Will Eisner's The Spirit

[Watashi]

Make that Frank Miller's The Spirit now.

The poster(s) have emerged and a teaser trailer should be up sometime this summer.

http://img383.imageshack.us/img383/1944/spiritoutdoorartsmalluo8.jpg

Meeeeh. I don't like what Miller is doing. I don't want another Sin City. The Spirit doesn't belong in Miller's universe.

[D_Davis]

Meeeeh. I don't like what Miller is doing. I don't want another Sin City. The Spirit doesn't belong in Miller's universe.

You can say that again.

I thought Brad Bird was doing this? His style would have been perfect.

[Grouchy]

Wow, seriously misguided. That looks exactly like what I'd expect the Sin City 2 poster to look like. Which has absolutely nothing to do with Will Eisner's universe.

At least it's in color, right?

[number8]

I'll ape what others are saying. Miller's basically making this Sin City. Bleh.

[EvilShoe]

http://www.darkhorizons.com/2009/spirit/spirit9.jpg
http://www.darkhorizons.com/2009/spirit/spirit5.jpg

And more:
http://www.darkhorizons.com/2009/spirit/gallery.php#

Get 'em before they disappear.

[SirNewt]

My mind was divided until now. I figured Miller might rape the innocent tone right out of The Spirit. But, I also figured he was a big fan and might be the best protection Eisner's work could get from Hollywood. I guess we'll be getting more of former.

:sad:

[Grouchy]

My mind was divided until now. I figured Miller might rape the innocent tone right out of The Spirit. But, I also figured he was a big fan and might be the best protection Eisner's work could get from Hollywood. I guess we'll be getting more of former.

:sad:
I predict lots of femme fatales with very little clothes.

I was pissed earlier on that Ebony White wasn't on the movie. Like, come on, Eisner was clearly not a racist even if the character was a stereotype. Just update it to our times.

[SirNewt]

I predict lots of femme fatales with very little clothes.

I was pissed earlier on that Ebony White wasn't on the movie. Like, come on, Eisner was clearly not a racist even if the character was a stereotype. Just update it to our times.

Ya, how seriously can you take him anyway with the name Ebony White, for crying out loud.

[DavidSeven]

I'm still trying to figure out how Frank Miller is all of a sudden qualified to direct movies.

[Ezee E]

Has anyone seen the pics of Samuel L. Jackson in this? They look hilarious.

[Grouchy]

I'm still trying to figure out how Frank Miller is all of a sudden qualified to direct movies.
Well, he does have a lot of experience in Hollywood dating back to Robocop II. And all of his comics are very cinematic.

[number8]

And all of his comics are very cinematic.

No, they're not.

[Qrazy]

I'm still trying to figure out how Frank Miller is all of a sudden qualified to direct movies.

Do you need a special badge in order to do so?

[Grouchy]

No, they're not.
If you had to do a film adaptation of Dark Knight Returns, shot by shot would be the way to go. Sin City was done that way almost all of the time, and it worked. What's not cinematic about his comics?

[KK2.0]

I'm still trying to figure out how Frank Miller is all of a sudden qualified to direct movies.

i've been asking the same question since the project was announced.

[lovejuice]

Do you need a special badge in order to do so?

no, but my two cents is you need more than a comic book of your own, cinematic or not.

[Sycophant]

Frank Miller is one of the most established and respected comic authors this side of Alan Moore. He at least nominally co-directed Sin City with Robert Rodriguez. Regardless of the actual nature of his contribution to the adaptation, he was on set, like, all the time and has seen and understood the process first hand. I really don't understand why his qualifications are being questioned. Did people say the same thing about, say, Breck Eisner? Or what about... anyone who directed a freshman feature?

[lovejuice]

Frank Miller is one of the most established and respected comic authors this side of Alan Moore. He at least nominally co-directed Sin City with Robert Rodriguez. Regardless of the actual nature of his contribution to the adaptation, he was on set, like, all the time and has seen and understood the process first hand. I really don't understand why his qualifications are being questioned. Did people say the same thing about, say, Breck Eisner? Or what about... anyone who directed a freshman feature?

film directing involves many skills which you haven't acquired by just doing anything else. a first time director who at least graduates from a film school has some basic training.

still art is mainly about taste. we can assume miller's is impeccable -- i.e. he knows a good thing when he sees one, and can easily turn out to be fantastic in the chair.

oh, and there is this issue about how well he is working with subordinates. something i have high doubt a comic artist can pull off. still that's never mattered in the biz or to the audiences.

[Sycophant]

film directing involves many skills which you haven't acquired by just doing anything else. a first time director who at least graduates from a film school has some basic training.
I'd still contend that sitting next to Rodriguez in the director's chair for the course of the production of Sin City would be about the greatest training one could hope for--most likely better than almost any film school training. Of course, Rodriguez himself doesn't have any training per se. But he more or less has the process figured out.

oh, and there is this issue about how well he is working with subordinates. something i have high doubt a comic artist can pull off. still that's never mattered in the biz or to the audiences.
Miller's had to work with other artists and numerous publishing honchos. I understand they haven't always the prettiest relationships, but writing for Batman isn't an isolated enterprise.

[DavidSeven]

Frank Miller is one of the most established and respected comic authors this side of Alan Moore. He at least nominally co-directed Sin City with Robert Rodriguez. Regardless of the actual nature of his contribution to the adaptation, he was on set, like, all the time and has seen and understood the process first hand. I really don't understand why his qualifications are being questioned. Did people say the same thing about, say, Breck Eisner? Or what about... anyone who directed a freshman feature?

Even Breck Eisner went to USC film school and directed a bunch of TV projects before he got Sahara.

[Sycophant]

Even Breck Eisner went to USC film school and directed a bunch of TV projects before he got Sahara.Shoot. I forgot that. I was searching my memory for a studio director who entered the business pretty well untested. They do exist.

[number8]

If you had to do a film adaptation of Dark Knight Returns, shot by shot would be the way to go. Sin City was done that way almost all of the time, and it worked. What's not cinematic about his comics?

Cool drawings /= cinematic. Cinematic is knowing how to fill the screen with interesting mise-en-scene and choreographing movements within a shot. Frank Miller is an excellent comic book artist with a great sense of page layouts, but his main strength is to constantly go from small panels and bulk text descriptions to splash pages for dramatic effect. What does it mean, it's cinematic? Is he gonna cut to a new shot on every movement?

Sin City barely worked. It looked cool as shit, but the performances and the stories carried that one. It had atrocious editing because it was shot-for-shot. I remember literally wincing at the awkward shot transitions and cuts because they were following the panel orders. A medium shot of someone facing left would cut to a low angle of the guy facing right. It works in comic books because--like Scott McCloud says--there are gaps between panels where we fill in our own movements. In movies, it looks retarded.

And that's just composition. How about pacing? Directing actors? Mood? Music? I'm not saying he can't do it, but there's really no proof as to why they even picked him for the job. Being a master at comic books says nothing to me of someone's moviemaking prowess.

P.S. - A shot for shot DKR? That would be boring as hell. Are you kidding? I don't want to see a movie that's half news broadcasts.

[Qrazy]

no, but my two cents is you need more than a comic book of your own, cinematic or not.

Like what? Are we writing off all cinematic debuts now? Everyone has to start somewhere.

