB can do a cool Batman series, then maybe a Sandman animated series might work! Or how about a BBC series like they are trying with Clive Barker's "Weaveworld" (is that still happening?).
Anything will be better than this abortion that WB is trying to pass off as the beloved Sandman. (Though I like the one posters idea of Roseanne as Despair, she wouldn't need a lot of make up!) -
d is for many things said some weird little Mr Dee bloke in one of the early comics.
In Warners case its for dumb. or disaster.
i dunno, dotn want to start another anti-US rant but i cant help feeling a small budget UK film would serve us a better Morpheus movie. The whole title was very Uk centered not just in terms of Neil and Dave McKean but also the style. It was a breath of freash air in a US domianted capes n tights medium and gave us Verigo etc.
Morpheus is a english goth.
You dont need a massive budget to do this story. Its a story about stories after all, not flash renderings of the dreaming and its dwellers.
bloody americans, you spoil everything 8)
(joke!)
-
Who directed WHAT DREAMS MAY COME? The images of heaven and hell that they devised for that movie show inspiration for Morpheus' castle and the realm of dreams he travels though. Television isn't ready for a Sandman series, look what they've done to the Crow (his makeup looks like the Joker and they hired the actual based on his resemblance to Brandon Lee, not his acting skills, but I digress). Also, imagine who they would try to cast? Gaiman has described the King of Dreams as looking around 17yrs old - can we guess who Hollywood would try to cast?
-
Goddamn these guys at WARNER!!! This is the time to get someone like Tim Burton to direct!!! The guy can spin some weirdness in this movie and keep the feeling of the comics!!! And better! HE WOULD CAST JOHNNY DEPP as MORPHEUS!!! PERFECT CAST!
-
Warner Bros. used to make good films. Now, they make bad ones, particularly when it comes to comic-to-film properties. Greed has always been a factor in Hollywood, but I also thought that telling a good story was important as well. Some may personally disagree, but the first two Batman films were well recieved by critics and fans alike. Somehow, this process was destroyed, and they let the evil Akiva and Joel in. Peters is a joke. His headstone should read "I @#$%ed up Superman" with two giant polar bears on each side. The WB will say they are trying to make the characters more accessible to the regular public (i.e. non-fans), but I have said this before and I'll say it again. THERE ARE ONLY TWO REASONS YOU CAN MAKE A FILM LIKE THIS: 1) A CREATOR HAS A VISION AND 2) THE FANS WHO BUY ALL THE COMICBOOKS, NOVELS, ETC. If the fans had never bought a Fleming novel, there would be no James Bond. If no one had cared about a comic called Superman, the WB would have never had a hit cartoon on their hands and a potential movie franchise. Star Wars and Star Trek have lasted so long because of their rabid fan base. So, I think that these producers, directors, writers and actors do have a responsibility to the core fans. It doesn't have to be their life, but during the time that they devote to making the film, at least give us your best. It's your job. If it's a good movie, everyone will go see it.
-
I haven't been a fan of Sandman for a while, and I doubt a movie could ever do the series justice anyway, but . . . well, this shit is just too much. I think it's about time we all seriously considered obtaining the home addresses of Peters and those like him, and paying occasional visits, armed with various blunt instruments. Yeah, I gotcher batman right here.
-
This whole Sandman fiasco is why. Comics translated to the big screen generally haven't been working for the very same reason that great novels don't usually make great movies -- something sort of gets lost in the translation, plus you usually have someone like Peters in control who wants to put "his own unique stamp on this." Best to leave well enough alone, at least in Sandman's case. It's a great, well-written, thought-provoking storyline with a hauntingly well-written lead character. Unfortunately Hollywood doesn't think the general public can handle intelligent material like that. "Well, let's dumb it down a bunch." I am reminded of the SNL commercial pitching a faux toy line for the film "Philadelphia," giving Tom Hanks a rocket pack, Antonia Banderas a "dino-buddy" and installing an ejection witness stand in the courtroom playset. I laughed my ass off at that one, it was so true. I mean, how the hell can they expect to sell Sandman Happy Meals if the script is -- oh my God!!! -- INTELLIGENT? "Dumb it down, make it suck, the kids'll eat it up, no one gives a shit anyway, IT'S ONLY A MOVIE!!!" Whatever. Over and out.
