Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

100 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Well... (1)

XTrollX (1398725) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988017)

With the economy this bad I guess movies that show crime are going to be more profitable then usual.

How so? (3, Insightful)

dlaudel (1304717) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988055)

Wouldn't people just sneak in to see it rather than pay?

Re:How so? (1)

Lilith's Heart-shape (1224784) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988103)

Why sneak into theaters when you use bittorrent to download a bootleg copy?

Re:How so? (1)

Brad_McBad (1423863) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988527)

To set up the camera...

Re:How so? (2, Insightful)

Cowmonaut (989226) | more than 5 years ago | (#25989499)

Oh be quiet you. Pretty much every pirated film is available as a DVD quality (or better) rip before or while it is in theaters. The issue is either with A) some of the people involved in rating the films or B) people involved in making the DVDs or C) anywhere else between production and distribution.

The people who sneak camera's in are just sad, and wasting their time.

Re:How so? (1)

Brad_McBad (1423863) | more than 5 years ago | (#25990193)

I thought the major source was east Asian gangsters taking prints from cinemas they have a stake in and transferring the prints digitally, which then find their way to the wider internets... Still plenty of cams about, though. Also -1 getting the joke ;-)

Re:How so? (1)

SBFCOblivion (1041418) | more than 5 years ago | (#25992595)

You were mostly right. It's west Asian gangsters.

Re:How so? (1)

Brad_McBad (1423863) | more than 5 years ago | (#25992737)

Hong Kong / China are west Asia now?

Re:Well... (1)

Spazztastic (814296) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988091)

With the economy this bad I guess movies that show crime are going to be more profitable then usual.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation [wikipedia.org]

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25989067)

He never said the relationship was causal. If there's a correlation in the past between the two things, it's reasonable to think they may correlate now (even if it's not causal).

I've seen the trailers (2, Interesting)

Lilith's Heart-shape (1224784) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988109)

I've seen the trailers, and if Miller does everything right, The Spirit could be an awesome work of film noir. Or it might suck harder than the new Guns 'n Roses album.

Re:I've seen the trailers (2, Informative)

objekt (232270) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988151)

Or it might be somewhere in between.

Re:I've seen the trailers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25993741)

Alternatively, it might be better than an awesome work of film noir.

Well, I think we've covered everything.

Re:I've seen the trailers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25990879)

Nothing is worse than the new GNR album.

The Shadow? (1)

razorh (853659) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988153)

I've seen the trailer for The Spirit a few times and it looks like a knock off of The Shadow. I did a bit of looking around and couldn't find much in the way of comparisons but I was just curious, from someone who knows, is that an accurate thought? The costuming and 'tone' of the trailer makes me think of The Shadow, but not knowing much about The Spirit, I could be way off.

Re:The Shadow? (2, Insightful)

kalirion (728907) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988749)

Don't forget The Phantom. These are all based on old comic book heroes, which seem to follow a certain pattern. I wouldn't be surprised if there were also The Shade, The Ghost, The Poltergeist, etc....

Re:The Shadow? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25989903)

When I saw the ad on TV for this movie my first thought was they made The Shadow into a movie. . I'm certainly no comic book expert, but that was my first impression before they revealed the name of the movie.

At least I'm not alone in my first impression. I've never heard of The Spirit before so maybe that's why I have the disconnect..

Re:The Shadow? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25990263)

As a comic geek, I've read my fair share of Miller Stories and Eisner stories (Will Eisner's the creator of The Spirit, for anyone who might not know). I like both types, but form what I can see of the movie, it's not going to be Eisner's Spirit that we see.

I have no idea whether or not the movie is going to be any good, but it certainly will not have the wit and light-heartedness of it's source material. Eisner's Spirit was a goofily flawed hero who spent as much time trying to figure things out and getting into trouble as he did saving the day. Miller seems to have kept the getting into trouble part but tossed out any of the lighthearted goofiness. It looks grim and bleak and not very happy. Eisner's Spirit always seemed happy.

Just my impression from what little I've seen.

Re:The Shadow? (1)

CyberLord Seven (525173) | more than 5 years ago | (#25991249)

Eisner's Spirit always seemed happy.

I dunno'. He didn't seem all that happy when P'Gell was working him over with a brick.

But then Denny did keep coming back for more, so who knows, maybe he was happy. :)

Re:The Shadow? (1)

OakDragon (885217) | more than 5 years ago | (#25997753)

...form what I can see of the movie, it's not going to be Eisner's Spirit that we see.

And don't expect to see Ebony White [photobucket.com] - at least without some kind of make-over.

Re:The Shadow? (1)

kcitren (72383) | more than 5 years ago | (#25991175)

It is a knockoff, kinda. Both the Shadow and the Spirit were late 30's comic books. Shadow came out a year or two before the Spirit.

Re:The Shadow? (1)

razorh (853659) | more than 5 years ago | (#26002937)

Wasn't the shadow originally a radio show though, before the comic book? Or was the comic before the radio?