I didn't think Sin City was particularly cinematic either but someone is a filmmaker when they start making films, they don't need anything special to allow them to do so.

[Qrazy]

film directing involves many skills which you haven't acquired by just doing anything else. a first time director who at least graduates from a film school has some basic training.

still art is mainly about taste. we can assume miller's is impeccable -- i.e. he knows a good thing when he sees one, and can easily turn out to be fantastic in the chair.

oh, and there is this issue about how well he is working with subordinates. something i have high doubt a comic artist can pull off. still that's never mattered in the biz or to the audiences.

Plenty of great filmmakers didn't go to film school and plenty of great filmmakers also made shit in film school.

[Qrazy]

Shoot. I forgot that. I was searching my memory for a studio director who entered the business pretty well untested. They do exist.

There are hundreds... Kubrick and Welles both spring to mind. Welles had a theater/radio background and did some minor shorts before getting Citizen Kane but two shorts isn't much in the way of a cinematic testing ground either. Kubrick did a couple short docs and then made his own first two features on shoestring budgets. I don't expect Miller to have a particularly good debut film (most people don't) but there's no reason he shouldn't make one and then improve from there. Fuck film school.

[Raiders]

Quentin Tarantino and Sam Fuller are two more I can think of. Particularly the latter, who had only work as a newspaper reporter, pulp novelist and soldier prior to making films.

[Qrazy]

Quentin Tarantino and Sam Fuller are two more I can think of. Particularly the latter, who had only work as a newspaper reporter, pulp novelist and soldier prior to making films.

Plus there are dozens of actors turned directors who have had little experience in the chair prior to their debut.

[lovejuice]

i don't disagree there are some, but to claim exceptions as conditions is rather scientifically incorrect. unless you can hit me with statistic and number, i remain unconvinced. how's about countless others who do not go to film school and cannot make it.

[Raiders]

i don't disagree there are some, but to claim exceptions as conditions is rather scientifically incorrect. unless you can hit me with statistic and number, i remain unconvinced. how's about countless others who do not go to film school and cannot make it.

The point is it can be done and not all successful directors must have film school or even any real notable on-set film experience. Nobody was arguing it was the rule, just a distinct possibility.

[DavidSeven]

Your guys' examples suck.

Kubrick and Fuller sank their savings into initial film projects before a studio ever gave them budgets. Tarantino completed a self-financed feature before Reservoir Dogs, which was financed by an independent studio for practically no money. Orson Welles is credited with directing at least two low budget short films (one of which is 40 minutes long) before RKO let him make Kane.

[Raiders]

Fuller sank... savings into initial film projects before a studio ever gave [him] budgets.

Um, no he didn't.

[DavidSeven]

Um, no he didn't.

Borderline. He was given a three picture deal by a producer specializing in B-movies at the time, and he received absolutely no compensation. He then sank his savings into Park Row before an actual studio (Fox) let him make Pickup on South Street.

[Raiders]

Borderline. He was given a three picture deal by a producer specializing in B-movies at the time, and he received absolutely no compensation. He then sank his savings into Park Row before an actual studio (Fox) let him make Pickup on South Street.

Regardless, I was speaking of talent and quality, not monetary returns or budgets.

That said, I'm not defending Miller here. I don't like his comics or the films based on them. I have no desire to see him fuck around with a Will Eisner film.

[Qrazy]

i don't disagree there are some, but to claim exceptions as conditions is rather scientifically incorrect. unless you can hit me with statistic and number, i remain unconvinced. how's about countless others who do not go to film school and cannot make it.

How about instead you hit us with the statistics for those who do.

[Qrazy]

Your guys' examples suck.

Kubrick and Fuller sank their savings into initial film projects before a studio ever gave them budgets. Tarantino completed a self-financed feature before Reservoir Dogs, which was financed by an independent studio for practically no money. Orson Welles is credited with directing at least two low budget short films (one of which is 40 minutes long) before RKO let him make Kane.

We already cited those minor lower budget efforts of theirs. I don't understand what you guys are saying. That someone ought to have to make their first film with no budget in order to be allowed to make films? It's a ridiculous idea. If they have the means available, have your debut funded with some cash... here are other examples... Clooney, Redford, Charlie Kaufman, and tons of other actors turned directors and writers turned directors.

Miller got a directing credit for Sin City, he clearly did something to earn that.

[Qrazy]

That said, I'm not defending Miller here. I don't like his comics or the films based on them. I have no desire to see him fuck around with a Will Eisner film.

I like some of his artwork (plus he went to my high school so gotta give him props) but whether we think the film will be any good is irrelevant. There is no reason someone involved with the industry (writing, acting, cinematographer, director) shouldn't be given a few bucks for their debut and it's happened countless times (as you recognize).

If you guys wanted to complain about Miller's move to directing you should have done it with Sin City, not now. Rodriguez resigned from the director's guild in order to give him co-directing credits.

[Mysterious Dude]

Miller got a directing credit for Sin City, he clearly did something to earn that.
He only directed that movie in the sense that Cormac McCarthy directed No Country for Old Men (i.e. he didn't direct a damn thing).

[Qrazy]

He only directed that movie in the sense that Cormac McCarthy directed No Country for Old Men (i.e. he didn't direct a damn thing).

Says you, I'll take Rodriguez (the other director's) word for it.

[Mysterious Dude]

Says you, I'll take Rodriguez (the other director's) word for it.
According to Rodriguez, he followed the comic book so exactly that the comic itself was the storyboard for the film, therefore Miller directed the film, even though the comic book was not intended to be a storyboard and was created many years before the film.

By any sane person's definition of the word, that is not directing.

[number8]

Well, I dunno. From what I've read, he was on set every day and the actors would go to him, not Rodriguez, to ask about their characters.

[Qrazy]

According to Rodriguez, he followed the comic book so exactly that the comic itself was the storyboard for the film, therefore Miller directed the film, even though the comic book was not intended to be a storyboard and was created many years before the film.

By any sane person's definition of the word, that is not directing.

Peter Jackson has a guy that does most of his storyboarding for him, I can not remember the guy's name because he does not have a directing credit for The Lord of the Rings films.

If giving Miller a directing credit was so important to Rodriguez that he'd resign from the director's guild to give him one (something the Coens don't even do), I think Miller probably did something to deserve it.

By any sane person's definition of a credit, the person who has the credit probably deserved it (except maybe some producer's).

[Mysterious Dude]

Well, I dunno. From what I've read, he was on set every day and the actors would go to him, not Rodriguez, to ask about their characters.I can see your second point, but I don't think being on set every day constitutes directing.


Peter Jackson has a guy that does most of his storyboarding for him, I can not remember the guy's name because he does not have a directing credit for The Lord of the Rings films.

If giving Miller a directing credit was so important to Rodriguez that he'd resign from the director's guild to give him one (something the Coens don't even do), I think Miller probably did something to deserve it.But this is just an assumption. I could say that if the director's guild didn't think Miller deserved a director's credit, then Miller must not have deserved a director's credit. It's the same argument. You're just taking someone's word for it.

And if we're in agreement that making a storyboard isn't the same thing as directing, then what did Miller do to deserve a director's credit?