-
I know it's unlikely, considering the Warner studio's proven aversion to intelligent influences on this project (their vetoing the Svenkmayer-style of the Dreaming, pardon my murderous spelling), but why not just get Dave?! He's been making films for a while now (anyone seen THE WEEK BEFORE or heard anything new about NEON?), and who better than Dave to capture the feel of the books? And while we're at it, let's go all out and get Jonathan Carroll to write the screenplay. If his site (www.jonathancarroll.com) is any indication of things, Carroll enjoys writing screenplays and is friends with both Neil and Dave. Get Tori to do the soundtrack and it's absolute gold for the diehard fans... To back up my argument for Dave as director, check out the great site DREAMLINE (http://vivisect.org/dreamline/main.html). WB: make it a small, arty film, in exactly the same way that SANDMAN was initally a small, arty idea , give the original creators just enough money to make it *really good*, stand back and watch it live.
Cheers,
Geoffrey -
Hopefully the WB will go bankrupt. I say this because they will be desparate to do better movies. Take for example Marvel Comics. Since they went bankrupt, they have gotten better creators, writers, and artists to breathe life into their creations. I only hope the same fate will come to the WB.
-
I must be having a bad dream. that's it. I'm still in bed having a nightmare. No, wait! This is all some nasty plot by Desire to get back at, er, her brother. No, no, I've got it now. It's Neil's bad dream- some kind of 'creation run amuck' storyline where the spandexed version of Morpheus is just the set-up for a series of nightmarishly bad adaptations of the comic, all sent to Neil by Morpheus himself as punishment for putting him through the wringer in the comic. Kind of a Wes Craven's New Nightmare deal. I'm right, aren't I? Aren't I? Someone? Anyone? Please?
-
As a Sandman reader who owns every
comic of the series, I just had
to add my comments. As tempting as
it is to want a Sandman movie, I
have to pass. It can't be done.
CAN'T. Because Sandman is completely and utterly a graphic novel/comic book story, one of the great modern myths. It can't be improved upon, therefore, any movie will be a step down and I couldn't bear to watch. I was receptive to a DEATH movie, but now that that awful MEET JOE BLACK thing is out there it will look like the same story (gee, wonder where they got THAT idea from!!!).
I would be tempted to watch a Sandman movie, BUT. If Gaiman's name isn't on it, I'll pass, without a second thought. If it absolutely had to become a movie it would have to be, in my perfect little world, an original story written by Gaiman (who did after all write for that Neverwhere series so he has SOME experience with scripts) and directed by, hmm, Wim Wenders. That'd be okay.
If they actually film that horrid script (i've HEARD about that thing) then that writer deserves to be hung by his toenails, along with anyone who participates in such dreadful saccrilege. I'll help. -
would be the perfect director for Sandman. Do the Corinthian series. That would be all you'd need. Why do people (i.e. the WB) go to so much effort to fuck things up when there are so many easier solutions? Just get talented people and get the fuck out of the way!
(Although I WOULD like to see the Rock 'em, Sock 'em Sandman Super Punching Arm Toy...) -
Actually, Gaiman has nothing against turning his own works into films. He's doing just that with "Neverwhere." Although, in that case, he's making a movie of a novel of a TV series. The film version of "Neverwhere" is for Jim Henson Productions, if my memory serves.
-
Yeah, Tori for the music definitely! But we need to cast her as delirium too, i mean, she IS delerium.