Re:The Shadow? (1)

razorh (853659) | more than 5 years ago | (#26002977)

nm, a quick look on wiki mentions the radio show being first... looking at the pictures on this article, the costume looks pretty much just like the trailers for The Spirit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shadow [wikipedia.org]

I have a bad feeling about this (3, Funny)

genner (694963) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988203)

This will be bad. I mean really horribly bad. I mean crawl under the covers and watch the Star Wars Christmas Special bad. You may have thought the Matrix sequels were bad but that's peanuts to this.

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (2, Funny)

Todd Fisher (680265) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988333)

Why do you hate Life Day?

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (0, Redundant)

ProppaT (557551) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988371)

Of course it will be terrible. Have you seen the other Frank Miller films? And the thing is, this one doesn't even look like it might have promise.

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (1)

Brad_McBad (1423863) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988635)

Hell, I'll take something Frank Miller writes over anything that Stan Lee has had anything to do with...

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (2, Insightful)

ProppaT (557551) | more than 5 years ago | (#25989311)

I don't have any problem with Frank Miller's writing...he did some of my favorite comic book writing of all time when he worked on the Daredevil...I just have issues with the crappy movies. It reminds me of how MTV ruined The Maxx when they decided to animate it.

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (1)

Brad_McBad (1423863) | more than 5 years ago | (#25989545)

I really like them, they seem to capture the source material way better than other comic to film transfers. Just look to the works of Alan Moore for proof of how bad they can get.

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (1)

despisethesun (880261) | more than 5 years ago | (#25990109)

You should have a problem with Frank Miller's writing. He did great work 15-20 years ago. His more recent work (past 5 years or so) has been utterly atrocious. Seriously, have you read All Star Batman and Robin?

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (1)

TRex1993 (1135915) | more than 5 years ago | (#25990511)

Seriously, have you read All Star Batman and Robin?

Or compared The Dark Knight Returns to the Dark Knight Strikes Back? What a let-down...

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25993383)

There's really a "Dark Knight Strikes Back"? I think I may have done a variation of the showman/Costanza rule: I think I left comic books when they were at their top. That people now refer to compilation books for a series as a graphic novel was a pretty big hint that the readership has gotten dumber.

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25994771)

So how do you feel about Daredevil seeing it was created by Stan and later drawn/written by Frank?

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (1)

Brad_McBad (1423863) | more than 5 years ago | (#25994827)

Never liked the character, so never read any,if I'm honest. Marvel's mostly spangly jumpsuits and I can't be bothered with it. Punisher's an exception, but then I think I like the noir-ish stuff more than straight superheros. And he's written by Garth Ennis most of the time.

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (3, Insightful)

ethicalBob (1023525) | more than 5 years ago | (#25989253)

Hmm.. Methinks thou complains too much...

Miller has only been credited as a Director on the Sin City projects, and now The Spirit.

Sin City was great, and a good enough adaptation of his work that he co-produced, DID take a director's credit and is now going on to make a sequel with Rodriguez.

So whose opinion is more valuable here: Miller's, who has created a huge body or amazing work, or the boxer-short clad /. troll?

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (3, Insightful)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 5 years ago | (#25989269)

I remember reading a Spirit graphic novel called Life on Another Planet many years ago, but I certainly dont remember lots of sexy ladies and hammy dialogue. Is anything in this movie actually a Spirit story or done in the style of Will Eisner? The Spirit stuff I remember is introspective and smart, not the flashy-trashy stuff Miller now specializes in. For a minute I thought this trailer was for a sequel to his Sin City movie.

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (1)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 5 years ago | (#25996303)

I remember reading a Spirit graphic novel called Life on Another Planet many years ago

That was by Spirit creator Will Eisner, but it did not feature the Spirit characters.

but I certainly dont remember lots of sexy ladies and hammy dialogue.

The Spirit comics have some measure of both, but it's handled with infinitely more style and subtlety than could be ever be distilled from the morbidly stunted gray matter of Frank Miller. For a guy who claims to be one of Eisner's best buddies, he seems determined to shit all over everything the man stood for.

For a good comparison of the approaches of the two men, look for the book Eisner/Miller, published by Dark Horse Comics in 2005. Some samples from the book:

Eisner: In that book [you wrote], what was there that you regard as funny?
Miller: There's a running gag in it where our hero is hit by a car...

Eisner: The way I tell stories, I'm writing a letter to somebody. And I'm telling them about the past. I'm telling somebody what happened yesterday.
Miller: And I feel like I'm giving them a harassing phone call [laughter]!

Re:I have a bad feeling about this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25989723)

It's funny you say that, cause the DP for The Spirit also did the entire Matrix trilogy. But it won't be nearly as bad as you say... hot women, Samuel L Jackson, a couple of scenes with great acting, and really solid VFX to top it off.