[Mysterious Dude]

By any sane person's definition of a credit, the person who has the credit probably deserved it (except maybe some producer's).
Then Pierre Boulle totally deserved the Oscar he won for writing The Bridge on the River Kwai's screenplay.

[Qrazy]

I can see your second point, but I don't think being on set every day constitutes directing.

But this is just an assumption. I could say that if the director's guild didn't think Miller deserved a director's credit, then Miller must not have deserved a director's credit. It's the same argument. You're just taking someone's word for it.

And if we're in agreement that making a storyboard isn't the same thing as directing, then what did Miller do to deserve a director's credit?

Um no, the guild doesn't allow more than one person to have a director's credit, that's why they wouldn't let Miller, the Coens, etc have one. It has nothing to do with how much 'direction' the person does, the guild doesn't take notes on set to quantify that relation.

I'm taking Rodriguez word for it who is the authority on the matter in this case. If he thinks Miller deserved a credit, than he deserved the credit, probably for the DIRECTION that he enacted. You're taking nobody's word for it but your own.

[Qrazy]

Then Pierre Boulle totally deserved the Oscar he won for writing The Bridge on the River Kwai's screenplay.

Yeah, I guess he did, since it was adapted from his novel. That's the nature of an adapted screenplay, you share the credit with the original creator of the work.

With direction you share it with whoever else helped direct, if all Miller did was storyboard than Rodriguez could have just given him the storyboard credit. Clearly (as number8 has cited), Miller did more than just that.

[number8]

I can see your second point, but I don't think being on set every day constitutes directing.

Well, I wasn't suggesting that it is, just that he was always there as the go-to guy.

I remember this interview with Mickey Rourke and they asked him what was it like having two directors, and Rourke said that having Miller on set was invaluable because he could always go to this guy who created this Sin City world for advice.

This one time, Rourke asked Miller how Marv should walk. Miller told him to hold on, drew a sketch of Marv walking on some paper, and showed it to Rourke, and Rourke said that it was the best direction he could get and that he got it immediately after seeing the sketch. I think he said something about how directors can talk until your ear fall off but it's never going to be as clear as seeing an image of what it is the actor's supposed to do.

*shrug*

[DavidSeven]

We already cited those minor lower budget efforts of theirs. I don't understand what you guys are saying. That someone ought to have to make their first film with no budget in order to be allowed to make films? It's a ridiculous idea.

If you want to give your entire savings to a guy who's never held a camera before then be my guest. The idea that Miller is being given a blockbuster budget based on virtually nothing is what's ridiculous.


If they have the means available, have your debut funded with some cash... here are other examples... Clooney, Redford, Charlie Kaufman, and tons of other actors turned directors and writers turned directors.

Yeah... guys who have been a consistent presence in the industry and have been on sets for 20+ years before they were ever given a budget. Yeah, that's the same.


Miller got a directing credit for Sin City, he clearly did something to earn that.

You do realize we're talking about a movie that has a "Guest Director" credit for Quentin Tarantino, right?

[Sycophant]

I'd imagine the studio has some reason to have some confidence in him. They're more paranoid about this kind of thing than we are.

[Qrazy]

You do realize we're talking about a movie that has a "Guest Director" credit for Quentin Tarantino, right?

That's because he directed a scene in the film.

He has written scripts for Hollywood in the past as well. This conversation has become too entrenched and obtuse for me to continue with it. I've already said this three or four times but... like most independent debuts, I don't expect it to be anything spectacular, however Rodriguez and the studio both have faith in the guy, and I put more stock in their first hand knowledge of the situation than in some absurd notion that he has to make some shitty shorts in order to prove his capabilities beforehand. More power to him if he can get a budget for his first real film.

I don't know if you guys are all in film school and are foaming at the mouth or what but it's been proven time and again that you don't need film school to make films.

[DavidSeven]

That's because he directed a scene in the film.

He has written scripts for Hollywood in the past as well. This conversation has become too entrenched and obtuse for me to continue with it. I've already said this three or four times but... like most independent debuts, I don't expect it to be anything spectacular, however Rodriguez and the studio both have faith in the guy, and I put more stock in their first hand knowledge of the situation than in some absurd notion that he has to make some shitty shorts in order to prove his capabilities beforehand. More power to him if he can get a budget for his first real film.

I don't know if you guys are all in film school and are foaming at the mouth or what but it's been proven time and again that you don't need film school to make films.

I think you're the only one foaming at the mouth. What started as a throwaway comment on Miller's lack of experience has turned into some anti-film school diatribe by you. I don't think anyone here was bashing the guy for not going to film school.

[Qrazy]

I think you're the only one foaming at the mouth. What started as a throwaway comment on Miller's lack of experience has turned into some anti-film school diatribe by you. I don't think anyone here was bashing the guy for not going to film school.

Foaming at the mouth for the chance to get that kind of money for a first feature is what I meant. I can't understand such disdain for his current position being motivated out of anything but jealousy, concern for one's stock in Lionsgate or with his ability to live up to the source material. I have no problem with people approaching films with caution when they dislike the director, but I think we should give him and any newish filmmaker the benefit of the doubt when they're just starting, perhaps even more so when it's obvious the studio and his co-director have so much faith in him. Plus Bill Pope is covering cinematography, so hopefully we'll get some quality footage.

---

Lovejuice brought in film school as an example of a proving ground for a director's credentials.

[megladon8]

Of course you don't need film school to make films.

You just need some rich relatives, or a cousin who owns a film production company, or an uncle named Steven Spielberg.

/bitter rant

[lovejuice]

Lovejuice brought in film school as an example of a proving ground for a director's credentials.

my stance is not pro-"film school" per se. i am pro-experience. even if one is a first-timer, as long as you have some experience i can understand the person sitting in the director chair. (but as you mention, miller did more than "cruising around" the set of sin city.)

should that bar anyone from the job only because he or she is not yet a first-timer? definitely not. there are young faces who have never received any formal film education, and i support that they should get their break. (but not in a project of this scale.)

miller is a curious case. first he is not a "young face". i don't know behind-the-scene of this project. but it seems he gets the job because of his credential as a great graphic novelist. that's absurd to me. stephen king sucks as a director; is there a cause to expect more from miller? (although it seems michael crichton ain't so shabby.)

then again art is about taste. miller has that. he knows what's good, bad, beautiful, ugly, sensational, cold, sexy, and whatnot. even if he might not be able to produce things to the desired effect, he will know which shot/sequence to keep or leave on the floor.

[KK2.0]

I don't think you need film school but it's always a risky situation, even for experienced directors, let alone a virgin like Miller.

Orson Welles was already a respected stage director before making films, so, he knew how to conduct actors and rule a live-action production, it's a strong background and a much more natural transition to film than writing and drawing comics.

I guess there's no need to explain to you guys that directing isn't only sitting on a chair and barking orders, however, i believe that in big hollywood productions there are more than enough experienced assistants to help him, not to mention that producers sometimes have more control over the final product than the director itself, which will probably be the case with The Spirit. =/

Actors asking him for advice on set speaks more about the actors doing research than qualifying him as director, it's just like having the novel author on set imo.

[Sycophant]

It's been noted that he wrote screenplays for Robocops II & III, right? *shrugs*

[KK2.0]

It's been noted that he wrote screenplays for Robocops II & III, right? *shrugs*

take a side, please? :P

[Sycophant]

take a side, please? :PWell, this is all rather silly, and I think everyone's positions have been overstated. But on paper, the man has only slightly less so-called experience in the industry than Charlie Kaufman and nobody got in a huff about his opportunity to direct a film. I recognize differences there, but still.