-
If the folks at Warner actually read any of this stuff down here, the only thing they need to know is that just because something is a comic book, that doesn't mean it's about superheroes. Sandman is neither super nor a hero. He's a mythological character, and any treatment of that character, however it diverges from the source material, must reflect that or you're simply inventing a new character, which you could have done without spending the money on acquisition of rights. How could you buy something without knowing what it actually is? WHY would you? Yes, Sandman has a following, but face it, if only the people who have heard of Sandman saw the movie, it would be less than a failure, it would be a MISERABLE FAILURE. So there must have been something in the character or story that was attractive, perhaps stylish, cinematic noir aspects of the art and writing, or the superficial similarity to the current crop of "gothic" films and TV shows (you know, all those vampires and stuff). Believe me, anyone who has read even one issue of Sandman would vomit upon reading that first line...it's that far out of character that this one line, in the context given, can create such a reaction.
-
As several people have pointed out already, there is absolutely no way Sandman could be made into a movie. It's just too big. A good idea would be to get Neil to do an original script for a Sandman story he hasn't told yet (I understand that he has several ideas that he never used in the series.
Or if they can't get Neil to do this, they really should focus on one of the standalone issues (even the story arcs generally are too big to adapt properly). I think Ramadan would be an excellent choice if done well and with care. all of the best elements of the series are in that issue.
-
The Dream King is dead. Long live the King.
"The air was blue
you could hold it in your hand
blue.
Sad to realize
nothing lasts
forever.
But in your heart
you'll always be
a child."
- This Mortal Coil "Blood" - 1991 -
Probably the worst aspect of this Sandman, should it come to pass, is that this will "be" the general public's idea of the Sandman. That is to say, just as the fans of the Bat have been living under the shadow of the campy tv series, fans of Gaiman's Sandman will have have to contend with a public "biff-bam-pow" vision of the character. Not to mention what this will do to the public estimation of comic fans intellgence, in general, (as if we need more insults thrown at us by an increasingly illiterate public,sigh...) Of course, that's assuming that the general public is even aware that it would have been based on a comic.
The film needs a treatment like a Jean Cocteau movie, or as animated feature or series,(by animated, I mean no cutesy songs and cuddly sidekicks), translating the book to animation ala Keith's Maxx (which wasn't great, but the idea of staying closely with the comic appeals to me). It would work better as a series, given that it has a definite begining and end, and that it has little side stories and things, which wouldn't work in a 2 hour movie. (a adaptation of "Dream of a Thousand Cats", for instance, would work well as a 30 minute episode.) -
Probably the worst aspect of this Sandman, should it come to pass, is that this will "be" the general public's idea of the Sandman. That is to say, just as the fans of the Bat have been living under the shadow of the campy tv series, fans of Gaiman's Sandman will have have to contend with a public "biff-bam-pow" vision of the character. Not to mention what this will do to the public estimation of comic fans intellgence, in general, (as if we need more insults thrown at us by an increasingly illiterate public,sigh...) Of course, that's assuming that the general public is even aware that it would have been based on a comic.
The film needs a treatment like a Jean Cocteau movie, or as animated feature or series,(by animated, I mean no cutesy songs and cuddly sidekicks), translating the book to animation ala Keith's Maxx (which wasn't great, but the idea of staying closely with the comic appeals to me). It would work better as a series, given that it has a definite begining and end, and that it has little side stories and things, which wouldn't work in a 2 hour movie. (a adaptation of "Dream of a Thousand Cats", for instance, would work well as a 30 minute episode.) -
Probably the worst aspect of this Sandman, should it come to pass, is that this will "be" the general public's idea of the Sandman. That is to say, just as the fans of the Bat have been living under the shadow of the campy tv series, fans of Gaiman's Sandman will have have to contend with a public "biff-bam-pow" vision of the character. Not to mention what this will do to the public estimation of comic fans intellgence, in general, (as if we need more insults thrown at us by an increasingly illiterate public,sigh...) Of course, that's assuming that the general public is even aware that it would have been based on a comic.