Gotta love the classics (3, Interesting)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988211)

I just pray it's even half as good as the film adaptation of The Phantom [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Gotta love the classics (1)

richardpaulhall (813083) | more than 5 years ago | (#25999075)

My impression was The Phantom was abysmal, worse than The Shadow. From the stills and the trailer The Spirit is -not- Will Eisner's character. Instead we be shown a new character created by Miller who looks like The Spirit and may have some superficial similarities with Eisner's character. They have used the name and the look of the character and nothing else.

Re:Gotta love the classics (1)

jdgeorge (18767) | more than 5 years ago | (#25999181)

"The weed of evil bears bitter fruit." - The Shadow.

I thoroughly enjoyed The Shadow. I don't know if it was Penelope Ann Miller, Tim Curry, Ian McKellan, or Penelope Ann Miller, but I really thought it was pretty cool. Oh, and there were some pretty nice (for the time) special effects. And Alec Baldwin did a pretty good job, too. The story was coherent, sufficiently ridiculous, funny, stylized, and felt on the mark for the "spirit" of The Shadow radio show.

The Phantom, on the other hand, had Billy Zane in a purple diving suit. I seriously can't remember anything else about it.

Will the Spirit suck more than a turbo-charged Hoover? I don't know, but 30 minutes of someone's recount of an unreleased film won't tell you.

Don't be bitter.

Sin City was incredible (2, Insightful)

olddotter (638430) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988359)

I think I liked it because it was stylized and was really like a comic book brought to life. Not sure if I will like this movie as well, but I will definitely watch it to find out.

Re:Sin City was incredible (1)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 5 years ago | (#25991859)

I think I liked it because it was stylized and was really like a comic book brought to life. Not sure if I will like this movie as well, but I will definitely watch it to find out.

And the nudity. Wait, did I just say that out loud?

Re:Sin City was incredible (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25991939)

A friend of mine mentioned that comparing the Sin City graphic novel with the movie really reflects American culture in general, specifically that all the violence was passed along straight to the movie but with none of the nudity and sex. What's wrong with us for accepting such horrific violence but if a nipple shows up in film it's offensive?

Sin City was nippless. (1)

Ostracus (1354233) | more than 5 years ago | (#25995313)

"What's wrong with us for accepting such horrific violence but if a nipple shows up in film it's offensive?"

Because a nipple isn't a dangerous weapon? Best you can do with one is put an eye out.

question (3, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988413)

Am I the only one who finds Miller really overrated?

Re:question (1, Troll)

oahazmatt (868057) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988585)

Am I the only one who finds Miller really overrated?

No. But then I've read DK2 [wikipedia.org] .

Re:question (3, Interesting)

jfengel (409917) | more than 5 years ago | (#25990065)

No. I find his work visually attractive but stultifyingly misogynistic. I hate the way it glorifies violence. I'm familiar with it mostly from films rather than the books, but the films seem to hew very closely to the books.

Sin City is the only film I've walked out of in disgust. 300 was beautiful but best viewed with the sound off because the dialogue was incredibly stupid.

Re:question (1)

floodo1 (246910) | more than 5 years ago | (#25993043)

You'd probably dislike the graphic novels then because they carry the same themes as the movies. Personally I don't share your distaste for misogyny or violence and find his story telling to be quite good! Not to mention his artistic style is captivating.

Re:question (1)

solios (53048) | more than 5 years ago | (#25993873)

Me, I enjoy his linework and composition*.... I just really, REALLY wish he'd come out of the damned closet with his blatant bondage fetish.

I'm down with excessive violence... what I'm tired of is the boring-ass no-purpose "pornography of violence" that's fills out the runtime of a film more than it fleshes out the story.**

* There are comics I read for Story (Appleseed, The Invisibles, Transmetropolitan, Watchmen, etc) and then there are comics I buy strictly for the visuals (some of Miller's stuff, Battle Angel Alita, etc).

** Take, for example, Titus's stint in the Arena in HBO's Rome and compare the emotional impact of that scene with the hum-drum stylized slashfest of 300. Both are entertaining, but Rome offers up an emotional punch and very satisfying character development in addition to the ultraviolence, whereas the most you'll feel from 300 is the same kind of HELL YEAH! sports fans bellow after their team scores a touchdown.

Re:question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25996417)

I was just the opposite. I enjoyed Sin City but turned off 300 which was just a gore-porn with constant yelling of sophomoric rhetoric. And talk about misogyny.. I couldn't take looking at Gerard Butler's gynecomastia clearly from steroid abuse in bulking up for the role.

Re:question (1)

Areyoukiddingme (1289470) | more than 5 years ago | (#26067325)

Nailed it in one. "Stultifyingly misogynistic" is a perfect summary of Frank Miller. I read the Sin City comics, to see if the movie was worth watching. The main character was a Punisher retread, and the only people he interacted with, besides men he killed, were women dressed as whores with excessively large breasts. There was never a panel depicting any other person, despite the fact that there were numerous nominally city settings. They were the emptiest cities I've ever seen. Non-whorish women and non-violent men don't exist to him. Just judging by his depiction of the city, I'd say Frank Miller is a sociopath at best, and judging by the rest of his material, he's a psychopath. We should be thankful he's found a way to channel it into an artistic medium, because if he thinks at all the way he writes, he's dangerously unbalanced.