[Grouchy]

Cool drawings /= cinematic. Cinematic is knowing how to fill the screen with interesting mise-en-scene and choreographing movements within a shot. Frank Miller is an excellent comic book artist with a great sense of page layouts, but his main strength is to constantly go from small panels and bulk text descriptions to splash pages for dramatic effect. What does it mean, it's cinematic? Is he gonna cut to a new shot on every movement?
That's only his Sin City years. His previous work is much less splash page-y. Year One / Born Again are comics with perfect pacing and Mazzuchelli even draws believable and not stylized "performances". Obviously that's not a guarantee that he can direct a good movie, but he's as cinematic as a comic-book artist can be, his comics read closer to a movie than Will Eisner's.


Sin City barely worked. It looked cool as shit, but the performances and the stories carried that one. It had atrocious editing because it was shot-for-shot. I remember literally wincing at the awkward shot transitions and cuts because they were following the panel orders. A medium shot of someone facing left would cut to a low angle of the guy facing right. It works in comic books because--like Scott McCloud says--there are gaps between panels where we fill in our own movements. In movies, it looks retarded.
Well, I just don't think it looked that bad. I dunno where all this Sin City bashing originally came from, but as an aside, I hate it when the axis jumps (dunno if this is the right expression in english) is given so much importance. I mean, obviously you should know enough about technique to avoid jumping the axis on most cuts, but when you know that you're doing it and the editing is vibrant enough to sustain it, you should keep it in. Scorsese and Raimi do it all the time. This is actually a personal sour one I have with some of my mates at film schol.


And that's just composition. How about pacing? Directing actors? Mood? Music? I'm not saying he can't do it, but there's really no proof as to why they even picked him for the job. Being a master at comic books says nothing to me of someone's moviemaking prowess.
Well, you said yourself he directed the actors in Sin City. I don't think he'll have any problems with pacing or mood. In all honesty here, I don't think it's so much an issue of a producer "giving" Miller the job, so much as he actually got interested on the filmmaking process and liked this project. This can turn right or wrong, sure, but I can think of people less related to movies than Miller.


P.S. - A shot for shot DKR? That would be boring as hell. Are you kidding? I don't want to see a movie that's half news broadcasts.
I'd be first in goddamn line, man.

[EvilShoe]

Miller probably gets to direct because his name being attached to a project = money after Sin City & 300.

[Watashi]

Some official images:

http://www.aintitcool.com/images2007/SpiritOctopus.jpg

http://www.aintitcool.com/images2007/SpiritFinal2.jpg

[EyesWideOpen]

This movie is near the top of my anticipated films of the year.

[Watashi]

This movie is near the top of my anticipated films of the year.
Why am I not surprised.

[KK2.0]

maybe it's my negative bias, but for an artist know for his stylish drawings those pictures are so meh.

[SirNewt]

maybe it's my negative bias, but for an artist know for his stylish drawings those pictures are so meh.

They look like 'Sin City'. Eisener was very innovative in his use of how he divided his cells onto the page. Give us some split screen photography for crying out loud.

[Watashi]

Teaser Poster:

http://www.aintitcool.com/images2007/SpiritTeaserSm.jpg

Trailer comes out tomorrow.

[DavidSeven]

So... this must be what Frank Miller learned on the set of Sin City:

How to make a movie that looks exactly like Sin City.

[Watashi]

So... this must be what Frank Miller learned on the set of Sin City:

How to make a movie that looks exactly like Sin City.
Indeed.

Also, is the movie called "My City Screams" starring some guy named the Spirit?

Anyone who is unfamilar with the comic is going to have no idea what the title is.

[ledfloyd]

I loved Sin City, and even though Frank Miller has been easy to bash lately with his recent Batman work and 300, I still consider myself a fan.

This looks horrendous. A black suit? If he can't get the color of the suit right I can't trust him to get anything else right.

I won't completely declare this dead in the water until I see some footage. But aside from Scarlett, nothing about this looks good.

[Watashi]

Teaser trailer (http://www.mtv.com/overdrive/?id=1585694&vid=225572)

Yeah, this doesn't look like Sin City at all.

[ledfloyd]

Teaser trailer (http://www.mtv.com/overdrive/?id=1585694&vid=225572)

Yeah, this doesn't look like Sin City at all.
liar.

[Sxottlan]

So then. Sin City 2.

Not familiar with the graphic novel, but did it look anything like this?

[trotchky]

My official position on this is that the Sin City comics are brilliant in ways most people either don't realize or take for granted, and the movie is one of the most mismanaged, poorly conceived, and generally horrible adaptations of a source material I've ever seen. I guess it's possible that that was exclusively the fault of RR (I mean, he is a hack), but somehow I doubt that Frank Miller is as much of a cinematic genius as he is a comics one. In conclusion, I've never read the Eisner comic but I'm guessing this will make a trainwreck of it, and Miller is wasting his talents.

[ledfloyd]

So then. Sin City 2.

Not familiar with the graphic novel, but did it look anything like this?
nothing at all. it was in color, for one.

[Henry Gale]

The difference between the two looks like if Batman Begins was an direct adaptation of the Adam West series (stylistically, not in terms of quality).

Having said that, the two long shots of him jumping from building the building looked very cool. But the rest... nah.

[megladon8]

I don't know why, but I just find it a little, um, disrespectful that Miller - who was apparently a good friend of Eisner in his latter years - seems to be turning this into something that takes place in his own universe.

It's not like that's never been done before. I realize "different interpretations" is something we are all accustomed to, and I like to embrace these.

But The Spirit is such a legendary, iconic character. It'd be like giving Mickey Mouse to Quentin Tarantino, and him turning it into a foul-language filled, super violent study of kung-fu cinema.

It just seems...wrong.

[dreamdead]

Well, the two shots of the Spirit running across the building has an old school Eisner panel frame, but it just feels generic cinematically. Unfortunately, that means we get Millerisms for the rest of the teaser.

I want a real film noir, with sets and the works. Not this computer graphics stuff.

[Grouchy]

I don't know why, but I just find it a little, um, disrespectful that Miller - who was apparently a good friend of Eisner in his latter years - seems to be turning this into something that takes place in his own universe.

It's not like that's never been done before. I realize "different interpretations" is something we are all accustomed to, and I like to embrace these.

But The Spirit is such a legendary, iconic character. It'd be like giving Mickey Mouse to Quentin Tarantino, and him turning it into a foul-language filled, super violent study of kung-fu cinema.

It just seems...wrong.
Exactly. This is totally ridiculous, actually. I dunno why the Eisner estate allows this fucking travesty.

[EyesWideOpen]

Comic book movies going away from their source material, i've never seen that before.

[megladon8]

Comic book movies going away from their source material, i've never seen that before.


Well, if you read my post, you'd see that I think there's quite a bit of difference between a simple "straying from source material", and what Miller is doing with this.

It's not like even Batman Begins was a perfect representation of the source material.

Differences are going to occur, no matter what. It's unavoidable.

Miller's just going insane, though.