The film needs a treatment like a Jean Cocteau movie, or as animated feature or series,(by animated, I mean no cutesy songs and cuddly sidekicks), translating the book to animation ala Keith's Maxx (which wasn't great, but the idea of staying closely with the comic appeals to me). It would work better as a series, given that it has a definite begining and end, and that it has little side stories and things, which wouldn't work in a 2 hour movie. (a adaptation of "Dream of a Thousand Cats", for instance, would work well as a 30 minute episode.) -
Probably the worst aspect of this Sandman, should it come to pass, is that this will "be" the general public's idea of the Sandman. That is to say, just as the fans of the Bat have been living under the shadow of the campy tv series, fans of Gaiman's Sandman will have have to contend with a public "biff-bam-pow" vision of the character. Not to mention what this will do to the public estimation of comic fans intellgence, in general, (as if we need more insults thrown at us by an increasingly illiterate public,sigh...) Of course, that's assuming that the general public is even aware that it would have been based on a comic.
The film needs a treatment like a Jean Cocteau movie, or as animated feature or series,(by animated, I mean no cutesy songs and cuddly sidekicks), translating the book to animation ala Keith's Maxx (which wasn't great, but the idea of staying closely with the comic appeals to me). It would work better as a series, given that it has a definite begining and end, and that it has little side stories and things, which wouldn't work in a 2 hour movie. (a adaptation of "Dream of a Thousand Cats", for instance, would work well as a 30 minute episode.) -
Probably the worst aspect of this Sandman, should it come to pass, is that this will "be" the general public's idea of the Sandman. That is to say, just as the fans of the Bat have been living under the shadow of the campy tv series, fans of Gaiman's Sandman will have have to contend with a public "biff-bam-pow" vision of the character. Not to mention what this will do to the public estimation of comic fans intellgence, in general, (as if we need more insults thrown at us by an increasingly illiterate public,sigh...) Of course, that's assuming that the general public is even aware that it would have been based on a comic.
The film needs a treatment like a Jean Cocteau movie, or as animated feature or series,(by animated, I mean no cutesy songs and cuddly sidekicks), translating the book to animation ala Keith's Maxx (which wasn't great, but the idea of staying closely with the comic appeals to me). It would work better as a series, given that it has a definite begining and end, and that it has little side stories and things, which wouldn't work in a 2 hour movie. (a adaptation of "Dream of a Thousand Cats", for instance, would work well as a 30 minute episode.) -
Probably the worst aspect of this Sandman, should it come to pass, is that this will "be" the general public's idea of the Sandman. That is to say, just as the fans of the Bat have been living under the shadow of the campy tv series, fans of Gaiman's Sandman will have have to contend with a public "biff-bam-pow" vision of the character. Not to mention what this will do to the public estimation of comic fans intellgence, in general, (as if we need more insults thrown at us by an increasingly illiterate public,sigh...) Of course, that's assuming that the general public is even aware that it would have been based on a comic.
The film needs a treatment like a Jean Cocteau movie, or as animated feature or series,(by animated, I mean no cutesy songs and cuddly sidekicks), translating the book to animation ala Keith's Maxx (which wasn't great, but the idea of staying closely with the comic appeals to me). It would work better as a series, given that it has a definite begining and end, and that it has little side stories and things, which wouldn't work in a 2 hour movie. (a adaptation of "Dream of a Thousand Cats", for instance, would work well as a 30 minute episode.) -
Sigh, why does Harry or anybody else think anyone else at WB
actually reads this ? Nobody does.
Those old fat jack-offs at WB
don't give a crap about us.
They only thing they care about
is still having a job and making
more money. It's pointless.
I once said I hated WB so much,
that I would never see another new WB movie again and a lot of people mocked me for saying such a thing. Now, a few months later, I've proven to be right, huh ?
WB is making shit movies after non-stop shit movies. I hate WB and will never see another new WB (Warner Brothers) movie again. Geez, these fellows screw up movies even before they actually begin making the movie!
Is Jon Peters, an idiot ? Of course. If BATMAN, the Tim Burton movie was made today, would anybody see it. Nope, because we'd have sites like this which would tell us of script problems, bad casting, etc...
Why is Jon Peters allowed to
life ? Easy. He made WB millions
back in 1989 with Batman and WB
believes if he did great back then, he will be great now.