I must be old-fashioned about comics because my reaction to Sin City and to Punisher series 4 and similar comics is simply eww. Glorifying violence is one thing. Continuous graphic depictions of ultra-violence are quite another. No thanks. My only reaction to the people who say they love his work is "Get therapy." Calling it gore-porn is insulting to porn.

Re:question (0, Troll)

Tragedy4u (690579) | more than 5 years ago | (#25994581)

No you're not, Miller was great when he first started producing great material in the 80's. It was refreshing to see how he re-invented Batman for example (The Dark Knight). His work falls flat over time, almost all his characters are ultra-violent and I find over time is he relies on that crutch of breaking out a "big fight" in order to help move the plot along. Many good comic book writers as they mature often grow out of always resorting to that tired story mechanic.

Review of 30 minutes of the movie (2, Funny)

internerdj (1319281) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988549)

I can't wait for the other 2.5 installments of this review...

Only 30 minutes? (1)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 5 years ago | (#25988895)

I mean, I know the economy is hard on everyone right now, but you'd think he'd have waited until he could see the entire movie.

Quick, let's raise a collection so he can review the entire thing!

Miller (1)

hrieke (126185) | more than 5 years ago | (#25989049)

Is a great writer and artist.
He totally sucks when it comes to making movies, IMHO.
I think he's too in-love with CGI to be effective in his movies- what he does well on the page of a comic book doesn't translate to the big silver screen.

Re:Miller (1)

mmkkbb (816035) | more than 5 years ago | (#25989287)

How are people judging him on his skill as a director, when he's only ever directed one other film which was co-directed by Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino?

Re:Miller (1)

Shinmizu (725298) | more than 5 years ago | (#25991563)

Oh, if only people had had the foresight to judge Uwe Boll on his skills as a director after only his first film and stop him before he amassed a great dark power that made his continued direction unstoppable!

Oh dear, hype machine (2, Interesting)

Smuttley (126014) | more than 5 years ago | (#25989097)

Hmm, film is released in less than a month and journos are shown a sneak peak of 30 minutes worth of clips?

That sounds like the studio has seen it, it's not good, and they are shitting themselves. Best thing to do is get the hype machine rolling with some choice clips to the press.

Hell I could pick 30 minutes of clips from 300 to make it look like a promising film but when you watch the whole film it's pretty boring. My guess is this is going to be the same deal.

Shame, because I loved Sin City :(

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

D Ninja (825055) | more than 5 years ago | (#25989197)

Hell I could pick 30 minutes of clips from 300 to make it look like a promising film but when you watch the whole film it's pretty boring. My guess is this is going to be the same deal.

Did you watch the same 300 that I did?

Granted, it wasn't factually accurate (I *really* wish that had told the true story of the traitor...way cooler than what they showed) and it definitely had a bit of fantasy to it, but I'm not sure I'd call 300 "boring."

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (5, Interesting)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 5 years ago | (#25989947)

In fact, I'd call it one of the truest representations of the ancient Greek epic storytelling style to ever see the big screen. Since I'm guessing that was the whole point, I'm gonna go ahead and call the movie really damn good, not just as an action movie, but as an expression of art.

Disagree? Go look at the fight scenes in the Iliad and watch the movie again with that in mind. The somewhat fantastic animals, the way the heroes were larger-than-life, the fights over a fallen comrade, the caricatured enemy--it is exactly the way you'd expect a somewhat-talented ancient Greek storyteller to handle the tale.

Is it Homer? No. The story itself isn't as good. Is it a story about ancient Greece, told with impressive fidelity to the style of dramatic art popular in that time period? Hell yes. If that was the film makers' goal, then I'd say they nailed it.

I'd love to see The Iliad done in a similar style, gods and all. It'd be glorious. The Odyssey's another matter, but then it always read more like a modern novel to me, anyway.

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

CyberLord Seven (525173) | more than 5 years ago | (#25990157)

Are you confusing 300 with The Illiad? Those are two different stories. One is fictional (well, maybe based on an actual event), the other is based on an acknowledged historical event. If you want to see a close approximation of what happened during the battle of Thermolply(spelling is wrong) pick up a copy of Larry Gonick's "History of the Universe". That is MUCH better than anything in 300. 300 is pure crap as far as historical accuracy.

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 5 years ago | (#25990623)

I'm not confusing anything. Re-read my post. I'm pretty sure the point of 300 wasn't historical accuracy, but to show a story of a real event being told with the embellishments and other characteristics of ancient Greek storytelling. If that was indeed the goal of the film makers, then they did a damn good job IMO.

The fantastic elements and caricatures of the enemy are a fit for this sort of folk-history storytelling, and my reason for bringing up the Iliad is that the battle scenes in 300 are composed of imagery and incidents very similar to those described (again, and again, and again) in the many, many action sequences of that epic.