[EyesWideOpen]

Well, if you read my post, you'd see that I think there's quite a bit of difference between a simple "straying from source material", and what Miller is doing with this.

It's not like even Batman Begins was a perfect representation of the source material.

Differences are going to occur, no matter what. It's unavoidable.

Miller's just going insane, though.

You haven't even seen the movie to make that comparison.

All your going on is stills and a short teaser. I admit the visual style from what has been shown is quite different than what it is in Eisner's book but I trust in Miller enough to wait and see the final product.

[megladon8]

You haven't even seen the movie to make that comparison.

All your going on is stills and a short teaser. I admit the visual style from what has been shown is quite different than what it is in Eisner's book but I trust in Miller enough to wait and see the final product.


And I don't like the style that is being represented in the teaser, posters and photos. What's wrong with that?

It looks reflective of Miller's worlds, and not of Eisner's.

[EyesWideOpen]

And I don't like the style that is being represented in the teaser, posters and photos. What's wrong with that?

It looks reflective of Miller's worlds, and not of Eisner's.

When did I say that you can't not like the style that is being represented?

My comments were meant to counter the whole attitude that he is destroying Eisner's work with this film when no one has seen it. Using words like "fucking travesty" based on stills is ridiculous.

[megladon8]

When did I say that you can't not like the style that is being represented?

My comments were meant to counter the whole attitude that he is destroying Eisner's work with this film when no one has seen it. Using words like "fucking travesty" based on stills is ridiculous.


Er...I never said the stills were a "fucking travesty".

I said it's disrespectful of Miller to use this opportunity to make Will Eisner's The Spirit, to instead make Frank Miller's The Spirit.

[EyesWideOpen]

Er...I never said the stills were a "fucking travesty".

I said it's disrespectful of Miller to use this opportunity to make Will Eisner's The Spirit, to instead make Frank Miller's The Spirit.

Read the other posts in the thread. Once again, my comments were made against the consensus of posters comments here not just yours.

[Grouchy]

Read the other posts in the thread. Once again, my comments were made against the consensus of posters comments here not just yours.
You can't deny those stills and teaser trailer make it look like a Sin City rip-off. True, I haven't seen the movie, but the teaser must've been completely deceitful if that's not the style featured in the movie.

And, actually, when I say "fucking travesty", I'm attacking the use of that style, not the idea that the movie can be good. Eisner is a guy who reinvented the language of comics and who created a series with a very outlined pulpy universe and style. Maybe The Spirit will be an awesome Sin City rip-off, but why base it on Eisner's comics then? Just make up your own story and vigilante.

[megladon8]

Vigilantism rules.

[Dukefrukem]

meh

[SirNewt]

Well, if you read my post, you'd see that I think there's quite a bit of difference between a simple "straying from source material", and what Miller is doing with this.

It's not like even Batman Begins was a perfect representation of the source material.

Differences are going to occur, no matter what. It's unavoidable.

Miller's just going insane, though.

Batman has changed much over the years. There, however, has only ever been one Spirit, coming from one source. The pictures, dialog, and characters are highly consitent throughout the entire series. That leaves little to interpert. Never mind that, though, Miller isn't even respecting the general tone. Full color panels were as much a part of 'The Spirit' as inky black ones.

I'm in total agreement. Interpretation isn't even a single bullet for Miller's weaponless defense.

[EyesWideOpen]

Batman has changed much over the years. There, however, has only ever been one Spirit, coming from one source. The pictures, dialog, and characters are highly consitent throughout the entire series. That leaves little to interpert. Never mind that, though, Miller isn't even respecting the general tone. Full color panels were as much a part of 'The Spirit' as inky black ones.

I'm in total agreement. Interpretation isn't even a single bullet for Miller's weaponless defense.

That's actually not true. Their has been a Spirit series going for over a year now which started with a Batman/The Spirit crossover written by Jeph Loeb and an ongoing The Spirit series written by Darwyn Cooke and now Mark Evanier and Sergio Aragones.

[SirNewt]

That's actually not true. Their has been a Spirit series going for over a year now which started with a Batman/The Spirit crossover written by Jeph Loeb and an ongoing The Spirit series written by Darwyn Cooke and now Mark Evanier and Sergio Aragones.

Oh come on.

[EyesWideOpen]

Oh come on.

Come on what? You stated that their has been one Spirit from one source and i am correcting you on your mistake.

[SirNewt]

Come on what? You stated that their has been one Spirit from one source and i am correcting you on your mistake.

Your correction had little relevance to my point. Regardless of that one year run, the work representing the Spirit is infinitesimal when compared to the work representing Batman. And even more minute is the work representing the Spirit that is not Eisners. Looking to the work not Eisner's is like looking to the moon when the sun is out.

[Grouchy]

Come on what? You stated that their has been one Spirit from one source and i am correcting you on your mistake.
But that series is clearly intended as a homage to Will Eisner.

The Spirit canon is the work of only one man and it has a coherent style.

[number8]

Wow, that shit is retarded.

Goddamn it, Miller. God fucking damn it.

[megladon8]

I'm also concerned about the cast.

Gabriel Macht doesn't instill much confidence in me. Maybe I've seen all the wrong movies with him, but he doesn't seem like charismatic leading man material. Just kind of a pretty boy.

And Eva Mendes is in it. That says loads right there.

[ledfloyd]

Darwyn Cooke's spirit is very faithful to the original.

This movie needs to be called The Goddamned Spirit

[Grouchy]

Darwyn Cooke's spirit is very faithful to the original.

This movie needs to be called The Goddamned Spirit
Heh. Exactly.

[megladon8]

http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/5139/spiritevateaserprint07lv6.th.j pg (http://img136.imageshack.us/my.php?image=spiritevateaserpr int07lv6.jpg)


...no, you look like a bad actress.

[Lasse]

I have no response other than "I'd hit it".


:|

[eternity]

*reads the thread*

Is there a chance, any chance at all, that the obvious Sin City 2-ish nature to the teaser/posters are purely from the marketers viewpoint? It may be misleading, but Frank Miller making a spiritual Sin City 2 would plant a lot of asses in the seats.

[Watashi]

New trailer (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=46870)

Still looks a lot like Sin City 2, but man... this is one weird trailer.

[megladon8]

Ugh, that is awful.

I really wish they had gotten someone to make the film as more of a tribute to Eisner, instead of making it their own little exercise in loving their own style.

And if that hadn't had the title The Spirit at the end, I would have thought it was a trailer for a porno.

[Watashi]

And if that hadn't had the title The Spirit at the end, I would have thought it was a trailer for a porno.

Wait, what?

[megladon8]

Wait, what?


Seriously. All the moaning and air-brushed women.

And dialogue that sounds like it came from a porno.

Man that was bad.

[eternity]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YVBaZpZD_E

He's talking about this, and yeah, it's...holy crap/

[number8]

Seriously. All the moaning and air-brushed women.

And dialogue that sounds like it came from a porno.

It's called Frank Miller.

[megladon8]

It's called Frank Miller.


Indeed.

No wonder his work is so popular among 14 year old boys.

[Watashi]

Indeed.

No wonder his work is so popular among 14 year old boys.
Why is it always 14 year old boys with you? Why not 13 or 15?

[number8]

Why is it always 14 year old boys with you? Why not 13 or 15?

It was the age he discovered that he could masturbate to Frank Miller's comics.