Well, they're wrong and have got their heads shoved up way up where the sun don't shine. WB, you morons, that was 1989 and now
this is 1998! What worked back then, won't work now. Jon Peters
may have had a tiny bit of talent
back in the 80's but now with Guber (his partner in crime),
he's a full-fledged idiot.
Execessive promotion and hype
no longer makes a movie work or make millions at the box office.
New innovative talent is needed to make a great movie.
Could the Sandman been a great movie ? Yeah, sure. But will it
be ? Nope. Who do we have to thank for not letting the dream become
a reality ? Two words = WB a.k.a.
Warner Brothers. They're the worst studio in Hollywood.
Not too long ago, I said everybody should stop seeing any new Warner Brothers movies. Thereby these new spawns from hell won't make any money and so, with all there crappy movies not making any money, WB then might finally get some sense in it's head. They'll fire the jerks and enlist the great new original people who knew what is right and what is wrong and maybe, just maybe WB might start making great movies, again.
But until they do, I vow never to
see another new Warner Brothers movie again.
-
Why does WB continue to screw its films up? First, it lets Tim "King of Hacks" Burton and Jon "Illiterate Hairdresser" Peters double-team to destroy Superman. Now THIS? A "fight & [CENSORED]" Neil Gaiman Sandman movie? What are they thinking? Are they actually TRYING to go bankrupt? Good grief. I mean, Gaiman's Sandman needs the touch of producer Laura Ziskin and director Terry Gilliam--a team that would treat the comic with love and respect. Superman needs the high-energy faithful-to-source writing and directing of Nicholas Meyer and the respect-for-tradition producing of Richard Donner. But NOOOOOOOO!!! WB hires MORONS like Peters and Burton to screw these films up!! I hope Peters is proud of himself. I mean, how many producers in Hollywood can say, "Hey, I helped Tim Burton disembowl Superman and I single-handedly trashed the Sandman"?
-
Screenwriters Ted Elliot and Terry Rossio produced an excellent screenplay adaptation of SANDMAN. It contained bits from the first arc, The Doll's House arc (including the cereal convention), and even the short story "Fear of Falling" . . . and they made it *work*. These guys actually understand the story and respect it totally. Totally faithful to the source material. Unfortunately, it was a bit thick for the producers (read: they were expecting a comic book action madhouse where the climax is a fistfight between Sandman and the Corinthian) and was ditched.
If your interested, go to http://www.wordplayer.com/welcome.html and ask Ted to send you an email copy. He just might . . .
-
Ok...I have a suggestion. It may appear moronic....but what the hell.
Sandman is easily some of the greatest stories I've ever read. Even at its worst, its still pretty goddamned good.
Why do we need a Sandman script? Gaiman wrote wonderful dialogue in addition to terrific ideas and characters? Why recreate the wheel? Why not just use Gaiman's script? Or is that too easy? -
I just thought I would add in for anyone who cares that at some casting has apparently been done for the film. Not too long ago on fairuza.com, there was a picture posted from a magazine that had a small blurb about Fairuza Balk playing the part of Death. As for Tori taking part... we can dream.
-
Neil, has said in the past that WB
plans to turn his cerebral dream king into a no-brained STEEL type, and that's why he won't be involved w/ the script. -
He did wonders with Steel, why not unleash his seemingly bottomless talents on Gaiman's wonderful creation? I keep hearing him utter that "foolish mortals" line in my head. Man, he'd be perfect. My only qualm: they can't make Sandman if there isn't a role for Irma P. Hall. Ain't no stoppin' that woman!
-
I think I fit into that "ideal market" category that was mentioned at the beginning of this posting, so I guess I'm entitled to make a few observations:
1. I've read the Farmer script, and have a very close & reliable source who's read the Elliott/Rossio version. The latter SUCKS. The Farmer script is actually very good.
2. Doesn't anyone read the Corona page? Whether or not you people approve of Morpheus' first line is a moot point, considering that IT'S NOT GOING TO BE MADE!