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#25993187)

In fact, I'd call it one of the truest representations of the ancient Greek epic storytelling style to ever see the big screen. Since I'm guessing that was the whole point, I'm gonna go ahead and call the movie really damn good, not just as an action movie, but as an expression of art.

Disagree? Go look at the fight scenes in the Iliad and watch the movie again with that in mind. The somewhat fantastic animals, the way the heroes were larger-than-life, the fights over a fallen comrade, the caricatured enemy--it is exactly the way you'd expect a somewhat-talented ancient Greek storyteller to handle the tale.

Well that's all true, except the part where that makes it good. I had no problem with the fantastic battles or historical inaccuracies in and of themselves. It's that the result was, while pretty and kinda fun in parts, still mostly boring and pointless. "Done in the style of..." doesn't automatically make something good even if they do accurately ape the style. After all there was crap Greek storytelling too.

Okay, and I'll admit, I just really couldn't get over the way the traitor was handled. The King makes a big point of how he would be happy to have the aid of the deformed man's strong spear arm, but alas, he can't raise his shield arm well and the Spartans always fight in phalanxes, don't you know, where the man next to you depends on your shield, so sorry it just wouldn't work. Then the battle starts and they fight in phalanx formation for maybe five seconds before voluntarily abandoning it to fight bar-brawl style. I can't remember any times where someone's shield was used to protect someone other than the one holding it.

Not that I have a problem with them not fighting in formation; it was a video game beat-em-up (complete with boss fight) on the big screen. I don't care if they fight in phalanxes or not. But they shouldn't mention that piece of unnecessary historical accuracy as part of a pivotal plot point only to ignore it five minutes later. The King should have just said that hey, we'd love to have you, except Spartan warriors represent the pinnacle of the human form who fight using magic spear-fu, and you're a mutant freak. Then at least it would have been consistent.

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

CyberLord Seven (525173) | more than 5 years ago | (#25994507)

I think it was Chekov (not the Star Trek guy!) who said something akin to "if you call attention to a pistol hanging on the wall in Act I, then you had better fire it before the end of Act III".

I think the only people who actully like Frank Miller's writing are people who read comic books more than any other kind of book.

I am not trying to start a flame war. I have been an avid reader/collector of comics for decades. I used to have a complete set of Spider-man, Daredevil, the Journey Into Mystery issues that featured Thor, and a nearly complete set of Fantastic Four and a bunch of titles I barely remember.

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25995737)

"Then the battle starts and they fight in phalanx formation for maybe five seconds before voluntarily abandoning it to fight bar-brawl style. I can't remember any times where someone's shield was used to protect someone other than the one holding it."

As a fan of the book, that really kind of pissed me off. They started off by teasing us with a few moments of the single very best depiction of phalanx combat ever put to film and then abandonded it for the rest of the movie.

In the book they NEVER broke formation. That was practically the whole point of the story. Hell, that was practically the whole point of the entire fucking Spartan civilization!*

*Not to glorify the ultraviolence and facism of the Spartans, of course. Not to mention they got slapped around by combined-arms strategies every time they went up against someone too smart to go head-to-head or let them control the terrain...

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#25996691)

As a fan of the book, that really kind of pissed me off. They started off by teasing us with a few moments of the single very best depiction of phalanx combat ever put to film and then abandonded it for the rest of the movie.

In the book they NEVER broke formation. That was practically the whole point of the story. Hell, that was practically the whole point of the entire fucking Spartan civilization!*

You're kidding me... So that was the director/screenwriter, not Frank Miller. Well that's good to know. Maybe I'll give the comic a read some time.

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

replicant108 (690832) | more than 5 years ago | (#25994027)

The somewhat fantastic animals, the way the heroes were larger-than-life, the fights over a fallen comrade, the caricatured enemy--it is exactly the way you'd expect a somewhat-talented ancient Greek storyteller to handle the tale.

Actually, the last three cliches are exactly the way I'd expect any mediocre storyteller to handle the tale.

"Somewhat fantastic animals" are not especially characteristic of ancient Greece either.

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

Doggabone (1025394) | more than 5 years ago | (#25999793)

The somewhat fantastic animals, the way the heroes were larger-than-life, the fights over a fallen comrade, the caricatured enemy--it is exactly the way you'd expect a somewhat-talented ancient Greek storyteller to handle the tale.

...

"Somewhat fantastic animals" are not especially characteristic of ancient Greece either.

Typical of ancient Greek storytelling however, which I think was the point. Minotaurs, chimera, hydra, harpy, hippogriff and so on.

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

bogjobber (880402) | more than 5 years ago | (#25998009)

In fact, I'd call it one of the truest representations of the ancient Greek epic storytelling style to ever see the big screen.

Maybe you're correct, because the style was the only reason to go see it, as it had absolutely no substance. Glorifying a fascist, militaristic society. Intentionally misleading thing suchs as calling Athenians "boy lovers". All of the characters were unlikeable (even Leonidas), the story was laughably disconnected with the real one (I guess that was the point though?) and the hot pants....oh God, the hot pants. Hot pants and capes for everybody!