[Acapelli]

what the fuck was that?

[megladon8]

It was the age he discovered that he could masturbate to Frank Miller's comics.


No, I actually discovered masturbation with a zombie movie.

True story.

[Ezee E]

meg knows porno.

he watches it all day, and gets paid to transcribe it people.

[Grouchy]

I masturbated for the first time with a Howard Chaykin comic.

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u5/thaoworra/349547.jpg

True story.

[number8]

Geez, guys. I wasn't serious. Didn't any of you discover softcore porn at a young age like I did?

[D_Davis]

Wow...

That looks terrible.

Was this made in 1993 and then put in a time capsule?

[Kurosawa Fan]

Geez, guys. I wasn't serious. Didn't any of you discover softcore porn at a young age like I did?

*raises hand*

Shannon Tweed, you will always have a special place in my heart. And loins.

[D_Davis]

Back in the day, my friend Paul and I used to plan our weekend viewing based on what was rated R or NR with 'Nudity' listed first in the cable guide.

And by back in the day I mean last weekend.

[megladon8]

Back in the day, my friend Paul and I used to plan our weekend viewing based on what was rated R or NR with 'Nudity' listed first in the cable guide.

And by back in the day I mean last weekend.


I can picture you sitting there with an oat soda, watching Playboy's Playmate Bloopers.

"Hehehe...boobies!"

[D_Davis]

I can picture you sitting there with an oat soda, watching Playboy's Playmate Bloopers.

"Hehehe...boobies!"

It usually ended up being some stupid shit like The Handmaiden's Tale with like 5 frames of side boob.

[number8]

What's funny is that I only get a perverse kick out of R and NR skin flicks in high school, after I've lost the taste for actual porn. Back in 5th and 6th grade, I was all about getting older guys to rent me those ridiculous Skinemax porn. I guess I got it kind of backwards.

[number8]

I'm changing my mind, by the way. I think this might be the most unintentionally hilarious movie of the year, so now I'm kind of looking forward to it.

[Dukefrukem]

video no longer up?

[Grouchy]

I'm changing my mind, by the way. I think this might be the most unintentionally hilarious movie of the year, so now I'm kind of looking forward to it.
I'm beginning to feel the same way. I didn't even need a Spirit movie anyway, so, even if Miller is fucking shit up, well, who cares? The trailer looks totally stupid and fun.

[chrisnu]

I think this could be my new Wicker Man.

[EyesWideOpen]

http://www.joblo.com/video/player.php?video=thespirittrlr 2

New trailer. This movie is gonna be all kinds of awesome.

[dreamdead]

"I'm gonna kill you all kinds of dead."

Hoo boy. I think the unintentional hilarity factor just got ratcheted up. So much so that I vaguely want to watch this atrocity now.

[number8]

Reading Miller's recent works, I think he's just trying to blur the lines between noir and comedy these days.

[EyesWideOpen]

"I'm gonna kill you all kinds of dead."

Hoo boy. I think the unintentional hilarity factor just got ratcheted up. So much so that I vaguely want to watch this atrocity now.

From everything i've read about the movie it's very much intentional. A recent interview with Sam Jackson was talking about how they very much were trying to make a live action cartoon where like a Looney Tunes cartoon if someone gets hit with a pipe it bends to the shape of their head that's the style they are going for.

[SirNewt]

From everything i've read about the movie it's very much intentional. A recent interview with Sam Jackson was talking about how they very much were trying to make a live action cartoon where like a Looney Tunes cartoon if someone gets hit with a pipe it bends to the shape of their head that's the style they are going for.

How many dailies do they have to watch to realize that this isn't working?

[chrisnu]

I hope it isn't boring, or this will be very painful to sit through.

For a moment there, I thought he said Sans Serif. :)

I AM THE OCTOPUS!!!

[Boner M]

I wish all movies looked like this!

[Dukefrukem]

LOL!

"I'm the Octopus. I have eight of everything!"

[Raiders]

I do have to admit the Carol of the Bells-scored Christmas-time TV spots for this are pretty cool.

Still looks awful.

[Grouchy]

Reading Miller's recent works, I think he's just trying to blur the lines between noir and comedy these days.
Reading Miller's recent works, I think his mind just jumped a big fucking giant squid and blurred the lines between hardcore and stupid.

[Ivan Drago]

It'll be a visual feast...but that's it.

Speaking of which, a movie that looks just like this is FINALLY getting into production in May...some movie called Sin City 2 (http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/12/07/frank-miller-and-rosario-dawson-confirm-sin-city-2-is-written-will-shoot-in-april-2009/).

[MadMan]

Yeah this looks bad. I'll probably rent it solely for the action, and maybe for the visuals.

[Amnesiac]

It'll be a visual feast...but that's it.

Speaking of which, a movie that looks just like this is FINALLY getting into production in May...some movie called Sin City 2 (http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/12/07/frank-miller-and-rosario-dawson-confirm-sin-city-2-is-written-will-shoot-in-april-2009/).

Johnny Depp was attached to this at one point. I wonder if that'll still work out.

[Spun Lepton]

AICN says, "Worst movie since Battlefield Earth." Take that however you will.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39450

[MadMan]

AICN says, "Worst movie since Battlefield Earth." Take that however you will.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39450I'm gonna take that as a really bad sign.

[EyesWideOpen]

AICN says, "Worst movie since Battlefield Earth." Take that however you will.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39450

AICN didn't say anything. A random poster at AICN wrote in a review saying "Worst movie since Battlefield Earth."

[Ivan Drago]

Just curious but does anyone know of any sites with old Spirit comic panels or strips? Because I'm curious about how drastically different the film is going to be visually from the comics.

[Melville]

There are a few full pages of The Spirit on here:

http://www.quickstopentertainment.com/comics101/13.html

[Spun Lepton]

AICN didn't say anything. A random poster at AICN wrote in a review saying "Worst movie since Battlefield Earth."

If it's published on AICN's site, they have effectively endorsed it, thus "AICN says ..." Are we going to argue some more about semantics? Because I just fucking love that shit.

More AICN madness:

El Gringo Says THE SPIRIT Is 'absolutely deprived of anything resembling life'...
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39470

[number8]

AICN didn't say anything. A random poster at AICN wrote in a review saying "Worst movie since Battlefield Earth."

If they publish it, they should stand behind it.

And I only say that because they've had DVDs quote their "guest reviews".

[The Mike]

Anytime someone says something is the worst movie they've ever seen, I feel like they should watch more movies.

[D_Davis]

Anytime someone says something is the worst movie they've ever seen, I feel like they should watch more movies.

Why?

Whether someone has seen 5000 movies or 5 movies, one of them will be the worst they have seen.

[Wryan]

El Gringo Says THE SPIRIT Is 'absolutely deprived of anything resembling life'...

That's actually pretty good and damn funny. One point awarded for style...

[The Mike]

Why?

Whether someone has seen 5000 movies or 5 movies, one of them will be the worst they have seen.

99% of the times I hear it said it's regarding a) a movie that is playing in multiplexes, has a lot of good things going for it, but fails to reach its goals (i.e. Vacancy, A Knight's Tale, etc.); or b) an independent movie that they claim is the worst movie ever because of how weird it is (i.e., The Royal Tenenbaums, Wolf Creek, etc.).