3. In case someone out there really thinks the Elliott/Rossio script is worth the paper it's written on, just remember: these are the guys who brought you "Men in Black", "Small Soldiers", & that unforgettable masterpiece "Godzilla"! Uh...what was that you were saying about "shallow, brainless, cookie-cutter superhero romps"? -
>>I've read the Farmer script, and have a very close & reliable source who's read the Elliott/Rossio version. The latter SUCKS.>>
Whoever your realiable source is, we can definitely rule out Neil Gaiman. Of course, he actually read the script himself, so his opinion was actually an informed one.
A small clarification: Terry Rossio and I did not receive credit on MEN IN BLACK (although I wish we had).
TAElliott -
Well, sure, WB is going to make another bad film. Surprise. But that's not entirely bad news.
Since Time Warner is a household word (ok, words), people buy their stock. Of course, with the demise of good filmmaking at WB, and CNN and HNN's constant loss of market share, Time Warner is going down, big time.
But, if you invest, that's not bad news. You can short their stock (NYSE: TWX).
There are companies with no direction, but Time Warner (and WB in particular) is even worse: they have direction, it's just stupid, shortsighted, and lame direction.
Their stock has run up from 60 to 95 over the past year. With WB turning out some of the worst movies ever, and CNN losing ground, how long before the company dies?
-
I was just over at Corona's Coming Attractions, and I'd say at least a good fourth of projects listed in "Development Hell" are comics-to-film projects. In other news, another possible nightmare in the making, the next Batman film. The dreaded director Joel said the only way he will do another is if they make Batman in his 20s, confirming my worst fears that Joel wants to "reinvent" the franchise (those were his own words folks). I saw the story appear on another site as well. This could be a good thing, though, because maybe the WB will not be interested in his demands, and let him go from the franchise. We can only hope. I just pray that he's not trying to do the Miller Batman: Year One. That would be...sick to put such great material in his undeserving hands. I can already smell the stench coming off of Akiva's first draft...
-
Maybe it's me, maybe I'm tha one who's crazy, but why is it Warner Bros. cant resist destroying great comic books? Leave Sandman well enough alone. Without Gaiman at the helm, this project is most likley doomed. It was Gaiman's fevered vision and richly complex storytelling that made Sandman what it was and without those vital elements...I dont even want to thik about what Hollywood would do to this masterpiece of storytelling. Learn from your mistakes for once WB!
-
Sandman in black tights, fighting the Corinithian. This is what I've heard that Warner wants to do with Sandman. Warner would probably put $60-$70 million into the movie, knowing film budgets these days. Why don't they use their heads this time instead of aborting Sandman like they did Batman. If you are going to take the time to do it, do it well. Try the risk 20th Century took with Jeunet on lien:Ressurection.
I believe they could do it well.
However, if you are going to let someone like Joel Schumaker(Lost Boys&Falling Down were good, but what happened?Were you lobotomized?) then just don't do it at all. The people who read Sandman don't want to waste the ticket price for a crappy movie.
Also, please don't let Guber-Peters produce it, take it off their hands at any cost.
-
I just read about the sandman screenplay. I must admit that I have never read anything alike. To describe it as utter crap would be polite. But somehow I am not even surprised. Has there ever been a comic adaptation for serious comic readers? Why did they not use Frank Miller's Return of the Dark Night for the Batman movies? You dont even have to look to comic adaptations, just consider SF. There are thousands of price winning SF Novels out there. But as soon as it comes to a new SF movie, some dick head has to write a crap screenplay. Maybe these producers think that people who read are not going to see a movie, or to put it more frankly, people who watch movies are to stupid to get the same quality plot as the respective book/comic reader. But if they turn Sandman into an americanized lesser version of batman, I will never, ever go and see a Warner movie again, no matter what topic it is about. Just on principle.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 439 total posts 165 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 144 total posts 142 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 153 total posts 138 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 55 total posts 47 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 196 total posts 45 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 36 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 127 total posts 36 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 35 total posts 35 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 513 total posts 29 posts
- The Sensorties Revisit The Friday Docback (And Still Smell)!! DOCTOR WHO Story #7 Again, The Coming Of Season/Series 7, And More!! -- 117 total posts 26 posts