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 5 years ago | (#25999003)

Haha, all true, though some of it does make sense. The glorification of a fascist society and the inaccurate insults toward other cultures can be chalked up to the narrator's views, which are steeped in Spartan ignorance and militarism.

The lack of likable characters is actually pretty common in ancient Greek writing, too. Just about every important character in The Iliad was a dick, with the possible exception of Hector. The plays of the great tragedians are full of assholes and morons, too.

As for the costuming... yeah, well, at least the practice scenes weren't done in the nude :)

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

godglike (643670) | more than 5 years ago | (#25998537)

Having actually read The Iliad recently, 300 is better. Both movie and book.

A movie of The Iliad would be eye-gougingly repetitive.

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 5 years ago | (#25998961)

Yeah, you'd actually have to cut out some of the fighting to get it down to 300's action/story ratio, which some people already said was too high :)

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

CyberLord Seven (525173) | more than 5 years ago | (#25990035)

One man's meat is another man's poison.

I too found 300 to be boring.

Much of that is probably due to my love for history. I found it terrible that they left out the influence of the Thespians and Thebans and possibly others who were present and all of whom outnumbered the Spartans.

In much the same way I am not as excited as I should be about the upcoming Valkyrie. Count von Stauffenberg was missing an arm as well as an eye. I can see Tom Cruise running and leaping about Deutschland like some modern day espionage agent instead of the heroic Count von Stauffenberg who knew the incredible risk he was taking.

Oh, well, it should be an exciting movie. I suppose.

Oh, yeah. One last point for those who feel the need to point out that Tom Cruise is not missing an arm. Lots of actors who have all limbs have played characters missing one or more.

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

Wooky_linuxer (685371) | more than 5 years ago | (#25990409)

Well, I watched the movie then rea the comics. I found the movie refreshing - yes, it glorifies violence, and more, it displays violence as a form of art. If you don't like that - you're not going to enjoy the movie.

Of course, don't go for any historical accuracy. There is none. But it makes sense in the context of the movie. It is being told from the eyes - well, one eye really ;) - of a spartan soldier. It is obvious he would raise the Spartan feats and those of his king to a demigod standard, and portray the Persians as evil monsters.

That said, I think the movie has some racist undertones which weren't present in the comic book. But I can live with that. In short, expect a work of fiction with lots of violence, an innovative photography and choreography, and not an accurate historical recreation. Then you might enjoy the movie.

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

CyberLord Seven (525173) | more than 5 years ago | (#25994657)

violence as a form of art

I've been eating that stuff up ever since 1972 when Five Fingers of Death was shown at the California theatre in Berkeley, California. The next year Enter The Dragon was released and the entire country was eating that stuff up.

Yes, I like "violence as a form of art"; however, I insist that it be done well. Gratuitous violence is just...gratuitious violence. The art of creating art implies that the reader/viewer is connected emotionally with at least one of the characters. Without reader/viewer participation it's just porn.

By "porn", I mean the U. S. Supreme Courts definition, not some moron railing against Playboy or any depiction of nudity.

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

Wooky_linuxer (685371) | more than 5 years ago | (#25995929)

I respectfully disagree. I was emotionally connected to the story itself - the story of 300 men fighting to death a war they knew they couldn't win. And while the characters were undoubtedly shallow, I found they somewhat believable.

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25990907)

Oh, yeah. One last point for those who feel the need to point out that Tom Cruise is not missing an arm. Lots of actors who have all limbs have played characters missing one or more.

Well, my point is, if I pay full price movie fare to watch Tom Cruise. and he's missing an eye, I should be getting some sort of discount. And more, especially if he's missing an arm. Are any of you ladies with me? ladies? ...Is this thing on?

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

Abreu (173023) | more than 5 years ago | (#25990169)

I have been told that you need to be gay to fully appreciate 300 [ducks!]

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

OakDragon (885217) | more than 5 years ago | (#25997775)

I have been told that you need to be gay to fully appreciate 300

I was in quite the lighthearted mood when I saw it!

Re:Oh dear, hype machine (1)

floodo1 (246910) | more than 5 years ago | (#25993479)

stop being biased. Its just as plausible that the studio likes the movie (or is neutral) and is releasing 30 minutes of it to get some hype going about 'how they let the press preview 30 minutes of it!!!!'

She is my mother, my lover? (0, Troll)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25989341)

After raping the Spartans, now he's going after the story of ol' Oedipus?

Creepy tagline. If they want to get all incestuous, they could at least crib from my old sig:

They say that cat Oedipus is one bad mother--
Shut your mouth!
But I'm just talkin' 'bout Oedipus!
Then we can dig it!

Re:She is my mother, my lover? (0, Offtopic)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 5 years ago | (#25990713)

Oh, shit, you're the one who had that sig? One of my favorites!