And I think of some of the crap produced in the past and some of the DTV junk that's out there today, and think they're kinda silly.

[Dukefrukem]

99% of the times I hear it said it's regarding a) a movie that is playing in multiplexes, has a lot of good things going for it, but fails to reach its goals (i.e. Vacancy, A Knight's Tale, etc.); or b) an independent movie that they claim is the worst movie ever because of how weird it is (i.e., The Royal Tenenbaums, Wolf Creek, etc.).

And I think of some of the crap produced in the past and some of the DTV junk that's out there today, and think they're kinda silly.

who the fuck thinks Wolf Creek is the worst movie ever?

[number8]

who the fuck thinks Wolf Creek is the worst movie ever?

Probably me.

[Wryan]

Probably me.

I can't hate a movie entire if there were parts, however small, that I enjoyed. WC has a few, a scant few, a really friggin scant few, of those things.

[number8]

I can't hate a movie entire if there were parts, however small, that I enjoyed. WC has a few, a scant few, a really friggin scant few, of those things.

Not me. When there are small parts that are good in a shitty movie, I see the potential of what could've been and that causes me to hate the movie even more.

[megladon8]

I can't say I'm shocked at all about the preliminary reviews.

It's looked like crap since day one.

[Spun Lepton]

Probably me.

Yeah, Wolf Creek is teh crapz0rz.

[Dukefrukem]

fuck everyone who hates Wolf Creek.

<3 :D

[Spun Lepton]

fuck everyone who hates Wolf Creek.

<3 :D

Are you propositioning me? :pritch:

[The Mike]

who the fuck thinks Wolf Creek is the worst movie ever?

I've heard it. And they even followed it up by saying "And I see a lot of movies!" :rolleyes:

[Dukefrukem]

I've heard it. And they even followed it up by saying "And I see a lot of movies!" :rolleyes:

now if they had said... Cabin Fever... I may have agreed. ;)

[The Mike]

now if they had said... Cabin Fever... I may have agreed. ;)

Oh, I've heard that one too.

And it's not. :P

[EyesWideOpen]

now if they had said... Cabin Fever... I may have agreed. ;)

or Transformers.

[Grouchy]

I liked Cabin Fever a lot when I saw it three years ago. I wonder if it'll hold up now. The karate kid will still be funny, I bet.

[number8]

WHY WHY WHY WHY.

A pox on you Frank Miller.

[Boner M]

So will this movie's epic failure mean a well-deserved moratorium on automatically 'visually stunning' graphic novel adaptations that look like a cross between a screensaver and Dogville?

[Qrazy]

So will this movie's epic failure mean a well-deserved moratorium on automatically 'visually stunning' graphic novel adaptations that look like a cross between a screensaver and Dogville?

Nah, Sin City 2 will eventually be made and released methinks.

[D_Davis]

Wolf Creek is a beautiful looking film that is far too ugly for me to honestly enjoy. But damn does it have some gorgeous vistas.

[Ivan Drago]

Nah, Sin City 2 will eventually be made and released methinks.

It's going into production in May.

[number8]

Elaborating on m previous outburst: this is the worst fucking movie of the year for me. Jesus Christ. It's like a really lazy Speed Racer. With no monkeys.

[Spun Lepton]

Elaborating on m previous outburst: this is the worst fucking movie of the year for me. Jesus Christ. It's like a really lazy Speed Racer. With no monkeys.

Details! Let's hear 'em.

[number8]

Details! Let's hear 'em.

Sam Jackson dresses up like a Nazi for no reason. Like, seriously, no explanation. The Spirit jumps into a sewer, Scarlett Johannsen drugs him, then he wakes up tied up in a chair in front of a giant swastika and a photo of Hitler. Then Sam Jackson and Scarlett come out in Nazi uniforms. The Spirit didn't even think this was strange. Nobody made any mention of the fact.

It also overlaps several narrative devices. In one scene, The Spirit delivers exposition to his cat, then he just starts talking to himself, then he looks at the camera and starts talking to the audience, then he shuts up and, while he's still staring at the camera, suddenly we hear his voiceover, then it cuts to a flashback. What? Pick a fucking style, Miller.

[Qrazy]

It also overlaps several narrative devices. In one scene, The Spirit delivers exposition to his cat, then he just starts talking to himself, then he looks at the camera and starts talking to the audience, then he shuts up and, while he's still staring at the camera, suddenly we hear his voiceover, then it cuts to a flashback. What? Pick a fucking style, Miller.

Hahahahah... nice.

[Ivan Drago]

Sam Jackson dresses up like a Nazi for no reason. Like, seriously, no explanation. The Spirit jumps into a sewer, Scarlett Johannsen drugs him, then he wakes up tied up in a chair in front of a giant swastika and a photo of Hitler. Then Sam Jackson and Scarlett come out in Nazi uniforms. The Spirit didn't even think this was strange. Nobody made any mention of the fact.

It also overlaps several narrative devices. In one scene, The Spirit delivers exposition to his cat, then he just starts talking to himself, then he looks at the camera and starts talking to the audience, then he shuts up and, while he's still staring at the camera, suddenly we hear his voiceover, then it cuts to a flashback. What? Pick a fucking style, Miller.

Wow. From the sounds of that Miller should just stick to writing graphic novels and stay AWAY from the director's chair.

[Mal]

I was always curious why they moved this from January '09 to Christmas. Is this movie really soooo bad for even the shit season, that they'll throw it up against every holly jolly film in hopes that nobody realizes it tanks?

[megladon8]

I was always curious why they moved this from January '09 to Christmas. Is this movie really soooo bad for even the shit season, that they'll throw it up against every holly jolly film in hopes that nobody realizes it tanks?


Christmas is a time when studios release a second wave of big movies.

So no, your thinking's backwards - the studio was hoping it would be a big success.

[Spun Lepton]

Christmas is a time when studios release a second wave of big movies.

So no, your thinking's backwards - the studio was hoping it would be a big success.

And it probably will be #1 on its opening weekend.

[Mal]

Christmas is a time when studios release a second wave of big movies.

So no, your thinking's backwards - the studio was hoping it would be a big success.

I dunno... I remember some bad movies being dumped on Christmas, like the Anna Paquin horror film Darkness, that sat on the shelf for a while.

[megladon8]

I dunno... I remember some bad movies being dumped on Christmas, like the Anna Paquin horror film Darkness, that sat on the shelf for a while.


Bad movies come out all year round. It's not just Christmas.

There are always several big movies released at the Christmas season. Last year's was I Am Legend.

[eternity]

Lionsgate is marketing this so much that they're hoping for the Big Hit Christmas deal, and not the Epic Dud Christmas deal. But yes, both do exist. They want the former, they'll get the latter.

[The Mike]

This thread title makes me wish it was Will Ferrell's The Spirit.

Actually, most of the lines in the trailer would sound better coming from Ferrell.

MOM! GET ME A TIE! AND IT BETTER BE RED!!!!! :lol:

[Spun Lepton]

Phew, critics are savaging this, and I can't say I'm surprised. As somebody who generally dislikes Miller's work, I'm feeling a tiny bit a schadenfreude. Okay, a lot of schadenfreude.

I bet it'll be #1 this weekend.

