"Captain Marvel" Screenwriter Shakes Up the Fanboys -- Shazam!
Gotta give it up for screenwriter John August. Not only is he entirely forthcoming about his upcoming "Shazam!" (aka "Captain Marvel") adaptation, but he's sharing all sorts of information about the project on his blog. He also had a few, well, potentially controversial things to say about the comic book heroes of yesteryear...
Mr. August (who's penned some really fine movies so be respectful when commenting at his blog) is pretty generous with the "Captain Marvel" / "Shazam!" histories and back-stories, which shows that he's done a lot of homework on the project, but near the end of his article the man goes and shakes up things just a little, and I suspect he meant to do it. Some of his comments include:
Source: The Blog of John August
Mr. August (who's penned some really fine movies so be respectful when commenting at his blog) is pretty generous with the "Captain Marvel" / "Shazam!" histories and back-stories, which shows that he's done a lot of homework on the project, but near the end of his article the man goes and shakes up things just a little, and I suspect he meant to do it. Some of his comments include:
Quote:Zowie! You go, John! Frankly I applaud the guy's honesty even as I sympathize with the amount of hate mail he's bound to receive. Yeah, yeah, he should be more reverent of the classic comic characters and (yawn) all that jazz. Anyway, all I need to know is that the guy who wrote "Go," "Charlie's Angels," "Big Fish," "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory," and "Corpse Bride" is writing a superhero movie. That alone is enough to get me into the theater. (Yes, I know he also wrote "Charlie's Angels 2," and yes I intentionally neglected to mention it. You got me.)
"DC publishes hardcover anthologies that gather up decades’ worth of Captain Marvel comics. If I were writing a dissertation on the evolution of the Captain Marvel character, these would be invaluable. But I’m not. So every time I read one of these, I’m struck with the same realization I encounter trying to watch The Honeymooners or a black-and-white movie: Wow. Old things suck.
Yes, I know that will piss off the vintage comics fans, who insist that the original incarnations are the purest forms of a character. But what you quickly realize is that old-time comic books were awkwardly written, crudely drawn, and bewilderingly inconsistent with their rules. They were making up the art form as they went along, and today’s comic books are better for the accumulated wisdom."
Source: The Blog of John August
Related Items
| Celeb: | John August |
| Movie: | Adventures of Captain Marvel |
| Go | |
| Charlie's Angels | |
| Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle | |
| Big Fish | |
| Charlie and the Chocolate Factory | |
| Tim Burton's Corpse Bride |
(1-20 of 21 posts) | Reply
 on Apr 09 2007 01:48 AM He makes a point about the comic characters and the Honeymooners. But just black and white movies? He enters true moron territory with that mention. (Reply to this) |
 on Apr 09 2007 06:05 AM Please dont diss The Honeymooners or old funny books (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 09 2007 06:29 AM other than charlie's angels.... looks pretty good (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 09 2007 07:28 AM Is someone really going to go up in arms about someone changing Shazam? is there even anyone alive today who knows who Shazam is? (Reply to this) |
 on Apr 09 2007 07:37 AM In reply to this comment (#860694) agreed. it'd be better to cannibalize the story and reinvent. like other DC properties, such as Green Lantern, new origins/fresh interpretations can breathe life into 60 year old characters. (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 09 2007 07:47 AM Oh no, he didn't just slam black and white movies, did he? What an idiot thing to do. I admire his honesty though, and I do think he has a point. I think that older comics should be respected more for their inventing of the medium than for their being aesthetically coherent. That said, I'm not sure todays comics are any better than the comics of twenty or thirty years ago. Definatly better than the stuff of the 30s and 40s, but the 70s and 80s? Not so sure. (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 09 2007 08:54 AM I wouldn't let that cocksucker touch any properties at all. If he does do Shazam, I hope it bombs big time. I certainly won't see it. (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 09 2007 08:56 AM In reply to this comment (#860692) Good comment. (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 09 2007 11:26 AM The only moronic thing is people jumping on him for his comments. I was going to try to explain what he meant, but if you can't figure it out yourself, then you deserve to wallow in your ignorance. (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 09 2007 01:20 PM In reply to this comment (#860694) [b]YOU IGNORAMUS![/b] ANYONE WHO KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT COMIC BOOKS KNOWS WHO CAPTAIN MARVEL IS! HE WAS BIGGER THAN SUPERMAN AT ONE POINT (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 09 2007 01:25 PM In reply to this comment (#860701) [b]True[/b] I was just telling a friend that DC sued to have Captain Marvel stopped. They won. Before that Captain Marvel was outselling Supes by a huge margin. If DC hadn't won, Supes may not even be who he is today... BTW, I'm all for an update, but please show some reverence or at least a little respect for the character!!!!! (Reply to this) |