I've been meaning to ask you whether your current one is original, and if not, where you found it. I've Googled, but to no avail.

Re:She is my mother, my lover? (1)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25995115)

The Oedipus one I got from MST3K, the Dune one is an original.

its crazy comment time ..... (0, Offtopic)

sister bliss (1234142) | more than 5 years ago | (#25989607)

there's a VERY scary user comment just below the post Re: Review - 30 minutes of Frank Miller's The Spirit Posted by sergal on December 4, 2008 02:49:02 PM I'd like inform you that Scarlett Johansson (actress)actually is a clone from original person,who has nothing with acting career.Clone was created illegally using stolen biomaterial.Original Scarlett Galabekian last name is nice, CHRISTIAN young lady.I'll tell more,those clones(it's not only 1)made in GERMANY-world leader manufacturer of humans clones,it's in Ludwigshafen am Rhein,Rhineland-Palatinate,Mr.Helmut Kohl home town.You can't even imaging the scale of the cloning activity.But warning,H.Kohl staff strictly controlling their clones spreading around the world,they're NAZI type disciplined and mind controlled,be careful get close with clones you will be controlled too.Original family didn't authorize any activity with stolen biomaterials,no matter what form it was created in,it's all need to be back to original family control in Cedars-Sinai MedicalCenter in LA.Controlling clones is US military operation.Original Scarlett never was engaged,by the way

Not a review (4, Insightful)

liquiddark (719647) | more than 5 years ago | (#25989885)

There is a difference between a review and a recap of the action. This "review" contains no actual critical discussion. All that the guy has done is recap what he saw. I'm sure it's interesting if you're looking for spoilers, but it's pretty much as unhelpful as you can get in determining the quality of the pic and whether or not it's worth seeing.

Not really "The Spirit". (2, Insightful)

reginaldo (1412879) | more than 5 years ago | (#25990291)

From what I have read and seen, it looks like Frank Miller is turning the work of Will Eisner into Sin City. Couldn't he just have done a straight adaptation?

I mean, there's a reason the award they give for excellence in comics is called the "Eisner Awards."

Re:Not really "The Spirit". (1)

SteelWheel (769945) | more than 5 years ago | (#25993809)

Tru dat. I loved Sin City, and I loved the Spirit--but they're entirely different genres. Anybody familiar with Eisner's Spirit knows that it wasn't some ultra-violent film noir kind of thing. It started off as being vaguely super-hero-ish, but over time, The Spirit became almost a supporting character. The stories were sort of little slice-of-life kinds of things, some humorous, some dramatic, some off-the-wall. However, they were not grim "My city screams" sorts of things. I'll end up seeing the movie anyway, but I know I'll be humphing my way through it, and afterward trying to explain to all my friends how the "Real" Spirit is nothing like the movie. Bleh.

Re:Not really "The Spirit". (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26023155)

From what I have read and seen, it looks like Frank Miller is turning the work of Will Eisner into Sin City. Couldn't he just have done a straight adaptation?

I mean, there's a reason the award they give for excellence in comics is called the "Eisner Awards."

How true. It's not like The Spirit ever became a suck-ass character like Batman, needing a serious reboot. Eisner's comic pioneered cinematic comic art, and The Spirit was always a laid-back, tongue-in-cheek hero _sans_ superpowers. From what I've seen in the trailers, and read in the blogs, we Eisner fans will see little that's recognizable in Miller's adaptation of The Spirit. Shame.

I'm still waiting for an official statement... (1)

Keyper7 (1160079) | more than 5 years ago | (#25990663)

...from Miller, explaining why he spent years refusing deals for filming Sin City, claming he was afraid that the director wouldn't be faithful to the comic book's spirit (pun not intended), and now is perfectly confortable in imposing his own view of The Spirit over Eisner's.

I'm not questioning here if the movie will be good or not. I'm just wondering if he ever tried to explain why he's not being completely hypocritical.

Re:I'm still waiting for an official statement... (1)

solios (53048) | more than 5 years ago | (#25993997)

Dude. Reality check. Frank Miller is alive. The living need money, and movies pay a lot better than comics.

And Will Eisner is dead. As I'm sure Bryan Herbert would tell you, it doesn't matter what the dead may have wanted done with their work. The only thing that matters is the money to be made from their creative corpse.

Re:I'm still waiting for an official statement... (1)

Doggabone (1025394) | more than 5 years ago | (#25999855)

I'm not questioning here if the movie will be good or not. I'm just wondering if he ever tried to explain why he's not being completely hypocritical.

His blog: http://www.mycityscreams.com/index2.html?swf=blog [mycityscreams.com]

Much has been the fuss in the comicsâ(TM) blogosphere about my SPIRIT movie - much justified, much hoped for, and much to my delight, that there has been a fuss at all. Some comics readers are terrified that THE SPIRIT will be a retread of my SIN CITY. Others quarrel over the change of the SPIRITâ(TM)S traditional blue hat, mask, and jacket, to black. These are understandable concerns for any lover of Will Eisnerâ(TM)s masterpiece. I take this opportunity to address these concerns. With glee, I take this opportunity.