[Ezee E]

Phew, critics are savaging this, and I can't say I'm surprised. As somebody who generally dislikes Miller's work, I'm feeling a tiny bit a schadenfreude. Okay, a lot of schadenfreude.

I bet it'll be #1 this weekend.
I'll go with Valkyrie or Benjamin Button.

Scratch that... Bedtime STories.

[Watashi]

Ebert is awesome. (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081223/REVIEWS/812239987)


“The Spirit is mannered to the point of madness. There is not a trace of human emotion in it. To call the characters cardboard is to insult a useful packing material.”

[EyesWideOpen]

Me and the wife saw it last night and we both thought it was great. I'm disappointed in you number8 I know you've been the biggest hater of the movie since it was announced but as a "professional reviewer" i thought you would be able to put that aside and review the movie but judging from just the little paragraph or so you wrote in your above post i highly doubt you even watched it.


Sam Jackson dresses up like a Nazi for no reason. Like, seriously, no explanation. The Spirit jumps into a sewer, Scarlett Johannsen drugs him, then he wakes up tied up in a chair in front of a giant swastika and a photo of Hitler. Then Sam Jackson and Scarlett come out in Nazi uniforms. The Spirit didn't even think this was strange. Nobody made any mention of the fact.


Sam Jackson dresses up like a nazi for no reason? Cmon. Might it have to do with the fact that everytime we see him he has a different style. First he's got an old prospector's outfit, the next scene he's dressed like a samurai and Scarlett in a kimono, then he dresses like a doctor and Scarlett like a nurse, etc. Every scene Octopus and Floss are in they have a specific style. How come you didn't say Sam Jackson dresses up like a samurai for no reason?

And then you say no one even questions the fact that their dressed as nazis. Well their in a room alone with the Spirit and he mentions it strangeness and questions it two or three times in his monologue as soon as he wakes up and finds himself in the nazi room.

A negative review is one thing but at least try not to blatantly lie about the film.

[number8]

I didn't find any of the other costumes he wore nearly as baffling. He was a 70's pimp at first, which goes with the whole crime boss thing. And he was dressed as a doctor while he was experimenting in a lab. That's not a costume, that's just a gear. The samurai thing is weird, but the Nazi outfit and memorabilia stood out the most because... Well, because Samuel L. Jackson is black.

The Spirit might've commented about the room (I honestly don't remember, I spent most of the film facepalming and giggling with the other reviewers on my row), but the whole situation was still completely arbitrary--It's Frank Miller indulging in his Nazi-as-villain fetish again, like giving Joker a naked henchwoman with swastika on her boobs. That's what I found ridiculous about. Appearing in a different outfit every scene is not a reason, it's an ill attempt at a running gag, just like his cloned henchmen's names.

[megladon8]

I thought this was a funny and apt paragraph from the IGN review of the movie...


As a visual exercise, The Spirit is artfully rendered, but as everything else that a movie needs to be it is a regrettable mess. Miller simply lacks the chops as a filmmaker to handle a movie that wants to be so many different things at once, and one gets the feeling that those around him were too preoccupied telling him what a genius he is that they dared not tell him his ideas weren't working. The Spirit is by no means the death knell for comic book movies, but it may very well be for Miller's fledgling directing career.

[number8]

See, I don't know how it is "artfully rendered." I went to RT this morning (its got 15%) and even the negative reviews are saying that the only good thing about it is the visuals. Man, the visuals look like shit, a step down from even Sin City. The flat animated look of objects worked well in Sin City with jewelries and glasses and such, but having The Spirit's soles constantly glowing white like that is just terrible. Same goes with his animated red tie.

[Ivan Drago]

Yeah, Frank Miller should keep his day job.

[megladon8]

Yeah, Frank Miller should keep his day job.


Writing equally bad comic books?

No, I think he just needs a new schtick all together.

[Spun Lepton]

Writing equally bad comic books?

No, I think he just needs a new schtick all together.

Retirement shouldn't be out of the question ...

[megladon8]

Retirement shouldn't be out of the question ...


Do you like his earlier work ("Year One" and "The Dark Knight Returns", "Ronin", "Daredevil", etc.)?

I love that stuff.

If he could get that magic back, that'd be great. But he really seems to have lost his gift.

[Ivan Drago]

Writing equally bad comic books?

Anything to get him away from writing and directing a movie. The Spirit's story was almost nonsensical, the characters have zero personality, and the dialogue was terrible. A prime example was one instance that number8 mentioned where The Spirit is standing on top of a building talking to himself out loud, then it cuts to him walking and doing a voiceover. That moment is made even worse by the dialogue: "I'm gonna find you and kill you Octopus! But I gotta get some answers from you first!" or something to that extent. The majority of the movie, and ALL of Sam Jackson's scenes are flat out hilarious and cheesy too - I'm not gonna lie:

I've never laughed so hard at a kitten melting in my entire life.

[trotchky]

It wasn't nearly as awful as I was hoping; instead it was just dull. Like Frank Miller's Sin City for preemies, which probably makes it one of the dullest movies I've ever seen. Jesus, what a waste of time.

[trotchky]

Writing equally bad comic books?

No, I think he just needs a new schtick all together.

All-Star Batman and Robin is hysterical; I don't know what if anything else Miller is working on but that alone tells me he's still got it.

[eternity]

There's a very good chance I see this tonight for the sheer lolling that will likely take place.

[Spun Lepton]

#9 at the box office! I can't say I've been so happy to be so wrong ... :lol:

[megladon8]

All-Star Batman and Robin is hysterical; I don't know what if anything else Miller is working on but that alone tells me he's still got it.


I couldn't disagree more. It's one of the worst books I've ever read.

[Barty]

This was awesome. :lol:

[Ivan Drago]

This was awesome. :lol:

It's just...so damn odd.

[Skitch]

This was awesome. :lol:


It's just...so damn odd.

I completely agree with both of you.

Sooooo sssstttrrrraaaannnggeee. But awesome. :)

[KK2.0]

i'll probably rent it.

Had zero interest in this, but the words "strange", "unintentionally hilarious" and "worst movie ever" truly draw me in. :lol:

[EyesWideOpen]

i'll probably rent it.

Had zero interest in this, but the words "strange", "unintentionally hilarious" and "worst movie ever" truly draw me in. :lol:

Anyone who thinks the movie is "unintentionally hilarious" is clueless.

[Spun Lepton]

All right, I caught MOST of it. Thankfully I didn't have to stick around for the ending. Ugh.

It's like a big-budget Ed Wood movie with A-list actors. Eva Mendes is terrible all the time, every scene she's in. Jackson doesn't just chew the scenery, he eats it, craps it out, and eats it again. It's ridiculous. At times the dialogue left me wondering "Whaaat... ??" Like, every time Jackson mentioned eggs. What was with his obsession with eggs? And samurai gear? And ... Nazi uniforms ... ???

Every movement is over-blocked to absurdity. Watch Johannsen take a drag off her cigarette at any point in the movie. She's like a robot.

Somebody should tell Miller that putting an iPod Touch in the middle of his other-worldly-nowhere-world really rips the viewer out of the movie.

3/10

Only line I laughed at: "Oh, c'mon, toilets are always funny!" And I'm not sure I laughed at it for the same reason Miller thought it was funny.

[DavidSeven]

Vindication for the debate on Pages 1-2.