 on Apr 09 2007 05:16 PM I agree with some old comics and TV shows but not everything "old". Obviosuly, he's overreacting so when he make the changes, he can be apologized. (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 09 2007 06:11 PM The release of Shazam will bring about the end of this era of comic book movies. Bet on it. (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 09 2007 06:33 PM "...black-and-white movie: Wow. Old things suck." World-class idiot. Three examples of black-and-white movies: "Seven Samurai", "Citizen Kane", "M", "Nosferatu". But wait... they didn't really have a choice, they HAD to make them in color, right? Well... "Psycho", "Schindler's List", "Raging Bull", "Manhattan" then. John August is an ignorant. On top of being an idiot. (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 09 2007 11:45 PM In reply to this comment (#860701) I think he meant anyone alive and with a life. Sorry for the confusion. (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 09 2007 11:56 PM In reply to this comment (#860705) Okay, I'll bite... I'm sure he didn't mean that ALL black and white movies and television. check out his site for his response. htt (Reply to this) |
 on Apr 10 2007 01:26 AM In reply to this comment (#860707) Totally agreed. People commenting about John August's IQ based on a few harmless remarks he made, only seeks to prove their own stupidity instead. He was simply generalising and yet does have a point that watching many black and white movies these days just isn't the same. Many ARE dated and do not resonate with younger generations. It's good to pay your respect to old films sure, and many older citizens grew up with them so there's a certain nostalgia factor, BUT, there's a reason technology has a habit of being progressive! Certain mediums are always going to be continually improved upon. A lot of the time, people watch old films just to appreciate the advancements we've since made and that particular film's role in bringing it about. Yes, some old films are great, CLASSICS in fact, but as John August said (I think it refers to the industry as a whole) "They were making up the art form as they went along, and today’s comic books are better for the accumulated wisdom." - this also applies to movies. A lot of (younger) pretentious movie freaks love to claim certain black and white movies are their favourites, when I'd swear they're only saying it as if to get some sort of "indie cred" or show how cinematically mature they are. (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 10 2007 07:07 AM In reply to this comment (#860707) Well. Actually, I meant my post as a joke. If you look closely, you'll see that when I gave FOUR examples of great B/W movies, I said there would be three. Maybe my joke was too subtle. Not a single person, with AT LEAST half a working brain, would claim black-and-white movies to be bad just because they are in black-and-white.There are bad movies in B/W just as there are bad movies in color. But ONE thing need to be made perfectly clear, NOT A SINGLE MOVIE in history is bad just because it was made in black-and-white. Also, there are many (TOO MANY!) films out there that are bad for the simple fact of being in color. The first example that comes to mind is Gus Van Sant's remake of Psycho (OK, that movie is awful for many reasons other than format) and Tom Savini's remake of Night of the living dead. (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 10 2007 10:29 AM In reply to this comment (#860710) Your post is a lesson in contradictions. You make a good point in saying there are no films that are bad by virtue of being in black and white. But then, somehow, you allow by the same logic that there are films that are bad because they're in color? I'm sorry. But that doesn't make any sense at all. You say there are many -"TOO MANY! Well you are hereby challenged to give us ONE example with an actual argument as to how a film is bad because it's in color. Just one. I'm curious. And no cheating. Don't name a bad film and list real reasons why it sucks. (Reply to this) |
|
on Apr 10 2007 11:39 AM There is an undeniable flaw in August's logic: the same "old things suck" adage could be applied to any slate of films/comics from any era, including this one. When he says "old things suck", is he speaking personally or for a demographic like some sort of beancounting shill? Nostalgia is a moot concept, always has been since the advent of home video and reprints. To appreciate classic stories, one needs only to have an open mind and a certain understanding of the story (including knowledge of what was possible in its era in question). Because of this, [i]Forbidden Planet[/i] will remain a personal favorite of mine... a movie I'd only seen a few years ago, yet made almost twenty years before my time. Seems like August wants [i]Shazam[/i] to "pwn" audiences rather than "wow" them. (Reply to this) |
IGN RSS Feeds