THE SPIRIT is, with every effort I give it, not a rusty, dusty old monument to the work of my beloved Mentor, so much as it is an extension of what I know to have been Eisnerâ(TM)s central intent: to create something new, witty, and exploratory. Thatâ(TM)s what he did. Thatâ(TM)s what Iâ(TM)m doing.

It only resembles SIN CITY in that I am its director, and, well, yes, I have my ways and my proclivities. Luckily, I was able to discern three important proclivities I share with the Master. We both love good stories. We both love New York City. And we both love beautiful women.

(Please forgive my constant present-tense references to my dear friend. His creative force, and his force of personality, remains so strong in my mind that I canâ(TM)t often think of Will Eisner as a man who has left us.)

Now, about that blue suit.

Comic books have long traditions based on the limitations of pre-digital printing. Among these are traditions from the old newsprint-run-through-letterpress approach (yes, comics have been?and still doâ"follow tradition that dates all the way back to Gutenberg!). Bad printing on pulp paper is why it was necessary for every superhero to have his emblem printed on his chest, and that everything thatâ(TM)s black be printed in blue. Hence Supermanâ(TM)s preposterous blue hair. And the Spiritâ(TM)s blue hat, mask, and suit.

In tests?and we did several?the blue made the Spirit look like an unfortunate guest at a Halloween party. Going to black brings back his essential mystery, his Zorro-like sexiness. It also makes that red tie of his look very, very cool. So I made the call, with all respect to Eisnerâ(TM)s creation, and most importantly, to what I perceived as his underlying intention. It was an easy call for me to make. The Spirit dresses in black, and looks much the better for it. As I said, my desire was never to slavishly follow the rules of â(TM)40s printing into campy oblivion, but to reintroduce Eisnerâ(TM)s creation, via modern technology, to our brave new world.

And THE SPIRIT as some sort of SIN CITY REDUX? No, SIN CITY, that oneâ(TM)s my own baby, folks, and it looks the way it does for its own reasons. THE SPIRIT is, and will always be, Eisnerâ(TM)s SPIRIT. Anybody watching me on the set could attest that I very frequently drew a storyboard for a given shot first as I saw it, then as Will might?ve seen in?and, in every case, went with what I saw as Willâ(TM)s version.

To drive the point home, THE SPIRIT, despite any accidental impression left by that kickass teaser-trailer, is a full-color movie. SIN CITY?and I hope to make of it a movie trilogy all its own, come Hell and high water?is, visually, a playhouse for black and white.

THE SPIRITâ(TM)s been one hell of an adventure, one thatâ(TM)s made me love the world of comics more than ever.

Iâ(TM)m confident that itâ(TM)s going to be one hell of a good movie.

FM

Francis Ford Coppola's Bram Stoker's Dracula redux (1)

akahige (622549) | more than 5 years ago | (#25990737)

Frank Miller adapting Will Eisner makes about as much sense as Sam Peckinpah adapting Jeeves and Wooster.

When Quentin Tarantino made Jackie Brown from Elmore Leonard's Rum Punch, people were all "dazzled" by how brilliant it was, this fusing of two great dialogue masters. Personally, I found that Tarantino's choices, starting with moving the story out of Miami and working right on through the list, did nothing more than systematically eliminate everything that made the book charming and great. In the end, what you had was something that was Tarantino's flesh and fetishes hung over the barest mention of Leonard's skeleton.

I fully expect that's what we're going to have with this Spirit movie. Frank Miller is possibly the least qualified person to adapt Eisner (personally, I think Kevin Smith would do a better job), and I'm glad Will's not around to see this.

Miller Has Lost His Mind (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25991487)

The thing with Frank Miller is that in recent years he's lost his friggin mind when it comes to writing. I present All Star Batman and Robin as exhibit A.

Re:Miller Has Lost His Mind (1)

cptnapalm (120276) | more than 5 years ago | (#25992837)

I read the first 9 issues of ASBAR in one sitting. While initially it was very much a "huh?" phenomenon, if you roll with it, it is pretty damn fun. Not DKR quality, of course, but I did find it fun.

Crimewave was AWESOME! (1)

mujadaddy (1238164) | more than 5 years ago | (#25991971)

That is all.

Bleh Sin City (1)

jweller13 (1148823) | more than 5 years ago | (#25993377)

Bleh I hope it's not like Sin City, that movie sucked big time. But from the trailers unfortunately it pretty much looks like a Sin City knockoff.

I hope not (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25993549)

Sin City was a fucking piece of shit. Tasteless violence for violence sake.

Glass

Frank (1)

comicbookman333 (1424755) | more than 5 years ago | (#26009319)

Though he is one the best comic book writers alive today, ( I disown All Star Batman and Robin)I'm not entirely sure of Frank Miller's competence as a director. Sin City was good but I'm pretty sure Robert Rodriguez helped a lot.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>